HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-08-16 City Council Regular MeetingAgenda
City Council Meeting
City of Edina, Minnesota
Edin a City Hall Coun cil Cham be rs
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
7:00 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Approval of Meeting Agenda
IV.Community Comment
During "Community Comment," the City Council will inv ite 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 spea kers on the same
issue in the interest of time a nd topic. Generally spea king, items that
are elsewhere on tonight 's a genda may not be a ddressed during
Community Comment. Indiv iduals should not expect the Mayor or
Council to respond to their comments tonight. Instead the Council
might refer the matter to sta ) for consideration at a future meeting.
V.Adoption of Consent Agenda
All agenda items listed on the consent agenda are considered
routine and will be ena cted 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 rollca ll vote of majority of Council Members present to
approv e.)
A.Approve Minutes of August 3, 2016 Work Session, August 3,
2016 Regular Meeting a nd August 3, 2016 Closed Meeting
B.Receive Payment of Claims As Per: Pre-List Dated 8/04/2016
TOTAL: $685,432.08 And Per Pre-List Dated 8/11/2016 TOTAL:
$1,609,214.50
C.Resolution No. 2016-76: Authorizing 2016 Public Health
Emergency Preparedness Contract with Bloomington Public
Health
D.TraDc Safety Report of July 6, 2016
E.Request for Purchase: About Town Paper
VI.Special Recognitions And Presentations
A.July Speak Up, Edina Presentation
B.Photo Contest Winner Recognition
VII.Public Hearings
During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony
after City sta) members ma ke their presentations. If y ou wish to
testify on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your
testimony is relevant to the discussion. To ensure fa irness to all
speakers and to allow the eDcient conduct of a public hearing,
speakers must observe the following guidelines:
Indiv iduals 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 nonv erbal communication is not allowed.
A.PUBLIC HEARING: Site Pla n Review for Wold Architects on behalf
of Edina Public Schools a t 7600 Metro Boulev ard. Resolution No.
2016- 74
B.PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning with Variance and Subdiv ision for
Opus Development LLC a t 5901 Lincoln Driv e. Resolution No.
2016-75 & Ordinance No. 2016-12
C.PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance No. 2016- 13; Tempora ry Family
Health Care Dwelling
VIII.Reports/Recommendations: (Fav orable vote of ma jority of Council
Members present to approve except where noted)
A.Southdale Area Tra nsportation Study
B.Arden Park D Neighborhood - Parking Signage
C.Memorandum of Agreement with Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District for Arden Pa rk Restoration Plan
D.Resolution No. 2016-77: Accepting Various Donations
IX.Correspondence And Petitions
A.Correspondence
B.Receive Petition - Braemar Winter Recreation Area
C.Minutes
1.Minutes: Planning Commission July 13, 2016
2.Minutes: Herita ge Preservation Board July 12, 2016
3.Minutes: Park Board July 12, 2016
X.Av ia tion Noise Update
XI.Ma y or and Council Comments
XII.Ma nager 's Comments
XIII.Schedule of Upcoming Meetings/Dates/Events as of August 16,2016
XIV.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortabl e bei ng part of the
publi c proc ess . If you need as s is tanc e i n the way of heari ng am pli Jc ation, an
interpreter, large-print doc um ents or s om ethi ng els e, pleas e c al l 952-927-8861
72 ho urs in advance of the m eeting.
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: V.A.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Minutes
From:Deb ra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Item Activity:
Subject:Ap p ro ve Minutes o f Augus t 3, 2016 Work S es s io n,
Augus t 3, 2016 Regular Meeting and Augus t 3, 2016
Clo s ed Meeting
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve minutes as presented.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Draft Minutes Augus t 3, 2016 Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes of Augus t 3, 2016 Work Ses s ion
Page 1
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
AUGUST 3, 2016
7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
II. ROLLCALL
Answering rollcall were Members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, and Mayor Hovland.
III. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED
Member Stewart made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, approving the meeting
agenda.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
IV. COMMUNITY COMMENT
Frank Lorenz, 7151 York Avenue South, expressed concern over the new electronic security system
at the new school building. Because fire codes require that doors must open outwards, Mr. Lorenz
was worried that faculty would not be able to lock out a potential attacker.
V. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED
Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the consent
agenda as revised to remove Item V.D. Resolution No. 2016-69, Amending the 2016 Budget
to Transfer 2015 General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance, as follows:
V.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of July 19, 2016
V.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register
dated July 14, 2016, and consisting of 34 pages; General Fund $121,260.08; Police
Special Revenue $960.71; Arts and Culture Fund $466.61; Working Capital Fund
$24,037.58; Equipment Replacement Fund $3,411.85; Art Center Fund $6,315.37; Golf
Dome Fund $40.97; Aquatic Center Fund $28,091.74; Golf Course Fund $20,766.48;
Ice Arena Fund $12,429.78; Edinborough Park Fund $2,299.57; Centennial Lakes Park
Fund $2,923.92; Liquor Fund $263,818.51; Utility Fund $480,672.55; Storm Sewer
Fund $8,649.06; Risk Management ISF $230,507.80; PSTF Agency Fund $5,881.53;
Southdale 2 District $19.20; Payroll Fund $10,610.99; TOTAL $1,216,340.60; and, for
receipt of payment of claims dated July 21, 2016, and consisting of 38 pages; General
Fund $544,225.56; Police Special Revenue $586.09; Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety
Fund $31,421.96; Arts and Culture Fund $98.00; Working Capital Fund $772,681.52;
PIR Construction Fund $712.50; Equipment Replacement Fund $897.05; Art Center
Fund $3,408.35; Aquatic Center Fund $11,500.66; Golf Course Fund $128,185.68; Ice
Arena Fund $11,945.10; Sports Dome Fund $113,627.46; Edinborough Park Fund
$4,839.69; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $12,227.28; Liquor Fund $160,653.36; Utility
Fund $842,156.97; Storm Sewer Fund $432,082.29; Recycling Fund $37,184.67; PSTF
Agency Fund $3,508.54; Centennial TIF District $4,159.00; Grandview TIF District
$215.00; TOTAL $3,116,316.73; and, for receipt of payment of claims dated July 28,
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 2
2016, and consisting of 32 pages; General Fund $130,646.56; Police Special Revenue
$1,335.45; Arts and Culture Fund $875.00; Working Capital Fund $813,545.12; Art
Center Fund $4,264.85; Golf Dome Fund $26.07; Aquatic Center Fund $23,545.78;
Golf Course Fund $26,465.93; Ice Arena Fund $80.21; Edinborough Park Fund
$5,229.42; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $7,468.36; Liquor Fund $177,283.43; Utility
Fund $348,586.60; Storm Sewer Fund $344,805.82; Risk Management ISF
$146,776.21; PSTF Agency Fund $74,434.31; Centennial TIF District $28,440.62;
Payroll Fund $2,570.10; TOTAL $2,184,952.65; and, Credit Card Transactions dated
April 26 – May 25, 2016; TOTAL $56,887.79
V.C. Request for Purchase, Rosland Park Playground Replacement, awarding the bid to
the recommended bidder, Game Time at $275,000.00
V.D. Resolution No. 2016-69, Amending the 2016 Budget to Transfer 2015 General Fund
Unassigned Fund Balance
Rollcall:
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
V.D. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-69, AMENDING THE 2016 BUDGET TO TRANSFER 2015
GENERAL FUND UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE – ADOPTED
Manager Neal answered a question of the Council related to the smaller amount to be transferred.
He explained that the goal was to be more precise in budgeting; however, the capital side needed
to be looked at more closely. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution
No. 2016-69, Amending the Budget for the City of Edina for the Year 2016. Member
Swenson seconded the motion.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VI. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
VI.A. CENTER POINT ENERGY GRANT – ACCEPTED
Lieutenant Conboy explained that he had applied for the Center Point Energy Grant and
introduced Mary Lou Watson from Center Point Energy.
Ms. Watson shared that Center Point Energy was proud to partner with the cities it served. The
$2,500.00 grant would be used to purchase Automated External Defibrillators for squad cars.
Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, to receive the Center Point
Energy Grant.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD – Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file.
VII.A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CHRISTIAN FAMILY CHURCH AT 7375 BUSH LAKE
ROAD – RESOLUTION NO. 2016-70 ADOPTED
Community Development Director Presentation
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 3
Community Development Director Teague presented the request from Christian Family Church to
remodel the interior of the existing office building at 7375 Bush Lake Road into a church. The
proposed sanctuary would seat 360 people maximum and there would be classrooms for children
education within the building. There were 170 parking stalls on the site and the site was code
compliant. To accommodate the request, a Conditional Use Permit was requested. Staff and the
Planning Commission recommended approval.
Chuck Rickart, WSB & Associates, answered a question of the Council related to whether a four-
way stop was warranted at Dewey Hill Road.
Proponent Presentation
Dr. Tim Peterson, Pastor Christian Family Church, noted that he would like to see a four-way stop
at Dewey Hill Road for safety and thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve in Edina.
Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
Public Testimony
No one appeared to comment.
Member Stewart made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2016-70, Approving a
Conditional Use Permit for Christian Family Church at 7375 Bush Lake Road, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below:
• Site and building plans date stamped June 17, 2016.
• Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council
meeting.
2. Two additional over-story trees must be planted on site to comply with minimum
landscaping requirements.
3. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies.
Member Stewart seconded the motion.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VII.B. REZONING AND SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH VARIANCES FOR TED CARLSON, ORION
INVESTMENTS, AT 4528 AND 4530 FRANCE AVENUE – RESOLUTION NO. 2016-71
AND ORDINANCE NO. 2016-11 ADOPTED
Community Development Director Presentation
Community Development Director Teague presented the request from Orion Investments to
redevelop the properties at 4528 and 4530 France Avenue. The applicant was proposing to tear
down the existing building at 4530 France Avenue and build an addition above the existing garage
at 4528 France Avenue that would match the existing building on that lot. The applicant was
requesting a rezoning of the 4530 site from Planned Commercial District-4 to Planned Commercial
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 4
District-1 and a Site Plan Review with building, signage, parking, and parking lot setback variances.
Mr. Teague answered questions of the Council related to combining the two lots, restaurant use,
and zoning designations of the homes to the south.
Proponent Presentation
Ted Carlson, Orion Investments, noted the changes that had been made based on the feedback
from the Planning Commission and City Council
Ed Farr, Edward Farr Architects, discussed the positive feedback from the neighborhood meetings
and presented a site plan photo and building renderings from neighborhood views. Mr. Farr also
expressed concern over sidewalk, boulevard, and storm water drainage requirements listed in the
City Engineer’s Memo dated July 6, 2016.
Mr. Carlson answered questions of the Council related to the property ownership, combining the
two parcels, and restricting restaurant use. Engineer Millner addressed the sidewalk, boulevard,
and storm water drainage issues.
Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m.
Public Testimony
Frank Lorenz, 7151 York Avenue South, addressed the Council.
Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2016-71, Approving
Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District-4 to PCD-1, Planned
Commercial District-1 and Site Plan Review with Variances for 4528 and 4530 France
Avenue, as amended to add “and variances” to the 1st paragraph under Section 3.
APPROVAL; and, subject to the following conditions:
1. The Final Development Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Development
Plans June 17, 2016 and the materials board as presented to the Planning Commission
on July 13, 2016.
2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter
36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must
be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required
landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit.
The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after
the project is built.
3. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated July 6,
2016.
4. Provision of code compliant bike racks (5 minimum) near the building entrances.
5. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require
revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements.
6. The on-site drive aisle shall be widened to accommodate emergency vehicle, subject to
review and approval of the fire marshal.
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 5
7. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent residential property
and from France Avenue, per Section 36-1459 of the City Code.
8. Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum lighting requirements per Chapter 36 of the
Zoning Ordinance. Lighting shall be down lit.
9. The applicant shall enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City of Edina. The
agreement shall be filed prior to issuance of a final occupancy permit for the new
building.
10. The applicant shall combine the two properties of addresses into a single parcel.
11. The back patio shall not be used for restaurant seating should a restaurant occupy the
building.
12. The sidewalk on France Avenue shall be 5 feet in width with a 2-foot boulevard naturally
landscaped.
13. The applicant shall work with the City Engineer to explore ways to direct drainage to the
east.
Member Stewart seconded the motion.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
Member Brindle made a motion to grant First Reading to Ordinance No. 2016-11, Rezoning
4530 France Avenue from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District. Member Swenson
seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VIII. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS
VIII.A. GRANDVIEW DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION STUDY – APPROVED
Manager Neal asked the Council to act on this item in such a way to affirm that staff could depend
on and use this information moving forward. He suggested approving or adopting the study
instead of receipt or acknowledgement.
Transportation Planner Nolan shared that LHB would be presenting the final report and
recommendations of the Grandview District Transportation Study.
Lydia Major, LHB, presented the Grandview District Transportation Study including the role of the
transportation study; the process following Recommend Week; and the Final Report structure
including short-term, mid-term, and long-term phases.
The Council discussed the Grandview District Transportation Study and each shared their opinion.
The Council noted that it was a great guidance tool for all modes of transportation in the present
and the future.
Attorney Knutson answered a question of the Council related to a possible conflict of interest
explaining that there was no conflict for a person who was formerly on the Planning Commission
and now serving on the Board because that person was never an employee of the City. Member
Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, approving the Grandview District
Transportation Study Final Report.
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 6
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VIII.B. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-72 HUMAN RIGHTS CITY DESIGNATION – ADOPTED
Ellen Kennedy, Human Rights and Relations Commission, shared that several cities in the United
States had adopted resolutions designating themselves as a Human Rights City. These cities used
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was used as a standard to make decisions and take
action when considering programs, policies, statements, and laws. The U.S. Conference of Mayor’s
officially endorsed the Human Rights Cities initiative in 2013, affirming the role of local
governments in serving as leaders on issues that extend beyond municipal boundaries. The
passage of the Human Rights City designation resolution would confirm the City’s commitment to
human rights. Ms. Kennedy answered a question of the Council related to areas that Edina would
focus on including discrimination and affordable housing.
Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2016-72, Establishing
Edina, Minnesota as a Human Rights City. Member Swenson seconded the motion.
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
VIII.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-73 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. 2016-73
accepting various grants and donations. Member Brindle seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland
Motion carried.
IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
IX.A. CORRESPONDENCE
Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council’s receipt of various correspondence.
IX.B. MINUTES:
1. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, JUNE 9, 2016
2. PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 22, 2016
3. EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, JUNE 16, 2016
4. HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION, JUNE 28, 2016
Informational; no action required.
IX.C. ADVISORY COMMUNICATION:
1. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMUNICATION
2. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION REPORT: MPCA COMPOST
RULEMAKING
Informational; no action required.
X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE – Received
Minutes/Edina City Council/August 3, 2016
Page 7
XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS – Received
XII. MANAGER’S COMMENTS – Received
XII.A. ENVIRONMENTAL PURCHASING POLICY
XII.B. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD
XIII. SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS AND DATES AS OF AUGUST 3, 2016 – Received
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting
adjourned at 9:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Minutes approved by Edina City Council, August 16, 2016.
Video Copy of the August 3, 2016, meeting available. James B. Hovland, Mayor
MINUTES
OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
AUGUST 3, 2016
5:32 P.M.
Mayor Hovland called the work session of the Edina City Council to order 5:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Answering rollcall was: Members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson and Mayor Hovland.
Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Ryan Browning, IT Manager; Kelly Dumais, City
Management Fellow; Susan Faust, Assistant Park & Recreation Director; Ann Kattreh, Park &
Recreation Director; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Chad Millner, Engineering Director; Scott Neal, City
Manager; Eric Roggeman, Finance Director; Kyle Sawyer, Assistant Finance Director; Lisa Schaefer,
Assistant City Manager; and Cary Teague, Community Development Director.
2017-2021 CIP & 2017 BUDGET
Finance Director Roggeman presented to the City Council the components making up the annual
budget for the City consisting of the Governmental Fund that included: General Fund, Debt
Service Fund, Construction Fund, and Special Revenue Funds and the Enterprise Funds that
included: Utility Fund, Liquor Fund and Park Enterprises. The timeline for the 2017 budget
adoption was reviewed along with the proposed 2017-2021 Capital Improvement Plan. The
Council expressed a desire to have another work session when further discussion could center on
the project staff has included in the draft CIP. Issues to be discussed included: whether or not to
levy for HRA expenses, which projects to include in the CIP, possible funding sources for the CIP,
possible levy impacts of different scenarios and whether any of the existing franchise fees be
increased.
QUARTERLY BUSINESS MEETING: WORK PLAN & FINANCE
The Council received the second quarter updated work plan and financial report. There was no
time for discussion. Questions can be directed to staff for any items needing clarification.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:59 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Minutes approved by Edina City Council, August 16, 2016.
James B. Hovland, Mayor
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: V.B.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Claims
From:Eric Roggeman, Financ e Director
Item Activity:
Subject:Rec eive P ayment o f Claims As P er: P re-Lis t Dated
8/04/2016 TOTAL: $685,432.08 And P er P re-List
Dated 8/11/2016 TOTAL: $1,609,214.50
Ac tio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve claims for payment.
INTRODUCTION:
Detailed claims list is attached.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Claims Pre-Lis t Dated 8/04/2016 TOTAL: $685,432.08
Claims Pre-Lis t Dated 8/11/2016 TOTAL: $1,609,214.50
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page- 1
Business Unit
3471 8/4/2016 133644 A DYNAMIC DOOR CO INC.
489.35 RAMP DOOR REPAIR 407268 21606241 4090.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
489.35
3472 8/4/2016 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY
24.80 407359 2022795 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
36.00 407362 2026664 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
65.60 407361 2026671 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
63.20 407360 2026676 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
67.20 408376 2028413 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
92.00 408374 2028416 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
16.80 408375 2028421 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
102.40 408377 2029098 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
60.00 408378 2029103 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
528.00
3473 8/4/2016 100575 ALL SAFE INC.
147.41 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 408270 147482 5511.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
147.41
3474 8/4/2016 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS
345.67 COFFEE 408272 1236156 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION
345.67
3475 8/4/2016 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION
2,627.00 407840 54599500 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
91.55 408385 54703600 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
29.95 408384 54724600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
144.76 407370 94308700 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
62.80 408386 94356300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
2,956.06
3476 8/4/2016 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS
240.84 OFFICE SUPPLIES 407274 WO-213250-1 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION
67.26 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00004021 407409 WO-215269-1 1160.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES FINANCE
29.13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 408282 WO-215491-1 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION
33.50 OFFICE SUPPLIES 408282 WO-215491-1 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION
370.73
3477 8/4/2016 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS
63.90 COOLANT 00005490 407796 1076230 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 2
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 —
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3477 8/4/2016 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS Continued...
63.90
3478 8/4/2016 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
932.09 SAMSUNG H46B 408471 CLC6734 2310.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT E911
1,083.58 SAMSUNG TVS 408211 CXK0635 2310.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT E911
776.09 SAMSUNG TV 408210 DBS9690 2310.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT E911
932.09- RETURN 408212 DRQ4096 2310.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT E911
1,859.67
3479 8/4/2016 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD
549.56 XCEL BILLING - LIFT STATION 00001337 407278 6523 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT
595.61 XCEL BILLING 00001347 408287 6545 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT
1,145.17
3480 8/4/2016 130477 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO
213.00 407377 67-351 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
497.75 408397 67-484 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
710.75
3481 8/4/2016 104020 DALCO
932.23 PARKS CLEANING SUPPLIES 00005507 407284 3046461 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
187.20 NITRILE GLOVES 00005507 407285 3047571 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
1,119.43
3482 8/4/2016 134730 EXPLORE EDINA
41,025.06 JUNE 2016 LODGING TAX 407290 6/2016 1001.4030 LODGING TAX GENERAL FUND REVENUES
41,025.06
3483 8/4/2016 124541 GEYEN GROUP
293.91 CARPET CLEANING 407297 25952 5420.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CLUB HOUSE
293.91
3484 8/4/2016 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE
104.22 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 408481 080216 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
104.22
3485 8/4/2016 129508 IMPACT
655.35 JULY LATE NOTICES 408310 115639 5902.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE
655.35
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/412016 - 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page- 3
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3486 8/4/2016 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. Continued...
26.29 BUSHING, PVC ELLS 00001360 407312 1006198 5912.6530 REPAIR PARTS WELL HOUSES
53.50 PVC PIPE, ADAPTER, TEE, CAP 00001386 407313 1006203 5912.6530 REPAIR PARTS WELL HOUSES
79.79
3487 8/4/2016 102146 JESSEN PRESS INC.
695.00 LETTERHEAD 408312 673106 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS
792.75 FALL CATALOG 408311 673274 1629.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION
1,487.75
3488 8/4/2016 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC.
59.50 407315 104970 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
59.50 TOILET RENTAL 407314 104971 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
119.00
3489 8/4/2016 100858 LOGIS
1,595.00 IT CONSULTING 407317 41997 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS
1,595.00
3490 8/4/2016 101792 LUBE-TECH
3,947.50 OIL 00005593 408314 805700 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
3,947.50
3491 8/4/2016 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI
3,762.32 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 1160.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT FINANCE
70.24 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5110.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
53.33 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5210.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT GOLF DOME PROGRAM
94.25 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5310.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT POOL ADMINISTRATION
275.28 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5410.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT GOLF ADMINISTRATION
267.91 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5510.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT ARENA ADMINISTRATION
74.04 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5552.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT SPORTS DOME ADMINISTRATION
166.52 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5710.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION
109.75 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5760.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
204.52 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5820.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT 50TH STREET GENERAL
468.84 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5860.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
533.69 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5840.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
1,421.12 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5902.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE
202.19 2015 AUDIT FINAL 408315 40396 5932.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT GENERAL STORM SEWER
7,704.00
3492 8/4/2016 101483 MENARDS
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 4
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3492 8/4/2016 101483 MENARDS Continued...
56.20 HARDWARE 00001373 407323 18823 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
46.95 REBAR RODS, CONCRETE 00001377 407322 18844 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
9.55 HUMIDITY GAUGE 00007560 407813 18905 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY
111.28 CEDAR LUMBER 00001391 407324 19007 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE
15.78 CAUTION TAPE 00002150 408317 19088 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
266.08 LUMBER 00001399 407326 19106 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE
46.42 HARDWARE 00001402 407325 19128 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
8.40 SUPPLIES 00007501 408318 19494 5520.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA CONCESSIONS
199.05 SUPPLIES 00007501 408318 19494 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
2.76 SUPPLIES 00007501 408319 19522 5520.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA CONCESSIONS
7.94 SUPPLIES 00007501 408319 19522 5520.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA CONCESSIONS
39.95 SUPPLIES 00007501 408319 19522 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
810.36
3493 8/4/2016 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPPLY
565.74 STEEL 00005586 407329 354155 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
565.74
3494 8/4/2016 132364 OASIS GROUP, THE
658.75 AUG 2016 EAP SERVICES 408328 3983 1556.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES
658.75
3495 8/4/2016 127773 PREMIER SPECIALTY VEHICLES INC.
261.00 BUSHINGS 00005484 408334 1001308 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
261.00
3496 8/4/2016 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY
78.81 TAMPONS FOR MACHINE 407334 10306 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
519.18 LINERS, TOWELS, SOAP 408339 10310 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
613.95 CUPS, LIDS, NAPKINS 408336 10314 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
255.88 SANITIZER, GLASS CLEANER 00002232 408337 10316 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
131.59 HAND SANITIZER, TISSUE 408335 10351 5311.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
286.81 PLATES, CUPS 408335 10351 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
262.08 TOWELS, SOAP 00002386 408338 10353 5761.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
161.10 TOWELS, DISPENSERS 408340 10356 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
2,309.40
3497 8/4/2016 101004 SPS COMPANIES INC.
16.66 SINK REPAIR 00001319 407819 S3285853.001 5821.6530 REPAIR PARTS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
16.66
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 5
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3497
3498
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
101004 SPS COMPANIES INC.
102390 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC
Continued...
286.00 IMPELLER REPAIRS 00001335 407341 29729 5921.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT
286.00
3499 8/4/2016 118190 TURFWERKS LLC
80.17 SWITCH 00005487 407822 0140037 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
80.17
3500 8/4/2016 119454 VINOCOPIA
640.75 407395 0156899-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
102.12 408442 0157345-IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
170.50 408446 0157385-IN 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
214.00 408441 0157386-IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
130.50 408444 0157387-IN 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
178.25 408445 0157388-IN 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
690.50 408251 0157389-IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
129.00 408443 0157444-IN 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
2,255.62
3501 8/4/2016 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION
500.15 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407354 46102632 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
1,149.42 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408364 46165584 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
27.46 408365 46199821 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
1,720.89 408366 46204597 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
3,397.92
3502 8/4/2016 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE
856.50 407396 431350-00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,339.10 408253 431893-00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,883.07 407868 431904-00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
702.25 408252 432131-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
4,780.92
406537 8/4/2016 133522 AARP DRIVER SAFETY PROGRAM
160.00 408269 B00842 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS
160.00
406538 8/4/2016 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY
79.35 SHOES 407402 902761500 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 6
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406538 8/4/2016 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY Continued...
93.64 MERCHANDISE 407404 902788373 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
138.26 SHOES 407403 902836667 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
311.25
406539 8/4/2016 138818 AIRMAXX TRAMPOLINE PARK
465.00 7/21/2016 EVENT 407269 TRAVELIN TEENS 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER
465.00
406541 8/4/2016 136618 ANCHOR BUILDERS
2,500.00 ED140083 REFUND DEMO ESCROW 407405 5605 MCGUIRE RD 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
2,500.00 ED140395 REFUND ESCROW 407406 5605 MCGUIRE RD 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
7,500.00 ED146372 TEMP CO REFUND 407407 5605 MCGUIRE RD 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
12,500.00
406542 8/4/2016 100595 ANOKA COUNTY
300.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 408271 080116 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
300.00
406543 8/4/2016 100632 AQUA ENGINEERING
1,775.20 FRANCE AVE IRRIGATION 00001332 407270 76964071516 1301.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
1,775.20
406544 8/4/2016 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY
769.00 407363 3114510 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
1,322.00 408379 3115990 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
2,433.70 408381 3115991 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
2,248.45 408380 3115992 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
12.16- 407366 350170 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
8.48- 407364 350171 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
7.84- 407365 350172 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
5.16- 407367 352132 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
29.02- 407368 352133 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
164.52- 408382 352878 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
6.66- 407369 352908 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
6,539.31
406545 8/4/2016 106304 ASPEN MILLS
299.90 UNIFORMS 00003777 408196 176992 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
118.20 00003738 408197 177537 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
130.00 00003777 408198 177826 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page- 7
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406545 8/4/2016 106304 ASPEN MILLS Continued...
255.87 00003777 408199 178008 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
64.77 00003743 408200 178157 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
392.45 00003797 408201 179375 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
387.45 00003797 408202 179376 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
392.45 00003790 408203 179377 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
387.45 00003790 408204 179378 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
381.45 00003790 408205 179379 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
387.45 00003790 408206 179382 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
473.30 00003777 408207 179387 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
464.30 00003778 408208 179397 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
4,135.04
406546 8/4/2016 138827 AURORA INVESTMENTS LLC
79,231.00 ESCROW RELEASE - PARTIAL 407791 FRANCE AVE 1000.2066 ESCROW DEPOSITS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
IMPROVEMENTS
79,231.00
406547 8/4/2016 120995 AVR INC.
1,174.50 READY MIX 408277 132077 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER
2,681.75 READY MIX 00001254 408273 132253 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
3,221.00 408274 132353 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
1,562.50 408276 132885 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
1,872.50 408275 132970 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
10,512.25
406548 8/4/2016 102195 BATTERIES PLUS
31.80 BATTERIES 00001378 407271 018-409276 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
36.97 BATTERIES 00005513 407272 018-409584 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
43.98 BATTERIES 00001413 407794 018-409909 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES
112.75
406549 8/4/2016 134025 BAUER BUILT TIRE
968.94 TIRES 407793 180192977 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
112.00 RIM 407792 180193718 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,080.94
406550 8/4/2016 136267 BAUHAUS BREW LABS LLC
398.00 408219 9663 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
347.00 408218 9722 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
472.50 407839 9723 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 8
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406550 8/4/2016 136267 BAUHAUS BREW LABS LLC Continued-.
272.50 408383 9834 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
1,490.00
406551 8/4/2016 138829 BECKER, BOB
2.50 FIREARM SAFETY TRAINING 407795 REFUND 1600.4390.21 FIREARM SAFETY TRAINING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
2.50
406552 8/4/2016 134474 BELLA CUSTOM HOMES
2,500.00 ED143458 REFUND ESCROW 407408 6012 HANSEN RD 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
2,500.00
406553 8/4/2016 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC.
216.00 408279 4643107 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
360.00 PIZZA 408278 4643451 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
576.00
406554 8/4/2016 125139 BERNICK'S
185.90 408280 309516 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
309.55 407371 309521 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
357.50 408281 310737 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
219.20 408387 310745 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
709.12 407841 310746 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
1,781.27
406555 8/4/2016 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY
126.95 COFFEE 407273 T199256 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
126.95
406556 8/4/2016 100653 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC.
25,650.00 REPLACE TENNIS COURTS 00001969 408283 10323 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
24,033.94 HOT MIX 407275 25664 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
49,683.94
406557 8/4/2016 122248 BLICK ART MATERIALS
29.94 ART SUPPLIES 407410 188842 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
29.94
406558 8/4/2016 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS
1,380.63 407372 135234 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
727.50 408388 135409 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8 /3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 9
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406558 8/4/2016 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS Continued...
2,108.13
406559 8/4/2016 123621 BRAEMAR ARENA
138.57 DREAM ICE - RENTAL 408284 991 1629.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ADAPTIVE RECREATION
138.57
406560 8/4/2016 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA
387.45 407373 1080500849 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,650.88 407843 1080504073 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
114.85 407842 1080504144 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
2,279.27 407844 1080504145 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
754.78 408389 1080504146 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
217.53 408390 1080504147 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
295.93 408391 1080504148 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
962.35 408220 1080504149 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
64.13 407848 1080504150 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
2,630.62 407847 1080504152 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
1,245.74 407846 1080504185 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
146.30 407845 1080504186 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
10,749.83
406561 8/4/2016 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER LLC
1,469.90 407374 1090590874 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
2,146.30 407849 1090591677 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
72.40 407850 1090591678 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
3,724.65 408393 1090593881 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
227.50 408392 1090593882 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
840.00 408394 1090593887 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
8,480.75
406562 8/4/2016 104470 BRIDGESTONE GOLF INC.
161.61 GOLF BALLS 407412 1002528466 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
587.35 GOLF BALLS 407411 1002528467 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
748.96
406563 8/4/2016 103239 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO.
259.00 DOOR REPAIR 00002384 408285 532011S 5761.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
259.00
406564 8/4/2016 122074 BUIE, BARB
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 10
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406564 8/4/2016 122074 BUIE, BARB Continued-.
43.00 408209 072516 5760.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
70.22 408209 072516 5760.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
113.22
406565 8/4/2016 114575 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS SUPPLIES INC.
1,149.84 GLOVES, PAINT 00001199 407276 T33813 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
1,149.84
406566 8/4/2016 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF
325.00 GOLF BALLS - GRAND OPENING 407413 926965809 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE
2,518.38 GOLF BALLS 407414 926984781 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
2,843.38
406567 8/4/2016 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES
20.45 407376 00011217 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
419.45 407375 960198 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
2,746.90 408395 966314 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
10,219.90 407852 966315 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
14.00 408396 972375 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
132.00 407851 972392 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
13,552.70
406568 8/4/2016 129923 CAWLEY
37.52 NAME BADGES 408289 V389846 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES
37.52
406569 8/4/2016 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY
23.30 10089900-4 407415 10089900-7/16 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
89.40 10437426-9 407419 10437426-7/16 5553.6186 HEAT SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS
242.67 5546504-1 407418 5546504-7/16 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
90.87 5563827-4 407416 5563827-7/16 5210.6186 HEAT GOLF DOME PROGRAM
1,369.18 5591458-4 407417 5591458-7/16 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL
19.76 9546705-6 407797 9546705-7/16 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS
744.86 9724639-1 407420 9724639-7/16 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
2,580.04
406570 8/4/2016 123898 CENTURYLINK
55.42 952 920-1565 408473 1565-7/16 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
59.70 952 920-1586 408474 1586-7/16 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
83.06 952 922-2444 408472 2444-7/16 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 11
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406570 8/4/2016 123898 CENTURYLINK Continued...
59.70 952 920-8632 408286 8632-7/16 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION
257.88
406571 8/4/2016 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES
156.01 00114064-0203163012 407798 203163012-7/16 4091.6189 SEWER & WATER GRANDVIEW MAINTENANCE
156.01
406572 8/4/2016 100692 COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS
344.44 407378 0138483519 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
344.44
406573 8/4/2016 120433 COMCAST
33.91 8772 10 614 0373022 407421 373022-7/16 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
85.99 8772 10 614 0540232 407279 540232-7/16 4090.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
119.90
406574 8/4/2016 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO.
21,989.49 HOT MIX 407280 071516 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
21,989.49
406575 8/4/2016 101329 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC.
360.00 MORTAR MIX 00001374 408288 0144471-IN 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER
360.00
406576 8/4/2016 102332 CRAWFORD DOOR SALES OF THE TWIN CITIES
287.50 GARAGE DOOR REPAIR 407281 22621 5553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS
287.50
406577 8/4/2016 137004 CR-BPS INC.
11,298.00 ASSET MANAGEMENT 407277 EDINA001-12 450007.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CRBPS Energy Analytics
11,298.00
406578 8/4/2016 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES
773.51 MOOD STADIUM CUPS 408290 47823 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
658.74 WATER BOTTLES 408291 49191 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
1,432.25
406579 8/4/2016 123653 CROSSTOWN CONCRETE & BRICK PAVING INC.
2,280.00 PAVER REPAIRS 408292 072516 5761.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
2,280.00
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 12
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 —
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406579
406580
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
123653 CROSSTOWN CONCRETE & BRICK PAVING INC.
100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER
Continued...
213.84 114-10079853-6 408293 071516 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION
213.84
406581 8/4/2016 100701 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. INC.
56.00 BRAKE DRUM/HUB 00005551 407282 168617 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
56.00
406582 8/4/2016 102514 CUTTER & BUCK
1,026.60 SHIRTS FOR EVENT 408475 93455005 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION
12.24 408476 93458241 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION
1,038.84
406583 8/4/2016 127913 CUTTER SALES
50.63 SEAL 407799 111065 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
50.63
406584 8/4/2016 124231 D. ERVASTI SALES CO.
162.60 HOSE 00001246 407283 13430 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
162.60
406585 8/4/2016 102791 D2 SERVICES INC.
17,619.00 RADIO INSTALLATION 00001024 407800 10694 4616.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SCADA Radio System Upgrade
17,619.00
406586 8/4/2016 138844 DAU, HOLLY
250.00 STAR WARS ART CAMP 408477 REFUND 1600.4390.69 PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
250.00
406587 8/4/2016 132356 DAVE ALAN HOMES INC.
2,500.00 ED132424 ESCROW REFUND 407422 4022 GRIMES AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
2,500.00
406588 8/4/2016 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO.
4.02 SOCKET 00005550 407286 111074 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
4.02
406589 8/4/2016 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC.
24.50 650487671 407287 650487671-7/16 5510.6575 PRINTING ARENAADMINISTRATION
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 13
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406589 8/4/2016 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. Continued...
24.50
406590 8/4/2016 100571 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS
658.00 ROAD PAINT 00001156 408294 802167937 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS
658.00
406591 8/4/2016 123995 DICK'S/LAKEVILLE SANITATION INC.
6,210.10 REFUSE 408295 DT0001509478 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH
1,564.03 408296 DT0001509479 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH
7,774.13
406592 8/4/2016 136484 DIEBEL, MIKE
476.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 408478 072716 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
225.00 PGAJR LEAGUE 408463 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
701.00
406593 8/4/2016 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC,
600.00 STEEL 00005477 407423 4120039 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
600.00
406594 8/4/2016 138427 DIXON, RALPHARD
208.00 OFFICIATING FEES 408450 072916 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES
208.00
406595 8/4/2016 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES INC.
768.75 CHEMICALS 00005328 407289 827000932-16 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT
3,227.34 CHEMICALS 00005328 407288 827000933-16 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT
3,996.09
406596 8/4/2016 104192 DYNAMIC BRANDS
108.00 CART 407424 1035238 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
108.00
406597 8/4/2016 100740 EARL F. ANDERSEN INC.
1,817.00 TRAFFIC CONES, SEAL MARKER 00001363 408297 0111669-IN 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS STREET NAME SIGNS
1,817.00
406598 8/4/2016 119716 EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC.
54.00 APPAREL 407425 563262 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
54.00
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 14
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 —
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406598
406599
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
119716 EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC.
121333 EDINA FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION
Continued...
10,176.00 FOOTBALL PROGRAM PARTNERSHIP 408298 072616 1630.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS
10,176.00
406600 8/4/2016 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC.
1,740.00 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003752 408213 1839418 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1,740.00
406601 8/4/2016 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY
28.12 TRANSFER CASE FLUID 407291 69-232486 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
54.96 TRANSMISSION FLUID 407802 69-232571 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
489.30 PADS, ROTORS 408299 69-232627 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
572.38
406602 8/4/2016 102485 FAHRENKRUG, ROGER
1,464.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 408479 072716 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
225.00 PGA JR LEAGUE 408464 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
1,689.00
406603 8/4/2016 100216 FARMER BROTHERS COFFEE
178.48 COFFEE 408300 984721 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE
178.48
406604 8/4/2016 122549 FARNER-BOCKEN COMPANY
671.60 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407292 4991500 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
643.30 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408301 4999936 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
1,314.90
406605 8/4/2016 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY
1.10 HARDWARE 00001302 407293 MNTC2138677 5920.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER CLEANING
1.10
406606 8/4/2016 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS
3,238.36 SOFTWARE/MAINTENANCE 00001172 408302 0199623-1 5916.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS METER READING
1,899.01 HYDRANT REPAIR PARTS 00001277 408260 0202453 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION
5,156.83 6" METER FOR RESALE 00001322 407294 0203712 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR
1,383.74 METER REPAIR PARTS 00001338 407426 0204225 5917.6530 REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR
29.14 GASKETS, BOLTS 00001341 407803 0205636 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR
1,562.49 METER FOR PARKS BLDG 00001340 408261 0205638 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 15
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406606 8/4/2016 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS Continued...
13,269.57
406607 8/4/2016 101512 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY
446.80 CAMERA PARTS 00001345 408303 20221 5923.6530 REPAIR PARTS COLLECTION SYSTEMS
446.80
406608 8/4/2016 138847 FOLEY PD
425.00 CANCELED COURSE REFUND 408480 INSTRUCTION 7401.4390 REGISTRATION FEES PSTF REVENUE
425.00
406609 8/4/2016 102727 FORCE AMERICA
1,164.41 REPAIR KIT 00005588 407295 IN001-1066812 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,164.41
406610 8/4/2016 138838 FOSTER, JAMES
189.47 UTILITY REFUND - FINAL 408459 6505 ASPEN RD 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
189.47
406611 8/4/2016 100764 G & K SERVICES
151.83 ACCT 0039263 408304 1013908516 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL
151.83
406612 8/4/2016 100775 GENERAL SPORTS CORPORATION
83.00 PRACTICE PUCKS 407296 91115 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
83.00
406613 8/4/2016 138837 GILBERT, LINDA M.
67.55 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 408455 37515573 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
67.55
406614 8/4/2016 125935 GOLF SCORECARDS INC.
857.00 SCORECARDS 407298 42726 5410.6575 PRINTING GOLF ADMINISTRATION
857.00
406615 8/4/2016 101103 GRAINGER
604.80 SAFETY RED SPRAY PAINT 00001326 407299 9167366351 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
93.09 SCRAPERS, BIT 00001327 407300 9168813070 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION
19.37 GLOVES, BANDAGES 00005510 407302 9169233773 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
228.92 SAFETY GLASSES, TOWELS 00005591 407301 9169767333 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
304.48 WATER COOLERS 00001397 408306 9172645849 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 16
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406615 8/4/2016 101103 GRAINGER Continued...
163.29 TUBE CLAMP KIT 00005591 407805 9172645856 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
94.90 WIRE BRUSHES 00001327 407808 9172781347 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION
39.97 SLEDGE HAMMER 00001327 407807 9172781354 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION
127.05 HAND CLEANER 00001327 407806 9172781362 5920.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER CLEANING
44.40 LIGHT BULBS 00002233 408305 9173663114 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
7.69 COMPARTMENT BOX 00005591 408307 9173874935 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,727.96
406616 8/4/2016 102613 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO
109.95 ALIGNMENT 00005555 407804 100604 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
109.95
406617 8/4/2016 120201 GRANICUS INC.
500.00 SPEAK UP EDINA 408308 78355 1554.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS
690.00 WEBSTREAMING 408308 78355 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS
1,190.00
406618 8/4/2016 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC
928.25 408221 MN00007706 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
928.25
406619 8/4/2016 138846 GREISER, MIKE
225.00 PGAJR LEAGUE 408465 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
225.00
406620 8/4/2016 100785 GREUPNER, JOE
1,480.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 408482 072716 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
1,480.00
406621 8/4/2016 129248 GROTH SEWER & WATER
800.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001330 407303 6069 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
1,400.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001331 407304 6070 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
2,200.00
406622 8/4/2016 100008 GRUBE, MIKE
1,412.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 408483 072716 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
225.00 PGA JR LEAGUE 408466 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
1,637.00
406623 8/4/2016 138839 GUERRERO, JAVIER
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 17
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406623 8/4/2016 138839 GUERRERO, JAVIER Continued...
12.36 UTILITY REFUND - FINAL 408460 5500 MALIBU DR 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
12.36
406624 8/4/2016 138840 GULBRONSON, LYNN
228.20 UTILITY REFUND - FINAL 408461 5 COOPER AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
228.20
406625 8/4/2016 138823 HAEG, MICHAEL
22.00 ART CLASS REFUND 407427 213123 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES
22.00
406626 8/4/2016 102060 HALLOCK COMPANY INC
28.35 LIGHT BULBS 00001273 407305 161408-4 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES
94.30 LIGHT BULBS, RAIL 00001398 407306 162261-1 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES
122.65
406627 8/4/2016 137025 HANRAHAN, KELLY
50.00 GOLF LESSON REFUND 407428 119024 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
50.00
406628 8/4/2016 100797 HAWKINS INC.
2,546.06 CHEMICALS 00005329 407307 3918253 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT
2,546.06
406629 8/4/2016 138841 HEALY, TIM
15.28 UTILITY REFUND - FINAL 408462 5608 BERNARD PL 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
15.28
406630 8/4/2016 117186 HELGREN, ADAM
56.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 408309 072916 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE
56.96
406631 8/4/2016 138824 HELMER, JENNY
110.00 MINI HAWKS PROGRAM 407429 REFUND 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
110.00
406632 8/4/2016 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER
2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 407809 45505 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
2,475.08
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 18
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406633 8/4/2016 118765 HENRY SCHEIN INC. Continued...
98.93 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003725 407308 32367919 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
118.38 00003725 407309 32371350 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
27.44 00003723 407310 32371365 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
244.75
406634 8/4/2016 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS
42.33 SQUEEGEE 407311 700244261 5521.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT
42.33
406635 8/4/2016 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC.
606.00 407379 838530 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
1,165.75 408398 839794 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
1,271.00 408222 839897 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
1,208.00 407853 839949 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
58.00 407854 839950 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
4,308.75
406636 8/4/2016 138845 HOLGERSON, ALEX
225.00 PGA JR LEAGUE 408467 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
225.00
406637 8/4/2016 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY
977.13 407855 41964 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
151.50 408399 41969 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
1,128.63
406638 8/4/2016 129484 INTERNATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION
391.20 PERMIT REFUND 408214 ED147656 1470.4161 SPRINKLER PERMITS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
391.20
406639 8/4/2016 102640 IPMA-HR
650.73 PRE EMPLOYMENT TESTING 407810 INV-17507-SOT8Q 1556.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES
0
650.73
406640 8/4/2016 100828 JERRY'S FOODS
5.65 407811 063016 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS
10.76 407811 063016 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
35.97 407811 063016 1556.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES
44.84 407811 063016 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 19
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406640 8/4/2016 100828 JERRY'S FOODS Continued...
97.22
406641 8/4/2016 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE
14.39 408262 7/16-EQUIPT 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
173.83 408262 7/16-EQUIPT 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
188.22
406642 8/4/2016 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN
1,161.90 407381 2537142 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
36.80 408400 2537143 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
17.55 407380 2537144 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
6,905.05 408403 2537166 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
42.05 408402 2537167 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
2,578.98 408225 2537168 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
3,987.87 408404 2537173 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
17.55 408224 2537175 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
5.38- 408223 2537176 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
279.40 408401 2537188 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
15,021.77
406643 8/4/2016 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
632.64 407385 5478642 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
2.32 407856 5490427 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
740.00 407383 5494661 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
441.89 407386 5495793 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
232.65 407384 5495796 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,439.28 407382 5495800 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
100.23 407430 5495804 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
195.48 408415 5501417 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
2.32 408233 5501418 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
291.48 408411 5501420 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
785.49 408416 5501421 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1.16 408405 5501422 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
612.38 408417 5501423 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
315.51 408412 5501424 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
51.16 408413 5501425 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
175.53 408414 5501426 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
1,845.40 408406 5501429 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
173.32 408407 5501431 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
2,326.24 408408 5501434 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 20
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #
8/4/2016 -
Doc No Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406643 8/4/2016 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Continued...
307.84 408410 5501435 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
2,299.23 408231 5501439 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
402.09 408228 5501441 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
827.15 408232 5501442 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,469.25 408230 5501443 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
459.72 408229 5501444 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
73.52 408227 5501445 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
1,832.54 408226 5501446 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
10.00- 408421 578617 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
856.28- 408420 582016 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
21.89- 408419 582017 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
13.15- 408235 582849 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
50.76- 408236 583060 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
25.16- 407387 583061 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
14.88- 408234 583466 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
12.00- 408409 583739 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
10.08- 408418 583742 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
17,021.62
406644 8/4/2016 138834 JOHNSON, NELLENE S.
74.51 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 408456 37051903 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
74.51
406645 8/4/2016 102603 JONAS, LENORE
70.39 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 407431 072616 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
70.39
406646 8/4/2016 138467 JUST US CONSTRUCTION & RESTORATION INC.
11,944.70 BASEMENT REPAIRS 00001788 408485 5195 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC-OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS
11,944.70
406647 8/4/2016 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE
356.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 408486 072716 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES
356.00
406648 8/4/2016 119947 KRAEMER MINING & MATERIALS INC.
755.84 ROCK 407316 254542 5913.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK DISTRIBUTION
755.84
406649 8/4/2016 136231 LARSON, DEB
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page- 21
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406649 8/4/2016 136231 LARSON, DEB Continued...
700.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 408313 072916 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET GENERAL
700.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 408313 072916 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL
700.00 MARKETING CONSULTANT 408313 072916 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL
2,100.00
406650 8/4/2016 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
138.05 ANTI-SEIZE COMPOUND 00005592 407812 9304239432 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
138.05
406651 8/4/2016 138833 LINTON, MICHAEL
107.00 SKYHAWKS LACROSSE 408487 REFUND 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
107.00
406652 8/4/2016 138012 M & M HOME CONTRACTORS INC.
2,500.00 ED147645 DEMO ESCROW REFUND 407432 4532 RUTLEDGE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
AVE
2,500.00
406653 8/4/2016 129657 M.S. INDUSTRIES INC.
1,690.00 MILLING BITS 407318 12846 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
1,690.00
406654 8/4/2016 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC.
2,850.00 STRIP BROOMS 407321 P00320 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER
221.45 SWITCH 00005473 407319 P00396 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
106.61 0-RINGS, SEALS 00005485 407320 P00425 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
3,178.06
406655 8/4/2016 134063 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY
6,410.04 DIESEL FUEL 407433 591060 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
6,842.84 UNLEADED FUEL 408316 601038 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
400.00- MAY 2016 REFUND 407434 CM-012355 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
400.00- JUNE 2016 REFUND 407435 CM-012425 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
12,452.88
406656 8/4/2016 102241 MARGRON SKOGLUND WINE IMPORTS INC.
83.00 408237 20020010 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
83.00
406657 8/4/2016 130635 MILLNER, CHAD
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 22
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406657 8/4/2016 130635 MILLNER, CHAD Continued...
235.12 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 407815 072616 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL
235.12
406658 8/4/2016 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER
1,950.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001333 407327 35252 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
2,025.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001334 407328 35253 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
3,975.00
406659 8/4/2016 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS
53.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 408320 20560 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS
53.00
406660 8/4/2016 138828 MNCREW
65.00 BILL NEUENDORF 407814 MNCREW EVENT 9232.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT
65.00
406661 8/4/2016 121491 MORRIE'S PARTS & SERVICE GROUP
183.26 ARM ASSEMBLIES, BUSHINGS 00005427 407436 542516F6W 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
183.26
406662 8/4/2016 102395 MOSE, WILLIAM
364.00 OFFICIATING FEES 408451 072916 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES
364.00
406663 8/4/2016 102421 MPGMA
100.00 DUES 408488 2016 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION
100.00
406664 8/4/2016 106314 MR. ROOTER PLUMBING
1,000.00 CURB STOP REPLACEMENT 00001342 408321 4945064 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
1,000.00
406665 8/4/2016 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO.
284.50 408239 112083 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
525.00 407857 112084 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
211.00 408238 112085 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,020.50
406666 8/4/2016 137081 NEW LOOK RENOVATIONS LLC
2,500.00 ED142780 ESCROW REFUND 407437 4443 GARRISON 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 23
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406666 8/4/2016 137081 NEW LOOK RENOVATIONS LLC
LANE
Continued...
2,500.00
406667 8/4/2016 105791 NICOLLET COUNTY
310.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 408322 080116 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
310.00
406668 8/4/2016 104350 NIKE USA INC.
308.11 APPAREL 407438 988890436 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
792.27 407439 988990869 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
183.11 407442 989059867 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
1,341.94 407441 989433270 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
360.83 407440 989489933 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
77.13 407443 989536202 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
190.83 407444 989621944 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
99.63 407445 989709554 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
324.00 GOLF BALLS 408323 989829881 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
59.63 GOLF BALLS 408324 989894444 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
26.25 APPAREL 408325 989999188 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
3,763.73
406669 8/4/2016 103106 NLSC PRODUCTS INC.
64.00 LED LAMPS 00001269 408489 96843BAL 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
64.00
406670 8/4/2016 132509 NOLAN, MARK
80.46 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 408326 080116 1262.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TRANSPORTATION
80.46
406671 8/4/2016 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC
122.48 STROBE LIGHT 00005436 408327 41439 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
122.48
406672 8/4/2016 136562 NORTHLAND RECREATION LLC
1,106.00 CONCRETE PICNIC TABLE 407816 792 47098.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS Creek Valley Donation
1,106.00
406673 8/4/2016 103578 OFFICE DEPOT
75.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES 407332 837958503001 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENAADMINISTRATION
67.61 OFFICE SUPPLIES 407331 838902366001 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENAADMINISTRATION
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 24
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406673 8/4/2016 103578 OFFICE DEPOT Continued...
143.21
406674 8/4/2016 138662 ON SITE SANITATION-TWIN CITIES
2,606.02 RESTROOM TRAILER 408490 0000282471 7411.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PSTF OCCUPANCY
2,606.02
406675 8/4/2016 101659 ORKIN
130.00 28429180 407449 28429180-7/16 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
22.00 28438083 407448 28438083-7/16 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP
22.00 28441102 407447 28441102-7/16 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP
136.73 286500543 407446 28650543-7/16 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
310.73
406676 8/4/2016 103624 P & L AUTOMOTIVE INC.
70.00 WINDOW TINTING 407333 286952 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
70.00
406677 8/4/2016 104916 PAINTERS GEAR INC.
488.88 PAINT SPRAYER PARTS 00001382 408330 38029 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS
488.88
406678 8/4/2016 131698 PARLEY LAKE WINERY
282.00 407388 16130 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
282.00
406679 8/4/2016 138020 PATRICK'S CATERING
49.38 CATERED FOOD 408329 0852 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
57.58 CATERED FOOD 408491 0853 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
106.96
406680 8/4/2016 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY
859.52 407389 8555566-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
2,321.22 407859 8556287-IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
434.96 408240 8556290-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
390.60 407858 8556292-IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
4,006.30
406681 8/4/2016 138825 PAYNE, LINDSAY
89.00 BASKETBALL CAMP 407450 REFUND 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
89.00
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL Page - 25
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406681
406682
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
138825 PAYNE, LINDSAY
100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY
Continued...
788.14 408331 54136800 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
659.78 408333 54136864 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
2,387.43 408332 54136876 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
144.00 408241 55531388 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
3,979.35
406683 8/4/2016 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES
632.01 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 8 408263 PROMENADE P4 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS
3,555.92 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 8 408263 PROMENADE P4 01251.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A-251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE
1,891.07 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 8 408263 PROMENADE P4 04401.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS PROMENADE H2O FEATURE&PATH
3,688.85 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 8 408263 PROMENADE P4 9232.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT
9,767.85
406684 8/4/2016 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
683.10 407390 2012970 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
91.16 408245 2012976 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
256.68 407391 2013154 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
6.96 408430 2016588 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
293.39 408427 2016589 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
992.01 408422 2016590 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
73.16 408423 2016591 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
73.16 408428 2016593 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
361.16 408242 2016595 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
2.32 408426 2016597 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
41.74 408424 2016598 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
764.40 408431 2016602 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
192.98 408244 2016608 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
877.71 408243 2016609 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
877.32 408425 2016610 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
1,445.08 408429 2016612 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
71.66- 408432 241422 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
146.32- 408246 242015 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
6,814.35
406685 8/4/2016 100953 PHYSIO-CONTROL INC.
4,767.84 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 408215 416137513 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
4,767.84
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 26
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406686 8/4/2016 110777 RAINBOW TREECARE Continued...
623.00 EMERALD ASH BORER INJECTION 00001434 408341 1273172 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE
603.00 DUTCH ELM DISEASE INJECTION 408342 1274052 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE
1,226.00
406687 8/4/2016 124537 RALPH, ROBERT
598.00 OFFICIATING FEES 408452 072916 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES
598.00
406688 8/4/2016 104643 RECREATION SUPPLY COMPANY
1,201.95 GOGGLES, WATER TOYS 408343 305432 5310.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL ADMINISTRATION
1,201.95
406689 8/4/2016 132392 RED POWER DIESEL SERVICE
33.67 VALVE HANDLE 00005417 407817 10170MN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
33.67
406690 8/4/2016 138832 REGAL HOMES LLC
2,500.00 ED128326 ESCROW REFUND 408492 6024 ST JOHNS 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
AVE
2,500.00
406691 8/4/2016 106036 REITER, JERRY
78.97 UNIFORM PURCHASE 408344 072916 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE
78.97
406692 8/4/2016 137023 RITE
9.24 CC TERMINAL CLEANER 408345 13276 5822.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING
9.24 CC TERMINAL CLEANER 408345 13276 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING
9.25 CC TERMINAL CLEANER 408345 13276 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING
27.73
406693 8/4/2016 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO.
917.52 SOFTENER SALT 407335 337523 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
917.52
406694 8/4/2016 138708 ROCK, KEITH
104.00 OFFICIATING FEES 408453 072916 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES
104.00
406695 8/4/2016 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
R55CKR2
Check #
LOGIS101
Date Amount
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 27
Business Unit
406695 8 /4/2016 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT Continued...
112.67 0402 37306935 0 407818 005634 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD VANVALKENBURG
112.67
406696 8/4/2016 138820 SAVOX COMMUNICATIONS INC.
15,080.00 TFI EQUIPMENT 00003819 407336 46391 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
15,080.00
406697 8/4/2016 119799 SCHIMETZ, SCOTT
104.00 OFFICIATING FEES 408454 072916 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES
104.00
406698 8/4/2016 138830 SHEEKH, FATMA
16.95 RENTAL REFUND 408216 072716 5750.2039 SALES & USE TAX PAYABLE CENTENNIAL LAKES BALANCE SHEET
233.05 RENTAL REFUND 408216 072716 5751.4555 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK CENTENNIAL LAKES REVENUE
250.00
406699 8/4/2016 104098 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP
50.00 ACROBAT LICENSE 00004345 407337 B05097800 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS
83.00 ACROBAT LICENSE 00004345 407337 B05097800 1140.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLANNING
83.00 ACROBAT LICENSE 00004345 407337 B05097800 1470.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
216.00
406700 8/4/2016 120784 SIGN PRO
163.48 BATHROOM SIGNS 00001253 407338 10635 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
185.00 DASHERBOARD 408346 10680 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENAADMINISTRATION
348.48
406701 8/4/2016 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC.
40.93 408349 289834 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
77.86 408350 290001 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
22.16 HOT DOG BUNS 408347 290132 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
77.86 408348 290288 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
218.81
406702 8/4/2016 137482 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
186.45 INSECTICIDE 00001303 408351 76675006 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
182.61 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001308 408352 76685299 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
43.56 NOZZLE KIT 00001314 408353 76698744 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
412.62
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 28
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 -
Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406703 8/4/2016 132195 SMALL LOT MN Continued-.
360.04 407392 8094 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
588.30 408433 8525 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
540.30 408247 8526 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,488.64
406704 8/4/2016 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS
1,156.40 407394 1432141 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
996.40 407393 1432143 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
214.40 408249 1434628 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
832.21 408436 1434629 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
735.20 408248 1434630 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,826.80 407866 1434633 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
144.80 407861 1434634 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
2,738.56 407860 1434635 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
577.40 407863 1434636 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
1,243.61 407862 1434637 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
1,580.00 407865 1434639 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
3,654.00 407864 1434640 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
201.85 408435 1435968 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
210.93 408434 1435969 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
80.00- 407867 9078867 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
16,032.56
406705 8/4/2016 120588 SPRIGGS PLUMBING & HEATING INC.
292.72 PLUMBING SERVICE 407339 7334A 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
292.72
406706 8/4/2016 129360 STANLEY CONVERGENT SECURITY SOLUTIONS
273.87 MONITORING CHARGES 407340 13698877 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
273.87
406707 8/4/2016 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC
507.75 408437 11761 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
911.75 408250 11762 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
1,419.50
406708 8/4/2016 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC.
55.00 TIRE DISPOSAL 407820 10139251 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
395.76 TIRES 00005442 407821 10139814 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
450.76
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 29
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406708
406709
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC.
122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC.
Continued...
500.00 MOVIE RENTAL 408217 DB2210884 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC-OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
500.00
406710 8/4/2016 119864 SYSCO MINNESOTA
160.20 FLOOR CLEANER 407149 607130998 5311.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
588.76 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407149 607130998 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
1,081.84 407148 607151927 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
298.91 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407150 607192607 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
1,053.44 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407147 607201021 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
1,313.54 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408354 607220744 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
756.53 408355 607250527 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
448.61 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408356 607262583 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
5,701.83
406711 8/4/2016 104932 TAYLOR MADE
142.52 407452 31838396 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
610.21 APPAREL 407451 31838719 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
300.65 407453 31838877 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES
1,053.38
406712 8/4/2016 113549 TENNIS WEST
13,200.00 RESURFACE TENNIS COURTS 00001285 407343 16-00783 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
400.00 CRACK REPAIRS 407344 16-00783ADD 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
17,270.00 RESURFACE TENNIS COURTS 00001147 408493 COUNTRYSIDE PK 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
30,870.00
406713 8/4/2016 138836 THOMPSON, HAILEY A.
678.16 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 408457 36867208 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
678.16
406714 8/4/2016 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
1,480.60 408439 1117198 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
176.05 408438 1119615 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
1,656.65
406715 8/4/2016 120700 TIGER OAK MEDIA
330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 408357 2016-154285 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING
330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 408357 2016-154285 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 30
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406715 8/4/2016 120700 TIGER OAK MEDIA Continued...
330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 408357 2016-154285 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING
990.00
406716 8/4/2016 104889 TILSNER, ADAM
400.00 PGA JR LEAGUE 408468 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
400.00
406717 8/4/2016 138283 TIN WHISKERS BREWING CO LLC
616.00 408440 4710 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
616.00
406718 8/4/2016 120595 T-MOBILE
28.08 ENGINEERING GPS 407342 477067848-6/16 1261.6188 TELEPHONE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
28.08
406719 8/4/2016 122302 TOUCHPOINT LOGIC LLC
155.00 PATCH CABLES 407454 4182 421130.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT
155.00
406720 8/4/2016 130874 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) INC.
65.50 BELTS 00005444 407823 138962515-001 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
65.50
406721 8/4/2016 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC BOZEMAN
167.97 FIELD PAINT 00001103 408358 1501-004911 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE
167.97
406722 8/4/2016 103298 UPS STORE #1715, THE
33.70 SHIPPING CHARGES 00001177 407345 TRAN:1609 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION
33.70
406723 8/4/2016 114236 USA BLUE BOOK
565.62 HOSE ADAPTERS 00001300 407346 998465 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
565.62
406724 8/4/2016 101058 VAN PAPER CO.
540.38 TOWELS, LINERS, TISSUE 407347 393309-00 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION
109.95 CAN LINERS 408359 393309-01 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
281.88 LIQUOR BAGS 407348 393520-00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING
932.21
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 31
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406724
406725
8/4/2016
8/4/2016
101058 VAN PAPER CO.
101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC.
Continued...
273.63 CAT5E - TRAFFIC CAMERAS 00001375 408363 1375 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
883.32 STREET LIGHT REPAIR PARTS 00001309 407349 1594114 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
384.08 WIRE CRIMP TOOL 00001311 407350 1595094 1321.6556 TOOLS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
173.40 UNDERGROUND REPAIR PARTS 00001311 407352 1595110 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
40.53 STREET LIGHT REPAIR PARTS 00001311 407351 1595113 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
4.14 STRAPS 00001311 407353 1600354 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
54.05 LIGHT SENSOR 00001311 408360 1600364 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
206.01 CAT5E - TRAFFIC CAMERAS 00001375 408361 1613586 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
25.09 DUCT SEALS 00001376 408362 1617550 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
2,044.25
406726 8/4/2016 133629 VON HANSONS MEATS
144.21 BRATS 408367 94994 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
306.88 408368 94996 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
451.09
406727 8/4/2016 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN
72.30 407355 0019968 1481.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK FIRE STATION
84.09 407355 0019968 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
101.15 407355 0019968 1470.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
167.66 407355 0019968 1628.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL SENIOR CITIZENS
266.76 407355 0019968 1551.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL
344.35 407355 0019968 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
461.57 407355 0019968 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
528.57 407355 0019968 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE
528.57 407355 0019968 1552.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING
71.08 407355 0019968 5111.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT
281.26 407355 0019968 5311.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL POOL OPERATION
165.91 407355 0019968 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
344.88 407355 0019968 5420.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE
1,283.21 407355 0019968 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
1,336.95 407355 0019968 5720.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
87.23 407355 0019968 5861.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL VERNON OCCUPANCY
221.03 407355 0019968 5841.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK OCCUPANCY
6,346.57
406728 8/4/2016 100509 WATERLOO, PATRICK
225.00 PGA JR LEAGUE 408469 GOLF 5401.4593 GREEN FEES EXEC COURSE GOLF REVENUES
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 32
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #
8/4/2016 -
Doc No Inv No
8/4/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406728 8/4/2016 100509 WATERLOO, PATRICK Continued...
225.00
406729 8/4/2016 130574 WATSON COMPANY
419.30 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407356 866558 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
492.62 CONCESSION PRODUCT 407357 866687 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
277.26 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408369 866839 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
641.91 408370 866958 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
1,831.09
406730 8/4/2016 138831 WATSON-FORSBERG CO.
2,500.00 ED143388 ESCROW REFUND 408494 4109 W 54TH ST 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
2,500.00
406731 8/4/2016 101312 WINE MERCHANTS
169.54- 407401 708972 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
108.16- 407400 706973 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
121.16- 407399 708975 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
13.67- 408258 708991 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
8.67- 408257 708995 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
13.92- 408256 708996 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
653.14 407397 7090099 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
526.96 407398 7091049 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
158.16 408449 7092002 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
238.68 408448 7092003 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,326.09 408447 7092004 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
191.16 408255 7092007 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
79.16 408254 7092008 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
2,738.23
406732 8/4/2016 138835 WOOD, JILLIAN F.
1,553.16 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 408458 37432772 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1,553.16
406733 8/4/2016 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC.
3,769.00 TRAFFIC STUDY 408371 1-01686-740 4422.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC STUDIES
679.50 TRAFFIC STUDY 408372 46-01686-020 4422.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC STUDIES
4,448.50
406734 8/4/2016 138826 WUBBEN, PAM
3.65 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 407455 PERMIT 328 1000.2039 SALES & USE TAX PAYABLE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 33
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406734 8/4/2016 138826 WUBBEN, PAM Continued...
50.00 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 407455 PERMIT 328 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
53.65
406735 8/4/2016 101726 XCEL ENERGY
49.23 51-4420190-3 407457 509709783 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL
14.83 51-0010619811-5 407456 509776956 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
17.31 51-0160483-1 407836 509800524 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS
23.81 51-0223133-2 407837 509800706 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
22.37 51-6541084-2 407838 509887398 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE
20.34 51-0010118404-0 407826 509929066 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
76.56 51-9770164-7 407825 509935484 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
130.96 51-0010166207-2 407827 509936615 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE
12.45 51-0010573502-3 407830 509942442 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
12.20 51-0010573385-0 407829 509943233 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
54.26 51-0010619455-3 407831 509943692 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
15.15 51-0010777228-2 407832 509947626 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
31.78 51-0011004217-3 408264 509953130 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
18.65 51-0010876012-2 407833 509957720 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
21.80 51-0010876028-0 407834 509958733 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
23.07 51-9770163-6 407824 509964043 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
13.16 51-0010573384-9 407828 509965393 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
16.26 51-0011270406-5 407835 509966063 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
13,752.21 51-6644819-9 408495 510072313 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
10,682.44 51-6955679-8 408496 510249897 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL
25,008.84
406736 8/4/2016 129312 YOUTH TECH INC.
1,976.25 MOVIE MAKER, ROBOTICS 407458 5301 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
2,093.75 GAME DESIGN, ICODE 408373 5344 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
4,070.00
406737 8/4/2016 120099 Z WINES USA LLC
518.00 408259 17097 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
518.00
406738 8/4/2016 101091 ZIEGLER INC
625.54 COUPLINGS, HOSE 00005549 407459 PC001798327 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
625.54
685,432.08 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/4/2016 — 8/4/2016
8/3/2016 10:25:48
Page - 34
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
685,432.08 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals
Checks
A/P AC H Payment
Total Payments
603,261.82
82,170.26
685,432.08
8/3/2016 10:25:56
Page- 1
R55CKS2 LOGIS100
CITY OF EDINA
Note: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. Council Check Summary
8/4/2016 - 8/4/2016
Company Amount
01000 GENERAL FUND 358,720.11
02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 1,859.67
02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 632.01
04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 17,778.57
04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 155.00
04500 CANDO FUND 11,296.00
05100 ART CENTER FUND 4,333.65
05200 GOLF DOME FUND 144.20
05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 7,625.73
05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 20,141.00
05500 ICE ARENA FUND 16,711.69
05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 450.94
05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 18,456.64
05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,774.05
05800 LIQUOR FUND 136,008.48
05900 UTILITY FUND 72,934.54
05930 STORM SEWER FUND 7,622.93
07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 3,031.02
09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 3,753.85
Report Totals 685432.08
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 qici
procedures d /1-1 (
ri;DI AeVITAFA
- er Pr"
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page- 1
Business Unit
3503 8/11/2016 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS
490.44 COFFEE 408807 1238393 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION
490.44
3504 8/11/2016 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO.
14,125.00 SE SEWER STUDY 408699 23271474.00-9 5925.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - SEWER
2,548.50 STORMWATER MODELING 408698 23271514.00-1 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES-STORM
16,673.50
3505 8/11/2016 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC.
85.00 RUBBER FLOORING 408808 1002581 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
85.00
3506 8/11/2016 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION
390.20 408558 54703500 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
56.00 408559 94358800 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING
62.29 408559 94358800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
508.49
3507 8/11/2016 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS
44.58 POSTCARDS 408700 OE-424896-1 1261.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
86.10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003067 408627 WO-217274-1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
130.68
3508 8/11/2016 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS
148.43 OFFICE SUPPLIES 408814 120498 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
42.59 OFFICE SUPPLIES 408815 120749 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
52.17 OFFICE SUPPLIES 408816 120894 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
243.19
3509 8/11/2016 132444 BOLTON & MENK INC.
7,078.50 SANITARY SEWER REHAB 408701 0192439 03493.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Presidents Neighborhood
7,078.50
3510 8/11/2016 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS
54.72 SLACK ADJUSTER 00005496 408817 1077056 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
63.90 COOLANT 00005562 408819 1077995 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
39.11 BELT 00005499 408820 1078587 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
120.00- CORE RETURN 408818 CM1067453 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
37.73
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 2
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3511 8/11/2016 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. Continued-.
44.46 SURFACE CASE 00004350 408943 DPM5968 2710.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CAS ADMINISTRATION
1,178.97 SURFACE PRO 408944 DQV0434 2710.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CAS ADMINISTRATION
147.90 SURFACE PRO WARRANTY 408945 DRK8334 2710.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CAS ADMINISTRATION
1,371.33
3512 8/11/2016 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD
400.00 FILTERS 408826 518537 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
208.00 SCRUBBER STEERING CABLE 408827 519056 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
655.00 CLEANING SUPPLIES 408828 519059 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
1,263.00
3513 8/11/2016 100513 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES INC.
2,895.44 CLEANING SERVICES 00004056 408946 7070227388 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL
2,895.44
3514 8/11/2016 104020 DALCO
345.93 CAN LINERS, TOWELS,TISSUE 00009498 408831 3053454 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT
43.20 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00001390 408832 3054377 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
85.90 INSECT KILLER 00001390 408833 3055820 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
475.03
3515 8/11/2016 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANCE
1,475.40 E-82 PARTS 408922 88195 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1,475.40
3516 8/11/2016 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC.
425.00 ROWAY 408717 2470424 1263.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENT
425.00
3517 8/11/2016 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP.
637.71 CHEM FEED EQUIP REPAIRS 00001360 408722 1008821 5915.6530 REPAIR PARTS WATER TREATMENT
637.71
3518 8/11/2016 108618 JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC.
105.03 BUNKER PANTS REPAIR 408925 228884 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
105.03
3519 8/11/2016 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC.
14.87 TOILET RENTAL 408725 103213 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL
14.87
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 3
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3519
3520
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC.
103217 LHB, INC.
Continued...
23,755.48 GRANDVIEW TRANS STUDY 408728 150515.00-9 9234.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC-OTHER GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT
2,400.00 STREETSCAPING 408729 160238.00-1 9238.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC-OTHER SOUTHDALE 2 TIF DISTRICT
26,155.48
3521 8/11/2016 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP
162.14 408593 220913 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
178.31 408592 220914 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
591.06 408594 220915 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
824.23 408595 221443 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
741.51 408597 221444 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
1,057.84 408596 221445 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
3,555.09
3522 8/11/2016 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI
5,500.00 2015 AUDIT - FINAL 408527 40389 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION
5,500.00
3523 8/11/2016 102560 MAXIMUM SOLUTIONS INC.
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 1600.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5110.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5310.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POOL ADMINISTRATION
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5710.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION
2,600.00 MAXGALAXY 408730 19167 5760.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
23,400.00
3524 8/11/2016 101483 MENARDS
47.33 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001372 408529 18626 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
61.98 TRAILER PLUG & CORD 00001406 408782 19412 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
11.40 CONCRETE MIX 00001427 408531 19678 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
80.79 NAILS, TRIPOD 00001428 408530 19682 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE
15.98 CHISEL, DRILLING HAMMER 00001430 408532 19739 5920.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER CLEANING
217.48
3525 8/11/2016 100906 ion DISTRIBUTING INC.
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 4
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3525 8/11/2016 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. Continued...
660.40 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001409 408538 1080245-00 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
660.40
3526 8/11/2016 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC.
487.00 TIRES 00005518 408737 210242735 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
487.00
3527 8/11/2016 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY
68.15 TISSUE 408664 10388 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
227.12 CUPS 408664 10388 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
295.27
3528 8/11/2016 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY
728.26 INSTALLED FAUCET 408853 69138 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL
728.26
3529 8/11/2016 101000 RJM PRINTING INC.
158.50 BUSINESS CARDS 408546 91430 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS
158.50
3530 8/11/2016 102935 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC
495.09 WINE CHILLER REPAIR 408953 67304 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
495.09
3531 8/11/2016 122455 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING
8,550.00 SCADA PROGRAMMING 00001351 408745 1711 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION
8,550.00
3532 8/11/2016 118190 TURFWERKS LLC
101.90 TIRE ASSEMBLY 00005558 408752 E196918 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
19.18 PULLEY 00005560 408863 E196925 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
2,305.95 PUMP ASSEMBLY 00005494 408862 0140134 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
2,427.03
3533 8/11/2016 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION
33.30- CREDIT 408869 46224250 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
758.31 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408868 46226952 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
725.01
3534 8/11/2016 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 5
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
3534 8/11/2016 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE Continued...
318.30 408918 10179 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
1,730.50 408917 10262 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
80.00- 408919 432241-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,968.80
406739 8/11/2016 129458 ACME TOOLS
903.00 COMPRESSOR 408620 4195195 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
237.00 TOOL BATTERIES 00005603 408497 4326175 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,140.00
406740 8/11/2016 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION
241.76 CO2 408621 33095790 5330.6545 CHEMICALS FLOWRIDER
241.76
406741 8/11/2016 105262 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC.
32.00 HANDLE 00003850 408767 30308 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
32.00
406742 8/11/2016 138842 ALEXANDER, IAN
194.00 ART CLASS REFUND 408498 216806 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES
194.00
406743 8/11/2016 101115 AMERIPRIDE SERVICES INC.
251.94 408806 073116 1470.6201 LAUNDRY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
373.68 408806 073116 1551.6201 LAUNDRY CITY HALL GENERAL
556.30 408806 073116 1470.6201 LAUNDRY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
83.04 408806 073116 5821.6201 LAUNDRY 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
128.19 408806 073116 5841.6201 LAUNDRY YORK OCCUPANCY
241.54 408806 073116 5861.6201 LAUNDRY VERNON OCCUPANCY
1,634.69
406744 8/11/2016 101874 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC.
203.00 BATTERIES 00003824 408768 61639 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
203.00
406745 8/11/2016 135988 APPRIZE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
835.05 AUG 2016 ADMIN FEES 408769 12914 1556.6160 DATA PROCESSING EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES
835.05
406746 8/11/2016 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 6
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406746 8/11/2016 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Continued...
89.00 408556 3103627 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
89.00
406747 8/11/2016 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS
281.42 1-14635 4 408920 080116 7411.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL PSTF OCCUPANCY
281.42
406748 8/11/2016 120995 AVR INC.
751.00 408624 133198 1365.6520 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS & PATH MAINTENANCE
875.15 408625 133339 1365.6520 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS & PATH MAINTENANCE
751.00 READY MIX 408623 133443 1365.6520 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS & PATH MAINTENANCE
654.00 READY MIX 00001254 408622 133548 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
3,031.15
406749 8/11/2016 136267 BAUHAUS BREW LABS LLC
284.00 408557 9883 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
284.00
406750 8/11/2016 126996 BCA - CJTE
480.00 TRAINING 408500 10410 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
480.00
406751 8/11/2016 136847 BEDFORD TECHNOLOGY LLC
4,194.55 BRAEMAR SIGNAGE POSTS 00001176 408499 52726 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES-STORM
4,194.55
406752 8/11/2016 105864 BEN MEADOWS COMPANY
399.73 SAWS 00001282 408809 SI02679342 1644.6556 TOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE
399.73
406753 8/11/2016 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC.
1,527.05 AUG 2016 SERVICE 408921 146978 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY
1,527.05
406754 8/11/2016 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC.
792.00 PIZZA 408626 4644026 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
360.00 PIZZA . 408810 4644068 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
1,152.00
406755 8/11/2016 125139 BERNICK'S
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page- 7
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406755 8/11/2016 125139 BERNICK'S Continued...
788.95 408882 311884 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
315.05 408883 311885 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
1,104.00
406756 8/11/2016 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY
495.70 COFFEE 408813 T210599 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
126.95 COFFEE 408811 T81041 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
86.95 COFFEE 408812 T81042 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
709.60
406757 8/11/2016 122599 BIOLAWN
987.40 LAWN TREATMENTS 408941 105419 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
987.40
406758 8/11/2016 125268 BLUE COMPACTOR SERVICES
386.00 COMPACTOR RENTAL 408770 AUG2016-2 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH
386.00
406759 8/11/2016 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY
841.58 HAND DRYERS 00001307 408942 911516206 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
841.58
406760 8/11/2016 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS
121.50 408560 135431 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
121.50
406761 8/11/2016 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA
1,740.60 408561 1080500848 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
652.60 408892 1080504151 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
3.45 408891 1080504153 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
295.93 408890 1080504184 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
726.90 408887 1080504187 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
860.65 408565 1080507472 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
707.45 408564 1080507473 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
37.15 408562 1080507514 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
1,307.03 408563 1080507515 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
484.40 408884 1080507517 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
6,451.04 408888 1080507518 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
33.07 408889 1080507519 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
931.25 408886 1080507520 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 8
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406761 8/11/2016 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Continued...
2,055.90 408885 1080507521 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
12.00- 408566 2080135475 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
1,025.00- 408568 2080142217 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
61.72- 408570 2080142243 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
22.50- 408571 2080142246 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
6.52- 408567 2080142247 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
13.04- 408569 2080142251 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
44.76- 408893 2080144807 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
15,101.88
406762 8/11/2016 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER LLC
857.70 408574 1090593883 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
3,123.90 408573 1090593884 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
23.80 408894 1090593885 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING
2,681.30 408575 1090593886 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
3,101.95 408572 1090594792 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
9,788.65
406763 8/11/2016 122250 BROWN, JEFF
136.08 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 408628 080316 1490.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH
136.08
406764 8/11/2016 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC.
394.24 AG-LIME 408702 16411 1642.6542 INFIELD MIXTURE FIELD MAINTENANCE
394.24
406765 8/11/2016 132976 BUCKLEY, TOM
26.77 UNIFORM PURCHASE 408629 080116 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE
26.77
406766 8/11/2016 123615 CANADA GOOSE MANAGEMENT INC.
2,850.00 POPULATION SURVEY 408501 201608 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
2,850.00
406767 8/11/2016 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES
32.50 408576 00011223 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
478.85 408578 972438 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
3,339.65 408577 972439 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
3,851.00
R55CKR2
Check #
LOGIS101
Date Amount
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page- 9
Business Unit
406768 8/11/2016 100897 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Continued...
19.25 408703 8000014561-7/16 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
44.87 408703 8000014561-7/16 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION
90.47 408703 8000014561-7/16 1628.6186 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS
126.74 408703 8000014561-7/16 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING
400.15 408703 8000014561-7/16 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
246.83 408703 8000014561-7/16 5111.6186 HEAT ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT
35.11 408703 8000014561-7/16 5422.6186 HEAT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
296.82 408703 8000014561-7/16 5420.6186 HEAT CLUB HOUSE
2,654.09 408703 8000014561-7/16 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
120.59 408703 8000014561-7/16 5761.6186 HEAT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
19.25 408703 8000014561-7/16 5821.6186 HEAT 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
31.69 408703 8000014561-7/16 5841.6186 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY
34.19 408703 8000014561-7/16 5861.6186 HEAT VERNON OCCUPANCY
97.88 408703 8000014561-7/16 5913.6186 HEAT DISTRIBUTION
105.69 408703 8000014561-7/16 5921.6186 HEAT SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT
426.96 408703 8000014561-7/16 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS
4,750.58
406769 8/11/2016 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY
63.44 5584304-9 408825 5584304-7/16 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY
20.65 5584310-6 408823 5584310-7/16 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER
37.73 5590919-6 408824 5590919-7/16 7413.6582 FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER
22.24 5596524-8 408822 5596524-7/16 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
162.66 8034001-1 408821 8034001-7/16 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING
306.72
406770 8/11/2016 123898 CENTURYLINK
129.00 952 831-0024 408631 0024-7/16 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING
57.50 952 929-0297 408632 0297-7/16 4090.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
445.68 952 927-8861 408633 8861-7/16 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
136.59 952 920-9996 408630 9996-7/16 2310.6188 TELEPHONE E911
768.77
406771 8/11/2016 138851 CITI CARDS
110.00 SUPPLIES 408634 4176 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY
110.00
406772 8/11/2016 122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS
139.60 FLAGS 408829 COM-0899 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
139.60
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 10
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406772
406773
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS
122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES
Continued...
2,287.57 00082198-0200815001 408940 200815001-7/16 1551.6189 SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL
697.80 00101025-0203600013 408937 203600013-7/16 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE
374.88 00101025-0203610011 408938 203610011-7/16 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE
767.63 00114667-0210000012 408939 210000012-7/16 4090.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
4,127.88
406774 8/11/2016 101850 CITY OF ST. PAUL
458.00 PDI TRAINING 408502 IN00016916 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
458.00
406775 8/11/2016 120433 COMCAST
9.04 8772 10 614 0161120 408830 161120-7/16 5510.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ARENAADMINISTRATION
9.04
406776 8/11/2016 139006 COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
1,792.71 DUPLICATE PAYMENT 408771 REFUND 1400.4334 POLICE GENERAL FEES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1792.71
406777 8/11/2016 101329 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC.
432.00 CONCRETE FORMS, PLACERS 00001385 408504 0144470-IN 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE
58.83 REPAIR MORTAR, BONDING AGENT 408503 0144472-IN 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL
490.83
406778 8/11/2016 137891 CREATIVE COLOR GRAPHIC & PRINT STUDIO
5,875.86 CUSTOM SIGNS 408772 10261 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM
5,875.86
406779 8/11/2016 105570 CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING
31.00 PERMIT REFUND 408773 ED149637 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS INSPECTIONS
31.00
406780 8/11/2016 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC.
810.00 DRAIN CLEANING 408774 112846 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
810.00
406781 8/11/2016 102791 D2 SERVICES INC.
7,374.90 PROGRAMMING 00001350 408635 10705 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION
7,374.90
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 11
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406781
406782
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
102791 D2 SERVICES INC.
100707 DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE
Continued...
356.00 SOD REPAIRS 408704 JULY2016 5913.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT DISTRIBUTION
356.00
406783 8/11/2016 102455 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC.
104.58 CLUTCH 00005497 408505 4-208728 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
104.58
406784 8/11/2016 134792 DECISION WISE LLC
7,500.00 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SURVEY 408775 16364 1556.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES
7,500.00
406785 8/11/2016 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO.
69.45 HEX SET 00001405 408507 112060 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
88.60 CLAMPS, SHEET METAL TOOLS 00005594 408506 112097 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
78.36- CREDIT 408508 112777 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
176.04 TRITON INSERT 00005563 408705 114240 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
255.73
406786 8/11/2016 118189 DEM-CON COMPANIES
175.50 WOODDALE PROJECT 408636 11043 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION
175.50
406787 8/11/2016 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC.
208.48 651972955 408776 651972955-7/16 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
208.48
406788 8/11/2016 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC.
12.45 STEEL ROUND 00005564 408706 4124697 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
12.45
406789 8/11/2016 136031 DUCHON, SUSAN S.
300.00 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY 408777 080416 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS
1,035.00 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY 408777 080416 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
1,335.00
406790 8/11/2016 103594 EDINALARM INC.
147.18 ALARM REPAIRS 408709 106480,107440 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
673.31 ALARM MONITORING 408707 107230 5821.6250 ALARM SERVICE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 12
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406790 8/11/2016 103594 EDINALARM INC. Continued...
673.31 ALARM MONITORING 408707 107230 5841.6250 ALARM SERVICE YORK OCCUPANCY
673.32 ALARM MONITORING 408707 107230 5861.6250 ALARM SERVICE VERNON OCCUPANCY
192.00 ALARM MONITORING 408708 107326 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
2,359.12
406791 8/11/2016 122792 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC.
1,383.68 SQUAD BUILD UP 408510 25021 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT
115.80 UNITROL REPAIR 408509 RP072016-6 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1,499.48
406792 8/11/2016 102179 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC.
344.64 RISER RINGS 00001362 408834 029165 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS
344.64
406793 8/11/2016 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY
255.25- CREDIT 408716 1-5042029 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
76.06 ENG/TRANS MOUNTS 408711 1-5046042 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
88.36 WHEEL SEALS 408713 1-5047631 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
34.71 BATTERY 408714 1-Z08374 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
90.52- CREDIT 408715 69-232736 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
268.98 PLUGS, WIRE KIT, TENSIONER 408511 69-233196 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
128.56 CERAMIC PADS, ROTORS 408513 69-233197 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
78.05 A/TRANS DEXRON 408512 69-233227 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
11.03 ENG/TRANS MOUNT 408710 69-233487 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
158.58 ROTOR ASSEMBLIES, BRAKE KIT 408712 69-233628 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
197.91 BLOWER, RESISTOR, CONNECTOR 408837 69-234012 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
290.55 408835 75-228563 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
290.55- 408836 75-228737 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
696.47
406794 8/11/2016 122549 FARNER-BOCKEN COMPANY
988.58 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408838 5024926 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
988.58
406795 8/11/2016 130136 FAUS, SUSAN
144.18 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 408923 080816 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
144.18
406796 8/11/2016 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS
653.65 WATER SERVICE PARTS 00001277 408514 0202289-1 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 13
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406796 8/11/2016 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS Continued...
559.21 HYDRANT REPAIR PARTS 00001352 408839 0204135 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION
1,212.86
406797 8/11/2016 126444 FISH WINDOW CLEANING
1,250.00 WINDOW CLEANING 408947 2315-16466 4090.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
1,250.00
406798 8/11/2016 101512 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY
498.00 CAMERA WHEELS 00001349 408637 20235 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS
498.00
406799 8/11/2016 134486 FLINT TRADING INC.
3,697.63 BIKE LANE ON OHMS 408718 199739 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS
3,697.63
406800 8/11/2016 137685 FORTERRA BUILDING PRODUCTS
269.45 ADJUSTING RINGS 00002016 408515 SH00007494 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
269.45
406801 8/11/2016 101178 GOPHER
327.37 GYM EQUIPMENT 00002231 408638 9187252 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
327.37
406802 8/11/2016 100780 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC.
1,506.60 JULY 2016 SERVICE 408639 6070332 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION
1,506.60
406803 8/11/2016 101103 GRAINGER
116.64 FAN MOTOR 00001292 408948 9160123304 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
228.90 CIGARETTE RECEPTACLES 00005511 408516 9169426047 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
293.58 PADLOCKS 00005381 408517 9175220582 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
33.85 POISON IVY CREAM 00001417 408640 9177342004 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE
33.85 00001417 408642 9177342012 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE
13.54 00001417 408641 9177579514 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE
472.20 GLOVES 00005514 408643 9178367513 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
37.26 CLIPBOARD CASE 00005591 408719 9179262614 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
90.24 FILTERS 00005591 408840 9182239088 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,320.06
406804 8111/2016 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 14
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
6/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406804 8/11/2016 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC Continued...
156.50 408895 MN00007997 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
156.50
406805 8/11/2016 138300 H2OVERHAUL LLC
4,800.00 RAMP CLEANING 408949 1071 4090.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
4,800.00
406806 8/11/2016 126992 HARRINGTON, DEAN
150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/25/16 408766 080116 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
150.00
406807 8/11/2016 100797 HAWKINS INC.
4,174.96 CHEMICALS 00005329 408518 3922157 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT
4,174.96
406808 8/11/2016 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD
2,862.41 PIPE SUPPLIES 00001394 408519 F850220 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
2,862.41
406809 8/11/2016 138843 HEINEN, JOSIE
133.00 ART CLASS REFUND 408520 216831 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES
133.00
406810 8/11/2016 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
2,570.75 JUNE 2016 ROOM & BOARD 408521 1000079172 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES
2,570.75
406811 8/11/2016 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
1,220.17 JULY 2016 BOOKING FEES 408841 1000079445 1195.6170 COURT CHARGES LEGAL SERVICES
1,220.17
406812 8/11/2016 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
27,614.00 SHARED MAINTENANCE 408924 1000078611 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS
27,614.00
406813 8/11/2016 - 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
2,192.44 JULY 2016 RADIO FLEET FEES 408842 1000079583 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
165.00 BUNDLED SERVICE 408720 1000079696 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING
165.00 JULY 2016 BUNDLED SERVICES 408843 1000079697 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
2,522.44
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 15
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406813
406814
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
118765 HENRY SCHEIN INC.
Continued...
242.19 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003723 408778 32591113 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
242.19
406815 8/11/2016 128215 HOFFMAN & MCNAMARA
1,600.00 LANDSCAPING 408721 7397 01355.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA-355 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD
1,600.00
406816 8/11/2016 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC.
4,020.00 408582 840793 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
1,200.00 408579 840888 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
2,400.00 408581 840889 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
1,363.50 408580 841247 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING
1,784.00 408897 841365 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
1,355.00 408896 841487 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
12,122.50
406817 8/11/2016 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY
429.50 408898 42169 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
429.50
406818 8/11/2016 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC.
217.30 REPAIRS 408522 537937 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE
217.30
406819 8/11/2016 139008 IRET PROPERTIES
222,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUND 408779 SOUTHDALE 1000.2066 ESCROW DEPOSITS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
MEDICAL
222,000.00
406820 8/11/2016 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE
101.35 408844 07/16-FACILITIE 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
S
11.97 408723 7/16-ELEC 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
23.17 408723 7/16-ELEC 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
12.39 408926 7/16-FIRE 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS
265.21 408926 7/16-FIRE 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
93.50 408644 7/16-PARKS 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
276.18 408644 7/16-PARKS 1644.6556 TOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 16
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406820 8/11/2016 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE Continued...
984.27 408644 7/16-PARKS 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE
10.38 408644 7/16-PARKS 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
3.19 408523 7/16-POLICE 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
199.17 408724 7/16-STREETS 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
28.77 408724 7/16-STREETS 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
24.45 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION
38.03 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT
57.79 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5920.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER CLEANING
72.88 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5915.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT
129.61 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR
188.45 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION
309.11 408645 7/16-UTILITY 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES
2,829.87
406821 8/11/2016 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN
1,180.40 408583 2537174 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING
6,061.95 408899 2537196 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING
7,242.35
406822 8/11/2016 138425 JOELSON, ERICA
333.18 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 408845 080516 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE
333.18
406823 8/11/2016 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
.58 408587 5501419 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
1,689.00 408589 5501428 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
3,355.09 408588 5501430 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
313.78 408586 5501432 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
1,614.88 408585 5501433 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
3,677.24 408900 5501436 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
686.96 408584 5501440 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
8.14- 408590 583741 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
33.16- 408591 583989 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
11,296.23
406824 8/11/2016 102603 JONAS, LENORE
64.71 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 408846 080516 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
64.71
406825 8/11/2016 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 17
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8 /11/2016 — 8/11/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406825 8/11/2016 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES Continued...
821.60 FLANGES, BEARINGS 00005587 408524 K521925 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
821.60
406826 8/11/2016 119947 KRAEMER MINING & MATERIALS INC.
374.08 ROCK 00001393 408525 254838 5913.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK DISTRIBUTION
374.08
406827 8/11/2016 120982 KROOG, RACHEL
250.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/18/16 408764 080116 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
250.00
406828 8/11/2016 103271 LAKE RESTORATION INC.
900.00 WEED & ALGAE TREATMENTS 408847 150455 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
900.00
406829 8/11/2016 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
487.62 NUTS, SCREWS, SEALANT 00005489 408727 9304247666 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
285.47 TUBING 00005489 408726 9304256572 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
773.09
406830 8/11/2016 138211 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
1,000.00 PAID LOSSES 408780 LMCGL0000000100 6002.6200 INSURANCE RISK MGMT EMP SHARED SERVICE
74
1,000.00
406831 8/11/2016 129657 M.S. INDUSTRIES INC.
1,690.00 MILLING BITS 408646 12845 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
1,690.00
406832 8/11/2016 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC.
49.14 WORKLIGHT 00005419 408526 P00554 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
604.80 HYDRAULIC MOTOR 00005494 408848 P00564 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
653.94
406833 8/11/2016 131581 MARCO INC.
12,726.99 PRINTER MAINTENANCE 408528 INV3496580 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS
12,726.99
406834 8/11/2016 102241 MARGRON SKOGLUND WINE IMPORTS INC.
310.00 408598 20020021 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 18
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406834 8/11/2016 102241 MARGRON SKOGLUND WINE IMPORTS INC. Continued...
310.00
406835 8/11/2016 138850 MARKIR SERVICES INC.
855.00 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 00001423 408647 2419 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE
855.00
406836 8/11/2016 101327 MEDICINE SHOW BAND, THE
600.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/21/16 408765 080116 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
600.00
406837 8/11/2016 137002 MELTWATER NEWS US INC.
4,000.00 MEDIA MONITORING 408781 IN-S151-436994 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS
4,000.00
406838 8/11/2016 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
51,663.15 JULY 2016 SAC 408783 080416 1495.4307 SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS
51,663.15
406839 8/11/2016 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERV
412,865.70 SEPT 2016 SERVICE 408533 0001058226 5922.6302 SEWER SERVICE METRO SEWER TREATMENT
412,865.70
406840 8/11/2016 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAIRIE
16.26 SOCKETASSEMBLY 00005556 408731 499454 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
16.26
406841 8/11/2016 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER
1,638.75 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001355 408950 35237 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
1,710.00 SANITARY LATERAL REPAIR 00001354 408951 35238 5923.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS COLLECTION SYSTEMS
3,348.75
406842 8/11/2016 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT
18,301.10 JULY 2016 WATER 408648 431-0005-7/16 5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION
18,301.10
406843 8/11/2016 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY
64.19 CO2, METHANE 408927 171159018 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER
86.72 CO2 408534 183225571 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER
150.91
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 19
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406844 8/11/2016 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. Continued...
21.38 WINDOW CLEANING 408649 928057071 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY
16.09 WINDOW CLEANING 408650 928057072 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY
5.36 WINDOW CLEANING 408651 9529035730 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
42.83
406845 8/11/2016 106193 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY AND
792.00 EVOC CLASSES 408537 629430-5250 2340.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DWI FORFEITURE
938.00 PIT CLASSES 408536 629430-5259 2340.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DWI FORFEITURE
1,730.00
406846 8/11/2016 118144 MINNESOTA PREMIER PUBLICATIONS
99.00 MN PARENTADS 408849 168748 5510.6575 PRINTING ARENAADMINISTRATION
99.00
406847 8/11/2016 112908 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS CO.
666.00 CRS2 OIL 408652 74397 1314.6519 ROAD OIL STREET RENOVATION
666.00
406848 8/11/2016 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO.
48.00 TURF NOZZLES 00001938 408653 0116224-IN 1643.6556 TOOLS GENERAL TURF CARE
689.25 REBUILT PUMP 00001433 408732 0116225-IN 1643.6556 TOOLS GENERAL TURF CARE
737.25
406849 8/11/2016 106215 MITCHELL, ANDREW &TERESA
1,110.55 UTILITY REFUND - FINAL 408784 6624 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET
LONDONDERRY
1,110.55
406850 8/11/2016 101385 MITY-LITE INC
1,165.94 TABLES 00002388 408785 00031202 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
1,165.94
406851 8/11/2016 120996 MOBILE MINI INC.
135.11 CONSTRUCTION STORAGE 408535 9000626134 7411.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PSTF OCCUPANCY
153.54 STORAGE 408928 9000682331 7411.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PSTF OCCUPANCY
288.65
406852 8/11/2016 102169 MOONLIGHT SERENADERS
150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/17/16 408763 080116 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
150.00
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL Page- 20
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406852
406853
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
102169 MOONLIGHT SERENADERS
101390 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES INC.
Continued...
1,526.00 BOOTS 00003826 408786 IN1050878 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1,526.00
406854 8/11/2016 103056 NELSON AUTO CENTER
24,276.17 2016 GMC SIERRA PICKUP 00005194 408952 F36845 421260.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT
24,276.17
406855 8/11/2016 100763 NEOPOST USA INC
228.79 POSTAGE MAINTENANCE 408539 54088970 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS
228.79
406856 8/11/2016 136354 NEW BRIGHTON FORD
1,173.96 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005498 408850 5153934 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
1,173.96
406857 8/11/2016 102551 NFPA
628.25 STICKERS, POSTERS 408787 6752137Y 1470.6614 FIRE PREVENTION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
628.25
406858 8/11/2016 134830 NIGHT RAIN IRRIGATION
80.00 SPRINKLERHEAD REPAIR-301 BLAKE 408733 1106 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES-STORM
80.00
406859 8/11/2016 103106 NLSC PRODUCTS INC.
30.54 13W LIGHTS 00001384 408788 97084 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
135.00 BALLASTS 00001408 408540 97146 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING
165.54
406860 8/11/2016 100927 NORTHERN AIRE POOLS INC
27.92 FOUNTAIN PARTS 00001422 408654 7569 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE
27.92
406861 8/11/2016 102712 OFFICE OF MN.IT SERVICES
14.80 408655 W16040658 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
14.80 408655 W16040658 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
29.60 408655 W16040658 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
44.40 408655 W16040658 1481.6188 TELEPHONE YORK FIRE STATION
55.25 408655 W16040658 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 21
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406861 8/11/2016 102712 OFFICE OF MN.IT SERVICES Continued...
89.44 408655 W16040658 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
148.64 408655 W16040658 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY
29.60 408655 W16040658 5111.6188 TELEPHONE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT
7.72 408655 W16040658 5311.6188 TELEPHONE POOL OPERATION
45.04 408655 W16040658 5410.6188 TELEPHONE GOLF ADMINISTRATION
66.60 408655 W16040658 5710.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION
66.60 408655 W16040658 5760.6188 TELEPHONE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
29.60 408655 W16040658 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
44.40 408655 W16040658 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY
44.40 408655 W16040658 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY
15.44 408655 W16040658 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION
162.64 408656 W16040663 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE
908.97
406862 8/11/2016 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES
190.17 JAWANCHORS 00001268 408657 584770 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE
190.17
406863 8/11/2016 129214 OUVERSON SEWER AND WATER INC.
6,915.00 SEWER REPAIR 408734 3980 01420.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 2016 RECON GOLF TERRACE B
6,915.00
406864 8/11/2016 136189 PM GOLF SUPPLY LLC
237.32 GOLF BALLS 00002389 408789 INV13204 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING
237.32
406865 8/11/2016 138020 PATRICK'S CATERING
44.88 CATERED FOOD 408658 0883 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS
44.88
406866 8/11/2016 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY
3,893.00 408600 8556734-IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
5,725.00 408602 8556736-IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,889.25 408601 8556739-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
984.70 408902 8557055-IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
404.50 408901 8557056-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
1,190.96 408599 8557057-IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
14,087.41
406867 8/11/2016 125492 PAYPAL INC.
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 22
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406867 8/11/2016 125492 PAYPAL INC. Continued...
39.95 UTILITY FEES 408541 52651862 5902.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE
39.95
406868 8/11/2016 121040 PC ADVENTURES INC.
79.00 VIDEO SYSTEM REPAIR 408659 9954 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY
79.00
406869 8/11/2016 119219 PC/NAMETAG
70.94 LAMINATION POUCHES 408735 15779485 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
70.94
406870 8/11/2016 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY
96.82 408660 55867502 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
2,834.66 408851 55867511 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
2,931.48
406871 8/11/2016 138081 PETERSON SALT & WATER TREATMENT
291.55 SOFTENER SALT 408661 141917 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
291.55
406872 8/11/2016 131877 PETTY CASH
23.58 BAND AIDS 408663 072216 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
250.29 BIRTHDAY CAKES 408663 072216 5310.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL ADMINISTRATION
8.24 WATER LEVEL SENSOR 408663 072216 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
282.11
406873 8/11/2016 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
1,868.20 408607 2016592 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
41.36 408606 2016594 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
1.16 408903 2016596 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
13.92 408906 2016600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING
1,379.10 408605 2016603 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD VVINE YORK SELLING
950.43 408904 2016604 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
2,893.49 408905 2016605 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
2,335.25 408603 2017596 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
6.96 408604 2017597 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
9,489.87
406874 8/11/2016 102423 PLAISTED COMPANIES INC
4,645.56 TOP DRESSING 00001401 408736 STMT 3237 1642.6542 INFIELD MIXTURE FIELD MAINTENANCE
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA 8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 23
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406874 8/11/2016 102423 PLAISTED COMPANIES INC Continued...
4,645.56
406875 8/11/2016 100958 PLUNKETT'S PEST CONTROL
44.89 PEST CONTROL 408542 5485431 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY
44.89
406876 8/11/2016 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 1600.6235 POSTAGE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5110.6235 POSTAGE ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5310.6235 POSTAGE POOL ADMINISTRATION
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5410.6235 POSTAGE GOLF ADMINISTRATION
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENAADMINISTRATION
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5710.6235 POSTAGE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION
617.50 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 408929 080816 5760.6235 POSTAGE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
4,322.50
406877 8/11/2016 138292 PRECISE IRRIGATION
653.56 IRRIGATION REPAIR 00002387 408790 1303 5765.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROMENADE EXPENSES
653.56
406878 8/11/2016 125979 PRECISE MRM LLC
950.00 GPS 408662 1N200-1009504 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SNOW & ICE REMOVAL
950.00
406879 8/11/2016 138848 PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION
3,969.00 SOFTWARE LICENSE RENEWAL 408543 EDINA-05 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
3,969.00
406880 8/11/2016 139009 RAINBOW LAWNCARE
900.00 HYDROSEEDING - ED144470 408791 55838 1144.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REDEVELOPMENT REGULATION
900.00
406881 8/11/2016 110777 RAINBOW TREECARE
165.00 ELM INJECTION 00001436 408544 1274774 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE
165.00
406882 8/11/2016 132063 RAPP, CRAIG
395.00 LEADERSHIP RETREAT 408852 16.6.01 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION
395.00
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 24
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406883 8/11/2016 125936 REINDERS INC. Continued...
1,980.00 SEED 00001388 408545 3040158-00 1643.6547 SEED GENERAL TURF CARE
893.00 FERTILIZER 00001410 408738 3040303-00 1642.6540 FERTILIZER FIELD MAINTENANCE
2,873.00
406884 8/11/2016 138860 RESCUE 42 INC.
10,999.50 POD RUNNER 408792 2062731 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
10,999.50
406885 8/11/2016 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED
29.97 JACK 00005604 408739 1927782071 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
29.97
406886 8/11/2016 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO.
144.48 SOFTENER SALT 00001412 408854 337856 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING
144.48
406887 8/11/2016 113372 RONNING, TED
150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/22/16 408855 080116 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
150.00
406888 8/11/2016 100988 SAFETY KLEEN
124.21 CLEAN PARTS WASHER 408740 R002288501 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
124.21
406889 8/11/2016 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
70.85 ACCT 0402 37306935 0 408856 080516-TENNIS 1623.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TENNIS INSTRUCTION
70.85
406890 8/11/2016 100991 SCHWAB-VOLLHABER-LUBRATT
674.08 FAN 408954 INV114364 1551.6530 REPAIR PARTS CITY HALL GENERAL
674.08
406891 8/11/2016 133069 SCOTT'S GARAGE DOORS
200.00 GARAGE REPAIR 408793 173 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
200.00
406892 8/11/2016 100995 SEH
1,202.15 54TH ST 408744 318644 01416.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR
8,082.37 ARDEN PARK 408743 318645 01412.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON
8,345.59 MORNINGSIDE 408741 318647 01422.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 2016 RECON MORNINGSIDE A
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 25
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406892 8/11/2016 100995 SEH Continued...
3,030.29 MORNINGSIDE 408741 318647 01438.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 2016 Recon White Oaks C
4,276.20 MORNINGSIDE 408741 318647 03492.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Morningside A & White Oaks C
4,830.42 MORNINGSIDE 408741 318647 05558.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Morningside A & White Oaks C
3,584.52 MORNINGSIDE 408741 318647 04416.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Morningside A & White Oaks C
33,76821 TRACY AVE RAB 408742 318648 01430.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY VIEW & TRACY IMPR
40,785.48 WINTER RECREATION PROJECT 408930 318649 47099.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT Braemar Winter Recreation
107,905.23
406893 8/11/2016 101106 SERVICEMASTER
2,150.00 TRASHROOM CLEANING 408955 55576 4090.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
2,150.00
406894 8/11/2016 135326 SHRED-IT USA
21.80 SHREDDING SERVICES 408547 9411718718 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
21.80
406895 8/11/2016 120784 SIGN PRO
209.78 SIGN STICKERS 408548 10665 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS STREET NAME SIGNS
60.00 HANGING SIGNS 408665 10693 5862.6575 PRINTING VERNON SELLING
72.00 HANGING SIGNS 408665 10693 5822.6575 PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING
72.00 HANGING SIGNS 408665 10693 5842.6575 PRINTING YORK SELLING
413.78
406896 8/11/2016 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC.
48.32 HOT DOG BUNS 408857 290637 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
129.56 HOT DOG BUNS 408858 290769 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
177.88
406897 8/11/2016 137482 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC
126.46 WEED KILLER 00005512 408549 76824498 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE
126.46 ROUND UP 00001396 408666 76854203 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE
252.92
406898 8/11/2016 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS
6,564.36 408913 1434632 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
1,070.80 408614 1434638 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
.80 408615 1434641 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING
2,021.70 408612 1435970 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
307.73 408613 1435971 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
1,145.17 408907 1437161 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 26
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406898 8/11/2016 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS Continued...
284.53 408908 1437162 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING
450.80 408909 1437163 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
2,473.73 408910 1437164 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING
614.06 408915 1437165 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
3,863.35 408914 1437166 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING
1,744.40 408912 1437167 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
4,674.17 408911 1437168 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
1,945.35 408610 1437169 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
1,557.15 408611 1437170 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING
2,896.40 408609 1437171 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
7,675.71 408608 1437172 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
260.00- 408916 9083507 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
39,030.21
406899 8/11/2016 101007 STAR TRIBUNE
735.51 EDINA LIQUOR ADVERTISING 408667 073116 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING
735.52 EDINA LIQUOR ADVERTISING 408667 073116 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING
735.52 EDINA LIQUOR ADVERTISING 408667 073116 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING'
2,206.55
406900 8/11/2016 103882 STEELE COUNTY
500.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 408746 080416 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
500.00
406901 8/11/2016 120569 STEWART PLUMBING
170.22 PERMIT REFUND 408794 ED149445 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS INSPECTIONS
170.22
406902 8/11/2016 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC.
328.84 TIRES 00005557 408747 10140556 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
459.76 TIRES 00005559 408748 10140568 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
46.25 TIRE DISPOSAL 00005519 408859 10140627 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
834.85
406903 8/11/2016 101910 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC.
5,800.00 CAD & RMS MIGRATION SERVICES 408550 123465 421554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT IT CENTRAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT
5,800.00
406904 8/11/2016 130867 SUSSMAN, PETER
35.00 MEMBERSHIP REIMBURSEMENT 408860 HISTORY MUSEUM 1140.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PLANNING
R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 27
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406904 8/11/2016 130867 SUSSMAN, PETER Continued...
35.00
406905 8/11/2016 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC.
500.00 MOVIE RENTAL 408795 DB2214465 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
500.00
406906 8/11/2016 119864 SYSCO MINNESOTA
1,041.63 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408668 607271070 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
97.75 FLOOR CLEANER 408669 607290699 5311.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION
737.65 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408669 607290699 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
583.94 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408670 608010999 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS
2,460.97
406907 8/11/2016 138281 TARRAF CONSTRUCTION INC.
129,617.23 TRAINING FACILITY PROJECT 408931 APPL 4 7411.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PSTF OCCUPANCY
129,617.23
406908 8/11/2016 113549 TENNIS WEST
400.00 PICKLEBALL STRIPING 408671 COUNTRYSIDE PK 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE
400.00
406909 8/11/2016 139004 THE OPTICAL AT 50TH & FRANCE
3.65 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 408796 080316 1000.2039 SALES & USE TAX PAYABLE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET
50.00 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 408796 080316 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE
53.65
406910 8/11/2016 120700 TIGER OAK MEDIA
550.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 408861 2016-165348 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION
550.00
406911 8/11/2016 128347 TKO WINES INC.
402.50 408616 3900 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
402.50
406912 8/11/2016 120595 T-MOBILE
34.06 477067848 408956 072716 1261.6188 TELEPHONE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
34.06
406913 8/11/2016 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY
32.00 TRAINING AID 00005590 408750 10145551 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 28
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406913 8/11/2016 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY Continued...
14.20 WELDING TIPS 00005554 408749 10146428 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
46.20
406914 8/11/2016 123649 TOWMASTER
457.52 MOTOR DRIVE SANDER 00005598 408751 383032 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
457.52
406915 8/11/2016 131040 TRANS UNION RISK AND ALTERNATIVE
113.75 JULY 2016 USAGE 408551 269634-8/16 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
113.75
406916 8/11/2016 103048 U.S. BANK
450.00 2014A PAYING AGENT 408935 4356331 5902.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE
450.00 2015A PAYING AGENT 408936 4356388 3301.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PIR DS REVENUES
450.00 2015B PAYING AGENT 408934 4356389 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION
1,800.00 2014HRA TRUSTEE 408932 4360064 3201.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL DS REVENUES
1,900.00 2015A HRA TRUSTEE 408933 4360264 3201.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL DS REVENUES
5,050.00
406917 8/11/2016 101051 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
1,872.77 UNIFORMS 408753 073116 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
1,872.77
406918 8/11/2016 130874 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) INC.
727.87 BATTERIES FOR LIFT 408672 138353266-001 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS
727.87
406919 8/11/2016 103590 VALLEY-RICH CO. INC.
10,627.00 REPLACE HYDRANT/GATE VALVE 408754 23005 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION
10,627.00
406920 8/11/2016 139010 VALSTAR CAPITAL LLC
2,500.00 ED140313 REFUND DEMO ESCROW 408797 5516 BENTON AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
2,500.00 REFUND ED140770 ESCROW 408798 5516 BENTON AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
7,500.00 REFUND ED147163 CO ESCROW 408799 5516 BENTON AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS
12,500.00
406921 8/11/2016 101058 VAN PAPER CO.
3.77 BOXED KNIVES 408552 393521-01 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING
3.77
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 29
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406921
406922
8/11/2016
8/11/2016
101058 VAN PAPER CO.
133470 VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA
Continued...
2,214.50 AUG 2106 SERVICE 408864 46782 5511.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
2,214.50
406923 8/11/2016 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS
35.01 408801 9766302565 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE
35.01 408801 9766302565 1140.6188 TELEPHONE PLANNING
70.02 408801 9766302565 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
84.71 408801 9766302565 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
210.06 408801 9766302565 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL
315.18 408801 9766302565 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
385.13 408801 9766302565 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS
770.30 408801 9766302565 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
980.41 408801 9766302565 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
35.01 408801 9766302565 5760.6188 TELEPHONE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
684.40 408801 9766302565 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING)
46.25 408800 9766355442 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
831.47 408800 9766355442 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
502.06 408800 9766355442 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING)
136.56 408800 9766355442 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY
35.01 408803 9767940845 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE
35.01 408803 9767940845 1140.6188 TELEPHONE PLANNING
70.02 408803 9767940845 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
70.02 408803 9767940845 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
210.06 408803 9767940845 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL
315.11 408803 9767940845 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS
385.11 408803 9767940845 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS
831.68 408803 9767940845 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
980.28 408803 9767940845 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
35.01 408803 9767940845 5760.6188 TELEPHONE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE
728.21 408803 9767940845 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING)
50.78 408802 9767994387 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
914.04 408802 9767994387 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL
450.22 408802 9767994387 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING)
41.33 408802 9767994387 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY
10,273.47
406924 8/11/2016 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC.
556.61 GENERATOR PLUG 00001310 408674 1612449 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page - 30
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 -
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406924 8/11/2016 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC. Continued...
64.40 REPLACEMENT COVERS 00001376 408865 1617545 5553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS
56.15 LED LAMPS FOR CHAMBERS 408673 1634400 1551.6530 REPAIR PARTS CITY HALL GENERAL
228.00 LIGHT SWITCH, SENSOR 00001426 408866 1649852 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL
2,925.00 REPLACEMENT POLES 00001835 408867 1654926 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
3,830.16
406925 8/11/2016 133629 VON HANSONS MEATS
54.89 BRATS 408873 94999 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
54.89
406926 8/11/2016 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN
41.01 408870 7414077 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS
41.01
406927 8/11/2016 101692 WATEROUS COMPANY
156.50 DRAIN VALVE KIT, PLUNGER 00005488 408553 P2K9407001 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
156.50
406928 8/11/2016 130574 WATSON COMPANY
353.28 CONCESSION PRODUCT 408871 867255 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS
353.28
406929 8/11/2016 131648 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC.
549.20 TRAFFIC STUDY 408755 11604948 4422.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC STUDIES
549.20
406930 8/11/2016 101312 WINE MERCHANTS
781.29 408617 7092006 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING
4,146.27 408618 7092009 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING
4,927.56
406931 8/11/2016 124503 WINSUPPLY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
104.74 CREEK VALLEY POWER SUPPLIES 00001442 408756 13472700 47098.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT Creek Valley Donation
31.43 MINIATURE CIRCUIT 00001461 408872 13490700 47098.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT Creek Valley Donation
136.17
406932 8/11/2016 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC.
39,149.50 TRACY AVE - PHASE 2 408757 15-01686-640 01399.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 2016 RECON TRACY AVE
1,742.00 YORK AVE & 66TH 408758 2-01686-720 9232.6133 PROFESS SERVICES-ENGINEERING CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT
1,027.00 TRAFFIC STUDY 408762 2-01686-730 4422.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC STUDIES
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #
CITY OF EDINA
Council Check Register by GL
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Page - 31
Business Unit
406932 8/11/2016 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. Continued...
137.00 SE QUAD - 66TH & YORK 408759 4-01686-690 9232.6133 PROFESS SERVICES-ENGINEERING CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT
666.67 GIS/AMS SERVICES 408761 5-01686-700 5924.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - WATER
666.67 GIS/AMS SERVICES 408761 5-01686-700 5925.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - SEWER
666.66 GIS/AMS SERVICES 408761 5-01686-700 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM
579.50 VALLEY VIEW PED BRIDGE 408804 8-01686-650 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS
44,635.00
406933 8 /11/2016 101726 XCEL ENERGY
3,680.84 51-4159265-8 408874 509851453 7411.6185 LIGHT & POWER PSTF OCCUPANCY
150.67 51-5938955-6 408696 509887028 5937.6185 LIGHT & POWER INDIANHEAD LK VEGETATION CONTR
29.07 51-0193479-4 408677 509974918 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT
10,525.09 51-4827232-6 408681 510043762 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER POOL OPERATION
1,568.28 51-5107681-4 408880 510047778 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT
29,355.40 51-4621797-2 408682 510048435 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
2,427.40 51-5547446-1 408879 510057130 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER SENIOR CITIZENS
99.84 51-6692497-0 408680 510072643 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER CIVILIAN DEFENSE
29.36 51-8976004-9 408684 510100638 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
33.37 51-8102668-0 408685 510103254 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
1,985.79 51-9011854-4 408676 510104422 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION
167.37 51-8987646-8 408683 510107027 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
173.28 51-9337452-8 408679 510108507 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
247.81 51-9608462-5 408675 510113714 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT
7,725.83 51-9603061-0 408878 510114336 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING
698.84 51-0010060454-7 408877 510116547 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
22.97 51-0010504853-2 408689 510130579 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
13.28 51-0010876027-9 408686 510131611 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
17.14 51-0010619810-4 408687 510133441 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
17.39 51-0010619788-5 408688 510147949 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
23.90 51-0011342111-2 408805 510160187 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS
419.55 51-6046826-0 408695 510235151 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS
428.99 51-5634814-2 408678 510236270 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT
514.48 51-6229265-9 408875 510236356 1481.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK FIRE STATION
1,820.72 51-6229265-9 408875 510236356 1470.6185 LIGHT & POWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL
1,008.48 51-9251919-0 408690 510268086 5765.6185 LIGHT & POWER PROMENADE EXPENSES
40.95 51-0010103585-7 408692 510279157 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM
82.20 51-0010838463-7 408691 510313090 5936.6185 LIGHT & POWER ARROWHEAD LK VEGETATION CONTRC
35.78 51-0194596-8 408693 510704288 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR
1,750.49 51-6979948-4 408876 510798338 5821.6185 LIGHT & POWER 50TH ST OCCUPANCY
1,790.08 51-6979948-4 408876 510798338 5861.6185 LIGHT & POWER VERNON OCCUPANCY
2,066.06 51-6979948-4 408876 510798338 5841.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK OCCUPANCY
R55CKR2 LOGIS101
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:47
Council Check Register by GL
Page- 32
Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary
Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No
8/11/2016 —
Inv No
8/11/2016
Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit
406933 8/11/2016 101726 XCEL ENERGY Continued...
306.48 51-9422326-6 408694 510865861 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL
69,257.18
406934 8/11/2016 130618 YOUNGSTEDTS COLLISION CENTER
9,764.16 VEHICLE REPAIRS 408881 15349 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN
9,764.16
406935 8/11/2016 120099 Z WINES USA LLC
720.00 408619 17057REV 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WNE YORK SELLING
720.00
406936 8/11/2016 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
242.30 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES 408554 54063183 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY
172.18 408555 54063195 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY
414.48
406937 8/11/2016 101091 ZIEGLER INC
5,751.56 PAVER MACHINE PARTS 408697 SW140152653 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION
5,751.56
1,609,214.50 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals
Checks 1,499,980.75
A/P ACH Payment 109,233.75
Total Payments 1,609,214.50
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 d
procasiures e to ' (
R55CKS2 LOGIS100
CITY OF EDINA
8/9/2016 10:31:55
Note: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. Council Check Summary Page- 1
8/11/2016 - 8/11/2016
Company Amount
01000 GENERAL FUND 499,330.18
02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 2,083.89
02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 4,277.13
02700 CONSERVATION & SUSTAINABILITY 1,371.33
03200 CITY HALL DEBT SERVICE 3,700.00
03300 PIR DEBT SERVICE FUND 450.00
04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 151,279.47
04100 PIR CONSTRUCTION FUND 3,030.29
04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 31,459.85
05100 ART CENTER FUND 6,349.85
05200 GOLF DOME FUND 739.79
05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 17,921.38
05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 5,526.66
05500 ICE ARENA FUND 15,712.74
05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 2,664.40
05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 4,684.01
05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 8,548.49
05800 LIQUOR FUND 147,924.32
05900 UTILITY FUND 513,570.04
05930 STORM SEWER FUND 17,641.02
06000 RISK MGMT ISF 1,000.00
07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 141,915.18
09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 1,879.00
09234 GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 23,755.48
09238 SOUTHDALE 2 DISTRICT 2,400.00
Report Totals 1,609,214.50
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: V.C.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Jeff Brown, Co mmunity Health Ad minis trator
Item Activity:
Subject:Res o lutio n No. 2016-76: Authorizing 2016 Pub lic
Health Emergency P rep ared ness C o ntract with
Bloomingto n Pub lic Health
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt Resolution No. 2016-76 authorizing contract with Bloomington P ublic Health for P ublic Health Emergency
P reparedness services.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Staff Report: PH Emergency Preparednes s Contract with Bloomington Public Health
Res olution No. 2016-76
Edina-Bloomington PHEP Contract 2016-17
June 13 2016 Community Health Commis s ion Minutes
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
August 16, 2016
Mayor and City Council
Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator
Public Health Emergency Preparedness Agreement
Motion to approve Resolution No. 2016-76 authorizing Public Health Emergency Preparedness
Agreement between Edina and Bloomington.
Information / Background:
The 2016-17 Agreement cost is $52,447. The costs for these services are offset by the 2016-17
emergency preparedness grant funding received from the Minnesota Department of Health as
awarded by the Center for Disease Control.
The Edina Health Division will retain a portion of the grant money specifically for expenses
generated by Edina staff training, ongoing emergency planning, public education and administrative
duties. This is the fifteenth year of the grant and the agreement with Bloomington Public Health.
This amendment will build upon activities in the previous four budget periods, providing additional
federal funding to address ongoing changes in federal requirements. This is the final budget period,
which will be used to complete all grant duties, exercises, work plans and deliverables. Federal
funding of Public Health Emergency Preparedness was reduced across Minnesota by seven percent
to redirect funds toward Zika virus efforts.
The Community Health Commission received a Public Health Emergency Preparedness update from
Bloomington Public Health at its June 13th meeting, and passed a motion to recommend approval of
this contract.
The City Attorney has reviewed the contract.
RESOLUTION NO 2016-76
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF EDINA
TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE AGREEMENT
WITH THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
WHEREAS, the CITY, acting as a Community Health Board, and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
145A.04, is empowered to enter into a contractual agreement for the provision of statutorily prescribed
public health services, and
WHEREAS, the Public Health Division within the City of Bloomington is a duly certified public
health agency operating in accordance with all applicable federal and state requirements, and
WHEREAS, the CITY has for fourteen years contracted with the Public Health Division of the City
of Bloomington for emergency preparedness and response services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that the Mayor and the City
Manager are authorized to execute a Public Health Preparedness and Response Agreement with the City
of Bloomington to complete administrative and programmatic duties as a Community Health Board.
Passed and adopted this 16th day of August, 2016.
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
August 16, 2016, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 16th day of August, 2016.
_________________________________
City Clerk
1
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA
FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO BIOTERRORISM
THIS AGREEMENT is made this _______ day of ____________________, 2016 between the
City of Bloomington, acting through its Public Health Division, a Minnesota municipal corporation,
located at 1800 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 (hereinafter referred to as
"Bloomington"), and the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, located at 4801 West 50th
Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424 (hereinafter referred to as "Edina").
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Bloomington warrants and represents that its Division of Public Health is a duly
certified public health agency operating in accordance with all applicable federal and state requirements;
and
WHEREAS, Bloomington's Division of Public Health provides Public Health Emergency
Preparedness Services to respond to bioterrorism, infectious diseases, and other threats to public health
including, but not limited to coordination, assessment, planning and exercise, response, surveillance,
Health Alert Network (HAN), and training (hereinafter referred to as “PH Emergency Preparedness
Services”); and provides services and activities to improve the mass dispensing of medicines and medical
supplies through the Cities Readiness Initiative (hereinafter referred to as “CRI Duties”); and
WHEREAS, Edina wishes to promote, support, and maintain the health of its residents by
providing public health emergency preparedness, and CRI planning activities, and to contract with
Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, to provide such services to residents of Edina; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed herein, the parties
agree as follows:
I. TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017, subject to
2
termination as provided in Article VI.
II. DUTIES OF BLOOMINGTON
A. Bloomington shall provide residents of Edina with the PH Emergency Preparedness
Services as further described in Exhibit A attached.
B. It shall be the sole responsibility of Bloomington to determine the qualifications, functions,
training, and performance standards for all health service personnel who render PH Emergency
Preparedness Services and CRI Duties under this Agreement.
C. Bloomington will communicate with Edina relative to PH Emergency Preparedness
Services and CRI Duties to be performed hereunder by Bloomington, such communication to be in the
form of reports, conferences, or consultations, as Edina requests.
D. At Edina’s request, and not more than two (2) times during the term of this Agreement,
responsible administrative officers from Bloomington shall attend meetings of the Edina City Council or
appropriate board or commission to answer questions and give further information relative to the
activities performed and PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties rendered under this
Agreement.
E. Bloomington shall submit invoices to Edina for services provided as outlined in Exhibit
B attached.
III. DUTIES OF EDINA
A. Edina shall pay to Bloomington the total not-to-exceed amount of FIFTY TWO
THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FORTY SEVEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($52,447.00) during the
term of this Agreement as further described in Exhibit B attached.
IV. DUTIES OF THE PARTIES
A. Each city shall be liable for its own acts and the results thereof to the extent provided by
law and agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless each other (including their officials, employees,
3
volunteers and agents), from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs or
expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any negligent act or
omission of the party, anyone directly or indirectly employed by it, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or
omissions it may be liable, in the performance or failure to perform its obligations under this
Agreement. Each city’s liability shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466
and other applicable law. The parties agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by Minnesota
Statute 471.59, subdivision 1a and that the total liability for the parties shall not exceed the limits on
governmental liability for a single unit of government as specified in 466.04, subdivision 1(a).
1. Each city warrants that it has a purchased insurance or has a self-insurance
program.
2. Duty to Notify. Each city shall promptly notify the others of any claim, action,
cause of action or litigation brought against the party, its employees, officers, agents or
subcontractors, which arises out of the services contained in this Agreement and should
also notify the other cities whenever any city has a reasonable basis for believing that the
city, and/or its employees, officers, agents or subcontractors, and/or the other cities might
become the subject of a claim, action, cause of action or litigation arising out of the
services contained in the Agreement.
B. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner
as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting
Bloomington’s staff as the agents, representatives or employees of Edina for any purpose in any manner
whatsoever. Bloomington and its staff are to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect
to all services performed under this Agreement. Bloomington represents that it has, or will secure at its
own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel
of Bloomington or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by
4
Bloomington under this Agreement, shall not be considered employees of Edina, and any and all claims
that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said
personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such
person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation,
claims of discrimination against Bloomington, its officials, agents, contractors or employees shall in no
way be the responsibility of Edina. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to
any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from Edina, including, without limitation,
tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment
Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA.
C. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota
Statutes, Section 363, as amended.
D. Edina agrees that Bloomington will own and have the right to use, reproduce and apply as
it desires, any data, reports, analyses and materials which are collected or developed by Edina or anyone
acting on behalf of Edina as a result of this Agreement.
V. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between the Parties
and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms
and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties.
B. Americans With Disability Act and TTY Requirements. The Parties agree to comply with
the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and not
discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its
services, programs, or activities. Edina agrees to utilize their own text telephone or the Minnesota Relay
Service in order to comply with accessibility requirements. Bloomington has designated coordinators to
5
facilitate compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of
the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development regulations.
C. Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. The Parties will comply with all applicable
provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes, as
amended.
D. Applicable Laws. This Agreement shall be interpreted using the laws of the State of
Minnesota. The parties agree to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations
and ordinances in the performance of the duties of this Agreement.
E. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assignable except with the written consent of the
parties.
F. Examination of Documents. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of
the parties, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the other party, and either the
legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subdivision 5.
G. Mediation. Both parties agree to submit all claims, disputes and other matters in question
between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be
conducted through the Conflict Resolution Center, 2101 Hennepin Avenue, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN
55405. The parties hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non-binding. If the parties
cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non-binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either
party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and may commence such action prior to the expiration
of the applicable statute of limitations.
H. Severability. If any provision or term of this Agreement for any reason is declared invalid,
illegal or unenforceable such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining terms or conditions in
6
this Agreement.
I. Signatory. Each person executing this Agreement on behalf of a party hereto represents
and warrants that such person is duly and validly authorized to do so on behalf of such party, with full
right and authority to execute this Agreement and to bind such party with respect to all of its obligations
hereunder. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,
but all of which taken together shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
VI. TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving thirty (30) days' advanced
written notice to the other party.
Bloomington reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in event of default or
violation by Edina of any provision of this Agreement. Bloomington will provide a thirty (30) day
written notice period within which Edina may cure said default or violation. During the thirty (30) day
cure period, Bloomington may cease performance of any duties under this Agreement until Edina is no
longer in default or violation of this Agreement. In the event the default or violation is not cured,
Bloomington may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or desirable to
collect damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement.
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK.]
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day
and year first above written.
CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
DATED: BY:
Its City Manager
Reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
__________________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF EDINA
DATED: BY:
Its Mayor
DATED: BY:
Its City Manager
Exhibit A
PH Emergency Preparedness Services
In collaboration with Edina, Bloomington will develop a work plan to address these tasks:
Administrative Duties:
1. Multiyear training and exercise plan will be updated no later than November 30, 2016 (Time
Period: January 2017 to December 2019).
2. Integrate the access and functional needs of at-risk individuals in plans and exercises, in
conjunction with key partners. (e.g., updates to size, geographic distribution, and other needs of
at-risk individuals is maintained by some agency in jurisdiction).
3. Integrate the needs of individuals with chronic medical conditions in plans and exercises, in
conjunction with key partners. Partners are encouraged to use the Health and Human Services
(HHS) emPOWER Map at www.phe.gov/empowermap/Pages/default.aspx to better anticipate
the potential access and functional needs of individuals with chronic medical conditions before,
during, and after an emergency.
Capability 1: Community Preparedness
4. During Budget Period 5 (BP5), provide and report on additional community engagement activity
opportunities that focus on Education (schools, alternative education, post-secondary) and/or
Childcare settings to build relationships, provide preparedness planning information, or engage
in exercises.
5. Complete the Plan Self-Assessment no later than December 30, 2016.
6. Complete the Resource Element Self-Assessment status update no later than December 30, 2016.
7. Participate or conduct jurisdictional risk assessment based on jurisdiction’s established cycle to
identify public health, medical and mental/behavioral health hazards and vulnerabilities.
8. Build partnerships and community support using community engagement opportunities.
9. Continue and expand efforts from Budget Period 4 (BP4) to integrate preparedness work as a
core function into public health and environmental health work.
Capability 3: Emergency Operations Coordination
10. Review Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) provided Demonstration Assessment of PHEP
Capabilities for accuracy and add missing function and resource element detail (BP1 – BP4) no
later than December 30, 2016.
11. Conduct one exercise (table top exercise or higher) that demonstrates a Capability, Task, or
Resource Element that has not been tested during the current five year project period (BP1 –
BP4).
12. Complete one functional (or full-scale) exercise to test public health agency incident command
system activation for response to a public health-led emergency scenario.
13. Based on the PHEP capabilities, write after-action-reports-improvement-plans (AAR-IP) from
exercises and significant incidents, continuing to document the status or completion of corrective
actions from AAR-IPs from the past year. Retain AAR-IP documents for use in planning
additional exercises and track progress on improvement / corrective actions. Submit an AAR-IP
within 60 days of the exercise/incident to health.phep@state.mn.us.
14. Continue to assure staff have appropriate National Incident Management System (NIMS)
training, using PHEP Capability 3 as a guide.
Capability 4: Emergency Public Information & Warning
15. At least one person from each Community Health Board (CHB)/Tribal Health Department
(THD) needs to attend a training provided by MDH on: “How to Communicate During a
Response: Overview of Communications with MDH”.
Capability 6: Information Sharing
16. At the Local Health Department (LHD)/CHB/THD level, acknowledge all State Health Alerts (1
hour) and Advisories (24 hours). Transmit them to local Health Alert Network (HAN) recipients
as requested by MDH within one hour of receipt for Alerts and 24 hours for Advisories.
17. Request acknowledgement of every HAN from hospital and clinic contacts. Track the responses
to Alerts from partners (by organization).
• If hospital response rates are less than 100% and/or clinic response rates are below 80% for
the first HAN, complete an AAR-IP to address identified gaps and track progress on
moving toward the targets during subsequent HANs.
• You will be asked to report on one HAN at mid-year and one at the end of the year.
• The HAN you will report on will not be announced.
18. Identify clinics in your jurisdiction by name, and if relevant, by specialty (e.g., family practice,
OBGYN, dermatology, etc.) and indicate which ones are regularly included in HAN messaging,
which ones are not and why they are not included (e.g., specialty, clinics receiving messaging
through a system).
• This list will be dynamic and, depending on the HAN message, may necessitate sending a
message to a clinic that normally doesn’t receive HANs.
• This is an internal document for LHDs/THDs. MDH will not collect this information.
Capability 8: Medical Countermeasures and Capability 9: Medical Material Management & Distribution
19. All CHBs will review and update points of distribution information in CDC’s Inventory
Management and Tracking System (IMATS) (at Mid-Year and End of Year).
20. If offered, participate in webinars/training for changed MDH agent-specific protocols.
Capability 10: Medical Surge
21. Participate in regional and/or local healthcare coalition-led guided discussions around planning
for at-risk and individuals with access, functional and special medical needs.
Capability 15: Volunteer Management
22. To maintain an efficient system and back-up system for notification and activation of volunteers,
LHDs will work on cleaning-up local MN Responds Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) databases.
23. MN Responds MRC administrators will communicate with registered volunteers on a twice a
year basis. Examples of communication could include: MN Responds MRC communications,
written materials, training / volunteer / exercise opportunities, emergency preparedness news,
information on public health initiatives, etc. Call-down drills do not qualify as retention
communication.
24. Test Volunteer Notification. Conduct a call down drill, based on LHD’s/CHB’s choice of
scenario and complete and submit an AAR-IP.
25. If a statewide MRC conference is held, the primary MN Responds administrator would be
required to attend, if local funds are sufficient to support attendance.
Cities Readiness Imitative (CRI) responsibilities:
1. Based on the operational readiness review (ORR), submit a summary of activities completed
toward closing the gaps identified in the BP4 medical countermeasures (MCM) ORR, as detailed
in the Technical Assistance Plan.
2. Conduct three different MCM planning drills from the CDC’s list of CRI drills and provide
reports to CDC by May 1, 2017 using the data collection and reporting suite (DCARS).
3. Tactical Communications Drills:
• Test ability to use at least three forms of communications quarterly, e.g. email, radios, cell
phones, landlines and document testing activity (no travel required).
• Conduct an annual training on how to operate communications equipment (e.g. radios) with
all core point of distribution (POD) staff.
• Conduct quarterly call down drills of all core staff needed to operate all open PODs.
• Complete the drill AAR-IP designed for CRI drills only.
4. Other duties as required by MDH and CDC.
Exhibit B
Payment
A. Edina shall pay to Bloomington the total not-to-exceed amount of FIFTY TWO
THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FORTY SEVEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($52,447.00) during the
term of this Agreement for services outlined below:
1. FORTY THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FORTY SEVEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS
($40,447.00) for PH Emergency Preparedness Services; and
2. TWELVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($12,000.00) for CRI Duties.
B. The amounts above will be paid according to the following terms:
1. Bloomington shall bill Edina for PH Emergency Preparedness Services identified on
Exhibit A as follows:
Invoice Date Amount
Upon Contract Execution $13,112
December 1, 2016
$13,112
March 1, 2017
$13,112
June 1, 2017
$13,112
2. Payment shall be made within fifteen (15) days of receipt by Edina of Bloomington’s
invoice.
3. In the event Edina desires to inspect the financial books and records of Bloomington
related to the providing of PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties by
Bloomington, Bloomington shall make its financial books and records available at the
Bloomington City Hall for inspection and copying by Edina, or any agent, employee,
or representative of Edina, upon reasonable request during business hours.
4. In the event of termination pursuant hereto, the payment next due shall be prorated and
paid for only the period ended on the date of termination, and Edina shall pay such
reduced payment for the period ended on the date of termination, within fifteen (15)
days after receipt of Bloomington’s invoice.
MINUTES
Community Health Commission
June 13, 2016 at 6:30 PM
City Hall, Community Room
I.Call To Ord er
II.Roll Call
Pres ent: Chair Britta Orr, Kris ten Conner, Cathy Co zad , C o nnie Wes to n, Christy
Zilka, Caleb Sc hultz, Steve Sarles . S tud ent Members Jessic a Hong and Nina
Soko l. Ab s ent: Alison Penc e, Melind a Bothun-Hurley.
III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion by Cathy Cozad to Approve Meeting Agenda. Seconded by Connie
Weston. Motion Carried.
IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion by Connie Weston to Approve Meeting Minutes - May 9, 2016.
Seconded by Cathy Cozad. Motion Carried.
A.May 9, 2016 Minutes
V.Community Comment
VI.Reports /Recommend ations
A.Ed ina Resource Center P res entation
P res entation from And rea Bernhardt, Edina Res o urc e Center. Overview of
ERC respons ib ilities and s ervices. ERC works as a c onnec tion point fo r
residents to a wid e variety o f s ervices.
B.Bloomingto n Pub lic Health - Emergenc y Preparednes s Pres entatio n/Contrac t
P res entation from Nic k Kelley, As s is tant Pub lic Health Directo r with
Bloomingto n Pub lic Health. Overview o f P ublic Health Emergenc y
P rep ared ness fund ing thro ugh Minnes o ta Department o f Health from the
Centers for Disease C o ntro l.
Motion by Connie Weston to Recommend Approval of Public Health
Emergency Preparedness Contract with Bloomington Public Health
for 2016-2017.. Seconded by Caleb Schultz. Motion Carried.
C.Co uncil Wo rk Session Topic s /Dis cus s io n
Dis cus s io n o f to p ics for Joint Wo rk Session with City Counc il on Augus t
16th at 6:15 p .m.
-Nina Soko l to present s tudent fo cus ed to p ics.
-Britta Orr to present up d ate o n Edina P ublic Schools Mental Health and
Wellnes s Initiative.
-Caleb S chultz to pres ent on S ugar S weetened Beverage Taxes and To b acc o
21.
VII.Corres pond enc e And Petitions
VIII.Chair And Member Comments
IX.Staff Co mments
X.Adjournment
Meeting ad jo urned by Chair Orr.
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: V.D.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Trans p o rtation P lanner
Item Activity:
Subject:Traffic Safety Report of July 6, 2016 Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Review and approve the Traffic Safety Report of July 6, 2016.
INTRODUCTION:
T he Edina Transportation Commission (ET C) reviewed the July 6, 2016 Traffic Safety Report at their July 21
meeting and moved to forward the report to the City Council for approval; see attached draft minutes.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Staff Report: Traffic Safety Report of July 6, 2016
Draft Minutes Trans portation Commis s ion, July 21, 2016
August 16, 2016
Traffic Safety Committee
Joe Totten, Traffic Safety Coordinator
Traffic Safety Report of July 6, 2016
Information / Background:
The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 6. The City Engineer,
Assistant City Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator, and Transportation Planner were in
attendance for this meeting. The Public Works Director and Police Lieutenant were informed of the
decisions and did not object to the recommendations.
For these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have
been contacted and the 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 July 21 Edina Transportation Commission and the August 16 City Council meeting agendas.
Section A : Items on which the TSC recommends action
1. Dovre Drive and Parkwood Lane sightline
issues:
• At the corner of Dovre Drive and
Parkwood Lane, there are utility boxes,
which are obscured by a tall, pink shrub.
• The intersection is all-way stop controlled
• The shrub is entirely in the 30-foot by 30-
foot clearview triangle, laid out in city
ordinance.
• The requestor is concerned with children
biking, and notes that they do not stop at
stop signs.
• The requestor is concerned with
pedestrians, as a northbound pedestrian on
Parkwood Lane, combined with an
Photo : The shrub in question behind the eastbound
approach’s stop sign
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 2
Photo : Maloney Avenue, looking eastbound
Map : Maloney Avenue, from Tyler Avenue to Lincoln Drive
eastbound driver on Dovre Drive taking a
right turn, could potentially cause conflict.
• The rest of the corner is free of
obstructions.
• Both streets at this corner are listed as
local connectors in the Living Streets Plan.
• No crashes have occurred in the past 10
years, at this intersection.
After review, staff has determined that the
shrub in question poses a minor traffic safety
concern. Therefore, the TSC recommends
that this item be forwarded to the City
Forester, and that the resident should trim
the hedge to a lower level. The reasons for
this decision are listed below:
• The shrub is within the 30-foot by 30-
foot clearview triangle.
• The intersection is a four-way stop with no other obstructions to sightlines.
• The shrub appears to have been planted for neighborhood aesthetic (hiding utility
boxes).
• The data and situation do not present a strong case for a safety concern at this time.
For these reasons, staff recommends working with the homeowner to trim the shrub.
2. Request for further Maloney Avenue speed control
• This request comes from a resident of the
Presidents Neighborhood, asking for speeds
on Maloney Avenue to be reduced, by any
and all means necessary, as the speeds are
unsafe, and the sidewalk in this location is
directly on the back of curb.
• No crashes have been reported in the past
ten years along Maloney Avenue, which cite
high speeds as a contributing factor.
• Maloney Avenue is 29.5 feet wide, from face
of curb to face of curb, and has no parking on either side of the street.
Map : Dovre Drive and Parkwood Lane, Lincoln Drive is
on the far west of this map
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 3
Photo : Mirror Lakes Road, looking north, at the intersection
with Northwood Drive
• Maloney Avenue has a volume of 1,902 ADT and an 85th-percentile speed of 35.8 mph.
o In 2015 Maloney Avenue in the same location had a volume of 1,659 ADT and an 85th-
percentile speed of 35.7 mph.
o In 2005 Maloney Avenue in the same location had a volume of 1,224 ADT and an 85th-
percentile speed of 37.3 mph.
• A 5 foot wide sidewalk is on the back of curb on the north side of the street.
• Maloney Avenue is listed as a Collector in the Living Streets Plan, and is an approved primary bike
route.
After review, staff recommends that edge lines be painted on this roadway to visually narrow
the driving lanes. The recommended lanes width would be 11-feet, reducing each lane by
3.75-feet. The reasons for this decision are listed below:
• Volume has increased on Maloney Avenue in recent years.
• Speeds have remained constant, or decreased on Maloney Avenue in recent years.
• No crash history is present which cites speed as a concern.
• Speeds are high, and of concern for both possible safety and comfort.
• With construction scheduled nearby on the TH-169 bridge in 2017, Maloney Avenue is
expected to have a large increase in traffic.
In an attempt to slow drivers, staff recommends placing edge lines on Maloney Avenue.
Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends no further action
1. Request for a four-way stop intersection on Mirror Lakes Drive at Northwood Drive
• The requestor noted that speeds on Mirror
Lakes Drive were excessive, and that the
road was being used as a cut-through route
for traffic between Vernon Avenue and
Interlachen Boulevard.
• The requestor asked for stop signs at the
bottom of the hill at southbound Mirror
Lakes Drive as it approaches Northwood
Drive.
• The requestor said the intersection is
dangerous, and that the stop sign request was
not only to deter speeds.
• Northwood Drive has a volume of 240 ADT
and an 85th-percentile speed of 26.9 mph
west of the intersection.
• Mirror Lakes Drive has a volume of 775 ADT and an 85th-percentile speed of 31.8 mph south of the
intersection.
• This is a four legged intersection; due to roadway geometry, counts north and east of the
intersection were not seen as able to gain reliable data.
• Currently, the intersection is controlled with two-way stop, with Northwood Drive stopped and
Mirror Lakes Drive uncontrolled.
• Mirror Lakes Drive is listed as a “Local Connector” in the Living Streets Plan; this designation is
described as:
Local Connectors provide continuous walking and bicycling routes, and some may
accommodate transit routes as well. While they are essential to the flow of people between
neighborhoods and destinations, the needs of people passing through must be balanced with
the needs of those who live and work along Local Connectors.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 4
Map : Ridgeview Drive, from 66th Street to Abercrombie Drive
A sidewalk is planned for this location,
though not scheduled for construction at this
time.
• Northwood Drive is listed as a Local Street
in the Living Streets Plan and is described as:
For the purposes of the Living
Streets Plan, Local Streets are those
with a Local Street functional
classification as defined in the
Comprehensive Plan, excluding Local
Connectors (see above). These
streets provide immediate access to
residences and are used primarily for
local trips and are characterized by
lower vehicle and pedestrian volumes. The primary role of Local Streets is to contribute to
a high quality of life for residents of Edina.
• No crashes at this location have been recorded in the last ten years.
• Westbound Northwood Drive and southbound Mirror Lakes Drive are seen as having the most
severe issues with sightlines at this intersection:
o If stopped even with the stop sign, a westbound driver on Northwood Drive can see a
southbound vehicle about 150 feet (or about 3 seconds) away.
o If the driver on Northwood Drive were to roll forward such that they were stopped shortly
before the edge of pavement on Mirror Lakes Drive, they would be able to see an
approaching vehicle 250 feet (or about 5.5 seconds) away.
• Northwoods Drive was measured as 28 feet from edge of pavement to edge of pavement, and
parking on both sides.
• Mirror Lakes Drive was measured as 27 feet from edge of pavement to edge of pavement with
parking on both sides.
After review, staff recommends no further action on this item. A speed report for Mirror
Lakes Drive was forwarded to the police department for targeted enforcement. The reasons
no further action was recommended are below:
• Warrants were not met for installing an all-way stop control intersection.
• There is no crash history at this intersection which would suggest controlling Mirror
Lakes Drive would increase safety.
• Sightlines at the intersection are not deficient for local streets or local connectors.
• Speeds on Mirror Lakes Drive, while high, are not atypical for the city.
For these reasons, staff has recommended that targeted enforcement be employed, and no
other action taken at this time.
2. Request for traffic calming on Ridgeview Drive.
• This request comes from a family concerned
with the volume and speed of traffic on
Ridgeview Drive.
• A count on Ridgeview Drive had a daily
volume of 546 ADT and an 85th-percentile
speed of 29.6 mph.
• No crashes in the past ten years have been
reported in this location, which has cited
speed as a contributing factor.
Photo : Ridgeview Drive, looking north.
Map : Mirror Lakes Drive at Northwood Drive.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 5
Photo : Ruth Drive parking restrictions.
Map : 59th Street and Ruth Drive, the Edina Public Schools
athletic fields are in the north of this map.
• Ridgeview Drive is listed as a Local Connector in the Living Streets Plan.
• Requestor did not want simply more enforcement, signage or use of the dynamic speed sign trailer,
but to change driver behavior and signify that this is a residential neighborhood inappropriate for
high speeds.
• Ridgeview Drive was measured as 29.5 feet wide, from face of curb to face of curb, with parking on
both sides.
After review, staff recommends no further action on this item. A speed report for Ridgeview
Drive was forwarded to the police department for targeted enforcement. The reasons no
further action was recommended are below:
• There is no crash history on this segment which would hint to excessive speeds.
• The 85th-percentile speeds on Ridgeview Drive are less than the speed limit.
• When the road is reconstructed, traffic calming can be discussed then, but at this time,
the City cannot justify using resources to redesign or alter the street to calm traffic.
For these reasons, staff has recommended that targeted enforcement be employed, and no
other action taken at this time.
3. Request for one-sided parking in the West 59th
Street and Ruth Drive cul-de-sac
• A requestor noted that with the athletic
fields currently under construction, near the
Edina Community Center, their cul-de-sac
will inevitably be full of athletes and their
parents, using the road as a parking lot.
• A survey was sent to the nine properties with
frontage on the cul-de-sac.
• Five responses received were generally
supportive of the plan to restrict parking, but
also noted that they would prefer not to have
restrictions apply to themselves or their
guests.
o Additionally, some responses noted
that the fields did not previously
cause disruption, and if the parking
situation remains unaltered, there
should be no need for the restriction.
• School district staff has requested that the
restriction not be placed at this time, as the
school parking lots are being rebuilt at this
time, and coordinators for users of these
facilities are instructed to direct their users
to use the school district parking lots
o School district staff noted that the function of the fields is not changing.
o School district staff noted that adding the restriction at this time would be premature, as the
fields are not completed and it is not known how well communication efforts will mitigate
concerns.
After review, staff recommends no action taken at this time on this item for the following
reasons.
• Residents’ opinion was mixed on the restriction.
• The athletic fields are still under construction.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 6
Photo : Blake Road, looking north, at the intersection with
Scriver Road.
Photo : Mirror Lakes Road, looking north, at the intersection
with Northwood Drive
Map : Blake Road and Scriver Road, Mirror Lake is shown in
this photo.
• There is no data, nor has there been an opportunity to collect data on if the road is
being used excessively for parking
Therefore, staff believes this request was asking for premature judgement, and cannot be
implemented at this time. Staff may consider this request in the future when work is
complete.
4. Scriver Road and Blake Road Crosswalk
• A requestor asked for a crosswalk for getting
to Fox Meadow Park from Scriver Road.
• The requestor noted that Blake Road is a busy
road, with higher speeds, and crossing it,
especially with children was difficult.
• The requestor noted that Blake Road has a
sidewalk on one side, and that side is opposite
Scriver Road.
• A camera was placed in this location to
determine the number of pedestrians using
the crossing, and found a maximum of 10
crossings in a two hour window.
• In 2015, Blake Road had a volume of 3,120
ADT and an 85th-perfcentile speed of 35.1
mph.
• No crashes relating to pedestrians have been
reported in the past ten years, at this location
• Scriver Road is a cul-de-sac with 11
properties on it, and has an informal
connection with Oak Ben Lane, which has an
additional 10 properties.
After review, staff recommends no action on
this item for the following reasons:
• The crossing did not meet warrants for placement of a crosswalk, with only 10
crossings in the maximum 2-hour period.
• No crash history informed the committee of a further safety issue which would have
been apparent.
For these reasons, staff recommends that a crosswalk not be placed.
5. Request for Melody Lane curve signage.
• A requestor asked for help in ensuring drivers
take due caution and give respect to the
roadway of Melody Lane, north of Grove
Street.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 7
Photo : Mirror Lakes Road, looking north, at the intersection
with Interlachen Boulevard
Map : Melody Lane is cirlced, Melody Lake is shown on this
map.
Map : Mirror Lakes Road and Interlachen Boulevard
• A sharp curve in the road approximately 150 feet north of Grove Street has a design speed of 13
mph.
• A counter was placed in this location, and found that the 85th-percentile speeds were 18.5 mph, with
a volume of 160 ADT.
• When the site was visited, there was some
overhanging brush on the inside of the curve.
This observation was sent to the City Forester
to be addressed.
• The interior sightlines cannot be reasonably
maintained, with the horizontal sightline offset
required to be 44 feet with an 85th-percentile
speed of 18.5 mph, or 34 feet with a design
speed of 13 mph.
o The right-of-way for this road extends
approximately 28 feet from the
centerline of the road towards the
vertex of the curve.
• No crashes have been reported in the past ten
years, at this location.
• Melody Lane was measured as 27.5 feet wide,
from edge of pavement to edge of pavement,
with parking on both sides.
After review, staff recommends no action on this item for the following reasons:
• The volume of traffic on this road is very low, and likely only residents accessing their
property are using this roadway.
• Drivers are taking this curve very slowly already.
• Local roads usually do not have warning signs placed on them.
Therefore, staff does not believe a sign at this location is warranted. Some brushes were
hanging over the curb and this has been forwarded to the City Forester for enforcement.
6. Request for a Crosswalk across Interlachen
Boulevard at Mirror Lakes Drive.
• A requestor noted that high speeds along
Interlachen Boulevard were detrimental to
residents’ quality of life, and asked for a
crosswalk to be placed to better connect the
Rolling Green neighborhood to the park, as
well as using the crosswalk as a strategy to
calm traffic on Interlachen Boulevard.
• A camera was set up to review the area, and
found that the maximum two-hour window had
nine pedestrian crossings.
• A check of Mirror Lakes Drive’s pedestrian
crossings was also performed, and the
maximum two-hour window had eight
pedestrian crossings.
• No crashes relating to pedestrians have been
reported in the past ten years, at this location
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 8
After review, staff recommends no action on this item for the following reasons:
• The crossing did not meet warrants for placement of a crosswalk, with only nine
crossings in the maximum 2-hour period.
• No crash history informed the committee of a further safety issue which would have
been apparent.
• There exists no good connection from the south side of the road to the Rolling Green
neighborhood at this intersection.
For these reasons, staff recommends that a crosswalk not be placed.
Section D: Other items handled by Traffic Safety
D1. A request was received for traffic calming on Ridgeview Drive between Meadow Ridge and Duggan
Plaza. A counter was placed in this location, and found a volume of 546 ADT and an 85th-percentile speed of
29.6 mph. Further data was forwarded to the police department for targeted enforcement. The requestors
were informed of the speed study results and were helped to start the petition process for a sidewalk on
Ridgeview Drive.
D2. A manager for a seniors’ apartment building wanted to extend the walk time for crossing Vernon
Avenue at Eden Avenue, due to low mobility and slow crossings for senior citizens heading from their
homes to Jerry’s and associated shopping. The requestor was forwarded to Hennepin County.
D3. A resident called about the construction at Edina Senior High School and construction signage concerns.
The resident was forwarded to the school district and the sign companies. The sign has been relocated to
accommodate the resident.
D4. A resident wanted alternative detours and further control of the intersection of Vernon Avenue and
View Lane due to the construction work at Vernon Avenue and Blake Road. Alternative routes were
explained and the area is under observation for the possible temporary placement of traffic controls.
D5. Concerns with sightlines on Lincoln Drive and private roads were evaluated. The AASHTO safe sight
distances for a left turn from a stop were calculated for the 85th-percentile speed of Lincoln Drive and a map
showing the approximate lengths behind the curb the homeowners association would need to clear for their
driveway were marked.
D6. Concerns about Valley Lane’s pedestrian environment were received, with crossing Valley Lane to
access the sidewalk on the southern side being of primary concern. The requestor specifically asked for
sidewalks on the north side of Valley Lane for pedestrians to use to access the all-way stop intersection at
Creek Drive, such that crossing the road would be easier and safer at that intersection. The requestor was
forwarded to the City of Edina petition forms and advised on how to petition for a sidewalk. No further
data can be collected on Valley Lane until the Tracy Avenue-Valley Lane roundabout is complete, and thus,
no further actions were taken at this time.
D7. A request on Gorgas Avenue to keep large trucks helping on reconstruction projects in the roadway
was received. The requestor was going to send photos of damage to the lawn of the requestor’s property,
this did not happen. The residential redevelopment coordinator sent an email to the contractors on the cul-
de-sac reminding them to back out of the cul-de-sac if they cannot remain on the street during their turn-
arounds.
D8. A request for increasing stopping rates at the intersection of Gleason Road and Dewey Hill Road was
received. Working with the homeowner on the northwest corner of the intersection, plants will be
trimmed, the sign on the northwest corner moved closer to the road, the southwest corner has
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 9
overgrowth in front of its stop sign cleared, and 36-inch stop signs will be installed to replace the 30-inch
stop signs which were in place.
D9. Concerns were received on the placement of ”No Parking” signage on Thielen Avenue. Sign locations
were altered as much as possible to accommodate the concerns over aesthetics and functionality.
D10. A request was received for the intersection of Golf Terrace and Lakeview Drive. Currently, the
southwest corner of the intersection is the site of a residential redevelopment. The request concerned
sightlines at the intersection. The contractor was seen as having a stockpile too close to the intersection,
and was told to move the soils to outside the 30-foot by 30-foot clearview triangle. Further analysis of this
intersection cannot be done due to the home construction and the roadway reconstruction which will be in
the intersection. The permanent portion of this request will be considered at the completion of the roadway
reconstruction project.
D11. A concern about Kelsey Terrace Traffic was received, with concerns about increases in the speed and
volume of traffic. A counter was placed in this location, and found an 85th-Percentile speed of 27.6 mph and
a weekday volume of 294 ADT. This count was recorded for future comparisons with US 169’s upcoming
construction.
D12. A request for child safety on South Knoll Drive, near View Lane was received. The requestor noted
that traffic on South Knoll Drive was increasing from each year, and speeds were very high. From 2014, the
volume of South Knoll Drive was 679 ADT with an 85th-percentile speed of 32.5 mph. A counter was placed
this year and found a volume of 780 ADT and an 85th-percentile speed of 28.5 mph. Due to construction
conflicts in the area, a count done at this location was during the dates of the Artisan Home Tour, which
included a house on South Knoll Drive, near the count location. The speed report was forwarded to the
police department, when informed of the results the resident noted that children were in danger because of
the volume of vehicles and speeds observed on the roadway. The requestor did not elaborate on the
request beyond demanding strict enforcement of the speed limit during the evening peak periods.
D13. Various requestors were concerned with cut through traffic in Parkwood Knolls, specifically noting
that the speed of traffic and volume of traffic was too great through their neighborhood. Counters were
placed throughout the neighborhood, and along the main path for this cut-through traffic as described by
residents. 85th-percentile speeds were found to be below 30 mph. Volumes of 900-2800 vehicles per day
were seen on the streets classified as local connectors in the Living Streets Plan, these volumes are high for,
but not entirely out of line for, that classification. The question of if this is local traffic accessing their
property, or cut-through traffic has not been entirely clarified, but with Blake Road closed at Vernon
Avenue, it is unlikely that good data can be collected in the near term. Neighbors were also concerned
about an increase in traffic due to the United Health Group site’s proposed redevelopment. These
neighbors were referred to the public hearing on the development on July 13th for the Planning Commission.
D14. Concerns and anger were expressed by residents of Parkwood Knolls, about the closure of Blake
Road at Vernon Avenue for Centerpoint Energy’s pipeline construction. These concerns were listened to
and responded to, but no better detour routes were suggested or established.
D15. A requestor had concerns about the sidewalk on the east side of York Avenue being closed during the
construction of an apartment building in front of Yorktown Continental Apartments. The permit for the
sidewalk closure from the county runs through the end of August, but the foreman of the project expressed
optimism that the entire permit would not need to be used. This was reported to the requestor. The
requestor further noted discomfort with crossing York Avenue using the Promenade, due to the hills
required to access the walkway, and the sheer difficulty in crossing the road due to the persistence of traffic
on York Avenue. When the requestor was told of the crosswalk warrants for the City of Edina they did not
wish to pursue the placement further.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 10
D16. A requestor was concerned with the curve in Parkwood Knolls of Parkwood Road and Londonderry
Drive, as there were branches hanging over the street and obscuring vision. These concerns were
forwarded to the City Forester.
Traffic Safety Report of Jul 06, 2016 Page 11
Appendix A:
All Way Stop Sign Warrants
When it is determined that a full stop is always required on an approach to an intersection a STOP (R1-1)
sign shall be used.
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:
1. 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 1 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
Other criteria that may be considered in an engineering study include:
A. The need to control left-turn conflicts;
B. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate high pedestrian
volumes;
C. Locations where a road user, after stopping, cannot see conflicting traffic and is not able to negotiate
the intersection unless conflicting cross traffic is also required to stop; and
D. An intersection of two residential neighborhood collector (through) streets of similar design and
operating characteristics where multi-way stop control would improve traffic operational
characteristics of the intersection.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
1
Minutes
City of Edina, Minnesota
Transportation Commission
Council Chamber
July 21, 6:00 p.m.
I. Call To Order
Chair LaForce called the meeting to order.
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call were members Bass, Boettge, Brown, Iyer, Janovy, LaForce, Loeffelholz, Miranda, and Olson.
Absent at roll call were members Ding and Ruehl.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion was made by member Iyer and seconded by member Bass approving the meeting agenda. All voted aye.
Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion was made by member Bass and seconded by member Olson approving the edited June 16, 2016,
minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried.
VII. Reports/Recommendations
D. Traffic Safety Report of July 6, 2016
A.1. It was not clear if the City’s forester or the resident would be trimming the shrubs. Planner Nolan
explained that the practice is for the resident to do this.
A.2. Why is Maloney Avenue posted no parking? Planner Nolan did not know why.
B.3. Staff sent a survey to nine property owners. Moving this item to section C was suggested because was not a
denial.
Motion made by member Olson and seconded by member Bass to forward the July 6, 2016, TSC
report to the City Council. All voted aye. Motion passed.
XII. Adjournment at 8:25 p.m.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
2
JFMAMJJASOND SM WS
# of
Mtgs
Attendance
%
Meetings/Work Sessions 1111111 1 8
NAME TERM
(Date) 6/21
Bass, Katherine 3/1/2017 1111 11 1 788%
Boettge, Emily 3/1/2017 111111 1 788%
Brown, Andy 3/1/2019 11111 1 6100%
Iyer, Surya 3/1/2018 1111111 788%
LaForce, Tom 3/1/2018 1111111 1 8100%
Loeffelholz, Ralf 3/1/2018 1111 1 1 675%
Janovy, Jennifer 3/1/2017 1111111 1 8100%
Miranda, Lou 3/1/2019 11111 1 6100%
Olson, Larry 3/1/2017 1111111 1 8100%
Ding, Emily (student) 9/1/2016 11 225%
Ruehl, Lindsey (student) 9/1/2016 111 1450%
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: V.E.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Reques t For Purchas e
From:Kaylin Eid s ness, S enior Communic atio ns Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Req ues t for Purchas e: About Town P ap er Ac tio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve the purchase of a year's worth of paper for "About Town," the City's quarterly magazine.
INTRODUCTION:
To achieve cost savings and to buy a custom-sized sheet that will result in less paper waste, the Communications
& Technology Services Department accepted estimates for paper for the next four issues of About Town. T he
estimated annual savings by purchasing in bulk is estimated to be nearly 10 percent.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Reques t for Purchas e: About Town Paper
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
Mayor and City Council
Kaylin Eidsness, Senior Communications Coordinator
☒
☐
Aug. 9, 2016
Request for Purchase – “About Town” Text-Weight Paper
July 11-22, 2016
Anchor Paper
Lindenmeyr Munroe
Veritiv Corporation
$26,489
$26,489
$31,534
Recommended Quote or Bid:
Anchor Paper
General Information:
To achieve cost savings and to buy a custom-sized sheet that will result in less paper waste, the
Communications & Technology Services Department accepted estimates for paper for the next four issues of
About Town. The estimated annual savings by purchasing in bulk is estimated to be nearly 10 percent.
Having standardized the magazine at 54 pages, the City will need 506,000 sheets of text-weight paper and
40,000 sheets of cover-weight paper for the next four issues. However, the minimum quantity of cover-
weight paper cut to a custom size is now 50,000 sheets. Because of the extra cover-weight paper we had to
purchase in 2015, we still have enough left over from last year for a couple more issues. This Request for
Purchase is only for the text-weight paper, used for the inside of the magazine.
The City has purchased the paper in bulk since 2010. Three estimates were received this year. The
Communications & Technology Services Department recommends, then, that the City purchase the same
paper as used in the past (Lynx text-weight) for $26,489 from Anchor Paper, who also supplies the cover
paper.
The City has purchased the magazine’s paper from Anchor Paper in the past. Pricing includes the cost of
Anchor Paper storing the paper for the City, with quarterly deliveries to the magazine’s printer, Jessen Press.
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VI.A.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Jo rd an Gilgenb ach, Communic atio ns Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:July S p eak Up, Ed ina Presentation Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
No action requested.
INTRODUCTION:
Since June 2012, the City of Edina has used the online engagement website SpeakUpEdina.org to collect ideas
and opinions from residents. In July 2016, the discussion topic centered on Open Streets on 50th.
In September 2015, the City and the 50th & France Business Association held the first “Open Streets on 50th”
event, closing streets in the area to focus on non-motorized use of Edina’s streets. Organizers estimate nearly
9,000 people attended the four-hour event. More than 100 businesses, community organizations, service clubs
and athletic associations provided food, entertainment, information and more. T he mission of Open Streets on
50th is to get outside, get active and to make connections. Organizers are planning the second Open Streets on
50th for Sunday, Sept. 25.
In this discussion, the City posed the following questions:
Did you attend the inaugural Open Streets on 50th in 2015? What did you think of the event?
What changes should be made for the upcoming 2016 event? What did you think of the variety of
organizations and businesses present at the event?
Do you plan to attend in 2016? What would entice you to attend the 2016 Open Streets on 50th?
T he discussion was open for comments between June 29 and Aug. 8. During that time, 11 comments were made.
During that time, 854 users visited the site 1,277 times, garnering 4,274 page views. All commenters in this
discussion were from Edina. Attached are the comments from the discussion.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Comments from Speak Up, Edina
Speak Up Edina Staff Pres entation
Open Streets on 50th
Closed Aug 08, 2016 · Discussion · 6 Participants · 4 Topics · 11 Answers · 0 Replies · 1 Votes
6 4 11 0 1
PARTICIPANTS TOPICS ANSWERS REPLIES VOTES
SUMMARY OF TOPICS
ATTENDING LAST YEAR'S EVENT 5 Answers · 0 Replies
Did you attend the inaugural Open Streets on 50th in 2015? What did you
think of the event?
Susan de Hoog · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Jul 06, 2016 12:15 pm
0 Votes
No, was out of town.
Robert Aderhold · Citizen · (Postal Code: 90043) · Aug 04, 2016 11:17 pm
0 Votes
Yes; it was well attended; it was fun and multigenerational; I don't know how the
merchants did; but it seemed like everyone was having a good time.
Robert Aderhold · Citizen · (Postal Code: 90043) · Aug 04, 2016 11:17 pm
0 Votes
Yes; it was well attended; it was fun and multigenerational; I don't know how the
merchants did; but it seemed like everyone was having a good time.
Jah x · Citizen · (Postal Code: 55439) · Aug 05, 2016 1:01 am
0 Votes
I attended. It was fine - we don't live near 50th but we biked over. More food and
businesses participating would be a good idea. More places to sit along the street
would be nice - without a place to sit it was harder to enjoy some of the food and drink
offered. I liked the bike corral idea.
But spread the food and drink out further - and go later into the day. I think it ended on
the early side.
1 of 3 Full Report
Open Streets on 50th
Closed Aug 08, 2016 · Discussion · 6 Participants · 4 Topics · 11 Answers · 0 Replies · 1 Votes
Jim Stromberg · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Aug 05, 2016 6:45 am
0 Votes
Yes, we wandered through the area. While nice to DO that, I'm not sure what benefit it
was to the merchants in the area - did anyone follow-up on that to get their response? I
agree with Jah x: places to sit would be nice - a person either had to walk or stand...I
envied the little ones in strollers!
CHANGES FOR 2016 3 Answers · 0 Replies
What changes should be made for the upcoming 2016 event?
Rob Webb · Citizen · (Postal Code: 55424) · Jul 28, 2016 8:25 pm
1 Votes
50th Street is a county road and major collector for the area, and should not be closed. If
it is, traffic should use Halifax and 49 1/2 as the ring road versus diverting into
residential areas.
Jim Stromberg · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Aug 05, 2016 6:49 am
0 Votes
Keep the plan for Sunday (less traffic to divert), and see if portable benches are a
possibility. Incidently - 49 1/2 is as 'residential' as they come!
Sue Keator · Citizen · (Postal Code: 55436) · Aug 05, 2016 5:08 pm
0 Votes
Friends who live in Country Club and I were astounded and greatly disturbed by the
volume and speed of traffic diverted to their area. It was quite ridiculous! Silly idea to
close off such a major thruway, and highway exit. We have enough problems as it is
with 100 being closed almost every weekend. Pick another street - maybe 49 1/2?
EVENT BOOTHS 1 Answers · 0 Replies
What did you think of the variety of organizations and businesses present at
the event?
Jim Stromberg · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Aug 05, 2016 6:52 am
0 Votes
To be honest, I did not really pay attention to that part of the event. I don't know if it
was my lack of concentration, or if the 'displays' were not "attention-grabbing-enough"
for me to notice. I guess I was just enjoying the 'walk' and the people-watching too
much. I'll try and do better this year.
WILL YOU ATTEND? 2 Answers · 0 Replies
Do you plan to attend in 2016? What would entice you to attend the 2016
2 of 3 Full Report
Open Streets on 50th
Closed Aug 08, 2016 · Discussion · 6 Participants · 4 Topics · 11 Answers · 0 Replies · 1 Votes
Open Streets on 50th?
Susan de Hoog · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Jul 06, 2016 12:20 pm
0 Votes
I would like to see businesses and vendors of products/services that lend to a healthy
lifestyle. Although a wide open topic; it should be useful and educational to the
population of people that would come to the Open Streets event. Also games and
activities for all ages would be nice!
Jim Stromberg · Citizen · (Postal Code: unknown) · Aug 05, 2016 6:54 am
0 Votes
I will attend - and am anxious to see what the event offers this year. Thank you!
3 of 3 Full Report
The CITY of
EDINA
Speak Up, Edina!
July Discussion: Open Streets on 50th
The CITY of
EDINA www.SpeakUpEdina.org
EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of
EDINA Open Streets on 50th
•Did you attend the inaugural Open Streets on 50th in 2015?
What did you think of the event?
•What changes should be made for the upcoming 2016 event?
•What did you think of the variety of organizations and
businesses present at the event?
•Do you plan to attend in 2016? What would entice you to
attend the 2016 Open Streets on 50th?
EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of
EDINA July Discussion
•Open June 29 to Aug. 8
•11 comments made
•854 visitors, 1,277 total visits
•4,274 page views
•All commenters from Edina
EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of
EDINA
•Want to see vendors and businesses that lend to a healthier lifestyle.
•Games and activities for all ages.
•Being a major street, 50th Street shouldn’t be closed. Detour shouldn’t go through
neighborhoods.
•Well attended in 2015, fun, multigenerational.
•Unsure of how the businesses fared the event.
•Would like to see more places to site along route; hard to enjoy food/drinks offered.
•Consider longer event, later into the day.
•Spread food/drink out along event route.
•Sunday was a good day as there is less traffic.
Comment Analysis
EdinaMN.gov 5
The CITY of
EDINA Speak Up, Edina!
•Current discussion: Edina Aquatic Center
•Open until Sept. 2.
•SpeakUpEdina.org
EdinaMN.gov 6
The CITY of
EDINA
2016 Photo Contest
The CITY of
EDINA People & Community
•“Hang’in Around”
Bryan Singer
www.EdinaMN.gov 8
The CITY of
EDINA Business
•“Edina”
Bryan Singer
www.EdinaMN.gov 9
The CITY of
EDINA Education
•“First Day of School”
Andrea Bryant
www.EdinaMN.gov 10
The CITY of
EDINA Places
•“Holiday Tree Lighting”
Sarah Pettit
www.EdinaMN.gov 11
The CITY of
EDINA Plants & Animals/Nature
•“Baltimore Orioles on
Lake Edina”
William Webb
www.EdinaMN.gov 12
The CITY of
EDINA Readers’ Choice
•“Baby’s Backyard Friend”
Jan Johnson
www.EdinaMN.gov 13
The CITY of
EDINA Best In Show
•“Hang’in Around”
Bryan Singer
www.EdinaMN.gov 14
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VI.B.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Other
From:Jo rd an Gilgenb ach, Communic atio ns Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Photo C o ntes t Winner Rec o gnitio n Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Recognize the winners of the 2016 Images of Edina P hoto Contest.
INTRODUCTION:
T he City established the Images of Edina photo contest in 2004 to recognize and collect photographs that capture
Edina as a preeminent place for living, learning, raising families and doing business. Each year, residents and
employees who work in Edina are called to submit their favorite “Edina” photos taken over the past year. T he
photos are judged on subject matter, composition, clarity, depth of field, lighting, quality of color or black and
white, artistry and drama, degree of difficulty, Edina relevance and overall impact.
P hotos were judged and selected by City of Edina and Edina Magazine staff.
From the submitted photos, judges chose the winning photographs in five categories: P eople & Community,
Business, Education, P laces and P lants & Animals/Nature. Once submissions were finished, the photos were
published on Edina Magazine’s website for readers to vote, selecting the Readers’ Choice Award Winner.
Of the winners, one photo was chosen as the overall "best in show" winner. T he winners will be announced at the
City Council meeting. Mayor Jim Hovland is invited to present awards to all the winners.
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VII.A.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Cary Teague, Co mmunity Develo p ment Directo r
Item Activity:
Subject:PUBLIC HEARING: Site Plan R eview for Wo ld
Arc hitec ts o n b ehalf o f Ed ina Public S cho o ls at 7600
Metro Boulevard. Res o lutio n No . 2016- 74
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt Resolution No. 2016-74.
INTRODUCTION:
On July 27, 2016, the P lanning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the site plan and added the
following conditions:
1. Trees and landscaping shall be added along Edina Industrial Boulevard to help screening of the fence and
building.
2. T he fence shall be moved back away from Edina Industrial boulevard to square it off evenly across the front.
3. Edina Industrial Boulevard shall be striped for two lanes. (T his has already been done by the public works
department.)
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning Commiss ion Staff Report
Planning Commiss ion Minutes
Revis ed Resolution No. 2016-74
Revis ed Site/Lands cape Plan & Grading Plan
City Engineer's Memo dated July 22, 2016
Revis ed Traffic Study
Staff Pres entation Bus Garage
DATE: July 22, 2016
TO: 7600 Metro Blvd Owner and Development Team
CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director
FROM: Chad Millner P.E. - Director of Engineering
RE: 7600 Metro Blvd – Site Plan Review
The Engineering Department has reviewed site development plans dates 8/19/2016, and survey dated
3/31/2016.
Details
1. Per previous discussions, staff supports the vacation of the 5-ft each side or 10-ft total width east-west
utility easements per Doc. 3515484. This will require formal application and fees for vacation per our
standard process.
Survey
1. Dedicate drainage and utility easement 5-ft on each side of property line or 10-ft total along the new
north-south property line.
2. The Fire Department requires continued access to the fire lanes shown along the east edge of the
property between the neighboring building.
Living Streets
1. Clearly label new sidewalk along Edina Industrial Boulevard with min 5-ft wide blvd and min 5-ft wide
sidewalk.
Traffic and Street
2. Construction staging and traffic control plans will be required if construction operations affect Edina
Industrial Boulevard or 76th Street.
3. Access roads and entrances will need to accommodate a ladder fire truck for both properties (turning
template included).
Sanitary and Water Utilities
4. Clearly indicate private vs public utilities.
5. Information required on the north – south watermain along the east property line. This is a private
system for 7600 Metro Blvd that may be located on the new school district parcel. City will take
ownership of new watermain systems that connect and loop between Edina Industrial Boulevard and
76th Street to improve water quality and reliability. If public loop is desired, provide 10’ utility easement.
City will not take ownership of old watermain systems in new utility easements. It is recommended not
to cross-connect to neighboring private water system.
6. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit. Wet tap to occur at night if two way traffic cannot be
maintained. City staff to be present to inspect, cost to be paid by developer. Separate meters for fire
and domestic services will be required.
7. A SAC and WAC determination will be required and Met Council and City fees will be calculated from
the determination.
Storm Water Utility
8. Analyze flood elevation risk for offsite drainage at northwest corner of property, and provide inlet to
stormwater system at this point. Resubmit hydraulic and hydrologic report showing system sizing that
leads to no increase in flood risk to neighboring property.
9. Evidence of watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement for stormwater
system in favor of watershed is required for building permit.
10. Retention system engineer required to verify construction of the underground retention systems done
per plan.
11. Provide signed plan from underground retention system manufacturer and confirm it is designed for
80,000lb fire truck load.
12. Describe removals of existing storm system, or interconnect of private systems in northeast corner of
site, if any.
Grading Erosion and Sediment Control
1. Provide geotechnical report with soil borings.
2. A SWPPP consistent with the state general construction site permit is required.
Other Agency Coordination
3. Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit is required. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits are required.
WENCK File #3022-05
July 29, 2016
Prepared for:
City of Edina
Edina Public Schools
Prepared by:
WENCK Associates, Inc.
1800 Pioneer Creek Center
Maple Plain, MN 55359
Phone: 7963-479-4200
Fax: 763-479-4242
Traffic Impact Study for
Transportation Facility for
Edina Public Schools in
Edina, MN
July, 2016 i
DRAFT
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1
2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1
4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1
5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-1
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 6-1
7.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 7-1
FIGURES
FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2
FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN ................................................................................ 2-3
FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-2
FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY 600-700 AM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..... 4-3
FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY 830-930 AM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..... 4-4
FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY 145-245 PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..... 4-5
FIGURE 7 WEEKDAY 400-500 PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..... 4-6
FIGURE 8 WEEKDAY 600-700 AM PEAK LOS RESULTS .................................. 5-5
FIGURE 9 WEEKDAY 830-930 AM PEAK LOS RESULTS .................................. 5-6
FIGURE 10 WEEKDAY 145-245 PM PEAK LOS RESULTS .................................. 5-7
FIGURE 11 WEEKDAY 400-500 PM PEAK LOS RESULTS .................................. 5-8
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under
my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional
Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
__________________________________ DATE: July 29, 2016
Edward F. Terhaar
License No. 24441
July, 2016 1-1
DRAFT
1.0 Executive Summary
The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new
transportation facility for Edina Public School District located in Edina, MN. The project site
is located between W. 76th Street and Edina Industrial Boulevard west of Metro Boulevard.
The proposed project location is currently vacant.
This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed
development at the following intersections:
Metro Boulevard/Edina Industrial Boulevard
Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road
Metro Boulevard/W. 76th Street
Bush Lake Road/W. 76th Street
W. 76th Street/proposed site access
Edina Industrial Boulevard/proposed site access
The proposed project will involve constructing a new 63,600 square foot building to house
office space, bus maintenance bays, and bus storage. The project includes approximately
100 on-site parking spaces.
As shown in the site plan, the project includes access points on W. 76th Street and Edina
Industrial Boulevard. The access on W. 76th Street will accommodate all entering and
exiting automobiles and exiting only for buses. The access on Edina Industrial Boulevard
will accommodate entering only for buses. The project is expected to be completed by the
end of 2017.
The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as
follows:
The proposed project is expected to generate 115 trips during the 600-700 a.m.
hour, 117 trips during the 830-930 a.m. hour, 115 trips during the 145-245 p.m.
hour, and 117 trips during the 400-500 p.m. hour.
The project includes access points on W. 76th Street and Edina Industrial Boulevard.
The access on W. 76th Street will accommodate all entering and exiting automobiles
and exiting only for buses. The access on Edina Industrial Boulevard will
accommodate entering only for buses.
All intersections operate at acceptable levels of service during all time peri ods under
all 2016 and 2018 scenarios.
The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both
existing and future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in
the intersection operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development
have minimal impact on traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no
mitigation measures are needed to accommodate the proposed project.
July, 2016 1-2
DRAFT
Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours duri ng
both the a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to
minimize the impact of the project during any one particular time period. In
addition, bus route start and end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips
spread out and not concentrated during short time frames.
The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn
lanes, lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic
and future bus maneuvers
At the Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road intersection, the southbound
approach is wide enough for two lanes but is not currently striped that way.
Observations at the intersection indicate the approach operates as two lanes under
existing conditions. We recommend that the approach be striped for two lanes to
avoid the potential of one vehicle blocking the entire approach. This will help to
ensure adequate traffic operations during the peak time periods.
The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle
operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has
minimal impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and
bicycle operations.
Future plans for this area include additional sidewalk and bicycle routes. Sidewalk is
planned for the west side of Bush Lake Road, the east side of Metro Boulevard, and
both sides of Edina Industrial Boulevard. For bicycle facilities, Bush Lake Road,
Metro Boulevard, and Edina Industrial Boulevard are designated as Approved Primary
Routes. The proposed project will benefit from the sidewalk and bicycle facilities
planned for this area.
July, 2016 2-1
DRAFT
2.0 Purpose and Background
The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study i s to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new
transportation facility for Edina Public School District located in Edina, MN. The project site
is located between W. 76th Street and Edina Industrial Boulevard west of Metro Boulevard.
The proposed project location is currently vacant. The project location is shown in Figure
1.
This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed
development at the following intersections:
Metro Boulevard/Edina Industrial Boulevard
Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road
Metro Boulevard/W. 76th Street
Bush Lake Road/W. 76th Street
W. 76th Street/proposed site access
Edina Industrial Boulevard/proposed site access
Proposed Development Characteristics
The proposed project will involve constructing a new 63,600 square foot building to house
office space, bus maintenance bays, and bus storage. The project includes approximately
100 on-site parking spaces. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2.
As shown in the site plan, the project includes access points on W. 76th Street and Edina
Industrial Boulevard. The access on W. 76th Street will accommodate all entering and
exiting automobiles and exiting only for buses. The access on Edina Industrial Boulevard
will accommodate entering only for buses. The project is expected to be completed by the
end of 2017.
July, 2016 2-2
DRAFT
July, 2016 2-3
DRAFT
July, 2016 3-1
DRAFT
3.0 Existing Conditions
The proposed site is currently vacant. The site is bounded by W. 76th Street on the north,
Edina Industrial Boulevard on the south, and existing industrial uses to the east and west.
Near the site location, all the surrounding streets are two lane roadways. Edina Industrial
Boulevard widens to four lanes west of the intersection with Metro Boulevard, which is
signal controlled. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are
shown in Figure 3 and described below.
Metro Boulevard/Edina Industrial Boulevard (traffic signal control)
This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound
and westbound approaches provide one left turn/through lane and one through/right turn
lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn lane and one through/right turn lane.
The northbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The northbound
approach serves as access for an existing retail area.
Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road (minor street stop sign control)
This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the minor street
approaches. The westbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The
eastbound approach provides one left turn/through lane and one through/right turn lane.
The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane.
The southbound approach is wide enough for two lanes but is not currently striped that way.
The south leg of the intersection is signed as enter only, which was confirmed through field
observations.
Metro Boulevard/W. 76th Street (minor street stop sign control)
This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the eastbound
approach. All approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane.
Bush Lake Road/W. 76th Street (minor street stop sign control)
This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the eastbound and
westbound approaches. All approaches provide one left turn/through/right turn lane. The
west leg of the intersection serves as access to an existing parking lot.
Traffic Volume Data
Turn movement volumes were recorded at each intersection in April, 2016.
July, 2016 3-2
DRAFT
July, 2016 4-1
DRAFT
4.0 Traffic Forecasts
Traffic Forecast Scenarios
To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were
completed for the year 2018, which is one year after the expected completion of the
transportation facility. Specifically, traffic forecasts during the weekday a.m. and p.m.
hours of 600-700 a.m., 830-930 a.m., 145-245 p.m., and 400-500 p.m. were completed for
the following scenarios:
2016 Existing. Turn movement volumes collected in April 2016 were used for
existing conditions. The existing volume information includes trips generated by
uses near the project site.
2018 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased at a
rate of one percent per year to account for background growth generated by other
development within the immediate area.
2018 Build. Trips generated by the proposed use and were added to the 2018 No-
Build volumes to determine 2018 Build volumes.
Trip Generation
The expected development trips were determined from detailed bus schedule and routing
information and on-site employee information provided by school district staff. The
proposed use will generate employee trips and bus trips. Employee trips include employees
entering and exiting before and after each work shift as well as other trips that occur during
a typical weekday. Bus trips include all trips made by buses in and out of the site. Bus
driver employees enter the site in their personal vehicle, exit the site in a bus to complete a
route, return to the site in a bus, and exit the site in their personal vehicle.
Trip generation information for employee and bus trips are both presented in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1
Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Transportation Facility
Trip Type 600-700 AM 830-930 AM
In Out Total In Out Total
Employee 56 5 61 9 54 63
Bus 0 54 54 54 0 54
Trip Type 145-245 PM 400-500 PM
In Out Total In Out Total
Employee 54 7 61 5 58 63
Bus 0 54 54 54 0 54
July, 2016 4-2
DRAFT
Traffic Volumes
Employees and bus trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the
detailed routing information provided by the school district. Traffic volumes were
established during the 600-700 a.m., 830-930 a.m., 145-245 p.m., and 400-500 p.m.
hours for the following forecasting scenarios:
2016 existing
2018 No-Build
2018 Build
The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figures 4 through 7.
July, 2016 4-3
DRAFT
July, 2016 4-4
DRAFT
July, 2016 4-5
DRAFT
July, 2016 4-6
DRAFT
July, 2016 5-1
DRAFT
5.0 Traffic Analysis
Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described
earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial
analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control.
Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in
terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the
best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using th e intersection. LOS F
represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed
description of the conditions described by each LOS designation:
Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually
unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an
unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10
seconds or less.
Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with
some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a
signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An
unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this
level.
Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant
influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general
level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges
from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an
unsignalized intersection at this level.
Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are
significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and
convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for
a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection.
Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the
intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55
to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an
unsignalized intersection at this level.
Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching
the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often
experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort
and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a
signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection
correspond to this level of service.
July, 2016 5-2
DRAFT
The LOS results for the study intersections are described below and are shown in Figures 8
through 11.
Metro Boulevard/Edina Industrial Boulevard (traffic signal control)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS B under all scenarios.
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS D or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS C under all scenarios.
Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road (minor street stop sign control)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS C or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS D or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
Metro Boulevard/W. 76th Street (minor street stop sign control)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS C or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
Bush Lake Road/W. 76th Street (minor street stop sign control)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenari os.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
July, 2016 5-3
DRAFT
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better
under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
W. 76th Street/proposed site access (stop control on access approach)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
Edina Industrial Boulevard/proposed site access (stop control on access approach)
During the weekday 600-700 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 830-730 a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 145-245 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
During the weekday 400-500 p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all
scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios.
Overall Traffic Impacts
The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both existing and
future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in the intersection
operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on
traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed to
accommodate the proposed project.
Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours during both the
a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to minimize the
impact of the project during any one particular time period. In addition, bus route start and
end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips spread ou t and not concentrated
during short time frames.
The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn lanes,
lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic and future
bus maneuvers.
July, 2016 5-4
DRAFT
Pedestrian and Bicycle Impacts
Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided on the west side of Metro Boulevard from
Edina Industrial Boulevard to W. 76th Streets and points further north. Sidewalk is not
provided on W. 76th Street, Bush Lake Road, or Edina Industrial Boulevard. Bicycles are
allowed on all the surrounding streets and are mixed with general traffic.
The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle
operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has minimal
impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and bicycle
operations.
Future plans for this area include additional sidewalk and bicycle routes. Sidewalk is
planned for the west side of Bush Lake Road, the east side of Metro Boulevard, and both
sides of Edina Industrial Boulevard. For bicycle facilities, Bush Lake Road, Metro Boulevard,
and Edina Industrial Boulevard are designated as Approved Primary Routes. The proposed
project will benefit from the sidewalk and bicycle facilities planned for this area. The full
sidewalk and bicycle facility plan maps are included in the Appendix.
July, 2016 5-5
DRAFT
July, 2016 5-6
DRAFT
July, 2016 5-7
DRAFT
July, 2016 5-8
DRAFT
July, 2016 6-1
DRAFT
6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as
follows:
The proposed project is expected to generate 115 trips during the 600-700 a.m.
hour, 117 trips during the 830-930 a.m. hour, 115 trips during the 145-245 p.m.
hour, and 117 trips during the 400-500 p.m. hour.
The project includes access points on W. 76th Street and Edina Industrial Boulevard.
The access on W. 76th Street will accommodate all entering and exiting automobiles
and exiting only for buses. The access on Edina Industrial Boulevard will
accommodate entering only for buses.
All intersections operate at acceptable levels of service during all time periods under
all 2016 and 2018 scenarios.
The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both
existing and future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in
the intersection operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development
have minimal impact on traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no
mitigation measures are needed to accommodate the proposed project.
Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours during
both the a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to
minimize the impact of the project during any one particular time period. In
addition, bus route start and end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips
spread out and not concentrated during short time frames.
The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn
lanes, lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic
and future bus maneuvers
At the Edina Industrial Boulevard/Bush Lake Road intersection, the southbound
approach is wide enough for two lanes but is not currently striped that way.
Observations at the intersection indicate the approach operates as two lanes under
existing conditions. We recommend that the approach be striped for two lanes to
avoid the potential of one vehicle blocking the entire approach. This will help to
ensure adequate traffic operations during the peak time periods.
The proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on pedestrian and bicycle
operations in this area. The number of trips generated by the proposed project has
minimal impact on operations at the nearby intersections, including pedestrian and
bicycle operations.
Future plans for this area include additional sidewalk and bicycle routes. Sidewalk is
planned for the west side of Bush Lake Road, the east side of Metro Boulevard, and
both sides of Edina Industrial Boulevard. For bicycle facilities, Bush Lake Road,
Metro Boulevard, and Edina Industrial Boulevard are designated as Approved Primary
July, 2016 6-2
DRAFT
Routes. The proposed project will benefit from the sidewalk and bicycle facilities
planned for this area.
July, 2016 7-1
DRAFT
7.0 Appendix
Sidewalk Facilities Map
Bicycle Facilities Map
Level of Service Worksheets
¹»
¹»
¹»
¹º¹º
¹º
ñ
ñ
ñ
¹»
¹º
¹º
¹º
¹º
¹º
ñ
¹º
ñ
ñBraemar Go lf Cour se
Bredes en Park
Rosla nd Pa rk
Pamela Park
Lewis Par k
Highlands Par k
Walnut Ridge Park
To dd Par k
Gar den Park
Heights Park
Va n Va lkenburg Par k
Fr ed Richar ds G olf Course
Cree k Va lle y Pa rk
Lake Edina Park
Krahl H ill
Nor mandale Par k
We ber Field Park
Arneso n A cre s Pa rk
Countryside Park
Alde n Park
Utley Pa rk
Yo rkto wn Pa rk
Wo o dda le Pa rk
Arden Par k
York Par k
Cor ne lia Par k
Str ac ha uer Par k
Fox Me adowPark
Edinboro ugh Par k
Koje tinPark
Mc GuirePark
Bir chcr estPark
Sher woodPark
Me lody LakePark
Williams Park
Cho we nPark
St. Jo hn'sPark
TingdalePark
Brow nda lePark
Gra ndv iewSquare
Fr ankTupa Par k
Courtne y Fields
?ÞA@
?úA@?vA@
?úA@
?ÞA@
?vA@
Mu d La ke
Lak eEdina
Mirror Lake
Lak e
Cor nel i a
Arr ow h eadLake
Hi g hl an d sLake
Indianhea dLake
Melody Lake
Lak ePamel a
Haw k esLake
Har vey Lak e
C e n
t e n
n
i a
l
L a
k e
Minnehaha Creek
N i n e M i l e C r e e k
Nine Mile Creek
C a n a d i a n P a c i f i c R a i l r o a d
C a n a d i
a n
P a c i
f i
c R
a i
l r o a d
CityHall
St P eter sLutheran Sch o ol
FireStatio n
Pub lic W o rk s &Park Ma inte na nce
Pub licLibrary
Co n co rdSchool
Co r nel iaSchool
Hig hla ndSchool
Ed inaHighSchoo l
Our La dy ofGrace Sch o ol
Sou th vie wMiddleSchool
Co u ntr y sid eSchool
Valley Vie wMiddle Sch oo l
Cr eek Vall ey Sch oo l
Nor m an da leElementary
Ed inaComm un ityCenter
Gol denYearsMontesso r
Ca lvinChristi anSchool
FireStatio n
B L A K E
R
D
S C
H A E F E R
R
D
V E R N O N A V E
F R
A
N
C
E
A
V
E
S
X
E R X
E
S
A
V
E
S
C A
H
I
L L
R D
70T H ST W
66T H ST W
Y
O
R K
A
V
E
S
IN TER LA C H EN B LV D
M A LO N EY A V E
4 4 T H S T W
50T H ST W
54T H ST W
58T H ST W
G L E A S O N R D
70T H ST W
76T H ST W
D EWE Y H I LL R D
VALLEY VIEW RD
V A LLEY V IE W R D
M I N N E S O T A D R78TH ST W
/
En gi nee rin g D eptNovember 20 14Sidewalk Facilities
Leg en d Exi sti ngSidewalk
Cit y of Edina2008 Comp rehensive Plan Update
Futu reActive Rou tesTo Sch oo l Si dewa lk
Futu re State -Aid Sid ewa lk Futu reCity Sid ewal k Futu reNine Mi le Cree kRegional Trai l
æ
¹»
¹»
æ
æ æ
æ
æ¹»æ
æ
¹º¹º
¹º
ñ
ñ
ñ
¹»æ
æ
æ
¹º
¹º
æ
æ
¹º
æ
æ
¹º
¹º
æ
æ
æ
ñ
æ
¹º
ñ
æ
ñ ?úA@
?ÞA@
?vA@
Mud Lake
LakeEdina
Mirror Lake
Lake
Cornelia
ArrowheadLake
HighlandsLake
IndianheadLake
Melody Lake
LakePamela
HawkesLake
Harvey Lake
C e n t e n n i a l L a k e
AldenPark
VanValkenburgPark
FoxMeadowPark
HighlandsPark
Todd Park
Weber FieldPark
KojetinPark
BrowndalePark
WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark
FrankTupaPark
SherwoodPark
ArdenPark
YorkPark
ChowenPark
PamelaPark
St JohnsPark
StrachauerPark
RoslandPark
BristolParkCorneliaPark
ArnesonAcresPark
LakeEdinaParkFred Ri chardsGolf Course
YorktownPark
EdinboroughPark
GardenPark
Mel odyLakePark
TingdalePark
Countrysi dePark
BredesenPark
WalnutRidgePark
KrahlHill
Creek Valley Park
HeightsPark
Normandal ePark
McGuirePark
LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney F ields)
Minnehaha Creek
N i n e M i l e C r e e k
Nine Mile Creek
C a n a d i a n P a c i f i c R a i l r o a d
C a n a d i a n P a c i f i c R a i l r o a d
CityHall
St Peters Lutheran Church & School
FireStation
Public Works &Park Maintenance
CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary
ConcordSchool
EdinaCovenant
CorneliaSchool
ColonialChurch
HighlandSchool
CalvaryLutheran
EdinaHighSchool
Our Lady ofGrace Church& School
SouthviewJr High
CrossviewLutheran
CountrysideSchool
St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High
Creek Valley School
NormandaleLutheran
WooddaleChurch
St PatricksCatholic
New CityCovenantChurch
NormandaleElementary
St StephensEpiscopal
EdinaCommunityCenter
GoldenYearsMontessori
CalvinChristianSchool
GoodSamaritanMethodist
EdinaMorningsideChurch
ChristPresbyterianChurch
ChapelHillsCongregtional
Shepard of the HillsLutheran
Edina Community Lutheran Church
FireStation
B l a
k e R d
V e r n o n A v e
F r a n c e
A v e
S
X e r x e
s A v e S
C a h i l l R d
70th St W
Interlac hen Blvd
Maloney Ave
4 4 t h S t W
50th St W
54th St W
58th St W
G l e a s o n R
d
70th St W
76th St W
Dewey Hill Rd
Valley View Rd
Valley View Rd
Minnesota Dr78th St W
W o o d d a l e
A v e
T r a
c y A v e
Parklawn Ave
C o n c
o r d A v eBenton Ave
G
l
e
a
s
o
n
R
d
M a l i b u R d
G r e e n F a r m s R d
M c C a u l e y T r l S
M i r r o r L a
k e
s D r
Lincoln Dr
W a
s h i n g t o n A v e
Division St
V e r n o n A v e
Golf Ter
C o d e
A v e
W i l r y a
n A
v e
N o r m a
n d a l e R d
W e
s t S h o r e
D r
C o r n e l i a D r
F r a n c e
A v e
S
Y o r k A v e
S
77th St W
O h m s L n
Hilary Ln
Olinger Blvd
66th St W
A n t r i m R d
63rd St W
X e r x e
s A v
e S
69th St W
B u s h L a k e R d
M e t r o B l v d
66th St W
62nd St W
Valley Ln
B r o o k s i d e
A v e
?úA@
?ÞA@
?vA@
74th St W
V a l l e y V i e w R d
Engineering DeptJanuary 2016
/
Bicycle FacilitiesBike R outes (signed and/or marked as)
Green Shared Bike LanesAdvisory Bike Lanes
Bike LanesBike Boulevards
Signed Bike Routes
Bike or Shared Use Paths
Shared Lane MarkingsApproved Primary RouteApproved Secondary Route
O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Comprehensive.mxd
The CITY of
EDINA
Site Plan Review
7600 Metro Boulevard
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 5
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 6
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 7
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 8
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 9
The CITY of
EDINA This Request Requires:
www.EdinaMN.gov 10
•Site Plan Review
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 11
City Standard PCD-3 Proposed
Building Setbacks
Front Street – Edina Ind. Boulevard
Front Street - 76th Street
Side – West
Side – East
Parking Lot Setbacks
Front Street – Edina Ind. Boulevard
Front Street - 76th Street
Side – West
Side – East
50 feet
50 feet
20 feet
20 feet
20 feet
20 feet
10 feet
10 feet
187 feet
152 feet
100 feet
90 feet
130 feet
60 feet
20 feet
15 feet
Building Height 4 stories & 48 feet 1 stories & 23 feet
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) .5 of the tract .2 of the tract
Building Coverage .3 .2
Parking Stalls (Southdale) Office – 1/200 s.f. (27)
Warehouse – 1/2,000 s.f. (30)
Maintenance – 3 spaces per bay (15)
Total Required = 72
110 stalls
Drive Aisle Width 24 feet 24 feet
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 12
Bus
Enter
Bus
Exit
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 13
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 14
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 15
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 16
The CITY of
EDINA Recommendation
www.EdinaMN.gov 17
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 18
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VII.B.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Cary Teague, Co mmunity Develo p ment Directo r
Item Activity:
Subject:PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning with Variance and
Subdivis io n fo r Opus Development LLC at 5901
Linc o ln Drive. Resolution No . 2016-75 & Ord inance
No . 2016-12
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
T he P lanning Commission unanimously recommended denial of the request. (See resolution for denial.)
Staff recommends approval. (See resolution for approval.)
INTRODUCTION:
See attached P lanning Commission Staff Report for details of the proposal.
Based on the discussion and recommendation of the P lanning Commission, the applicant has revised the plans to
address issues that were raised. T he revised plans are attached, and will be presented at the City Council meeting
on August 16th.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning Commiss ion Staff Report
Planning Commiss ion Minutes
Res olution No. 2016-75 Denial
Res olution No. 2016-75 Approval
Corres pondence up to Augus t 9th
Opus Submittal 2016-08-10
Lincoln Drive Staff Pres entaton
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-75
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT
AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR OPUS DEVELOPMENT LLC AT 5901 LINCOLN DRIVE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
Section 1. BACKGROUND.
1.01 Opus Development Company LLC is proposing to re-develop a portion of the former
United Health Group site at 5901 Lincoln Drive. Children’s Minnesota has moved into
the existing office building on the north and east side of the site. A portion of the
existing office building is proposed to be torn down, and replaced with a four-story
250 unit apartment building, with a 250 space underground parking ramp built in its
place.
The property is legally described as follows:
See attached Exhibit A.
1.02 To accommodate the request, the following is required:
Preliminary Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to MDD-5 Mixed
Development District.
Preliminary Development Plan with a surface parking stall Variance from 187
surface parking stalls to 112 with a proof-of-parking plan for 188 total.
Subdivision.
1.03 On May 25, 2016 the Planning Commission held a public hearing. A motion to
approve the project failed on a vote of 2 Ayes and 6 Nays. A motion to deny the
Rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Development Plan passed. Vote: 8 Ayes and
0 Nays. Planning Commission findings for denial included: lack of affordable housing;
lack of plan details including lighting, traffic calming, building renderings, and better
site sections; concern over pedestrian safety, traffic concerns; and impact on adjacent
property to the south.
1.04 The applicant revised and added to their planning submittal package to address
concerns raised by the Planning Commission.
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-75
Page 2
1.05 On August 16, The City Council held a public hearing and considered the request.
Section 2. FINDINGS
2.01 Approval is subject to the following findings:
1. The proposal contains two uses on separate lots; however, they are linked by an
interior sidewalk connection between the two sites, an improved boulevard style
sidewalk, and a shared parking arrangement. With the inclusion of affordable
housing per the City’s Policy, the proposed plans are reasonable to achieve goals
within the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
2. Calculating Density within an MDD-5 Zoning District including both sites would
meet the Comprehensive Plan Density Requirement of a maximum of 30 units per
acre. By using the MDD-5 for both sites, and calculating the density using both
sites assists the applicant to meet the Comprehensive Plan, and allows more units
to assist in providing affordable housing.
3. The proposed uses, Office and High Density Residential are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, which guides the site OR, Office Residential.
4. The proposed plat meets all Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements.
Section 3. APPROVAL
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina,
approves the Preliminary Plat, Preliminary Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to
MDD-5, Mixed Development District and Preliminary Development Plan to construct a 250-
unit apartment building at 5901 Lincoln Drive. Approval is subject to the following Conditions:
1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary
Development Plans dated July 1, 2016, and the Plans presented to the City Council
on August 16th. Final plans must show all mechanical equipment and the means to
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-75
Page 3
screen it. No ground level mechanical equipment shall be located in front of the
building on a public street.
2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per
Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per
Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s
memo dated June 13, 2016, including the requirement for a development
agreement.
5. The applicant is providing fee-in-lieu of affordable housing to allow the City to
build affordable housing units elsewhere.
6. A shared parking arrangement to allow residents and guests to use the parking
ramp on evenings and weekends.
7. The residential site shall be held to the high density residential sign requirements
and the office site the planned office district regulations.
8. A construction management plan shall be submitted at the time of building permit
application; including hours of construction, construction staging, traffic control,
parking, restriction on parking on Lincoln Drive, and pedestrian access.
Construction management plan shall be subject to approval by city staff.
9. The Final Plat must be considered within one-year after approval of the Preliminary
Plat, or the Preliminary Plat shall be deemed null and void.
10. The Final Plat must show drainage and utility easement over the floodplain.
11. The Park Dedication fee of $1,250,00 shall be paid prior to release of the mylars
approving the Final Plat.
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-75
Page 4
Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on August 16, 2016.
ATTEST:
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS
CITY OF EDINA )
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-75
Page 5
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 August 16, 2016, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2016.
_________________________________
City Clerk
August 8, 2016
Edina Mayor, Jim Hovland
Edina City Council Members
Re: Proposed Lincoln Drive Residences
The consensus of opinion from many Edina West residents is to have the proposed Lincoln
Drive Residences (LDR) stopped. Meanwhile, it is important to have our combined thoughts
given to you if you decide to proceed with this unwelcome project, an anathema to all Lincoln
Drive residential lifestyles, and to which we are vehemently opposed. If a maximum of 100
units were being considered, there might be more appeal and support.
We strongly believe that this project will lower property values with "subsidized housing," will
lower serenity and living standards by creating incredible congestion (no matter what your
experts' traffic study results say), and will create a doubly-dangerous hazard for pedestrians
with the two proposed driveways into the apartments and into the Children's offices. (See
Traffic section) After all, Lincoln Drive is only a service road.
AESTHETICS:
The proposed building is too massive for the site and has a commercial, unappealing look to it
plus looks out of place for the neighborhood. The color scheme appears to just be following
the template of so many of the 2016 apartments springing up everywhere; a mish-mash of
inexpensive materials and textures combined with garish colors. We understand wanting to
appear cutting edge architecturally, but the "don't improve upon a classic" concept regarding
style is a well thought out classic statement with years of merit. There is longevity in keeping
with an upscale residential neighborhood feel rather than being obsolete looking in ten years.
The white panels serve no purpose. A more elegant, monochromatic: look with gradations of
earth tones will be better integrated in the overall Edina neighborhood feel and not be at al!
d ul I/boring.
For other apartment references, study new apartment building colors on north 169 and
Minnetonka Boulevard as well older units off Lincoln Drive: Oaks of Edina and Cottages of
Edina. For pure hideousness of color and design as well as massiveness, look at the
humongous black and orange "Big "D" apartment building on Cedar Lake near Louisiana.
Page 2
The current planned design would be more appropriate for the Southdale area which has "we
be with it — we be cool" feelings appropriate for the energy of that area. As it is planned, LDR
looks like a small city. The United Health building across the street is an example of class using
a combination of very few materials, using real brick and not using prefabricated materials.
Also, the LDR balconies look insignificant size-wise and should be eliminated or sized larger.
They look like architectural add-on's, especially with the color black. Balconies in many other
apartment complexes have a neutral colored balcony that is nicely integrated and blends into
the overall color scheme. In the case of this project, LESS IS MORE.
TRAFFIC PATTERNS
Are two entrances to the property being planned: one entrance to the apartments and a
separate one for entrance to Children's? If so, the traffic pattern coming around the Lincoln
Drive curve both ways will be unusually congested as drivers exit off or prepare to turn onto the
Londonderry/Bren bridge. Add to this, vehicles turning into Children's, the apartments, and the
going into and out of the shopping center. Certainly flashing lights will need to be installed
along with speed signage of 20 miles per hour. Even speed bumps might be necessary. People
move very fast along this route. Turning lanes are a must for those drivers trying to get to their
homes via Lincoln Drive and are not turning into any of the above mentioned exits/entrances.
These lanes will aid in keeping them from getting caught up in the congestion as well as to
keep traffic moving.
Is it possible to have one entrance only; one that would then fork to the left for Childrens' and
one to the right for LDR?
Also, is the one way traffic pattern design around the LDR building safe for emergency vehicles?
DENSITY
This overpowering project is so large that it takes up most of the land. MDD-5 regulations for
multi-use call for incorporation of residential, office, and retail use. It seems as though a form
of a shell game is being used in this LDR project because land for the apartment complex does
not own either the office complex or the shopping center. How can they say they are multi-
use? MDD-5 is meant for a project that is all inclusive of all three needs: residential, office,
retail. Tacking on these spaces to appear in compliance for approval is inappropriate when the
two pieces are not owned by the project. If we heard correctly, the density is not to exceed 30%
of the project; if we heard correctly, the density expected on the plans is currently 37% and
only qualifies for multi-use with incorporating the 2 spaces of the shopping center and office
space. Certainly this "percentage changing" deserves great oversight before approval by City.
Page 3
PARKING
It was stated at the Planning Board meeting that Children's will allow overflow LDR parking on
their property, especially weekends when the area is not being used by them.
This parking arrangement could very well be disallowed in the future due to a new tenant who
might say "no apartment parking" or due to changes in the current company needs. If
Children's adds more workers (which seems to be in their future plans) parking will then be
limited unless LDR has a really long term contract.
Because many tenants will have two cars, there will be extensive parking outside. Guests also
need to be factored in using the spaces. This makes for a long walk from the parking to the
front entrance or any side entrances, especially on cold days, snow and ice days, and rainy days,
not to mention the walk from the parking ramp.
MAIN ENTRANCE
Is there only one main entrance that everyone will be using? (Edina West has four main
entrances — one for each building plus a side entrance for each building).
Will all delivery trucks be using only the Main Entrance or will they have a service entrance?
Will there be a concierge/doorman on full time duty?
Are there other entrances for each building? For fire entrances/exits? For access to parking and
the pool?
LIGHTING PLAN
Proper and attractive lighting is an important piece of the overall aesthetics plan for: entrance
signage — building lighting — parking and residential property lighting — plus style of lighting
fixtures.
If overall lighting is not properly planned, this humongous building could look like a space ship
about to take off and certainly won't promote a residential feeling.
Page 4
FLOOR PLANS/AMENITIES QUESTIONS
Square footage of unit?
Proposed rental rates?
Laundry in each unit?
Exercise area?
Library reading area?
Party rooms?
Guest rooms?
Service elevators plus residential elevators?
Completion date for nine mile creek through Edina?
Pet rules and regulations? F.Y.I.(Most residential units on Lincoln Drive do not allow pets in
hallways, on grounds, or walking on premises. They must be taken from property in pet carry-
alls at all times. Dogs are limited to two per unit and 20 pounds.)
Is the putting green a necessary amenity or something to just add on to the sales prospectus?
The current busses on Lincoln Drive only stop once in the a.m. and once in the p.m. It is
important that the routes are confirmed so the marketing materials do not imply constant bus
availability.
Thank you for your consideration of the above stated and heartfelt concerns. Obviously, the
overall hope is that the project will be stopped, and that a stunning upscale town house
development will replace this behemoth. Once anything is built on this property it will be there
for years to come. Should it be an eyesore? - or something of which Edina residents can be
assured that all of Edina will be proud of the newest addition to our community. Please keep
the neighborhood feeling and think in terms of upscale, serenity, longevity of look and
environment.
Sincerely from proud Edina residents,
Pamela Jo Albinson, Edina West, Building 3 Georgean Swartz, Edina West, Building 3
-------- ------
------
BLOCK I
LOT 2
PROPOSED ROADWAY ERMAN
SAW CUT UNE
PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
ENTRANE
CONCRETE
APRON AT .
LINCOLN DRIVE
MISTNO PAVEMENT TO REMAIN
RECONFIGURE PARKING STRUCRIRE.FMIRANCE
ONE► WAY DR, ---Jc!`
\.:41L2IIRTION 14LS
OU, LE1,903.3 . aprneac.s •
400 YR HWL.9).14.
PROOF OF
4,1; 1.4w.i !ja i ii I T )
PRO
6 ES
Colt 45 Havre before Olpolng:
811 or cal11311.com
Common Goun4
04 OPUS.
THE OPUS GROUP
OpUs/tE0roup, LLC.
I nil %ad Dm
General Site Notes ILL4M-T41.1
Opue DaVEWMonl Company, LLC.
I. BAMMoUND INFORMATION FOR THIS PROJECT PROMO ET HANSEN TIOTP FEL!. OLSON,
Mc. EDEN PRAIRIE MN. '
2. LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EASING TOPOGRAPHY AND UTUTIES AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN
ARE APPROMMAIE. CONTRACTOR SHALL MELD VERIFY SITE CONDITIONS AND MILT. LOCATORS
PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CONSTRLICRON. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND, THE ENGINEER
SHOULD OE NOTIFIED IMMECIATELY.
3. at6r13.151055 ME TO FAM OF CURB OR EXTERIOR FACE OF MILLING ?muss OTHERWISE
4. anumous PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE SECTIONS TO MATCH COSTING PAVEMENT SECTIONS.
N Vittn2HPICANOWNTESTelTO 7)ZVO'irgigrEliTY"Illa
DURINGf 2c1srmc''
PROPERTIES.
0.
14;11hpi'll'ilDSAZ47E: WTTEED7111TV:liZA:11
.
11:EFIV )1aNTSOI&-T,ec7.° rETE TEED'
7, CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRACIE AREAS WITHIN OMITS OF GRADING AND PROVIDE A
SHOWN OR BEIWIDI SLCN ,
WHLFZIit
, ,,
Slag5
0
4111-
o
r POINTS MERE ELEVATIONS ARE
B. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL STATE AND FEDERAL RULES INCLUDING THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REOUIRAIENIS.
Site Legend
ERIBELO MP=
---- PROPERTY UNE
LOT UNE
SETBACK UNE
EASEMENT LINE
CURB AND GUTTER
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL
RETAINING WALL
FENCE
=71 Q CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE SMEWALX
I I HEAVY MIT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
STANDARD DUTY MILIMINDUS PAVEMENT
0 NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS
TQ TRANSFORMER
414 SITE LIGHTING
TMMC SIGN
POEMS POLE
DOL ARD / PONT
Site Notce 0
A ES12 CONCRETE CIAO 0,77,1 ,,C,1 .1
17 Site Details
1 MID CURB M GUTTER
2 CONCREIE DRIVEWAY APRON
3 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP
4 ACCESSIBLE DROPPED PEDESTRIAN RAMP (WIN TRUNCATED DOMES)
5 ACCESSIBLE PATHOS LOGO, MINNS, IA SIGNAGE
EI MOSS WALK STRIPING
7 RETAINING WALL
5 STANDARD DUTY BITIMINGUS PAVEMENT (PARKIN° STALLS)
0 HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS FAIMADIT (DRIVE MOLES)
10 CONCRETE SIGMA.
II CONCRETE PAVEMENT
SITE PLAN
nut". ,unorn
C2.0
O. SO' 100. 15
al000lleap.a
culnunnu
Westwood
fEISICIS
MOGI
Lincoln Drive
Residences
Edina, Iii1111•30i0
. OMIT?
ISSUE RECORD
Site Plan Submittal
A
mrc 05.20.15
Pot Ir0;
MOM .
Zech Webber
DOM. MI
Ryon Bluhm
1.1.7.4.2/1
Lt.
1440 IL Mut=
TULLIS Ir 4175/
Jackie Hoogenakker
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hyland, Leslie -10 <leslie.hyland@schmittmusic.com >
Tuesday, August 09, 2016 8:46 AM
Edina Mail
Jackie Hoogenakker
Proposed Opus project - Lincoln Drive
Good Morning,
I live in the Manor Homes of Edina. I live in the first building — my bedroom window faces 169 and my living area
windows face the project in question. Due to the proximity of the building, my home will be greatly impacted by the
proposed apartments. With their proposed parking plans, I fear almost a steady stream of traffic very close — possibly at
all hours of the day — considerably close to my home.
Additionally, I hear that the current Children's building is planning on adding a few to several hundred more employees
at that location. With a large apartment building and the Children's increase in employees, I am very concerned about
the traffic situation on Lincoln Drive. We all know that 169 is closing for a significant amount of time and that only
makes things worse.
Lighting — the parking lot is currently lit but the lights are not that bright. If the apartment building is lighting for safety, I
can only assume that the lights will be much brighter — all day and all night. That changes the "feel" of both my home
and of the neighborhood. We currently live in a residential-type neighborhood. We are maintained much like single
dwelling homes with a lot of green space. The "downtown/urban" feel of this proposed apartment with bright lights,
outdoor pool, and contemporary design are all out of place in this area. I also feel that the four story design belongs in a
more urban setting. This building will dwarf everything around it and , I suspect, dramatically affect our property values.
Lastly, my building will look directly into the courtyard area. If I had wanted to look down on an outdoor pool and all
that goes along with it, I would have purchased in another area.
Thank you for listening to my increasing concerns regarding this proposed project. I hope that considerable thought will
be devoted to the possible ramifications of going forward with it.
Regards,
Leslie Hyland
6958 Langford Drive
Edina, MN 55436
1
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: suekaiser2@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 8:17 PM
To: Jackie Hoogenakker
Subject: 5901 Lincoln Drive
Hello, I live immediately south of the proposed development on Lincoln Drive and have these ideas/concerns
to share:
1. Rush hour and daily traffic on Lincoln Drive has been MUCH better since the 5901 Lincoln Drive property
has been vacant and/or only partially occupied. Should this development proceed, I would like to see the
posted speed limit on Lincoln Drive reduced or more closely monitored to keep the speeds in check. I catch
the M-F bus on Lincoln Drive and often don't feel safe standing there.
2. If it is true that Children's is interested in the southern half of the property, I would prefer that over the
Opus Development. We already know what it's like to have a corporate neighbor.
3. I fear that my extremely safe and crime-free streets (Langford Drive/Circle) will not be as safe and crime-
free.
4. Not sure if pets are allowed at the proposed apartment building or not. We could see an influx in dog
walkers, joggers/walkers, etc. on Langford Drive/Circle.. We are pet & human friendly, but don't really need a
disproportionate influx of non-residents on our street.
5. I think there needs to be a safer pedestrian crossing to the retail on the west side of Lincoln (D'Brians,
Caribou, etc.) It's already a bit blind/dangerous as it is.
6. Traffic on Lincoln Drive will become unmanageable during the 169 construction. This is a given — we saw
what happened when the Bren/Londonderry bridge was under construction. I suspect a good majority of
United Healthcare will be using Lincoln Drive to avoid backups for southbound 169 in the afternoons. During
evening rush hour, it's already interesting to see how many cars from the west side of 169 come all the way
over the bridge (to the east) and then use Lincoln Drive . It's just not possible that all these people live in the
neighborhood — they are cutting through to Gleason/Vernon I suspect.
Thank you for letting me share my concerns and ideas.
Sue Kaiser
6915 Langford Drive
952-944-9080
1
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: Lev Mailer <levmeister@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 9:55 AM
To: Jackie Hoogenakker
Cc: Lev Mailer
Subject: RE: Proposed Apartment Building
Our concerns are:
Congestion of traffic on Lincoln.
Access to shopping mall hampered by excessive traffic.
Lev and Paula Mailer
6875 Langford Drive
1
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: Pat Addy <pataddy@hotmail.com >
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 12:20 PM
To: Jackie Hoogenakker
Subject: 5901 Lincoln Drive Rezoning
Re: Case File 2016.009
This letter is to serve as my testimony against the Rezoning Proposal at 5901 Lincoln Drive.
There already exists an over abundance of traffic in our neighborhood. I am all in favor of adding to the
Population of Edina. However, our area is extremely difficult to travel in currently. There are way too many
vehicles on Lincoln Drive and also on Vernon Avenue.
*The Proposed Project is too large for the area.
*The Land is zoned for Industrial Use and should stay that way.
*1 do not think they will have appropriate parking.
*Traffic is already terrible and our community CANNOT SUPPORT MORE TRAFFIC!
If there were new developments regarding traffic, parking, or shrinking the size of the Proposed Project, I may
change my stance.
Pat Addy
6670 Vernon Avenue South #312
Edina, MN 55436
1
The Opus Group | 10350 Bren Road West Minnetonka,MN 55343 | 952.656.4444 | www.opus-group.com
MEMO
DATE: 08/10/2016
TO: Cary Teague – Community Development Director - City of Edina
FROM: Philip Cattanach
RE: Lincoln Drive Residences – City Council Meeting 2016-08-16
Dear Cary,
On behalf of the Opus Group team, we are pleased to submit the enclosed City Council submittal for the proposed Lincoln
Drive Residence redevelopment located at 5901 Lincoln Drive, Edina MN 55463.
Index list below identifies the City Council submittal package.
1 – Memo
2 – Statement of Intent (July 21, 2016) and Supplemental Statement of Intent (August 10, 2016)
3 – Concept Site Plan – Proof of Parking
4 – Preliminary Plat
5 – Concept Site Plan*
6 – Concept Site Plan – Pedestrian Paths
7 – Concept View of Crosswalk*
8 – Construction Access Map
9 – Enlarged Concept Plan – Landscape Buffer*
10 – Concept View of Landscape Buffer*
11 – Concept Section Between Apartments And Neighboring Residents*
12 – Concept Section Between Apartments And Neighboring Residents*
13 – Site Line Study*
14 – Site Line Study*
15 – Site Line Study*
16 – Site Line Study*
17 – Site Line Study*
18 – Site Line Study*
19 – Concept Photometric Plan
20 – Concept Floor Plans
21 – Concept Elevations
22 – Concept Elevations
23 – Conceptual Rendering – Amenity Aerial
24 – Conceptual Rendering – Amenity Aerial
25 – Conceptual Rendering From Entry Drive
*Indicates additional sheets requested by Planning Commission
Should you have any immediate questions on the submittal, please do not hesitate to contact me at 952-656-4777.
Sincerely,
Phil Cattanach
Director, Real Estate Development
Opus Development Company, L.L.C.
Statement of Intent
www.opus-group.com
Lincoln Drive Residences – Edina, MN
Opus Development Company, L.L.C.
July 21, 2016
Lincoln Drive Residences is a premier new construction, first class multi-family development located off
HWY 169 and Lincoln Drive. The property offers dramatic views of the adjacent Opus 2 business park to
the west and the Walnut Ridge Park and wetland network to the east. This luxury multi-family offering is
adjacent to the newly renovated Children’s Hospital Clinic location at 5901 Lincoln Drive. The four story
building, with a single story of partially below grade parking, will replace a vacant office building and
surface parking lot with 250 premier units and full complement of amenities which will redefine the live,
work, play experience. The development benefits from outstanding freeway access, immediate adjacency
to the regional trail network and proximity to retail, restaurant and hotel accommodations in one of the
most desirable municipalities in the Twin Cities.
The building is organized around a south-facing central courtyard that includes an entry court and a large
outdoor amenities area. This courtyard is the focal point of the development, creating an attractive “front
door” as well as enhancing the residents’ and visitors’ views and experience. The front elevations are
articulated by a distinct pattern of angled walls and recessed balconies, creating a strong architectural
rhythm facing Highway 169. Further articulation is achieved by a composition of brick, glass and fiber
cement panels, used in a way that helps to break down the scale of the building and give each elevation
unique character.
The intent is to rezone the entire property to a Mixed Development District (MDD) as this aligns with the
City’s future guide plan and is supportive of the existing office use while also supporting a multi-family use
with the targeted density of the development. Specifically the MDD5 zoning will allow for one unit per
3,300 SF; which with a lot size of 946,253 SF equates to a maximum of 280 units. Building heights,
building setbacks and coverage to include minimum tract area are all in conformance with this proposed
development.
The site accommodates the separate uses of the Children’s Hospital Clinic and the Lincoln Drive
Residences with individual access points onto Lincoln Drive, while also incorporating connectivity
between the two properties via pedestrian connections a trail connection to the east of both the
Children’s Hospital Clinic office building and the Lincoln Drive Residences as well as sidewalk connections
between the properties and the adjacent retail amenities across Lincoln Drive and ultimately connecting to
the forthcoming regional trail that aligns with the northern boundary of the property and is currently under
development with Three River Parks district.
Consistent with Staff’s recommendation we are proposing one variance under the MDD-5 City Standards
as part of our application. The variance is to reduce the required surface parking stalls of 0.75 to 0.44 with
the ability, through proof of parking, to add 76 additional surface stalls thus meeting the ordinance for
required surface parking stalls should these be necessary. Furthermore, Opus is collaborating with
Children’s Hospital Clinics to implement a shared parking arrangement such that in the event an occasion
arises where additional parking is necessary during non-office hours; accommodations may be made to
support overflow parking within a portion of the parking deck of the Children’s property on the site.
Through conversations with City Staff no parking lot setbacks variance is required for the internal lot line
that will be created following subdivision of the parcel.
The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for “Office Residential – OR” which allows for both the
existing office use and the proposed multi-family development; thus no comprehensive plan amendment
is necessary.
Opus is aware of the City of Edina’s affordable housing policy. Opus questions the technical applicability
of the policy to this specific project. Nonetheless, despite those questions, Opus is prepared to make a
voluntary financial contribution to the City of Edina’s efforts to increase the supply of affordable housing in
Statement of Intent
www.opus-group.com
the community. It is Opus’ goal to work in collaboration with City Staff and ultimately City Council to
arrive at a mutually acceptable financial contribution targeted specifically towards the advancement of
affordable housing in the City of Edina.
Supplemental Statement of Intent
www.opus-group.com
Lincoln Drive Residences – Edina, MN
Opus Development Company, L.L.C.
August 10, 2016
Opus has taken the feedback and the conditions outlined by the Planning Commission into consideration
and implemented this feedback as illustrated in the supplemental sheets submitted and attached to our
Application for presentation and consideration by Edina City Council.
Section Sheets: Opus has provided a few section sheets to show the distance and elevation change
between the adjacent residences to the south and the proposed building. While the height of the building
proposed does not seek a variance; we can appreciate how the sections will help communicate the
relationship between the structures. As the sections will indicate, both in distance and in elevation; we
feel the generous setbacks we have provided, coupled with the green space will offer an improved
experience for both neighboring properties and our proposed project.
Green Space and Screening: While the elevation of the proposed roadway is lower than the neighboring
properties to the south; we are sensitive to the concerns of headlights and have implemented a few
additional evergreen trees in locations that seem appropriate to enhance the vegetative buffer between
the properties. Additionally, we will install a few select vertical screening green wall elements in select
areas to offer diversity in vegetation while also serving as a functional screening of headlights in key
areas.
Circulation Road: Opus met with the City of Edina Fire Marshal to further understand fire/life safety
requirements. To clarify, a 26 foot wide access is preferred; but less is permissible contingent upon
appropriate signage. Access may be provided through a variety of methods. In collaboration with the Fire
Marshal, we will utilize the 16 foot wide circulation road with a rolled curb and the adjacent 5 foot
sidewalk with required signage to provide necessary access. This serves both the operational needs for
circulation of the proposed project for residents as well as providing a stable, year round maintainable
access path for fire/life safety. The project team did study opportunities of lowering the roadway elevation
further and concluded that the use of additional vegetative screening and the currently planned alignment
of the drive will effectively mitigate the concerns of vehicle headlights.
Lighting Plan: Opus has provided a photometric plan as requested by the Planning Commission which
provides effectively zero light cut off at the south property line which is less than the code requirement of
0.5 foot-candles.
Crosswalk Signal: Opus has provided a proposed lighting beacon for the pedestrian cross walk to
promote awareness for vehicles and enhance pedestrian safety.
City of Edina Affordable Housing Policy: Opus is aware of the City of Edina’s affordable housing policy.
Opus questions the technical applicability of the policy to this specific project. Nonetheless, despite those
questions, Opus has collaborated with City Staff and is prepared to make a Two Million ($2,000,000.00)
dollar voluntary financial contribution to the City of Edina to support the advancement and increase of
affordable housing opportunities in the community.
The CITY of
EDINA
Rezoning with parking space Variance &
Subdivision – 5901 Lincoln Drive
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 5
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 6
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 7
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 8
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 9
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 10
The CITY of
EDINA Revisions Since Sketch Plan
Boulevard style sidewalk on Lincoln Drive.
More building and site plan detail; however, the shape, mass and scale of the
project are the same.
Increased green space with proof-of-parking.
www.EdinaMN.gov 11
The CITY of
EDINA Item Continued to Address
additional Sketch Plan Issues –
Changes Made
Addressed Affordable housing.
Shared parking between the two uses.
Attempted to create a more integrated development plan to better “mix” the two
uses together by providing more sidewalks.
Provided a direct connection to the regional trail.
Additional on-site amenities and trees.
Improve the new boulevard style sidewalk to enhance the pedestrian
experience.
www.EdinaMN.gov 12
The CITY of
EDINA This Request Requires:
www.EdinaMN.gov 13
Preliminary Rezoning from PID, Planned Industrial District to
MDD-5 Mixed Development District.
Preliminary Development Plan with a surface parking stall
Variance from 187 surface parking stalls to 112 with a proof-of-
parking plan for 188 total.
Subdivision.
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 14
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 15
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 16
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 17
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 18
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 19
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 20
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 21
Nonresidential and Mixed
Use Categories
Description, Land Uses Development Guidelines Density Guidelines
OR
Office-Residential
No current examples in
City. Potential examples
include Pentagon Park area
and other I-494 corridor
locations
Transitional areas along major
thoroughfares or between higher-
intensity districts and residential
districts. Many existing highway-oriented
commercial areas are anticipated to
transition to this more mixed-use
character.
Primary uses are offices, attached or
multifamily housing.
Secondary uses: Limited retail and service
uses (not including “big box” retail),
limited industrial (fully enclosed),
institutional uses, parks and open space.
Vertical mixed use should be encouraged,
and may be required on larger sites.
Upgrade existing
streetscape and building
appearance, improve
pedestrian and transit
environment.
Encourage structured
parking and open space
linkages where feasible;
emphasize the enhancement
of the pedestrian
environment.
Floor to Area
Ratio-Per current
Zoning Code:
maximum of 0.5 to
1.0*
12-30 units/acre
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 22
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 23
The CITY of
EDINA Primary Issue:
www.EdinaMN.gov 24
•Is the Rezoning reasonable and Variances justified?
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 25
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 26
The CITY of
EDINA Recommendation
www.EdinaMN.gov 27
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 28
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 29
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 30
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 31
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 32
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 33
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 34
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 35
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 36
The CITY of
EDINA Recommendation
www.EdinaMN.gov 37
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 38
City Standard MDD-5 Proposed
Building
Setbacks
Front Street–
Lincoln Drive
Side - south
Side - east
Parking Lot
Setback
45 feet (based on a 55 foot
tall building)
45 feet (based on a 55 foot
tall building)
45 feet (based on a 55 foot
tall building)
20 feet
60+
60+
100+
20 feet
Building Height 4 stories & 48
feet 4 stories & 42 feet
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
FAR)
1.0% .45%
Building
coverage 30% 15%
Usable Area 200 s.f. per
unit = 50,000
s.f. (250 units)
50,000+ (including the amenity
area and sidewalks/trail
connections)
Density 30 units per acre (660 per Comp. Plan) &
1 unit per 3,300 s.f. of lot area (280 - MDD-5
Zoning)
250
250
Parking Stalls -
Residential
Parking Stalls -
Office
1.00 stalls enclosed per unit = 250 total
+.75 exposed stalls per unit = 187
(437 total)
697 (based on a 203,134 s.f. building)
250 enclosed
112 surface* (188 with proof of
parking)
653 ramp
226 surface
879 total
Parking Stall
Size 8.5’ x 18’ 8.5 x 18’
Drive Aisle
Width 24 feet 24 feet
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 39
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 40
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 41
The CITY of
EDINA
www.EdinaMN.gov 42
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VII.C.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Cary Teague, Co mmunity Develo p ment Directo r
Item Activity:
Subject:PUBLIC HEARING: Ord inance No . 2016- 13;
Temp o rary Family Health Care Dwelling
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
T he P lanning Commission recommends the City of Edina not opt out of the state statute requirement to allow
temporary health care dwelling units.
INTRODUCTION:
See attached P lanning Commission Memo
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Planning Commiss ion Memo
Planning Commiss ion Minutes
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VIII.A.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Trans p o rtation P lanner
Item Activity:
Subject:So uthdale Area Transportation Study Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve the Southdale Area Transportation Study.
INTRODUCTION:
In September 2015 the City hired WSB to prepare a Southdale Area Model Update and Transportation Study.
T he attached document is the final report, which incorporates comments made by staff and the ET C (draft
minutes attached).
Staff from WSB will give a brief presentation and will solicit comments from Council regarding this Study.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Southdale Area Trans portation Study
Draft Minutes Trans portation Commis s ion July 21, 2016
Staff Pres entation Southdale Area Trans portation Study
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670
Southdale Area
Transportation Study
For:
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55024
July 22, 2016
Prepared By:
WSB & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55416
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 2
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly registered professional engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Charles T. Rickart, P.E.
Date: July 22, 2016 Reg. No. 26082
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATION ...................................................................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................... 3
LIST of FIGURES / TABLES .................................................................................................................................. 3
INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 6
FORECASTED 2040 CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................. 11
PEDESTRIAN NETWORK ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 23
CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 33
LIST of FIGURES / TABLES
Figure 1 – Study Area Intersections ................................................................................................. 5
Figure 2 – Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes ..................................................................... 7
Figure 3 – Level of Service Ranges ................................................................................................... 8
Figure 4 – Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................... 10
Figure 5 – TAZ Trip Increase Assumptions ................................................................................ 12
Figure 6 – Transit Mode Share Assumptions ............................................................................. 14
Figure 7 – 2040 Base Condition ADT ............................................................................................ 15
Figure 8 – Base ADT Percentage Change ..................................................................................... 16
Figure 9 – 2040 High Density Scenario ADT .............................................................................. 17
Figure 10 – High Density Scenario ADT Percentage Change ................................................ 18
Figure 11 – 2040 Base Condition Level of Service ................................................................... 19
Figure 12 – 2040 High Density Scenario Level of Service ..................................................... 21
Figure 13 – 2040 High Density Scenario LOS by Movement ................................................. 22
Figure 14 – Existing Comprehensive Plan Sidewalk System ................................................ 24
Figure 15 – Existing Comprehensive Plan Bicycle System .................................................... 25
Figure 16 – Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Generators ...................................................... 31
Figure 17 – Future Pedestrian and Bicycle Generators ......................................................... 32
Table 1 – Population and Households Assumptions............................................................... 11
Table 2 – Changes in Number of Trips ......................................................................................... 11
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 4
INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND
In 2008 WSB assisted the City in the development of a traffic model using the
Synchro/SimTraffic modeling software for the Southeast area (Southdale) of the City. The
study area was bounded by TH 62 (Crosstown) on the north, the Richfield/Edina border on
the east, the Bloomington/Edina border on the south and TH 100 on the west. The model
included 40 signalized intersections, 20 un-signalized intersections, and three
roundabouts.
The purpose in developing the model was to provide a consistent baseline for traffic
analysis and to provide continuously updated results to help gauge the compound effect of
multiple developments in the Southdale area. Since the model was completed, it has been
used by several developers and the City in reviewing the area traffic impacts of proposed
development. Although, the model has been continually updated with traffic characteristics
from approved developments the original traffic conditions were based on 2007 traffic
counts. It is now in need of updating and recalibration with new traffic counts.
Also in 2008 WSB assisted the City in preparation of the Transportation Plan in conjunction
with the Comprehensive Plan update. As part of the Transportation Plan a city wide
transportation planning model was developed for the existing and future land use
projections. Since the preparation of the land use projections in the Transportation Plan
density changes have occurred in the Southdale area. In addition questions of the
appropriate density have been asked for the area specifically on the west side of France
Avenue.
In March of 2015 the City Council appointed a working group that developed the Working
Principles for the France Avenue Southdale Area. These principals will serve as a tool to
guide the development process for the whole Southdale area, and demonstrate methods
that might be used during the Comprehensive Plan update in 2018. In order to provide data
to assist in moving this process to the next stages, development of transportation forecasts
should be completed.
The purpose of this Study is to:
1. Update the existing Synchro/SimTraffic traffic model in the Southdale area,
Including expanding the study area to north of TH 62 to W. 60th Street;
2. Updating the CUBE transportation planning Regional Travel Demand model for the
entire City, and;
3. Preparation of a transportation analysis for two land use density scenarios for the
Southdale area.
4. Review and analysis of pedestrian/bicycle connections and conflicts in the
Southdale area in relation to the local/regional system.
Figure 1 shows the study area and intersections included with the analysis.
The following sections of this memorandum provide an update on the data collection and
preliminary study results.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 5
Figure 1: Study Area Intersections
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 6
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WSB collected traffic counts at 20 intersections and 20 roadway segments in the study
area. These counts together with traffic counts provided by Hennepin County and the City
of Edina were used to update the Synchro/SimTraffic models.
Traffic signal timing information was updated based on information provided by Hennepin
County. Lane geometry, new intersections, changes of intersection control, pedestrian
timing and other information like speed limits were updated based on field visit to all the
study intersections. Figure 2 shows the existing Average Daily Traffic volumes on the
adjacent roadways.
Traffic Analysis Methodology
The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented in
the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis
techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations.
Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from “A” to “F” to describe the
average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is primarily a
function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration,
and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and
drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection operating at that level. LOS E
represents the condition where the intersection is at capacity, and some drivers may have
to wait through more than one green phase to make it through an intersection controlled
by traffic signals. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be
handled by the intersection, and many vehicle operators may have to wait through more
than one green phase to make it through the intersection. At a stop sign-controlled
intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each
approach at an all-way stop, or long queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable
gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through-street intersection.
The LOS ranges for both signalized and un-signalized intersections are shown in Figure 3.
The threshold LOS values for un-signalized intersections are slightly less than for
signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers’ expectations at
intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing
(or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the
timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also
changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease.
LOS, as described, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as
“approaches”) or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a
LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a
very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example,
improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a two-way stop condition to an all-
way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant
penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road.
Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes,
could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 7
Figure 2: Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 8
Figure 3 - Level of Service Ranges for Signalized and Un-signalized Intersections
Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct
roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user.
Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with
a lower LOS. An overall LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban
areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or
E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low-volume legs of some
intersections.
The LOS analysis was performed using Synchro/SimTraffic:
Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input
database for turning-movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and
timing characteristics. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing
parameters for future conditions. Output from Synchro is transferred to SimTraffic,
the traffic simulation model.
SimTraffic is a micro-simulation computer modeling software that simulates each
individual vehicle’s characteristics and driver behavior in response to traffic
volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model simulates
drivers’ behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as different
vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue lengths at
each intersection being analyzed.
80
55
35
20
10
LOS A
LOS B
LOS C
LOS D
LOS E
LOS F
No
t
C
o
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
Co
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
50
35
25
10
LOS A
LOS B
LOS C
LOS D
LOS E
LOS F
No
t
C
o
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
Co
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
15
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
Co
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
p
e
r
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
(
s
e
c
.
)
Co
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
p
e
r
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
(
s
e
c
.
)
SOURCE: Level of Service thresholds from the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 9
Existing Conditions Analysis
The turning movement counts obtained from the field counts were input into the
Synchro/SimTraffic model using the existing roadway geometrics and intersection control.
The SimTraffic model was then run for five replications. The output from the five
simulations was then averaged.
It should be noted that Roundabouts and Stop Controlled intersections are classified as un-
signalized intersections and have different delay thresholds than signalized intersections
according to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).
The result of the analysis indicates that in general most intersections are operating at an
acceptable overall Level of Service (LOS) D or better, with the exception of:
1. York Avenue at W. 78th Street = LOS F
2. France Avenue at TH 62 North Ramp = LOS E
3. France Avenue at W. 76th Street = LOS E
Figure 4 shows the existing Level of Service (LOS) at each of the study area intersections.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 10
Figure 4: Existing Level of Service
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 11
FORECASTED 2040 CONDITIONS
The regional Travel Demand Model developed by Metropolitan Council and used for the
City’s current (2008) Transportation Plan, was utilized to obtain base 2040 forecasts for
traffic growth in the area. The models were updated with projected traffic and the
forecasted 2040 level of service was determined at the study area intersections.
Subsequently, an alternative analysis was conducted with updated information on
development density in the City’s Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) in the Southdale
area. The regional Travel Demand Model was rerun with the higher density conditions and
traffic growth rates were estimated for the year 2040 with the higher density
developments in place. Using the growth rates obtained from this alternative, the
Synchro/SimTraffic model was updated to reflect higher traffic forecasts and the Level of
Service under this scenario. Areas of concern were highlighted.
Proposed Development Density Scenario’s
In order to understand the impacts of increasing the density of development in the
Southdale Area, an alternative was analyzed which involved increasing the development
density in future leading to higher number of trips. Table 1 below shows the assumptions
used in this alternative. The increased density was assumed to be in form of number of
households
Table 1: Population and Households Assumptions
TAZ
2040
Population -
Base Scenario
2040 Number of
Households -
Base Scenario
Comp Plan
Average
Density
(Units/Acre)
High Density
Assumption
(Units/Acre)
Increase
Factor
2040
Population -
High
Density
Scenario
2040 Number
Of
Households -
High Density
Scenario
512 2170 1130 21.00 50.00 2.4 5167 2690
513 5060 2610 19.75 48.00 2.4 12298 6343
514 280 130 43.50 100.00 2.3 644 299
515 3110 1550 33.50 65.00 1.9 6034 3007
517 1560 680 22.80 50.00 2.2 3421 1491
518 6470 2910 9.55 14.25 1.5 9654 4342
519 1930 880 10.35 13.25 1.3 2471 1127
Total 20580 9890 39689 19299N/A
These assumptions correspond to trip generation numbers from each zone as shown in
Table 2 below.
Table 2: Change in Number of Trips
Productions Attractions Total Productions Attractions Total
Absolute
Change
Percent
Change
512 11340 18641 29981 20810 24249 45059 15078 50%
513 25413 32107 57520 47950 45611 93561 36041 63%
514 9836 23915 33751 11116 24632 35749 1998 6%
515 14735 19284 34019 24425 24633 49059 15040 44%
517 15669 40355 56024 22234 43488 65722 9698 17%
518 25110 19261 44371 36392 24980 61372 17001 38%
519 9106 11176 20282 11053 12177 23230 2948 15%
2040 Base Scenario 2040 High Density Scenario Total Change
TAZ
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 12
Figure 5 shows the increase in households and population along with resulting trip
increases from each Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ).
Figure 5: TAZ Trip Increase Assumptions
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 13
Transit Model Assumptions
Transit is a key component to the transportation system in the Southdale area. In 2014
Metro Transit opened the Southdale Transit Center and Park & Ride facility. The Transit
Center is located southwest of the York Avenue and 66th Street intersection, on the east
side of Southdale Center near the entrance to JC Penney. The site includes 70 surface Park
& Ride parking spaces, with overflow parking for additional vehicles east of the Southdale
Center ring road.
Transit service is provided to the Southdale Center from 8 primary routes including:
Route 6 - to Minneapolis (urban local)
Route 515 - to Bloomington, 66th Street Richfield, METRO Blue Line (VA
Medical Center, Mall of America)
Route 537 - to Bloomington, Normandale College
Route 538 - to south Bloomington, METRO Blue Line (Mall of America)
Route 578 - to Minneapolis (express)
Route 579 - to U of M (express)
Route 684 - to Minneapolis, Eden Praire, Chanhassen and Chaska (SouthWest
Transit)
Route 694 - to Eden Praire, Chaska, Normandale College,
Richfield (Southwest Transit)
The Metropolitan Council regional Travel Demand Model assumes a Transit mode share for
the area when determining the future traffic projection. This percentage for the study area
was 3.5% on the average. The transit mode percentage varies by TAZ and the value for each
TAZ is shown in Figure 6.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 14
Figure 6: Transit Mode Share Assumptions
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 15
Figure 7 shows the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) as forecasted by the regional Travel
Demand Model for the year 2040 base condition.
Figure 7: 2040 Base Conditions ADT
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 16
Figure 8 shows the percentage change in ADT as forecasted by the regional Travel Demand
Model between the base model year (2010) and the year 2040.
Figure 8: Base Condition ADT Percentage Change
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 17
Figure 9 shows the forecasted 2040 ADT for the high density scenario.
Figure 9: 2040 High Density Scenario ADT
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 18
Figure 10 shows the percentage change in ADT for the increased density scenario from
year 2040 and the base model year (2010).
Figure 10: High Density Scenario ADT Percentage Change
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 19
The turning movement volumes for the PM peak hour in 2040 were estimated based on the
ADT growth percentages derived from the model for various links. The turning movements
were then simulated in the Synchro/SimTraffic network. Figure 11 shows the 2040 Level
of Service assuming growth levels consistent with the 2040 regional Travel Demand model.
Figure 11: 2040 Base Condition Level of Service
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 20
Projected 2040 Conditions Analysis
The turning movement volumes for the PM peak hour were adjusted from the base
condition based on the ADT growth percentages derived from the high density scenario
model. Figure 12 shows the Level of Service at the study intersections in the High Density
Scenario assuming no significant improvements to the intersections from current
conditions. The results indicate that in general most intersections with either the 2040
Base conditions or 2040 High Density conditions would continue to operate at an overall
Level of Service (LOS) D or better, with the exception of:
2040 Base Condition:
1. York Avenue at W. 78th Street = LOS F
2. Minnesota Drive at Edinborough Way = LOS F
3. France Avenue at TH 62 North Ramp = LOS E
4. France Avenue at W. 76th Street = LOS E
5. Hazelton Road at Target Access = LOS E
2040 High Density Condition:
1. York Avenue at W. 78th Street = LOS F
2. Minnesota Drive at Edinborough Way = LOS F
3. York Avenue at Parklawn Avenue = LOS F
4. France Avenue at TH 62 North Ramp = LOS E
5. Xerxes Avenue at TH 62 North Ramp = LOS E
6. France Avenue at Parklawn Avenue = LOS E
7. France Avenue at W. 76th Street = LOS E
8. Hazelton Road at Target Access = LOS E
9. France Avenue at Minnesota Drive = LOS E
It should be noted that at some intersections which are not operating at an overall LOS E or
F, may still be individual movements that are at LOS E or F. Figure 13 shows individual
movements that are at LOS E or F at the study intersections.
In addition to the intersections listed above, as development continues to occur in the
Southdale area particular attention should be given to the following intersections as part of
any traffic analysis prepared, which could be operating at LOS F:
1. France Avenue at W. 66th Street – Westbound approach
2. France Avenue at W. 65th Street – Southbound left turn
3. France Avenue at W. 69th Street – Westbound approach, Southbound left turn
4. France Avenue at W. 70th Street – Westbound left turn
5. France Avenue at Hazelton Road – Westbound approach, Northbound and
Southbound left turns
6. France Avenue at Gallagher Drive – Westbound approach, Eastbound left turn
7. Valley View Road at W. 69th Street – Southbound approach
8. Minnesota Drive at W. 77th Street – Southbound left turn
9. York Avenue at W. 69th Street – Westbound approach
10. York Avenue at Hazelton Road – Westbound approach, Northbound left turn
11. Edinborough Way at W. 76th Street – Northbound approach
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 21
Figure 12: 2040 High Density Scenario Level of Service
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 22
Figure 13: 2040 High Density Scenario LOS By Movement
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 23
PEDESTRIAN NETWORK ANALYSIS
The purpose of the pedestrian and bicycle analysis was to highlight existing and potential
future pedestrian and bicycle trip generation and needs in the Southdale area. The analysis
is separated into five sections. The first section provides documentation of the existing
pedestrian and bicycle system in the Southdale Area; the second provides background
considerations about pedestrian and bicycle trip generation; the third section describes
existing pedestrian and bicycle trip generators; the fourth section identified potential
pedestrian and bicycle trip generators based on planned development in the Southdale
area, and; the fifth section includes general conclusions for walking and bicycling in the
Southdale area.
Existing Pedestrian/Bicycle System
There are some existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in place in the Southdale area. The
existing and planned sidewalk and bicycle networks are shown in Figures 14 & 15. There
are sidewalks in place on many of the streets in the commercial and higher-density
residential areas of the study area, including France Avenue, W. 66th Street, W. 70th Street,
and York Avenue. In most cases, there are sidewalks along both sides of these roadways.
While there are sidewalks in place along many of the busier streets in the study area, there
are some challenges for pedestrians. In some locations there are narrow sidewalks at the
back of the curb. Many pedestrians feel uncomfortable walking close to busy roadways, and
it can be a challenge to keep back-of-curb sidewalks clear of snow and ice in the winter.
Additionally, it can be uncomfortable for pedestrians to cross four- and six-lane roadways
within the study area. Crossing distances can be long due to the number of through and
turn lanes. The City of Edina has begun to address these challenges in some locations,
including France Avenue. The sidewalks and intersections along France Avenue have
recently been upgraded to provide a more comfortable pedestrian experience for people
walking along and across France Avenue. There is a very limited sidewalk network in the
residential areas west of France Avenue, and within large commercial developments such
as Southdale Center.
There is a limited bicycle network in place within the study area. The Edina Promenade is
an off-street shared use path that extends from W. 70th Street through Centennial Lakes
Park. There is also an off-street path along Parklawn Avenue. There are bike lanes and
shared lane markings in place along W. 70th Street west of France Avenue. Cornelia Drive
is also a bicycle boulevard.
The lack of dedicated bicycle facilities creates challenges for people bicycling within the
study area. West of France Avenue, many of the low-volume local streets are comfortable
for bicycling without dedicated bicycle facilities. However, the street grid is interrupted in
this area and many of the low-traffic local streets do not provide direct connections. There
are very few bicycle facilities within the commercial and high-density residential areas in
the eastern half of the study area.
The street network in this area is not conducive to on-street bicycling without dedicated
bicycle facilities. Many of the streets in this area are high-volume, multilane roadways.
Most people do not feel comfortable sharing a lane with motorists under these conditions.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 24
Figure 14 – Existing Comprehensive Plan Sidewalk System
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 25
Figure 15 – Existing Comprehensive Plan Bicycle System
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 26
Pedestrian and Bicycle Trip Generation Background
Unlike motor vehicle trip generation, there are not established methods for estimating
bicycle and pedestrian trip generation. Rates of walking and bicycling vary throughout the
U.S. and even within the same metro area. For that reason, it is not possible to make clear
forecasts of pedestrian and bicycle trip generation. Specific land uses cannot be considered
in isolation. There are number of factors that influence rates of pedestrian and bicycle trip
generation, including:
Residential proximity to retail/office land uses: Walking and bicycle use are
typically higher in mixed-use areas or areas where residential land uses are in close
proximity to retail/office land use. Retail, office, and recreational land uses tend to
attract the most bicycle and pedestrian trips.
Residential density: Areas with higher density residential land use tend to see
more walking and bicycling than lower density areas.
Scale of land use and building design: People tend to prefer to walk and bike in
areas where the land use and building design are at a pedestrian scale, including
smaller building footprint, active uses on ground floors, visually interesting
buildings, and concealed parking.
Road network: Small block sizes and narrow streets are associated with more
pedestrian and bicycle activity. In areas with large blocks and large-scale
development, people often have to walk or bike out of their way to reach their
destination. Wide streets tend to be difficult for people to cross on foot or bike.
Pedestrian and bicycle network: People tend to walk and bicycle more in areas
with continuous and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Areas with higher
quality facilities (wide sidewalks with separation from the roadway and/or
physically separated bicycle facilities) often see more pedestrian and bicycle use.
Transit network: People tend to walk and bike more in areas with frequent public
transit service.
Ease or difficulty of vehicle use in an area: Areas with traffic congestion, lack of
parking, and/or parking fees tend to generate more bicycle and pedestrian trips as
vehicle trips can be more costly or frustrating.
There are certainly other factors that influence rates of walking and bicycling in an area.
Weather, personal preference, access to a personal vehicle (or lack thereof), income,
physical ability, and other factors influence whether people walk or bike to a destination.
However, the factors listed above are those that a city has the strongest potential to
influence. With this information in mind, the sections below identify assumed pedestrian
and bicycle generators based on current and future land uses.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 27
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Trip Generators
Commercial retail and office development has been in place for a long time in the Southdale
area. However, there is limited bicycling and walking in the area due to auto-oriented
development, large block sizes, wide roadways with high traffic volumes, gaps in
pedestrian and bicycle network, and separation between commercial and residential land
uses. The sections below describe different types of pedestrian and bicycle trip generators
in the study area. Many of these destinations may not attract significant bicycle and
pedestrian traffic today; however, they have the potential to be generators as residential
density increases and new pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure is constructed.
Office Land Uses: Within suburban contexts, office land uses are less of a pedestrian
generator than other commercial land uses. Most people do not live within walking
distance of their workplace, medical provider, or other professional services. Office land
uses tend to attract some bicycle trips due to people bicycling to work. Office land uses are
situated in the following locations:
Medical offices north of W. 66th Street (Fairview Southdale Hospital, Southdale
Medical Center, Twin Cities Orthopedics, and others)
Offices north of W. 66th Street between France and York Avenues
Offices along the west side of France Avenue
Offices located along W. 77th Street
Centennial Lakes office buildings
It is assumed that offices located in the study area do not attract significant pedestrian
traffic at this time. However, this could change as additional high density housing units are
constructed in the study area. It is possible some people will move to the area to be close to
their workplace. It is also assumed that there are low rates of bicycle transportation to
offices in the study area, mostly due to lack of bicycle infrastructure in the study area and
surrounding neighborhoods.
Retail Land Uses: Retail land uses tend to attract more pedestrians and bicyclists than
other land uses, provided that housing is located within close proximity to retail land uses.
People tend to visit retailers close to their home or workplace, unless they have needs for
specialty goods or are visiting destination retail areas. The Southdale area is a regional
retail destination. It is expected that most people drive to Southdale retail if they live
outside of the study area; however, some people shopping in the area prefer to walk
between retail destinations once they reach the Southdale area. The diversity of retail land
uses in the study area mean that most nearby residents should be able to meet their retail
needs within the study area. Retail pedestrian/bicycle generators include the following:
Southdale Center
Galleria
Southdale Square (York Avenue and W. 66th Street)
Retail uses along France Avenue
Retail uses along York Avenue
Retail uses along Hazelton Street
Limited retail/banks north of W. 66th Street
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 28
As with office land uses, it is assumed that retail in the study area does not currently attract
significant pedestrian and bicycle traffic. However, existing retail will likely draw
additional pedestrian and bicycle traffic as residential density increases.
Hotel Land Uses: There is currently one hotel in the study area. The Westin Edina Galleria
is located at York Avenue and W. 69th Street, in close proximity to both the Galleria and
Southdale Center. It is expected that the hotel generates more pedestrian traffic than other
land uses, given its close proximity to retail and restaurants in the area. Hotel guests are
more likely to walk to their destinations as some might not have access to a vehicle during
their stay. The Westin is unlikely to be a significant bicycle trip generator as most guests do
not have access to bicycles during their stay; however, there may be some bicycle use
among employees of the hotel.
Transportation Land Uses: The Southdale Transit Center is located on the east side of
Southdale Center, near York Avenue. It serves several local and express buses. The transit
center is expected to be a more significant pedestrian and bicycle trip generator, as most
people access transit by walking and bicycling.
Recreational, Worship, and Institutional Land Use: There are several recreational,
worship, and institutional land uses within the study area. Several of these are expected to
generate more bicycle and pedestrian trips than other destinations in the study area,
particularly parks and schools. These destinations include:
Lake Cornelia/Edina Aquatic Center
Arneson Acres Park
Lake Edina Park
Centennial Lakes
Edina Art Center
Southdale YMCA
Southdale Library and County Service Center
Cornelia Elementary School
Christ Presbyterian Church – W. 70th Street and TH 100
Residential Land Uses: Residential land uses are currently located along the edges of the
study area. Single family residential is generally located west of Valley View Road/France
Avenue and east of Xerxes Avenue. High density residential (apartments, condos, and
townhomes) are located north of W. 66th Street, west of France Avenue, south of Hazelton
Road, and along both sides of York Avenue south of Hazelton Road.
It is expected that high density housing generates a greater share of pedestrian and bicycle
trips in the area. This is assumed in part because high density housing is located closer to
retail, office, and transit than single family residential areas. Single family residential land
uses are likely to generate more pedestrian and bicycle trips to the recreational and school
land uses in the study area, as those destinations are located closer to single family
residential.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 29
New high density housing has been constructed at York Avenue and W. 69th Street (One
Southdale Place). It is assumed that this housing generates more pedestrian trips than
other residential land uses in the study area, given its close proximity to retail and
restaurant destinations in Southdale Center, the Galleria, and along the east side of York
Avenue.
Potential Future Pedestrian and Bicycle Trip Generators
Pedestrian and bicycle use is expected to grow in conjunction with anticipated
development in the Southdale area. As part of the city’s land use plan, the city is
considering an increased density scenario that would plan for 100-150 units per acre
within the area bounded by TH 62, Xerxes Avenue, France Avenue, and W. 77th Street. This
area is dominated by retail and office land uses at this time. As residential density grows in
this area, there will be more people living within a short walk or bike ride of retail and
office destinations. As a result, it is assumed that more people will walk and bicycle for
transportation. The increased density scenario is already coming to fruition. The sections
below describe private development that is planned within the study area and expected to
be constructed over the next one to two years.
New development in is also an opportunity to influence walking and bicycling behavior in
the area. Given the proximity of new residential to commercial land uses, there is a lot of
potential for pedestrian and bicycle transportation. The city can work with developers to
integrate new or enhanced walking and bicycling routes into or adjacent to developments.
The city can also encourage pedestrian-scale development including as active uses on
ground floors, windows, and entrances that are oriented towards the sidewalk (rather than
towards parking).
Residential development: Within the study area, over 1,400 units of high density
residential housing are in some stage of the development process. These developments are
generally located much closer to existing commercial development and are therefore
expected to generate more pedestrian and bicycle trips as compared to existing residential
land uses. Planned residential developments include:
Gateway Pointe (York Avenue and W. 66th Street) – 210 apartment units
6725 York (Wicks site) – 242 apartment units
7200 France – 160 apartment units
Aurora on France (6500 France) – 188 senior/transitional housing units
Byerly’s/Think Bank development – 234 units
Continental Gardens (York Avenue) -100 senior housing units
Titus/Eberhardt development (W. 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue) – 275 units
Beacon Housing – 39 units for homeless young adults
Retail/restaurant development: At this time, there is less commercial development
planned than residential development. Several of the residential developments listed above
will be mixed-use and will include restaurant and/or retail spaces. The only stand-alone
commercial development planned at this time is the Bank of America redevelopment at
France Avenue and W. 69th Street. New commercial development is expected to attract
pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 30
In addition, the existing commercial land uses are expected to generate additional
pedestrian and bicycle trips as residential development occurs in close proximity to
existing retail and restaurant land uses. It is also possible that residents of the new units
(particularly apartment units, as people renting typically have more flexibility in housing
location than people who own their homes) will move to the area to be closer to jobs in
area retail and restaurants. These residents will be more likely to walk and bike to their
work due to the close proximity.
Hotel development: The Southdale Hotel is currently in the development process, to be
constructed at the southwest corner of York Avenue and W. 66th Street. Given the hotel’s
proximity to Southdale Center and Southdale Square, it is expected that this development
would generate pedestrian trips. As discussed above, the hotel is unlikely to be a strong
generator of bicycle trips.
Office/medical development: Fairview Southdale is expanding its Emergency Room.
Southdale Medical Center is also pursuing an expansion. It is unlikely that these
developments would have an impact on pedestrian and bicycle trip generation in the area.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Analysis Conclusion
Currently, the greatest pedestrian and bicycle trip generators in the area are the
commercial areas located in the core of the study area (bounded by W. 66th Street, York
Avenue, Hazelton Road, and France Avenue), the Southdale Transit Center, and existing
high density housing. However, pedestrian and bicycle use in the area is currently low due
for several reasons. Current development patterns are auto-oriented, with parking fronting
the street in most cases and large block sizes that add travel time for people walking and
bicycling.
Transportation infrastructure is also a barrier, as there are wide roadways and
intersections with fast-moving vehicles, gaps in the pedestrian network, and a lack of
bicycle facilities. Additionally, most residential land use is separated from commercial land
uses, which means that people need to cover greater distances if they wish to walk or bike
from their home to retail/office destinations.
Increased residential density in the study area is expected to increase pedestrian and
bicycle trips. The greatest future generators are the planned residential development in the
core of the study area. As the study area shifts to a mixed-use development pattern, the
shorter distances between residential and commercial land uses will make it easier for
residents to walk and bike for transportation within the study area. It is expected that
future residential and existing retail land uses will generate more pedestrian and bicycle
trips than today. Hotel development will also generate additional pedestrian and bicycle
trips.
The Southdale Working Group is continuing to develop a framework plan for the area
based on a set of “Working Principles and Supporting Questions”. One of the principals
identified with Phase 1 was “Foster a logical, safe, inviting and expansive public realm
facilitating movement of people within and to the district” the identified attribute
developed in Phase 2 for this principal is “Improved and new pedestrian connections, new
street grid”.
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 31
Figure 16 – Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Generators
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 32
Figure 17 – Future Pedestrian and Bicycle Generators
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 33
CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the analysis and modeling for both the 2040 base scenario and 2040 high density
scenario, issues with some intersections and/or movements will exist if improvements are
not made to the transportation system.
As development is proposed in the Southdale Area detailed analysis of adjacent
intersections should be conducted to document the need for specific improvements at the
critical intersections. These intersections at a minimum would include:
2040 Base Conditions Scenario
1. France Avenue at TH 62 Ramps
2. France Avenue at W. 65th Street
3. France Avenue at W. 66th Street
4. France Avenue at W. 69th Street
5. France Avenue at W. 70th Street
6. France Avenue at W. 76th Street
7. France Avenue at Minnesota Drive
8. York Avenue at W. 69th Street
9. York Avenue at Parklawn Avenue
10. York Avenue at W. 78th Street
11. Hazelton Road at Target Access
12. Minnesota Dr at Edinborough Way
2040 High Density Scenario
1. France Avenue at TH 62 Ramps
2. France Avenue at W. 65th Street
3. France Avenue at W. 66th Street
4. France Avenue at W. 69th Street
5. France Avenue at W. 70th Street
6. France Avenue at Hazelton Road
7. France Avenue at Gallagher Drive
8. France Avenue at Parklawn Ave
9. France Avenue at W. 76th Street
10. France Avenue at Minnesota Drive
11. Xerxes Ave at TH 62 North Ramp
12. York Avenue at W. 69th Street
13. York Avenue at Hazelton Road
14. York Avenue at Parklawn Avenue
15. York Avenue at W. 78th Street
16. Valley View Road at W. 69th Street
17. Hazelton Road at Target Access
18. Edinborough Way at W. 76th Street
19. Minnesota Dr at Edinborough Way
20. Minnesota Drive at W. 77th Street
Most of the traffic issues documented in this Study can be addressed by relatively low-cost
improvements such as:
Signal Timing;
Improvements to turn lanes geometry, or:
Installation of traffic signals or roundabouts at stop controlled intersections;
With the current proposed development and possible increased development scenario, in
the future more trips are expected by all modes of transportation. If a greater proportion of
these trips are walking, bicycling, and/or transit trips, it will reduce the pressure on the
roadway system. The study area has potential to be a place where residents can meet many
of their transportation needs by walking, bicycling, and using transit. Below are general
recommendations that the City could pursue to encourage walking and bicycling in the
Southdale area:
SOUTHDALE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 07/22/2016
CITY OF EDINA
WSB PROJECT NO. 1686-670 PAGE 34
1. Enhance and expand the pedestrian and bicycle network in the study area:
o Develop a dense web of pedestrian connections so people can access
destinations more directly (rather than walking out of their way to follow
existing pedestrian connections)
o Identify, enhance, and develop key pedestrian and bicycle routes between
residential and commercial land uses
o Plan and implement a low-stress bicycle network to expand upon the
successful Edina Promenade
o Address challenging pedestrian and bicycle crossings within the study area:
work to shorten crossing distances, remove free-right turns, and improve key
pedestrian crossings at currently un-signalized locations
o Improve and/or develop pedestrian timing plans in coordination with
vehicle signal timing plans
2. Balance the needs of different transportation modes: Improved signal timing, adding
turn lanes or widening roadways may improve conditions for people driving, but
will make crossings more challenging for people walking and bicycling. It will be
important to consider impacts to people walking and bicycling as the city considers
improvements to the roadway system.
3. Work with residential and commercial developers to improve bicycle and
pedestrian conditions in the study area:
o Integrate new or enhanced walking and bicycling facilities into or adjacent to
development
o Develop building designs and site plans that are pedestrian scale: including
active uses on ground floors and entrances oriented towards the sidewalk
4. Work with owners of existing large commercial properties (for example, Southdale
Center and the Galleria) to develop pedestrian and bicycle routes through their
development.
5. Coordinate with “Southdale Working Group” to implement the identified Working
Principals and associated Attributes.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
1
Minutes
City of Edina, Minnesota
Transportation Commission
Council Chamber
July 21, 6:00 p.m.
I. Call To Order
Chair LaForce called the meeting to order.
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call were members Bass, Boettge, Brown, Iyer, Janovy, LaForce, Loeffelholz, Miranda, and Olson.
Absent at roll call were members Ding and Ruehl.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion was made by member Iyer and seconded by member Bass approving the meeting agenda. All voted aye.
Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion was made by member Bass and seconded by member Olson approving the edited June 16, 2016,
minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried.
V. Special Recognitions And Presentations
A. Southdale Area Transportation Study
Mr. Chuck Rickart, traffic engineer with WSB & Associates, presented the final study. Mr. Rickart reviewed the
purpose of the study which included updating the existing traffic model, updating the transportation planning
model, transportation analysis of land use density scenarios, and review and analyze pedestrian/bicycle
connections. He reviewed the study process, noting where changes were made since the April 21 presentation
which included updating the existing Average Daily Traffic volumes, adding transit usage to the 2040 Forecasts,
and adding the Pedestrian and Bicycle Network Analysis. Mr. Rickart said the Pedestrian and Bicycle Network
Analysis present challenges because of a lack of dedicated facilities. He said the Bike, Comp and Sidewalk Plans
have proposed facilities.
Mr. Rickart said the study’s recommendations are:
1. Intersections improvements (signal timing, turn lane geometry, new traffic signal);
2. Enhance/expand the pedestrian/bike network in the Southdale area;
3. Balance roadway improvements with pedestrian/bike improvements; continue to work with developers
to improve pedestrian/bike conditions;
4. Continue to work with Southdale and the Galleria to improve their pedestrian/bike facility.
Discussion
• Was any scenario planning done? Mr. Rickart said scenario planning was noted in the 2030 Comp Plan
for commercial properties and it was increased for residential properties in the 2040 Forecast.
• There is a draft Small Area Plan for the Southdale area that recommends making the block size smaller;
should this be included in the study as anticipated change? Mr. Rickart said it was discussed and they
decided not to include it because it is not an approved plan. Planner Nolan added they could find a way
to include the principle of the plan.
• How are pedestrians factored in with intersections Level of Service (LOS)? Mr. Rickart said they are
already included so that pedestrians can cross in one traffic signal cycle and it is factored in as a
percentage of traffic volume. Including this information in the study was suggested.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
2
• The Nine Mile Trail wasn’t included and it would be helpful to include it. Planner Nolan said the crossing
will be at Gallagher Drive.
• Was employment forecasting for the major employers in the area identified? This is related to concerns
about potential redevelopment at W. 69th Street near the water tower. Mr. Rickart said not specifically.
He said he worked with planner Teague on residential redevelopment forecasting and while this was
their focus, they assumed increases in employment and traffic. He said the study considered
development at W. 69th Street because a restaurant was proposed for that area.
• Is the next step to seek Council approval? Not necessarily, said planner Nolan, but the study may be
given to the Council informationally. He said the information will be used to update the Comp Plan,
used for future planning, and is available to traffic engineers when evaluating sites for redevelopment.
• Mr. Rickart was asked to explain intersections LOS which range from A-F. Mr. Rickart said similar to
letter grades in school, each intersection gets a rating based on wait time at the intersection. He said in
urban areas like Edina, a certain amount of wait time is acceptable.
• The study conclusion states small, low cost improvements can make a difference, are these quantified in
the model in terms of LOS improvements? No, said Mr. Rickart because the improvements are specific
for each intersection. If the improvements are low cost, why not make the improvements now and
improve the LOS? Planner Nolan said the LOS ratings are degradation that will happen over time and
staff will plan for improvements by including them in the Capital Improvement Plan.
XII. Adjournment at 8:25 p.m.
J F M A M J J A S O N D SM WS
# of
Mtgs
Attendance
%
Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8
NAME TERM (Date)6/21
Bass, Katherine 3/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88%
Boettge, Emily 3/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88%
Brown, Andy 3/1/2019 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 100%
Iyer, Surya 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88%
LaForce, Tom 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100%
Loeffelholz, Ralf 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 75%
Janovy, Jennifer 3/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100%
Miranda, Lou 3/1/2019 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 100%
Olson, Larry 3/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100%
Ding, Emily (student)9/1/2016 1 1 2 25%
Ruehl, Lindsey (student)9/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 50%
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and
Transportation Study
City of Edina
City Council
August 16, 2016
Background
Original SE Edina Area Traffic Model was
developed in 2008.
Current city wide Transportation Plan and Model
developed in 2008.
Significant area development and traffic
changes.
France Avenue Southdale Area Work Group
Comprehensive Plan update
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Study Purpose
Update existing Traffic Model
Expand Study area north of TH 62 to W. 60th Street
Update Transportation Planning Model to 2040
traffic forecasts
Provide transportation analysis of two land use
density scenarios
Comprehensive Plan density
High density residential
Review and analyze pedestrian/bicycle
connections
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Data Collection
Updated Traffic Model to existing conditions
57 intersections
Traffic volumes
Traffic control and lane geometrics
Signal timing
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Edina City Council
Update Traffic Model
Synchro/SimTraffic Model software
Level of Service
Existing Conditions
2040 Base Forecast
2040 High Density Forecast
Overall and by Movement
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
80
55
35
20
10
LOS A
LOS B
LOS C
LOS D
LOS E
LOS F
No
t
C
o
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
Co
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
50
35
25
10
LOS A
LOS B
LOS C
LOS D
LOS E
LOS F
No
t
C
o
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
Co
n
g
e
s
t
e
d
15
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
Co
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
p
e
r
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
(
s
e
c
.
)
Co
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
p
e
r
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
(
s
e
c
.
)
SOURCE: Level of Service thresholds from the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000.
Edina City Council
Edina City Council
Edina City Council
Edina City Council
Edina City Council
Pedestrian Network Analysis
Existing Pedestrian/Bicycle System
Edina Comprehensive Plan
Existing pedestrian and bicycle system has
challenges especially with major barriers such as
France Ave and lack of facilities such as dedicated
bike lanes
The Comprehensive Plan does identify future
pedestrian and bicycle system connections in the
Southdale Area
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Edina City Council
Edina City Council
Pedestrian Network Analysis (cont)
Pedestrian/Bicycle Trip Generation
Existing/Future Pedestrian/Bicycle Generators
Office
Retail/Restaurant
Hotel
Transportation
Recreational, Worship and Institutional
Residential
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Conclusions / Recommendations
Intersection Improvement Needs
Overall intersection LOS E/F
Existing – 3 Intersections
2040 Base Forecast – 5 intersections
2040 High Density Forecast – 9 intersections
Individual movement or approach LOS F
2040 Base Forecasts – 12 intersections
2040 High Density Forecast – 20 intersections
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Conclusions / Recommendation (cont)
Primary issues can be addressed with low-cost
improvements such as:
Signal timing
Improvements to turn lane geometry
Installation of traffic signals at stop controlled
intersections
Improvements would be identified as traffic
increases and/or with future development proposals
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Conclusions / Recommendation (cont)
Enhance and expand the pedestrian and bicycle
network in the Southdale area:
System of connections
Identify, enhance and develop key routes between residential
and commercial uses
Plan and implement a low-stress bicycle network to expand
upon the Edina Promenade
Address challenging pedestrian/bicycle crossings by working to
shorten crossing distance, remove “free-right” turns, improve
crossings at un-signalized locations
Continue to implement intersection improvements similar as the
France Ave Pedestrian Improvement project
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Conclusions / Recommendation (cont)
Balance roadway improvements with
pedestrian/bicycle impacts
Continue to work with developers to improve bicycle
and pedestrian conditions:
Integrate new or enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities into
developments
Develop building design and site plans that are pedestrian and
bicycle friendly with active uses on the ground floor and
entrances towards the sidewalks
Continue to work with Southdale and Galleria to
accommodate pedestrian facilities through their
property
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Questions/Comments?
Edina City Council
Southdale Area
Traffic Model Update and Transportation Study
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VIII.B.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Chad A. Millner, PE, Direc tor of Engineering
Item Activity:
Subject:Ard en Park D Neighb o rhood - Parking S ignage Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve changes to the parking restrictions and signage in the Arden P ark D Neighborhood as detailed in the
attached staff report.
INTRODUCTION:
See attached staff report for detailed information.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Staff Report: Arden Park Parking Signage
Staff Pres entation Arden Park Neighborhood Parking Signage
August 16, 2016
Mayor and City Council
Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering
Arden Park D Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Project – Parking Follow-up
Information / Background:
Please recall at the Public Improvement Hearing in December 2014 with the City Council, parking
regulations were discussed at length. The outcome of those discussions was the promise to study the
parking in the neighborhood and report back in August 2016. This would allow an approximately one-year
review period.
We collected 72 observations of parking use on Bruce, Arden, and Halifax Avenues. The results show the
utilization of parking range from 8% to 27%. This means in most cases, the supply of parking greatly exceeds
the demand for parking.
Over the past year we have continued the discussion of one-sided parking on streets without sidewalks that
are 27-feet wide. There has not been a strong desire to continue the practice of one-sided parking at this
time. The discussion focused on quality of life impacts to the residents. These include limited or no parking
in front of house, longer distances to travel to get to the house, or a longer distance for visitors to travel get
to the house. In my opinion, these quality of life impacts exceed the benefits anticipated with one-sided
parking.
We have received many calls about the size and location of the no parking signs. Comments include lack of
enforcement and inability to see the signs due to their size and spacing. According to industry standards, the
signs are spaced too far apart for the current 12”x12” signs. There are two options to improve compliance.
We can either install more signs closer together or replace the current signs with our city standard larger
ones that would be 18”x18”. I would recommend replacing the signs with the larger ones. Even with the
larger signs, we have 4 locations where we have received calls for additional signs and those locations are
warranted based on the current spacing.
Resident Comments:
The following comments were in response to a letter detailing the recommendations noted below. These
were received prior to submitting this report in the council packet.
STAFF REPORT Page 2
Item No. Resident Comment Number Received
1. Agree with staff recommendation 3
2. Opposed to more or larger signs 1
3. Opposed to removal of no parking signs (Gorgas Ave) 2
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the following changes to the parking restrictions and parking signage. The attached
graphic depicts the recommendations.
Item No. Location Recommendation
1. Bruce, Juanita, Indianola, and Gorgas
Avenues and 51st Street
Remove one sided parking restrictions, two
sided parking would be allowed.
2. Arden & Halifax Avenues and Minnehaha
Boulevard
Increase sign size from 12”x12” to the City
standard 18”x18”.
3. Halifax and 52nd Street Move sign closer to 52nd Street
4. Arden & Halifax Avenues and Minnehaha
Boulevard
Add 4 additional signs as shown on the
attached graphic.
Attachments:
Parking Recommendations Graphic
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpfbcdpfbcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
bcdpf
5300
4113
5230
5333
3945
4439
4075
6
4400
5330
3928 -3 948
5015 5 0 0 0
5030
5321
7
5026
5 1 0 0
5024
4 1 0 9
5019
8
5119
5209
5120
5036
5028
5301
5113
4401
5200
5313
5412
4421
5117
4100
4 0 1 5
5038
5114
5116
5111
5008
5006
5209
5205
5027
5213
5404
5336
5010
5332
5241
5217
5328
5324
5312
5316
4121
3904 -22
5221
5036
5320
5400
5 0 0 0
-2
8
5201
5013
5328
5200
5004
5201
5109
5308
5036
5304
5023
5300
5021
5232
5012
5205
5236
5224
5240
5204
5113
5328
5212
5105
5115
5200
5309
5354
5400
5208
5107
5050
5216
5201
5220
5225
4910
5228
5040
4200
3909-1 5
5101
4 4 3 1 5117
5217
5325
3917 -4 3
5225
5133
5221
5233
5131
5115
4919
5317
5229
5 0 3 4
5011
5 0 3 2
4 4 2 5
5229
4 4 2 9
5000
5241
5317
5029
5329
5325
5109
5002
5017
5021
5321
5313
5221
5016
5333
5337
5016
5100
5225
5211
5111
5241
5032
5309
4913
4 2 1 3
-
1 5
5107
5237
5025
5100
5128
5109
5120
5232
5003
5129
5000
5125
5109
5301
5305
5028
5241
5105
5245
4201
5028
4917
5 0 2 7
5029
5336
3
9
2
4
5001
5110
4
2
0
1
5401
5003
5121
5005
4919
5233
5237
5029
5112
5413
5103
5125
5 1 2 9
5033
4207
5007
5101
5405
5044
5009
5115
5124
5018
5108
5
0
2
2
5
0
2
0
4915
5001
5036
5105
5101
4 2 0 9
-1
1
5113
3 9 0 9
5112
5022
5400
5104
4
9
3
3
5006
5400
5201
54015401
5032
5011
5004
5116
5005
5037
5002
5101
5337
5401
5130
5332
5007
5324
5307
5008
5301
5020
5400
5320
5100
5228
5308 5308
5325
5220
5304
5324
5015
5337
5117
5316
5108
5104
5331
5304
5309
5300
5324
5105
5349
5224
5109
5104
5305
5351
5305
5209
5216
5120
5212
5224
5300
5308
5232
5333
5301
5124
5304
5329
5408
5221
5213
5217
5341
5300
5316
5125
5 2 2 8
5124
5116
5312
5101
5311
5236
5409
5328
5013
5121
5217
5116
5346
5120
52405236
5228
5325
5320
5404
5409
5305
5357
5336
5117
5113
5331
5133
5112
5128
5301
5351
5312
5403
5313
5404
5133
51175108
5132
5313
5232
5216
5112
5128
5232
5114
5108
5319
5343
5337
5409
4
2
0
0
5 2 2 7
4928
5405
5113
5109
5116
5104
5408
5318
5133
5220
5405
5018
5100
5129
5408
5013
5236
5336
5105
5017
5348
5124
5404
5129
4936
5125
5120
5023
5011
5128
4932
4920
5121
4914
5136
5009
51365137
5 2 2 4
4929
50245010
5017
5132
4911
5132
5021
5105
5129
5019
5112
5016
5014
5012
5117
4914
5015
5137
5019
4916
5200
5121
4912
5116
5034
5354
4908
3908
5137
4 9 2 6
-5
4
5020
3 9 0 7
5233
3 9 0 1
-0
7
4050
5332
3915
5 2 0 0
5 0 2 5
5 4 0 0
PR O JEC T LI M IT S
F R
A
N
C
E
A
V E
H
A
L I
F A
X
A
V
E
W 5 0 TH ST
M I
N
N
E H
A
H
A
B
L V
D
A
R
D
E N
A
V E
W 5 4 TH ST
B
R
U
C
E
A
V
E
W 5 2 N D ST
B R U C E A V E
BRUCE PL
G O
R
G
A
S
A
V E
W 51ST ST
I N
D
I
A
N
O
L A
A
V
E
J U
A
N
I
T
A
A
V
E
J A
Y
P
L
X
X
X
X X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
O
O
O
O
X X
/
Engineering DeptAugust 2016
20 15 Pro j ec t A reaArden P a rk D N e ig h bo rh o od Roa d way Rec o ns truc tionImprovement N o: B A -4 12
ObcdpfX Re m ov e N o Park ing Sign
Ad d a N o Park i ng Sign
Mov e th e N o Park ing Sign
Legend
Ch ang e fr om 12 "x1 2 " to 1 8"x1 8"bcdpf
The CITY of
EDINA
2015 Arden Park D Neighborhood
Roadway Improvements
BA-412
Parking Follow-up
August 16, 2016
The CITY of
EDINA Project Area & Sidewalks
www.EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of
EDINA Existing Parking
Existing: 1 sided No Parking, 12”x12” signs
- 24-ft Streets w/ sidewalk: Arden, Halifax, Minnehaha Blvd, 52nd
Street
- 27-ft Streets: Bruce, Juanita, Indianola, Gorgas, 51st Street
(27-ft with 2 w/ sided parking implemented for over 10-yrs)
Parking Analysis:
72 Observations
Utilization of 8% -27%
Supply > demand
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of
EDINA Parking Considerations
1.Little desire to continue with area wide 1-sided parking
2.Quality of Life Impacts to Residents
1.Travel distance to house
2.Amount of parking available
3.Living Streets: 0, 1 or 2 sided parking (project specific)
4.Resident Feedback
1.Before letter, Bruce, Halifax and Gorgas residents (residential
redevelopment)
2.After letter, 11 residents, mixed input (2 safety related and 2
residential redevelopment)
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of
EDINA Staff Recommendations
1.Remove 1-sided parking Bruce, Juanita,
Indianola, Gorgas, 51st Street
2.Change remaining signs to City
standard 18” x 18”, meets MUTCD
spacing guidelines
3.Move 1 sign
4.Add 4 additional signs to fill gaps
www.EdinaMN.gov 5
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VIII.C.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Chad Millner P.E.,Directo r of Engineering
Item Activity:
Subject:Memorand um o f Agreement with Minnehaha Creek
Waters hed District for Ard en Park Res to ration P lan
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve Memorandum of Agreement with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Arden P ark Restoration P lan
INTRODUCTION:
T he attached staff report provides the background and context for this agenda item.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Staff Report: Memorandum of Agreement with Minnehaha Creek
Memorandum of Agreement
Scope of Service
Staff Pres entaton Minnehaha Creek Waters hed Dis trict MOA
August 16, 2016
Mayor and City Council
Chad Millner, Director of Engineering
Memorandum of agreement with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Arden Park
Restoration Plan
Information / Background:
In 2014 and 2015 the Engineering Department made connections with the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD) and Arden Park neighborhood when working on neighborhood
engagement, feasibility, design and construction of improvements on 54th Street, the 54th Street
bridge, and the Arden Park D neighborhood reconstruction. In August of 2014, following flood
events and damage to the creek, the City and MCWD signed a Memorandum of Understanding
covering inter agency collaboration. The MCWD was involved in preliminary planning for the 54th
Street bridge and considered creating a fish passage around the grade control ‘falls’ just upstream
of the bridge, in the end deciding against the project due to cost, limited benefit, and risk to the
recreation kayak wave that was identified in the project engagement process. Subsequently in
2014, while the 54th Street Bridge was under construction, flood waters damaged portions of the
grade control, washing out downstream sediment, and eliminated the recreational value of the
drop.
In 2015 the MCWD approached Engineering staff about coordinating future improvements in the
Arden Park area where shared goals of the City and MCWD overlap. Since that time the 2015 Parks
Recreation and Trails Strategic Plan has been complete and the 2016 draft CIP has identified
potential planning and improvements for Arden Park including items CIP 17-081 Clean Water and
Natural Resources ($200,000 Stormwater Utility Funds), CIP 15-047 Arden Park Shelter Building
Replacement ($650,000 unfunded), and CIP 17-137 Arden Park Master Plan ($40,000 unfunded).
The attached MOA and scope of service describe a coordination between the City of Edina and
MCWD that would engage the Arden Park neighborhood and other stakeholders including the Park
Board, to jointly scope alternatives for hydraulic (flood projection, drainage, public safety), natural
resource (clean water, soil stability, fish passage, habitat, wildlife) and park improvements (drainage,
creek crossing, shelter, park amenities.) Public input for improvement alternatives would be
generated, and preliminary designs would be created for Park Board and Council review. This
STAFF REPORT Page 2
project would not obligate the City of Edina or MCWD to construct the plans, instead it would give
both agencies ideas and scope for future prioritization, and open the possibility to seek State Clean
Water grant funding for clean water portions of the project.
The MCWD has conducted this type of joint project planning, recently completing the improvement
of the Cottageville Park (415 Blake Rd N) in the City of Hopkins. Staff has reviewed the outcome of
the Cottageville Park project and spoke with Hopkins staff to seek best practice advice on their
coordination.
Staff views the opportunity presented by the MCWD to collaborate as a chance to accelerate
already identified park needs through joint planning, to align clean water, flood protection, natural
resource, and active park uses, while leverage district expertise and funds and increasing the
changes to leverage clean water grant funding sources. This proposed planning and neighborhood
engagement effort comes at a modest cost to the City of Edina. In anticipation of Council
consideration, Director Kattreh has notified the Park Board of the opportunity, and identified two
members of the board to be involved if Council chooses to move forward.
1
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is made between the City of Edina, a Minnesota
municipal corporation (“City”), and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed
district and political subdivision with powers at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D
(“District”).
Recitals and Statement of Purpose
A. The Minnehaha Creek corridor has sustained impacts related to its water quality, channel
stability, habitat and public use opportunities as the result of development, stormwater
discharges and adjacent urban land uses;
B. The District and the City have worked together on several initiatives, and with other public
and private stakeholders, for each party to achieve its goals and purposes in a manner that
enhances and integrates the environmental, social, and economic value along the corridor;
C. In 2014, the District and City signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) identifying
areas of collaboration within the realms of land use planning, transportation, stormwater
management, economic development, flood mitigation, parks and public land management,
greenway development and water resource improvements.
D. Under the 2014 MOU, the District and City examined options for an existing grade control
structure associated with the 54th Street bridge crossing of Minnehaha Creek, which is a barrier
to fish passage, creates an impoundment that accumulates sediments, and degrades aquatic
habitat upstream. The structure previously was a recreational amenity but now may be
removed without diminishing recreational use of the channel.
E. The stream reach in which this crossing is located flows through Arden Park, a City park and
recreational property. Channel habitat improvement must involve the City so that it supports
current and future public use of Arden Park, is consistent with the goals of the City’s strategic
plan for parks, recreation and trails, and integrates the riparian environment into the public use
experience.
F. Since 2014, the City and the District individually and together have significantly engaged the
neighborhood and a broader set of interested parties in potential channel, riparian and park
improvements. It is important that this continuing engagement be reflected in the design for
District resource improvements and City park improvements.
G. This MOA establishes a cooperative framework within which a Concept Arden Park
Restoration Plan for channel (hydraulic), natural resource and park improvements may be
developed jointly, and is intended by the parties to be legally binding.
2
Terms
1. The parties will initiate a planning process that identifies potential improvements to Arden
Park with enhancements to the hydraulic channel, riparian water resource, , natural resource,
soil stability, and drainage consistent with the following project goals:
• Restoration of natural stream function and fish passage by actions including removing
the grade control structure;
• Water resource and riparian habitat improvements which will enhance creek access and
draw attention to the role of natural elements in visual composition of the park;
• Natural resources, surface water, soils stability and drainage improvements which will
provide opportunities to enhance existing and future park recreation value.
• Public safety.
2. The District will develop a Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan development process that
incorporates public engagement, and will transmit it to the City for review and concurrence.
The parties expect that the process generally will follow the steps and schedule of Attachment
A hereto.
3. The District will coordinate outreach and engagement of the neighborhood and the broader
interested public in development of the Concept Plan, and will be responsible for process
facilitation including public notice, meeting space and similar administrative matters. The
parties will co-lead public sessions and the City will coordinate and assist the District in this
effort.
4. The District will develop a Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan for improvements based on
the above project goals and community input, and with the assistance of engineering anddesign
consultants as it may retain. The City will timely advise the District and its consultants, and
timely supply relevant information, as to recreational park improvements and programming,
treatment of existing and potential park structures, and City interests with respect to the
integration of park uses with channel and riparian improvements. In addition to the
engineering and design consultants that the District will retain, each party will provide for the
capacity necessary to support its participation in the process. Each party will timely inform and
consult with the other during the Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan development process.
Concerning channel and riparian improvements, the concept design may extend beyond the
boundaries of Arden Park as it may be defined.
5. The intent of the parties is that the planning process will potentially lead to a partnered
project incorporating water resource and park improvements. However, neither party has yet
determined that it will proceed with design or construction of a project. Therefore, it is the
parties’ intent that the Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan allow for either party to proceed
with design and construction within its realm of interest even if the other party has determined
not to do so, or the parties determine to proceed on different schedules.
3
6. District and City staff will cooperate to present the final Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan
to the City Council and the District Board of Managers, and to gain the support of each for that
plan.
7. The Concept Arden Park Restoration Plan is intended to establish a framework within which a
subsequent designer can proceed with relative confidence that, pending details, the design will
be acceptable to the City Council, the District Board of Managers and interested members of
the community. The Concept Plan development process, therefore, is intended to identify and
integrate relevant policy judgments of the Council and Board of Managers and resolve basic
questions of use, space and form on which design will rest.
8. The Concept Plan components are expected to have interrelated water resource and park
improvement elements. The City will consider incorporating into its capital improvement
program, so as to be eligible for progressing to construction, interrelated park improvement
sufficient for the District to proceed with its water resource improvements even if the City
determines not to proceed to full implementation of potential park improvements.
9. The parties will work cooperatively to solicit grant funds that may be available to fund
improvements identified in the Concept Plan.
10. If the parties elect to proceed with design, they will cooperate to prepare and execute a
subsequent agreement to establish roles, responsibilities and financial obligations for that
activity.
11. The following individuals will be the primary District and City contacts for matters
concerning this MOA. Either party may change the designated contact by notifying the other
party:
City MCWD
Ross Bintner, Engineer Renae Clark, Planner-Project
City of Edina MCWD
7450 Metro Blvd. 15320 Minnetonka Blvd.
Edina MN 55439 Minnetonka MN 55345
952-903-5713 952-641-4510
rbintner@edinamn.gov rclark@minnehahacreek.org
10. The City will reimburse the District for 50 percent, not to exceed $25,000, of planning
consultant fees as referenced in paragraph 4 above, excluding fees for subtasks concerning
engineering design of District channel and riparian improvements as will be separately
identified in the planning scope of work. Otherwise, each party will bear the costs of its
participation in the activities described herein.
4
11. Either party may terminate this MOA on thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other
party.
CITY OF EDINA MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
By: ___________________________ By: ___________________________
Scott Neal, City Manager Lars Erdahl, District Administrator
5
ATTACHMENT A
Tentative Process and Schedule for Concept Plan Development
1. Gather information and develop ideas (September 2016)
a. Public meeting 1: Design principles and programming assessment
b. Technical Advisory Team* meeting 1: review design principles, programming and
public input
c. Produce design alternatives based on stakeholder and technical input
2. Design alternatives assessment (Early October 2016)
a. Public meeting 2: Review and solicit input on two design alternatives
b. Technical Advisory Team meeting 2: review public input on design alternatives
c. Revise design alternatives and select preferred alternative based on public and
technical input to create a Concept Plan that includes a schematic design and a
preliminary itemized cost opinion
3. Concept Plan review (October 2016)
a. Public meeting 3: Review Concept Plan
b. Technical Advisory Team meeting 3: Review public comments on Concept Plan and
provide direction
c. Finalize Concept Plan
4. Concept Master Plan approval (December 2016)
a. Public meeting 4: Present final Concept Plan
b. Present Concept Plan to City Council and District Board of Managers
*Technical Advisory Team: District and City staff and consultants
Tentative Schedule for District Channel and Riparian Improvements
Concept Development: September - December 2016
Design Development: February - April 2017
Solicit bids for construction: 2017
Construction: January – July 2018
H ART H OWERTON, L TD.
N EW Y ORK • S AN F RANCISCO
S HANGHAI • L ONDON • S ÃO P AULO • H ONOLULU • B OSTON • M INNEAPOLIS
Robert L. Hart, AIA, AICP
David P. Howerton, FASLA, AICP
Craig Roberts
A. James Tinson, AIA
One Union Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: 415 439 2200 Fax: 415 439 2201
www.harthowerton.com
August 8, 2016
Renae Clark
Project Manager
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka Blvd
Minnetonka, MN 55345
Re: Proposal for Preliminary Design Services for the Arden Park Restoration Plan
Dear Renae:
We are pleased to submit a proposal for Preliminary Design Services for the restoration of
Arden Park in Edina, MN. It is our understanding that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District and the City of Edina are interested in collaborating to plan a joint restoration
project for Arden Park. Minnehaha Creek runs thru Arden Park and needs serious attention
on a number of levels including hydraulic, fluvial, natural resource and park amenity
upgrades. Two clear options for hydraulic and fluvial upgrades to the Minnehaha Creek
have been proposed in preliminary studies by Inter-Fluve that not only has implications on
how the creek moves thru the Park, but opens up opportunities for how a redesigned Park
responds to a revitalized Creek design. The goal, therefore, is to develop two detailed fluvial
concept designs focused on the renovation of Minnehaha Creek and subsequently integrate
possible park amenities to create two respective designs for Arden Park. The process to
develop park designs that not only respond to the respective Creek designs, but will include
engagement of the park and creek users, the public and local residents through a set of
public workshops implemented to inform and evaluate improvement scenarios, and develop
a consensus vision and recommended Park Restoration Plan for Arden Park
As part of this exercise, you have asked Hart Howerton (HH) to incorporate Inter-Fluve and
Kayak expert, John Anderson, into our proposal and have Hart Howerton oversee the entire
Preliminary Design process as defined above.
THE TEAM
The composition of this design team and their roles we propose as follows:
MCWD – The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is the client and is
responsible for overseeing the entire project, providing the necessary survey
information, collecting all past surveys and information, interaction and
agreements with the City of Edina, setting up the public meetings as well as
the Technical Advisory meetings, permitting strategy and oversight and
providing clarity and direction for the project. Renae Clark will be the
Planner in Charge and the point person for all communications.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
The City of Edina – The City will be a partner with the MCWD in
overseeing the project and will work with the MCWD to provide background
materials, surveys and information and will be a key player in setting up the
public meetings, assessing the various design approaches to the project and
providing direction for the team.
Hart Howerton – We will be the prime contractor for the project and will
oversee the work of the team members as well as coordination with the
MCWD and the City of Edina. Hart Howerton will also be the master
planners of Arden Park and oversee the generation of the graphics and
presentation materials for the various workshops. Roland Aberg will be the
Principal in Charge.
Inter-Fluve – Inter Fluve will be the fluvial engineers for the redesign of
Minnehaha Creek and will be in charge of any and all elements that pertain to
the creek redesign, cost opinion of improvements, graphic work that portrays
the creek design alternatives, representation of any and all fluvial engineering,
permitting process and modeling. Jonathan Kusa will manage staff and tasks.
Marty Melchior will be the project fluvial engineer.
John Anderson – John will be the whitewater/kayak consultant responsible
for understanding the goals of the residents, the City, the MCWD and the
team in terms of opportunities and constraints. John Anderson will be the
Principal in Charge and will be the point person for all work and public
interaction.
Technical Advisory Team – The Technical Advisory Team will consist of
Renae Clark (MCWD, select staff members from the City of Edina and City
of Edina Park Board, Roland Aberg (HH) and Marty Melchior (IF). John
Anderson (Whitewater Architect and Jonathan Kusa (IF) will attend for
special sessions identified in the proposal.
COMMUNICATIONS
All communications between the team, the City and the MCWD will go thru or be
copied to Renae Clark of the MCWD. Renae will be responsible for disseminating
relevant information and keeping files of that information and those
communications. She will also set up a project site where all information will be
stored for the team. The City of Edina staff and the MCWD will establish a
relationship and communication system to insure that both parties are in
coordination. Roland Aberg of Hart Howerton will be the point person for all
communications between either the MCWD or the City of Edina and the Hart
Howerton team (Hart Howerton, Interfluve and John Anderson). At the outset of
the project Hart Howerton will generate a roster of all the team members and firm
staff members connected with the project and distribute contact information to
everyone involved with the project.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Related to meeting notes, public workshop summaries and other information
relevant to the team, Hart Howerton will work with Renae Clark (MCWD) to set up
the communal files and storage website and inform all the relevant parties
periodically as to the content on the website.
APPROACH
We have outlined a series of steps and deliverables for how this process could evolve
as well as a set of fees specifically for Hart Howerton that would be appropriate to
meet all of the goals and scope that has been requested. For clarification, the
proposed fee shown with each Step is for Hart Howerton only. This approach works
in conjunction with the scope tasks and fees proposed by Inter-Fluve and John
Anderson which you will find in Attachments A and B.
Step One – Base Map Generation and Background Information Research –
HH Fee: $3,450 (See Attached Proposal for IF and JA Detail Scopes and Fees)
MCWD / City of Edina will provide the team with an accurate site
survey in both pdf and electronic format including topo at a
minimum of 2 foot contour interval including all structures,
pavements, existing utilities, improvements, creek edges and details,
trees of 6 inch caliber or greater, property lines, easements or any
other element that would have impact on developing design for the
park. This would also include available 1-ft LiDAR data
encompassing Arden Park as well as 500 ft. upstream and
downstream of the park property and as-built information of the 54th
Street Bridge.
MCWD / City of Edina will also provide an aerial photo of the site at
the same scale as the base survey and provide digital exhibits of just
the aerial photo and one of the survey superimposed on the aerial. .
HH will then generate base maps with title blocks for the team for
the entire Park area and a specific base map for IF focused on the
creek design work. . MCWD and the City of Edina will provide all
other background information that pertains to Arden Park to HH
including available information such as public surveys to date, list of
park events and activities currently supported by the existing park,
utility information and location, architectural drawings of existing
facilities, irrigation system and any other information that would have
impact on the park design. . HH will collect this information and
review with Interfluve.
Deliverables:
Base map at an approximate scale of 1” = 100’ showing Arden Park
and Creek with surrounding City and street system.
Base Map at an approximate scale of 1” = 30 feet of the study area.
Aerial photo of Arden Park and surrounding areas with labels
Aerial photo of Arden Park study area.
Enlarged base maps of the Creek relevant to the engineering detail
for the fluvial design work.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Step Two – Site Visit and Team Start-Up Meeting On-Site – HH Fee $2,900
(See Attached Proposal for IF and JA Detail Scopes and Fees)
HH, Interfluve, City staff and the MCWD will meet on site for a
detailed site visit. Interfluve and MCWD will present issues, concept
ideas for creek enhancement, background understanding of the site,
and potential opportunities that have been generated to date. City
staff will present background information relevant to the park from
their perspective. HH will look at the entire site and relationship of
the community to the Park and assess the current status of vegetation
and other built elements on the site.
Deliverables:
Attendance for site visit will include Roland Aberg and John Larson
(HH) as well as Marty Melchior, Jonathan Kusa (IF), Renae Clark
(MCWD) and City of Edina staff.
HH will produce an updated base map of Arden Park with notes and
key observations of existing landscape, existing facilities and other
criteria relevant to the design process.
See Task 2 (2.2) in Attachment A related to field visit by Inter-Fluve
related to Hydrologic and Geomorphic Assessment of the Creek.
Photo summary of site conditions usable by the team, for public
presentations and for development of the perspective sketches.
Step Three – Technical Advisory Team Meeting 1 – Fee $1,700 - (See Attached
Proposal for IF and JA Detail Scopes and Fees)
Based on all of the above information, the Technical Advisory Team
would meet to review design principles, programming and public
input to date. Outcome would also determine the agenda for the
Public Meeting and what information would be important to gain
from the public.
HH and MCWD team to develop an understanding of how the
Public Meeting is to be conducted and how questions and
information will be portrayed. HH would look at the existing exhibits
to be used by the City for the upcoming Public Meeting and help
determine any adjustments or other materials that might be needed
for the Meeting.
Deliverables:
Attendance at the Team Meeting would include Roland Aberg (HH),
Marty Melchior (IF), John Anderson (JH – Call in) and City.
Generation of an aerial photo exhibit of Arden Park in color copy
and digital format with notes.
Generation of a larger city wide aerial photo exhibit showing the
context of the Park within the City.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Step Four – Public Meeting 1 – Fee: $1,260
HH would attend the public meeting to hear the issues, public
concerns and ideas
Public meeting set up would be by others. Based on input from the
Public Meeting, City staff, the MCWD and HH would work together
to form a clear program for the park that responds to public
comments and represents agreed on team goals. This would be the
basis for development of the park restoration plan alternatives by
HH and Inter-Fluve.
The MCWD, City of Edina staff and HH would set up a separate
virtual meeting to allow John Anderson to receive input from kayaker
stakeholders and to discuss opinions and desired outcomes. See JA
proposal in the Attachments.
Deliverables:
Attendance at the Public Meeting would include Roland Aberg (HH),
Renae (MCWD) and City staff.
Review of meeting notes from City and MCWD with edits
HH would develop a summary report of the goals and direction for
the project to move into design phase
Virtual Meeting with kayaker stakeholders.
Step Five – Development of Conceptual Design for Two Alternatives – Fee: $
$19,050
HH and Inter-Fluve would have a work session to go thru all of the
background materials and begin generating concept ideas for two
alternatives.
HH would generate concept ideas in a series of sketch plans,
proposing a variety of opportunities while testing these with Inter-
Fluve. HH would also pull a variety of images from other places to
help the team to visualize concept ideas.
Once we felt that we had some promising ideas, we would meet with
the MCWD and City staff to discuss the plans. Based on that meeting
we would do adjustments and other edits and create a more
presentable set of plan solutions suitable to take to the public and
other stake holders. See Attachment for process, deliverables and fees
related to Inter-Fluve hydrologic and hydraulic Modeling, related
concept plans, opinion of probable construction cost for fluvial
system changes and technical memorandum.
Coordinated with design work being developed by Inter-Fluve, HH
would develop a preliminary cost opinion for upland and edge
condition areas of the park adjacent to the creek that would be
affected by the revised fluvial creek improvements. This cost estimate
would be limited only to suggested improvements adjacent to the
creek and would not include the entire Arden Park, even if other
improvements to the park are depicted in the alternative restoration
plan alternatives.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Deliverables:
Concept level drawings at approximately 1” = 30’ on trace overlays
for each of the two alternatives.
Meeting with MCWD and City staff to review strategy and design of
the concepts
Final color rendered concept plan for two alternatives at 1”= 30’
suitable for presentation to the public
Hydrologic, hydraulic modeling and related concept plans and
opinion of probable cost and technical memorandum by Inter-Fluve
as outlined in the Attachments
Opinion of probable cost for park restoration adjacent to creek
upland areas affected by stream improvements.
Technical Memorandum by John Anderson related to kayak
opportunities. See Attachments for details.
Step Six – Technical Advisory Team Meeting 2 – Fee: $4,120
The Technical Advisory Team would meet to review the alternatives
and discuss the impacts and implications of each proposed solution.
Clear input and direction would evolve from this meeting based on
decisions from the Technical Advisory Team.
The Advisory Team would determine the exhibits to be prepared for
Public Meeting 2. HH would prepare the exhibits for electronic
presentation and hard copies for wall presentation.
Deliverables:
Attendance at the Advisory Team Meeting would include Roland
Aberg (HH), Marty Melchior (IF), Jonathan Kusa (IF), Renae Clark
(MCWD), City staff and Katherine.
Summary document of comments from the meeting
Minor adjustments to the drawing exhibits such as notes, etc.
Step Seven – Public Meeting 2 – Review and Solicit Input on Design
Alternatives – Fee: $1,140
Generation of a Power Point Presentation including site photos,
existing conditions aerial photo, two proposed alternative plans in
plan format only, blowups from the plan alternatives, support
drawings from HH and IF that might add clarity to the presentation,
summary of goals, and any other support documents such as survey
information and summary of public input to date.
HH would attend the Public Meeting and do a Presentation to the
Public.
MCWD and City Staff would record the outcome of the meeting
including comments
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Deliverables:
Power Point presentation including both alternative approaches, site
photos, relevant images and/or clarification exhibits and summary
clarification drawings as appropriate.
Attendance at the public meeting would include Roland Aberg (HH),
Marty Melchior (IF), Renae Clark (MCWD) and City staff.
Wall exhibits would include the aerial photo and the two alternative
plans.
Step Eight – Technical Advisory Team Meeting 3 – Fee: $900
Based on the results of the public workshop, the Team would assess
all of the input and generate a final program for the Park including a
selection of one alternative to move to a more developed Park
Restoration Plan Level.
Team would discuss final plan graphic, perspective support drawing
and any other deliverable. Cost Opinion is not included in this
proposal. Should the City require a cost opinion, this would be
considered Additional Services.
Deliverables:
Attendance at the workshop would include Roland Aberg (HH),
Marty Melchior (IF), Renae Clark (MCWD) and City staff.
Summary of the outcome of the session and goals for producing the
final Park Restoration Plan
Step Nine – Development of Final Preliminary Park Restoration Plan – Fee:
$14,620
Working with Inter-Fluve, the final selected alternative plan would
then be developed to a much higher level of design with scaled areas
of land uses, detail description of elements including
recommendations for landscape zones, proposed creek edge
conditions, pavement types, potential lighting and other
improvements. This would be done in as a color rendered mater plan
graphic at a scale no smaller than 1” = 50’.
A color rendered perspective would also be generated that would
take a vantage view point suitable for presentation that would help to
“sell” the project concept as well as portray the vision for the park.
Hart Howerton will also provide an annotated plan describing the
preliminary approach to plant material including additions,
preservation or deletions in a plan format compatible with Inter-
Fluve’s creek restoration work.
HH will provide an Opinion of Probable Cost for the final Park
Restoration Plan limited to the upland areas immediately adjacent to
the fluvial improvements being proposed for Minnehaha Creek and
/or impacted by the proposed creek restoration. This does not
include the overall Arden Park restoration even though other park
improvements may be represented in the complete Arden Park
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
Restoration drawings. HH will work closely with Inter-Fluve to
coordinate their Opinion of Probable Cost to insure completeness
while not incurring redundancies.
See Inter-Fluve process, deliverables and fees for 30% Preliminary
Design in the Attachments.
Deliverables:
Development of a more detailed park restoration plan
Generation of a color rendered final plan with labels suitable for
public presentation
Generation of a color rendered perspective of the final plan
Summary document describing the elements of the proposed plan.
Opinion of Probable Cost limited to the Upland Areas immediately
adjacent to the creek corridor.
30 % Preliminary Creek Design by Inter-Fluve as per Attachment
Step Ten – Public Meeting 3 – Presentation of the Final Preliminary Park
Restoration Plan – Fee: $4,160
HH would develop an electronic Power Point presentation for the
Public Meeting including the final Park Restoration Plan rendering
with blow up areas, images of other places that would provide
imagery for the design, the perspective rendering with blowup areas,
other detail explanatory drawings from Interfluve, existing site
photos, results of the past surveys and goals lists and any other item
that would support explanation of the final design alternative.
Hard copies of plans deemed appropriate would also be available to
put onto the walls.
HH would present the design concepts with the MCWD staff and
City.
Deliverables:
Power Point presentation
Color prints of the plan and perspective
Attendance at the Public Meeting would include Roland Aberg (HH),
Renae Clark (MCWD) and City staff.
Note Related to Deliverables for all Steps and Tasks:
Hart Howerton deliverables will be provided in electronic format primarily in pdf
format. Where color prints or other hard copies are required, they will be printed and
delivered in size and quality relevant to the particular need. Inter-Fluve maps and
other deliverables will also be in electronic format as pdf’s and in CAD where
suitable. Hard copies will be delivered as requested. All printing and board mounting
are not included in the base fee and are part of reimbursable expenses.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Arden Park Proposal
SCHEDULE
The actual timing for the project and the specific components of the deliverables is
not clear at this point but is anticipated to begin in July 2016. A final project schedule
will be determined with further consultation between the MCWD and the team and
be available at the outset of the project work.
FEES
Hart Howerton will work on an hourly time basis plus reimbursable expenses. Hart
Howerton fees for this work is a fixed fee of $ 53,300. Reimbursable expenses are
additional. Should additional services be required such as extra meetings,
presentations or expanded cost opinion approach, we would perform these services
on an hourly basis as per our normal fee range. We will bill you on a monthly basis
including consultant fees and reimbursable expenses.
Full team summary of fees is listed below. Please refer to Attachments A and B to
understand how specific sub-consultant tasks and fees are allocated for Inter-Fluve
and John Anderson
Hart Howerton $53,300
Inter-Fluve $45,700
John Anderson (allowance) $2,500
Total $101,500
Inter-Fluve Additional Service $6,000
Reimbursable expenses relate to reproduction, travel, delivery and shipping. You
should assume an allowance of approximately $900 to cover these expenses
especially if board mounted color prints are required for the public presentations.
Thank you for the opportunity to work with you, the MCWD and the City of Edina.
We are very excited about such an important public space and look forward to the
development of a special design outcome. Please feel free to call me with any
questions.
Best regards,
Roland S. Aberg
Principal
Encl: Attachment A: Inter-Fluve proposal
Attachment B: John Anderson proposal
1
PROPOSAL TO HART HOWERTON TO PROVIDE CONCEPT AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS
MINNEHAHA CREEK - ARDEN PARK RESTORATION PROJECT
Project Summary: The City of Edina (City) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) desire to
collaborate and have the Hart Howerton team initiate a planning process that identifies potential
improvements to Arden Park with enhancements to the hydraulic channel, riparian water resource, natural
resource, soil stability, and drainage consistent with the following project goals:
Restoration of natural stream function and fish passage by actions including removing the 54th Street
grade control structure;
Water resource and riparian habitat improvements will enhance creek access and draw attention to
the role of natural elements in visual composition of the park;
Natural resources, surface water, soils stability and drainage improvements will provide
opportunities to enhance existing and future park recreation value; and,
Public safety.
Stream reconstruction design included in this contract are anticipated to be limited to the upstream extents
of the Park property and approximately 200-feet downstream of the 54th Street road crossing.
COMMUNICATIONS
As requested, Inter-Fluve, Inc. (Inter-Fluve) will only communicate regarding the Arden Park project
through Hart Howerton. All communication and direction for Inter-Fluve from the clients, comments and
direction regarding work product, or technical questions will be directed to Inter-Fluve through Hart
Howerton.
PROJECT TASKS AND WORK PRODUCTS
Task 1000. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS
1.1. General project management – Jonathon Kusa, PE will manage staff and tasks to ensure timely
completion of deliverables. Jonathon will be assisted by Dan Mielke, PE.
1.2. Project Meetings – Inter-Fluve has budgeted time to organize and participate in the following
meetings:
Kick-off Meeting- Inter-Fluve will meet with MCWD and Hart Howerton in the field and in
office to review field conditions, discuss design goals and elements, schedule and deliverables.
Design goals specific to in-stream processes and habitat creation will be outlined and used for
the basis of further design (assume Mielke in-person, Melchior and Kusa via phone).
Technical Advisory Meetings – Subtask includes three meeting with the project team including staff
from MCWD, City of Edina, and Hart Howerton to discuss progress, schedule, technical
items, information gaps, project findings and the message and content needed for a select
public meeting. The timing of the meetings shall be directed and scheduled by Hart Howerton
(assumes Melchior by phone for three meetings, attendance by Kusa by phone for one
meeting).
Attachment A
2
Public Meeting 1 – Public meeting organized and facilitated by MCWD and/or City to discuss
project’s programmatic goals and understand resident desires, issues and concerns for project.
Inter-Fluve staff will be not be in attendance to provide technical support to MCWD and City
staff. Time to develop project meeting content for facilitating the meeting is not included.
Kayaker Stakeholder Meeting – Meeting organized and facilitated by MCWD and/or City to
discuss project’s programmatic goals and recreational desires by kayak community. Inter-Fluve
staff will be in attendance by phone to provide technical support to MCWD and City staff. No
time is included to develop project meeting content. (Assumes Mielke attending by phone)
Public Meeting 2 – Public meeting organized and facilitated by MCWD and/or City to discuss
two concepts designs developed by the project team. The goal of the meeting will be to allow
public feedback on the two proposed concepts and have the public comment on the preferred
alternative. Inter-Fluve staff will be in attendance to provide technical support to MCWD and
City staff. Project meeting content to be developed by Hart Howerton. (Assumes Kusa
attending in person)
Public Meeting 3 – Public meeting organized and facilitated by MCWD and/or City to discuss
elements of the 30% design and Arden Park Restoration Plan. Inter-Fluve staff will not be in
attendance to provide technical support to MCWD and City staff. Project meeting content to
be developed by Hart Howerton.
Deliverables
Participation in meetings as described above.
Schedule
To be determined with further consultation with Hart Howerton
Conditions
No compilation of meeting notes or distribution of meeting notes is included.
Additional meetings can be added as needed on a time-and-materials basis using our standard billing
rates
Project meeting content to be developed by Hart Howerton.
Task 2. CONCEPT DESIGN
2.1. Data Acquisition and Basemap Creation – Inter-Fluve staff will review existing electronic data
pertinent to the modifications of the stream reach. Hart Howerton will create a basemap used
for development of content for meetings, concept design and the preliminary design plan.
Electronic Data (GIS or AutoCAD format preferred) to be provided by MCWD and or the City
for this phase to include:
Available 1-ft LiDAR data and stream bathymetry encompassing Arden Park as well as 500-ft
upstream and downstream of the park property.
Parcel Boundaries with address attribute data
Alignment of Existing Utilities
Available tree survey information
Available building footprint or infrastructure information.
3
As-built information of 54th Street Bridge
2.2. Hydrologic and Geomorphic Assessment – Inter-Fluve staff will complete a field visit comparing
existing geomorphic conditions to conditions reported in 2003 and 2012 considering the
sustained flooding event in the summer of 2014. A longitudinal profile within the project reach
will be field surveyed. Two cross sections reflective of a typical section within the reach, one
cross section downstream of the project within Reach 14 and the ordinary high water mark at
the 54th Street bridge will be field surveyed to identify and calculate existing bankfull discharge.
The calculate discharge will be compared to recorded USGS gage data information to determine
the most applicable channel forming flow used for further design.
2.3. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling – For conceptual design purposes, an existing condition U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) HEC-RAS 1-D model will be created based on previous
work completed associated with the 54th Street Fish Bypass, with additional information from
updated cross sectional data and any updated stream flow values from MCWD’s XPSWMM
model. Statistical flow values to be provided by MCWD or MCWD’s Engineer. Additional
incremental flow values and the determined channel forming flow from Task 2.2 will also be
included in the model. Proposed alternatives will be based in part on manipulating the existing
condition model to determine the conceptual hydraulic cross sectional area for the restored
channel, general bed material size and hydraulic conditions through the 54th Street Bridge.
2.4. Concept Plans –Design analysis will include a qualitative assessment of feasibility given the
potential stream slope and anticipated stream geometry based on regional analogs, cursory
hydrologic and hydraulic modeling and geomorphic assessment. For each alternative, a plan view
drawing and a cross section rendering will be provided. The rendering will be graphical enhanced
by Hart Howerton and integrated into public meeting material for Public Meeting #2.
Alternative 1: This alternative includes removal of the 54th Street grade control structure,
and no realignment of the channel upstream within the park. This alternative includes a
narrowed stream width through the park to mimic upstream and downstream conditions
and allow for the construction of naturalized banks and wetland complexes.
Alternative 2: This alternative includes removal of the 54th Street grade control structure
and stream realignment within Arden Park.
The task includes 6 hours of revisions or updates based on review and comment by MCWD and
City staff. Concept plans will be a stand-alone document.
2.5. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost – An opinion of probable cost on a conceptual level will be
developed for each Alternative. Both costs will include a 50% contingency.
2.6. Technical Memo – A technical memo will be developed to summarize the anticipated in-stream
advantages and disadvantages of each alternative with respect to the defined project goals. No
recommendations will be included.
Deliverables
Concept Designs in electronic format. Drawings will be provided in PDF 11” x 17” format
Concept Design Technical Memorandum outlining the basis for design, the advantages and
4
disadvantages of each alternative, and order of magnitude cost estimates for construction.
Schedule
To be determined with further consultation with Hart Howerton
Task 3. 30% PRELIMINARY DESIGN
3.1. Field Survey – Inter-Fluve to provide field guidance for survey effort completed by others.
Anticipated survey scope includes channel bathymetry within project extents, floodplain
topography, tree locations with species and size identified, utilities and park infrastructure
including trails, roads and buildings. The field survey should also be coordinated with the
wetland delineation to capture location of wetland boundaries. An existing topographic surface
will be generated by others, which will include available LiDAR data and new surveyed data.
Inter-Fluve to provide 2 hours of field assistance to guide survey effort. Submittal of survey
information by others to be in AutoCAD format. Task includes review and limited post-
processing of submitted survey data.
3.2. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling – For preliminary design purposes, an existing and proposed
condition USACE HEC-RAS 1-D model will be created based on using field survey data
collected from Task 3.1 and flow data from Task 2.3. Generated existing and proposed water
surface elevations from the created models will be compared but limited to the relative
comparison of the models created under this Task. No comparison to FEMA’s effective HEC-2
model or MCWD’s XPSWMM model is included. Potential changes to the floodplain based on
changes between existing and proposed HEC_RAS models will be documented and mapped. In
addition, scour calculations are not included. Model results will guide the preliminary design of
the channel providing detail on the required hydraulic cross sectional area, stream profile and
suitable bank treatment and stream bed material.
3.3. 30% Plans – Based on the Alternative selected by MCWD and the City, preliminary design plans
(30% complete) will be generated including:
Cover (1 page)
Existing conditions plan view (1 page)
Proposed schematic grading plan and profile (2 pages)
Cross sections (1 page)
Typical sections (2 pages)
Designed in-stream elements will take into account general park design and stormwater
elements defined upfront by others in a Technical Advisory Meeting but will be a stand-alone
plan set. MCWD will provide the locations, volume and loading of stormwater that discharges
to Arden Park and suggest techniques for stormwater treatment. 30% Plans will be submitted
prior to Public Meeting 3 allowing review and comment by MCWD and the City.
3.4. Opinion of Probable Costs – An opinion of probable cost on a preliminary level will be developed
for the selected alternative. Costs will include a 30% contingency and include estimated
construction costs for removal of the grade control structure, stream bank treatments,
earthwork, and re-vegetation. The costs will be based on a preliminary estimate of cut and fill
quantities and be limited to in-stream improvements only. Maintenance costs will be included.
5
3.5. Permit Coordination – Inter-Fluve will provide Hart Howerton the proposed project data. It is
assumed that MCWD will conduct permit coordination meeting with the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (MNDNR), Unites States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the City of Edina,
and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Inter-Fluve will provide 4-hrs of
assistance to MCWD and the City of Edina under this task with meetings being facilitated and
attended by MCWD and others. Some testing of the impounded sediments are included in this
phase of work to clarify permitting needs and potential construction cost implications. Based on
recent similar projects, the following permit submittals are anticipated:
1. City of Edina:
a. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) – If the existing creek
alignment is altered for more than 500 feet, a mandatory EAW will be required. We
recommend coordinating with the City of Edina to determine their anticipated
duration for an EAW, as they will be the Regulatory Governmental Unit (RGU).
Based on similar previous efforts, a 9-month process is anticipated, consequently, we
recommend initiating the EAW process in early fall.
b. No Rise Determination – MCWD will be provided the initial HEC RAS
modeling results and the associated floodplain impacts to initiate a discussion with
the City of Edina.
c. Conditional use Permit – Dependent upon scale of project, coordination with
the City is required to determine if applicable.
2. USACE
a. 404 permit – impact to navigable waters and jurisdictional wetlands.
b. Cultural assessment and collaboration with SHPO
c. 401 permit
3. DNR
a. Working within public waters permit
b. Endangered species and plant review
c. Dewatering Permit
4. MCWD
a. Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permit. Preliminary delineation of wetland
and assessment of potential affects (change in type). Inter-Fluve recommends
conducting a full wetland delineation and report this summer to capture the wetland
types and boundaries. Based on the anticipated project timeline, the wetland data
will be needed for a permit submittal this winter. It is anticipated that this task will
be completed by others under separate contract.
5. MPCA
a. Testing of impounded sediments completed under concept design phase.
Coordination with MPCA relative to results of sampling completed will be the
responsibility of MCWD.
3.6. Technical Memo – A technical memo will be developed to outline the design criteria and basis for
design elements, assess recreational opportunities through the rock riffle, outline the permitting
process, provide a relative comparison of existing and proposed water surface elevations, and
order of magnitude cost estimates for construction.
6
3.7. Client Review and Updates – One review session by MCWD and the City is included. Updates will
be based on compiled review comments submitted to Inter-Fluve through Hart Howerton prior
to Public Meeting 3. Updates to the plan set will be completed prior to Public Meeting 3.
Deliverables
30% Preliminary Plans in electronic format. Drawings will be provided in PDF 11” x 17” format.
30% Technical Memo
30% Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Schedule
To be determined with further consultation with Hart Howerton
Conditions
Task 3 will commence upon Notice to Proceed provided by Hart Howerton . Delivery of 30% plans
is anticipated to require six (6) weeks.
One comment and review period prior to Public Meeting 3
No structural design of project elements is included in the 30% design scope
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
Cost
Task 1 - Project Management and Meetings $6,020
Task 2 – Concept Design $17,100
Task 3 – 30% Preliminary Design $22,580
Project Total
$45,700
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Impounded Sediment Sampling – Based on our experience on over 75 dam removals as well as our
history of projects on Minnehaha Creek, sediment testing of impounded material is required to
determine accurate construction cost estimates. Inter-Fluve will coordinate with Hart
Howerton, MCWD, and MPCA to determine the appropriate sampling plan to characterize the
sediments impounded by the existing drop structure. Sediment sampling and testing during the
conceptual design phase will help determine what cost impacts might be associated with
sediments. A sediment management plan will be required if constituents of concern are
identified, but can be completed as a part of the 60% design process.
Sample collection and testing review - IFI labor fee: $4,000
Laboratory testing and analysis Fee: ~$2,000 / sample
J O H N A N D E R S O N
A R C H I T E C T L. L. C.
3 7 0 7 F A R R A G U T A V E N U E K E N S I N G T O N, M A R Y L A N D 2 0 8 9 5 (2 4 0 ) 8 8 8 – 4 5 0 2
July 8, 2016
Roland S. Aberg, Principal
Hart Howerton
13911 Ridgedale Drive, Suite 220
Minnetonka, MN 55305
REF. Whitewater Features at Arden Park, Minnehaha Creek, Edina, MN
Dear Roland,
John Anderson Architect (Consultant) is pleased to provide pre-design services to MCWD, City
of Edina staff and Hart Howerton related to whitewater recreation at Arden Park. With your
acceptance I will be authorized to perform the work as described.
Background
The dam on Minnehaha Creek at Arden Park was a popular whitewater destination until it was
damaged by a flood. The dam remnant is to be removed in order to re-create a more natural
stream function and ecology with consideration of historic uses, such as kayaking. The City has
invited the kayaking stakeholder group to participate in the re-visioning, so MCWD, City of
Edina staff and Hart Howerton desires Consultant’s specialized knowledge of whitewater
recreation elements.
Scope of Work for Pre-Design Services of Whitewater Recreation Elements
The following scope of work is to be performed at a level of effort consistent with proposed
fees.
Base Services
1.Review hydrology of the creek and dam releases
2.Cursory review of existing mapping, hydraulic modeling results, headwater/tailwater
relationship, site photos and video (very important)
3.Upon completion of items 1 and 2 above, participate in a virtual meeting hosted by
MCWD, City of Edina staff and Hart Howerton with kayaker stakeholder group to
solicit their opinions and desired outcomes for the project.
4.Assist MCWD, City of Edina staff and Hart Howerton in developing project criteria for
the whitewater feature(s) that is consistent with 1) realistic stakeholder desires, 2) the
overall project objective of stream restoration and 3) the nature and capacity of the
resource.
5.Review graphics and narrative prepared by the consultant team, suggest edits if
needed.
6.Participate by phone in MCWD, City of Edina staff and Hart Howerton’s internal team
coordination meetings.
Deliverable: Summary technical memorandum on items 1 to 4 above.
Fees: Time and expenses not to exceed $2,500 billed at a rate of $165 per hour.
Attachment B
Optional Additional Service
At the request of MCWD or the City of Adina, Consultant shall travel to Edina for an in-person
public meeting with stakeholder groups in lieu of Task 3 above, for a fixed fee of $1,650 plus
travel expenses. Travel expenses are estimated to be between $500 to $900, depending on
prevailing rates for airfare, lodging, rental cars, etc. at the time the Additional Services are
provided. The proposed fee takes into account savings from omitting Task 3 of the Basic
Services.
Assumptions
1. All mapping and data collection shall be performed by Hart Howerton and provided
electronically to Consultant in a timely manner consistent with Hart Howerton’s schedule and
prior to kayaker-stakeholder meetings.
2. Conceptual design of features is not included.
3. Artistic renderings or models are not included.
4. Consideration of, or opinions related to, hazard waste or site contamination is not
included.
5. It is understood and agreed that all documents and imagery produced by Consultant
under this agreement are instruments of service who shall be deemed author of the data and
shall retain all common law, statutory, and other rights. In delivering such documents and
imagery Consultant grants permission to The MCWD, the City of Edina, Hart Howerton and
InterFluve to use, copy, reproduce, and disseminate information contained therein without
restriction provided that such use is directly related to the Project.
Terms
Consultant shall not exceed the allowed fee without prior written authorization. Consultant
shall use his best effort to budget his time to address all tasks in the Scope of Work at an
appropriate level within the allowed fee. Consultant shall notify Hart Howerton if the level of
detail being requested on any particular task would jeopardize the available time for the
remaining tasks.
Invoices shall be submitted to Hart Howerton monthly by the 5th day of the following month
and shall be payable to Consultant within five days of Hart Howerton having received payment
for the same.
Communications: Roland Aberg of Hart Howerton shall be the sole point of contact for
communications to the client, stakeholders and other parties. Consultant shall not
communicate with any party unless so directed in writing by Roland Aberg.
Thank you and I look forward to working with you and InterFluve.
_______________________________________
John Anderson, RA Accepted, Hart Howerton
The CITY of
EDINA
Arden Park Restoration Plan
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Memorandum of Agreement
August 16, 2016
The CITY of
EDINA Project Area
2014 Stakeholder Engagement
Feedback - creek and park
Watershed was part of the team
www.EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of
EDINA Restoration Plan
Parks Strategic Plan
Comprehensive Plan – Clean Water and Natural
Resources
CIP Projects – Unfunded
Watershed – CIP Funding Available for 2017/18
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of
EDINA Restoration Plan
Hydraulic, natural resources, park improvements including
drainage
Staffing
City Staff
Park Board Members
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of
EDINA Staff Recommendation
Approve Memorandum of Agreement w/ Minnehaha Creek
Watershed
- opportunity to accelerate already identified park needs.
www.EdinaMN.gov 5
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: VIII.D.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Deb ra A Mangen, City Clerk
Item Activity:
Subject:Res o lutio n No. 2016-77: Acc epting Vario us
Do natio ns
Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt resolution.
INTRODUCTION:
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:
Description
Res olution No. 2016-77
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-77
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 Parks & Recreation – Art Center
Elizabeth Goff High Duty/Super Duty/Insulating Firebrick, Kiln
Shelves
Mike Bedard Twelve Art Books
Patty Burrels Wood & Glass Jewelry Case, Mat Case, 12
Cube Display Pedestals
Edina Police Department:
Edina Crime Fund $262.50
Dated August 16, 2016
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 August 16, 2016, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______________ day of ___________________, ____________.
City Clerk
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: IX.A.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
From:Deb ra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Item Activity:
Subject:Co rres p o ndence Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is correspondence received since the last Council Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Corres pondence Received Through 8-9-2016
Corres pondence Through 2016-08-11
Corres pondence Through 2016-08-12 noon
Correcs pondence Through 2016-08-16 noon
From:Ann Kattreh
To:Edina Mail; Janet Canton
Subject:FW: Building a Healthy Community through Mountain Biking
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 12:14:53 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Ann Kattreh, Parks & Recreation Director
952-826-0430 | Fax 952-826-0390
AKattreh@EdinaMN.gov | www.EdinaMN.gov
From: Jack Ellingson [mailto:ellingsonjack@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 9:23 AM
To: Ann Kattreh
Subject: Building a Healthy Community through Mountain Biking
Hello Ms Kattreh,
My name is Jack Ellingson. As a senior at Edina High School, I'm one of the captains of the Edina Cycling Team.
I personally know the many benefits mountain biking can bring to a community. Mountain biking can unite and
strengthen the mental, physical, and social health of a community. Kids who would be bullied and harassed in
school find a community where they are not only accepted, but well respected. Mountain biking can also inspire
kids to peruse careers in STEM by actively engaging them with the complex mechanics found on a bicycle. These
are just a few of the many benefits mountain biking will bring to Edina.
By building mountain biking trails in Edina, our community could better utilize the benefits that come with cycling.
If you have any questions or concerns about building trails in Edina, please email me back.
Thanks,
Jack Ellingson
Captain of the Edina Cycling Team
Leader of FIRST Robotics Team 1816 - The Green Machine
Captain of the EHS Business Club
From:Mark Larson
To:Edina Mail
Subject:keep nordic snowmaking on the table!
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 12:23:08 PM
I would like to strongly support continuing the conversation about the possibility of snowmaking in
Edina. The H.S. team is large bringing a natural group of users annually for year to come and the
community would love the chance to ski in Edina as well.
Thanks,
Mark Larson
4628 Arden Av
From:jmac6001@aol.com
To:swensonann1@gmail.com; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; James Hovland
Subject:Braemar ski proposal
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:00:01 PM
I am writing again to express my concern over the Nordic plan at Braemar. I see that many are writing in
favor of this idea for winter sports but notice that those people live far from the Braemar area and
definitely out of the range of lights, noise and snow over spray. The danger that the over spray would put
on Gleason and surrounding roads is a major concern. Many children are waiting for buses on
driveways and street corners that would be covered with this over spray and present a hazard if cars
would slide or lose control due to this moisture. I imagine if an accident occurred due to these conditions
that the city would have a liability problem. I hope you will vote NO for this project.
Sheran McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Drive
From:Leonard Bernstein
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Please keep the Braemar Ski project alive.
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:00:46 PM
Good afternoon.
We are a family of three who moved to Edina 12 years from Southern California so that we
could enjoy cross-country skiing in Minnesota.
We have ran and biked in the area of Braemar Golf Course and consider adding cross-
country skiing in winter to be a wonderful upgrade.
We implore you to either give the project the green light in your next meeting or, at the
very least, table this project for further consideration next month.
Thank you.
Leonard, Rhoda and Melissa Bernstein
Leonard Bernstein
651.983.9088
From:Jay at TeeMaster
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Proposed snowmaking at Braemar
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:10:31 PM
Dear Edina City Council,
I am so disappointed that the unfounded claims and ignorant complaints of a few residents and
neighbors could kill the proposed winter facility at Braemar. Do not cave in to the whims of these
uninformed residents who really don’t understand much about this issue.
I have been an avid and accomplished Nordic skier for the last 27 years training and racing all over
the area. I have helped teach beginners to Nordic skiing both adults and youth. I have used all the
trails throughout the Twin Cities extensively and have witnessed and experienced the development
of snowmaking facilities over the last ten years. I fully understand the issues surrounding
snowmaking with most complaints revolving around sound and snow drift/overspray. The same
exact issues were brought up when snowmaking was proposed near the high school a few years
back. Once approved the fears never panned out as the neighbors had dreaded. Again, the same
complaints were brought up in Bloomington when Hyland Lake Park Reserve proposed snowmaking
on the trails there. Once again the neighbor fears were completely unfounded and now Hyland has
the best man-made Nordic facility in the country. And now the Edina City Council is once again
getting pressure from this NIMBY group of neighbors with speculative and unsubstantiated fears
and complaints about snowmaking, demanding that the proposed facility to be killed.
This facility will be a huge asset to Edina and its citizens just as the ice arena, the golf course, and
more recently the dome at Braemar and new fields at the high school, Braemar, Pamela and
Kuhlman. By the way… Thank you for not caving into the crumb-rubber scare objections the NIMBY
crowd threw at you. These assets are awesome for our kids and our community, just as this winter
facility will be.
Nordic skiing is a life-long activity that any able bodied person can do and gets people outside and
active in the winter. The loss of the trails and snowmaking near the high school due to the
construction of the nine mile trail and high school expansion, along with the Hyland facility’s
unreasonable restrictions on high school use for training on their snowmaking trails, essentially
prevents the high school team from training together on snow for good. An Edina man-made trail
system will help the high school with its most popular high school sport.
So many of us Edina residents were very excited to hear that Braemar was seriously considering
adding trails and snowmaking at to its property. Now we’re bewildered, not only at unfounded
complaints of so few, but that the City Council is actually prepared to sacrifice this great community-
proposal to appease the uninformed few.
Please be the grownups in the room and vote to move ahead with this winter facility and make Edina
even better.
Sincerely,
Jay Adams
Edina High School Graduate 1983
Edina resident
From:Greta Simondet
To:Edina Mail
Cc:jeff simondet
Subject:Braemar Nordic Ski Trail
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:39:54 PM
Dear City Council Member,
Below is a summary that I have copied and pasted, highlighted in green, and think it is a good
cause for reflection and stalling the decision coming up in September. Too many times you
have public input which conflicts with what you want and you ignore the input. I have heard
that for every one person to comment, it represents another 100 people that don't take the time
(check the research on that). I am not representing a "Not In My Backyard" stance, nor do I
know anyone who lives there but I really think this is a bad idea. Please do not vote "yes" and
thank you for listening to me.
This endeavor would:
Destroy of hundreds of trees, wildlife will be displaced or killed off
Plow and expand existing foot trails to create a 50-foot wide ski trail that would run
approximately 2.2 kilometers long
Install snow-making machines spewing ice crystals for up to five hours nightly
Introduce noisy snow plows to "smooth out" the ice/snow during the evening hours
Increase noise -- constant, unrelenting
Light up the area at night -- lighting would be installed along the trail
Entail a year-long construction phase, which includes digging out a 50-foot wide path,
and digging under that to install hundreds of yards of piping to supply water to snow-
making machines; machinery traveling up through the Braemar Hills/forest for over a
year
Lose money. The City and the proposed vendor admit that it is unlikely that capital
expenditures would be recovered, and as Park & Rec representatives state, it is "hoped
that the facility would break even within 5 years"
Increase your taxes
Create a public hazard. The snow-making machines would "over spray" ice crystals onto
Gleason Road during the winter nights, so morning rush hour will be even more
treacherous.
Sincerely,
Greta Simondet (and my husband Jeff Simondet agrees, ask him...952-212-7734)
4448 Vandervork Avenue
Edina, MN 55436
952-212-7733
P.S. Just another thought, from Greta and not Jeff: If you decided to close Fred Richards
because it was not profitable without giving the issue adequate public input and effort on how
to change that to make it truly profitable (for example, promote a footgolf course), why would
you start on a new project like this that will not be profitable for at least 5 years, and it is not
even guaranteed beyond that? And will forever have the extra expense of the snowplows and
snowmaking? Just doesn't make good financial sense!!! Especially with use of tax dollars. I
certainly hope reputation and ego are not motivations for this--to be thinking Edina can have
some new thing to brag about--that is a wrong motive.
P.P.S. Peggy Erickson made some very intelligent comments about the snowmaking problems
compared to Hyland Hills and I hope you look at the details of what she wrote.
From:Jennifer Collins
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar Winter Recreation Proposal
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 2:15:39 PM
To Members of the Edina City Council:
I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed winter recreation project at Braemar.
While the project has many negatives, the most concerning to me is the rushed timeline and
initial lack of transparency. I first noticed something was up when survey markers appeared
in the woods. However I was not made aware of the project proposal until I read an online
article in the Star Tribune while I was on vacation. A letter about the July 13 public hearing
arrived during my vacation but fortunately I returned in time to attend.
I am baffled as to why the city would obtain input from the high school Nordic ski team,
instead of the residents in our neighborhood who will be directly and negatively impacted,
before approving a $330,000 expenditure to SEH Consulting to draw up this proposal. I am
further baffled by the tight timeline and rush to push through a project that will have
significant and detrimental costs to our neighborhood. There are the issues of light and noise
pollution (measured in summer with foliage on the trees and before clear-cutting of a 50-foot
wide path in the woods). Overspray from snowmaking is a big concern. Ice crystals will be
dumped in neighbors’ driveways, on roofs and decks, and coat landscaping, sidewalks and
Gleason Road. Will the city be compensating those homeowners for additional snow/ice
removal costs? There will be a huge environmental impact. I find it ironic that the golf
course has just installed signs touting the restoration of Braemar’s landscape while proposing
to hack a 50-foot wide trail through the East ridge. Lastly is the cost to taxpayers.
$3,000,000 is a lot of money for something the majority of residents in Edina have not asked
for. This is not in the city’s long-term plan nor has it been budgeted for.
I respectfully ask that you vote down this proposal. If there is city-wide support for snow
making or other winter recreation activities at Braemar we need to take the time to do it right.
Thank you,
Jennifer Collins
7500 Hyde Park Drive
From:Martin, Dawn
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar Nordic Proposal
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 2:43:13 PM
Attachments:Braemar.docx
Hello -
My name is Dawn Martin, and I have been on the Edina Soccer Club Board for the past 7 years. I
have acted as President for the past 3 years.
During this time, I have witnessed first hand the thoughtful and caring way the Park Board and
City Council have approached projects. There was a reason it took almost 12 years to find an
appropriate place to build the Braemar Sports Dome (or as I like to refer to it, the Braemar Soccer
Dome!).
And the reason was that you all listened to your constituency. As much as we all wanted the
Dome, you refused to put it in a place that would affect the quality of life for the residents. No one
wanted to look at it from their bedroom window, nor have the traffic, so you kept working until you
found the perfect place at Braemar. And that was the right thing to do.
I hope you will take the same thoughtful approach with the Nordic proposal, and slow down to look
at what is best for all of Edina.
Clearly, I am a huge advocate of sports in Edina. And with the condition of the current Nordic
team practice space, I totally approve finding a solution for them. I just don’t want that solution to
destroy the quality of life for my neighbors, nor my family.
I live at 7714 Tanglewood Court. Moved here from New York City 24 years ago, and bought this
house in Edina because of it’s proximity to nature views and wildlife. I work on Bush Lake Road in
Edina at BI WORLDWIDE, a $650MM company that started here 65 years ago. I am extremely
proud of our City.
Please consider the two attachments – one is your published map for the project. The legend
indicates “blue” as privately owned property. That translates to “homes.” I have indicated which
one is mine. The map is deceptive, as the ridge where the 50’ wide trail would be installed is only
about 75’ from the side of my house.
I have also attached a photo that I took from my master bedroom window last night. The red line
indicates the top of the ridge where that trail would be. Clearly, we would have lights streaming
into our living and sleeping areas, and the noise would be deafening. The sound meter that your
study was based on was situated on my property for 3 days. That weekend we had a water main
break, and the crews were there jackhammering the street nonstop. All the neighbors mowed
their lawns. Traffic on 494 and 169 was loud. We are also in a direct takeoff path from the
airport, so airplane noise is bad. Plus, it was summer. In the winter, it is much, much quieter.
The presenter at the July 13 meeting said the sound from the snow making machines would be
louder than what they measured, but “not bad.”
So under this proposal we have less trees, greenery, wildlife (we’ve actually named the flock of
wild turkeys that live in the woods on the side of our house). We have lights at night that will keep
us awake. We have skiers literally able to look into our bedroom windows. We have noise from
the snow blowers and mashers. We have declining property values. Declining quality of life.
But frankly, I’m most concerned about the ice falloff. The presenter on July 13 said, “you’ll just
shovel the ice pellets like you do the snow.” Most of us don’t shovel our own snow – we have
snow removal services. They will not shovel ice. So how does this get done? What will the ice do
to my shake roof? What happens if my 4 year old grandson slips and hits his head on the
sidewalk?
And forget about me, what happens when a high school student drives around one of the S
curves on Gleason Road and spins out? God forbid there are kids waiting for the school bus.
Let’s pray that no one gets hurt, but let’s also pray that there are no lawsuits against the City.
That would be devastating.
So clearly there are a lot of things to consider. Let’s work together to make this work for
everyone. We can do it – we’ve done it before with the Dome.
Please slow this down and think this through.
And thanks for all you do.
Sincerely,
Dawn
DAWN MARTIN
Vice President | Meetings & Shows
d 952.844.4819 | m 612.964.8989
BI WORLDWIDE
Australia Canada China India LATAM UK US
www.biworldwide.com
Check out our multiple award winning video on social issues at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xfNnkUFqBM
Please consider the environment before printing.
This e-mail message is being sent solely for use by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by phone or reply by e-mail, delete
the original message and destroy all copies. Thank you.
||||||
Our House
From:Stephanie Freudenthal
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Keep Braemar Green and Safe
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 3:20:48 PM
Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council Members,
Please stop the Nordic Ski Trail project. I am against this proposal as it stands
today. It is too expensive, unneeded, unwanted, dangerous for nearby residents,
and a noise and light pollutant.
Please, pause and rethink. Let’s enhance Braemar in a SENSIBLE way to allow
skiing but not with the total decimation of nature, with the nuisances of
pollution, noise and light.
I understand there are residents who enjoy cross-country skiing, however
perhaps not as much if it was in their own back yards
I don't oppose enhancing Braemar to improve the skiing aspect. It just cannot
be in this manner.
Thank you,
Stephanie Freudenthal
6912 Mark Terrace Drive
From:Arnold Bigbee
To:Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast); swensonann1@gmail.com; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton
Subject:Thank you!
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 9:24:21 PM
In my human rights advocacy in Edina since 2009, the Edina City Council has most often been unanimous in
support of advancing rights for everyone. Your leadership will benefit our community and be a positive influence
on other communities in MN and across this country.
Arnie
Sent from my iPhone
Arnie Bigbee
arnieb1@me.com
Cell 612-804-4660
www.legalshield.com/hub/abigbee
Small Business and Group Benefits Specialist
From:Ellen Kennedy
To:Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Kevin Staunton; swensonann1@gmail.com; James Hovland
Cc:Pat Arseneault; Arnold Bigbee; Charles And Colleen Feige; Cindy Edwards; Stephen Winnick; Leslie Lagerstrom
Subject:Edina - a Human Rights City
Date:Wednesday, August 03, 2016 9:53:09 PM
Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council members,
Thank you for the unanimous support of the Human Rights City
resolution. Our hard work begins now: to address challenges that those
who live, work, and study in Edina identify as obstacles to their full
participation in civic life.
The City of Edina continues to be a leader in the state in tackling
significant problems. We now join other cities around the world in
using the guidelines of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to try
to insure equal rights for us all.
Ellen Kennedy
--
Ellen J. Kennedy, Ph.D.
Executive Director
World Without Genocide at Mitchell Hamline School of Law
875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55105
www.worldwithoutgenocide.org
kennedy@worldwithoutgenocide.org 952-693-5206
From:Dick/Bernie Letsche
To:akettreh@EdinaMN.gov
Cc:James Hovland; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com
Subject:Proposed Braemar Winter Sports Facility
Date:Thursday, August 04, 2016 12:59:10 PM
To: Ms Ann Kattreh, Edina Parks and Recreation Director
Copy: Edina City Council Members
From the July 13 informational meeting, I know you are aware of many of the
concerns of Edina residents about the proposed Braemar winter sports project.
However, I want to be sure you are aware of those residents’ concerns who live
close to the proposed project.
While the economic and environmental aspects of the project are not favorable to
Edina residents, other major negatives which impact those residents living close to
the proposed project are:
. Intrusion of skiers so close to some residents’ homes that they can look into the
windows of the homes.
. Night-time noise from the ski making equipment and snow cats.
. Night-lighting that will be annoying to many residents.
. Snow/ice over spray onto Gleason Road and residents’ driveways and sidewalks.
This is a major issue, and it will be costly for frequent removal to mitigate the danger
from accidents and injuries, and the potential financial liability to the City could be
significant. I expect residents will expect the City to remove, or pay for the removal,
of the snow/ice over spray from their driveways and sidewalks.
. Residents close to the facility believe the value of their homes will be negatively
impacted. How will the City deal with this?
These are significant issues, in addition to the general economic and environmental
ones.
It appears that the project has been pushed forward before all the due diligence has
been completed. My belief is that a small percentage of Edina residents would be in
favor of this project, if they were fully aware of all its aspects; and that it has been
pushed by a minority of special interest people, few if any who live near the proposed
project. It took considerably longer to decide about the Fred Richards complex (has
it been decided yet what will be done there?), the redo of the Braemar golf complex
and other Edina facilities; so why the hurry with the proposed Braemar winter sports
project?
The project as proposed should not proceed. Additional study should be done, and
perhaps less intrusive and less costly solutions would be viable; in addition to
working with other governmental agencies to improve/expand cross-country facilities
at Hylland Recreation Area and perhaps other locations in the area.
Please share this with other Park Board Members, and any of you please contact me
if you would like to discuss these matters.
Thank you,
Richard Letsche
7435 Hyde Park Lane
Edina, MN 55439
952-944-2464
rbletsche@comcast.net
From:Xiaoxi Zhao
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Edina City Council
Date:Thursday, August 04, 2016 2:01:53 PM
Dear Mayor Hovland,
We are Edina residences. We strongly oppose the decimation of natural forestry and wildlife at Braemar golf course
using tax payers' money. We do not support this endeavor as it injures precious green space, will create a public
hazard due to snow-making machines, and is stated to be an expensive yet losing proposition financially. It only
benefit a very Small portion of residents and harmful to most people. I ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS
PROJECT. I ask that you consider more environmentally friendly (and less costly) ways to enhance Braemar for
public use: mountain biking trails, hiking, etc. Please redirect this funding to other, higher-priority level projects
that improve (not diminish) public safety, or which impose no such damaging impacts on the environment or
residents. Thank you!
Respectfully,
Brad and Xiaoxi Jannsen
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
From:Jane Mosher
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Developement of Braemar Park: Nordic Ski Track
Date:Thursday, August 04, 2016 2:54:54 PM
Hello,
Recently the potential plan to develop a ski track at Braemar, has come to my attention. I feel
the need to object to the plan presented in a mailing my husband and I received.
The way the idea was presented appears to be pretty bright, noisy, and commercial. We favor
development at Braemar to make it a more year round facility. We frequently walk there,
have cross country skied there, dined in the Tin Fish Restaurant there, and have attended
some very fun events in that location. We live within blocks and feel Braemar is a wonderful
facility and that it should have year round use to be most productive.
A big part of our objection is also the high cost that would not be recovered any time soon,
and would require raising our taxes. More thought needs to go into this so that anything done
would be less invasive and raise enough financially to make it viable as a good decision.
My husband and my hope is to have more ideas presented that could increase use of this area
without the burden of ruining the lovely nature aspect, as well as having a way to pay for
itself in the short term. We would also like to see more public events for the family since it is
located in a setting with many homes surrounding it.
Right now our vote on this particular use mentioned is NO from both of us.
Thank you for your careful consideration,
Jane and Don Mosher
From:Pat Downey
To:To: swensonann1; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; James Hovland
Subject:Nordic Skiing Project
Date:Thursday, August 04, 2016 2:58:20 PM
Dear Council Members,
My spouse and I are very concerned about the current Nordic skiing plans to develop the
wooded areas and hills of Braemar Park.
The impact on the nearby residential area with lights, motorized equipment and the loss of
trees and wildlife would all be negative. The overspray from the ice making machines on to
the surrounding streets including the busy and shady Gleason Road will result in a significant
number of serious vehicular and pedestrian accidents - the resultant substantial cost to private
citizens and the City should be factored into the cost of the project.
On the demand side we understand that the demand projections for use of the new facilities
from the projects consultants are at best "soft". Wow, is that a bright flashing red light in
terms of approving the project and its $3,000,000 likely to go up capital cost. Currently in the
winter many Edina kids use the hills in their current form to slide - all at no cost and no
disruption to the neighborhood. There may very well be more demand for this informal and
fun kid activity than from the relatively few kids on the Nordic ski team who can use existing
nearby facilities to hone their skills.
We would urge the City Council to vote NO to this project in its current state. Let's either
leave the area in its existing attractive open state or at least take a lot more time to develop a
plan that is more sensitive to the environment, public safety, our pocket book, the
neighborhood and that is something the community wants and needs.
In closing we thank Mayor Hovland for taking the time to come out last Monday evening to
hear the very real concerns of neighborhood residents.
Sincerely,
Susan and Pat Downey
7501 Hyde Park Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55439-1744
psdowney@gmail.com
952 941 4877
612 310 5870 cell
From:Jon
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar project
Date:Thursday, August 04, 2016 8:03:39 PM
Weighing in due to ridiculous paranoia and misleading hate mail from some.
Like the idea of the ski/tubing area and options to better use the space.
Don't appreciate the Armageddon slinging locals who are not willing to even discuss it.
Do, think we need to evaluate options and costs.
Do not like those who think the rest of the world needs to subsidize their personal park land. If they love it that
much sell it to them and reduce the rest of our taxes, if not then find a suitable public use/ good for it.
Sent from my iPad
From:cdemosslaw@aol.com
To:Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com
Subject:Southdale area gas station loss
Date:Friday, August 05, 2016 11:43:49 AM
Dear Mayor Hovland, and Council members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart and Swenson:
I am writing regarding the impending loss of the BP gas station at the intersection of France Avenue and
W. 70th Street. As you are well aware, this will be the 2nd loss (the old Sinclair station) of a gas station
at this intersection in the Southdale area; and also the 3rd loss in the past few years (I am referring to the
closing of Wally's gas station on Valley View Rd. and Wooddale), also in the general Southdale area. If I
look back to when the Grandview Tire establishment was built at Amundson and W. 70th St., this would
then be the loss of a 4th gas station for this area (previously, there had been a 76 gas station located on
the property).
It is my understanding, from reading the Sun Current, along with the Minneapolis Business Journal, and
in other places online, that the architect for the BP redevelopment, when the question was raised about
losing another gas station in the area, replied something to the effect that trends are changing and that
more people are driving hybrid vehicles. The Council approved the project, and to my knowledge,
nothing more has been said about what the residents in this area are supposed to do regarding this loss.
I live at 7436 West Shore Drive. My options are: Get on Highway 100 and drive either to the Shell
Station on Industrial Blvd (on the boarder of Bloomington); drive further down Highway 100 to the Holiday
Station near American Blvd. (IN Bloomington); Get on 494 and visit Bobby & Steve's (taking 70th to
France is never a very good option because there is SO much congestion, and it takes sometimes 15-20
minutes to get to Bobby & Steve's from 70th Street); or take 70th Street to France Avenue, then take
66th Street INTO Richfield to visit the Super America station (this drive takes at LEAST 20 minutes with
congestion/traffic and all of the stop lights).
What is the plan for residents AND the customers that come into Edina to visit Southdale and the
Galleria/Westin? While there is a distaste for cars and gas stations by some groups, the reality is that
when your residents and customers are not being served, something must be done. The idea that trends
are changing and more people are driving hybrid vehicles is more of an idea than a significant reality.
Look around Edina--SOME people have hybrids, but NOWHERE near a majority. Also, while I live and
work in Edina, I still need gas for my vehicle--and I should NOT have to travel on a highway, to another
city, OR for 15-20 minutes to put gas in my vehicle. Furthermore, people that work outside of Edina
need to put gas in their vehicles too.
Please, think about this and come up with a solution.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Christine DeMoss Moe
Resident
7436 West Shore Drive
Edina
From:Wendy McNulty
To:Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com; Ann Kattreh
Subject:Vote NO on Braemar Nordic Ski proposal
Date:Friday, August 05, 2016 3:09:39 PM
Dear City Council Members:
I have many concerns about the Braemar Nordic Ski Project.
Other than the obvious concerns (noise, pollution, hazardous conditions from
overspray, loss of wildlife, loss of trees, decrease of property value, etc.) I am very
unclear about the intent of this project.
My family and I have been hearing - through multiple sources - this will be a "Legacy"
project for retiring city council member Ann Swenson. Is this true? If so, why???
Why would 3 million + tax dollars be used on a pet project of a city council member -
a project that would benefit few, and negatively affect many?
I look forward to hearing from the city council members on this matter.
Please vote NO.
Sincerely,
Wendy McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Dr.
Edina MN 55439
From:Kelly McNulty
To:Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com; Ann Kattreh
Subject:Re: Vote NO on Braemar Nordic Ski proposal
Date:Friday, August 05, 2016 3:16:09 PM
Dear City Council Members:
Please vote NO on the Braemar Nordic Ski Project. My family, neighbors, and friends
all have serious concerns around the project as it currently stands. While we greatly
appreciate and value winter sports here in Minnesota, our concern is the approach
here is hasty and is not being given the proper time, review, and attention to build out
a ski environment that works not only for the skiing community, but for the wildlife,
nature, residents, and health and well being of the Edina community.
Again, the thought of a skiing space dedicated to the Nordic group is an idea worthy
of consideration, but not at the detriment of those animals and people whose lives
will be immediately and negatively impacted by a hasty decision and implementation.
Please vote NO.
Sincerely,
Kelly McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Dr.
Edina MN 55439
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Wendy McNulty <w_mcnulty@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear City Council Members:
I have many concerns about the Braemar Nordic Ski Project.
Other than the obvious concerns (noise, pollution, hazardous conditions from
overspray, loss of wildlife, loss of trees, decrease of property value, etc.) I am very
unclear about the intent of this project.
My family and I have been hearing - through multiple sources - this will be a
"Legacy" project for retiring city council member Ann Swenson. Is this true? If so,
why??? Why would 3 million + tax dollars be used on a pet project of a city council
member - a project that would benefit few, and negatively affect many?
I look forward to hearing from the city council members on this matter.
Please vote NO.
Sincerely,
Wendy McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Dr.
Edina MN 55439
From:Ann Satterthwaite
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Proposed Nordic skiing trail
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 9:29:24 AM
Dear Mayor and City Counselors,
I would like to add my voice in urging you to reconsider the Nordic skiing trail as proposed. I have concerns about
the proposed use of snow blowing/grooming equipment in particular. From my house I have to use black out blinds
to block the lights from Highlands ski area, which is quite far away. Whether I am affected by the proposed
grooming equipment for the Nordic trail or not, I know my SW Edina neighbors will be. The equipment is also very
loud. We have a rental ski house in Breckenridge, CO and when we are there we are woken nightly by the
grooming equipment across the valley. It does not seem appropriate to have that type of equipment in a residential
area.
If there are to be improved Nordic Trails through Braemar, I urge you to keep the natural feel of the area intact by
allowing nature to determine the amount of snow on the trails.
Yours,
Ann Satterthwaite
7109 Lanham Lane
Edina, MN. 55439
From:Alex Peters
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Nordic ski track
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 10:03:06 AM
As someone who lives close to the planned site for the Nordic ski expansion, we do NOT
support the current plan going for a vote on September 7th. Gleason Rd has no outlets, and
traffic would be backed up - this is not like Hyland Hills where the ski area is the end of the
road. The noise would be unacceptable - this is in the heart of a residential neighborhood.
And really - how large is the Nordic skiing need here? Why are we making an entire and
established neighborhood cater to the needs of frankly, a very small, almost exclusively adult
(male) sporting population? That makes no sense at ALL. Sacrificing the many for the few is
not customary for a reason in both life and in business - because it doesnt make sense. Please
vote NO for the planned expansion of Braemar Golf Course to install the Nordic track; kids
(and I have 4) can go to Theodore Wirth ot French Park for tubing.
--
Alex Peters
From:Debasish Mallick
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Concenrs against Braemar Ski Track Proposal
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 12:52:27 PM
Dear Members of The Council:
I am writing to voice my concerns against the proposed ski track project near the
Braemer golf course. After studying the proposal carefully, I do not think benefit of
this project exceeds the tangible and intangible costs of this project to the taxpayers.
I, therefore, request you to vote against this proposal benefit of the community and
for the environment.
Regards
Debasish & Anita Mallick
Resident of: 5709 Kemrich Drive, Edina, MN 55439
From:Wufei Zhang
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Please vote NO to the current Nordic Ski Park plan (in Braemar Golf Course)
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 2:43:04 PM
Dear Edina City Council,
Thank you for reading my letter!
I just heard that there is a proposal for a "Winter Park" in Braemar
Golf Course. After reviewing the details of the proposal from SEH, I
strongly oppose this plan because of the decimation of natural
forestry and wildlife at Braemar Golf Course to simply construct a
very advanced Nordic X-country ski trail for a very limited group of
people. There is a snow-tubing area for more general public, but the
majority is for a 3-mile long 50' wide advanced X-country ski trail on
the hill, and I believe majority of the expense is related to that. I do
not support this endeavor as it injures precious green space, will
create a public hazard due to snow-making machines, and is stated
to be an expensive yet losing proposition financially. I WOULD
LIKE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROJECT. I ask that
please consider more environmentally friendly (and less costly)
ways to enhance Braemar for public use: mountain biking trails,
hiking, etc. Please redirect this funding to other, higher-priority level
projects that improve (not diminish) public safety, or which impose
no such damaging impacts on the environment or residents. People
are talking about "Braemar Native Restoration". Why should we
destroy the last natural reserve in Edina?
I have talked to quite some people, most of them not living in Braemar area, and
only one person is very for it, and he has a kid in Nordic club. Most of the rest are
strongly against, and a few ski-lovers thought the park would be nice, but they also
agree that there are better options for the use of the funds that could benefit much
larger group, given the Hyland park is just minutes away.
The snow-spill will definitely also create a very dangerous situation, especially for
our kids. The Gleason road will be extremely slippery, and imagine our kids
walking on that road to wait for the school bus in the winter. There are several
school buses driving on Gleason.
Thank you!
Wufei Zhang
From:jmac6001@aol.com
To:swensonann1@gmail.com; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; James Hovland
Subject:Fwd: Native Restoration
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 3:07:48 PM
I received this from Braemar about the wonderful wild life and native plants that everyone can enjoy on the
new Academy course. These are the same plants and wildlife that exist on the area that would be
destroyed if the entire Nordic Ski program is implemented.
Sheran McNulty
-----Original Message-----
From: Braemar Golf Course <BraemarGolf@teeitupmail.com>
To: jmac6001 <jmac6001@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Aug 5, 2016 9:53 am
Subject: Native Restoration
Braemar Golf Course
6364 John Harris Dr | Edina, MN 55439
952-903-5750
Unsubscribe From Our Mailings
This message was intended for jmac6001@aol.com. If you do not want to receive email messages
from Braemar Golf Course in the future please use the unsubscribe link above to remove yourself.
For details regarding our email policies, or if you are having trouble unsubscribing, please contact
us through email at: BraemarGolf@edinamn.gov, by phone at: 952-903-5750, or by mail at: 6364
John Harris Dr | Edina, MN 55439.
From:Sampsell, Margie and John
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Re: cross country ski trail
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 3:16:33 PM
Council members-
We are lifetime Edina residents and also realtors and are writing in opposition to the Braemar
X-c ski trail. WE feel that Hyland Hills Ski Area- and surrounding cross country trails are very
close to Edina and we certainly do not have to waste money to duplicate a very good existing
facility on our border. Cutting down trees is not what we want done with the Braemar area.
This does not seem like a wise expenditure of dollars - to benefit a small group - the cost is
prohibitive based on the access we already have. This project should certainly not be fast
tracked but should be considered fully with public input - who is paying for this project but all
homeowners. Please reconsider this proposal and think through the costs and negative
impact on the Braemar area.
Margie and John Sampsell
MARGIE DIRECT - 952-927-1195 / CELL 612-701-6081
JOHN DIRECT - 952-927-2861 / CELL 612-598-6081
Secure Fax 1-866-519-4497
Edina Realty, Inc.
6800 France Avenue South - Suite 230
Edina, MN 55435
From:mary everett
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Vote no for brakeman cross country ski trails
Date:Saturday, August 06, 2016 3:56:26 PM
This sounds an awful lot like the bike lanes on Wooddale where a small minority wanted something, pushes it
through without the public knowing about it or discussing it. When you're spending 48,000 people's tax dollars it
would be nice to consider more than the Edina high school team and their needs. I vote no, I hope you're will too
Sent from my iPhone
From:Ge Zhiguo
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Please vote NO to the Nordic Ski Park plan (in Braemar Golf Course)
Date:Sunday, August 07, 2016 9:33:03 AM
Dear Sir or Madam in Edina City Council,
First thank you for reading my email.
I learned about such a plan some time ago and am concerned about the effects it may have on
our house.
Our house, as many in our community, will be directly exposed to the increased potential of
snow spill, loss of privacy and increased risk level of criminal activities.
I am also concerned about the woods, plants, animals that have been living there happily for a
long time, which will be unavoidably damaged as a result of such a process.
As a loyal tax payer living in the City of Edina, I strongly urge you to vote no to such a plan
for the good and safety of people living here.
Thank you,
Joey
From:Bob Robertson
To:Edina Mail; Mary Brindle
Subject:Nordic Ski Project - Braemar Park
Date:Sunday, August 07, 2016 3:58:58 PM
Attachments:BRAEMAR WOODS.doc
First, let me thank you all of you on the City Council for your hard work and efforts on this proposed
project, as well as all of the initiatives upon which you work to make Edina the wonderful city that it is. I,
as I know you are too, am very proud of our town.
A major part of what makes Edina standout in Minnesota, as well as the country, is people like you who
work the processes for our community. My pride in our town is what prompts this email.
Attached is a concise report regarding the Braemar Park Nordic Ski project. It highlights the arguments
for and against the project. It includes all of the thought and comments that I have received from friends,
neighbors, and ski enthusiasts, and of course thoughts of my own.
Please feel free to share this report with all, and especially those who are advocates for the construction
of the project. I really believe that the people of Edina, given all of the facts, would not pursue a project
for their own pleasure when it harms and causes pain to so many others.
I am thankful to have your committee and the process to ensure the best possible outcomes for Edina
residents.
Bob Robertson
7623 Gleason Road
Edina
bob7623@aol.com
952-829-0091
BRAEMAR WOODS
ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
BRAEMAR WOODS NORDIC SKI FACILITY
August 3, 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The conversion of Braemar woods to a nordic ski facilty will provide a challenging nordic ski
facility to a small number of high performance atheletes who feel not challenged by the flatter
surfaced nordic sking currently available at Braemar park. Such a facility would improve the
convenience and availability of a challenging course which is already being provided for now by
Highland Park, ten minutes away.
However this benefit is outweighed by the loss of safety, high costs, and significant pain and
suffering caused to many Edina residents. Including the following:
• Loss of safety due to snow machine fall out
• Increase in traffic
• Financial costs
• Taxes will be levied on all edina residents
• Fees will be required and charged for snow tubing which is currently free
• Noise and light pollution – loss of the peace and happiness
• Property devaluation will occur of homes in those neighborhoods suffered by the
loss of the Braemar forest and wildlife sanctuary
• The financial, quality of life and risk of safety would be carried and suffered by many for
the benefit of a small special interest group of high-performance nordic skiers. The vast
majority of those who would bear the burden would not be nordic skiers and would
receive no benefit – only harm
BRAEMAR WOODS TODAY:
Braemar woods is one of the last stand of natural forest and animal habitat in Edina. A wonderful
asset provided by nature and available to all of the citizens of Edina. It is home to a wide variety
trees and provides a home to many species of birds and animals includes owls, an eagle, deer,
turkey, and fox, as well as many more of smaller size.
There is a hiking trail which winds itself around and over the crest of its prominent hill.
Currently, people of all ages hike this trail for exercise and for the peace and comfort that is
brought with a return to nature and the escape from urban life. To hike the trail, to stand in
woods, is a visit to the world as god made it.
In addition to the year round hiking, snow tubing is enjoyed on one of Braemar’s hills.
And the woods of Braemar are right here in Edina. No need to go to the Boundary Waters. No
need to go to the cabin in the North. And it is here for all to enjoy.
PROPOSED NORDIC SKI PROJECT:
The purpose for constructing a nordic ski trail is to provide a more challenging nordic ski facility
for advanced and competitive skiers. Braemar park currently provides cross country nordic
skiing, however the current trails are on flat land that does not offer a desired challenge to the
more atheltic and capable skiers. Changeling facilities such as these located in Highland Park
(10 minutes away), Buck Hill and other locations are busy. Moreover, it is noted the length of
the ski season is limited to the time in which the required amount of natural snow is available.
Advocates have argued that the proposed construction of the hills of Baemar woods would
provide a more convenient changeling ski experience, and snow making capabilities would
extend the season.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
SAFETY:
As evidenced by Highland Park, fallout from the snow making equipment will line the adjacent
street of Gleason Road, sidewalks, lawns, and driveways.
Gleason road is already hazardous on snow days. It is a through street which attracts cut through
traffic. Traffic funnels in from routes 494, 169 and 62. Much of the traffic is from out of the
neighborhood. All of this encourages a less regard for speed that is appropriate for a residential
family neighborhood.
The challenges provided to motorists by the progressive curves on Gleason Road across from
Braemar, woods on snow days, is well known. Un-alert drivers have faced 180 degree spin
outs, crash against the rock wall, wind up on the boulevard or house lawn, and take out mail
boxes.
Fall out from the snow machines will extend the snow season and increase the hazards to safety.
TRAFFIC :
It was estimated that the construction of the ski trail would increase the traffic by 30-40%. Much
of this traffic will be out-of-neighborhood, out-of-Edina traffic, and less mindful of safety in the
neighborhood. The risk to safety will increase proportionately to the volume of traffic.
FINANCIAL COSTS - TAXES AND FEES:
The proposed construction is very expensive, running into the millions of dollars. The proposal
calls for the costs to be paid for by taxes and fees for snow tubing.
All Edina residents will be taxed. A few high performance skiers will benefit.
Snow tubers, which do so now free, will be charged the proposed $9 to help pay for the skiers.
NOISE AND LIGHT POLLUTION – LOSS OF THE PEACE:
The proposed lights and the snow machines, along with power and water pump equipment, will
line the entire crest of Braemar. The proposed trail itself is more like a two lane highway, than a
trail. This is not a small project. It is major contstruction.
The lights will go on every evening at dark. The noise will be driven from many machines and
will commence from the beginning of sub-32 degree weather until it melts. At first to create the
snow, and then to maintain it. The lights and the noise will be there everyday, every week, every
month, including holidays and weekends.
The leafless tress will offer virtually zero buffer. The noise and light will fall upon all who are
within earshot and eyesight.
One of the presenters suggested that nearby homes should close their drapes
PROPERTY DEVALUATION:
In addition to extra taxes, the homes in the Braemar and Dewey hill and other affected
neighborhoods will suffer a decrease in property values.
SKIING FACILITIES:
A wide variety of skiing facilities are already conveniently located in the area.
LOSS OF BRAEMAR WOODS – FOREST AND WILDLIFE
SANCTUARY:
Edina will lose, or at least greatly degrade, this wonderful sanctuary of nature. Thousands of
trees will be removed. Power and lighting equipment, water pumps and snow machines will be
installed. A virtual two lane highway will be cut through the crest. Wildlife will be endangered
and lost
Braemar woods, an Edina asset and sanctuary forest for nature, man and wildlife, will be lost.
There are no locks on the containers but have outside latches. Somebody could be accidentally
or intentionally locked in a container with possibly a bad outcome. There should be no container,
building or other structure that should be left unlocked in Edina Parks. The heavy shipping
containers are probably also making impressions on the new asphalt in the parking lot.
As I have complained about in the past the field lighting at Pamela is often on all day and late
into the night. Most of the children in Edina evidently have the combination to the $3 Masterlock
lock that locks the field lighting switch. What they need to install at Pamela is a photoelectric
switch that turns the lights on at dusk and turns them off whenever the park is closed. There is no
sign at Pamela indicating when the park is closed and pets should be kept off the synthetic turf.
The relatively new walking/biking trail in Pamela that has been complained about in the past is
still problematic since many parts of the trail were installed below grade and either have water
running over the trail when it rains and/or have pooling of water on the trail. It hasn't rained for a
week and there was standing water on the trail last night. This water issue becomes ice in the
winter and people have complained about falling.
David Frenkel
From:Common Sense Edina
To:James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; swensonann1@gmail.com
Cc:Scott H. Neal
Subject:Common Sense for Edina - Pamela Park issues
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 7:37:44 AM
There have been two twenty foot shipping containers in the parking lot of Pamela Park for the
past couple of weeks.
From:Michael R. Cashman
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar Park Trails and Natural Habitat Regeneration; Winter Recreation Proposal
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 11:57:00 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Ex. 1 - 2015 Barr Engineering Braemar Park NRIS.PDF
Ex. 2 - 1992 ACOE Mitigation and Conservation Permit.pdf
Ex. 3 - 1992 Barr Engineering Oak Savannah Restoration & Management Plan....pdf
Ex. 4 - 2016 Braemar Park Takings.pdf
Ex. 5 - 2006 Edina Needs Assessment.pdf
Ex. 6 - 2014 Edina Needs Assessment.pdf
Kindly distribute this email to the following group.
DISTRIBUTION
City Council
Park Board Director
Park Board
City Manager
City Environmental Engineer
FROM
Michael R. Cashman
5820 Vernon Lane
Edina, MN 55436
michaelrcashman@gmail.com
612-619-2783
I am writing to supplement prior correspondence on these topics based on new or additional information that has been provided. In short, the additional
information I have been provided strongly supports the eradication of invasive species, the development of a circuit trail around, and regeneration of several
varied natural habitats throughout all of Braemar Park, boundary to boundary, and not just in that section being abandoned by the golf course. Most of these
proposals were previously recommended by Barr Engineering. Some were required as a condition to obtaining permission to build the Clunie Nine in 1992, and
are long overdue. All are clearly in line with the highest park facility priorities identified by Edina residents. These actions should be a priority, and not
deferred any longer. The Oak Savannah restoration mandated by the Army Corps of Engineers has already been deferred for 25 years. The park facility
priorities identified by Edina citizens, environmental concerns and need for the regeneration and creation of natural habitats in Edina generally and Braemar
Park specifically also lead to the conclusion that the proposal to spend $3 million for man-made snow xc ski and tubing facility should not be pursued. The
allocation of a much more modest sum could accomplish clear community desires for environmentally important walking, biking, and nature trails and habitat
park facilities. Exhibits are attached, but screenshots of the most pertinent information from most of them are included in this email for your convenience.
Thank you for your consideration.
INTRODUCTION
In 2006 a Community Needs Assessment Survey was conducted “to establish priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs
and services within the community.” The top two facility NEEDS were (1) walking and biking trails, and (2) natural areas and wildlife habitats. The two
MOST IMPORTANT facilities were (1) walking and biking trails, and (2) natural areas and wildlife habitats. XC ski trails did not make either list. Neither did
snow tubing. XC ski trails and snow tubing were not among the 26 facilities identified as either most needed or most important.
In 2014 another Community Needs Assessment Survey was conducted. The top three facility NEEDS were (1) walking and biking trails, (2) nature trails, and
(3) natural areas and wildlife habitats. The three MOST IMPORTANT FACILITIES were (1) walking and biking trails, (2) nature trails, and (3) natural areas
and wildlife habitats. Once again, residents did not identify XC ski trails or snow tubing as needed or important facilities. Again, XC ski trails and snow tubing
were not amongst the top 35 facilities identified as most needed or most important.
The City Council, Staff and Park Board should pay attention to citizen priorities. See discussion below and Exs. 5 and 6.
XC ski trails and snow tubing are not priorities. They are not even in the top 35 priorities. The proposal to spend $3,000,000 or more to provide man-made
snow for XC ski trails and snow tubing on the Braemar East Ridge is in conflict with stated community priorities.
For example, the community has clearly stated its priority for walking and biking trails, which are available year ‘round. The XC and snow tubing proposal for
the Braemar East Ridge would displace the walking trail that is there already. Citizens cannot walk or bike on a XC trail in the winter. It is a mistake to assume
that people do not walk on paths in Braemar during the winter months.
A 50’ wide trail is not suitable for walking, biking or enjoying nature in the spring, summer or fall, either. A 50’ wide path is not a trail. It is a highway from
which nature and natural habitats have been eliminated. It would not allow for the sort of varied natural experiences, one of the recommendations that Barr
Engineering made in its 2015 NIRS for Braemar Park. See discussion below and Ex. 1. A 50’ wide path is nothing like a walking or nature trail.
The recently issued SEH Feasibility Study for the Winter Recreation Proposal suggests that Environmental Impacts on trees and wildlife would be insignificant
(Section 2.2.3; Section 2.2.4, Section 4.1 and Section 4.1.1). This assertion, however, is based on the proliferation and infestation of invasive species that have
degraded the natural habitat. SEH implicitly suggests that the degraded environmental conditions caused by decades of City neglect justifies the project. This
conclusion is fundamentally at odds with Community demands for more and better natural habitats, and conflicts directly with 2015 NIRS recommendations by
Barr Engineering to eradicate all invasive species and regeneration of the natural Oak Savannah habitat throughout Braemar Park, including the entire East
Ridge for the enjoyment of ALL citizens. Regeneration of such natural habitats is what the citizens of Edina have identified as a critical priority. Bredesen Park
is popular because of its natural habitat claim. The fact that the City has not managed the property in Braemar Park and has allowed invasive species to
proliferate on the East Ridge and elsewhere through lack of management and maintenance is not a valid justification for ignoring the wishes of Edina citizens.
Likewise, it is not a justification for ignoring the 2015 Barr NIRS recommendations and destroying the natural habitat that remains.
It is clear that the environmental impacts directly conflict with the repeated desire of Edina residents for more natural habitats. The xc trail and snow tubing
proposal calls for a 50’ wide out and back path along the East Ridge. In spite of any claims that might be made to the contrary, a 50’ wide path would inevitably
result in the destruction of acres of natural habitat, including hundreds and of mature Oak and other trees on the East Ridge. The 50’ width of an out and back
trail would be excessive and environmentally destructive. Gleason Road is only 30’ wide. A 50’ wide path would be 2/3rds again as wide as Gleason Road,
and equivalent to a highway across the East Ridge.
The conflict between the xc and snow tubing proposal, on the one hand, and the restoration of a natural Oak Savannah habitat with intimate walking and biking
trails for residents to enjoy it, on the other, is further demonstrated by the 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Permit requiring the City to do just that on the
Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park. The City has not complied with those obligations for 25 years. See discussion below and Exs. 2 and 3. The City,
Staff and Park Board can comply with the 1992 ACOE Permit, and satisfy the stated priorities of the community, by implementing the 2015 Barr
recommendations to restore the natural Oak Savannah habitat throughout ALL of Braemar Park.
If the City Council, Staff and Park Board need an example of the destruction that will result from a 50’ wide highway across the East Ridge, they need only look
to the acre of parkland and Oak Savannah on the Southwest Ridge of Braemar Park that was destroyed just weeks ago as part of an unnecessary expansion of the
cold storage public works facility. See Ex. 4, and discussion below. Instead of destroying more natural habitat to construct xc ski trails and snow tubing hills
that have never been identified as a need or a priority, the City, Staff and Park Board should listen to their constituents and focus their attention on and allocate
resources to making walking, biking and nature trails and habitat regeneration a priority. This means restoring and regenerating the habitat in all of Braemar
Park, and reclaiming parkland wherever possible, not cutting a 50’ highway across the East Ridge.
More specifically, instead of spending $3 million on facilities that are not needed or important to citizens, the City should allocate the much more modest
resources needed to implement previous recommendations by City consultant Barr Engineering for the full regeneration of multiple varied habitats and trails
throughout Braemar Park. These recommendations are environmentally correct, and consistent with the top facility needs and priorities of the community. As
discussed further below, the City Council and Park Board should:
1. Eradicate all invasive species and regenerate the natural habitat throughout Braemar Park, as Barr Engineering has recommended;
2. Comply with the 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Permit, which required the City to eradicate invasive species and restore the Oak Savannah
to the Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park 25 years ago;
3. Implement Barr’s 2015 recommendation for a complete trail circuit around, and more trail circuits and varied natural habitats within Braemar
Park; and
4. Reclaim the .02 acres of Braemar Park property on the South Ridge and regenerate an Oak Savannah habitat there as compensation and
mitigation for the 1 plus acre of Oak Savannah and nature trails that have been taken and the 40-50 mature Oak trees that were cut down by
Public Works without notice as part of an unnecessarily aggressive expansion of the cold storage facility.
DISCUSSION
1: In 2016 and 2017, Implement Barr’s Recommendation to Eradicate Invasive Species and Regenerate Natural Habitat Throughout Braemar Park.
The City hired Barr Engineering to provide recommendations on Braemar Park wetlands, natural habitats and habitat regeneration. Barr provided its
recommendations in a February 2015 Natural Resources Information Summary (NIRS). Barr recommended that the natural habitat be restored and regenerated
in all of Braemar Park, not just the golf course:
Braemar Golf Course is the largest green space in the City of Edina. The habitat that surrounds and
intersperse the course, however, has been slowly degrading. Regular management is necessary to prevent
further degradation and to allow for native plant community regeneration. If the degradation is allowed to
continue valuable species and habitat will be lost. In particular, native oak trees will not regenerate in the
presence of highly competitive, invasive plant species such as common buckthorn. Habitat degradation
can be halted and reversed through a regeneration and management program that stewards the plant
communities long into the future.
Barr identified the order of priority for habitat regeneration in Braemar Park in Figure 6: (1st) The Executive Course and entry to the golf course (which has
been completed); (2nd) the West Ridge (bordering the Metro Safety Building and the City Cold Storage Facility), the Northwest Ridge (north and west of the
golf dome); (3rd) degraded habitat within the course (which will be completed as part of the golf course renovation); and (4) the North Boundary Wetlands
(north of Hillary Lane), and the South Boundary Wetlands (along the Nine Mile Creek South Fork).
Barr identified the Northwest, West and East Ridges as the “best ecological quality” habitat remaining in Braemar, and recommended that the Oak Woodland
habitat be regenerated before it is too late after decades of neglect.
This is a screenshot of Barr’s Figure 6 habitat regeneration recommendation:
Invasive species eradication requires commitment, but it is not expensive. Invasive species eradication and re-seeding can be done for less than $3,000-$5,000
an acre or less:
http://www.midwestprairies.com/resources/technical-resources/buckthorn
Methods and Estimated Costs for Buckthorn Removal
Hand Cutting: $1,500 - 3,000 per acre
Stump Herbicide: $150 - $250 per acre
Burning Piles: $500 – 2,000 per acre
Forestry Mowing: $350 – 500 per acre plus a mobilization charge
Herbicide Re-sprouts: $150 - 250 per acre
Seeding: $300 – 600 per acre
Prescribed Burning: $1,500 for a typical 20 acre site
2: Implementing Barr’s 2015 Habitat Regeneration Recommendations Would Satisfy the City’s Obligations Under the 1992 ACOE Permit Requiring
it to Restore the Oak Savannah on the Northwest and West Ridge, an Obligation the City Has Not Met.
When it built the Clunie Nine addition to the Braemar golf course, the City was required to apply for an Army Corps of Engineers Permit to provide
environmental mitigation and habitat conservation as a condition for filling in wetlands along the Nine Mile Creek South Fork. In its application, the City
promised and agreed to restore the Oak Savannah in most of the Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park, areas outside the golf course. The Northwest and
West Ridges were already badly infested with invasive species. The City hired Barr to create a Restoration and Management Plan for the Oak Savannah on the
Northwest and West Ridges, as mandated by the 1992 ACOE Permit.
The Restoration and Management Plan that Barr created as mandated by the 1992 ACOE Permit stated:
In June of I992, the City of Edina received a wetland fill permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, The permit
allowed the City to fill in a portion of the wetland complex in Braemar Park as part of
a golf course expansion project, To partially mitigate the loss of wetland habitat, the
Corps of Engineers required the City to restore two publically owned, undeveloped
hillsides to native oak savanna.
The City has not complied with any of the mandates in the 1992 Restoration and Management Plan. Therefore, the City has not complied with and is in
violation of the 1992 ACOE Permit. To rectify this violation, the City should implement Barr’s 2015 habitat regeneration recommendations, see above, which
would include the Northwest and West Ridges and comply with the 1992 ACOE Mitigation and Conservation Permit. Habitat regeneration was required 25
years ago by the 1992 ACOE Mitigation and Conservation Permit, and is the environmentally correct action to take. It is also in line with the priorities of
Edina citizens, who have stated in response to Community Needs Assessments in 2006 and 2014 that nature trails and habitats are a top priority, in tandem with
the need for more walking, biking and nature trails.
3: In 2016 and 2017, Implement Barr’s Recommendation to Create A Trail Circuit Around and Multiple Circuits and Varied Natural Habitats in
Braemar Park
In Section 4.2 of its 2015 NIRS, Barr recommended (a) “a full walking, [biking and nature] circuit AROUND [the entire] course” and park; (b) multiple “smaller
circuits within the park;” and (c) multiple “varied natural area experiences for trail users” in and around the park:
As user needs of the park evolve, the possibility of establishing a trail network around the golf course is
becoming a priority. Figure 7 was produced as a preliminary examination of trail possibilities showing
both existing and proposed trails. . . .
Goals considering in creating this preliminary plan include:
Creating a full walking circuit around course.
Creating smaller circuits within the park.
Creating trail connections to the neighborhoods to the north and east of the park.
Creating trail connections to athletic facilities on the west side of the park.
Creating trail connections to the club house.
Creating varied natural area experiences for trail users.
4: Return .02 Acres of Parkland on the South Ridge of Braemar for Oak Savannah Habitat Regeneration as Mitigation and Compensation for the
Acre of Oak Savannah that was Unnecessarily Taken and Cleared Without Public Notice or Input
In late July 2016, the Public Works Department cut down more than an acre of mature Oak trees in the Oak Savannah on the Southwest Ridge of Braemar Park
to create a .56 acre expansion of the cold storage facility. Sheet 6/13 below shows the area of the Oak Savannah that was taken and cleared. Although this
parkland was not “protected” by the 1992 ACOE Permit (see above), Barr identified this area as higher quality Oak Savannah habitat and recommended that it
be regenerated. This area also included nature trails that have been taken.
Public Works took this land because it was losing the use of property at 70th and Amundson Streets, where it has been dumping street sweepings and other debris
for approximately 10 years (since Public Works moved from Grandview). The taking of this park property and the destruction of Oak Savannah occurred
without public notice or comment. There was no study of how much property was needed for public works, or whether these activities could be handled at other
existing public works facilities or locations. No consideration was given to the original design of the cold storage facility, where all outdoor storage is on the
west side of the building and shielded from view by pedestrians on the nature trails in Braemar Park.
Public Works is also planning to take another .02 acres on the top of the South Ridge. The dumping and storage of debris and construction material on that .02
acre parcel is not necessary and should not be allowed. Instead, that .02 acre parcel, identified as Area A on Sheet 2/13 below, should be returned to parkland.
An Oak Savannah habitat should be re-established there and the surrounding area as mitigation and compensation for the destruction of Oak Savannah on the
Southwest Ridge. At least 40 Oak trees should be planted (less than the number cut down as part of the cold storage expansion) along with natural forbs and
grasses. Walking, biking and nature trails should be included in this area as one of the “varied natural habitats” that Barr recommended for Braemar Park.
ATTACHMENTS
Ex. 1 - 2015 Barr Engineering Natural Resources Information Summary for Braemar Park
Ex. 2 – 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Mitigation and Conservation Permit
Ex. 3 – 1992 Barr Engineering Oak Savannah Restoration and Management Plan (Mandated by 1992 ACOE Permit)
Ex. 4 – Drawings for Braemar Park Takings for Cold Storage Expansion
Ex. 5 – 2006 Needs Assessment Survey
Ex. 6 – 2014 Needs Assessment Survey
BARR
-
Brqemor Golf Course Mqsler Plon
Nofurol Resources lnformotÍon Summory
Prepored for
City of Edino
Th.CITY.r
EDINTA
..fff ¡ivirq, ¡¿ñi¡g, ñi.trg t¡ù & dó¡t¡t ù{¡¡Ë
Februory 2015
4700 West 77th Slreei
Minneopolis, MN 55435-4803
Phone: 952.832.2600
Fox: 952.832.2601
Areas surrounding ponds and wetlands are dominated
by reed canary grass and narrow leaved cattails.lnfrequently mowed areas dom¡nated by non-
native grasses (Smooth Brome) and aggressive
weedy species (Canada Goldenrod).
4.1 HobitotRegenerotion Recommendotions
Braemar Golf Course is the largest green space in the City of Edina. The habitat that surrounds and
intersperse the course, however, has been slowly degrading. Regular management is necessary to prevent
further degradation and to allow for native plant community regeneration. If the degradation is allowed to
continue valuable species and habitat will be lost. In particular, native oak trees will not regenerate in the
presence of highly competitive, invasive plant species such as common buckthorn. Habitat degradation
can be halted and reversed through a regeneration and management program that stewards the plant
communities long into the future.
Hiclrn¡¡
Over time common buckthorn (shown in dark green) will prevent the
reproduct¡on of nat¡ve forest species and result ¡n a buckthorn monoculture
lmage source: Steven Apfelbaum, Applied Ecological Services, lnc.
Bkd
Tr*nds in $avanna Degtadation
'I
t, t
i¡l,i¡'*-
t,
,S: añll
râf aâ.åt l¡t 'lúf¡t!
(i*itt
- ?? t lF¡l
ÐEgnuæFtt*3fofi{¡¡{ßtåni c.t¡rÍHo¡Ia¡n&fl!
9
P:\Mpls\23 M N\27\23271-398 Braemar lmprovements\WorkFiles\Report\CourseMasterPlan_NatResourceslnfo.docx
Plant community regeneration and management can be expensive when large areas of invasive species
are to be removed. Phasing regeneration activities spreads out the cost making efforts feasible. The
approach recommended here directs initial management efforts to the east entry of the park along Hilary
Lane (Zone L in Figure 6). Regeneration efforts start here in order to attract attention and engage Edina
citizens to inspire them to support this effort. Much of this work is being incorporated into the executive
course renovation taking place in 2015. Figure 6 suggests a sequence for regeneration efforts.
After the park entry projects are completed, regeneration efforts should move to the remnant oak forests
(Zone 2 in Figure 6). In this management approach, buckthorn and other invasive species are to be
removed from the highest quality forests first. Then efforts move to more degraded habitats. Native
wildflowers, sedges, grasses and shrubs can be planted after invasive plants have been removed,
Thereafter, it is critical that invasive species be controlled each year. If not, buckthorn will quickly
recolonize.
The last areas for regeneration are the lowest quality forests and wetlands (Zones 3 and 4). These areas
will require extensive work because most are composed completely of weedy and invasive species. In
some cases significant clearing will be necessary to establish a maintainable native plant community.
Low quality woodland dominated by mature buckthorn trees lack diversity and quality habitat for
native flora and fauna.
It cannot be stressed enough that once an area has undergone initial regeneration efforts, regular
maintenance to keep invasive species at bay will be necessary to achieve a stable native habitat. Budgets
should be planned for perpetual maintenance for areas receiving initial regeneration work.
4.2 Pork Troils
As user needs of the park evolve, the possibility of establishing a trail network around the golf course is
becoming a priority. Figure 7 was produced as a preliminary examination of trail possibilities showing
both existing and proposed trails. This map should be considered preliminary in that it shows options for
L0
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271398 Braemarlmprovements\WorkFiles\Report\CourseMasterPlan_NatResourceslnfo.docx
new trail placement. Conflicts exist with golfing. Specific situations require further examination. The
purpose of this figure is to inspire thoughts for additional uses of the park.
Goals considering in creating this preliminary plan include:
¡ Creating a full walking circuit around course.
o Creating smaller circuits within the park.
r Creating trail connections to the neighborhoods to the north and east of the park.
o Creating trail connections to athletic facilities on the west side of the park.
¡ Creating trail connections to the club house.
¡ Creating varied natural area experiences for trail users.
11
P\Mpls\23 MN\27\2327L398 Braemar Improvements\WorkFiles\Report\CourseMasterPlan_NatResourceslnfo.docx
¡l ¡I I I
Å
ì I i \T
T
\\
Restorat¡on Phasing This map shows suggested phased ìmplementatìon of regeneration projects.Iffi Po¡linator plantings along main entrance add color ãnd beauty in most visible portion of course. Remove exotic ând jnvasive forbs ând grasses and ¡eplace with native pollinator species- Native oak trees may a¡so be planted here.2 oakt¡úoo¿la¡¡ds Remove buckthorn and exotic honeysuckle from oak woodland areas. l\4anage buckthorn to maintain clear understory for native woodland plant species-Some planting of native herbaceous species may be necessary.3 Degradedln-cou6eAreas Remove and mañage exotic and rnvasive specres within golf course. Areas of exotic and invâsive spec¡es are sources ol seed and make management of prev¡ously restored areas more difficult. Currently unmowed natural areas within the course ate of low ecological value and are recommended to be planted and restored with native sedge, grass and forb 4 Deqraded Woodlands Remove buckthorn from wetlands on north and south side ofgolf course. These areas are comprised of large siands of mature buckthom trees.Feet 0 250 500 1,000 r---r----o I SE Figure 6 Approach to Habitat Regeneration Braemar Master Planning City of Edina Edina, MN
Se
r
y
i
c
e
Lã
y
e
r
Cr
e
d
i
b
MN
Gê
o
WM
S
se
r
y
i
c
e
C
ty
of
Ëd
¡a
¿:
.
o i.
t'
t
'.
f
.
t."{
*
"
{+
:
,'
l\
t
'.
,
-
'
"-
,
r
¿
t
j'
.q
(s
""
Ú
ê
,I
'\
.
t
'
''
rÑ
l
"*
it
.
$
I
t.
"
*
d.
.
,f
,
@
t,
.
,
t
v
q
r;
ì
'
j
.*
.
'€
ù.
ó
I
l.
Park Trails This map shows existing and poteniial kai¡ alignments.l--_l Braemar Park Boundary - Existing Trail - Proposed Tra¡l O Proooseo rra¡l connection oEx¡st¡ng Tra¡l Connection Êxisting frail Connection to Golf Course lmproved Connection tô CIub House/Restaurant Club House/Restaurant Exist¡ng Sìdewalk Proposed S¡dewalk North Loop Trail (Proposed)Boârdwalk (Proposed)Existing Wetlând Feet 0 250 500 1,000 r--I---e I FARR Figure 7 Natural Area Trail lmprovemen!Boardwalk Option Braemar Master Planning Cily of Edina Ed¡na, MN
EXHIBlT
I
DBPARTMENT OF THE ARlwY PERMIT
Permittee Cltv of Edlna. Minnesota
Pef mir No. 89 - 1389 - 12
Issuing Office
St. Paul District
U.S. Armv Coros of Enslneers
NOTE: The term '!ou" and its derivatives, as used in this pe¡mit, meaü¡ the p€rmittee or any future transferee. The term "this office"
refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Englneers having jurisdiction over the perm¡tted activ¡ty or the
appropriate official of that ofñce acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the lerms and conditlons specified belo\ü.
Project Description: You are authorlzed to place fill rnaterlal lnto approxlmately 4, 9 acres of
v¡eLland durlng the development of a 9-hole regulatlon golf course wlthin Braemar Park,
The acreage of f111 and the locatlon of the f111 areas are shown on AtÈachment E of the
Deeember 1990 Anendment to the DeparÈnent of the Army perrnlt applicationr and as shown
on the attached permit drawings and tables labeled 89-i-389-12, pages 1 of 6 through 6
of6 -...:.==-
Project
Creek
The proJect lnvolves fill-íng wetlands along the South Fork of Nfne Mile
in the south L/2 of section 7, T116N, R2II.I, Hennepin County,
-¿-Conditions:Permit
Generål Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 3L. L994 If you find lhat you need more
lime to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this offìce for cons¡deration at leasl one month
before thc date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in coDformance w¡th the terms and conditions
of this permit. You are not relievgd of this requirement if you abandon the permitted ac¡ivity, although you may make a good fai¡h
transfer to a third party Ín compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maíntain thc authorized act¡vity
or should you desire to abandon it \ryithout a good faith lransfer, you must obtain a modification of this permit from ¡his oflicc, which
may reguire restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archaeological remains while accomplishing the act¡vity authorized by this
permit, you must immediately notif this offrce of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordination required
to determine if the remains ',varrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of H¡storic Places,
ENG FORM f721, Nov 86 EDITION OF SEP 82 IS OBSOLETE (æ cqn 320-330)
4. If you sell rhe properry associated with this p€rmit, you mus¡ obta¡n the signaturs of the new ow¡ter in the space providcd and
forward a copy of the permit to this office lo validate lhe transfer of this authorization.
5. If a conctitioned water guality cert¡ficåtlon has been issucd for your projecl, you must comply with the conditions specified in the
cert¡f¡cation as special conditions to this permit. For your convenicnce, a copy of thc certif¡c¿tion is attached if it contains such
conditions.
6. You must allow representatives from this ofñce to insp€ct the authorized activ¡ty at any t¡me deemed necessary lo ensure that
it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the terms and conditions of your permít.
S¡æcial Conditions:
1", The perrnlttee must construct/creête Èhe compensaÈory nltlgatlon sltes as
indicated on the permit tables and drawlngs, labeled pages 1 of 6 through 6 of 6. The
mitigation shall follow the plans described ln Section I of the Decernber 1990 amendment
to the permit application. The permlttee shall provide the Corps ¡vlth detailed
construction plans for the mitigation work. Plans shall be shown at a f-inch - 50-
foot or l-lnch - 100-foot scale. All rnitlgatlon work must be completed prlor to, or
coneurrent lrith, the constructlon of the golf course.
2. In order Èo minlmlze the lntroductlon of chemlcals lnto v¡atersr/wetlands of the
United States, the permictee shall grade all flLl areas such that herbfcldes and other
chemlcals cannot readlly flow into adJacent waters/weËlands, Such gradlng nay requlre
the constructlon of berms along these !¡aters/wetlands. AIso, Ehe pernlttee shall
establlsh a natural vegecatlve buffer, at least 15 feet wfde, along all exlstlng and
created wetlands bordering both the existing golf course areas to be alEered as parÈ of
the new golf course conscructlon and along the edges of the golf eourse holes to be
constructed, This berm or vegeÈatlve buffer shall- be established in all areas where the
SpecÍal Conditions contlnued on Page 4
Further Information:
1. Congresional Authorities: You have bcen authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to:
( ) Sect¡on 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
(X) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
( ) Secrion 103 of the Marine Prorecrion, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. l4l3).
2. Limits of this authorizåt¡on.
a. This pcrmit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law.
b. This permit docs not grant any property rigbts or exclusive privileges,
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the proporfy or rights of others.
d. This pcrmit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3. Limits of Fedcral Liabilíty. In isuing this permit, thc Federal Government docs not assume any liab¡liry for thc following:
l;or.3urutes
to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of othcr permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural
b. Damages lo the pêrmitted project or uses thereof as a result of currenl or future activities underlaken S or on behalf of
the United States in the public in¡erest,
,)
c. Damages to pÕrsons, property, or to other p€rmitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by the activlty authorized
by this perm¡t.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
e. Damage cla¡ms associated with any future modífic¿tion, suspension, or revocation of thi$ permir.
4. Reliance on Applicånt's Data: The determination of this office that isuance of this permít is not cutrary to the public intcrest
was made in reliance or the information you provided.
5, Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may recvaluate its decision on this pcrmit at any lime the circumstances warrant.
Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the fotlowing:
a. You fail to cornply wlth the terms and conditions of this permit.
b, The information provided by you in support of your permlt application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate
(See 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not considcr in reaching the original public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modificat¡on, and rcvocation proccdures
conta¡ned in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforçcment procedures such as thos€ contained in 33 CFR 32ó.4 artd 3?Ã5, The referenced
enforcement procedures provide for the ¡ssuance of an adm¡nistrativ€ order requlring you to comply w¡th the ternrs and conditions of
your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropr¡ate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measur€s ordered
by this office, and if you fail to comply witlr such directive, this off¡ce may in certain situations (such as ¡hqse specif¡ed in 33 CFR
2t9.l70) accomplish thc correçtive mea$ures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost.
ó. Ê¡(tensions, General condition 1 establishes a time limit for thc completion of the activity authorized by this
are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public
Corps will normally give favorablc consideration to a request for an enension of this time limlt.
pcrmit.
interest
Unless thcre
dccision, thc
Your signaturc below, as permittec, indicåtcs that voú
/,
acccpt Bnd agree to comply \¡/ith the terms and conditions of this p€rmit,
,, ,./ )/' /- /1
,/<'-.-C*- ¡,:i4 -/
(FERMITTEE)(D/4TE)
This permit becomes effective when the Federal officíal, designated to act for the Secretary of tbe Army, has $igned below
lruMqz-
(D,4TE)
RICEARD W. CRAIG
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue fo be binding on the new owner(s) of the prop€rty, To validate the transfer of this permit and
the associatcd liabilities associated wilh compliance with ¡ts terms ånd conditions, havc ths transferee sign and date below.
3
(TRANSFERREE)(DATE)
Speclal Conditions continued from Page 2.
(special condltion 2 contlnued)
iopogr"pty slopes tovrards the water/\^/etlands such that applied chernlcals could readily
enter waters/wetlands
3. The permittee shall develop ê management plan tha! ensures thaE the 2 oak
savanna hills in the lrestern portion of Braemar Park, labeled as Parcels A and B on che
attached map, are ¡naintained as natural areas. No ffll may be placed in the wetland
until this managenent plan ls reviewed and approved by the Corps. _Future conservancy
enhancement work may bå allowed in Lhese areås upon prior notfce and approval from Ehe
Corps ,
4. The permlttee shal1 execute a Covenant of Dedtcation on the area labeled Parcel
C on the attached map withln Braemar Park whlch involves the remalnlng wetland ln the
southwest portfon of the Park.
5. The perrnlttee shalL mainÈaln the renaining wetLand, wlthln the Clty of Edina,
along the south property lfne of Braemar Park for conservancy use ln ac-cordance wlÈh the
enclosed Covenant of Oedicatlon, This area is shov¡n as ParceL C on the attached map.
6. The permittee shall survey and prepare a legal descriptfon of Parcels A and B
for inclusion in Ehe nanagement plan and Parcel C for incluslon fn the Covenant of
Dedicatlon.
7. The permictee sha1l take the necessary actlons to record thls permlt and
DedicaEion of Covenant with the appropriate County Recorder or Reglstrar of Deeds
responsible for ¡naln¡alning records of tftle to, or lnterest in, real propercy, The
permittee shal1 provide evidence to the Corps that the permft has been properly recorded,
B. The permÍttee shall provide the Corps wlEh an annual rePort, for 5 years,
documenting che effectlveness of the rnltlgation work and the management actlvitfes ln
the oak "u.,ran,* parcels. These reports sha1l lnclude color photographs laken each year
from the sane vantage Point,
g. Erosion control neasures such as sllt fences and straw bale dlkes shalI be
lnstalled prior to âny construction activitles, and will be naintaÍned, untll all exposed
slopes are stabilized by mulch, vegetatlon or other Procective eovering'
10, Refer to the Standard Condltlons enclosure '---'-- -'*t
4
-
l
¡It
O
!
C
J
\
.
c
*
<
I
ç
o
r
c
J
c
o
c
j
o
(
¡
\
!
!
=
,
-
c
.
c
.
,
)
'
;
È
C
J
â
{
-
t
I!!
Õ
,
lt/túrr t/
.
r
c
I
,
I
t
f
r
_
n
¡
l
-
'
.
¡
l
I f. trf
r
.
1
i
l
6
,
¡
t
IIIIiIIIIIItga¡rr
¡
É
ú
m
n
r
m
t
l
-
1
.
r
/
r
q
c
.
?
,
t
l
l
q
¡
¿
t
I\ìIiIIIIIII¡II IIIIII¡IIIItIIIflI,II¡I
l
\
\
t
\
\
^
I
I
f
ì
\
É
t
a
ç
1
\
f
'
I
\
\
\
t
IiIIIIì\
I
tI
ú
t
¡
t
¡
:
l
i
.
t
r
y
l
6
r
r
f
t _____rr- l t ---_----------
BRÀE\'{AR SA\,¡,\NNA RESTORATION PROJ ECT
City of Edina
RE.STQRATIQ5_&TW
Brían I-1. Starrding
EXHIBIT3I
iJr¡emar Savanna Mgt. Plan 2
L BAÇKGRQUND:
In June of I992, the City of Eciina receivecJ a u'etlnnd fill permit from the U.S. Arnry
Corps of Engineers under Sectíon 404 of the Fecleral Clean Water Act, The permit
allowed the iìity to filI in a portion o1t the wetland complex in Braemar Park as part of
a golltcourse expansíon project, To partially mitigate the loss of wetlancl habítat,_the
Cırps ol Enginee.r ."q.tì..il the Citl' to lestore trvo pulrlir:ly ownc:cl, undevelope,l
hillsides to native oak savanna.
Barr Hngineering assi.-tecJ the Cify with the initial permit applicatìon.and clraftecl a set
of nlunig*ment-goals fo¡ the d"giaded savanna area. T'}ie City of Eclina contracted rvith
the Univ*ersity oflMinnesota to produce a long-term management plan to restore the
area. University consultation began in July of 1993'
II.
Braemar Park sits on thr: southwestern corner of the City of Edina, near the
íntersection of U.S, Route 169 and \¡alley View Road. The restoration site lies entireiy
lvithin the park boundaries, next to a public golf course on the east, an<l next to thc
c.ity ice ur"no, parking facilities and athletic fielcl'^ on the west ancJ north, On the south
side of the site, a managed wetlanil complex drains the gr.rlf colrrse and the high\t-aV
into Nine Mjle Creek, ivhich eventually outlets into the N{innesota River. Single-family
re¡^iclential development clominates the landsr:ap,: surrounding the perk (N4ap l)'
T'he 23-acrr-' art?a contaitrs trvo distinct parc''ls, eaih apprnsirlately 12,5 a,:res' The
southern parcel IParcel A) b,:gins tr:ar [he Brian Wippr]rn'ran I¡lcmc¡rial (ìun Range .rn'J
¡:xtenrls n,rrth t,ith,l goli c,ruisc rnaintenanL-e sh,-'.1. 'l'he norti"rcrn parcel [Parcel lìJ,
l¡,:atecJ on thr westt:rìi sicle of llraemar Avenue by' the E.-iina Colf Dome, extentls iroill
thr: ic,t: arena on the "-outh to the city sottball fields on tÌ're nrrfth'
Iìotlr parceis^ sit atop glacial kames u'ith stcep skrpes and san.Jy tti gravelly, well-drained
soils. Itarcel ,,\. rises f*nl u trase ot'860 feet abot'e seir lev¡.:l to two rjO-foot hills,
forming slopes in some places as steep as 5(J'1/t,. Parcel B, .although as high, is mort
uniform, rising gently to a single peak (Map 2J'
rd¡íi*l*iiMrçl
¿.
I
YIEII
€
¿
ù
Ë
à
N. t^t. 1/4 SEt.7, T116, H21
I
A
I
Ír[ ¿ü,ry J
I
I
o@@ OLF6
0
PAVILLIAN
BALL
F I tlos
BRAIilAR
ARTNA
0r{t
.yt, rl4
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
,NE ñfü
I
I
I8C,7, T116, R21
R I TLT RANGI
a
CD
CD I
Oco(D
I BI
I
(
a
\
ra.
l¡\ìlt ïrue
C830
830
Itr¡rtr
llra.:mlr Savanna Mgt, Plan I
vl. RLSIQBAII-QN &114ì:.A-Gi\{ENl
Mauageue¡rt-Gea-lsl
The poor condition ancJ small size of the [ìraenrar site pr,-',:ludes a t]ornplctr: reco\,¡er]' to
a ful\, functional Ércosystem. l{istorii:ally, plant,,-, animals, insects and climate reactecl
togetht:r in a t:omplex web of interclepe¡rdence. ì\'lissing eiements, such as the airsence
of'-Bison, or intr<>ciuce.J elements, r^ur--h as invasion b5'exotic piants, ,--an prolbttnclly alter
the clynamics of the r^ystem.
'fhe goal of restoration efforts shoulcl therefore Lre tr¡ rer-reate, as ,:losely as possible, the
prehiitoric structure of the prairie, savannai wc-,odland and fr-¡rest, By_ reintroclucing
natíve species ancl employing management techniques^ ¡^ur:h as controll,:d burnin¡¡, lv.:
can try io mimic the natural procr-:sses that shapr:d the iandscape. Exr>tic plants will
likcly never br: entirely eraclicat,-:cl; at br:st, i:ompetrtittn tiom natíves lrlay recluce their
current dominance. ()nce restored, the site u'ill recluire perir:dic maintcnance,
including weed control, regular burns arrd fiecluent monitoring'
Management Llnïts & S-urvey Plots:
N4aps qA g 4B show etrch parcel dlvicled into three or four ecologit:al zones. Each z,lne
is iuther diviclecl into tu¡o nlanagement units. Scheduling of controlled bums,
herbicide applications c-'r other perioclic treatments should rotate through each
trÊatment unit, sO that only one such unit per zone rr:ceives a partícular treatment in
rrny givrn yrar. 'fhi"^ ruill allow r:omparisons between treatec-l and untre¡ted sites,
facilitating monitoring ancl evaluation of treatment methocls,
One lO-meter by 10-metcr [20-meter by,25-nletr:r in woc.,clecl areas') survey plct l-ras
bc.'cn establ¡slicd-f'or ca(:h manageme nt unit, and a detail,:d biolt)gical int'entory has been
conch-rcted for r:ach pIot. 'l"his inventory shoulcl be upclateil annualiy fì:r all survey
¡rlo,;s, at least f'or the first ten ¡'ears.
Bracmar Sat'ar,nâ tr4gt. l'lan I (J
M
Controlled Btrning:
Prairie, savanna anà oak woocllancl r:ommunities all dc:pend on periodic fires fcrr their
maintenrrnce, I.'ire tlecreases lvoocly invaCers, decreases shade cover, promotes
germination of many native plants, and returns essential nutrients to the soil' The City
öf g,Jinu should plan on conducting fall or spring burns on portions of the site each
yerìr, Fali [',urns rna¡, minric the pattern sel by Natìve Americans in pre'European times
änci allow see.ls plantecl in the dırmant season to stratify over the u'inter. Spring fires,
on the c:ther harrd, u.sually burn more hotly ancl completely.
Corrtrolled Burn Schedule:
Zc:ne Begin lìesroration Phase \4aintenance Phase:
Prairie:P-l : Fall 1993
P- 2; Spring I 994
Burn every othcr 1'ear untíl non'
native species coverage = I 0Úlo or
less.
Lìurn evcry 3 ycars.
Savanna S-1:Spring 1S)94
S-2: Fall 1994
Burn every other year until shrub
coverage = I ()o/o or less.
Burn every 5 years
Woodland \À'-1;Fall 19"q4
\{i-2: Fall l9l'ì5
Burn t:very 3 years untii lvoodY
stem clcnsitY = i /square meter or
It--ss.
Burn every l0 years
['r)ft:St F-] & F-2: NiA Do not cleliberately [:'urn I)o not Lrurn
lilar'¡n.tr Sat atrtla \'tgi. I'lrin i4
lìeseecling Schedule:
Prairie
lìa van n a
Zone:Br:gin R¡'stora t ir¡n (-ìyr:1,'
ilor ar,:as wit[r nritiv| t]or',:ragt: = l0f]i, clr lesr^, rr-'srlr:)tl irnmeciiltely
irfter first burn r¡'ith f'.R.f . ivlised Hcight-\4esic (ir¡ss \'1ix (or
t:c1u iva 1t':;t1.),
RÈs,:,:cl ùlit-'r Si:r-t.rrjcl ,rr t jtirrl ltuLt'ti rr'i'rLr i.'lT,tvr irrg lrrt bs, lrom
Ir),:lri s,)uri.¡:s wh.,r,- i-,ossi[-,le:
{[.ist rbrth,'onrins, frorn l]. (,ìusliing]
Ii'nat.i.r (-r)\'críìgr] c,ne Srou'iilÄ sciìsc)n alì,.:r Lrurn or !t'et:cì (:[)lltrol
i.- Iil'ló or lrtss, resr:cci with fì¡liorr'ing, s¡reci,.:s, using I,lcui sour,:es
\lrhrrre possjble:
{l,jst fôrthcoming íronr []. Crrshing]
P-l ; Ijail l.L.l!)3
P-2: Spring 1Sr94
S-l: Spríng lS):-14
q_a. []ull I (.)!)¿1
Woocll'¡ncl W-l: Fall 19!r5
\V-2: Fril l9:.rr-ì
Fores,F-l: Fali lSl!j5
F-2: Fail l9!'6
lf natíve C{)vrìfâfi.' ()l-ì('j ,{f()\\¡in!, sçJiìst,)lì after r'r¡t:e:cl (l(.)lltl'tìl il L {-l';l,
,)r less, resretJ ryith lolklving spet:ies:
il.ist lrorth.:oming iri'rn E, t.'"rshin¡ll
132fuE NO.nl27@9 LOCATON MAP AND ACCESS PI.AN
BF
l
g
u
¡
a
co
l
o
sr
o
n
¡
G
ST
T
E
IM
P
F
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
w-
oþ
/
9
9
f
:
9
-
!.
f
t
_l
!
!
!
a
-
OE
9
d
R
.@z 'ìr '"Þ4:--dê S rd US 169
!
Iì
C
C
K
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
I
I
O
N
Íl
'
{.
"i
.
'
\
i;
!-
1
râ
9
US
i
.t
-
l
Íi r'
:l
ti
i 'k
it
î¡
ç
':
v
;
l i O)+l I l I
}:
+
m x ¡E {
úÞ
l
c
f
13EXSTNG CONDTIONS AND REMOVALS
BB
A
E
M
A
R
CO
L
D
ST
O
R
A
G
E
S]
r
I
E
IM
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
V ls
s
x
q4
-
_
_
w'
.o
þ
r
:
9
r
!
ß
:
.
-
s_
P
€
_
Lr
.
Nô
-
!3
J
6
a
-
DA
E
on
o
m
or
ÉB
DE
s
I
G
N
É
R
:
--
-
-
i
L
<>z
[3 Éð
=
CL
[
.
A
Ê
AN
C
CR
U
B
-
ia
r
r
o
v
F
Yr
f
t
K
N
c
pÁ
Ì
q
'ÊlFL#
RE
M
O
V
A
L
ff
'X
I
S
f
N
C
V/
A
I
K
I
N
G
PA
T
H
CO
N
S
I
C
E
R
[
D
NC
I
D
:
\
I
A
!
Ìo
co
v
r
r
o
N
Ex
c
^
v
A
l
c
N
ÊX
I
S
I
I
N
G
CO
L
D
ST
O
R
A
G
E
SU
I
L
D
NG
GR
Á
D
1
N
G
Li
V
I
T
S
CI
'
A
R
ÀN
D
6R
U
B
ZXISiING WÂL(ING ÊAiH tsOÙÑDARY
GR
A
D
I
N
C
!]
M
L
Ë
BO
U
N
D
A
R
I
(]
R
Â
D
NG
LI
M
L
f
S
EX
5
ì
N
C
WA
I
"
K
I
N
G
PA
B
0a
(
RT
M
O
V
E
Ct
s
A
I
N
-
L
i
N
<
TE
N
C
E
?R
O
E
C
T
IR
E
E
S
a=
4
9
7
4
1
9
.
6
2
7
6
'1311 ÞAE]o5/a946FESTORATON PLAN A
BR
A
E
M
A
R
CO
L
D
ST
O
F
A
G
E
SÍ
T
E
IM
P
F
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
ræ
ó
Rl
D
cr
R
c
l
E
0i
{
rw
_
uc
.
NÕ
.
-_
_
l
t
!
!
!
_
.
-
@
05
1
0
9
/
1
6
RE
V
S
T
O
N
S
OE
S
I
G
Ñ
ÉÍ
DÑ
E
S
:
EB E
l-
E
-
o
,
[
N
0
SE
D
I
M
í
N
I
CO
N
I
R
O
L
LO
C
-
TY
P
E
CO
U
P
O
S
I
MA
C
H
I
N
I
SL
I
C
E
D
SI
L
I
F€
N
C
¡
ER
O
S
I
O
N
CO
N
T
R
O
L
Ei
A
N
K
T
]
Wi
I
É
SE
E
;
Mr
x
Ì
u
R
E
S
25
-
1
4
1
O
,
21
-
r
1
1
(Ð
.
ÂN
D
rY
P
E
5
i:
R
f
n
.
r
z
t
R
(Ð
-€j><20a ÞæÆ *ôL 1b
NC
I
E
S
:
o ø @
ÂP
P
L
Y
SE
E
D
MI
X
T
!
î
Ë
25
.
i
4
1
O
IB
!
1
t
s
l
A
C
R
:
AP
P
L
Y
SE
E
D
MI
X
T
Ù
i
E
2]
]I
]
E
f,
O
O
I
B
/
A
C
R
I
AP
P
L
Y
IY
P
E
J
FÉ
Ê
Í
I
L
2
:
R
O
25
0
1
3
/
A
C
I
|
SE
D
I
M
E
N
T
CO
N
N
O
L
Læ
IW
E
CO
M
P
O
S
I
,
ST
A
K
E
D
LÊ
O
S
T
O
N
CO
N
I
R
O
L
8I
A
N
K
E
T
WB
sE
a
D
Mr
l
r
u
R
E
25
-
1
4
1
o)
,
21
-
r
1
1
€)
AN
D
IY
P
T
]
FE
R
I
I
L
I
Z
E
R
(
3
)
EXISTING coLo SÌæAGE BU LDING
1312ûr2769RESTOSA'TIOôI PLAN B
BR
A
E
M
A
N
CO
L
D
ST
O
R
A
G
E
S.
t
r
E
IM
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
EH
r.
,
.
ño
.
43
3
6
4
_
pô
r
.
0s
l
0
9
¡
6
DA
E
Éa E€
I
EC
E
N
D
{ûÞz
+
=
SE
D
I
ü
E
N
I
CO
N
I
R
O
L
:C
C
-
IY
P
I
CO
V
P
C
S
í
-
=
VA
C
H
I
N
E
SL
I
C
E
C
SL
i
II
N
C
L
2ô ¡0 træ==+i 'sh rþ
-
:R
O
S
O
N
CO
N
I
R
O
:
8L
Â
N
K
i
l
l{
l
!
l
Mr
r
r
u
R
t
s
25
-
r
¿
j
O
.
2i
-
i
r
r
ø
IY
P
É
J
iÊ
R
I
I
L
I
Z
I
R
O
SE
'
D
AN
D
NO
I
E
S
:
o ø o
AÞ
Þ
L
Y
S:
_
t
D
VX
f
U
R
i
25
l4
l
@
18
0
1
8
,
/
a
C
R
E
Ap
P
L
Y
SE
E
o
MI
I
U
R
i
21
.
1
:
I
Ð
3O
O
L
B
/
A
C
R
.
AP
P
L
Y
TY
P
E
3
F:
R
t
l
r
z
t
R
O
25
0
|
8
/
À
C
R
E
EX
SÌ
L
N
C
CO
L
Ð
ST
C
R
A
G
E
BU
l
L
D
ì
N
G
ER
O
S
I
O
N
CO
N
I
R
O
L
st
Ë
D
üX
Ì
U
R
E
25
-
1
¿
1
AN
D
IN
E
J
21
OA
K
SA
V
A
N
N
A
H
EO
U
N
D
A
R
Y
SE
D
I
M
T
N
i
CO
N
I
R
C
L
IY
P
E
Community Attitude and Interest Survev
Executive Summary of Citizen Survey Results
Overview of the Methodology
The City of Edina conducted a Parks and Recreation Facilities and Services Needs Assessment Survey
during September of 2006 to establish priorities for the future development of parks and recreation
facilities, programs and services within the community. The survey was designed to obtain statistically
valid results from households throughout the City of Edina. The survey was administered by mail'
Leisure Vision worked extensively with City of Edina officials in the development of the survey
questionnaire. This included holding a series of focus groups and stakeholder interviews with City of
Edina elected officials, staff, board members, and community members on AuguslZand 3, 2006. This
work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future
system.
In Septemb er 2006, surveys were mailed to a random sample of 3,000 households in the City of Edina.
Approximately three days after the surveys were mailed, each household that received a survey also
received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey.
The goal was to obtain a total of at least 500 completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded with a total
of 865 surveys being completed. The results of the random sample of 865 households have a 95o/o level
of confidence with a precision of at least +l-3A%.
The following pages summarize major survey findings
Executive Summary - I
Need Jbr Purks und Recreøtion Føcilities
From the list of 27 various parks and recreation facilities, respondents were asked to indicate which ones
they and members of their household have a need for. The following suÍl.marizes key findings:
Six of the 27 parks and recreation facilities had at least 407o of respondent households indicate
they have a need for them. These six facilities include: walking and biking trails (86%), natural
areas and wildlife habitats (66%), 18 and t hole golf courses (49%), playground equipment (45%),
indoor art center (40%) and indoor fitness and exercise facilities (40%).
Q7. Perc entaoe of Res pondent Households That Have
a Need for Variou s Parks and Recreation Facilities
by percentage of respondents (mult¡ple choices could be madel
Walk¡ng ancl biking trails
Natural areas ancl wilcllìfe habiiats
18 ancl I hole golf cour$es
Playground equiPment
Arl center
lncloor fitness ancl exercise facilities
lndoor runnirrgÁrvalking track
Or¡tdoor tennis couds
lndoor switnming Pools
Wartling lrouses
lndoor golf dome
lndoor playground
Ouldoor spray Pool Parks
Outdoor hockey rinks
Soccer fields
Off-leash dog Park
lndoor hockey ancl Tigure skal¡ng r¡nk
lndoor nature center
Senior center
Baseball fields
lndoor sports facilitY
lndoor baskelball ancl volleyball court
Football fields
Softball fields
Skatelroarcl park
Lacrosse fields
0ç/o
iir.rittr! 1.¡r'iliL : :irl,,li ìì j I lir.i¡rl!*
'
i:i:rìt1liJ !1 :í:ìir''i
200/o 4Ao/o 60%800/o l}Ao/o
7%
66% i
45o/o
2A%
11tt/
a1ç/
36%
91',/o
9%
40%
40o/o
n10t
1ú/t'
24i/o I
260/o ;
260/ù :26% :
2B% ì
32%:
ctol ì
Executive Summary - l0
Most Importønt Pørks und Recreation Facilities
From the list of 27 parks and recreation facilities, respondents were asked to select the four facilities that
are rnost impofiant to them and members of their household. The following summarizes key findings:
Based on the sum of their top 4 choices, the facilities that respondent households rated as the
most important include: walking and bikÍng trails (64%o), natural areas and wildlife habitat
(30o ),18 and t hole golf course (27oh), and playground equipment(24o/o). lt should also be
noted tliat walking and biking trails had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first
choice as the most important facility,
Q8. Parks and Recreation Facilities That Are
Most lmportant to Respondent Households
by perceniage of responclerts who selecled the itarì as one of their top four choices
Walking and biking traifs
Natural areas and wildlife habitats
1B and t hole golf courses
Playgrourrcl equipment
lndoor fitness anci exercise facil¡lies
lndoor playground
Off-leash clog park
Orndoor tennis courts
Or¡tdoor spray pool parks
Soccer fielcls
lndoor runningtuøålking track
Senior center
Arl center
lndotr hockey and figure skaling rink
Outdoor hockey rinks
lndoor swimming pools
lncioor golf dorne
Easeball fields
lncloor basketl¡all and volleytrall court
lncloor sports facility
Warm¡ng houses
Incloor nature center
Footþall fielCs
Softball fields
Lacrosse fields
$kateboarcl park
Olher
A% 1jo/o 2A% 30% Ato/o 5}o/o 60% 70o/o
f Most lmpoúant Cl2nd Most lmportatrt Cf 3rd Most lmportant f:4th Most lnrportant
','tr,r' I'rt t .. . ;,ii.l, l'lr' llrrt¡llu ifi.f .-]rrl'.-¡ :1,r,;.:
Executive Summary - 14
Findings Report for a Statistically
Val¡d Gomprehensive Gommunity
Needs Assessment Survey
fteCITYor
EDIÌ\TA
.. .P<x livirç, learníngl" r*i*irç fanr,{}ie* & d+ing br:sineax
3oo/o
7o/o
17o/o
12o/o
1 Io/ot
40o/o
39o/o
42o/o
42o/o
41o/o
28o/o
27o/o
27o/o
260/o
25o/o
21o/o
21o/o
2Qo/o
19o/o
Q8. Households that Have a Need for Parks and Recreation
Facilities
by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)
Walk¡ng and b¡k¡ng tratls
Nature trdls
Natural areas and w¡ldlife hab¡tals
Picnic arcas
Pârk shelter buildiilgs
lndoor filness and exercise facilitÞs
Playground equipmènt
Outdoor swimming pool/water fark
1 I and I hole golf courses
Ouldoor tennis ceurts
lndoor swimming pools for recr*lion
Soccer f¡elds
Community gardens
Outdoor hockefrinks
Off-leash dod park
lndoor playground
lndoor hockey and figure skat¡rtg r¡nk
Sen¡or center
Mountain bik¡ng trails
Outdoor splash pads
Baseball and softball fields
Outdoor basketball courts
lndoor basketball and volleyball courts
Football and lacrosse f¡elds
Archery range
Ultimatê Fr¡sbee felds
Pickle ball courts
Skateboard park
0o/o 20o/o
Srurie ì.risuft\'i.:ioÈjli,l'( hsl¡t¡tib.t:iLCiiyollì"liùailNcbor;lí]1,11
400/o 60% B0% 100%
Charts and Graphs 7
Q9. Parks and Recreation Facilities that
Are Most lmportant to Households
by percentage of respondents who selecled the item as one of their top four cho¡ces
Walking and bik¡ng lrails
Nature tra¡ls
Natural areas and wildlife habitds
1 I and I hole golf courscs
Playground equ¡pment
_ Offleash d_og.AFrk
lndoor l¡tness and exercise facilit¡es
Soccer figlds
Outdoor swimming pool/waterÈark
lndoor sw¡mming pools for recreation
Sen¡or cenler
Outdoor tenn¡s c{ourts
Outdoor hockeu rinks
lndoor hockey and f¡gure skating r¡nk
P¡cnio areas
Community gärdens
Basebal¡ and softbåll fields
lndoor playground
Outdoor splash pads
Park shelter bu¡ldings
Mounta¡ntiking tra¡ls
Football and lacrosse f¡elds
lndoor basketball and volleyball courts
Pickle bâll courts
Outdoor basketball courts
Ultimate Frisbee lìelds
Archery range
Skateboard park
None chosen
0o/o 20o/o 40o/o 60%80%
lMost lmportant E2nd Most lmportant E3rd Mosl lmportant E4th Most lmoortânt
Silr¡,e Lc,sur.:Tl:lorl,it::l'C'hsiitutibrtiraL'iiyofl.itliôaiOùobÒr;:ílì4Ì
Charts and Graphs I
From:Michael R. Cashman
To:Michael R. Cashman; Edina Mail
Subject:RE: Braemar Park Trails and Natural Habitat Regeneration; Winter Recreation Proposal
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 1:41:47 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Hi,
Please send this short supplement to the distribution list below.
I have quickly scanned the SEH Feasibility Study for the xc and tubing proposal. Appendix H, Opinion of Probable Cost Spreadsheet, Items 4 (Clearing and Grubbing), 10 (Permanent
Seeding) and 12 (Temporary Seeding), states that the eradication of invasive species and re-seeding would be no more than $7,700 an acre. This, apparently, is based on hand
removal, the most expensive method of eradication.
Although eradication could be accomplished much more cheaply through forestry mowing and controlled burns, the SHE study verifies that the cost of the invasive species
eradication recommended by Bar Engineering is modest – and certainly modest in comparison to the amounts being considered for the xc and tubing proposal.
Thank you.
Kindly distribute this email to the following group.
DISTRIBUTION
City Council
Park Board Director
Park Board
City Manager
City Environmental Engineer
FROM
Michael R. Cashman
5820 Vernon Lane
Edina, MN 55436
michaelrcashman@gmail.com
612-619-2783
I am writing to supplement prior correspondence on these topics based on new or additional information that has been provided. In short, the additional
information I have been provided strongly supports the eradication of invasive species, the development of a circuit trail around, and regeneration of several
varied natural habitats throughout all of Braemar Park, boundary to boundary, and not just in that section being abandoned by the golf course. Most of these
proposals were previously recommended by Barr Engineering. Some were required as a condition to obtaining permission to build the Clunie Nine in 1992, and
are long overdue. All are clearly in line with the highest park facility priorities identified by Edina residents. These actions should be a priority, and not
deferred any longer. The Oak Savannah restoration mandated by the Army Corps of Engineers has already been deferred for 25 years. The park facility
priorities identified by Edina citizens, environmental concerns and need for the regeneration and creation of natural habitats in Edina generally and Braemar
Park specifically also lead to the conclusion that the proposal to spend $3 million for man-made snow xc ski and tubing facility should not be pursued. The
allocation of a much more modest sum could accomplish clear community desires for environmentally important walking, biking, and nature trails and habitat
park facilities. Exhibits are attached, but screenshots of the most pertinent information from most of them are included in this email for your convenience.
Thank you for your consideration.
INTRODUCTION
In 2006 a Community Needs Assessment Survey was conducted “to establish priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs
and services within the community.” The top two facility NEEDS were (1) walking and biking trails, and (2) natural areas and wildlife habitats. The two
MOST IMPORTANT facilities were (1) walking and biking trails, and (2) natural areas and wildlife habitats. XC ski trails did not make either list. Neither did
snow tubing. XC ski trails and snow tubing were not among the 26 facilities identified as either most needed or most important.
In 2014 another Community Needs Assessment Survey was conducted. The top three facility NEEDS were (1) walking and biking trails, (2) nature trails, and
(3) natural areas and wildlife habitats. The three MOST IMPORTANT FACILITIES were (1) walking and biking trails, (2) nature trails, and (3) natural areas
and wildlife habitats. Once again, residents did not identify XC ski trails or snow tubing as needed or important facilities. Again, XC ski trails and snow tubing
were not amongst the top 35 facilities identified as most needed or most important.
The City Council, Staff and Park Board should pay attention to citizen priorities. See discussion below and Exs. 5 and 6.
XC ski trails and snow tubing are not priorities. They are not even in the top 35 priorities. The proposal to spend $3,000,000 or more to provide man-made
snow for XC ski trails and snow tubing on the Braemar East Ridge is in conflict with stated community priorities.
For example, the community has clearly stated its priority for walking and biking trails, which are available year ‘round. The XC and snow tubing proposal for
the Braemar East Ridge would displace the walking trail that is there already. Citizens cannot walk or bike on a XC trail in the winter. It is a mistake to assume
that people do not walk on paths in Braemar during the winter months.
A 50’ wide trail is not suitable for walking, biking or enjoying nature in the spring, summer or fall, either. A 50’ wide path is not a trail. It is a highway from
which nature and natural habitats have been eliminated. It would not allow for the sort of varied natural experiences, one of the recommendations that Barr
Engineering made in its 2015 NIRS for Braemar Park. See discussion below and Ex. 1. A 50’ wide path is nothing like a walking or nature trail.
The recently issued SEH Feasibility Study for the Winter Recreation Proposal suggests that Environmental Impacts on trees and wildlife would be insignificant
(Section 2.2.3; Section 2.2.4, Section 4.1 and Section 4.1.1). This assertion, however, is based on the proliferation and infestation of invasive species that have
degraded the natural habitat. SEH implicitly suggests that the degraded environmental conditions caused by decades of City neglect justifies the project. This
conclusion is fundamentally at odds with Community demands for more and better natural habitats, and conflicts directly with 2015 NIRS recommendations by
Barr Engineering to eradicate all invasive species and regeneration of the natural Oak Savannah habitat throughout Braemar Park, including the entire East
Ridge for the enjoyment of ALL citizens. Regeneration of such natural habitats is what the citizens of Edina have identified as a critical priority. Bredesen Park
is popular because of its natural habitat claim. The fact that the City has not managed the property in Braemar Park and has allowed invasive species to
proliferate on the East Ridge and elsewhere through lack of management and maintenance is not a valid justification for ignoring the wishes of Edina citizens.
Likewise, it is not a justification for ignoring the 2015 Barr NIRS recommendations and destroying the natural habitat that remains.
It is clear that the environmental impacts directly conflict with the repeated desire of Edina residents for more natural habitats. The xc trail and snow tubing
proposal calls for a 50’ wide out and back path along the East Ridge. In spite of any claims that might be made to the contrary, a 50’ wide path would inevitably
result in the destruction of acres of natural habitat, including hundreds and of mature Oak and other trees on the East Ridge. The 50’ width of an out and back
trail would be excessive and environmentally destructive. Gleason Road is only 30’ wide. A 50’ wide path would be 2/3rds again as wide as Gleason Road,
and equivalent to a highway across the East Ridge.
The conflict between the xc and snow tubing proposal, on the one hand, and the restoration of a natural Oak Savannah habitat with intimate walking and biking
trails for residents to enjoy it, on the other, is further demonstrated by the 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Permit requiring the City to do just that on the
Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park. The City has not complied with those obligations for 25 years. See discussion below and Exs. 2 and 3. The City,
Staff and Park Board can comply with the 1992 ACOE Permit, and satisfy the stated priorities of the community, by implementing the 2015 Barr
recommendations to restore the natural Oak Savannah habitat throughout ALL of Braemar Park.
If the City Council, Staff and Park Board need an example of the destruction that will result from a 50’ wide highway across the East Ridge, they need only look
to the acre of parkland and Oak Savannah on the Southwest Ridge of Braemar Park that was destroyed just weeks ago as part of an unnecessary expansion of the
cold storage public works facility. See Ex. 4, and discussion below. Instead of destroying more natural habitat to construct xc ski trails and snow tubing hills
that have never been identified as a need or a priority, the City, Staff and Park Board should listen to their constituents and focus their attention on and allocate
resources to making walking, biking and nature trails and habitat regeneration a priority. This means restoring and regenerating the habitat in all of Braemar
Park, and reclaiming parkland wherever possible, not cutting a 50’ highway across the East Ridge.
More specifically, instead of spending $3 million on facilities that are not needed or important to citizens, the City should allocate the much more modest
resources needed to implement previous recommendations by City consultant Barr Engineering for the full regeneration of multiple varied habitats and trails
throughout Braemar Park. These recommendations are environmentally correct, and consistent with the top facility needs and priorities of the community. As
discussed further below, the City Council and Park Board should:
1. Eradicate all invasive species and regenerate the natural habitat throughout Braemar Park, as Barr Engineering has recommended;
2. Comply with the 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Permit, which required the City to eradicate invasive species and restore the Oak Savannah
to the Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park 25 years ago;
3. Implement Barr’s 2015 recommendation for a complete trail circuit around, and more trail circuits and varied natural habitats within Braemar
Park; and
4. Reclaim the .02 acres of Braemar Park property on the South Ridge and regenerate an Oak Savannah habitat there as compensation and
mitigation for the 1 plus acre of Oak Savannah and nature trails that have been taken and the 40-50 mature Oak trees that were cut down by
Public Works without notice as part of an unnecessarily aggressive expansion of the cold storage facility.
DISCUSSION
1: In 2016 and 2017, Implement Barr’s Recommendation to Eradicate Invasive Species and Regenerate Natural Habitat Throughout Braemar Park.
The City hired Barr Engineering to provide recommendations on Braemar Park wetlands, natural habitats and habitat regeneration. Barr provided its
recommendations in a February 2015 Natural Resources Information Summary (NIRS). Barr recommended that the natural habitat be restored and regenerated
in all of Braemar Park, not just the golf course:
Braemar Golf Course is the largest green space in the City of Edina. The habitat that surrounds and
intersperse the course, however, has been slowly degrading. Regular management is necessary to prevent
further degradation and to allow for native plant community regeneration. If the degradation is allowed to
continue valuable species and habitat will be lost. In particular, native oak trees will not regenerate in the
presence of highly competitive, invasive plant species such as common buckthorn. Habitat degradation
can be halted and reversed through a regeneration and management program that stewards the plant
communities long into the future.
Barr identified the order of priority for habitat regeneration in Braemar Park in Figure 6: (1st) The Executive Course and entry to the golf course (which has
been completed); (2nd) the West Ridge (bordering the Metro Safety Building and the City Cold Storage Facility), the Northwest Ridge (north and west of the
golf dome); (3rd) degraded habitat within the course (which will be completed as part of the golf course renovation); and (4) the North Boundary Wetlands
(north of Hillary Lane), and the South Boundary Wetlands (along the Nine Mile Creek South Fork).
Barr identified the Northwest, West and East Ridges as the “best ecological quality” habitat remaining in Braemar, and recommended that the Oak Woodland
habitat be regenerated before it is too late after decades of neglect.
This is a screenshot of Barr’s Figure 6 habitat regeneration recommendation:
Invasive species eradication requires commitment, but it is not expensive. Invasive species eradication and re-seeding can be done for less than $3,000-$5,000
an acre or less:
http://www.midwestprairies.com/resources/technical-resources/buckthorn
Methods and Estimated Costs for Buckthorn Removal
Hand Cutting: $1,500 - 3,000 per acre
Stump Herbicide: $150 - $250 per acre
Burning Piles: $500 – 2,000 per acre
Forestry Mowing: $350 – 500 per acre plus a mobilization charge
Herbicide Re-sprouts: $150 - 250 per acre
Seeding: $300 – 600 per acre
Prescribed Burning: $1,500 for a typical 20 acre site
2: Implementing Barr’s 2015 Habitat Regeneration Recommendations Would Satisfy the City’s Obligations Under the 1992 ACOE Permit Requiring
it to Restore the Oak Savannah on the Northwest and West Ridge, an Obligation the City Has Not Met.
When it built the Clunie Nine addition to the Braemar golf course, the City was required to apply for an Army Corps of Engineers Permit to provide
environmental mitigation and habitat conservation as a condition for filling in wetlands along the Nine Mile Creek South Fork. In its application, the City
promised and agreed to restore the Oak Savannah in most of the Northwest and West Ridges of Braemar Park, areas outside the golf course. The Northwest and
West Ridges were already badly infested with invasive species. The City hired Barr to create a Restoration and Management Plan for the Oak Savannah on the
Northwest and West Ridges, as mandated by the 1992 ACOE Permit.
The Restoration and Management Plan that Barr created as mandated by the 1992 ACOE Permit stated:
In June of I992, the City of Edina received a wetland fill permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, The permit
allowed the City to fill in a portion of the wetland complex in Braemar Park as part of
a golf course expansion project, To partially mitigate the loss of wetland habitat, the
Corps of Engineers required the City to restore two publically owned, undeveloped
hillsides to native oak savanna.
The City has not complied with any of the mandates in the 1992 Restoration and Management Plan. Therefore, the City has not complied with and is in
violation of the 1992 ACOE Permit. To rectify this violation, the City should implement Barr’s 2015 habitat regeneration recommendations, see above, which
would include the Northwest and West Ridges and comply with the 1992 ACOE Mitigation and Conservation Permit. Habitat regeneration was required 25
years ago by the 1992 ACOE Mitigation and Conservation Permit, and is the environmentally correct action to take. It is also in line with the priorities of
Edina citizens, who have stated in response to Community Needs Assessments in 2006 and 2014 that nature trails and habitats are a top priority, in tandem with
the need for more walking, biking and nature trails.
3: In 2016 and 2017, Implement Barr’s Recommendation to Create A Trail Circuit Around and Multiple Circuits and Varied Natural Habitats in
Braemar Park
In Section 4.2 of its 2015 NIRS, Barr recommended (a) “a full walking, [biking and nature] circuit AROUND [the entire] course” and park; (b) multiple “smaller
circuits within the park;” and (c) multiple “varied natural area experiences for trail users” in and around the park:
As user needs of the park evolve, the possibility of establishing a trail network around the golf course is
becoming a priority. Figure 7 was produced as a preliminary examination of trail possibilities showing
both existing and proposed trails. . . .
Goals considering in creating this preliminary plan include:
Creating a full walking circuit around course.
Creating smaller circuits within the park.
Creating trail connections to the neighborhoods to the north and east of the park.
Creating trail connections to athletic facilities on the west side of the park.
Creating trail connections to the club house.
Creating varied natural area experiences for trail users.
4: Return .02 Acres of Parkland on the South Ridge of Braemar for Oak Savannah Habitat Regeneration as Mitigation and Compensation for the
Acre of Oak Savannah that was Unnecessarily Taken and Cleared Without Public Notice or Input
In late July 2016, the Public Works Department cut down more than an acre of mature Oak trees in the Oak Savannah on the Southwest Ridge of Braemar Park
to create a .56 acre expansion of the cold storage facility. Sheet 6/13 below shows the area of the Oak Savannah that was taken and cleared. Although this
parkland was not “protected” by the 1992 ACOE Permit (see above), Barr identified this area as higher quality Oak Savannah habitat and recommended that it
be regenerated. This area also included nature trails that have been taken.
Public Works took this land because it was losing the use of property at 70th and Amundson Streets, where it has been dumping street sweepings and other debris
for approximately 10 years (since Public Works moved from Grandview). The taking of this park property and the destruction of Oak Savannah occurred
without public notice or comment. There was no study of how much property was needed for public works, or whether these activities could be handled at other
existing public works facilities or locations. No consideration was given to the original design of the cold storage facility, where all outdoor storage is on the
west side of the building and shielded from view by pedestrians on the nature trails in Braemar Park.
Public Works is also planning to take another .02 acres on the top of the South Ridge. The dumping and storage of debris and construction material on that .02
acre parcel is not necessary and should not be allowed. Instead, that .02 acre parcel, identified as Area A on Sheet 2/13 below, should be returned to parkland.
An Oak Savannah habitat should be re-established there and the surrounding area as mitigation and compensation for the destruction of Oak Savannah on the
Southwest Ridge. At least 40 Oak trees should be planted (less than the number cut down as part of the cold storage expansion) along with natural forbs and
grasses. Walking, biking and nature trails should be included in this area as one of the “varied natural habitats” that Barr recommended for Braemar Park.
ATTACHMENTS
Ex. 1 - 2015 Barr Engineering Natural Resources Information Summary for Braemar Park
Ex. 2 – 1992 Army Corps of Engineers Mitigation and Conservation Permit
Ex. 3 – 1992 Barr Engineering Oak Savannah Restoration and Management Plan (Mandated by 1992 ACOE Permit)
Ex. 4 – Drawings for Braemar Park Takings for Cold Storage Expansion
Ex. 5 – 2006 Needs Assessment Survey
Ex. 6 – 2014 Needs Assessment Survey
From:Common Sense Edina
To:James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; swensonann1@gmail.com; leny.wallen-
friedman@edinaschools.org; sarah.patzloff@edinaschools.org; Regina Neville; david.goldstein@edinaschools.org;
amir.gharbi@edinaschools.org; Randy Meyer; lisa.obrien@edinaschools.org
Cc:Scott H. Neal; Ann Kattreh; margo.bauck@edinaschools.org
Subject:Common Sense for Edina - The science and politics of Synthetic turf fields
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 2:57:22 PM
Synthetic turf fields are complicated, have short lives and the science around synthetic turf is
in constant flux. What is the infill weight of the synthetic fields in Edina (see article below)?
David Frenkel
Study: Artificial turf composition key to
preventing High School Football injuries
A study presented at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine’s
(AOSSM) Annual Meeting in Colorado Springs, Colo., shows how the infill weight of
artificial turf surfaces can directly affect the number of injuries to high school football
players.
http://athleticturf.net/study-artificial-turf-composition-key-to-preventing-high-school-football-
injuries/
Blog: How UW-Madison Managed Rec Field
Project Responsibly
Communication, communication, communication
At UW-Madison and like many universities, the approval process to do a project like the Near
West Playfield Upgrade is extensive. We were required to present to many groups and receive
approvals, including: Campus Planning Committee (twice), Joint West Committee (four times),
Board of Regents (twice), UW System (multiple conversations), State Building Commission
(twice), and Friends of the Lakeshore Nature Preserve. In addition to that, we took it upon
ourselves to offer up, in some cases repeated presentations to our student government
committees, student organizations, sport club programs, university departments, community
groups, the Madison Sports Commission, and many others we could list. Our goal was to get out
in front of the communication. We wanted to address all questions and concerns, and make sure
the entire campus community was educated and prepared for the project. We feel strongly our
willingness to communicate our master plan has been a driving force behind its momentum.
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/uw-builders-blog/blog-how-uw-madison-managed-rec-field-
project-responsibly.html?eid=146643815&bid=1490697
From:Wufei Zhang
To:James Hovland
Subject:Please vote NO to the current Nordic Ski Park plan (in Braemar Golf Course) (for now)
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 6:14:54 PM
Dear Mayor Hovland,
Thank you for reading my letter!
I just heard that there is a proposal for a "Winter Park" in Braemar
Golf Course. After reviewing the details of the proposal from SEH, I
strongly oppose this plan because of the decimation of natural
forestry and wildlife at Braemar Golf Course to simply construct a
very advanced Nordic X-country ski trail for a very limited group of
people. There is a snow-tubing area for more general public, but the
majority is for a 3-mile long 50' wide advanced X-country ski trail on
the hill, and I believe majority of the expense is related to that. I do
not support this endeavor as it injures precious green space, will
create a public hazard due to snow-making machines, and is stated
to be an expensive yet losing proposition financially. I WOULD
LIKE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROJECT. I ask that
please consider more environmentally friendly (and less costly)
ways to enhance Braemar for public use: mountain biking trails,
hiking, etc. Please redirect this funding to other, higher-priority level
projects that improve (not diminish) public safety, or which impose
no such damaging impacts on the environment or residents. People
are talking about "Braemar Native Restoration". Why should we
destroy the last natural reserve in Edina?
I have talked to quite some people, most of them not living in Braemar area, and
only one person is very for it, and he has a kid in Nordic club. Most of the rest are
strongly against, and a few ski-lovers thought the park would be nice, but they also
agree that there are better options for the use of the funds that could benefit much
larger group, given the Hyland park is just minutes away.
The snow-spill will definitely also create a very dangerous situation, especially for
our kids. The Gleason road will be extremely slippery, and imagine our kids
walking on that road to wait for the school bus in the winter. There are several
school buses driving on Gleason.
Thank you!
Wufei Zhang
From:Dave Hruby
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Support Braemar Development
Date:Monday, August 08, 2016 6:23:28 PM
Please do not allow a few people to spoil an amazing community enhancement prove t that would benefit citizens of
Edina greatly.
From:Duininck, Adam
To:sstores@ci.bayport.mn.us; elizabeth.kautz@burnsvillemn.gov; Denny Laufenburger; gary.peterson@ci.columbia-
heights.mn.us; James Hovland; tlarson@ci.farmington.mn.us; mayortom@ci.hugo.mn.us;
gtourville@invergroveheights.org; jud.marshall@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us; Nora Slawik;
betsy.hodges@minneapolismn.gov; stephanie.zawistowski@minneapolismn.gov; gosspottery@tds.net;
paynesvillemayor@yahoo.com; rmurphy@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us; rihli@rogersmn.gov;
mayor@ci.rosemount.mn.us; dan.roe@cityofroseville.com; jerry.faust@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us;
tonya.tennessen@ci.stpaul.mn.us; Anne.Hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us; citycouncilmembers@waconia.org;
tkozlowski@ci.stillwater.mn.us
Cc:lmartin@ci.bayport.mn.us; mhanson@ci.bayport.mn.us; ahogg@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us;
sue.bast@burnsvillemn.gov; Garrett.Beck@burnsvillemn.gov; gsticha@ci.chanhassen.mn.us;
eric.hanson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us; kevin.hansen@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us; Ross Bintner; Scott H. Neal;
sack.thongvanh@falconheights.org; rolson@ci.falcon-heights.mn.us; akienberger@ci.farmington.mn.us;
MKohlbeck@CI.FARMINGTON.MN.US; MLindau@ci.hugo.mn.us; bbear@ci.hugo.mn.us; rleitz@ci.hugo.mn.us;
ecarlson@invergroveheights.org; abontrager@invergroveheights.org; sodonnell@invergroveheights.org;
ksmith@invergroveheights.org; mcalvert@invergroveheights.org; sneilson@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us;
shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us; chris.swanson@ci.maplewood.mn.us; Brian.Millberg@minneapolismn.gov;
Gayle.prest@minneapolismn.gov; Rob.Verke@minneapolismn.gov; trudie@cityofnewlondon.us;
Renee@paynesvillemn.com; mglick@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us; tmarshall@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us;
mbauer@ci.rogers.mn.us; jseifert@ci.rogers.mn.us; scartney@ci.rogers.mn.us;
Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us; Kim Lindquist; ryan.johnson@cityofroseville.com; mark.casey@ci.saint-
anthony.mn.us; jay.hartman@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us; jim.giebel@ci.stpaul.mn.us;
michael.solomon@ci.stpaul.mn.us; anne.hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us; therese.skarda@ci.stpaul.mn.us;
lbraaten@waconia.org; gary.hempeck@hcmed.org; Ann.Eilbracht@hcmed.org; leah.hiniker@hennepin.us;
Smith, Sara; Gehring, Brad; Willett, Jason; Rimstad, Robert; Jones, Pat; mary.t"kach@co.ramsey.mn.us;
daniel.winek@co.ramsey.mn.us; dave.wagner@ci.stpaul.mn.us; jzemke@threeriversparkdistrict.org;
jbarten@threeriversparkdistrict.org; Jonathan Vlaming; jbrauchle@threeriversparkdistrict.org;
dberens@threeriversparkdistrict.org; hkoolick@threeriversparkdistrict.org; nicki.castro@co.washington.mn.us;
don.theisen@co.washington.mn.us; Erik.Jalowitz@co.washington.mn.us; greg.wood@co.washington.mn.us;
tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us; Brickman, Kate; Thompson, Leisa; Lamb, Brian; Trevor Drake (tdrake@gpisd.net);
thie0235@umn.edu; kphillips@gpisd.net
Subject:Please join us to celebrate our solar garden collaborative!
Date:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:46:38 PM
Please join us to celebrate our solar garden collaborative!
Earlier this year, we worked together on a project that will help us make major advancements on
solar energy for our region and provide cost-savings to our local governments and taxpayers. As the
Metro Community Solar Garden Subscriber Collaborative continues to advance, I’d like to take a
moment to thank all of you for your partnership and celebrate our progress.
I hope you will be able to join me for a brief celebration event – we can highlight some of the results,
celebrate the progress for our region, and enjoy some refreshments. We will also be inviting local
media to this event, so we can highlight to the local community the work we are doing.
What: Solar Garden Collaborative Celebration Event
When: Tuesday, August 23, 9 a.m.
Who: All local partners of the Solar Garden Collaborative, including Mayors, City Council
Members, County Commissioners and staff
Where: Falcon Heights City Hall, 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
Why: To celebration our partnership and share our progress with local media
RSVP: To Kathryn Phillips at kphillips@gpisd.net or 612-767-7297
If you have any questions, please contact Trevor Drake at tdrake@gpisd.net or 612-767-7291.
Looking forward to seeing you all!
Thanks,
Adam Duininck
Metropolitan Council Chair
-------------
August 2, 2016
Dear Council Members,
My family and I are residents of the Braemar area. For the second time in just a few years I, and many of
our neighbors, have been surprised to learn that the hills of Braemar Park, overlooking Gleason, are
being considered for major project development. The first project was to develop the park area into a
motorized motor bike trail, with all the disruptions of noise and harming wild life in the park. Fortunately
this project went nowhere. The second project is, of course the Nordic Skiing proposal. Both projects
seemed to appear from nowhere, but were obviously supported by Park and Rec since each project had
consultants and other experts presenting their proposals. As mentioned, as neighbors we were very
surprised these projects had gotten so far, and there was virtually no neighborhood input. How does this
happen? From our prospective, it appears that Park and Rec jumps from project to project without much
consideration to the neighborhood.
By now, you have received numerous letters, emails phone calls, etc. that clearly do not support this
latest proposed intrusion into the surrounding neighborhoods. The consultants that proposed the project
were overly biased in support of the project, and quickly dismissed the "minor" inconveniences of noise
(they did a Db test in the middle of summer, with all the leaves on the trees, and at high relative
temperatures and dew points), lighting, overspray, cost, road safety, etc. The financial numbers in
support of the project were acknowledged as "soft", which means they cannot be used to justify the
project.
The only redeeming feature of the proposal was that it would cost less now, due to the golf course
reconfiguration. In other words, it may not be a good project, or self funding, etc., but nevertheless, let's
do it now because it will be more costly in the future. That's not good enough. I think the Council will
experience a lot of criticism on that basis.
I suggest that supporting this project is the wrong thing to do on your collective parts. The project was not
and never was part of the long range plan, which violates the intent of the plan, it is very costly, the
disruption to the neighborhoods is major (including loss of property values), and the long term financial
exposure to the city for curing overspray problems and avoiding overspray related accidents is potentially
overwhelming (remember, the consultants are long gone).
Please vote no.
James A. McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Drive
From:Ramaiah
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Greetings
Date:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 4:21:19 PM
Attachments:image.png
Chung.pptx
James B. Hovland
Mayor
City of Edina
Dear Mr. Hovland
It is an honor to meeting you and Mrs. Hovland at the SV temple on the occasion of
“Maha Kumbhabhishekam” and “Pranapratistha” on Sunday. Also, it is
a pleasure to meet Mrs. Hovland. As I promised, for next year occasion I
will prepare your presentation in Telugu- one or two minutes.
We had a brief conversation about vegetarian, healthy food habits etc. By
any means, I am neither expert nor promoter of vegetarianism. I only
shared my personal experiences with you. Please take them at their face
values.
I briefly mentioned a topic which I do not think it got your attention as there was
a lot of noises and interruptions. Please see the attached. I invite you to this
conference. If this subject is of any interest to you I will be happy to provide more
information and voluntary work rendered in the state of Minnesota by Asian
Indians.
A different subject: I am interested in learning about economic contributions of
Indians living in the city of Edina. Regrettably, no city in Minnesota keeps such
demographic information. Currently, Indian immigrant population is about 45,000
in Minnesota. The value of Asian Indian Human Capital (lifetime earnings) is
about $90 -95 billion, and buying power exceeds $1 billion; real estate value close
to $2 billion. 75-80% Asian Indians occupy managerial, business, science or arts
occupation. I think such information may be helpfully for the incoming new
prospective immigrant populations.
Please convey my regards to Mrs. Hovland. Hopefully, I expect we will meet in the
near future.
Best regards
Ramaiah
President/CEO
Indian Organization for Rare Diseases
Ramaiah Muthyala, Ph.D., Ph.D., M.B.A., FRSC
Associate Director, Center for Orphan Drug Development
Associate Professor, Department of Medicinal Chemistry
Adjunct Professor, Department of Medicine
Associate Professor, Department of Experimental Clinical Pharmacology
University of Minnesota
2001 6thSt SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
ph: 612-624-7120
fax:612-626-9985
email: muthy003@umn.edu
http://www.pharmacy.umn.edu/faculty/muthyala_ramaiah/home.html
Indo-US Rare Diseases Conference
Draft Plan
July 29, 2016
Organized by
Indian Consulate General, Chicago
Indian Organization for Rare Diseases
Date: November 18, 2016
Venue: University of Minnesota Campus
For further information: muthy003@umn.edu
Objective
IORD’s mission is to utilize a multi-faceted approach to promote awareness, greater research,
development, production and low-cost distribution of drugs which can be used to combat rare
diseases; and in those cases where finding a curative medication is a distant goal, at least developing
palliative care to help relieve pain and suffering. While each of the rare diseases afflicts a very small
portion of the population, with over 7,000 infirmities meeting the criteria of “rare disease” and a
population in excess of 7 billion, we are working for many millions of people. It is global health issue.
Almost all immigrants from India are highly educated and very productive community members;
unfortunately, a majority of them are not aware of rare diseases and problems associated with them.
In US there are more than 3.5 million people and in Minnesota more than 45000 people from Indian
Origin. The organizers call upon the Indian community in Minnesota and mid-western states to come
forward to contribute in combating the rare diseases problem in the world and specifically in India.
Although the conference is organized by patient support group from Indian origin, and Indian
consultee, rare diseases are not specific to any particular country; they are global issues. Therefore,
this conference invites people of all nationalities and open to all public.
The expected outcome of this meeting:
Raising the awareness of rare diseases; Emphasize the important role of India in the global public
health policy, initiate basic research, and orphan drug development collaborations
From:Wendy McNulty
To:Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com; Ann Kattreh
Subject:Vote NO on Braemar Nordic Ski proposal
Date:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 5:01:10 PM
Dear City Council Members-
I attended the Park Board Meeting last night at Braemar to hear the presentation
given by SEH regarding the Braemar Nordic Ski Project.
It became clear from the board member comments and questions (the audience was
not allowed to question or comment) that this project is not a good idea.
Almost every board member questioned the unprecedented fast track of this project.
It was pointed out the Braemar golf project has been in the works for at least 2 years,
this would have given plenty of time for additional project proposals and studies.
The cost is way too high. Some of the questions to SEH revealed that all costs are
NOT included and could be significantly higher that the $3 million soft estimate.
There was also an unanswered question regarding insurance increases to the city. It
seems highly unlikely that this project would not increase city insurance costs (and in
turn Edina resident taxes). The insurance would surely increase if only in
anticipation of lawsuits arising from slippery road and driveway accidents due to
overspray of snowmaking. It is rather alarming this was not considered.
The sound was another issue. SEH stated 50 dbs was the nighttime limit in Edina.
The snow making machines came in right at 50 dbs. He did not say when this study
was done - and no questions were asked regarding this. Because of the fast track of
this project, I assume the testing was done sometime after May 17th. This test would
be faulty, obviously, because the leaves on the trees would soften the sound. The
ice and the snow in winter would carry sound further. The 50 dbs estimate would not
be accurate, and in reality would be significantly higher.
There were many other concerns, but the general consensus of the board members
seemed to echo the concerns of the neighborhood:
Moving WAY to fast
Too expensive
Too expansive
Not enough testing done
Hazardous conditions for surrounding neighborhood
Decimation of trees and wildlife
Almost everyone on the board agreed that a much smaller scale natural project would
be more appropriate for the area without snow making machines, lights, noise, etc.
I hope you will all vote NO on this project.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Wendy McNulty
6001 Bonnie Brae Dr.
From:Randy Harris
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Keep Edina"s Braemar Green & Safe
Date:Wednesday, August 10, 2016 7:56:50 AM
I am writing to request that you not approve the proposed Braemar Snow Tubing and Nordic Ski Trail
development project.
My family and neighbors oppose this project for the following four reasons:
1. Edina residents should not be stuck funding such an expensive project with a dubious ROI.
2. The noise and light pollution resulting from snow making/grooming and operating the facility, as
well as the excess traffic that will result, will severely alter the surrounding neighborhood.
3. Hyland Lake Park Reserve, a mere 5 miles away, offers 9.5 miles of fantastic Nordic ski trails. The
surrounding community does not need more supply.
4. This project has clearly not been vetted with the residents of Edina, especially those who will be
most impacted, those of us living in Braemar Hills.
Please reject this proposed project.
Regard,
Randy Harris
7017 Mark Terrace Drive
Edina, MN 55439
This electronic message including any attachments ("Message") may contain information that
is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under trade secret and other
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately,
permanently delete all copies of this Message, and be aware that examination, use,
dissemination, duplication or disclosure of this Message is strictly prohibited.
From:Maggie Harris
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Keep Braemar Green!
Date:Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:25:34 AM
Dear Edina City Council;
I am a writing as a lifelong Edina resident and as a concerned community member. I follow
most city improvements and feel that most are discussed and reviewed and many times
residents have the opportunity to vote. My husband and I have been very supportive of all
referendums to improve the schools and fix streets and finally add a critical bike path link. So
I do not usually find myself in the position of protesting a project in Edina. However the
project to add skiiing trails and a tubing hill snuck up on a lot of us and I am scratching my
head to understand who wants this? Who is driving this project? And why hasn't it been
discussed or residents allowed to vote? There are a few key reasons this makes no sense to me.
1. The green spaces in our city are critical to keeping it looking established and wooded more
like Deephaven or North Oaks than a new suburb. One reason why many young families pay
a lot for older houses and spend a lot fixing them up to live in a beautiful established
community. Clearing away woods and the animals that live within hurts the richness of our
city.
2. I can not imagine this is going to be a profit generator and therefore will add costs that most
city members do not want.
3. Hyland Park reserve is UNDER 5 miles from this proposed spot. Have you studied to
understand how many people actually use that facility and would switch to using the one in
Edina? It seems the need is already being met in a facility close by.
I am asking that you table this project and the expense until you know it is a worthy initiative.
Push the pause button. I would be surprised if there was an overwhelming call by the
citizens of Edina for this project. This is an example of our City Council not doing their due
diligence on a project that creates additional on-going city expenses which will need to be
covered by more taxes for the greater good of a few.
Sincerely,
Maggie Harris
From:Mitchell Granberg
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Please Support the Braemar Winter Recreation Area
Date:Wednesday, August 10, 2016 6:08:00 PM
Dear Edina City Council:
I recently received a letter from the City detailing a nordic ski trail and other improvements to
Braemar. I was excited, as I live very close by and know that many golf courses benefit from
winter sports. I for one would very much appreciate a nearby facility for winter sports. Please
support this -- I believe it will improve Edina and make it a better place to live. Finally, I am
surprised at those who are against it, but I hope you continue to push to make our community
better.
Thank you,
Mitchell W. Granberg
6721 Galway Drive
Edina, MN
Roberta Link & Guido Emmer
5820 France Avenue South
Edina, MN 55410
August 8,2016
Dear Mayor Hovland,
This year we enhanced our property at 5820 France Avenue by replacing the asphalt
driveway with concrete. When addressing the point where the driveway meets the sidewalk
we connected with Edina's Public Works and talked to John Scheerer.
We feel strongly that John made a big difference in the success of our efforts. He returned
calls promptly, answered many questions, met on-site with our contractor to ensure the
driveway was the right height for the future apron/sidewalk.
We would like you to know that John and his crew set a gold standard for the joy of living
in Edina. They were impressively, fast and professional.
Thank you for your leadership and please convey our appreciation to the Public Works
Department.
Roberta Link
5525 Kellogg Ave.
Edina, MN 55424
952 92278171
7 Aug 2016
Mark Nolan
Transportation Planner
City of Edina
7450 Metro Blvd.
Edina, MN 55439
RE: "Provide Input On Grandview District Draft Trans-
portation Study", Edina Sun Current, 14 Jul 20169
p.6
Dear Mark Nolan,
Omitted from the study is the traffic hazard at the
Edina Library and Senior Center. See attached comments.
With the exception of the noted omission I think the
study will be worthwhile in improving the districts
transportation future. I appreciate the opportunity
to review and comment on the study.
Sincerely,
J hn R. Plotnicky
encls
1. Comments
2. Community Notes, Edina
Sun Current
30 Grandview District
(Draft) Transportation
Study, Section 7, p 41
cc: James B. Hovland, Mayor
City of Edina
Cheryl Bren, Patron Experience
Supervisor, Edina Library
Mal o:
friiermi fro ,bif -
IT/i1V milv h
6 Edina Sun Current Cum
COMMUN .- Y NO
Provide input
on Grandview
District draft .
transportation
study
The city is inviting com-
munity members to provide
input on the draft Grand-
view District Transporta-
tion Study. The draft study
will be available for public
comment until July 19.
The Grandview District
Development Framework,
approved by the Edina City
Council in 2011, includ-
ed a recommendation to
conduct a more thorough
transportation Inaksis to
assess existingsonditigns
of the transportation sys-
-tetif;WeeTrefirie and
-exrand upon the recom-
mendations made within
-the Framework; and to
make clear recommenda-
tions for next steps.
The city hired architec-
tine and- engineering rm
_14-1% transportation firm
Nelson/Nygaard Consult-
ing and Alta -Planning +
Design to lead the study
and to identify needs, chal-
lenges and Opportunities
and to review and evaluate
recommended changes to
the transportation network
of Grandview to meet the
community's long-term
needs.
As. the city nears comple-
tion of the project, the con-
sultant team tasrspatLed
a draft report, which can
b-efailinTaredi-naTith7g
grandview-transportation-
study. To comment on
the draft report, contact
Transportation Planner
Mark Nolan_ at mnolan.
edinaninzpv or 952-826-
0322.
"We are inviting all Edi-
na community members to
view the draft report and
provide us with input and
comments," said Ng* ,
"We are asking the publib
to let us know if we nave,
missed any key transjior7;
tation issues or overall
themes in the district and
how those issues might be
remedied."
City to host grand
opening event for
pickiebaii courts -.
•
The public is invited to
celebrate the grand 'Open
ing of the pickleball courts;
at Rosland Park.
A grand opening arid
bon cutting ceremony iS
p.m. Wednesday, July -20, at
the park, 4300 W. 66th St.
"These are the first dedi-
cated pickleball courts in
Edina, and I'm very ex-
cited," said Parks & Rec-
reation Director Ann Kat-
trek
The Parks & Recreation
Department previously
striped pickleball courts
on the Garden Park tennis
courts.
"Pickleball is a sport that
people of all ages and abili-
ties can play and that's one
of the things that makes
it great," Kattreh said.
"It's definitely an up-and-
coming sport, and I think
it'll be a fantastic addition
to an already prominent
park!!
Pickleball is a racquet
sport that combines ele-
ments of badminton; ten-
nis and table -tennis.The
sport shares the dithensions
and layout of a badminton,
Court and a net and rules
similar to tennis, with a few
Modifications. Construe-
' tion on the five-cOurt cOm-
plex, which is locateci next
to the tennis cotirts: at go
sland Park; began in May:
, The •coin s were made
possible` because of a gen-
erous donation from cous-
ins:Bryce and Paul Mooty
who made the 'donation:to
honor their fathers, John- ,.
respectively
The.grand opening event
will include remarks froth
1Vfay6t Juni Hovland, City
Manager ScOtt Neal and
Kattreh, as. well as a rib-
bdn-cutting ceremony. Fol.=
lowing the ceremony, the
courts will be opened up
for free play. Racquets and
balls will be provided.
The city will offer a
pickleball clinic 10-11 a .m.
Tuesday, July 26. Space is
limited, so those interested
are encouraged to make a
reservation soon. Reserva-
tions can be made. at the
Senior Center, 5280 Grand-.
view Square, or by calling
952-831,9570.
Info: 952-826-0433 or
aclarke@edinamn. gov.
Hi
add:
"I
Mot.
men
"Evl
degr
are
fere'
Willi
hart
TI
tricl
you
the
ing
GRANpVIEW SQ
Richmond Hills
Neighborhood .
7 — Richmond HWs Neighborhood
In this focus area, the realignment of Eden Avenue and the ad-
dition of a controlled intersection at 53rd Street provide an
opportunity to space intersections more logically along Vernon
Avenue. it also creates an opportunity for a more appealing and
safe bus stop location on Vernon with a strong pedestrian and
visual connection to the Library/Senior Center building.
A new controlled intersection at 53rd Street would allow safer
and easier access to the Richmond Hills neighborhood to the
south via Sherwood Road, by car, by bike, and on foot. This
intersection also allows residents from the west of Vernon Av-
enue to access the library more easily and safely by any mode.
Neighbors can also drive through the Grandview Square ar:EsP
to access Eden Avenue.
VVith Eden Avenue shifted slightly to the north, the properties
on either side can function much better, with more logical par-
cel size, access, and parking configurations. it is important, how-
ever, that those parking areas do not simply become another
sea of asphalt parking along Vernon Avenue. For instance, the
new library parking area nearer to Vernon could' be.a. convert-
ible plaza area that can be opened for parkyig. only as needed
(Figure 3.39 and Figure 3.40). In addition, a strone7 new pedes- . b'
Fi5ur e 3.38 Plan of-53,d Street,Vernon Avenue and Eden Avenue, showing
access to the Sherwood Neighborhood; I " = 200'.
trian connection from Vernon to the library's front door gives
this civic building an "address" on Vernon, as noted in the earlier
work of the torklng procesS. Parking in this area
can be time-limited as well, to prioritize its use for library and
senior center visitors rather than commuters. This might be
considered as new municipal ramps or shared parking solutions
are implemented around the District
Figure 3.39 Example of a parking lot that can be utilized as flex-space
for daily activities and seasonal special events. Photo credit: Close
Landscape Architecture photo archive.
Figure 3.40 Example of a parking lot that can support multi-layered
infrastructure and public green space including storm water filtration,
district heating/cooling, and urban food production. Photo credit: Close
Landscape Architecture photo archive.
City of Edina Grandview istrict Transportation Study -41
From:James Hovland
To:Pahoua Hoffman; James Hovland
Cc:Sean Kershaw
Subject:RE: MTG REQUEST: Citizens League Study Committee on Met Council Transportation Governance
Date:Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:31:23 PM
Attachments:image006.png
image007.png
image001.png
Pahoua, nice to hear from you! Of course, I would be pleased to meet with you and Sean to try to
assist in any manner I can regarding the undertaking of a study of all aspects of the region’s
transportation infrastructure. What are you thinking about from a timing standpoint?
James B. Hovland, Esquire
HOVLAND & RASMUS, PLLC
Southdale Office Centre
6800 France Avenue S., Suite 190
Edina, MN 55435
jhovland@hovlandrasmus.com
Phone: (612) 874-8550
Direct: (612) 874-8551
Fax: (612) 874-9362
Cell: (612) 961-6192
From: Pahoua Hoffman [mailto:phoffman@citizensleague.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:36 PM
To: James Hovland <jhovland@hovlandrasmus.com>; jhovland@EdinaMN.gov
Cc: Sean Kershaw <skershaw@citizensleague.org>
Subject: MTG REQUEST: Citizens League Study Committee on Met Council Transportation
Governance
Importance: High
Hi Jim,
With excitement, I am writing to let you know that the Citizens League is planning for a new study
committee related to our previous Met Council effort, but this time there will be a specific focus on
transportation governance. As you know, the 19-member Citizens League task force completed
their work this spring and came up with several recommendations including this one directed back
at the Citizens League:
Recommendations for Further Study by the Citizens League
Experts who met with the Citizens League task force maintained that the region’s system of
transit governance, planning, funding and operation works well despite its seemingly
fragmented but definitely complex nature. Still, there are important questions related to
accountability and transparency, efficiency and effectiveness, and equity. Given the limited
time the task force had to review these issues, it recommends that the Citizens League
undertake a study of the region’s system of governance, planning, funding and operation of
all forms of transportation.
At this time, we’d like to meet with you to get your advice and feedback on the proposed scope of
work. Would the both of you be open to meeting with Sean Kershaw and me? Please let me know
and I will send some dates for your consideration.
Thank you,
Pahoua
Pahoua Yang Hoffman | Policy Director
400 Robert St. N Ste 1820
Saint Paul, MN 55101
Office: 651.289.1071 | Cell: 612.508.2775
phoffman@citizensleague.org
Become a member: Join hundreds of Minnesotans in supporting us with a tax-deductible contribution today.
Follow us on social media:
From:Charles Carroll
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Nordic ski trail/snow tubing
Date:Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:09:05 PM
Please vote NO to this. We are against this project.
Thank you,
Charles & Carrie Carroll
From:Kathy Dahlheimer
To:Edina Mail; Scott H. Neal
Subject:Recent Article about Development Project Edina Realty Building
Date:Friday, August 12, 2016 10:13:57 AM
Hello...I recently read the following article as found in Twin Cities Biz Journal:
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/news/2016/08/10/edina-promenade-on-france-southdale-
office-centre.html
I assume you have all seen this or above is enough info to read it...I am not savvy on linking.
It seems that according to this article this is all but a done deal...more condos...another hotel (???)
and more..I do realize this is a long range plan but the following comment I found interesting is :
“But Dovolis doesn’t expect Promenade on France to be as contentious because the
developers have already discussed it with city staff and elected officials and were working
with the city's recent Southdale area study
<file:///Users/sblack/Downloads/iDraft_Plan_for_City_Council_May_17.pdf> .
Edina Mayor Jim Hovland <http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/search/results?
q=Jim%20Hovland> 's private law practice, Hovland & Rasmus, has office space on the
first floor of the 6800 building. Hovland said he's discussed the project with Dovolis, but
declined to comment because he hasn't seen the latest version of the plan.”
Again I do realize there is some upfront work done on any project so that they have some sense
whether the city is open to such development but the timeline they suggest indicates they fully
expect to move quickly and get this approved by what appears to be a very pro high density
development council. Right now many residents are questioning the process of who the developers
first contact at the city is and how much discussion should be done privately without full council and
public knowledge. I believe many residents are starting to question some very “tight” relationships
with consultants, architects and developers and wondering about some contracts being awarded by
the city. Of course private developments are just that but I am referring more to city projects
especially Park Board projects.
I guess we will see the sketch plans etc. but based on what I read I have to wonder exactly who is
living in all this high rent housing and another hotel....that would put how many within a few
blocks?I imagine this one would be a more acceptable brand name? I know the mayor was offended
by Homewood Suites which for me actually seems to be exactly the right brand for that corner of
the Southdale parking lot..although it will clearly block any views of a shopping mall there.
Lately it seems that most info on Edina does not come from the Edina city website, the Sun Current
(never gets delivered for anyone buying ads) but rather press releases to Biz Journal or Strib. Just
yesterday another article in the Strib about our city and its future. It was in the Strib that I learned
that the Grandview project currently on the table “has been jettisoned by the council” key words
“has been”...now I follow meetings fairly regularly and I do not recall any public discussion on this
for quite some time. Is that concept including some public space dead?
I don’t really expect a reply to any of the above but just felt some comments were in order about
our very rapidly changing City and I live fairly close to much of the action. Thanks for taking the time
to consider my thoughts.
Kathleen Dahlheimer
Richard C. Johnson
5700 Tucker Lane
Edina, MN 55436
August 12, 2016
Members of the Edina City Council:
I respectfully submit that the Council does not approve the proposed
redevelopment of a part of the property at 5901 Lincoln Drive or change the zoning of
that property. Here is why:
• The only way for vehicles to enter or exit that property is on a 2-lane Lincoln
Drive.
• During the rush hours, that street and Vernon Avenue which is connected to it, is
congested, principally by the traffic emanating from the buildings in Opus West
across Highway 169 in Minnetonka.
• To exasperate that congestion, in 2017 Highway 169 is going to be closed for a
year or more. Thus, notwithstanding a sign indicating "Locals Only", I would not
be surprised if traffic would be diverted to the Dovre Drive entrance for travel
through Parkwood Road to Blake. Some people are now doing that, including me.
Sincerely,
Richard Johns
ghudson4034@gmail.com
952-929-0634
4512 Belvidere Lane
Edina, MN 55435-4034
July 28, 2016
Attn: Mr. Scott Neal, City Manager
Mayor James Hovland
Council Members Ms. Brindle, Ms. Swenson, Mr. Staunton, and Mr. Stewart
Mr, Siems, Fire Marshall
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55435
Dear City Officials:
Re: Recreational Fire Permit regulation abuse
This morning I spoke with Jeff Siems, Fire Marshall, regarding still another occurrence of fire
permit regulation violations by my neighbor to the north, Steve Boman, 4515 Andover, Edina, MM.
Mr, Siems helpfully suggested that as future incidents occur I should call 911 and report what is
occurring. He did share that Mr. Boman does have a 2016 permit and that his record shows that he
received a letter in 2014 regarding violations. Mr, Siems also told me that his responsibility is to
enforce the law and that currently the City Council of Edina permits recreational fires. For this reason,
I am sharing details of the latest incident with all of you City Officials as illustration of the problems
caused by recreational fires and the abuse of regulations. I request that such fires no longer be
permitted.
I do recall that in 2014 or 2015 three people who live on York Avenue spoke during community
comment at a City Council meeting regarding a continuous situation of fires and smoky air which,
given their health problems, made their lives very difficult. And occasionally letters appear in the Sun
Current protesting the rights of those who wish fires over the rights of those who would like to enjoy
unpolluted air.
I have lived in my home at the above address since I retired as a faculty member from Minnesota
State University, Mankato in 2003. The Boman family moved to the property to the north of my lot
about six years later. Their fire pit was constructed in 2014. Mr. Boman's fires have also bothered
several of my neighbors on Belvidere, residents to my immediate west at 4516 and 4520. The home at
4516 has a screened porch which faces north, as does my home. The home at 4520 has a large deck.
The occupant at that home has COPD. We are tired of being unable to have windows open in the
summer lest our homes fill with smoke.
In 2015 we again experienced violations, namely, (1) we are not asked before fires occur, (2) fires
orrur even when winds send the smoke to our homes, (3) fires on weeknights last later than 9:00 PM,
(4) fires are left unattended to finally burn out on their own, etc. I have been uncertain how to report
violations of these regulations.
Problems continue in 2016. Before trees and bushes leafed out, this spring, on several occasions I
observed Mr. Boman bring shelving or cabinets out of his house and burn them in the fire pit. This
wood was stained and varnished. At times, these pieces would remain piled in the pit and were burned
a few days later. After that there have been fires which continued to violate the requirements for
Recreational Fire Permits.
Today I wish to report a serious incident which occurred last evening. The evening was cool and
windy, and so I turned of my AC and opened my windows at 7:00 PM. By 8:00 PM I could smell
smoke in my home, and so I closed all the windows to the north. Due to greenery I couldn't see the
flames, but I saw a column of smoke drifting off. I did not continue to watch the fire as I was busy. I
was viewing television at 9:48 PM when suddenly the wall opposite my LR bay window lit up brightly.
I got up and looked outside. The following is not an exaggeration. Flames were 15 to 20 feet in the
sky and six to eight feet wide, Something must have been thrown on the fire to make it flare up so
suddenly. Such use is a violation. Even by 10:10 PM sparks were still rising high and being carried
off in the wind. This is dangerous. I went to bed at 12:30 AM. When I opened the windows to the
north in my bedroom, I still smelled smoke and noticed flames still burning at the firepit. Mr. Boman,
of course, had long since gone into his house. Not putting fires out is another violation. Smoke was
apparent throughout the night, I was outside at 5:30 AM, and smoke still hung in the air. I assume that
during the night the fire had finally burned out.
As mentioned above, Mr, Siems told me to call 911 in the future when such violations occur.
I have written those of you who are city officials so that you will have another testimony of the
unfairness of yard fires for residents who would like to have unpolluted air and have their windows
open. The requirements look good, as I'm sure they did when they were approved. But the reality is
that they are not being followed in many cases. And I am certain that, like me, many people just put
up with the smoke. I am sure that many people do not know what the regulations are and do not realize
when some of them are violated, e.g., that 9:00 PM is the time when the fires are to be over on
weeknights, or that the person wishing a fire is to ask permission of neighbors, or that fires should not
take place when it is windy. and that they must not be left unattended to burn out on their own. I am
certain that many, like me, do not know how violations should be reported.
The regulations also lack clarity regarding permit loss. How many complaints lead to permit loss?
How many violations lead to permit loss? One? More? How are valid complaints different from
violations? Does the department keep track of both? None of this has been made clear at the end of
the document.
I ask again why the rights of those who wish recreational fires take precedent over those who would
like—or need to—breathe unpolluted air? Who wants their drapery, carpeting, etc. absorbing smoke
that drifts in through windows? Who wants to use air conditioning when temperatures do not make it
appropriate just because windows cannot be opened due to smoke?
Please revisit the issue of recreational fires. I urge that they no longer be permitted. Is it going to
take a house fire from sparks flying in the wind from a recreational fire to bring about a change? I shall
appreciate a reply.
Sin erely yours,
August 16, 2016
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Correspondence
Information / Background:
Attached is correspondence received since the Council’s packet was distributed.
From:Tom Davidson
To:Chad Millner
Cc:Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; Ann Swenson; James Hovland
Subject:Arden Park Neighborhood Reconstruction - No Parking
Date:Friday, August 12, 2016 12:41:13 PM
Mr. Milner,
I received your Arden Park D Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction letter dated August 2,
2016 and have a major concern with your recommendation to allow two sided parking on
Bruce, Juanita, Indianola Avenues in addition to 51st street. Putting it simply, it would NOT be
the best idea to now allow parking on both sides of these streets, that the City narrowed.
I’ll keep it to bullet points in an effort to be brief:
1. Children safety – It will become extremely unsafe for kids playing in their yards who run
into the street. Cars going down the street, with their focus on squeezing through cars
parked on both sides of the street, will not see small children running between parked
cars. They will have no chance against a moving car.
2. Where are the kids or those of us walking our dogs, supposed to go when there are cars
parked on both sides of the street AND a car driving down those streets that do not
have a sidewalk, such as Juanita? Jumping between parked cars or onto a front lawn
would not be ideal.
3. I just watched my neighbor back out of his driveway yesterday on Juanita, in an attempt
to leave his house. There were work trucks and cars parked on both sides of the street,
next to his driveway. He literally had to back up onto Juanita, pull forward, back up
again, pull forward again, and finally cleared the cars parked on both sides of the street.
4. Over 90% of the residents did NOT want this roadway narrowing project to begin with,
and we are obligated with a $12,000 bill. Why would you make getting in and out of our
driveways MORE difficult?
5. Winter – for 6 months out of the year, the snow will make it even worse to get down
our streets.
6. What problem is this solution trying to solve? Feels like a solution looking for a problem.
7. See the attached picture ("Arden Ave") taken Wednesday morning of Arden Avenue. (I
realize this street is not being recommended for parking on both sides of the street.)
The red car in front of me AND the white pickup behind it, both had to pull over so I
could get by. This is WITHOUT cars parked on both sides of the street. Traffic will not
only be slowed to a crawl, at times, it will STOP, with the recommendation of two sided
street parking.
8. See the attached pictures of Juanita Ave, labeled, "Juanita #1" and "Juanita #2." These
are taken yesterday in my vehicle. I got as close to the cars parked to my right, without
getting so close my right mirror would hit. As you can see, there isn't a lot of room to my
left, where cars would be parked, to get by easily.
9. Please keep in mind how much construction goes on in these neighborhoods. With each
house being built, there are 8-10 work and delivery trucks near the property.
Respectfully,
Tom Davidson
5137 Juanita Ave
From:Kay Bach
To:Edina Mail
Subject:A note to Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council members
Date:Friday, August 12, 2016 5:21:55 PM
Hello -- first of all, I want to thank you all for the time and energy that is used to benefit your
constituents like me! I have lived in Edina for more years than I should admit to, and have
been very involved in many ways with the City, with pleasure. From the 1988 Centennial
celebration all the way to the present, where I’ve just retired after 3 terms with the Edina
Historical Society.. Years with the League of Women Voters of Edina and much more... I
mention those to let you know that I (and husband Ron) really love living here...
My reason to write you all now is in regard to the possible development of a new large (50 ft
wide!!) trail for a Nordic Ski Track in Braemar Park -- with the addition of making snow for it!
And the price tag of $3 million (plus additional annual maintenance) -- and using up 300
million gallons of water per year! What would that do to our water sources?? We
homeowners are urged in our utility bills, to save water, and limited to certain days and times
for lawn watering etc... which I agree with for the health of our community..
In addition, the cost of this project is huge -- and when the nearby Hyland Park has all of
these features, a mere 3 miles away!! It is not at all necessary or desirable for this project to
go forward.
I believe that Braemar should stay with what we have there -- and let the trees continue to
grow, the walking/hiking/biking trail continue in its nature setting, and not the noise and
machinery creating more disruption, noise and light pollution to our area... much less the
water that would be used annually.
We would all miss the old trees and the deer around the Park... (not so much the increased
number of turkeys though!)...and the feeling of being in the quiet of nature.. hearing and
seeing the ducks, geese and herons daily here on Indianhead Lake.
Thank you all for your attention,
Kay and Ron Bach
6625 Dakota Trail -- 55439
952-941-9589
rkbach@mindspring.com
From:JerDodBock@aol.com
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Proposed Amusement Park at Braemar
Date:Saturday, August 13, 2016 7:48:54 AM
I am totally opposed to the planned destruction of Braemar to install skiing and tubing concessions and
the snow-making and grooming equipment to support them. How did this plan get started? Who
authorized the spending and hiring of the consultant? Who made this "boondoggle" a priority? I went to
the public meeting a few weeks ago and we heard no one from the audience support the plan. But we
heard all of the unanswered questions.
I urge the mayor and council to kill this bad idea and only work on the agreed upon city priorities.
Jerome Bock
6727 Apache Road
Edina, 55439
From:Paul Grangaard
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Opposing Braemar tubing and Xcountry trails
Date:Saturday, August 13, 2016 3:41:59 PM
Dear Mayor and City Council --
I'm opposed to the further redevelopment of Braemar as planned. It'll significantly disturb the peaceful winter
nights in West Edina and create excessive traffic on slippery roads through neighborhoods like mine. It also doesn't
seem to be financially wise, especially after the referendum to upgrade school facilities. With the lighted and
snowmaking-capable Hennepin County ski trails just on the other side of 494, why double up on this activity? I
enjoy skiing around Braemar golf course in the winter already. The woods along the side of groomed trails make it
quite nice. Why do we need more than that experience?
Please don't turn Braemar into Hyland Hills 2 with bright lights, extra noise, squirting water machines, ice blown
onto roads, and increased traffic. We're a bedroom community wth plenty of amenities already. Quietude and dark
winter nights with stars out are among my favorites.
Thanks for reading.
Paul Grangaard (former School Board Member and mostly lifelong Edina resident)
6927 Mark Terrace Circle
Edina
Typed on my iPhone.
Paul Grangaard
President & CEO
pgrangaard@allenedmonds.com
t +1 262 235-6667
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Allen Edmonds Corporation
201 East Seven Hills Road
Port Washington, WI 53074 USA
AllenEdmonds.com
From:John Debby
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar Golf Course
Date:Saturday, August 13, 2016 6:11:34 PM
Please cancel the plan to eliminate 9 holes on the golf course. It makes no sense, will cost
millions plus the loss revenues while the balance of the course undergoes unneeded
improvements.
Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S7.
From:Sharon, Dave Maetzold
To:James Hovland; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com
Cc:metzlink
Subject:KEEP the current SMALLER "No Parking" Signs
Date:Sunday, August 14, 2016 6:18:11 PM
To: Edina City Council
From: Dave and Sharon Maetzold, 5114 Halifax Ave. So.
Subject: “No Parking” Signs
We feel that keeping the smaller
no
parking
signs is the best
choice! Adding a few additional smaller signs is the best decision. The proposed 18 x 18 inch signs
are much too large for our newly narrowed residential streets. They’d look out of proportion.
There have been few
vehicles parked on the wrong side of the street. The
drastic reduction in Edina Art Fair parking over the years created some weekend violations, and the area across from the Lanterns is confusing to many people.
As Edina residents for 37 years, we’ve seen huge changes on our street and surrounding neighborhoods. We’ve learned that 3 things are certain: death, taxes, and what local contractors refer to their Edina teardowns as … we’ll “Halifax it!” This on-going need for large construction-related vehicles to park
as closely to the house as possible is a necessity for a continuance of Edina’s housing transitions.
In addition, the expense
of installing the SUPER-SIZED signs would best be
used in another
area.
We believe other residents would agree that the 18 x 18 inch signs are just TOO large after their replaced. Like the old saying goes, “You can’t UNRING a
BELL!”
Please, vote to KEEP the SMALLER “No Parking” signs. As people become familiar with the new parking rules the problem should be solved.
We would sincerely appreciate your action on this matter. Thanks for you service to the community.
Sincerely,Dave and Sharon Maetzold
5114 Halifaxmetzlink@earthlink.net
From:Bob MacPhail
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Braemar winter proposal
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 10:45:15 AM
Hi, and thanks for your work for our city.
Please do NOT approve the plan to spend $3 million of our tax money on the Braemar winter
proposal. There is no reason to spend this huge amount of our hard earned tax money to do
this, especially when something very similar already exists a few miles away at Hyland Park.
Looking into trails or other uses for this area is fine, but please consider only proposals that
are minimal / low cost. Perhaps it makes sense to cut some trails through the woods for
minimal cost and let people ski or bike for free. But please dispense with high cost ideas of
installing and running the man made snow equipment and lighting, hiring people to charge
admission, etc.
This is a horrible use of tax money. The supposed ‘break even’ scenarios presented
conveniently ignore the $3 million capital cost!
It seems like simple ski and / or bike trails might be a good idea for this area. If so, fine, but
please do not spend significant tax money on this.
Thanks!
Bob MacPhail
From:LYNNEJORDAN07@comcast.net
To:Edina Mail
Subject:re-zoning and Opus plans for Lincoln Road development
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 1:03:23 PM
I am a resident of the Manor Homes of Edina. I attended the Planning Commission
meeting on July 27th and was able to hear in detail the Opus building proposal for
the Lincoln Road request. I was very relieved when it was not approved by the
Planning Commission that night. I really hope that the City Council will not approve
it, either.
* Appeared to me that the re-zoning is far from appropriate, and just the work-around
for occupancy far exceeding what the limits for that site should be.
* The proposed residential building does not fit into the neighborhood. Its' modern
design is more suited for an urban setting and will soon be viewed as out-of-date.
* The parking solution is unrealistic. Why would the tenants want to park in the office
building ramp and walk a great distance to their building? Only 1 parking spot
provided in the underground parking for each unit? Not realistic. Why will the office
building agree to this when it has been announced that they will soon be increasing
their work staff to the tune of 700 additional workers? This will result in more surface
parking being provided which will be parking directly adjacent to Manor Homes back
yards - a major infringement for Manor Homes.
* There were NO positive comments from ANY of the surrounding neighbors and
most residential areas were represented. This development is not wanted by anyone
who was present and spoke before the Planning Commission.
* Parking in the Retail area off of Lincoln cannot handle the current needs. It truly
cannot accommodate 250 additional residential patrons.
* Personally, placing this 4 story building in that small area will greatly change what I
have come to enjoy in my Manor Home. From my deck (which backs up to the
current Childrens' open parking lot), I can currently view open sky between the trees.
The 4 story building will restrict this view. Although I can now hear the traffic on Hwy
169, that will be significantly increased by the increased traffic flow on Lincoln and for
parking at the new building. Because 250 people will live there, it will not be
restricted to week days or work hours - it will be 24x7. I currently enjoy leaving my
windows open. This will need to change because of privacy reasons especially in
the evenings. Pets from the units will be walked on the small green space adjacent
to Manor Homes and we will have little to say about the upkeep of that area. There
was no lighting plan presented to the Planning Commission, but by increasing and
adding 24x7 lighting to that site for the community areas for the large proposed
building, my personal enjoyment of evenings and nights will be significantly
diminished.
Please do not approve the Opus development plan for that site.
Listen to the concerns of the Edina residents who will be impacted.
Sincerely,
Lynne Jordan
6926 Langford Dr
Edina, MN 55436
1) The way the public was "informed" of the proposal. Special interest
groups were notified more than 2 months before the general residents
(they found out in very early May). We waited until early July to hear
about what was already being scoped for OUR resource. The parks dept
cited that a Sun article and STrib article were published as well. That is
not a way of notifying the public and being inclusive in the process.
2) The timeline of this proposal is ABSURD. We spend years filibustering
over the most necessary things in Edina (sidewalks as an example), and
yet we're pushing for this to happen in 4 months. 4 MONTHS when people
are out of town enjoying their summer. If this is something we need -- or
even want -- we can take the time to slow down and get everyone's
opinion.
3) We don't have $3MM. The city council has stated that we maintain a
AAA credit rating, which only relates to borrowing. Have we thought about
whether we should borrow? Why increase taxes over something that is
largely unwanted/unneeded? We kick the can down the road every year
by deferring CIP like roads (+$10MM worth), bridges, sidewalks and other
infrastructure...all of these investments are what make a community
livable. A "Premier Nordic Facility" is not a need...it's a want.
4) We cite Buckthorn and other irrelevant issues as a reason why we need
to. Buckthorn is a problem. This does NOT solve it. Creating a strategy
around eradication and preservation moves us toward solving it.
5) This proposal benefits very few, and the cost per capita is ENORMOUS.
We have a special interest group of ~200 children who have a passion for
Nordic skiing. That's great. But this is a $3MM proposal tailor fitted for
them. Let's even say there are 500 people who would really use this
facility for which it's intended (I think that's generous). That's costing us
as a tax base $6K per individual. That's the cost of a good used car.
6) We have previous obligations to maintain the wetlands of Braemar,
which have been left unfulfilled. As a part of our 1992 agreement with the
US Army Corps of Engineers we were obligated to eradicate invasive
species in the park. This was a trade off for getting permission to build
the "Clunie Nine", which included modifying wetlands. We've also talked
about maintaining our natural resources, and not obliterating them for
capricious over-development sake.
7) Why do we NEED to do anything? Show me a resident survey that
From:Ann Platt
To:Kevin Staunton; James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle
Cc:Buc SC
Subject:Nordic Ski Proposal
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 3:52:03 PM
Attachments:sigimg0
Jim, Kevin & Bob:
The following are comments by one of the neighbors that truly outlines the issues that I
concur are problematic with this proposal. I'm not sure if $3MM is the best use of funds
with no ROI and end up costing Braemar for operating expenses:
corroborates the need to develop a ski and tubing facility? One does not
exist. In 2014 Edina residents were asked for what they feel is important.
XC ski and tubing did not appear on that list of things that matter to
residents. In fact, we drafted a strategic plan that calls for preserving our
resources. Let's follow that plan.
8) This plan undermines the safety of an already hazardous stretch of
roadway, and potentially damages the rights and property of local
homeowners. The developer has openly admitted to it creating extra snow
on local roadways and homes that the homeowner can just "brush off" at
their expense. That will trickle down to the taxpayer base once there are
accidents and issues that arise from the amusement park we're proposing
to build. 35W has large digital signs warning drivers of snow on the road
when snow is being made at Buck Hill. That ski area is further away from
the freeway than the snow-making would be from Gleason Road.
9) There was an issue removing trees from the golf course during
renovation...apparently the tree preservationists have not heard about
this!
10) it has also been noted that they track would be rented out to
organizations for competitive events which would bring more traffic to the
area and limit the amount of time it is available for " locals" to use the
trail that it is proposed to benefit. Not sure if that is a benefit to Edina
residents.
Feel free to read the petition for other reasons at BraemarGreen.ORG
There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, and I'm hoping the
council is not ignoring them.
Ann Platt
Office: 952/837-1877
Pet Care in Private Homes since 1982
Facebook
Twitter
Website
--
Ann has owned Pets Are Inn for 25+ years,
A Member of the Rotary Club of Edina and on the Executive Board;
Rotary Club of Edina President 2016-17
Member of the Southdale YMCA Board
Joshua Ahlberg, Indian Hills
Another few things I see as problematic (sorry in advance for the novel):
1) The way the public was "informed" of the proposal. Special interest groups were
notified more than 2 months before the general residents (they found out in very
early May). We waited until early July to hear about what was already being scoped
for OUR resource. The parks dept cited that a Sun article and STrib article were
published as well. That is not a way of notifying the public and being inclusive in the
process.
2) The timeline of this proposal is ABSURD. We spend years filibustering over the
most necessary things in Edina (sidewalks as an example), and yet we're pushing
for this to happen in 4 months. 4 MONTHS when people are out of town enjoying
their summer. If this is something we need -- or even want -- we can take the time to
slow down and get everyone's opinion.
3) We don't have $3MM. The city council has stated that we maintain a AAA credit
rating, which only relates to borrowing. Have we thought about whether we should
borrow? Why increase taxes over something that is largely unwanted/unneeded?
We kick the can down the road every year by deferring CIP like roads (+$10MM
worth), bridges, sidewalks and other infrastructure...all of these investments are
what make a community livable. A "Premier Nordic Facility" is not a need...it's a
want.
4) We cite Buckthorn and other irrelevant issues as a reason why we need to.
Buckthorn is a problem. This does NOT solve it. Creating a strategy around
eradication and preservation moves us toward solving it.
5) This proposal benefits very few, and the cost per capita is ENORMOUS. We have
a special interest group of ~200 children who have a passion for Nordic skiing.
That's great. But this is a $3MM proposal tailor fitted for them. Let's even say there
are 500 people who would really use this facility for which it's intended (I think that's
generous). That's costing us as a tax base $6K per individual. That's the cost of a
good used car.
6) We have previous obligations to maintain the wetlands of Braemar, which have
been left unfulfilled. As a part of our 1992 agreement with the US Army Corps of
Engineers we were obligated to eradicate invasive species in the park. This was a
trade off for getting permission to build the "Clunie Nine", which included modifying
wetlands. We've also talked about maintaining our natural resources, and not
obliterating them for capricious over-development sake.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Comments & Agenda for Tonight's Meeting with Parks to
Discuss Nordic Ski Proposal
From: "Nextdoor Dewey Hill" <reply@rs.email.nextdoor.com>
Date: Mon, August 15, 2016 3:03 pm
To: aplatt@petsareinn.com
View or reply Thank · Private message
7) Why do we NEED to do anything? Show me a resident survey that corroborates
the need to develop a ski and tubing facility? One does not exist. In 2014 Edina
residents were asked for what they feel is important. XC ski and tubing did not
appear on that list of things that matter to residents. In fact, we drafted a strategic
plan that calls for preserving our resources. Let's follow that plan.
8) This plan undermines the safety of an already hazardous stretch of roadway, and
potentially damages the rights and property of local homeowners. The developer
has openly admitted to it creating extra snow on local roadways and homes that the
homeowner can just "brush off" at their expense. That will trickle down to the
taxpayer base once there are accidents and issues that arise from the amusement
park we're proposing to build.
Feel free to read the petition for other reasons at BraemarGreen.ORG
There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, and I'm having a really hard time
understanding why the council is ignoring them.
I WILL NOT vote for anyone who supports this destructive proposal.
Original post by Joshua Ahlberg from Indian Hills (17 replies):
Hi Neighbors,
Attached you will find a link to tonight's agenda for the parks meeting where they
will discuss the Nordic Ski proposal. As a reminder, this is not a meeting where
public input will...
Aug 8 in General to 17 neighborhoods
Not interested in following this discussion?
You received this update because you thanked or replied to this post. Stop receiving immediate updates on
this post
You can also reply to this email or use Nextdoor for iPhone or Android
This message is intended for aplatt@petsareinn.com.
Unsubscribe or adjust your email settings
Nextdoor, 760 Market Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94102
1) The way the public was "informed" of the proposal. Special interest groups were notified
more than 2 months before the general residents (they found out in very early May). We
waited until early July to hear about what was already being scoped for OUR resource. The
parks dept cited that a Sun article and STrib article were published as well. That is not a way
of notifying the public and being inclusive in the process.
2) The timeline of this proposal is ABSURD. We spend years filibustering over the most
necessary things in Edina (sidewalks as an example), and yet we're pushing for this to happen
in 4 months. 4 MONTHS when people are out of town enjoying their summer. If this is
something we need -- or even want -- we can take the time to slow down and get everyone's
opinion.
3) We don't have $3MM. The city council has stated that we maintain a AAA credit rating,
which only relates to borrowing. Have we thought about whether we should borrow? Why
increase taxes over something that is largely unwanted/unneeded? We kick the can down the
road every year by deferring CIP like roads (+$10MM worth), bridges, sidewalks and other
infrastructure...all of these investments are what make a community livable. A "Premier
Nordic Facility" is not a need...it's a want.
4) We cite Buckthorn and other irrelevant issues as a reason why we need to. Buckthorn is a
problem. This does NOT solve it. Creating a strategy around eradication and preservation
From:Mary Brindle
To:"Ann Platt"; Kevin Staunton; James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle
Cc:"Buc SC"
Subject:RE: Nordic Ski Proposal
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 3:54:01 PM
Attachments:image001.png
Hello Ann,
Thank you for your email message, below.
I appreciate having this input from you.
Mary Brindle.
___________________________
Mary Brindle
mbrindle@comcast.net
952-941-7746, 612-270-9887 call or text
From: Ann Platt [mailto:aplatt@petsareinn.com]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 3:52 PM
To: Kevin Staunton <kstaunton@EdinaMN.gov>; jhovland@EdinaMN.gov; Rstewart@EdinaMN.gov;
mbrindle@EdinaMn.gov
Cc: Buc SC <jplatt@PetsAreInn.com>
Subject: Nordic Ski Proposal
Jim, Kevin & Bob:
The following are comments by one of the neighbors that truly outlines the issues that I
concur are problematic with this proposal. I'm not sure if $3MM is the best use of funds
with no ROI and end up costing Braemar for operating expenses:
moves us toward solving it.
5) This proposal benefits very few, and the cost per capita is ENORMOUS. We have a special
interest group of ~200 children who have a passion for Nordic skiing. That's great. But this is
a $3MM proposal tailor fitted for them. Let's even say there are 500 people who would really
use this facility for which it's intended (I think that's generous). That's costing us as a tax base
$6K per individual. That's the cost of a good used car.
6) We have previous obligations to maintain the wetlands of Braemar, which have been left
unfulfilled. As a part of our 1992 agreement with the US Army Corps of Engineers we were
obligated to eradicate invasive species in the park. This was a trade off for getting permission
to build the "Clunie Nine", which included modifying wetlands. We've also talked about
maintaining our natural resources, and not obliterating them for capricious over-development
sake.
7) Why do we NEED to do anything? Show me a resident survey that corroborates the need to
develop a ski and tubing facility? One does not exist. In 2014 Edina residents were asked for
what they feel is important. XC ski and tubing did not appear on that list of things that matter
to residents. In fact, we drafted a strategic plan that calls for preserving our resources. Let's
follow that plan.
8) This plan undermines the safety of an already hazardous stretch of roadway, and potentially
damages the rights and property of local homeowners. The developer has openly admitted to
it creating extra snow on local roadways and homes that the homeowner can just "brush off"
at their expense. That will trickle down to the taxpayer base once there are accidents and
issues that arise from the amusement park we're proposing to build. 35W has large digital
signs warning drivers of snow on the road when snow is being made at Buck Hill. That ski
area is further away from the freeway than the snow-making would be from Gleason Road.
9) There was an issue removing trees from the golf course during renovation...apparently the
tree preservationists have not heard about this!
10) it has also been noted that they track would be rented out to organizations for competitive
events which would bring more traffic to the area and limit the amount of time it is available
for " locals" to use the trail that it is proposed to benefit. Not sure if that is a benefit to Edina
residents.
Feel free to read the petition for other reasons at BraemarGreen.ORG
There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, and I'm hoping the council is not ignoring
them.
Ann Platt
Office: 952/837-1877
Pet Care in Private Homes since 1982
Facebook
Twitter
Website
--
Joshua Ahlberg, Indian Hills
Another few things I see as problematic (sorry in advance for the novel):
1) The way the public was "informed" of the proposal. Special interest groups were
notified more than 2 months before the general residents (they found out in very
early May). We waited until early July to hear about what was already being scoped
for OUR resource. The parks dept cited that a Sun article and STrib article were
published as well. That is not a way of notifying the public and being inclusive in the
process.
2) The timeline of this proposal is ABSURD. We spend years filibustering over the
most necessary things in Edina (sidewalks as an example), and yet we're pushing
for this to happen in 4 months. 4 MONTHS when people are out of town enjoying
their summer. If this is something we need -- or even want -- we can take the time to
slow down and get everyone's opinion.
3) We don't have $3MM. The city council has stated that we maintain a AAA credit
rating, which only relates to borrowing. Have we thought about whether we should
borrow? Why increase taxes over something that is largely unwanted/unneeded?
We kick the can down the road every year by deferring CIP like roads (+$10MM
worth), bridges, sidewalks and other infrastructure...all of these investments are
what make a community livable. A "Premier Nordic Facility" is not a need...it's a
want.
4) We cite Buckthorn and other irrelevant issues as a reason why we need to.
Buckthorn is a problem. This does NOT solve it. Creating a strategy around
eradication and preservation moves us toward solving it.
5) This proposal benefits very few, and the cost per capita is ENORMOUS. We have
a special interest group of ~200 children who have a passion for Nordic skiing.
That's great. But this is a $3MM proposal tailor fitted for them. Let's even say there
are 500 people who would really use this facility for which it's intended (I think that's
generous). That's costing us as a tax base $6K per individual. That's the cost of a
good used car.
6) We have previous obligations to maintain the wetlands of Braemar, which have
been left unfulfilled. As a part of our 1992 agreement with the US Army Corps of
Engineers we were obligated to eradicate invasive species in the park. This was a
Ann has owned Pets Are Inn for 25+ years,
A Member of the Rotary Club of Edina and on the Executive Board;
Rotary Club of Edina President 2016-17
Member of the Southdale YMCA Board
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Comments & Agenda for Tonight's Meeting with Parks to
Discuss Nordic Ski Proposal
From: "Nextdoor Dewey Hill" <reply@rs.email.nextdoor.com>
Date: Mon, August 15, 2016 3:03 pm
To: aplatt@petsareinn.com
View or reply Thank · Private message
trade off for getting permission to build the "Clunie Nine", which included modifying
wetlands. We've also talked about maintaining our natural resources, and not
obliterating them for capricious over-development sake.
7) Why do we NEED to do anything? Show me a resident survey that corroborates
the need to develop a ski and tubing facility? One does not exist. In 2014 Edina
residents were asked for what they feel is important. XC ski and tubing did not
appear on that list of things that matter to residents. In fact, we drafted a strategic
plan that calls for preserving our resources. Let's follow that plan.
8) This plan undermines the safety of an already hazardous stretch of roadway, and
potentially damages the rights and property of local homeowners. The developer
has openly admitted to it creating extra snow on local roadways and homes that the
homeowner can just "brush off" at their expense. That will trickle down to the
taxpayer base once there are accidents and issues that arise from the amusement
park we're proposing to build.
Feel free to read the petition for other reasons at BraemarGreen.ORG
There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, and I'm having a really hard time
understanding why the council is ignoring them.
I WILL NOT vote for anyone who supports this destructive proposal.
Original post by Joshua Ahlberg from Indian Hills (17 replies):
Hi Neighbors,
Attached you will find a link to tonight's agenda for the parks meeting where they
will discuss the Nordic Ski proposal. As a reminder, this is not a meeting where
public input will...
Aug 8 in General to 17 neighborhoods
Not interested in following this discussion?
You received this update because you thanked or replied to this post. Stop receiving immediate updates on
this post
You can also reply to this email or use Nextdoor for iPhone or Android
This message is intended for aplatt@petsareinn.com.
Unsubscribe or adjust your email settings
Nextdoor, 760 Market Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94102
From:Germana P
To:Edina Mail
Subject:City needs to enforce pedestrian crossings near Centennial Lake
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 4:34:18 PM
Please forward my email to members of the City Council.
I'm writing in reference to the tragic death of a pedestrian on France Ave this weekend.
(http://www.startribune.com/pedestrian-hit-and-killed-on-busy-edina-street/390197891/)
I cross the intersection on Minnesota Drive on my way to Centennial Lake from my office in
the France Place building daily and I had a few closed encounters myself.
The pedestrian crossing is well marked with white stripes and yellow signs.
However, this does not seem to stop, or even slow down cars traveling on Minnesota Drive.
Furthermore, visibility is often reduced because buses park on the street, waiting to start their
route.
There are quite a few pedestrians in the area, because of the office buildings and the bus stops.
I believe it will be helpful if the Edina Police can periodically survey the area and fine
violations. Most of the traffic is from people working in the Centennial Park and I'm sure
their behavior will improve after a reminder or two.
The City has done a wonderful job at increasing the walkability of our town. However, drivers
seem slow in adapting to the changes. More should be done to prevent pedestrian accidents.
I'll be happy to share my experience with City staff on an on-site visit to the intersection.
Respectfully,
Germana Paterlini
5117 Duggan Plaza
From:Anne J Hinrichs
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Please keep snowmaking on the table!
Date:Monday, August 15, 2016 9:02:00 PM
Hello City Council members –
Clearly the Braemar neighborhood has voiced their concerns about snowmaking at Braemar. I think
a lot of them are reacting to misinformation. Until there has been clarification and additional time
for the Nordic community to garnish additional support from Edina at large, I’d like to ask you to
please keep the possibility of snowmaking at Braemar alive. I’d like to have this decision addressed
in September rather than at the meeting this week.
A few key points to keep in mind:
The Edina Nordic Team can NOT ski regularly at Hyland. I know a lot of people think we could just go
to Hyland but we truly only get on average one team permit per week, and that is for about 60
skiers max. As a result, we make snow and practice at EHS.
Snowmaking does not need to happen every day! HARDLY! Some of the information being spread
by the Braemar neighborhood says that snow will be made daily. If Mother Nature is not
cooperating and giving us the real stuff, we make snow a few times each season.
Yes, we’ve been able to ski at EHS for the past several years. That’s because we have volunteers
making snow and because we have established a trail system ourselves. The EHS construction
changes that are currently underway AND the Nine Mile Creek plans impact our trail system
dramatically. We need Braemar to keep 197 students active after school. They benefit substantially
from exercise, fresh air and community. We are a no-cut sport and give our athletes a chance to
balance their academic, sedentary lifestyle by doing some Nordic skiing. Please help us continue to
offer this to the youth in our community AND to all people from Edina!
Thanks –
Anne Hinrichs
From:Steve Christianson
To:Chad Millner
Cc:Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com; Steve Christianson;
Kristen Christianson (Kristen@resimplifiedmn.com)
Subject:Parking Recommendations for Arden Park Neighborhood
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 7:34:46 AM
Dear Mr. Millner, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council,
Thank you for your letter, dated August 2, 2016, and received August 8th. As we read your letter, it
is our understanding you intend to recommend to the Edina City Council that Indianola Avenue be
returned to 2-sided parking. We cannot state more deliberately or definitively our objection to this
possible recommendation.
You note in your letter parking utilization ranges from 8% to 27% during the one-year study period.
We read this (and your comments) to mean there is more than sufficient parking with the one-sided
strategy that is currently in place. Our fear is that if this is changed to 2-sided parking, while there
may be many days of zig-zag through-way, there will most certainly be weekends and events in this
area that will make the avenue impassable.
At present, we have a “Living Street”. Kids play and ride their bikes (and scooters) on the street, and
neighbors walk rather freely with their children and dogs. Also, by having 1-sided parking, you
encourage motorists to walk, if even just a few feet farther than they otherwise would have to. This
is the quality of life issue you should be focused on, not to mention the health benefits of walking a
bit more after parking one’s car. Isn’t that part of the Living Streets policy?
my opinion, the “Living Streets” initiative of the city of Edina has been unequally implemented over
the past several years. We lived in the Highlands neighborhood and favored sidewalks with a
narrower street. The decision was made to keep the streets wide and have no sidewalks. At the
time, one of the council members reported having walked those neighborhood streets and
determined the wide streets were safe and part of the character of the neighborhood (my
paraphrasing). Were any such walks done in the Arden Park neighborhood before the decision was
made to make the streets narrower with no sidewalks? The input of our community was strongly in
favor of no sidewalk and keeping the street at 30’, or construct a sidewalk if the street was to be
narrowed.
To this day, I have no idea what the goal of a one-year study was going to be after the streets had
already been permanently narrowed and no sidewalks were installed. I simply cannot fathom
having my kids walk, bike and scooter on this street with 2-sided parking. I would much rather walk
an extra 100 feet or so after parking my car, than have my children put at risk due to an
overcrowded roadway. You mention “quality of life” factors in your decision, but I see no mention
of safety. Nor do we see any mention of citizen input. What have the citizens of this neighborhood
voiced? You have obviously received unsolicited input with complaints about the parking situation,
but did you poll the residents to gather comprehensive input? I had not heard from the city until I
received your letter.
You also mention the absence of a strong desire from council to continue this practice of one-sided
parking, as one of your reasons for the recommendation. The absence of opinion should not be
used as a means to or rationale for decision making. This is nothing more than whimsical policy
making. I trust we have elected officials who have longer term vision for the City of Edina. This is a
wonderful city, one which I’m proud to call home. Therefore, we urge you to reconsider your
position and recommend to City Council that parking throughout the Arden Park neighborhood
remain 1-side only.
Further, we request any and all feedback from patrons of any activity at or near 50th and France,
where high volume parking in the Arden Park neighborhood is required, be made public as a specific
exhibit(s) to the proposed recommendation. We hope you will also publish any traffic volume and
flow studies that were done to support making one-sided parking permanent on some
neighborhood streets and not on others.
Governing is complicated in the easiest of times, and I respect that you all have difficult roles
attempting to make the right decisions for the community at large – citizens, businesses, visitors
alike. I appreciate your willingness to read our letter, and we anxiously await your decision on this
matter.
Respectfully,
Steve and Kristen Christianson
5121 Indianola Avenue
Steve Christianson, MSW, LICSW
VP, Client Services
Mobile: 612-859-6634
Email: schristianson@insigniahealth.com
Corp: www.insigniahealth.com
From:Hyland, Leslie -10
To:Edina Mail
Subject:proposed Opus development
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 8:57:32 AM
Good Morning,
I sent a longer email several days ago, but this question popped into my head as I am trying to
determine whether or not my presence at tonight’s meeting will make any impact – why would the
City Council even consider a project if the Planning Commission rejected it? Isn’t the Planning
Commission supposed to make recommendations based on research and what they feel is best for
the City?
Thank you for considering all of the feedback you are getting and not just the proposals of Opus.
Leslie Hyland
6958 Langford Drive
Edina, MN 55436
From:martin vaala
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Proposed Lincoln Drive apartment deficits
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:02:06 AM
There are many reasons why the proposed Opus apartments on Lincoln Drive will be harmful
to the neighborhood, especially for some of our neighbors. A foremost concern is the
construction of the apartments while 169 is closed. The impact of the closure itself is
unknown. But combined with the apartment construction it may impact or even gridlock
traffic to the point where there is a safety concern.
Martin and Kathy Vaala
Manor Homes of Edina
From:clover graham
To:James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Kevin Staunton; swensonann1@gmail.com
Subject:safety protocols and warning signage for crumb rubber fields
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:18:58 AM
Hello,
I am writing to follow up on my request for a safety protocol for Edina's crumb rubber fields,
including warning signage.
Here are a few more examples of suggested safety precautions that may be useful in
the development of Edina's warning signage and protocols.
Minnesota Department of Health Crumb Rubber Fact Sheets states:
Users of these fields can take some simple precautions such as:
-Washing with soap and water after use, especially any scrapes or cuts.
-Shaking out clothes/shoes to limit take home of rubber crumbs.
-Cover food/beverages to prevent contamination with rubber material.
Mount Sinai Children's Environmental Health Center Fact Sheet on Crumb Rubber states:
Tips for safer use of artificial turf fields:
-Do not use turf fields on extremely hot days.
-Parents and coaches should be educated on prevention and recognition of heat induced
illness.
-"Turf burns" should be cleaned with soap and water.
-When playing indoors, maximize ventilation by opening doors and windows and using fans.
-Monitor young children to prevent ingestions.
-Do not use turf fields for passive recreation. (eg. sitting, lying)
-Always wear shoes on turf fields.
-At home, take off shoes and shake out your children's equipment and clothes outside the
home or over the garbage.
-Have your child wash thoroughly after playing on the field.
These warnings and protocols are similar to the language that is in the legislation going
forward in the MN State Senate and House next session. If this bill passes, these warnings and
protocols will be required at all existing fields.
With the school year and fall athletics starting up in the next few weeks it is crucial that there
is a protocol and warnings in place so that educators, nurses, coaches and parents
understand how to limit our children's exposure to the toxins and chemicals contained in
crumb rubber.
Thank you for your time,
Clover Hackett
From:Jim Platt
To:Kevin Staunton; James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle
Subject:Fwd: Nordic Ski Proposal
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:20:35 AM
Mary, Jim, Kevin & Bob:
After attending the Park Board Meeting last week at Braemar .. I was totally unaware that the
Cost of the Project was $3M with NO pay back and looking to Braemar for $50,000 to
subsidize operating expenses and STILL there would be a year-end-operating-loss.. All to
feed more business to the Tin Fish ... This is NOT what we are known for in Edina for Fiscal
Responsibility. In addition, I had no idea there was an overwhelming demand for Cross
Country Skiing ( which there is NOT) .. not to mention the safety hazards along Gleason
Road and West 78th Street!
The following are comments by one of the neighbors that truly outlines the issues
that I concur are problematic with this proposal. I'm not sure if $3MM is the best
use of funds with no ROI and end up costing Braemar for operating expenses:
1) The way the public was "informed" of the proposal. Special interest groups
were notified more than 2 months before the general residents (they found out in
very early May). We waited until early July to hear about what was already being
scoped for OUR resource. The parks dept cited that a Sun article and STrib
article were published as well. That is not a way of notifying the public and being
inclusive in the process.
2) The timeline of this proposal is ABSURD. We spend years filibustering over
the most necessary things in Edina (sidewalks as an example), and yet we're
pushing for this to happen in 4 months. 4 MONTHS when people are out of town
enjoying their summer. If this is something we need -- or even want -- we can
take the time to slow down and get everyone's opinion.
3) We don't have $3MM. The city council has stated that we maintain a AAA
credit rating, which only relates to borrowing. Have we thought about whether
we should borrow? Why increase taxes over something that is largely
unwanted/unneeded? We kick the can down the road every year by deferring CIP
like roads (+$10MM worth), bridges, sidewalks and other infrastructure...all of
these investments are what make a community livable. A "Premier Nordic
Facility" is not a need...it's a want.
4) We cite Buckthorn and other irrelevant issues as a reason why we need to.
Buckthorn is a problem. This does NOT solve it. Creating a strategy around
eradication and preservation moves us toward solving it.
5) This proposal benefits very few, and the cost per capita is ENORMOUS. We
have a special interest group of ~200 children who have a passion for Nordic
skiing. That's great. But this is a $3MM proposal tailor fitted for them. Let's even
say there are 500 people who would really use this facility for which it's intended
(I think that's generous). That's costing us as a tax base $6K per individual. That's
the cost of a good used car.
6) We have previous obligations to maintain the wetlands of Braemar, which
have been left unfulfilled. As a part of our 1992 agreement with the US Army
Corps of Engineers we were obligated to eradicate invasive species in the park.
This was a trade off for getting permission to build the "Clunie Nine", which
included modifying wetlands. We've also talked about maintaining our natural
resources, and not obliterating them for capricious over-development sake.
7) Why do we NEED to do anything? Show me a resident survey that
corroborates the need to develop a ski and tubing facility? One does not exist. In
2014 Edina residents were asked for what they feel is important. XC ski and
tubing did not appear on that list of things that matter to residents. In fact, we
drafted a strategic plan that calls for preserving our resources. Let's follow that
plan.
8) This plan undermines the safety of an already hazardous stretch of roadway,
and potentially damages the rights and property of local homeowners. The
developer has openly admitted to it creating extra snow on local roadways and
homes that the homeowner can just "brush off" at their expense. That will trickle
down to the taxpayer base once there are accidents and issues that arise from the
amusement park we're proposing to build. 35W has large digital signs warning
drivers of snow on the road when snow is being made at Buck Hill. That ski area
is further away from the freeway than the snow-making would be from Gleason
Road.
9) There was an issue removing trees from the golf course during
renovation...apparently the tree preservationists have not heard about this!
10) it has also been noted that they track would be rented out to organizations for
competitive events which would bring more traffic to the area and limit the
amount of time it is available for " locals" to use the trail that it is proposed to
benefit. Not sure if that is a benefit to Edina residents.
Feel free to read the petition for other reasons at BraemarGreen.ORG
There are so many reasons why this is a bad idea, and I'm hoping the council is
not ignoring them.
I will be at the September 7th City Council Meeting when this issue is address.
Thanks in advance for your consideration!
Jim
Jim "Buc" Platt
Edina Resident since 1979
BMC 26 Year Member
BMC Board Member
Edina Rotary Member
Edina Chamber of Commerce Member
Support of the Edina Y
Member St. Patricks Church
Realtor/Broker "The Realty House"
E-mail: jplatt@JimBucPlatt.com
Owner: Pets Are Inn, Inc.
E-mail: jplatt@PetsAreInn.com
7723 Tanglewood Court
Edina, MN 55439
Office: 952-746-7557
Cell: 651-402-8085
From:Deborah Benson
To:Edina Mail
Subject:Opus Proposal
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 11:20:40 AM
To Whom it Concerns:
I live at 6924 Langford Dr and my back yard abuts up to the proposed site. I am
concerned about the size of the building which will not fit in with any of the consisting
buildings and besides being much larger, it also has an appearance of a very modern
structure unlike anything in the area. Could it possibly be downsized a bit? Also,
could the exterior be changed so as to not be so dated to the era?
I am also very concerned about the proposed driveway with cars going along my back
yard all day. Why can it not be put at the north end where there is only commercial
space?
Also, one of my major concerns is the traffic! With Children's adding some 700 more
employees and the addition of the terrific amount of units, I want to know how I will
get out of Langford Dr and make a left turn to get to work and make a left onto it after
work? What will happen when Hwy 169 closes down for at least 1 year?
LANGFORD DR IS THE ONLY ROUTE I HAVE IN AND OUT!
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Deborah Benson
From:Michael Baldwin
To:James Hovland
Subject:West 60th Street
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 11:23:20 AM
Mayor Hovland—please see below for a note I sent to the engineer technician for the 2017
Birchcrest Roadway Improvement project. The surveyor suggested I contact him directly but also
wanted to reach out to you to voice my concerns (I don’t know who my city councilperson is and
can’t find it anywhere online). I appreciate you taking the time to reevaluate any potential
sidewalks on West 60th Street. Thank you.
Mike Baldwin
612 759 8671
Andrew---a surveyor was out the other day taking some measurements and passed along your card
as I had some questions/concerns on the planned roadway improvements for 2017. We recently
moved into 5205 West 60th Street and have immensely enjoyed the neighborhood thus far. We
have noticed tons of people and families enjoying the nice days/evenings by walking around the
neighborhood on 60th Street. The surveyor and some neighbors both told me that there is a
proposal to add sidewalks on our side of 60th Street once the project starts next summer. I wanted
to voice my concern and opposition to adding a sidewalk on 60th Street for a couple reasons.
---One, I don’t appreciate my front yard being downsized.
---Two, the current width of streets allows for families to easily walk up and down 60th street side by
side (sidewalks will make these walks much more cumbersome due to the width of a sidewalk)
--- Three, parking on 60th street would become much more of a hassle
Bottom line I believe sidewalks on 60th Street are complete waste of time and huge inconvenience
to the current residents. I have signed a petition that one of the fellow neighbors was working on
and it seemed like everyone she had talked to was opposed to the sidewalk aspect of this project.
It sounds like Benton will have sidewalks one block north of us which seems more than sufficient for
the neighborhood. That and the fact that road work was completed WITHOUT sidewalks a couple
years ago on the 60th street but a couple blocks closer to highway 100 only further validates my
opposition to this plan. I hope you can respect my point of view as a current resident directly
impacted by this potential project design. I’d be happy to talk further about this at your pleasure.
Thank you for your time.
Mike Baldwin
Michael Baldwin
Director, Institutional Sales
Direct (612) 851-4941 | TF (800) 851-2920 | Cell (612) 759-8671 | Fax (612) 851-5955
Mail 45 S. 7th St., Suite 2000 | Minneapolis, MN 55402
Email mbaldwin@northlandsecurities.com
Web NorthlandSecurities.com
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Northland Securities does not accept buy, sell, or cancel orders by email, or any instructions by email that would require your signature.
Please use the links below for important disclosures regarding electronic communications with Northland Securities and its related
companies.
EMail Disclaimer | Unsubscribe | Firm Information
Member FINRA and SIPC
www.northlandsecurities.com
From:Steve Hobbs
To:Kevin Staunton; Edina Mail; Mary Brindle; Robert Stewart; swensonann1@gmail.com
Cc:Scott H. Neal; mshedina@mac.com
Subject:Gorgas Avenue- Parking on both sides of the street
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 11:26:32 AM
Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
I received a letter from City Engineer, Chad Millner, regarding his recommendation that
Gorgas Avenue, among other streets, be changed from its current designation for one-sided
parking to two-sided parking. I strongly urge you to maintain the one-sided parking on
Gorgas Avenue.
Two-sided parking on Gorgas, which has no sidewalk, would force pedestrians to walk
down the center of the street.
It would create more situations for children to be unseen by motorists as they could dart
from either side of the street.
The residential construction activity on Gorgas is substantial and more is on the way.
One-sided parking has been the only thing that has enabled cars to safely traverse
Gorgas during construction. If contractors are allowed to park on both sides of the road,
it will be very difficult for pedestrians and cars to move safely.
Gorgas is nothing more than a one-block long cul-de-sac. I have not heard any
complaints from neighbors about not having suitable parking near their house. In fact,
all I've heard from neighbors is welcoming the one-sided parking.
While this parking scheme is new, there have occasions of non-compliance, but let's not throw
the baby out with the bath water. If somewhat larger signs are needed or, perhaps better, the
addition of a sign or two, that would seem to be a better solution than compromising the
safety and quiet enjoyment of our little street.
I appreciate your time and I am always happy to discuss.
Thanks,
Steve Hobbs
5128 Gorgas Avenue
From:Duininck, Adam
To:Duininck, Adam; sstores@ci.bayport.mn.us; elizabeth.kautz@burnsvillemn.gov; Denny Laufenburger;
gary.peterson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us; James Hovland; tlarson@ci.farmington.mn.us;
mayortom@ci.hugo.mn.us; gtourville@invergroveheights.org; jud.marshall@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us; Nora Slawik;
betsy.hodges@minneapolismn.gov; stephanie.zawistowski@minneapolismn.gov; gosspottery@tds.net;
paynesvillemayor@yahoo.com; rmurphy@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us; rihli@rogersmn.gov;
mayor@ci.rosemount.mn.us; dan.roe@cityofroseville.com; jerry.faust@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us;
tonya.tennessen@ci.stpaul.mn.us; Anne.Hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us; citycouncilmembers@waconia.org;
tkozlowski@ci.stillwater.mn.us; mayorlindstrom@gmail.com; mike.opat@hennepin.us;
linda.higgins@hennepin.us; Marion Greene; commissioner.mclaughlin@hennepin.us;
randy.johnson@hennepin.us; jan.callison@hennepin.us; jeff.r.johnson@hennepin.us; Blake Huffman;
District2@CO.RAMSEY.MN.US; Janice Rettman; Toni.Carter@co.ramsey.mn.us;
Rafael.E.Ortega@co.ramsey.mn.us; Jim.McDonough@co.ramsey.mn.us; Victoria.Reinhardt@co.ramsey.mn.us;
Jeffrey Lunde; Jay.Stroebel@BrooklynPark.Org; sarntz@waconia.org; jsanborn@waconia.org
Cc:lmartin@ci.bayport.mn.us; mhanson@ci.bayport.mn.us; ahogg@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us;
sue.bast@burnsvillemn.gov; Garrett.Beck@burnsvillemn.gov; gsticha@ci.chanhassen.mn.us;
eric.hanson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us; kevin.hansen@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us; Ross Bintner; Scott H. Neal;
sack.thongvanh@falconheights.org; rolson@ci.falcon-heights.mn.us; akienberger@ci.farmington.mn.us;
MKohlbeck@CI.FARMINGTON.MN.US; MLindau@ci.hugo.mn.us; bbear@ci.hugo.mn.us; rleitz@ci.hugo.mn.us;
ecarlson@invergroveheights.org; abontrager@invergroveheights.org; sodonnell@invergroveheights.org;
ksmith@invergroveheights.org; mcalvert@invergroveheights.org; sneilson@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us;
sarntz@waconia.org; shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us; chris.swanson@ci.maplewood.mn.us;
Brian.Millberg@minneapolismn.gov; Gayle.prest@minneapolismn.gov; Rob.Verke@minneapolismn.gov;
trudie@cityofnewlondon.us; Renee@paynesvillemn.com; mglick@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us;
tmarshall@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us; mbauer@ci.rogers.mn.us; jseifert@ci.rogers.mn.us; scartney@ci.rogers.mn.us;
Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us; Kim Lindquist; ryan.johnson@cityofroseville.com; mark.casey@ci.saint-
anthony.mn.us; jay.hartman@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us; jim.giebel@ci.stpaul.mn.us;
michael.solomon@ci.stpaul.mn.us; anne.hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us; therese.skarda@ci.stpaul.mn.us;
lbraaten@waconia.org; gary.hempeck@hcmed.org; Ann.Eilbracht@hcmed.org; leah.hiniker@hennepin.us;
Smith, Sara; Gehring, Brad; Willett, Jason; Rimstad, Robert; Jones, Pat; mary.t"kach@co.ramsey.mn.us;
daniel.winek@co.ramsey.mn.us; dave.wagner@ci.stpaul.mn.us; jzemke@threeriversparkdistrict.org;
jbarten@threeriversparkdistrict.org; Jonathan Vlaming; jbrauchle@threeriversparkdistrict.org;
dberens@threeriversparkdistrict.org; hkoolick@threeriversparkdistrict.org; nicki.castro@co.washington.mn.us;
don.theisen@co.washington.mn.us; Erik.Jalowitz@co.washington.mn.us; greg.wood@co.washington.mn.us;
tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us; Brickman, Kate; Thompson, Leisa; Lamb, Brian; Trevor Drake (tdrake@gpisd.net);
thie0235@umn.edu; kphillips@gpisd.net
Subject:RE: Please join us to celebrate our solar garden collaborative!
Date:Tuesday, August 16, 2016 11:43:46 AM
Our celebration event for the solar garden collaborative is one week from today! Hope you can all
join us for a brief program and refreshments. Details are below – if you haven’t already RSVPed,
please do so to Kathryn Phillips at kphillips@gpisd.net or 612-767-7297.
Looking forward to seeing you all there,
Adam Duininck
Metropolitan Council Chair
From: Duininck, Adam
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:47 PM
To: 'sstores@ci.bayport.mn.us' <sstores@ci.bayport.mn.us>; 'elizabeth.kautz@burnsvillemn.gov'
<elizabeth.kautz@burnsvillemn.gov>; Denny Laufenburger <dlaufenburger@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;
'gary.peterson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us' <gary.peterson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us>;
'jhovland@edinamn.gov' <jhovland@edinamn.gov>; 'tlarson@ci.farmington.mn.us'
<tlarson@ci.farmington.mn.us>; 'mayortom@ci.hugo.mn.us' <mayortom@ci.hugo.mn.us>;
'gtourville@invergroveheights.org' <gtourville@invergroveheights.org>;
'jud.marshall@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us' <jud.marshall@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us>; Nora Slawik
<nora.slawik@ci.maplewood.mn.us>; 'betsy.hodges@minneapolismn.gov'
<betsy.hodges@minneapolismn.gov>; 'stephanie.zawistowski@minneapolismn.gov'
<stephanie.zawistowski@minneapolismn.gov>; 'gosspottery@tds.net' <gosspottery@tds.net>;
'paynesvillemayor@yahoo.com' <paynesvillemayor@yahoo.com>; 'rmurphy@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us'
<rmurphy@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us>; 'rihli@rogersmn.gov' <rihli@rogersmn.gov>;
'mayor@ci.rosemount.mn.us' <mayor@ci.rosemount.mn.us>; 'dan.roe@cityofroseville.com'
<dan.roe@cityofroseville.com>; 'jerry.faust@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us' <jerry.faust@ci.saint-
anthony.mn.us>; 'tonya.tennessen@ci.stpaul.mn.us' <tonya.tennessen@ci.stpaul.mn.us>;
'Anne.Hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us' <Anne.Hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us>; 'citycouncilmembers@waconia.org'
<citycouncilmembers@waconia.org>; 'tkozlowski@ci.stillwater.mn.us'
<tkozlowski@ci.stillwater.mn.us>
Cc: 'lmartin@ci.bayport.mn.us' <lmartin@ci.bayport.mn.us>; 'mhanson@ci.bayport.mn.us'
<mhanson@ci.bayport.mn.us>; 'ahogg@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us' <ahogg@ci.brooklyn-
center.mn.us>; 'sue.bast@burnsvillemn.gov' <sue.bast@burnsvillemn.gov>;
'Garrett.Beck@burnsvillemn.gov' <Garrett.Beck@burnsvillemn.gov>; 'gsticha@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'
<gsticha@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'eric.hanson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us'
<eric.hanson@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us>; 'kevin.hansen@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us'
<kevin.hansen@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us>; 'rbintner@edinamn.gov' <rbintner@edinamn.gov>;
'sneal@edinamn.gov' <sneal@edinamn.gov>; 'sack.thongvanh@falconheights.org'
<sack.thongvanh@falconheights.org>; 'rolson@ci.falcon-heights.mn.us' <rolson@ci.falcon-
heights.mn.us>; 'akienberger@ci.farmington.mn.us' <akienberger@ci.farmington.mn.us>;
'MKohlbeck@CI.FARMINGTON.MN.US' <MKohlbeck@CI.FARMINGTON.MN.US>;
'MLindau@ci.hugo.mn.us' <MLindau@ci.hugo.mn.us>; 'bbear@ci.hugo.mn.us'
<bbear@ci.hugo.mn.us>; 'rleitz@ci.hugo.mn.us' <rleitz@ci.hugo.mn.us>;
'ecarlson@invergroveheights.org' <ecarlson@invergroveheights.org>;
'abontrager@invergroveheights.org' <abontrager@invergroveheights.org>;
'sodonnell@invergroveheights.org' <sodonnell@invergroveheights.org>;
'ksmith@invergroveheights.org' <ksmith@invergroveheights.org>;
'mcalvert@invergroveheights.org' <mcalvert@invergroveheights.org>;
'sneilson@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us' <sneilson@ci.mahtomedi.mn.us>;
'shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us' <shann.finwall@ci.maplewood.mn.us>;
'chris.swanson@ci.maplewood.mn.us' <chris.swanson@ci.maplewood.mn.us>;
'Brian.Millberg@minneapolismn.gov' <Brian.Millberg@minneapolismn.gov>;
'Gayle.prest@minneapolismn.gov' <Gayle.prest@minneapolismn.gov>;
'Rob.Verke@minneapolismn.gov' <Rob.Verke@minneapolismn.gov>; 'trudie@cityofnewlondon.us'
<trudie@cityofnewlondon.us>; 'Renee@paynesvillemn.com' <Renee@paynesvillemn.com>;
'mglick@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us' <mglick@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us>; 'tmarshall@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us'
<tmarshall@ci.robbinsdale.mn.us>; 'mbauer@ci.rogers.mn.us' <mbauer@ci.rogers.mn.us>;
'jseifert@ci.rogers.mn.us' <jseifert@ci.rogers.mn.us>; 'scartney@ci.rogers.mn.us'
<scartney@ci.rogers.mn.us>; 'Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us'
<Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us>; Kim Lindquist <Kim.Lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us>;
'ryan.johnson@cityofroseville.com' <ryan.johnson@cityofroseville.com>; 'mark.casey@ci.saint-
anthony.mn.us' <mark.casey@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us>; 'jay.hartman@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us'
<jay.hartman@ci.saint-anthony.mn.us>; 'jim.giebel@ci.stpaul.mn.us' <jim.giebel@ci.stpaul.mn.us>;
'michael.solomon@ci.stpaul.mn.us' <michael.solomon@ci.stpaul.mn.us>;
'anne.hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us' <anne.hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us>; 'therese.skarda@ci.stpaul.mn.us'
<therese.skarda@ci.stpaul.mn.us>; 'lbraaten@waconia.org' <lbraaten@waconia.org>;
'gary.hempeck@hcmed.org' <gary.hempeck@hcmed.org>; 'Ann.Eilbracht@hcmed.org'
<Ann.Eilbracht@hcmed.org>; 'leah.hiniker@hennepin.us' <leah.hiniker@hennepin.us>; Smith, Sara
<Sara.Smith@metc.state.mn.us>; Gehring, Brad <Brad.Gehring@metc.state.mn.us>; Willett, Jason
<jason.willett@metc.state.mn.us>; Rimstad, Robert <Robert.Rimstad@metrotransit.org>; Jones, Pat
<Pat.Jones@metrotransit.org>; 'mary.t'kach@co.ramsey.mn.us' <mary.t'kach@co.ramsey.mn.us>;
'daniel.winek@co.ramsey.mn.us' <daniel.winek@co.ramsey.mn.us>; 'dave.wagner@ci.stpaul.mn.us'
<dave.wagner@ci.stpaul.mn.us>; 'jzemke@threeriversparkdistrict.org'
<jzemke@threeriversparkdistrict.org>; 'jbarten@threeriversparkdistrict.org'
<jbarten@threeriversparkdistrict.org>; 'Jonathan Vlaming'; 'jbrauchle@threeriversparkdistrict.org'
<jbrauchle@threeriversparkdistrict.org>; 'dberens@threeriversparkdistrict.org'
<dberens@threeriversparkdistrict.org>; 'hkoolick@threeriversparkdistrict.org'
<hkoolick@threeriversparkdistrict.org>; 'nicki.castro@co.washington.mn.us'
<nicki.castro@co.washington.mn.us>; 'don.theisen@co.washington.mn.us'
<don.theisen@co.washington.mn.us>; 'Erik.Jalowitz@co.washington.mn.us'
<Erik.Jalowitz@co.washington.mn.us>; 'greg.wood@co.washington.mn.us'
<greg.wood@co.washington.mn.us>; 'tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us'
<tmccarty@ci.stillwater.mn.us>; Brickman, Kate <Kate.Brickman@metc.state.mn.us>; Thompson,
Leisa <leisa.thompson@metc.state.mn.us>; Lamb, Brian <Brian.Lamb@metrotransit.org>; Trevor
Drake (tdrake@gpisd.net) <tdrake@gpisd.net>; 'thie0235@umn.edu' <thie0235@umn.edu>;
'kphillips@gpisd.net' <kphillips@gpisd.net>
Subject: Please join us to celebrate our solar garden collaborative!
Please join us to celebrate our solar garden collaborative!
Earlier this year, we worked together on a project that will help us make major advancements on
solar energy for our region and provide cost-savings to our local governments and taxpayers. As the
Metro Community Solar Garden Subscriber Collaborative continues to advance, I’d like to take a
moment to thank all of you for your partnership and celebrate our progress.
I hope you will be able to join me for a brief celebration event – we can highlight some of the results,
celebrate the progress for our region, and enjoy some refreshments. We will also be inviting local
media to this event, so we can highlight to the local community the work we are doing.
What: Solar Garden Collaborative Celebration Event
When: Tuesday, August 23, 9 a.m.
Who: All local partners of the Solar Garden Collaborative, including Mayors, City Council
Members, County Commissioners and staff
Where: Falcon Heights City Hall, 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
Why: To celebration our partnership and share our progress with local media
RSVP: To Kathryn Phillips at kphillips@gpisd.net or 612-767-7297
If you have any questions, please contact Trevor Drake at tdrake@gpisd.net or 612-767-7291.
Looking forward to seeing you all!
Thanks,
Adam Duininck
Metropolitan Council Chair
-------------
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: IX.B.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
R ep o rt / Rec o mmendation
From:Deb ra A. Mangen, City Clerk
Item Activity:
Subject:Rec eive P etitio n - Braemar Winter R ec reatio n Area Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Receive the petition.
INTRODUCTION:
On August 10th, Joshua Ahlberg submitted the attached petition opposing the Braemar Winter Recreation Area.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Petition Received From Jos hua Ahlbert 2016-08-10
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Supplement to Attached Petition to the City Council
City of Edina, Minnesota
4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota
Dated August 10, 2016
To Mayor James Hovland and all Edina City Council Members (Mary Brindle, Kevin Staunton,
Bob Stewart and Ann Swenson):
This Statement of Purpose intends to supplement the attached petition to clarify and summarize
the requests we Edina residents hereby put forth to the Mayor and City Council of Edina on
August 10, 2016.
The residents/voters who have signed this petition hereby ask the Mayor and the entire City
Council of Edina to:
1. Vote "NO" on September 7, 2016 in regard to the current proposal to develop a Nordic
ski trail and a tubing hill in Braemar Golf Course; and
2. Carefully and thoughtfully develop and propose an enhancement to Braemar Golf
Course that would instead be:
a. inclusive for residents of all ages, socioeconomic backgrounds and interests;
b. that would enrich, not destroy, precious green space and wildlife;
c. that would represent a careful and inclusive due-diligence process;
d. that would reflect the preferences of voters/taxpayers, not contravene voters'
wishes;
e. that would improve public safety, not introduce public hazards; and
f. that would represent a prudent and judicious use of taxpayer dollars,
demonstrating good stewardship rather than irresponsibility.
The residents and voters who signed this petition also reserve the right to resubmit this
Petition on or before September 7th :
1. The petition is gaining up to 100 signatures per week, and we wish for the
Council to see a more current version before the September 7th hearing;
2. The citizens advocating for a sensible enhancement to Braemar were not
afforded the same timeframe to respond to/express views on this proposal
as were a small, special-interest group; and
3. We understand that we may still submit an amended Petition to the City
Council on/before September 7th and remain within the rules governing
public hearings for the City of Edina.
The Mayor and City Council should reject the current proposal as it has been
presented by the Edina Parks and Recreation Board along with vendor SEH,
because this proposed construction represents:
A. Damage to the Environment. The proposal contravenes the City's
stated commitment and promise to remain a GreenStep City, because it
would irrevocably destroy hundreds of trees, affect wetlands and green
space, while displacing or killing wildlife.
B. Public Hazard. The proposed construction presents a public safety
hazard. Snow (ice) making machines will over-spray ice crystals onto
Gleason Road, as well as private properties, increasing winter travel
hazards on an already dangerous winter road.
C. Pollution Source. The proposal will introduce noise and light pollution
to the City.
D. Fiscally Irresponsible. At $3 million to start, the proposed plan is fiscally
irresponsible. At a time when taxpayers are tiring of constantly rising
taxes, the Council should instead use public funds for necessities, such
as repairing/maintaining infrastructure, not whimsical projects not even
among the City's stated strategic initiatives for the year.
E. Potential injury to the property and/or rights of homeowners.
F. Please see Petition for full list of damaging, destructive consequences
of this proposal.
The Mayor and City Council should instead take adequate time to carefully pursue
an enhancement to Braemar Golf Course that would enrich, not destroy or
devalue, the precious acreage of green space that Braemar offers.
The Mayor and City Council have a unique opportunity to enhance Braemar Golf
Course in a way that:
• Protects and enriches the environment;
• Encourages greater participation by refining hiking, mountain biking and
nature trails;
• Refines the paths many Edinans currently use to cross-country ski every year;
• That wisely and prudently deploys taxpayers' money, not recklessly.
We urge the Mayor and Council to vote "No" on this current proposal, and
instead, take adequate time to develop a sound, strategic, inclusive and responsible
enhancement to Braemar Golf Course that would include more participation (not
merely the participation of a small special-interest group) year-round, make sense
„t„,GITY
46
4,57 SEAL
AUG 1 0 2016
from a financial perspective (generate, not lose, money), and enrich the City's RECEIVED
landscape, rather than devalue properties, cause congestion in a residential are
and destroy precious green space.
Even if this proposed development were appropriate financially and
environmentally, the Mayor and Council should still vote "No” on September 7
because of the procedural defects surrounding this project, which enabled the
voices of a select few to benefit from early disclosure and hold sway over the City
Council unopposed for over 60 days.
The process and timeline plaguing this proposed development are problematic on a
number of levels, and have fractured public trust, for the following reasons:
A. The City of Edina did not pursue a fair and inclusive process in terms of
gathering full community feedback, but rather, proceeded at break-neck
speed based on the feedback of a special-interest group, which was received
and considered some 60 days before public disclosure.
a. The City of Edina met on May 17 and authorized staff to proceed with
a financial and trail feasibility study for cross-country ski trails and
now tubing at Braemar Park.
b. On May 18, SEH, Morton Trails and RRC began work on the feasibility
studies.
c. The first public mention of this project occurred on May 17th.
d. However, the Edina City Council received and considered letters from
Nordic ski supporters on May 13th. These letters were prompted by
the Nordic Ski Club Coach, and emails from ski-club students' parents
were time-stamped as early as Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:29a.m.
e. The Edina Parks and Recreation Board mailed a letter to allegedly the
"entire SW quadrant of the City," not the entire Edina taxpayer base,
on July 6, alerting a portion of the City's taxpayers of an informational
meeting to be held on July 13.
f. For most residents, the first public disclosure of the nature of this
proposal occurred either on May 17th (provided a resident attended
that hearing or sought out the public notes related to that hearing) or
13th as late as July (provided that resident was able to attend the
information meeting that day).
B. Clearly, the Nordic Ski Club coach knew the details of this proposal before
there was public mention of it on May 17th. Further, the City Council received
and entertained feedback from a select group of supporters before May 17th,
and then proceeded with this proposal based on that support, more than 60
days before informing the full taxpayer base of Edina voters.
IV.
C. This timeline leads to a reasonable inference that the Nordic Ski Club Coach
and all of the families he decided to contact to drum up support, had an
unfair informational advantage versus all of the other taxpaying citizens in
Edina who would be impacted (taxed) by this proposed plan. This not only
erodes public trust in City leadership, but appears to indicate the democratic
process was injured by what appears to be a "backroom deal." A small swath
of ski enthusiasts who enjoyed an unfair advantage in persuading this Council
to pursue an expensive, fiscally irresponsible and environmentally damaging
and dangerous proposal should not have been afforded a "private audience"
with City leadership to influence the use of all taxpayers' money.
D. We ask that the Mayor and Council vote "No" on the proposal, because of
the irregularities in public disclosure that occurred, and, because of the clear
and unfair advantage a single, special-interest group held over the majority
of taxpayers.
Even if the Mayor and City Council find the irregularities in public disclosure and
the fact that the Nordic Ski Club Coach was actively soliciting letters of support
before a public mention of the Braemar proposal acceptable, a "No" vote on
September 7th is required because if pursued, the proposal contravenes the City's
1992 Army Corps of Engineers Permit, which requires the City to eradicate invasive
species and restore the Oak Savannah to the Northwest and West Ridges of
Braemar Park by 2017.
A. In order to build the Clunie Nine in 1992, the City of Edina required
permission from the Army Corps of Engineers.
B. Among the mandated conditions of that permit were the eradication of
invasive species, the development of a circuit trail around and regeneration
of the several varied natural habitats throughout all of Braemar Park,
boundary to boundary, not merely the section being abandoned by the golf
course.
C. Most of these proposals were previously recommended by Barr Engineering,
recommendations again reinforced in 2015.
D. All of these recommendations are in line with the highest park facility
priorities as defined by Edina residents.
E. The Braemar Development Proposal for Nordic ski trails would directly
violated these recommendations, and continue a violation of the permit
requirements as issued by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1992.
F. In 2006, and again in 2014, the City of Edina conducted a Community Needs
Assessment Survey which identified that the top two (2) facility NEEDS were
walking and biking trails, and natural areas and wildlife habitats, as well as
nature trails, respectively.
G. Nordic ski trails and snow tubing were not among the 26 facilities identified
as either most needed or most important.
Because the proposed development of a Nordic ski trail and tubing hill woul
violate an agreement the City made in 1992, and, because it directly contravenes
residents' preferences as solicited by the City itself in its Community Needs
Assessments in recent years, the Mayor and City Council must vote "No" on
September 7 at its public hearing on the subject.
Conclusion:
The residents who have signed this Petition urge the Mayor and
Council to vote "No" on September 7th regarding the proposed
destruction of Braemar Park as put forth by vendor SEH and the
Edina Parks and Recreation Board on July 13.
The plan is not only destructive from a quality of life and environmental
perspective, but is fiscally irresponsible at a time when public funds are
desperately needed to address infrastructure needs (think Countryside
construction that found crumbling and sand beneath roads there) and measures
to increase, not decrease, public safety (think sidewalks).
Further, consider the timeline the City has followed regarding Weber Park; a
$100,000 proposed expenditure has now been discussed by the Edina Parks and
Recreation Board a total of four (4) times. This proposal, which would lose
money, become a "money pit" for taxpayers (the subsidizers), and which would
decimate acreage of natural habitat to the tune of $3 million, has been
addressed publicly twice: once on May 17, and then again at an "information"
meeting on July 13, long after much planning and progress had already occurred.
The Edina High School Nordic Ski Club is a voluntary organization that already
has a place to practice; the Edina School Board Liaison to the Board
acknowledged this fact publicly at the Parks & Recreation meeting on August 8th.
Another argument put forth by various supporters have claimed, "We'd be
missing a great opportunity here" if this project is not rammed through. To do so
would be a tremendous display of bad judgment and poor stewardship over
public money.
Finally, we assert that we instead support heartily a responsible, careful and
respectful modification to Braemar — provided previous commitments are
satisfied -- that would benefit residents of all ages, walks of life, and sports
preferences. We ask all of you to exercise the sound judgement and careful
stewardship of our dollars when you vote on September 7, for those are the very
qualities that encouraged us to elect you.
Karen Karen Hazel, Community Leader
Respectfully,
Joshh t hlberg, Community Leader
-
The City Council
City of Edina
Co fam '2 /"
Petition if qqAA4
Petition Instructions
This petition foiiii is to be used to ask the Edina City Council to consider the following types of improvements:
SIDEWALK
ALLEY PAVING
WATER MAIN
STORM SEWER
PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER
CURB AND GUTTER ONLY
(WITHOUT PERMANENT STREET SURFACING)
SANITARY SEWER
STREET LIGHTING
or another improvement you describe (called OTHER on this foi n).
You may use another petition form if you wish but the city council may reject such petitions unless they contain
the following information:
1. Type of improvement(s) requested, e.g., SIDEWALK, STORM SEWER, WATER MAIN, ETC.
2. Precise locations(s) of the requested improvements.
3. A statement that all who sign the petition understand that the city council may assess the costs of
these improvements against the properties benefiting from the improvements in amounts
determined by the Council.
4. Printed name of property owner, owner's signature and phone number, and property address.
5. Signature of person circulating the petition.
If you have questions, please call the City Clerk at 952-927-8861 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
DEBRA MANGEN
CITY CLERK
APRIL 2008
City of Edina, Minnesota
CITY COUNCIL
4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424
(952) 927-8861 • (952) 927-7645 FAX • (612) 927-5461 TDD
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
0 SIDEWALK 0 ALLEY PAVING 0 WATER MAIN
q STORM SEWER 0 SANITARY SEWER 0 STREET LIGHTING
q CURB AND GUTTER ONLY 0 PERMANENT STREET -MOTHER:
SURFACING WITH f Peririsp Te gpti.r
CURB AND GUTTER 16•1'41"4 Aro ct1.01-ANeafr
6F me ruitiv... Ski 7
okitie BasPeciAtx g
The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvecteintffsted above to the
locations listed below.
•
ISAACiwcit- CDI ot between (44K61"4/Cltvel 6t e,za /en! Sr • gar se
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADD SS
between and
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS
between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS
between
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS
IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST
THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED
BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES.
PROPERTY OWNER'S
SIGNATURE
OWNER'S NAME
(PRINTED)
PROPERTY ADDRESS
(PRINTED)
This petition was circulated by:
losAUA M. ARL -0-6 6fp.T- eA..ey Wela Ad. bra. vs's. Y1/.7_
NAME ADDRESS PHON1,
APS tiAle1-4401,41/611 9gr 64A-co's t° • oz . 6ylif here is space Tor more signatures on the back.
APRIL 2008
To the Mayor and City Council:
ADDRESS
and
ADDRESS
and
8/9/2016 KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE! • Change.org
KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE! • Change.org
City of Edina, Minnesota -- 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 5542 (952) 927-8861 • (952) 927-7645
FAX • (612) 927-5461 TDD
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
To the Mayor and City Council:
TYPE OF PETITION: OTHER — Petition to halt planning and development of the Nordic Ski Trail in Braemar
Golf Course
The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider STOPPING the improvements listed
above to the locations listed below.
IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING
FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER
429, MINNESOTA STATUTES.
KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE!
A CALL TO ACTION FOR EDINA RESIDENTS: This petition is not intended to spend incremental tax dollars on
improvements. Rather, it is intended to STOP the city from proceeding with the costly Nordic Ski proposal
currently under review. The City of Edina is working with contractor SEH to materially redevelop the natural
landscape of Braemar Golf Course to install a Nordic ski trail that will drastically alter the natural landscape at a
https://www.change.org/p/the-edina-city-council-keep-edina-s-braemar-green-and-safe 1/3
8/9/2016 KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE! • Change.org
cost of $3 million, and WILL tra reased taxes for residents.
SEAL
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNO AUG 0 ;:i)lb
This endeavor would: RECEIVED •
• Destroy of hundreds of trees, wi e will be displaced or killed off
• Plow and expand existing foot trails to create a 50-foot wide ski trail that would run approximately 2.2
kilometers long
• Install snow-making machines spewing ice crystals for up to five hours nightly
• Introduce noisy snow plows to "smooth out" the ice/snow during the evening hours
• Increase noise -- constant, unrelenting
• Light up the area at night -- lighting would be installed along the trail
• Entail a year-long construction phase, which includes digging out a 50-foot wide path, and digging under that
to install hundreds of yards of piping to supply water to snow-making machines; machinery traveling up
through the Braemar Hills/forest for over a year
• Lose money. The City and the proposed vendor admit that it is unlikely that capital expenditures would be
recovered, and as Park & Rec representatives state, it is "hoped that the facility would break even within 5
years"
• Increase your taxes
• Create a public hazard. The snow-making machines would "over spray" ice crystals onto Gleason Road
during the winter nights, so morning rush hour will be even more treacherous.
This project is not part of the City's designated priorities for the current fiscal year.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE CITY COUNCIL VOTES YES ON SEPTEMBER 7?
• It would likely materially change your quality of life and your property values (especially if you live near
Braemar), create a public safety hazard, and decimate precious natural land and wildlife.
• Hundreds of trees will die, and precious green space will be forever lost.
• Wildlife now living in Braemar Hills will be displaced or killed off.
• Edina will participate in exacerbating damaging climate change, with your tax dollars.
• Gleason Road will become even more dangerous for winter driving.
• Your taxes will go up.
• The costly project will lose money.
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
Construction is on track to begin in OCTOBER 2016. Time IS of the essence.
• SIGN THIS PETITION!!! By signing the petition we can collectively elevate our voice and ensure the city
council best assesses the costs of the proposal and strikes it down to the benefit of our community. The
council can then re-evaluate alternative uses of the vacant Braemar Golf Course space to protect the wildlife
in the area, and more broadly benefit the community the council serves.
• Email each and every City Council member and tell them to VOTE NO to this plan. To email ALL Council
Members, send your note to: Mail@EdinaMN.qov
• TELL YOUR NEIGHBORS about this project, and encourage them to sign this petition!
https://www.change.org/p/the-edina-city-councikkeep-edina-s-braemar-green-and-safe 2/3
WHAT CAN YOU SAY/WRITE: Alt 0
RECENED
y
Write to the Edina City Council, respectfully. Use simple language, such as:
8/9/2016 KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE! • Change.org
• Encourage neighbors to write to or call the Edina City Council.
• Engage in SpeakUp Edina to voice your opinion (in addition to writing the council and signing this
&>, petition) http://speakubedina.org/forums/winter-recreational-facility-at-braemar-golf-course NNVNO
CITY
SEAL
Dear Edina City Council, I strongly oppose the decimation of natural forestry and wildlife at Braemar Golf
Course to construct a Nordic ski trail. I do not support this endeavor as it injures precious green space, will
create a public hazard due to snow-making machines, and is stated to be an expensive yet losing proposition
financially. I ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROJECT. I ask that you consider more environmentally friendly
(and less costly) ways to enhance Braemar for public use: mountain biking trails, hiking, etc. Please redirect this
funding to other, higher-priority level projects that improve (not diminish) public safety, or which impose no such
damaging impacts on the environment or residents. Thank you!
TO LEARN MORE:Visit http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=winterrecbraemarThis petition will be
delivered to:
• The Edina City Council
• Mayor
James Hovland
• City Council Member
Mary Brindle
3 more decision makers...
https:/hvww.change.org/p/the-edina-city-council-keep-edina-s-braemar-green-and-safe 3/3
change.org
Recipient: The Edina City Council, James Hovland, Mary Brindle, Kevin Staunton, Bob
Stewart, and Ann Swenson
Letter: Greetings,
KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE!
Comments
Name Location Location Date Comment
James Wyckoff Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-19 I am opposed to this project. It will destroy a wonderful tract of woods for snow
tubing at an overpriced cost of $3 million dollars.
I support adding minimally invasion trails through this area; with hopefully a
focus on the removal of the buckthorn from the region.
Karen Hazel
Nicholas Seivert
Connie Bowen
Pat Robertson
Tom Gartner
Edina, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Eden Prairie, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
2016-07-19 This expenditure would be irresponsible. It is too costly, and imposes a tax
burden on residents.
2016-07-19 I have concerns on all fronts regarding this project, though safety is my number
one concern and priority.
2016-07-19 This is not in the best interest of the neighborhood or of Edina, since taxes will
increase. This project is not fiscally sound.
2016-07-19 I oppose the planned Nordic Ski Trail in Braemar Gold Course
2016-07-19 Please stop spending so much money unnecessarily
There is no such thing as public money; there is only taxpayers' money. -
Margaret Thatcher
Janae Hentges Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-19 This is not a good use of tax money. Stop spending tax money without
community backing. There are other priorities that are much more important
than a nordic ski trail that only benefits a small number interested in using it.
2016-07-19 It is not needed and totally unnecessary use of taxpayers dollars.
2016-07-19 I'm signing this petition because I am completely opposed to the cost and
negative impact that would result from this redevelopment.
2016-07-19 WASTE OF TAXPAYER'S MONEY! This expenditure would be irresponsible. It
is too costly, and imposes a tax burden on the residents.
2016-07-19 I want to halt the planning and development of the Nordic Ski Trail at Braemar.
I want our green space preserved and I see no need for all of the other
negatives that this project would bring, and there are many!
2016-07-19 I think the add-ons to this proposed development are unnecessary and
irresponsible, due to the displacement of wildlife.
2016-07-19 I don't want these trails if they come with a $3,000,000 price tag, snow making
equipment, noise and light pollution. I want sidewalks for our children and
neighbors.
2016-07-19 This project benefits the few at the expense of the many. As one of the many, I
demand you STOP ITI
2016-07-19 This is another example of the city of Edina attempting to make poor budget
choices. I am all for making improvements where improvements need to be
made. This is not one of those areas . If the majority of the residents feel
otherwise then I can support it but that doesn't seem to be the case.
2016-07-19 11 Lane tubing hill is outrageous for that area.
2016-07-19 I want to save the natural habitat of our neighborhood. I love all the green and
wild life that would be destroyed if this goes through. Please stop it!!
2016-07-19 I am vehemently against this project. Light pollution, sound pollution, $3M in
taxpayer $$s wasted, and an iced down Gleason road will adversely impact an
entire neighborhood. There are many better ways to enhance the Braemar
Park area without endangering public safety.
Allison Gartner Minneapolis, MN
Tom McNamee Minneapolis, MN
Bert Ledder Edina, MN
Wendy Fox Minneapolis, MN
Lisa Krohn Minneapolis, MN
Stephanie Freudenthal Minneapolis, MN
Judith Felker Edina, MN
Ann Meagher Edina, MN
Jackie Colwell
Minneapolis, MN
Marlese Alden Minneapolis, MN
Michael Radenbaugh Minneapolis, MN
Name Location Date Comment
Bonvino Chris Minneapolis, MN
2016-07-19 I pay nearly 30K in property taxes a year...how about trying to think of a way
not to spend our money on your feel good pet projects.
Susan Konezny Edina, MN
2016-07-19 I couldn't agree more. Please stop this plan! Let me know what I can do.
Laura Kondrick Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 The city needs to stick to the plan and not explore and adopt ad hoc schemes
like a winter recreation site and a Nordic Ski Trail. This is irresponsible when
the city has much more pressing needs that 3 million dollars could pay for.
Peggy Westfall Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 I think this would be a waste of money and also harm the environment.
Micahel Benson Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 Michael benson
Paul Settle Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 I am against the environmental and wildlife changes that could occur by the
Braemar Nordic Trail construction.
Patrick Stubbs Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 This ski trail will benefit a small percentage and cost everyone money! Not a
fair assignment of obligation vs. reward.
Kathy tran Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 We're spending way too much money. We have great ski trails in Bloomington
and our taxes keep going up and up.
Jeff Barin Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 I believe that this is an excessive amount of money being spent for a very small
number of residents to be able to use. It will also destroy too much of our
natural habitat, and trees, as well as most likely creating a hazard for drivers on
Gleason. This entire project is a waste.
Jenny Beamish Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 I don't want my taxes increased and do not want to see the impact to the
community and nature.
Rita Paris Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-20 Too destructive to the natural environment and not cost effective.
James Stangl Minneapolis, MN
Anne Dixon Minneapolis, MN
2016-07-20 Sounds like a "Nice to Have" project which would only be used by a few
residents. Edina tax's have been increasing steadily every year. We do not
need to spend money we don't have.
2016-07-20 There are other things that would have a greater benefit to Edina residents. I
would prefer more walking/hiking trails. This seems like a project that would
mostly benefit people who come from other communities. As such, I don't like
the idea of paying for it with my taxes.
I'm also VERY concerned about lighting pollution. One of the wonderful things
about west Edina is that at night, one feels far from the city.
I find it incomprehensible that the city would even propose such a plan with the
cost and destruction it contains. I see no reason why cross country trails
cannot be incorporated without the destruction and excessive expense. Part of
the pleasure of cross country skiing is to enjoy the natural element, not
recreate it altogether. Please reconsider and do NOT approve this proposal as
it stands. Thank you.
Jennifer H Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21
Anna Medina
Marcia Friedman
Pine River, MN 2016-07-21 Save the trees!!!
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21 This is a ridiculous amount of money proposed to be spent on a project that is
not needed. Hylands is just a stone's throw and has wonderful facilities. I have
a huge concern about the wildlife that is finding harder and harder places to
prosper and roam. There are so many ways that Edina parks can be improved
and embellished upon, this is just not a good idea. I have been involved and
af supported Edina in so many ways over the years, this is the first time I have
\ O •
ever felt this strongly to oppose a proposal. I am not coming from a NIMBY
EGA`,
stance, just reality. DON'T DO IT.
Amanda Wagner
Location Date Comment
Ed indNIN sEAL 4' 2016-07-21 This is a horrible use of tax dollars, Edina needs more practical things like
d
ijn sidewalks and buckthorn removal. Highland ski area is only minutes away. This
( 01C; 0 should not even be up for consideration in a residential area. I want to keep our
MOWED wildlife also, not tear down natural habitats. Lighting and snow machines are a
unnessisary waste of resources.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21 Upon looking into the details of this proposal I feel it has more negative
consequences than positive ones and is environmentally irresponsible.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21 This is a terrible waste of money. We should help the xc ski team keep its
current training area, Hornet Hills instead of creating this environmental
disaster at Braemar
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21 Fiscal responsibility....show the public revenue impact of councils approved golf
program....
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-21 Redundant to the work Minneapolis is doing st Theodore Wirth.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-22 Just another extravagance by an out of control City Council. First they ruin our
streets and now our golf course.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-22 I live close enough that I would feel the effects of the snow making equipment
which will make Gleason Road very slippery in the winter. This is a total waste
of money and the area will miss the trees.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-22 I'm not opposed to the idea of improvement, but I think this proposal is being
rushed, is excessive and has more negative effects than positive.
Name
Marilyn Anderson
Evan Anderson
bruce freeman
Robert Kurek
Bill Ziegler
Robert Maginnis
Bernadine Letsche
Richard Letsche Edina, MN 2016-07-22 The snow making equipment would impact Gleason Road and many driveways
and lawns of the area close to Braemar. This is a bad idea for the
neighborhood. We value the trees on the site and don't want them cut down.
Patricia Charnel] Edina, MN 2016-07-22 From all the families and children of the braemar area - we do not want more
traffic or construction in our area. Please stop plans for the Nordic Ski Trail and
listen to the families that live in the area!
Bob Hussey Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-22 While well intentioned, I think the proposal is too ambitious. At a minimum, the
nordic trail should be no wider than 25' across, and the proposed sledding hill
should be scrapped
Jeffrey Moore Edina, MN 2016-07-22 I believe that this expenditure of our tax dollars will not realize the intended
benefit to the community. Though I do not live in the affected neighborhood, I
feel that the disruption to the area will be highly unfavorable.
Melissa Steen Edina, MN 2016-07-23 I am opposed to destroying the trees and wildlife habitat. I have teenagers and
new drivers and am concerned about the ice and snow hazards. I am also
concerned about the fiscal irresponsibility of the project for Edina residents.
Kristin Reichling Edina, MN 2016-07-23 This project 1) is not in the strategic plan, 2) is not budgeted, 3) was minimally
socialized and yet it impacts ALL Edina residents, 4) does not contain any of
the top 10 requests from the 2014 citizen survey, 5) removes green space, 6)
increases tax dollars, 7) requires significant maintenance for the city and
people living near Braemar, 8) competes with Hyland Hills, which citizen tax
dollars also fund 9) is a significant expenditure and 10) does not contain a clear
path to profitability.
Jackie Zipp Eidna, MN 2016-07-23 This proposed project adversely impacts a residential neighborhood, is not
projected to be self-funding, and destroys nature. Edina government, please
respect the limited financial resources of many of our community's residents.
This is an imprudent expenditure of our tax dollars.
Ted Youel Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-23 This project does a lot of harm to Braemar and its neighbors when Hornet Hills
is preferred by ski team. also, the skiing at Braemar will be for experts only and
snow making will produce a whole set of pollutantions: noise, light, ice
Name
Sue Keator
Location Date Comment
16-07-24 The City seems hell-bent on paving over or destroying every last bit of green
space. The parks and open space are what drew me here, not more pavement.
Plus, this is ridiculously expensive and is being done in an underhanded
manner, as seems common with the council these days.
Edina, MN agry
SEAL
ta 1 0 206
RECEIVED
Carey Wennerlyn
Judith Straub
Celia Ellingson
Minneapolis,
Edina, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Wufei Zhang
Hugh Thompson
William Steinke
Brian Rodeghier Edina, MN
16-07-24 I believe we should protect the existing wildlife in the area and because we
have access to ski trails nearby.
2016-07-24 Leave the trees, do not produce snow. Taxpayers do not want this nor do
environmentalists. Thank you.
2016-07-24 I am opposed to this project for environmental and financial reasons. As a
member of the Hills of Braemar neighborhood, I am opposed to this for the
detrimental impact expected on our neighborhood. Please respect the opinions
of those who will feel the consequences of this every day.
Thank you.
Celia Ellingson
2016-07-24 I don't want to see them lose any of Braemar golf course. We already lost Fred
Richards- don't need to lose any more venues and holes to golf.
2016-07-25 Keep green areas in Edina.
Edina is being bombarded with building and change that is completely
changing the look and integrity of our city.
2016-07-25 Instead of wasting time and money on this frivolous kind of project, fix our
roads instead!! So many main roads like Gleason and Tracy shake your liver
out when you drive them. Come on council - focus on the important stuff!
2016-07-25 We live in this neighborhood... It would ruin this beautiful park as it is... The
added traffic is not wanted or welcome... The area is already bustling with a
great hockey, figure skating, baseball and soccer programs... Not tome tip. The
golf! We're good!
2016-07-25 I am for a NOrdic trail at Braemar but not for a fancy tubing hill
2016-07-25 I do not want wildlife to be displaced nor do I want to increase my taxes and
have snow making happening so we might have more dangerous roads. I like
the peace and quiet.
2016-07-25 I am signing not because I am convinced this is a bad idea, though I suspect
that it is. I am signing because it is way to big a project to be pushed through
this quickly, given that it is not in the budget.
2016-07-25 I am tired of the overspending and not listening to residents who pay for all of
this!
2016-07-26 Adverse impact on environment, safety of nearby roads, noise and night-time
light in the neighborhood.
2016-07-26 This natural, wooded, hilly terrain is an asset in this part of Edina, Decimating it
for crass commercial gains would undo the years of foresight and wisdom
exhibited by the previous city planners who left the area undeveloped in its
natural state.
2016-07-26 I don't think this project is good for the environment or else. Therefore I would
like to express my objection to it. Thanks!
2016-07-26 More tax money out of all our pockets. Hyland Park full facilities are 2 miles
away
2016-07-26 I disagree with the spending
2016-07-26 I am opposed to this project due to the destruction of nature and the increase in
noise, lights, traffic, and unnecessary spending of public funds.
Rachel Ruegemer
Sandy r Matas
Tom McCanna
Kristi Colby
Richard Hauritz
Karen Howard
Frank Lerman
Debbie Lundstrom
Pankaj Gupta
Ajay Rawal
Minneapolis, MN
Edina, United States
Minor Outlying Islands
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Edina, MN
Name Location Date Comment
Linda Davis Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-26 This proposal is environmentally unsound, financially unsustainable and
unnecessary. The best ski hills in the metro area are within 5 miles of this
location. Money should be spent on education, if at all.
Balkrishna Jahagirdar Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-26 KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE.
Michael Launer Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-26 Too high of a cost for the Nordic Ski Trail
Anne Langaard Hopkins, MN 2016-07-27 We don't need a big, loud ski trail in Edina. It does not fit the city.
Kathy Cross Edina, MN 2016-07-27 I live close. Don't want the natural beauty destroyed. Don't want snow maker
noise. People noise. Extra traffic. Light pollution. Not needed. Too expensive.
You already assessed my taxes for the new Valley View Rd roundabout.
STOP I !II
j. k. Hopkins, MN 2016-07-27 not in favor of wasting ANY money for any projects/programs ... for such a
minority-percent-of-population-use. (low usage, high maintenance, high
maintenance cost, very weather-dependent activity). plenty of local parks to ski
in. leave braemar alone.
Sachin Choudhary Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-27 I want to keep the Braemar green and untouched
MARY WILEY Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-27 I am totally opposed to this project and feel the City Council has not been
responsive or responsible to Edina taxpayers.
Meredith Deeds Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-27 No lights! No tubing!
Jeanne Urban Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-28 Not a good use of our money and environmentally not sound
Peter Mulheran Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-28 I oppose!
Barb Hiserodt Maple Grove, MN 2016-07-28 It's a beautiful golf course. - and should remain that - a golf course.
Kelly Griffing Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-29 I don't support this plan.
nancy hall Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-29 We should leave the trees, not have the snow machine and evening activities
with it's light pollution in a primarily residential neighborhood. The 3 million
dollars is too much money
Tacia Babcock Edina, MN 2016-07-29 I am opposed to this project -do not feel it is necessary and way overpriced.
Not a good use of tax dollars.
Gary Bartolett Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-29 This is one of the stupidest ideas for wasting money Edina has ever embarked
on.
patricia winter Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-29 I'm signing because the words paid for by the sale of bonds are code words for
higher taxes.Dan Winter
Caroline Gade Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-30 Natural habitat, green space, walking trails and biking trails are a priority to the
residence of Edina. Implementing this ski plan will eliminate one of the last
places that these activities could take place.
,0„GITY
41' SEAL
AUG 1 0 "'
RECEIVED
Name
Bette Anderson
Location Date Comment 72316
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-30 I'm, frankly, SICK AND TIRED of all of the frivolous, all for show, proje,o vnEkle-D.
costing Edina millions and millions of dollars at the expense of the•taXpayers,
many who have had it and are moving elsewhere - LIKE ME!!! I've hadit with
Minnesota and it's uncontrolled spending and am moving to SOUTH
CAROLINA where the living is easy, luxurious and CHEAP!!! Minnesota could
take some lessons from WELL-MANAGED states and municipalities. My
property taxes DOUBLED in one year in 2015!!! Do ya really think that's
AFFORDABLE for most residents, plus road improvement assessments borne
SOLELY by the residents, school levies to give kids everything but their own
Lazyboy. arenas that no one uses, subsidized businesses building in the area,
etc., etc. Edina USED TO BE a very well-managed city with a sensible city
council that truly tried to get the most from conservative resources without
SOAKING the taxpayers. GET REAL AND CONSIDER THE POCKETBOOKS
OF EDINA RESIDENTS FOR A CHANGE INSTEAD OF SOLELY YOUR
UNJUSTIFIED EXCESSIVE SPENDING FOR AESTHETIC PURPOSES,
ETC., ETC nnnnniiimnimn
Dawn Martin Edina, MN 2016-07-30 We moved here from NYC to see greenery and natural habitat, yet be close to
the city. It is currently the best of both worlds, however, this plan will put a lit,
noisy ski trail directly in our line of sight from living areas and bedrooms.
Literally, our green views with deer, fox and rabbits will be replaced by
strangers looking into our windows. The lights and noise will be intolerable,
and the ice overspray on our house, walks and street will be treacherous and
bothersome. The ice overspray on Gleason, however, will bankrupt the City as
soon as one of the school children waiting for a bus gets hurt by a vehicle out
of control. The lawsuit will be unavoidable and undefendable. This is
irresponsible and must be stopped.
Bob York Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-30 Proposed development appears to make little sense. Another Nordic ski facility
developed by Park district is a few miles away. It has many more miles of trail
and is nearly as convenient to Edina residents and high schoolers. My
understanding is that the proposed budget for this facility shows it losing money
for at least a few years. I suspect whatever the projection is will be overly
optimistic. This is a bad project that will benefit relatively few while costing all
of us, particularly those in the nearby neighborhood. (I am not in an area
directly impacted. )
Richard Jahnke Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-30 I believe the $3MM for XC snowmaking is not a good investment of money and
trees. I support the investment of $200K for single trail MTB at Braemar to
provide a practice facility for the EHS MTB TEAM.
Tyler Colwell San Luis Obispo, CA 2016-07-31 This project is to large in scope and needs to be scaled back. Needs more
emphasis on mt bike trails.
Jeff Stevens Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-31 The costs, inconveniences, risks and losses grossly outweigh the benefits.
Karin VanDyke Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-31 The destruction of trees and wildlife habitat along with the traffic hazards
resulting from the snow making equipment is not what Edina residents want.
This is not an economically viable project and is not a good use of taxpayer
money.
Lisa Jahnke Edina, MN 2016-07-31 This is not cost effective. It will cost too much to maintain and there is already a
cross country ski path available at Highland Park in west Bloomington.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-31
Edina, MN 2016-07-31
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-31
Minneapolis, MN 2016-07-31
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-01
Joan Roe
LuAnne Speeter
Judy Fundingsland
Geneva Guilfoyle
Richard Katz
Dave Anderson
Judith Harvey
Name Location Date Comment
Donna D'Aquila Edina, MN 2016-07-31 As a resident of Edina since 1978, I would have expected to receive
information on this wasteful and destructive project before yesterday. The
meeting was July 13th? SEH privately pitching to "Our" city council and city
council not sharing this information fairly to Edina residents?? Appalling
behaviors even for this council.
My vote is "NO" to such a costly, not designated priority, environmentally
destructive (which shocks me with all the eco friendly recycling, can't burn
leaves and yard waste in eco bags required that the thought of tearing down
trees of magnitudes,etc), safety hazard, known money loosing scheme, bring in
the riff raff and raise my taxes again after all the bike lane flip flopping this
council has done is CRAZY.
Who are you council members really representing?? A question that has been
asked to many times to count.
Again, my vote is no and yours as representing our township should be no, as
well.
Donna D'Aquila
The increase in taxes for the benefit of a few, damage to the beautiful land
which supports wildlife, and now Buck Hill has developed accomodations for
cross country skiing, I feel it is not advisable. I can't afford more tax increase.
I'm all for activities that encourage individual and family engagement but still
respect the natural environment. This project needs alternative plans brought to
the residents for broader approval. We already have many sports venues in
Edina that draw in nonresidents. The Braemar winter project should focus on
Edina residents' needs and interests first. Please allow us to study alternative
plans before rushing forward so we can all proudly support it.
This project is way over the top in cost and size, what would be good is to
groom cross country trials on the golf course cart paths. It appears to me that
the company proposing to build this project has not investigated how the
people of Edina want to spend their tax money.
Residents need to have a voice on this decision.
Waste of taxpayer money. Fiscally irresponsible.
I live right by Braemar and I do not want the extra light, extra noise and snow
machines in the area. And I definitely don't want my taxes going up because of
it!
This project is unnecessary in my view. It displaces wildlife who are already
being encroached on with the construction of the Nine Mile Creek trail. We
have Hyland Park in Bloomington nearby and there are plenty of ski trails for
residents. If this is for the high school then they have a lot of available land for
ski trails below the high school. If there is such an operation in an area that is
not near residential locations nor would displace as much wildlife or kill as
many trees, that would be worthwhile studying. This project seems fast-
tracked and unwarranted especially in that location.
Name
Eric Kirchner
Location Date Comment
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-01 Strongly opposed to the thought of having snow making
crystals all over Gleason Road and having to shovel my
times a day as a result of the blowing "snow".
or CL_ s0- c\\1:3
mach es dOADAcEit\le.D.
drivew OJ mW'
Kyle Smoley
Stu erickson
Lucy Erickson
Daniel Bryant
Peggy Erickson
scott peterson
Karen Hazel
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Edina, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Edina, MN
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-02
How close is Hyland Park Reserve of which is already a wonderful facility for
this type of activity? Yep, thought so.
Last I checked people don't appreciate bright lights illuminating a bedroom, let
alone a child's bedroom, at all hours of the evening - and I certainly don't either.
I don't believe this is an appropriate use of funds or the property itself. There is
not a clamoring for this type of facility in Edina. Furthermore, it makes no
sense in the middle of a residential area. I also believe the Council members
are not doing their duty to vet this proposal appropriately.
it's fine like it is and I dislike the scraggly weeds that surround the new holes by
Gleason.
I'm signing this because I'm a skier and I know how bright the lights can be and
how loud snow blowers are. This seems very unnecessary, being that there is a
ski hill 5 minutes away. It would also destroy the natural beauty of the Braemar
area.
It hurts too many to please so few. Most would not be from our city. Three
rivers does a great job and they harm no one. Stop it !
This is a bad idea. It would destroy the neighborhood. The noise, lights and
snow crystals would be bring the quality of life down for the neighborhood and
surrounding areas. Trees would be lost and the deer I enjoy would be driven
away form all the traffic. Please don't pass this!
I oppose the Nordic Trail
The more I learn about this proposal, the worse it becomes. We depend on
ALL council members to vote on behalf of their constituents, not driven by pet
projects or special interest group demands. The fact is, ALL Edinans will be
paying for this, and the homeowners in the vicinity of this poorly designed plan
will suffer. Please vote NO, and pause, reboot, and devise a SENSIBLE
enhancement to Braemar. NOT this.
Ernest Martin Edina, MN 2016-08-02 Again, Edina going over the top.
Peggy Erickson
THOMAS WAGNER
Lesli Rauch
Dan Goodenough
Virginia Sweeny
Patrick Dulany
Ondrej Vesely
Chelsea Ganske
Name Location Date Comment
Edina, MN 2016-08-02 I am very concerned and oppose the plans for the Braemar Nordic skiing trails.
I ask that you vote "NO" for this project.
I have worked at Hyland Hills as a ski instructor and on the admin/managerial
side of the business for years. I can tell you first hand that snow blowing is a
messy, loud business. The blown snow travels very far from the intended paths
and ends up in the neighborhood surrounding Hyland (Buck Hill has a warning
sign on Hwy 35 for this). The lights from Hyland are a nuisance for the
neighborhood across the way. The manmade snow is much different from the
mother nature kind. Because of the chemicals added, it crystallizes denser and
makes it almost impossible to scrape off of your windshield and roads. Each
season when the snowsports season starts, the Hyland office gets hammered
by complaints about snow blowing, the noise and lights. However, Hyland Hill
Ski area was there long before the neighborhood was built, so many neighbors
knew what they were buying into. That is not the case with the Braemar Hills
neighborhood. We have lived in the area for almost 20 years and loved the fact
that Braemar used to claim to be a "wild life sanctuary" (on the old sign to the
entrance). The plans to build the nordic paths would be a detriment to the flora
and fauna. The paths in the woods would be raped of the trees that so many
hiker/walkers enjoy. I have hiked those woods for years and it would break my
heart to see so many trees gone. It makes me sad that the Edina City Council
would deteriorate the quality of life for the area surrounding Braemar Hills,
spend taxpayers' money and shove this nordic plan forward. I have noticed the
survey markers in the Braemar woods long before the nordic plans hit the
media. It upsets me that the land would be surveyed and taxpayers money
spent before Edina residents could have a say in the matter. The cart was put
on before the horse.
I don't oppose the nordic ski trails (I'll use them). However, they should just go
through the golf course and blown snow will not affect the area homes. Any
project that moves forward should be on a much smaller scale.
fundamentally opposed to a $3m development with profound environmental
and neighborhood impact when we already provide tax support for Hyland Park
ski facilities are 2.8 miles south of Braemar (8 min away per google maps)
I disagree with the unbudgeted potential spend on a project that serves so few.
I am also disappointed that a project of this magnitude could potentially come
to fruition, without following proper protocol. It's extremely disappointing on too
many fronts.
Why would we do this???? Not needed and wasteful.
This is a permanently disruptive and unneeded project.
I don't feel this is a good use of tax payers dollars. Only a small group would
benefit from this huge expense.
I oppose this project. It is financially questionable, destroys natural habitat, and
creates significant burden on the surrounding residential neighborhood. In
particular, the proposed length of the cross-country ski trails (3.0 km = 1.9
miles) does not compare to existing 9.5 miles of ski trails in Hyland Lake Park
Reserve (which is located just few miles south across highway 494) and does
not in my opinion justify such a reckless and significant disturbance of the
existing wildlife habitat. Also, someone please help me understand how does
snow tubing align with Edina's strategic plan and vision. Thank you.
I am signing this because I feel that a project of this magnitude should allow for
more public input (Edina residents) and SME scrutiny.
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-02
Edina, MN 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-02
Saint Paul, MN 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-03
Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-03
Nicholas Winninger Minneapolis, MN
Mandy Bai Minneapolis, MN
Yongjun Hou Edina, MN
Laurie Wilson Spencer Minneapolis, MN
1,SC
'LI Date Comment
, C)*-- „el
2016-08-03 The city of Edina is hell bent on spending money on new proj
. N
Th
u
e
:
C.) 1-- - •
..:4 \ N& ' ( alternative solution to constructing the Nordic Ski Trail at Brae ar .8if ) 93.0ge
is to use the new Nine Mile Creek bike path in the winter as a c ass 684ntry ski
trail that costs no additional dollars since it's already under constru ik-Iliau
solved!
2016-08-03 If it won't break even, and imposes a tax burden on non-nordic ski users then
why would I want to support it?
2016-08-04 I am against this proposal to protect the original green nature and wildlife in
Edina. Human beings are already too greedy to invade into natures wherever
possible.
2016-08-04 Keep limited green space for Edina
2016-08-04 This is not the way we want the environment to be in our neighborhood. The
cost vs use is not only prohibitive but the usage at potentially 43-60 days a year
is totally an unreasonable usage to destroy this wild life environment and
assess us 3 million in taxes. I would hope the city council and mayor would
listen to your constituents on our wants and needs, not frivolous pet projects
not needed or wanted by special interest groups for such a high price with such
a limited usage of time.
Name Location
Ed DonFrancesco Edina, MN
ward Johnson Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-04 I love the concept.
Kristin Lindberg Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-04 Do not need a destination tubing/nordic area in Edina. Do not want additional
traffic through our community.
albert matson edina, MN 2016-08-04 Halt development
Max Martin Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 It would destroy property value and severely ice surrounding neighborhood
roads. It is essentially ONLY beneficial for a small community (nordic),
Jojn Leach Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 To have edina stop wasting money.
Tong Miao Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 I am opposed to this project, the money should be used at more useful area.
And Edina is such a small city, and the neighborhood is going to be affected by
the noise, which is not good for families.
Dong Ouyang Wauconda, IL 2016-08-05 Damage to the natural park
Yi Liu Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 We don't want to pay the tax to support this project that only benefit very very
limited persons. We have already paid a lot of extra tax to improve the school
facility, the road construction. We cannot pay any more, Please stop this project
and reduce the already heaven burden to edina residence. Thanks.
Jia Huang Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 Cost too much!
Bo Lu Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 The value/cost of this project needs complete evaluation before final decision is
made.
Xiaowen Huang Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 This is a very costly project and definitely not best use of tax payer's money. It
will not be beneficial to general public. More importantly it potentially makes
our neighborhood less safe. I strongly oppose to this project!!
Cathy Ge Eden Prairie, MN 2016-08-05 I am signing because I am part of the Edina community and I want to keep
Edina's Braemar green.
Shenglan Long Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 I don't like the property tax go up. I like the current nature with wild
trees,animals and walking trail
Michael Nicklay Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-05 I want to keep some natural space undeveloped in the city. Not every inch of
green space needs to be developed.
Name cy
•
L9Fatli
Judith Felker 5 co\ dina, I1/1N
%)1
ovERK
c).
Date Comment
2016-08-05 This is too big a project to rush through as fast as its going. $3 million is worth
making sure all residents know about it and weigh in before the mayor and city
council vote. Sept 7th is too soon for a vote of this consequence. Postpone the
vote, please.
2016-08-05 This would path directly affect our everyday lives- for the worse. We would be
able to see skiers from our bedroom windows! Not even to mention the safety
issues on Gleason or the noise that it would cause.
2016-08-05 It affects the health of the neighborhood residents. The tax increases due to the
project burden every resident but the project benefits just a few people!
2016-08-05 I don't understand why you would want to do this to such a gorgeous area. This
area was such discussed on the news for it wildlife refuge.
Bob Martin Minneapolis, MN
jie na Minneapolis, MN
Carol Bruemmer Minneapolis, MN
Why don't you develop side walks on at least one side of all streets in Edina
instead. It would make more sense and create a walking friendly environment.
I definitely don't see why anyone would want to add this project to a beautiful
are like Braemar Golf Course.
Pauline Fofana Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-06 I want a smart development that preserves nature and our tax dollars
Luhe Ge Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-06 This project will not benefit the general public while spending such a big
amount of money. It will also damage the only natural preserve we have left in
Edina.
Kathryn Rivers Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-06 The cost, safety, not necessary.
Tammy Rosselit Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-07 Why do we want the City to get into something that won't be financially
sustainable and safe for the residents leaving near there.
Robert Nazarian Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-07 I am signing because I'm opposed to spending $3 million to build a redundant,
money losing recreational activity which creates noise and light pollution in a
previously tranquil area
Linda Berg Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-07 NO! This cannot happen in our neighborhood.,..no ice. Ski crap...
Elizabeth Wright Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-07 We are already putting too much money into the park at Fred Richards and just
eliminated that. Now we have to pay for more? Why didn't we just put money
into Fred Richards? Ridiculous
David Buyse Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-08 I oppose the proposed ski trail and tubing hill at Braemar because of the
unnecessary cost to be borne by the Edina taxpayers, the destruction to the
current green space, and the noise and light pollution created by the trail,
snowmaking and grooming equipment.
Highland Hills is close...we don't need this in Edina. Save the money!!
Angela Buyse Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-08 I'm signing because I don't want the City to spend OUR money on a XC Ski
track, when we are so close to Highland Hills. Additionally, we don't want the
trail cut thru the current green space, along with all the created noise, light
pollution, and cost for snow making and grooming.
Finally, we don't need a tubing hill! We don't need to pay to slide in Edina!
Lishi Vesely Minneapolis, MN
Barbara Grossman Minneapolis, MN
2016-08-08 Please stop this wasteful project.
2016-08-08 We don't need this at Braemar. Hyland is just across 494 where there are
many winter activities. I wonder how many Edina residents will use this. Let's
keep Braemar green and environmentally preserved. I don't believe this is a
good use of taxpayer money and I don't want my taxes increased for
something most residents will not use. Thank you.
Melissa Lindholm Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-09 To preserve the natural beauty, wild life and tree.
Peter Lee Minneapolis, MN 2016-08-09 I oppose the plan to develop this area into a Nordic Ski Trail and sledding hill.
change.org
Recipient: The Edina City Council, James Hovland, Mary Brindle, Kevin Staunton, Bob
Stewart, and Ann Swenson
Letter: Greetings,
KEEP EDINA'S BRAEMAR GREEN AND SAFE!
c
Signaturetc''',0
or'?
Name
Joshua Ahlberg
James Wyckoff
Karen Hazel
Kelli Ahlberg
Nicholas Seivert
Nicole Kirkwood
John Swon
Connie Bowen
Pat Robertson
Leslie Vogel
Babette Bean
Patricia Kivestu
Julie Hurley
Tom Gartner
Janae Hentges
Allison Gartner
John Traul
Susan Lewis
Tom McNamee
Liberta Ledder
Carol Kerr
Ravi Amara
Wendy Fox
Traci Lewis
Kristen Neal
Maria Lux
Lorraine Hanson
Charles Ledder
Lisa Krohn
Ashley Bowles
Location Date
, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-19
Name
Ginger Traul
Stephanie Freudenthal
Judith Felker
Ann Meagher
Nancy Jones
Carolyn Davies
Jackie Colwell
Lynn Swon
Marlese Alden
Bob Grossman
Michael Radenbaugh
Raquel Radenbaugh
Amy Benson
Bonvino Chris
Susan Konezny
Cristina Notermann
Deanna Duffy
kristen rice
Trina Bloemendaal
Linda Wood
Jen Medina
Adam Weber
Andrew Dypwick
Laura Kondrick
Mike Hurley
Meghan Van Someren
Nathaniel Shea
David Vandermolen
Miriam Stake
Julie Abdo
Peggy Westfall
Micahel Benson
Location
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Howard Lake, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Hood River, OR, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
tO
Date SEA 2;
fw „ ,?c)
2016-0 -19NY "
2016-07 g,1
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-19
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
2016-07-20
Patrick Stubbs
Kathy tran
Jeff Barin
Jenny Beamish
Rita Paris
James Stangl
Sam Carrillo
Anne Dixon
Jessica Spindler
Dennis Kaplan
john Gries
Jody Olsen
Jennifer H
Robert Ortiz
Anna Medina
Marcia Friedman
Marilyn Anderson
Evan Anderson
Addie Hardie
Vivien Talghader
Nancy Joas
Bruce Freeman
paul k joas joas
Robert Kurek
Ruth Kurek
Bill Ziegler
Sail Amara
David Johnston
Molly Sikora
Jim Beer
Pat Stotts
c
o cLER/r
g ' Name -- , o<1,0
5 ,c,\
Paul Settle \''...,4-. 01\
\ J °
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Mayfield Heights, OH, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-20
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
San Francisco, CA, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-21
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-22
Name
Robert Maginnis
Jennifer Collins
Barbara Conroy
Lisa Mottla
Bernadine Letsche
Jody Beresford
Austin Wagner
Susie Van Hoomissen
Amanda Wagner
Karen Bach
Lori Elton Cowles
Joey Ge
Richard Letsche
Patricia Charnel!
Patrick Downey
Jane Barcelow
earl faulkner, sr
Jim McNulty
KRIS A. BARCELOW 7436
SHANNON DR.
Duncan Charnell
Sheran McNulty
Devorah Koval
Jim Downey
Kathy Christensen
Bob Hussey
Jeffrey Moore
Melissa Steen
Sunil Bafna
paul steen
Paulette Mitchell
Kristin Reichling
Location
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Punta Gorda, FL, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Howard Lake, MN, United States
Date t..
c.NlY
sEta-
201 7..R \ 020
2016 741COleO.
2016-07-
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-22
2016-07-23
2016-07-23
2016-07-23
2016-07-23
2016-07-23
Name
Jacqueline Zipp
Carol Wolfe
Lynne Swanson
Ted Youel
Mark Burke
John Reichling
Sue Keator
Paul Rosenthal
Carey Wennerlyn
Beth Darg
Andrew Downey
Judith Straub
Celia Ellingson
Rachel Ruegemer
Elizabeth McCarty
Tim Deutsch
Keith Dixon
John Gilbert
Ruth Kewitsch
Katherine Rodeghier
Sandra Matas
Tom McCanna
Kari Halker
Leslie Jones
Kristi Colby
Jack Kewitsch
Margaret Joas
Richard Hauritz
Brenda Olson
Laura Gustafson
Karen Howard
Dan Wolfe
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-23
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-24
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-25
Date .co cisiti,
7 cep.-
20164 p P\`'
2016-07-*,T"
2016-07.5 —
Name
Shirley Polly
Frank Lerman
Cynthia Janssen
Gunjan Sinha
Debbie Lundstrom
Pankaj Gupta
Stacey Govito
Anthony Kosters
Ajay Rawal
George Mori
Wufei Zhang
Pallavi Rao
Mike Sackett
Patricia Gilligan
Michael Madich
Hugh Thompson
Susan Downey
Darcy Dahnert
William Steinke
Jeff & sheila Bowers
Janice Leverentz
Brian Rodeghier
Mary Finnegan
Francis Finnegan
Linda Davis
Balkrishna Jahagirdar
Joel Johnson
Rozlyn Caruso
Michael Launer
Angela Holland
Luana Metil
Anna Mae Lambert
Location
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Beaufort, SC, United States
Eden Prairie, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
eagan, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Hopkins, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
2016-07-25
2016-07-25
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-26
2016-07-27
2016-07-27
Name
cheri hannagan
Lily O'Connor
Anne Langaard
Marcella McIntyre
Tara Wyckoff
Kathy Cross
Lee Ann Gustafson
Bobbi Laird
Erin Choudhary
sr
Sachin Choudhary
Julia Meyer
MARY WILEY
Bill Berard
Meredith Deeds
Tricia Frisk
Erin Keeley
Ann Platt
Mark Arnold
Jeanne Urban
Evan Byers
Mark Urban
mary kosters
Katie Byers
Peter Mulheran
Joseph Talghader
Matthew Mulheran
Barb Hiserodt
Kelly Griffing
nancy hall
Nancy Haley
Tacia Babcock
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Hopkins, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-27
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
edina, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Osseo, MN, United States 2016-07-28
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-29
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-29
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-07-29
Edina, MN, United States 2016-07-29
Name
Gary Bartolett
Daniel Winter
Ann Kapaun
Peter McHugh
Caroline Gade
Bette Anderson
david frenkel
Maria M. Malooly
Dawn Martin
Bobby Martin
Bob York
Richard Jahnke
Ted Colwell
Jeff Stevens
Renee Hunzelman
Karin VanDyke
Inna Hays
Lisa Jahnke
Randee Jez
Chad Smith
Donna D'Aquila
Joan Roe
LuAnne Speeter
Howard Bolter
Judy Fundingsland
Genny Guilfoyle
jan hall
Randy Evans
Richard Katz
Jerome Bock
Kyoung Lee
Dave Anderson
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-30
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-07-31
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
2016-08-01
Location
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Name
Judith Harvey
Eric Kirchner
Kyle Smoley
john primus
Mary Wenborg
Stu erickson
Lucy Erickson
Xijian Chen
Peter Seng
Jianying Zhao
Daniel Bryant
Ken Barnes
William Erickson
scott peterson
Ruby Benson
Ernest Martin
Jeannie finer
Sarah Miller
THOMAS WAGNER
Lesli Rauch
Catherine Thatcher
Joan Miesbauer
Chuck Dunn
Dan Goodenough
Jeff Johnson
Tim McNulty
Christine Loving
KJ McNulty
K McNulty
lauren peterson
Virginia Sweeny
Marit Swanson
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Edina, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Edina, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-01
Edina, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Edina, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-02
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
United States
Name
Daniel Lowin
Stacey Dulany
Patrick Dulany
Paul Kaefer
Toni Cady
Neil Sheehy
Alison Dougherty
Wei Zhao
Ondrej Vesely
Chelsea Ganske
Ed DonFrancesco
Reid Gustafson
Nicholas Winninger
Miriam Olson
Paul Muchulas
Roger Lund
Susan Dolan
Mark Shull
Xiaoxi Jannsen
Yuefen Deng
Yirong Jiang
Mandy Bai
Yanping Chang
Lei Jiang
Brad Jannsen
Jerry Tian
Guihong Chen
Yongjun Hou
Jerry Witowski
Yu Zhang
Laurie Wilson Spencer
ward johnson
Location
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Minneapolis, MN,
Date 4 50.
\c
2016- [7: -0 r ),,I,c)
2016-08-02
2016-08-02
2016-08-02
2016-08-02
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-03
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
2016-08-04
1C—LE-R-Ar
.g. ce‘\' l `' Name 5 c). 40
Kristin Lindberg '1' °D.<-04 - CZ
Hongyu Xue
Andrew Brown
Albert Matson
Max Martin
Jinmei Shen
Nicole Stevens
Jojn Leach
yan Zhang
Janette Hansen
Qingguo Zhang
Emily fan
Tong Miao
jinghua ma
Dong Ouyang
Chenfeng Lu
Grace Li
Yi Liu
Jia Huang
Minghong Fan
Guanghai Wang
Patrick Zhu
Bo Lu
julie mellum
Barbara J. Anderson
Zongyuan Yu
Amy Nelson
Yong Yang
Xiaowen Huang
Cathy Ge
Shenglan Long
Michael Nicklay
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-04
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-04
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-04
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-04
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
FORNOMPfi, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
01035DVIJAfi, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
edina, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Eden Prairie, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-05
Name
Matthew Kotefka
De Zhang
Boyang Hong
Bob Martin
jie na
Elizabeth Dokken
Rebecca Douglas
Carol Bruemmer
Helen Liu
Hui Zhu
Lei Pan
Pauline Fofana
Erica Wu
Aaron Swann
James Blanner
Evelyn Ge
Steven Vogt
Debasish Mallick
Anita Mallick
Kathryn Rivers
Mike Spencer
Chrys Bryant
Pamela Newsome-Prochniak
Katie Downey
Brandi Reed
Kathryn Peterson
Germana Paterlini
Tammy Rosselit
Bryan Kooistra
Mukund Prajapati
Robert Nazarian
Linda Berg
Location
Saint Paul, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
0AJEF7EVIAfi, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Edina, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
CSei CI-44
Date ea EP - Lu
2016-08-0
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-05
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-06
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
2016-08-07
0 4-
( 4. 0.\-
Name me
-40 .0 Elizabeth Wright
John Cameron
Michael McFarlane
David Buyse
Amelia Kooistra
Kari Ciardelli
Tony Satterthwaite
Marilee Hanson
Angela Buyse
David Wright
Tom Martens
Lishi Vesely
Shawn Hartfeldt
Victoria Atwater
John Elsing
Vincent Bongaarts
Sandra Grossman
Jean Tracy
Barbara Grossman
Eric Seng
Clare Coldren
Melissa Lindholm
Peter Lee
Location Date
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-07
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-07
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Edina, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-08
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-09
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-09
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-09
Minneapolis, MN, United States 2016-08-09
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: C.1.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Minutes
From:Jac kie Ho o genakker, P lanning Sup p o rt
Item Activity:
Subject:Minutes : P lanning Co mmis s io n July 13, 2016 Info rmatio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
Find attached July 13, 2016, P lanning Commission Meeting Minutes
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
2016 07-13 Planning Commis s ion Meeting Minutes Regular
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 1 of 12
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Planning Commission
Edina City Hall Council Chambers
July 13, 2016 7:00 P.M.
I. Call To Order
Chair Platteter called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
II. Roll Call
Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Hobbs, Lee, Thorsen, Strauss, Olsen, Nemerov,
Hamilton, Bennett, Chair Platteter. Student Members Kivimaki, Ma. Staff Present, City Planner,
Teague, Assistant City Planner, Aaker, Communications Coordinator Gilenbach, Administrative
Specialist, Hoogenakker
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Chair Platteter filed the Agenda as submitted.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the June 22, 2016, meeting
minutes. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
V. Public Hearings
A. Public Hearing: Rezoning & Subdivision of 5901 Lincoln Drive, Opus Development
Company LLC – Continue Public Hearing to the July 27, 2016 meeting.
Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to continue the public hearing for 5901 Lincoln
Drive, Edina MN to the July 27, 2016, meeting of the Planning Commission. Motion was
seconded by Commissioner Lee. All voted aye. The motion carried.
B. B-16-11 Galleria Variance Request
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 2 of 12
Planner Presentation
Planner Aaker reported that the requests are for a 10.01 foot setback variance to construct a 17-foot
tall, 20’ x 60’ protective canopy/Porte Cochere over a drive aisle and parking area as part of a proposed
building expansion for a net increase of 19,980 square feet of gross leasable area to the north east
corner of the Galleria Mall. The Mall addition conforms to all of the zoning ordinance requirements with
the exception of the canopy setback and number of on-site parking stalls provided by the entire Mall
site/Westin site parking ramp.
Approve the requested variances based on the following findings:
a) The practical difficult is caused by the current parking codes which do not recognize
tenant mix and shared parking opportunity.
b) The Porte Cochere encroachment into the setback is a very small area compared to the
size of the existing building and proposed addition on the site. The Porte Cochere is a
minor overlap into the setback, is an overhang structure and is not part of enclosed mall
area.
c) The request is reasonable given that the improvements will enhance the entire mall and
support the Southdale Area Guiding Principles of public engagement, human scale and
minimizing surface parking.
d) The Parking assessment study concludes that there is adequate parking available.
Approval of the variances is also subject to the following conditions:
1. The Porte Cochere canopy, site plan and parking plan must be constructed as per the proposed
plans date stamped June 13, 2016.
2. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering’s memo dated July
6, 2016.
3. Nine Mile Creek watershed Permit is required
4. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits are required.
Appearing for the Applicant
Greg Houck, Cunningham Arch.
Discussion and Comments
Commissioners expressed the following:
• Planner Aaker was asked about the usage of the ramp. Planner Aaker responded that the ramp
is regularly underutilized. She said there could be some hesitancy on the role of the ramp, if it’s
for the Westin or Shopping Center.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 3 of 12
• A question was raised if Edina has “shared parking” language in their Ordinance, adding if it
doesn’t it is something the City needs to address especially in the Greater Southdale Area.
• It was suggested that the Galleria look at any site redevelopment while keeping an eye toward
future changes in use in the neighborhood and on the Galleria site itself.
• It was suggested that more study needs to be done on the pedestrian access points to make
them safer; pointing out that area of the parking lot services multiple uses to include residential.
• It was also suggested that signage definitely needs to be added and or clarified. It was further
suggested that if there are earmarked “drop off” points they need to be better developed and
clarified. It was further noted signage could play an important role in traffic calming on the site;
noting as presented the pedestrian experience along with vehicle circulation is lacking on the
plan presented.
• Use better signage or the media to let Galleria visitors know that the ramp can be used while
they shop. Again better clarify the ramps purpose.
• Concern was expressed on the cut-through nature of the drive aisle between the Westin and
Ramp.
• Provide clear pedestrian connections and signage from the parking ramp across the drive-aisle
and to the Galleria.
While the Commission stated they understood the proposed addition they expressed dissatisfaction
with the plans as presented, especially as they relate to pedestrian connections, and traffic calming
measures for vehicles. Adequate signage and clearer pedestrian points need to be developed.
Applicant Comments
Mr. Houck said that signage is proposed throughout the site. He pointed out that the Galleria has
multiple points of entrance and their goal is to face the mall outwards. Proposed Ramp signage should
aid in clarifying who can use the ramp.
Public Testimony
Chair Platteter opened the public hearing.
The following residents spoke to the issue:
Les Wanninger, 3209 Galleria, #1608 informed the Commission he resides at the Westin and his concern
is with cut through traffic.
Christine Warren, 3209 Galleria, #1302 told the Commission she has internal traffic flow safety concerns
especially for the senior population. Warren also noted that she supports retaining as much
greenspace as possible.
Chair Platteter asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Thorsen
moved to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye.
The motion carried.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 4 of 12
Motion
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to approve the Galleria Variance request based on
staff findings and subject to staff conditions. No second was offered.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nemerov to table the request to the next meeting of the
Planning Commission on July 27th, or to a future meeting to allow the applicant time to address
concerns over pedestrian connections, traffic calming and signage. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Thorsen.
Chair Platteter offered an amendment asking the applicant to address/clarify traffic calming
issues to include pedestrian access points (crosswalks), way finding (appropriate signage) and
eliminate/reduce the option of using the drive aisle between the Westin and parking ramp for
cut through traffic and to better identify the ramp as a parking ramp for the Galleria Shopping
Center. Commissioners Nemerov and Thorsen accepted those suggestions.
Commissioner Nemerov said with regard to the request about cut through traffic that the
applicant could present solutions or reasons why it can’t be done differently.
All voted aye to table the variance request to the meeting of July 27, 2016. Motion carried.
C. Rezoning from PCD-4 to PCD-1 & Preliminary Site Plan Review with Variances for Ted Carlson
at 4528 &4530 France Avenue, Edina, MN.
Staff Presentation
Planner Teague reported that Ted Carlson, Orion Investments is proposing to redevelop the properties
at 4528 and 4530 France Avenue. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing building at 4530
(former Rapid Oil Change) and build an addition above the existing garage at 4528 France that would
match the existing building on that lot. A bank drive-through is proposed along France Avenue.
The plan is generally consistent with a sketch plan that was reviewed for redevelopment of the site back
in 2011, and most recently in April, 2016. At that time the plan was generally well received. The Council
also concluded that a small area plan was not required prior to rezoning. The proposed building is
slightly smaller than the one proposed in 2001. Teague said to accommodate the request the applicant
is requesting the following:
• A rezoning of the Oil Change site (4530 France) from PCD-4 to PCD-1, Planned Commercial
District; and
• Site Plan Review with building, signage, parking and parking lot setback variances.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 5 of 12
Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Preliminary
Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PCD-1, Planned Commercial District and
Preliminary Development Plan with the requested Variances to tear down the existing building at 4530
and build an addition above the existing garage at 4528 France that would match the existing building
on that lot. A bank drive-through is included in the approval. Approval is subject to the following
findings:
1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed variances are reasonable. The practical difficulty is the small lot size, the single-
family homes to the west, and the existing structures and parking lots/drive aisles on the site.
These conditions make any redevelopment difficult. A code compliant free standing sign would
potentially be blocked from view on France if the proof of parking stalls were constructed.
3. The proposal is a vast improvement over existing conditions, which includes pavement that
extends to the lot lines. Green space has been added along west lot line and France Avenue. A
lot of landscaping has been added, including on top of the existing parking structure that will
remain. A fence and landscaping along the west lot line will provide an improved buffer to the
single-family homes to the west.
4. A parking study was conducted by WSB that concludes that adequate parking is provided within
the development. City Code required parking is not necessary for the site. A proof-of-parking
plan is proposed for additional spaces. These stalls are not expected to be needed, but could be
constructed if parking becomes a problem.
5. The site is uniquely located adjacent to single-family homes, and the existing nonconforming
underground parking structure is not common in this PCD-1 Zoning District. These conditions
were not created by the applicant.
6. The proposed new building will enhance the character of the neighborhood, as it is a vast
improvement to the existing structure. The parking areas will also be improved by adding
landscaping along the west lot line, where there is none today. The landscaping and green space
in front and in back of the new building will also improve the character of the neighborhood.
Approval is also subject to the following Conditions:
1. The Final Development Plans must be consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated
June 17, 2016, and the materials board as presented to the Planning Commission.
2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the
Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for
one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or
erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for
replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built.
3. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated July 6, 2016.
4. Provision of code compliant bike racks (5 minimum) near the building entrances.
5. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions
to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 6 of 12
6. The on-site drive-aisle shall be widened to accommodate emergency vehicle, subject to review
and approval of the fire marshal.
7. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent residential property and from
France Avenue, per Section 36-1459 of the City Code.
8. Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum lighting requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Lighting shall be down lit.
Appearing for the Applicant
Ed Farr, Edward Farr Architects
Discussion and Comments
Commissioners expressed the following:
• Is the drive-up window still present? Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. He pointed
out the
drive-up has been relocated from sketch plan review to make it less visible.
• Planner Teague was asked to clarify what a Proof of Parking (POP) Agreement is. Planner Teague
explained that a Proof of Parking Agreement in entered into between the City and applicant
when the applicant has room to add additional parking spaces; however do not add those
spaces unless needed. The Proof of Parking Agreement affords many sites the opportunity to
maximize greenspace instead of a concrete parking lot.
• It was asked if the applicant could just go ahead and add those POP spaces. Teague said
nothing would prevent the applicant from adding those spaces. Teague said that traditionally
that hasn’t been found to happen. Teague also suggested if that was a concern the Commission
could “tighten up” the POP agreement.
• Commissioners commented on the on-going auto leasing spaces that occurs in the existing
garage questioning if those spaces would continue to be leased. Planner Teague responded if
those spaces are needed they will be used by tenants of the site.
Applicant Presentation
Ted Carlson, Gateway Bank, addressed the Commission and informed them when designing the project
they
applied the newly drafted Greater Southdale Study Working Principles. He echoed Planner Teague’s
comment
that their intent was to use the parking spaces in the lower level for tenant parking. With regard to the
Proof of
Parking agreement Carlson said they would like that kept open and up to them. Carlson said they do
not want
to limit themselves with regard to parking.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 7 of 12
Mr. Farr told the Commission they held a neighborhood meeting that was attended by residents of
both
Morningside and White Oaks.
Continuing, with graphics Farr pointed out the changes to the plan to include a new architectural
element
a clock tower. Farr further pointed out the reduction in curb cuts, enhanced landscaping, bike racks and
screened patio.
Discussion and comments
• The applicant was asked if the storm water management plan included the build out of the POP
stalls. Farr responded those stalls were added in the calculations. He said they will comply with
all storm water management requirements.
• It was suggested (if possible) that more deciduous trees were added to the landscaping plan.
• The applicant was asked how the neighborhood residents liked the clock tower and other
revisions to the plan. Farr responded that roughly 24 neighbors attended the neighborhood
meeting; adding he believes the project was positively received. Farr said that traffic was
discussed with Farr reporting they believe the project would disperse traffic throughout the day
with over 70% occurring during non-peak hours.
• Farr was questioned on how they addressed the noise potential from the proposed patio. Farr
responded that the patio would be screened to help reduce noise.
Public Testimony
Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Motion
A motion was made by Commissioner Hobbs to recommend approval of the rezoning with
variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Thorsen.
Commissioner Nemerov offered a friendly amendment giving the applicant the option of not
putting grass between the sidewalk and street. The amendment was not accepted by the
motioners.
Planner Teague asked that the conditions for approval include the Proof of Parking Agreement.
Commissioner Hobbs and Thorsen agreed to include that as a condition.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 8 of 12
A brief discussion ensued on the strip of grass along France Avenue. It was noted that that area can be
planted
with native plants that would survive the elements that come with being so close to the street.
Commissioner Lee stated that she could not support the project as presented. She said she believes
that
pedestrians will feel like they are walking through a parking lot. She further expressed concern that
the Proof of Parking spaces will be added sooner than later. Lee said in her opinion this is a mini strip
mall with
parking in front.
Chair Platteter called for the vote. Ayes; Hobbs, Thorsen, Strauss, Olsen Nemerov, Hamilton,
Bennett, Platteter. Nays; Lee. Motion carried 8-1.
Chair Platteter told the applicants the Commission appreciated that you listened to our concerns and
suggestions, adding he believes it created a better product.
D. Conditional Use Permit for Christian Family Church at 7375 Bush Lake Road, Edina, MN
Staff Presentation
Planner Teague informed the Commission that Christian Family Church is proposing to remodel the
interior of the existing office building at 7375 Bush Lake Road into a Church. The church would hold
services Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. They have 200 members in their congregation
including children. There would be classrooms for children education within the building that would
also take place primarily Sunday and Wednesday’s. The proposed sanctuary would seat 360 people
maximum, which would provide an opportunity for the congregation to grow in size. The required
number of parking stalls for churches is one space per three seats in the largest place of assembly.
Additional spaces may be required for other uses that take place at the same time. There are 170
parking stalls on the site today. There are no exterior alterations proposed to the building or the site.
To accommodate the request, the following is requested:
• Conditional Use Permit for the church. Churches are conditionally permitted uses in all zoning
districts
Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional Use
Permit for Christian Family Church at 7375 Bush Lake Road.
Approval is subject to the following findings:
The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria in Section 36-305 of the City Code as follows:
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 9 of 12
a. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or
existing or proposed improvements;
b. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property;
c. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare;
d. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in
the vicinity;
e. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is
located, as imposed by this chapter; and
f. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Final approval is subject to the following Conditions:
1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below:
• Site & building plans date stamped June 17, 2016.
• Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council
meeting.
2. Two additional over-story trees must be planted on site to comply with minimum landscaping
requirements.
3. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies.
Appearing for the Applicant
Dr. Tim Peterson, applicant
Discussion and Comments
• A question was raised on how the City defines places of worship in the Code. Planner Teague
responded that a number of the City’s zoning districts allow religious institutions, including
churches, etc. as a conditional use. He said religious institutions are conditionally permitted in
all residential districts, adding language varies per district.
• It was asked if hours of operation can be limited. Planner Teague responded that in the
residential districts there can be limitations placed on hours of operation.
• Planner Teague was asked if the City received any feedback from neighbors. Planner Teague
responded he doesn’t believe the City has received any comments on the request, adding
residents were notified and a sign was posted.
Applicant Presentation
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 10 of 12
Dr. Peterson introduced himself and his wife, Shireen and explained he has been a pastor for 35 years
and has a
Church in Owatonna. He added what they would like is to find a permanent home in the metro area
and hope
that home is here.
Dr. Peterson was asked if the entire building would be used as the church. Dr. Peterson responded in
the
affirmative. He said the building would be renovated; and used for church purposes (office, classrooms)
and
hopeful growth. Dr. Peterson was further asked if there would be overnight stays at the church. Dr.
Peterson
responded that he believes the children’s group has an overnight once a quarter.
Public Hearing
Chair Platteter opened the public hearing. No one spoke to the issue.
A Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded
by
Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Motion
Motion was made by Commissioner Thorsen to recommend approval of the Conditional Use
Permit for 7375 Bush Lake Road based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Motion
seconded by Commissioner Strauss. All voted aye. The motion carried.
VI. Community Comment
Chair Platteter opened Community comment.
No Community Comment
VII. Reports and Recommendations
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 11 of 12
A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Temporary Family Health Care Dwelling
Planner Presentation
Planner Teague explained that the Planning Commission is asked to consider an Ordinance Amendment
that
would opt out of the recently passed legislation requiring cities to allow temporary family health care
dwelling
units.
Teague reported that this year’s legislative session approved a bill that requires cities to allow
temporary
accessory dwelling unit (no larger than 300 square feet). Teague said the law exempts these uses from
typical
zoning authority and requires cities to approve them within 15 days. The passed legislation included a
provision
for cities and counties to opt out of the requirement. Teague concluded that there are three options the
city can consider 1) support the legislation, 2) opt-out, and 3) write our own ordinance. The Planning
Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on July 27, 2016.
Chair Platteter suggested that the Commission not act on the amendment until the public hearing. All
agreed.
Comments and Questions
Commissioners expressed the following:
• Planner Teague was asked what he thought would be a reasonable application fee. Planner
Teague responded in his opinion the required $100.00 won’t cover the City’s cost. He said an
application fee would be far more than $100.00 noting multiple departments would need to
review the application.
• Planner Teague was asked what is meant by “temporary structure”. Teague responded that the
ordinance states that the initial temporary dwelling permit is valid for six months, adding that
the applicant may renew the permit once for an additional six months.
Chair Platteter reiterated that the public hearing on the ordinance amendment was scheduled on
July 27, 2016 Planning Commission meeting.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 7/27/2016
Page 12 of 12
VIII. Correspondence and Petitions
Chair Platteter acknowledged back of packet materials. He further acknowledged receipt of a letter
from residents of Edina West. Platteter reminded the Commission and audience that the proposal
by Opus to construct a 250-unit apartment building at 5901 Lincoln Drive was continued to the July
27, 2016 Planning Commission meeting.
IX. Chair and Member Comments
Commissioner Olsen said she would like to have the Commission develop a shared parking
ordinance. Chair Platteter agreed that shared parking needs to be addressed and suggested that it
become part of the process with updating the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Bennett asked what the time frame was for the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Teague
responded that the goal is to present a framework to the City Council sometime this fall.
X. Adjournment
A motion was made at 8:50 P.M. to adjourn the meeting of the Edina Planning Commission.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olsen. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Jackie HoogenakkerJackie HoogenakkerJackie HoogenakkerJackie Hoogenakker
Respectfully submitted
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: C.2.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Minutes
From:Jo yc e R ep ya, S enior Planner
Item Activity:
Subject:Minutes : Heritage P res ervatio n Board July 12, 2016 Info rmatio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
Attached are the approved minutes from the July 12, 2016 Heritage P reservation Board meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Heritage Pres ervation Board Minutes , July 12, 2016
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Heritage Preservation Board
Edina City Hall Community Room
July 12, 2016 at 7:00 p.m.
I. Call To Order:
Chair Birdman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. Roll Call:
Answering rollcall were Chair Birdman and Members Moore, Christiaansen, McLellan, Kelly, Nymo,
Pearson, Loving, and Student Member Puerzer. Absent were Member Sussman and Student
Member Otness. Staff Liaison, Senior Planner Joyce Repya and Preservation Consultant Robert
Vogel were also in attendance.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda:
Motion was made by Moore and seconded by McLellan to approve the meeting agenda.
All voted aye. The motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes:
Motion was made by Kelly and seconded by McLellan to approve the minutes from the
June 14, 2016 meeting. All voted aye. The motion carried.
V. Community Comment: None
VI. Reports/Recommendations:
A. Certificate of Appropriateness: 4229 Country Club Road - New Entry & Addition
Planner Repya explained that the proposed Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application
is comprised of two-parts, including the addition of a 24 square foot front entry portico; and
additions to the rear of the home that are visible from Wooddale Avenue which is the side
street.
The proposed 24 square foot front entry canopy requires a COA because it is a structural change to the
street facing façade of the home. The new portico is designed to provide protection from the elements
at the front entry; and is proportional to the front façade of the home measuring approximately 3.5 feet
by 6.75 feet. The design of the portico is consistent with those previously approved for Colonial Revival
homes in the district with an arched gable front, two - 10” supporting posts and asphalt shingles to
match the house.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
The proposed additions to the rear of the home include three components:
1. A single stall tandem garage/laundry & mud room on the west side
2. A 2-story addition - 1st floor family room/2nd floor guest bedroom/bath
3. A single story pass-thru from the living room to the dining room on the east side.
The design of the additions is compatible with the existing home including the 8” smooth
cedar lap siding, Marvin double hung windows, window trim, shutters, as well as asphalt
shingles to match the existing home.
Repya concluded that because the proposed exterior alterations and additions will not
destroy important details and the loss of historic fabric will be minimal, approval of the COA
is recommended subject to the plans presented dated June 24, 2016.
Applicant representative: Mark A. Jones, Jones & Company for owners Sandra & Sylvain
Lesenfants
Motion was made by Moore and seconded by Christiaansen to approve the COA for the
new front entry portico, and additions to the rear of the home visible from the side
street, subject to the plans presented dated June 26, 2016. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
B. Certificate of Appropriateness: 4621 Browndale Avenue - Change to Plan
Planner Repya reminded the board that on November 9, 2015 a COA was approved for a new
detached garage on the subject property. Now, as they are under construction, the homeowner
has requested the following changes to the plan:
1. Remove a roof-top dormer on the front elevation, and the dormer’s window relocated to the
upper level of the south elevation.
2. Replace the limestone window trim proposed with wood/painted trim (except the front
elevation where the limestone trim will remain).
Planner Repya recommended approval of the revised plan noting that the changes cited would
not alter the architectural integrity of the new detached garage.
Applicant representative: Jon Linde, Refined Remodeling for Jason & Josie Tabor
Motion was made by Kelly and seconded by Nymo to approve the proposed changes to the
previously approved detached garage. All voted Aye. The motion carried.
C. Sketch Plan Review: 4608 Casco Avenue
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
Planner Repya explained that the existing home at 4608 Casco Avenue is a 1977 Contemporary
style. A new owner is interested in demolishing the home and constructing a new one. Because
the home was constructed after the district’s period of significance (1924-1944), it is not classified
as an historic resource, thus it may be demolished; however plans for the replacement home must
meet the criteria of the district’s plan of treatment and receive a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Currently, the concept for a replacement home has been created; and feedback from the HPB is
requested prior to completing the plans to submit with a Certificate of Appropriateness
application.
Property Owner: Dan Schaefer
Mr. Schaefer explained that the architect Andrea Snow was unable to attend the meeting; however
in her absence he provided the following explanation of the plan:
• A 2-story, Italianate style, garage in front of the home - side loading creating a front
courtyard, with a bedroom above garage.
• The street facing façade of the garage will have a single window with pilasters on both
side; and a Juliette balcony above on the second floor.
• Since the plan of treatment does not prohibit, but simply discourages front loading
garages, the garage in the front of the home is shown to preserve an Ash tree in the rear
yard and Maple tree in the front yard, maximize the size of the home, and reduce the
amount of impervious surface on the property.
Mr. Schaefer concluded that he believed the plan provides for a quality, high-style Italianate home
with a quaint courtyard that will fit in well with the neighborhood.
Board members provided Mr. Schaefer with the following feedback:
• The plan of treatment discourages front loading garages, thus the proposal could set an
undesirable precedence unless strong justification for why a rear garage cannot be
designed is provided.
• The front loading garage/courtyard is not a design seen in the Country Club District; and
would be more suitable for a suburban neighborhood such as Bearpath.
• Balance of fenestration is important - front window on the garage lacks symmetry
• The canopy for the Ash tree in the rear yard overlaps with the footprint of the structure, causing
concerns for the survival of the tree due to the root system being compromised during
construction.
• Italianete style is a good choice, however question the wisdom of planning the design of
the home around a questionable tree (both because it is an Ash which are being removed
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
citywide; and due to the potential damage construction would impose on the tree’s root
structure).
Mr. Schaefer thanked the board for their input.
D. Historic Context Study Update:
Consultant Robert Vogel explained that the Historic Context Study provides the HPB with the
basic foundation for decision making by generating scholarship to substantiate decisions. Mr.
Vogel elaborated on the work he has undertaken relative to the four following themes:
1. Churches
2. Cold War Fall-out Shelters
3. WPA Federal Relief Construction
4. American Four-Square Houses
Mr. Vogel pointed out that when completed, a result of adding these new themes to the Historic
Context Study will provide the board with necessary information to add new properties under
those categories to the list of those that could be eligible for landmark designation. The board
thanked Mr. Vogel for the update. No formal action was taken.
1. Correspondence and Petitions: None
VII. Chair And Member Comments:
A. Chair Birdman welcomed new member Scott Loving
VIII. Staff Comments:
A. Next Meeting Date - August 8, 2016 (MONDAY)
B. Summer Tour 2016 - July 20, 2016, 6:30 p.m. (Special Meeting)
C. 2016 Preservation Conference - Sept. 8 & 9 in Hastings.
D. Joint Meeting with City Council - September 20, 2016
IX. Adjournment: 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Joyce RepyaJoyce RepyaJoyce RepyaJoyce Repya
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: C.3.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Minutes
From:Ann Kattreh, P arks & Rec reation Direc tor
Item Activity:
Subject:Minutes : P ark Bo ard July 12, 2016 Info rmatio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
P ark Board Minutes from July 12, 2016.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Park Board, July 12, 2016 Minutes
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Park Board
Edina City Hall, Council Chambers
July 12, 2016
I. Call To Order
Vice Chair Good called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call were Vice Chair Good, Members McAwley, Dahlien, Meyer, Strother,
Gieseke, Miller, Nelson and Student Member Lohani. Absent were Chair McCormick and
Student Member Crist. Staff present: Liaison Ann Kattreh, Assistant Parks & Recreation
Director Susan Faus, Administrative Support Specialist Janet Canton and Braemar Golf Course
General Manager Joe Abood.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Vice Chair Good suggested they move Item V.C., the Rosland Park Playground Equipment
Design, to Item V.B., and move Item V.B., the Braemar Park Winter Recreation Facility Update,
to Item V.C.
Motion by Gieseke to approve the July 12, 2016 agenda with the changes made. Motion
was seconded by Vice Chair Good.
Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion made by Miller to approve the May 10, 2016 minutes. Motion seconded by
Gieseke. Motion carried.
V. Special Recognitions and Presentations
A. Mountain Bike Community Presentation
Bruce Freeman, 6112 Eden Prairie Rd., gave a power point presentation to the Park Board
regarding mountain biking.
Bill Biegarnek indicated he is a member of MORC (Minnesota Off-Road Cyclists
Association) which is a non-profit association responsible for all of the off-road trails in
the Twin Cities area and he is here to support trail growth. Mr. Biegarnek gave a power
point presentation on the demographics of mountain biking.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
Leigh Mazion, coach of the Edina Mountain Bike Team, gave a brief history on the Edina
Mountain Bike Team. He also talked about what their season consists of and went
through their statistics.
Lydia Reiner and Frank Delaney, co-captains of the Edina Mountain Bike Team, each
explained why they got involved in mountain biking and why they wanted to join the
team.
Park Board members asked questions and had discussions.
Liaison Kattreh noted this item will be on the Park Board’s August agenda and at that
time she would like for the Park Board to make a recommendation to the City Council.
VI. Community Comment
None
VII. Reports/Recommendations
A. Braemar Golf Update
Joe Abood, Braemar Golf Course General Manager, informed the Park Board of the
following updates at Braemar Golf Course:
• Discussed the new Braemar Golf Course logo
• Discussed the grand opening to be held the first week in August
• Gave an update on the Master Plan
• Received a favorable bid that will go to the City Council at the July 19 council
meeting
• Noted construction will start in October
Park Board members asked questions and had discussions.
B. Rosland Park Playground Replacement Design
Assistant Parks & Recreation Director Faus introduced Harlan Lehman from Minnesota
Wisconsin Playground.
Member Nelson gave a presentation on the Rosland Park Playground Replacement
Design to the Park Board. Liaison Kattreh went through the history and process of how
they got to where they currently are with the replacement design.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
Motion was made by Strother to recommend to the City Council the purchase and
installation of the Rosland Park playground as designed by Minnesota Wisconsin
Playground. Motion was seconded by McAwley.
Ayes: Good, McAwley, Dahlien, Strother, Gieseke, Miller, Nelson
Nays: Meyer
Motion carried.
Park Board members asked questions and had discussions.
C. Braemar Park Winter Recreation Facility Update
Liaison Kattreh gave an update of where they are at in the process for the Braemar Park Winter
Recreation Facility including the following:
• An open house will be held on July 13 at 7 p.m. at Edina Public Works
• Park Board will be asked to make a recommendation to the City Council at the August
Park Board meeting
• A public hearing will be held at the Sept. 7 City Council meeting
Park Board members asked questions and had discussions.
VIII. Correspondence And Petitions
Vice Chair Good acknowledged the Park Board’s receipt of various correspondences.
IX. Chair And Member Comments
• Vice Chair Good reminded the Park Board that the August Park Board meeting and
retreat will be held on Monday, Aug. 8 at 5 p.m. at Braemar Golf Course. There will be
a tour, dinner, lawn games, annual photo and meeting.
X. Staff Comments
• A presentation to the City Council regarding the selection of a master plan consultant
is planned for July 19 City Council meeting.
• There will be a ribbon-cutting for the Pickleball courts at Rosland Park on Wednesday,
July 20 at 4 p.m.
• Gerry Greene has resigned from his position on the Park Board. This vacancy will
continue until the annual appointments next year.
Draft Minutes☐
Approved Minutes☒
Approved Date: 8/8/2016
• Braemar Arena will be hosting the Da Beauty League which consists of NHL players. The
league will play on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 5:55 p.m., 7:20 p.m. and 8:45 p.m. from July
12 through Aug. 9. Tickets can be purchased at Braemar Arena.
XI. Adjournment
Motion made by Nelson to adjourn the July 12, 2016 meeting at 8:59 p.m. Motion seconded by Dahlien.
Motion carried.
Date: Augus t 16, 2016 Agenda Item #: XIII.
To:Mayo r and City Co uncil Item Type:
Other
From:Deb ra A. Mangen
Item Activity:
Subject:Sc hed ule o f Up coming Meetings /Dates /Events as o f
Augus t 16,2016
Info rmatio n
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
Here's the most current schedule of events.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Schedule of Events as of Augus t 16, 2016
CITY COUNCIL SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS AS OF AUGUST 16, 2016
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS
Tues Aug 16 Last Day to File Affidavit of Candidacy 8 A.M. 0 5 P.M. CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
Tues Aug 16 Work Session – 2017 – 2021 CIP & 2017 Budget 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Aug 16 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Mon Sep 5 LABOR DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED – City Hall Closed
Tues Sep 7 HRA Work Session 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Sep 7 Joint Work Session Community Health Commission 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Wed Sep 7 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues Sep 20 HRA Work Session 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Sep 20 Joint Work Session Heritage Preservation Board 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Sep 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues Oct 5 Boards & Commission Annual Work Plan Meeting 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Oct 5 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues Oct 18 HRA Work Session 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Oct 18 Business Meeting 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Oct 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues Nov 1 2017 Budget 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Nov 1 Finalize City and Board and Commission Work Plans 6:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Nov 1 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tues Nov 9 GENERAL ELECTION DAY – POLLS OPEN 7 A.M. UNTIL 8 P.M.
Fri Nov 11 VETERAN DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED – City Hall Closed
Tues Nov 15 HRA Work Session 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Nov 15 Joint Work Session Arts & Culture Commission 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM
Tues Nov 15 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Thu Nov 24 THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY OBSERVED – City Hall Closed
Fri Nov 25 DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY OBSERVED – City Hall Closed