2021-03-09 CC Agenda PacketPLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
CITY OF MOUND MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Mound, through teamwork and cooperation, provides at a reasonable cost,
L quality services that respond to the needs of all citizens, fostering a safe, attractive and flourishing community.
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
1. Opening meeting
2. Pledge of Allegiance
TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 2021 - 7:00 PM
LOCATION: WESTONKA SCHOOLS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
3. Approve agenda, with any amendments
*Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature, have been evaluated by
staff, recommended by staff for approval by the Council, and will be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests. At this time, anyone present who
wishes to offer dissenting comment to any items on the Consent Agenda is invited to identify themselves and the item
of concern so that the it may be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered after discussion in normal sequence.
Separate introduction or further support from petitioners or requestors is not required at this time and removal of an
item from the Consent Agenda for this purpose is not required or appropriate.
4. *Consent Agenda Page
*A. Approve payment of claims 465
*B. Approve minutes: February 23, 2021 Regular Meeting 466 - 469
*C. Approve Pay Request #3 and Final in the amount of $17,315.92 to Widmer 470 - 480
Construction for the 2019 Fernside Forcemain Improvement & Bay Ridge Sewer
Service City Project PW-19-03 & 09
*D. Approve Pay Request #2 in the amount of $207,352.03 to Metropolitan Council 481 - 485
Environmental Services for the 2018 Street, Utility, and Retaining Wall
Improvements—Westedge Blvd, PW-18-01
*E. Approve Resolution 21- Amending Resolution No. 19-80 that approved 486 - 494
vacations in Mound Harbor District (Planning Case No. 19-06)
5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda.
(Limit to 3 minutes per speaker.)
5.1 (added) Liz Vandam from Westonka Historical Society requesting action on a resolution 494.1
of sponsorship related to the Westonka Historical Society
6. Sergeant Tim Sonnek with the Orono Police Department February Mound Activity 495 - 497
Report
PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
7. Planning Commission Recommendation
A. Consideration of request for evaluation of tattoo studio as substantially similar use at 498 — 522A
5439 Shoreline Drive in Lost Lake commercial building as provided by City Code Sec. 129-71
Applicant: Dane Vocelka
Owner: Samuel C. & Shea F. Steadman
Requested Action: Approval of Resolution No. 21-_regarding substantial use 501
Determination for property at 5439 Shoreline Drive in Lost Lake commercial building
8. City Engineer Brian Simmons providing a presentation on City Water System and Water 523 - 551
Quality
A. Action to approve a Resolution directing Engineering Staff to Notify Residents and 549
Municipal Water Customers of the Presence of Manganese in the City Water that Exceeds
the Minnesota Department of Health Advisory Limit
B. Action to approve a Resolution Ordering Preparation of Report on Water Treatment 550
Facilities
9. Information/Miscellaneous
A. Comments/Reports from Council members
B. Reports: Finance —January 2021 552 - 555
Fire —January 2021 556 - 557
Liquor — February 2021 558
C. Minutes: February 2, 2021 Planning Commission 559 - 571
D. Correspondence:
10. Adjourn
COUNCIL BRIEFING
March 9, 2021
In tune with Phase III of the Stay Safe MN Plan; through mid -November, we will re -open Council and
Commission meetings to in -person attendance for our residents. Meetings will be hosted in the
Westonka Schools Performing Arts Center where social distancing requirements can be more easily
met; or Council Chambers in the Centennial Building as noted below. Council meetings will continue
to be held the second and fourth Tuesday each month at 7:00 PM with agendas and meeting
details/locations posted to the City website the Thursday prior under the "Mayor and Council' section
of the "Government" tab of the Home Page.
Upcoming Events Schedule: Don't Forget!!
March 9 - 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required)
March 9 - 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting
* * * at Westonka Performing Arts Center***
March 16 - 7:00 PM — City Council Planning Commission Special Meetings, Joint Workshop
***Meeting held in ZOOM remote meeting ***
March 23 - 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required)
March 23 - 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting
* * * at Westonka Performing Arts Center***
April 13 - 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required)
April 13 - 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting
* * * At City Council Chambers, Centennial Building
April 20 - 6:30 PM — City Council Special Meeting, Annual Reports Workshop
* * * At City Council Chambers, Centennial Building * * *
April 27 - 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required)
April 27 - 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting
* * * at Westonka Performing Arts Center***
City Offices:
Until Further Notice; by Day -to -Day Essential Business by Appointment Only
City Official's Absences
Please notify the City Manager in advance of an absence.
Inauire in advance. please......
Council members are asked to call or email their questions in advance of a public meeting so that more
research may be done or additional information may be provided that will assist in your quality decision -
making.
01'L19 (II El011Oki
1
Date March4,2021
To Mayor and City Council
From Catherine Pausche Director of Finance and Administrative Services
Subject Claims listing for March 9,2021
The pap olkaccounts payable clerk has been on vacation since the last City Council meeting on
Febmary23, therefore there are no claims listings for the March 9, 2021 regular meeting with the
exception of what appears on the consent agenda A roll call vote should still be taken for
approval of the consent agenda payment items and the rest of the claims will be included on the
March23,2021 regular meeting agenda
Please let Catherine know if you have any questions regarding this matter at (952)472 0633_
465-
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
February 23, 2021
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on
Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. in the Westonka Schools Performing Arts Center in
Minnetrista.
Members present: Mayor Ray Salazar; Council members Phil Velsor, Paula Larson, Sherrie
Pugh, and Jason Holt
Members absent: None
Others present: City Manager Eric Hoversten, Fin Dir/Clerk/Treasurer Catherine Pausche, City
Engineer Brian Simmons, Sherriff Dave Hutchinson, Trevor Nelson, Brian Nelson, Easton
Velsor
Consent agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in
nature by the Council. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a
Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event it will be removed from the Consent
Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
1. Open meeting
Mayor Salazar called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2 Pledae of Alleaiance
3. Approve agenda
MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Larson, to approve the agenda. All voted in favor. Motion
carried.
4. Consent agenda
MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Pugh, to approve the consent agenda. Upon roll call vote, all
voted in favor. Motion carried.
A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $446,063.40
B. Approve minutes: February 9, 2021 Regular Meeting
C. RESOLUTION NO. 21-21: RESOLUTION APPROVING PULIC GATHERING PERMIT
FOR USE OF SURFSIDE PARK AND BEACH AS WEIGH-IN STATION FOR
MINNETONKA CLASSIC FISHING TOURNAMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA ON
SATURDAY, JUNE 5, 2021
5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda.
Trevor Nelson, 2620 Tyrone Lane, stated the right of way on Shannon is the only access they
have to get to their boat and access has been limited and he submitted his concerns to the
Council and would like to hear more from them. Nelson thanked those that have already
reached out. Nelson said 70-14 states UTVs and ATVs may be used to access their boats.
Nelson asked for the rule to be modified to allow them to allow UTVs and ATVs from their home
�
Mound City Council Minutes — February 23, 2021
to the dock. Nelson asked that UTVs and ATVs be allowed on city roads just like any car and
noted the fire department and DNR both use them.
Brian Nelson, 2620 Tyrone Lane, said he received a letter from the City's field officer and it
states that the access can only be used to board and unboard their boat and he can't find
anything in the City Code that limits the use. Nelson said it is a wide access and he sees lots of
different activities including fishing and boat maintenance. Nelson requested clarification on
where the language is.
Holt asked to comment on speaker. Salazar said staff has addressed the concerns in the letter
provided by the City and if they have further comments or concerns they should be directed to
City Manager Eric Hoversten. Holt said the letter was in the packet and he too would like
clarification on where the language limiting activities is. Pausche said she is in charge of Dock
Administration and she would be happy to discuss and although she feels the code does
address it, she recognizes it can be clearer. Holt again said he would like the Nelsons to get
their answer.
Pausche said the Docks and Commons Commission meets the third Thursday of most months,
including March, and that would be an appropriate starting point for addressing changes to the
Code.
6. Update from Hennepin County Sheriff Dave Hutchinson
Sheriff Hutchinson said there are over 40 chiefs in Hennepin County and he communicates
regularly with them. Hutchinson said the department is working hard to prepare for the Chauvin
trial. Hutchinson thanked the Orono Police Department for their partnership and noted the
Sheriff's Water Patrol made over 200 safety and traffic stops in 2020. Hutchinson said Lt.
Shane Magnuson has been promoted to Captain of the Water Patrol Unit. Hutchinson the West
Metro Drug Task Force has made 5 arrests for 5th degree meth possession and 1 arrest for an
illegal shotgun.
Hutchinson said Operation Cold Snap collects and distributes gently used hats and glove
throughout the County. Hutchinson said the hired a full-time therapist to work with the staff on
mind-body-spirit/mental health, which is the first agency in Minnesota to do so. Hutchinson said
they improved gym equipment and they have 4 chaplains of different denomination. Hutchinson
said his emphasis is on treating the employees and customers right. Hutchinson said 150
jurisdictions are preparing for any potential unrest due to the trial.
Hutchinson said violent crime spiked because so many Minneapolis officers left. Hutchinson
said freedom of speech will be protected, but property damage will not be tolerated.
7. City Engineer Brian Simmons presenting proposed sketch work for improvement of the east City
entrance monument on Shoreline Drive (CSAH 15)
Simmons said Council Members Larson and Velsor were appointed by the Council to serve in an
advisory capacity on next steps on the eastern entrance monument sign, with the goal of bringing
down the cost and to further define the vision for design. Simmons showed the updated design
including a picture of it lit up at night. Simmons said a cost of estimate of $50K has been included and
the request is for the Council to decide if they would like to proceed.
-467-
Mound City Council Minutes — February 23, 2021
Salazar asked Simmons to clarify how it is lit and height. Simmons said the logo and letters will be lit
from behind, also known as halo lighting, with some spot lights as well. Simmons said the monument
will be just under 5 feet, which the advisory committee did not want it to get covered up by snow
and/or foliage. Salazar confirmed electrical outlets will be part of it and Simmons said yes.
Salazar said this has been under discussion since 2017/2018 and he thanked everyone for the effort.
Salazar noted this is an investment. Holt clarified if the trees shown are new or existing and Simmons
said a combination of both. All concurred that they liked the design.
MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Larson, to approve the following resolution. All voted in favor.
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 21-22: RESOLUTION APPROVING CONCEPT AND ORDERING PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE
ENTRANCE MONUMENTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
8. Information/Miscellaneous
A. Comments/reports from Council members/City Manager:
Salazar noted there has been progress made on the Williams Store and asked the City
Manager for any updates. Hoversten said the Council agreed to keep all tools/options available
and the attorneys have exchanged some emails regarding potential milestones with the goal to
renew, refresh and remodel and bring back a planned use. Hoversten said he is optimistic that
an agreement can be made and avoid order of abatement.
Larson thanked the public utilities department and noted the Council approved the snow
removal on the trail and she can see it is heavily used and appreciated. Larson thanked the
Council for moving forward with that.
Hoversten noted meetings on March 9 and 23rd will be at the PAC, but the March 16 joint City
Council and Planning Commission will need to find an alternate site, which he will work with the
Mayor on.
Hoversten noted the Polar Plunge at Surfside Park & Beach on March 6 and encouraged
listeners to either participate or donate, noting the healthy rivalry between Mound Fire and
Orono Police Department teams.
B. Reports:
C. Minutes: Parks & Open Spaces Commission: 01-14-21
D. Correspondence: Gillespie Center Donation Request
Suburban Rate Authority 2020 Activities Report
9. Adjourn
MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Larson, to adjourn at 7:45 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion
carried.
E.:
Mound City Council Minutes — February 23, 2021
Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk
Mayor Raymond J. Salazar
�
T
BOLTON
& MENK
Real People. Real Solutions.
March 4th. 2021
Mr. Eric Hoversten, City Manager
City of Mound
2415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
RE: Fernside Lane Forcemain Improvement & Bay Ridge Sewer Service
City Project No. PW-19-03 & PW-19-09
Pay Request No. 3 & Final
Dear Mr. Hoversten:
2638 Shadow Lane
Suite 200
Chaska, MN 55318-1172
Ph:[9521448-8838
Fax:[9521448-8805
Bolton-Menk.com
Please find enclosed Pay Request No. 3 & Final from Widmer Construction. for work completed
on the Fernside Lane Forcemain Improvement & Bay Ridge Sewer Service Projects from August
5', 2020 through March 2nd, 2021.
At this time, all punchlist items have been completed, and we have received and reviewed the
Contractor's close out documents including IC134 Labor compliance, Lien Releases and Surety
Releases, and are satisfied that the Contractor has met their requirements to make final payment
on the project.
We have reviewed the contractor's request, verified quantities, and recommend payment in the
amount of $17,315.92 to Widmer Construction, which includes full payment of remaining
retainage, and the Contract is now considered complete.
Sincerely,
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
:T>.. T
Brian D. Simmons, P.E.
City Engineer
Bolton & Menk is an
DATE: 3/2/2021
CONTRACTOR'S PAY REQUEST NO. 3 CONTRACTOR
Widmer Construction
FERNSIDE LANE FORCEMAIN IMPROVEMENTS & BAY RIDGE SEWER SERVICE OWNER
City of Mound
CITY PROJECT NOS. PW-19-05, PWA9-11 ENGINEER
Bolton & Menk
BMI PROJECT NO. C17.117635
FOR WORK COMPLETED FROM 8/5/2020 THROUGH 3/2/2021
TOTALAMOUNT BID..............................................................................................................................................................................
$ 344,026.20
APPROVEDCHANGE ORDERS....................................................................................................................................
$ 25,647.50
$ 6,046.14
CURRENTCONTRACT AMOUNT.................................................................................................................................
$ 375,719.84
TOTAL, COMPLETED WORK TO DATE......................................................................................................................................
$ 346,318.43
TOTAL, STORED MATERIALS TO DATE.....................................................................................................................................
$ -
DEDUCTION FOR STORED MATERIALS USED IN WORK COMPLETED.............................................................
$ -
TOTAL, COMPLETED WORK & STORED MATERIALS.................................................................................................................
$ 346,318.43
RETAINEDPERCENTAGE ( 0% ).....................................................................................................................................
$ -
TOTAL AMOUNT OF OTHER DEDUCTIONS...........................................................................................................................
$ -
NET AMOUNT DUE TO CONTRACTOR TO DATE......................................................................................................................
$ 346,318.43
TOTAL AMOUNT PAID ON PREVIOUS ESTIMATES...............................................................................................................
$ 329,002.51
PAYCONTRACTOR AS ESTIMATE NO. 3..........................................................................................................................................
$ 17,315.92
Certificate for Payment
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, all items quantities and prices
of work and material shown on this Estimate are correct and that all work has been
performed in full accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract for this project
between the Owner and the undersigned Contractor, and as amended by any
authorized changes, and that the foregoing is a true and correct statement of the amount
for the Final Estimate, that the provisions of M. S. 290.92 have been complied with and that
all claims against me by reason of the Contract have been paid or satisfactorily secured.
Contractor: Widmer Construction
99455 County Road 15
Maple Plain. MN 55359
BY
Nama-� Title
Date
CHECKED AND APPROVED AS TO QUANTITIES AND AMOUNT:
BOLTON & MENK, INC., ENGINEERS, 2638 SHADOW LN, SUITE 200, CHASKA MN 55318
By PROJECT ENGINEER
Brian D. Simmons
Date 3-2-2021
APPROVED FOR PAYMENT:
Owner: CITY OF MOUND
By
Name Title
Date
- 471 -
m
O
U
2
0
U
E
I
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
N
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
V
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
h
O
O
O
O
O
O
F
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
0
M
T
0
0
0
N
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
M
0
N
O
O
N
N
O
O
M
N
0
O
N
O
N
N
D
O
O
O
V
�
m
N
O
N
N
O
V
N
O
��
N
N
T
0
T
O
(D
O
N�
N
0
V
0
M
0
(D
N
�
M
T
N
(D
0
�
V
M
O
N
N
N
O
�
d
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
M
fA
fA
N
fA
fA
¢
¢
0
O
F
O
O
O
O
O
00
M
M
W
OO
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
O
wFZ
OO
O0OO
M
OOMO0OOOOO
O
ri
L
¢
d
NNm!MONNON�MO
N
m
N
J
a
0
O
Z
D
F
<
ZO
¢
m
F
~
F
Z
d
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
N
M
N
O
O
h
M
N
O
O
N
N
O
V
m
m
m
O
N
O
O
h
W
O
O
N
fA
fA
fA
fA
O
N
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
fA
O
O
fA
m
N
fA
fA
m
h
O
N
z�
a
0
m
F
J
O
O
O O O O
N N 0 0
O
0
O
O
O
N N N
O N O
m m N N M
Z_
6] Z
——
ry
V V N
N
m (V
Z
�
d
0
F
m m x
LL
LL
LL LL x x p p p p p LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
x x x x
LL LL LL LL x x x �' p
> > > > >
z
m w
w
o
z
z z w w x x 0 0 o z
z
z
z
o
i i 0 i i
z z z z i i d x
o o m m m �
�
�
�
m
w w� w w
� � � � w w� m o
x
0
a -
F x
w U
w i
� a
y
W O
Q
W
O O
O O
W
O
J J
F
W
p
Z Z
W W
0
W
O O
O O
6
O
Q Q
Z
W W
Z Z
N
W
W 0 0
VOJ
Z
W
W
W
W
F
0 W W
O_ W W
O O W
H H W
Z
U U W
>
O>
Q U U
W W d Z
d
W
OZ
Q
Q Z Z
O O d
tx9
m
Q
W
<
>
Q
O
O
W
W W W
W
Z Z Z W
Z
x )
>
W
Q Q Q U
W
Q
Z > U>
X
H
E
W
Z
O
>
d
x
U
0
m
U U U
p
Z W U U
H> H
W
0
W
O O
0 Z 0 0 W
p
U
W
Z VJ O Q H Q x
W
O
m
Q
d d
U U t9
O Q O O
U
W
Z Z
m m Z
p 2 p p J z
W
H
H
Q W Q W X?
Q
y
O O
O 0 x
m
W
W
W Z Q V' W W d d
O
m
Z
Q
X X p Q Q
W W W ro ro Z m=
W
U
U
W U
W X 0 m W W
�
O�
W W m 0 0
W
0 O O U
Z Z x
Z
Z
U W p
W O Q W Q VOJ Q W
O
x
U
W
O O W W
p W W U
W p W W>> Z
Z
O p W
O
O
O IL Q W
0 O Z
W
W
H H H W W
U U U Z O
Q
Q U t9
U
U
O W
IL Z Z p Z W
W
W
H
W
W
H H Q j>
Z
p `o p p j j U d
£
N O o-J
W
W
W H W
W O O p Q N X Q> p
W
W
Q
W
U
U U U
W W W W W W W
W
— p>>>
W
p p Q W W O H—
Z
W
H
Z
W W W>>
U U U U H H 0 t9
Q
O
O
O Z Z> U' W 0 Z Z 0
0
0
Z
O
Z Z 0 p p
O d O O Q Q Q Q
K
W Q w
2
2
2 Q Q m Q O Q x 0
Q
p
z
x
U
z z c9
x p x x c9 c9 U U
O
W
O p
H 0
W
0
W
0
W W W Z H W H O
0 Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 a
a
O
0
O
2
eo
0 0 0 H H
O O Q x x
> W Z
a eo eo eo a eo W 0 p
lwzoz
z
W
II L
m
I
O
O
O
O
00000000000000000000000
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
F
moo
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
h
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z
N
O
N
N
O
O
h
O
O
O
O
N
0
N
N
N
0
M
N
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
N
N
M
0
O
N
0
0
0
O
N.
N
0
M
0
N
N
0
N
N
M
O
0
O
O
w
ww
w
ww
M
F»F»
�
ww
w
w
g
w
w
0
O
F
-
F
o
0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
o
0
0
O
0
O
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
Z
¢
O
o
N
0
M
0
0
0
N
0
o
N
O
N
M
O
N
O
N
o
M
0
(D
0
O
o
V
0
(D
o
tj
d
CM,I
J
a
0
O
Z
D
F
<
¢
O
m
F
~
F
Z
d
........
O
00000
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
...
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
N
W
V
h
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
M
N
M
0
V
V
N
O
O
N
M
0
0
0
O
W
N
N
M
N
N
f9
fA
O
O
h
0
0
0
O
0
fA
0
h
0
h
V
N
O
O
fA
fA
N
fA
O
d
.....
O
-
.
O
.
.
O
.
....
�
O
m
N
N
fA
O
Z
L
4
w
N
� a
0
m
F
J
Z_
Z
V N V V
. . N N
6]
�
d
0
w
U
F
w w
m m w w S o o m
S S S S o z
Z
o 0 0 0
0
>>
0 W o>> z
o 0 0 0> m Q
0
x x x x
x z
z z o
o m
m m o w z z x o o O
m m
z z z z x x x z z x o
m o
i
2E
w
F
0
m
0
O
i
W W
w U
o w z
w
> a Q
o
w o w
o
c�
i
w o w O i
z
m
z w >
w= w i z w u
Q
O O < S W
m m- Q H Z
O u
> Z o a
i w w z >
> m>
w m O
>
i
im
a?QO
QmWw zHZ
i
zWHQ
UWO0
6WmOZ�
Dui
XmWQWOd
Zm- iZdtO9
X¢
00
0
> Q� m
wm
w
Wm
OZ
mWZ
m 0 )Q
WWHWa
QW
H
O
_Wwm
00
WZH
WOw
O
m
HO O Z6O Q
Hd
0 O
a Q W W 0
O
>U
~
00
0
0 0
O
¢ OQ
=Wm
>
O O
QQ
W
W O Q
N W X W W W
OO
O
Q U
Ut m 0
�O
U U m m mwoZW
eNW>o
rtil::Eoz
Q
rfl
II J
m
I
h
Q
A
- 474 -
Firefox
https://www.mndor.state.mn.us/tp/eservices/ /Retrieve/0/Dc/cAtZ...
DEPARTMENT
OF REVENUE
Your Contractor Affidavit request is Approved. A copy of this page MUST be provided to the contractor or government agency that
hired you.
Submitted Date and Time: 5-Feb-2021 3:34:26 PM
Confirmation Number: 1-763-654-432
Name:
WIDMER CONSTRUCTION LLC
ID:
6610572
Affidavit Number:
1856495616
Project Owner:
CITY OF MOUND
Project Number:
17.117635
Project Begin Date:
2/1/2020
Project End Date:
8/30/2020
Project Location:
MOUND
Project Amount:
$346,318.43
Subcontractors:
Name ID Affidavit Number
KLEIN UNDERGROUND 4856552 1 1404047360
Please for your records using the print or save functionality built into your browser.
- 475 -
1 of 1 2/5/2021, 3:34 PM
Widmer Construction LLC
RECEIPT AND WAIVER OF MECHANIC'S LIEN RIGHTS
DATED 02/18/2021
The undersigned hereby acknowledges receipt of the sum of $346,318.43
CHECK ONLY ONE
1 _ as partial payment for labor, skill and material furnished.)
2)_as payment for all labor, skill and material furnished or to be furnished(except the
sum of (retainage)
3)_X-as full and final payment for all labor, skill and material furnished or to be furnished
to the following property:
Mound Fernside and Bayridge
and for value received hereby waives all rights acquired by the undersigned to file or
record mechanic's lien against said real property for labor, skill or material furnished to
said real property(only for the amount paid if Box 1 is checked, and except for retainage
shown if Box 2 is checked). The undersigned affirms that all material furnished by the
undersigned has been paid for, and all subcontractors employed by the undersigned
have been paid in full.
Company- i;q,Avoju (JA*Utc*Lo�/1
By:�—
Title: �Ull�lui� M,e►�h.��
Address:
0 �� r
NOTE: If this instrument is executed by a
corporation, it must be signed by an officer,
and if executed by a partnership, it must be
signed by a partner.
- 476 -
1/22/2021 https://www.mndor.state.mn.us/tp/eservices/_/Retrieve/0/Dc/U_Ap7GRB_P_GmyPZfckN8A_?FILE= Print2&PARAM$_ 2750726992277040324
DEPARTMENT
OF REVENUE
Your Contractor Affidavit request is Approved. A copy of this page MUST be provided to the contractor or government agency that hired
you.
Submitted Date and Time: 22-Jan-2021 5:08:12 PM
Confirmation Number: 0-938-945-312
Name:
KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC
ID:
4856552
Affidavit Number:
1404047360
Project Owner:
CITY OF MOUND
Project Number:
17.117635
Project Begin Date:
1/1/2020
Project End Date:
8/20/2020
Project Location:
FERNSIDE LANE, MOUND, MN
Project Amount:
$16,933.81
Subcontractors:
No Subcontractors
Please print this page for your records using the print or save functionality built into your browser.
https://www.mndor.state.mn.usltpleserviccs/_/Retrieve/0/Dc/U Ap7GRB_P GmyPZ4747A=?FILE=Print2&PARAMS= 2750726992277040324 1/1
Widmer Construction LLC
RECEIPT AND WAIVER OF MECHANIC'S LIEN RIGHTS
DATED 01/22/2021
The undersigned hereby acknowledges receipt of the sum of $16M.81
CHECK ONLY ONE
1 _ as partial payment for labor, skill and material fumished.)
2? as payment for all labor, skill and material fumished or to be fumished(except the
sum ot_X (retainage)
3) X as full and final payment for all labor, skill and material furnished or to be fumished
to the following properly:
Femside Lane Forcemain Improvements
and for value received hereby waives all rights acquired by the undersigned to file or
record mechanic's lien against said real property for labor, skill or material fumished to
said real property(only for the amount paid if Box 1 is checked, and except for retainage
shown if Box 2 is decked). The undersigned affirms that all material furnished by the
undersigned has been paid for, and all subcontractors employed by the undersigned
have been paid in full.
Company: j�l.G(i1 . &Z
By. -
Title: p.
Address: /QP
NOTE: If this Instrument is executed by a
corporation, it must be signed by an officer,
and if executed by a partnership, it must be
signed by a partner.
2/19/2021 https://www.mndor.state.mn.us/tp/eservices/ /Retrieve/O/DclYPTpWe!LBygsDHJ2732CpA ?FILE=Print2&PARAMS_=59814558361...
DEPARTMENT
OF REVENUE
Your Contractor Affidavit request is Approved. A copy of this page MUST be provided to the contractor or government agency that hired
you.
Submitted Date and Time: 19-Feb-2021 12:49:40 PM
Confirmation Number: 0-169-690-912
Name:
QUAM CONSTRUCTION CO INC
ID:
1257678
Affidavit Number:
88870912
Project Owner:
CITY OF MOUND
Project Number:
17.117635
Project Begin Date:
3/1/2020
Project End Date:
3/31/2020
Project Location:
CITY OF MOUND
Project Amount:
$23,263.00
Subcontractors:
No Subcontractors
Please print his page for your records using the print or save functionality built into your browser.
https://www.mndor.state.mn.usltpleservicesl_lRetrieve/OlDclyPTpWeiLBygsDlJ7@2CpA_?FILE= Pdnt2&PARAMS_=5981455836192724760 1/1
T
BOLTON
& MENK
Real People. Real Solutions.
March 4, 2021
Mr. Eric Hoversten, City Manager
City of Mound
2415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
RE: 2018 Street, Utility, and Retaining Wall Improvements — Westedge Blvd
City Project No. PW-18-01
Pay Request No. 2-MCES
Dear Mr. Hoversten:
2638 Shadow Lane
Suite 200
Chaska, MN 55318-1172
Ph:[9521448-8838
Fax:[9521448-8805
Bolton-Menk.com
Please find enclosed Pay Request No. 2-MCES from Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES) for work completed on the 2018 Street, Utility, and Retaining Wall
Improvement Project. This project is complete and is currently in the warranty period. This pay
request is out of cycle from the precedent established by previous projects due to the cooperative
project process; MCES is the lead agency and has been processing interim pay estimates. This
nuance has created the lag that is resulting in the presentation of a 2018 Project pay request in
March 2021.
The attached pay request represents 100% of the completed project billings, MCES
administrative fees and removal of retainage withheld. We have reviewed the request and
verified quantities and dollar amounts. We recommend payment in the amount of $207,352.03
to MCES on this invoice.
Sincerely,
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Brian D Simmons, P.E.
City Engineer
Bolton & Menk is an
INVOICE
Invoice No: 0001120445
Invoice Date: 2/16/21
MEoTROPOLITAN Page: 1 of 1
Please Remit To:
Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services
PO Box 856513
Minneapolis MN 55485-6513
United States
Bill To:
CITY OF MOUND
NOAHIVERSON
2415 Wilshire Blvd
Mound MN 55364
United States
For account questions: metcarQ, metc. state. mn. us
Line Identifier Description
MSC
COOP AGMT 171084 Prj 802829
*Back up documents are emailed separately.
Subtotal:
Customer Number:
Payment Terms:
Due Date:
AMOUNT DUE:
7735
Due 30 dys
3/18/21
$ 207,362.03 USD
Amount Remitted
Quantity UOM Unit Amt
Net Amount
1.00 EA 207,352.03 207,352.03
207,352.03
This invoice is to request final payment for City related work done under Cooperative Agreement 171084 as part of the MCES Mound 7021 forcemain
project (802829).
This invoice includes administrative fee associated with agreement, additional change order costs and remaining balance from previous invoice
0001115863.
For questions about this invoice, please contact Chris Remus at 651-602-4538 or christopher.remus@metc.state.mn.us.
For questions about payment procedures or account balance: metcar@metc.state.mn.us
ANY UNPAID BALANCE OVER 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF INVOICE WILL BE SUBJECT TO A FINANCE CHARGE AT THE RATE OF 1.5% PER
MONTH (18% PER YEAR)
PAYMENTS ACCEPTED VIA CHECK, CREDIT CARD, OR ACH/EFT
> CHECK: use the remit address at the top of this invoice
> CARD: visit http://metcar.metc.state.mn.us/
> EFT/ACH: provide your EFT/Direct Deposit enrollment form to metcar@metc.state.mn.us
Amount Due:
$ 207,362.03
CITY OF MOUND
RESOLUTION NO. 21-
RESOLUTION OF SPONSORSHIP AS RELATED TO THE
WESTONKA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
WHEREAS, the Westonka Historical Society is seeking state aid to fund construction of a new
museum in Mound; and
WHEREAS, the Westonka Historical Society has requested the City of Mound to act as legal
sponsor for state aid funds; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to support the effort to secure funding for a new facility,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota:
That the City of Mound will act as legal sponsor for the application for state funding
as submitted by the Westonka Historical Society
That the City of Mound may enter into agreement with the State of Minnesota for the
specific funding mentioned above
That the City of Mound will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated
in the agreement
That the Finance Director act as the fiscal agent on behalf of the City of Mound
Adopted by the City Council this 9'h day of March, 2021.
Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk
Mayor Raymond J. Salazar
- 494.1 -
Project No.
802829
Contract No.
17P289
Bate
Contractor:
Caplinger and sons, Inc
Morass
511 Central Avenue south
Po Boxa3]
Watkins, AN 55389
sPls]122, 8151 Rehab. M025A, M026, W38 Improvements
Pay Whores Tots
Period Covered b this Earmate:
ITEM No.
DESCRIPTION
CONTRACTPMouNT
PREMOUSEARNINcA
ART THI S ESTI MATE
TOTAL ART EARNED
UNIT
GUY
UNITPRICE
AMOUNT
GUY
AMOUNT
GUY
AMOUNT
GUY
AMOUNT
Mobilization Demobilization
2
Pmed Documenit nantl Con9rudonsurvem
Ls
_
1
$ 2➢0000➢0
$ 2➢000000
000
_
$
_
095
$ 19000000
_
095
$ 190DOO 00
3
CunclsAdim Ustratve Odra
LS
1
$ ]5000➢0
$ 7500000
000
$
111
$ 8325000
111
$ 834000
4
UtilA Potholin
LVF
350
$ 8000
$ 2➢,00000
000
$
9000
$ 720000
9000
$ 720600
5
Utility Relocation Allowance
""
1
$ 15➢000➢0
$ 15➢00000
000
$
046
$ 6900000
046
$ 6�0000
_...
6
_...
C t itlsolDp IAII
""
1
_.
$ 75,00000
_.
$
_...
-.
$
_.
$
_...
099
_..
$ -
j....
allowance
""
$
$ 5000000
000
O.O.tl.......
$..............
099
495000.tl.
.........000
$.........�....f0.0..0.Q..
8
snow Removal Nlowance
Snow Penney
""
_1
1
450 5000�00
$
$ 45000.0.0
000
$
0�...........Q
$
-
$
-0
---
^"
-1
75000➢0
$ ]500800
7500000
$
000--
$ --
100
100 --$
100
$
10
Tunnel Boulder
TunnelT oultler Removal Allowance
Removal
$ 170000➢0
$ 17500000
50 CFO OF
000
$
100
575 000000---100
$ 175000➢0
50DOO O00
$ 175DOO F
11
MCES Hog Pipe ReparNlowanm
^"
_1
1
$ ]5000➢0
$ ]500000
_
000
$
100
$ ]500000
_100
100
$ ]5p0000
OF
12
_
Restoration Alowance
""
1
$ 300,000➢0
$ 300,00000
000
$
061
$ 183,00000
_
061
$ 183DOO 00
13
Bite Pre aration
LS
1
$ 150,00000
$ 150,00000
000
$
1 00
$ 150,00000
1 ➢0
$ 15➢pOB00
1st_
Bid Poll
LF_
102➢0
$ 2➢0
$ 2➢40000
000
$
1631600_
$ 3263200
1631600
$ 32p200
15_
SIRFence- Machine Sliced
LF21100
$ 200
$ 512➢000
000
_
$
561200
$ 1122400
561200
$ 1122400
16
siX Fence-Heav OW
LF
8300
$ 225
$ 1867500
000
$
A8689
$ 1]4➢5➢
A8689
$ 1]j2➢5➢
17
SIR Fence Super Duty Fabric only
LF
$ 5➢0
$ 4050000
000_
$
88950
$ 444750
88950
$ 444750
18
__.
Flotat onSIR CPlan
LF
_8100
$ 1800
$ 81 000 00
000_
__.
$
485000
$ 8730000
485000
$ 87 300 00
orn
_45➢0
_
9➢OO O........800
600
20...
Cory etl and Flared Entl l net Pmtetlon�
EH�
YU
$ 10000
$ 3EOooo
olio
$ .....
p00......0
� .....R00.00
21
storm Drain l nlet Pmtecton
EA
90
$ 15000
$ 1350000
000-
$ -
3000
$ 450000
3000
$ 4550000
Erosion Coniml Blanket wSWetl Mix21-
22
;porary
ll
%.
25000
$ 125
$ 31250.00
000
$
2700
$ 33.75
27.00
$ 33.]5
23.
Temporary HytlmMulch w/seetl Mix 21-111
sV
25000
$ 050
$ 1250000
000
$
1728650
$ 864325
1728650
$ 850.325
24
Dew Leos Trench pipeline and structure
exca25-
W.
1
$ 20,00000
$ 2➢,00000
000
_
$
100
$ 20,00000
100
$ 2➢DOO 00
Dewaterng Channel Crossing Tunnel Pis
Ls
1
$ 100000➢0
$ 10000000
000-
$ -
100
$ 10000000
100
$ 1000000
-
Temporary Conveyance of Wa9ewater-]021
-
-
_.
_
_.
26
F Sys
W.
1
$ A5p,000➢0
$ A5➢,00600
600
$
1➢0
$ A5➢,000➢0
1➢0
$ A5➢p0600
_
Tempi ceoTWasewaier-7020
_
_
_
_
9
Sysmvey
L6
1
$ 750,00000
$ 75➢,00000
000
$
100
$ 750,00000
100
$ 75➢DOO 00
W
Temporary Conveyance of Wa ewater-Mountl
W.
1
$ 50,00000
$ 50,00000
000
$
100
$ 50,00000
100
$ 50D0000
Gravity & FS Systems
_
Tempysery ConveyanceoTWasewa$er-Smoothsta
�....1
29
-
$ 65,00000
$ 6500000
000
$
100
$ 6500000
100
$ 65DOO 00
30
Traffic Control
Ls
1
$ 10000000
$ 100 000 00
000
$
095
$ 9500000
095
$ 95D0000
31
Barr ers
LF
1500
$ 135,2000
$
851638
$ iZ585000
851638
$ iZ505000
32_
Salvage Reinstall Sign
EA
35
-$
$ 14000
$ 5000
000
$
3900
$
$
33_
Street Sweeping
sirest Sweep ng_
HR
800
$ 14300
12 CFO OF
$ 13000000
250 _
_
$
41290
$ 943000
240
41290
943000
$ 59p3000
34
Dus ControlCalciumChloride
GAL
000
20000
$
$
000
$
4238700
$ 4250000
$ 4250000
36
cantml water
GAL
2f1100
$ 100
20,00000
$ 1750000
000
000
$
4250000
a21 000
$ a25➢000
az1 000
4250000
$ a25➢000
36
ahi
Cabeand Pipe WceimEquipment
1
000
$ 1]50400
$
$
$ 17
$ 00
37
TEA
Bituminous Pavement Milling Up To2lnMes
sV
16000
$ 4➢0
6400000
$ 6400600
000
000
$
350
2235➢61
8940244
$ 8940244
350
2/15061
8940244
$ E�0244
Bi world ous Pavement Demolmon 2- Inches to6
38
nMes
sV
15400
$ 300
$ 462➢000
000
$
5211670
$ 156350.10
5211670
$ 156350.10
iominous Pavement DemolAon Greater Than 6
39
_I
nMes Thick
sV
48000
$ 500
$ 24000000
000
$
3593000
$ 17965000
3593000
$ 179650.00
40
Concrete Pavement Demolition Up To 6Inches TrnW
sv
680
$ 500
$ 3,40000
000
$
4U26G
$ 2163➢0
4U26G
$ 2163➢0
41
mete Pavement Demolition Greater Than6
sv
z5➢
$ e➢O
$ z,00600
600
$
600
$
600
$
n ma Thick
42
Concrete Curb and Gutter Demolition
LF]830
$ 500
$ 39150.00
000
$
]13600
$ 3568000
]13600
$ 3568B00
43
RIIetl Biumnous Curb Demoli on
LF
4630
$ 100
$ 463000
000
$
49]900
$ 49]900
49]900
$ 49]900
44
24 Inch Forcemain Structure Abandonment
EA
16
$ 250000
$ 4000000
000
$
1000
$ 2500000
1000
$ 25D0000
45_
24 Structure ndonment
Fmel
EA
16
$ 401800
$ 64 000
000
$
1200
$
$ 48p0600
46
In For
241nM siest Fmc anAbantlonmeni
LF
$ 18➢0
08CFO00
$ 17200000
000
_
$
_
5095800
$ 5➢35➢00
8310
$
47
Demotion
LF
9000
$
$
000_
$
843700
$ 0
843700
$ 6749600
48
ForcemainAandoman
Forceman Less Than 24
LF
1050
1560
200
$ 1300
1260000
$ 1468000
000
__.
$
132600
111300
1592067
$ 1533900
132600
111300
15/1200
$ 1533900
49
Demotion Le
Fr®man Demolition Lesthan 241nM
rich
LF
$ 3➢0
$
000
$
11300
$ 339➢0
$ 339.00
6➢
Waterman Dernoeion
LF
_4550
455➢
$
365000
$ 11400
000
_
$
4000
$ 131A 6➢
PRE0
4000
$ 13,1Ab➢
51_
Leatl Jo ni Waterman Demoln on
LF
150
000
$ 10➢0
000
$ 0.00
000
$
000
$
000
$
4_
Gravity Sewer Abandonment LesThan 241nM
LF
240
$ 1200
$ 8000
_
000
$
000
$
000
$
53
Gravii sewer Demol fon Les TM1an241nM
LF
610
$ 1200
$ 4B00
B00
$
5b➢0
$ 62➢0
5b.00
_
$ 6200
54
Gravity Sewer Manhole Demotion
EA
$ 35000
$ 000
000
$
10➢0
$ 35➢0➢0
1000
$ 35➢000
55
_._
storm sewer Moorea Demoktion
EA
_4
1
35➢➢0
5➢.00
_ 000 _
100
-11 35000
100
1 350.00
MCEs
Hennep n County
Mountl
Amount
/I Amount
% I Amount
100%
$ 190CFO 00
0%
$ -
0%
$
82%
6826500
0%
$
18%
$__ 1498500
__$
100%
$ 720000
_
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 69CFO 00
U%
$
U%
$
100/
$
0/
$
0/
$
100 /..........
.$ 49500.O11...........
0%
u ............
0%..
.. ..... ...J.......
100%
$
0%
$
0%
$
100% -
$ 75D0000
- 0%
$ --
0%
$ -
100%
$ 150CFO 00
0%
$
0%
$
100%
-$ 7500000
- 0%
$
0%
$--
100%
$ 18300000
0%
$
0%
$
95%
$ 14250000
0%
$
5°/
$ 750000
56%
$ 1827392
39%
$
5%
$ 1 631 60
96%
$ 1077504
0%
_1272648
$
4%
$ 44896
100%
$ 1752050
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 444750
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 87 COO 00
_
0%
_
$
0%
$
95%
$ 855➢00
- 0%
$ --
5%
$- 45➢00
100%
..$.
.. 0%
$ ...
0%
$..
95%
$ 421500
- 0%
$ -
5%
$- 22500
100%
$ 33.75
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 864325
_ 0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 2000000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 100CFO 00
- 0%
$ -
0%
$-
100%
$ 950D0000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 75000000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
0
0%
$
0%
$
100%
0
0%
0%88%
0
]%
$ 655➢00
5%
$ 4]5➢➢0
92%
4
T
]%
$ 86422f1
1%
$ iZT]A6
88%
0
]%
$ 4096➢
5%
$ 2926➢
88%
40
7%
$ 416010
5%
$ 2W15➢
88%
E6
7%
$ 256109
5%
$ 211935
88%
00
]%
$ 26]500
5%
$ 212500
13%
0%
$
0%
$
3%
263200
$ 2582W
97%
$ 86]203]
0%
$
87%
$ 136D2459
2%
$ 3,12700
11%
$ 17,19851
100%
$ 17965000
0%
$
0%
$
93%
$ 2pn 59
]%
$ 151 ai
0%
$...
93%
$
]%
$
0%
$
66%
$ 2354880
0%
$ ---
34%
$ 1213120
93%
$ 463047
]%
$ 34853
0%
$
100%
$ 2500000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
48p0000
0%
$
0%
$__
__$
100%
$ 5➢,W'H 00
_
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 6149600
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 1561200
0%
$
0%
$
$ 33900
0%
$
0%
$
27%
200
$ 355/31
0%
$
$ 96195H
100%
$
0%
$
0%
0%
$
100%
$
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 6200
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 35➢000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
35➢00
0%1
0%
rwow��e��mwrvweiem. rmsm siuumnn. Page 1 of 4
- 482 -
BPIB]122, 8151 Rehab. M025A, M026, W38 Improvements
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
CONTRACTAMOUNT
PREMOUBEARNINGA
AMTTHIBEBTIMATE
TOTAL
ART EARNED
MCES
Hands
---30%$
n County
Mound
--AmountWstorm
UNIT
GUY
UNIT PRICE
MOUNT --
OTV
MOUNT
OTV
PMOUNT
%
Amount
Amouni
Bawer Eared End Demolition Les Than 2a
EA
25
$ 100➢0
$ 25➢000
000
$
$ 100➢0
1➢0
$ 10000
31%
$9300$
700
Inch
5➢
Bmrm Sewer PipeD orlon Less Than 2a Inch
LF
165➢
$ 15➢0
$ 2475➢00
000
$
$ 17985➢0
119900
$ 1798500
100%
$ 1798500
storm Bawer Flared End Demotion Greater Than 2a
EA3
$ 5➢0➢0
$ 15➢000
000
$
_
$ 100000
200
$ 1CF000
93%
$ 93000$
7000
.59
60
Storm Sewer PipeD olon Greater To an 2a Inch
LF
125
$ 18➢0
$ 225➢00
000
$
$ 1782➢0
9900
$ 178200
100%
$ 178200
61
Remove Guard Rail
LF
1279
$ 6➢0
$ 767400
000
$
7OTYAMOUNTAMOUNT
$ 8,622➢0
143700
$ 852200
100%
$ 852200
F%Amount
62
Tempoary Water Bervce
EA
100
$ 175➢0
$ 175➢000
000
$
$ 1715➢00
9800
$ 1715➢00
8%
$ 137200
15A60063
Conned to Ed9in Watermain
EA
16
$ 3500➢0
$ 5600600
600
$
$ 35,000➢0
1600
$ 35p0600
12%
$ L2f1600
30,8060064
Conned to Edging Water Bervim
EA
63
$ 125➢0
$ ]81500
600
$
$ ]75➢➢0
6200
$ ]75➢.00
11%
$ 845➢
6BW.5➢65
1 Corpoat on Stop
EA
64
$ 100➢0
$ 640000
000
$
$ 65➢000
6500
$ 6j➢000
11%
$ ]1500$
_
5]850066
1"CurbBto antl Boz
EA
64
$ 25➢➢0
$ 16,00000
000
$
$ 16,000➢0
6400
$ 16➢0600
11%
$ 1760.00$
__
14,2400067
2 Corpoat on Stop
EA
1
$ 380➢0
$ 38000
000
$
$ 380➢0
100
$ 38000
0%
$
$
3800068
6 Gate Valve antl Boz
EA
2➢
$ 15➢0➢0
$ 3000000
000
$
-$ 3000000
-2000
$ 30COO 00
10%
$ 3p0000$
- 2700000
8Gi Valve and
FA
4
$ 1900➢0
$ 760000
000
$
400..........$
7600➢0.
$...........].500100..
5➢%
300000............
0%
__.
$..............
5➢%
$... 3a80000
....69....
]0
.......... ............
10" Gate Valve and Boz
.....
EA
....
$ 250000
..........
$ 2500000
.............
000
..............
$
1000
$ 2500000
........400
1000
$ 25➢0600
.......$.
0%
$
0%
$
100%
......... ..........
$ 2500000
71
_
Water Said ice Gtl Cover
EA
_10
$ 25000
$ 250000
000
_
$
_
000
$
-_000
$
0%
$
_
--_ 0%
$ -
100%
$
72
_
H,,DaM
EA
_10
8
$ 400000
$ 3200000
000
_
$
_
800
$ 3200000
800
$ 32➢0000
12%
$ 304000
0%
$ -
88%
$ 2816000
73_
ITydant Extension
LF
5
$ 52500
$ 2625.00
000
$
500
$ 262500
500
$ 2525.00
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 2625.00
74_
1 Water Said ice Pipe
LF
1750
$ 3500
$ 6125000
_
000
$
191400
$ 6699000
$ 66_,9000
9%
6➢2910
_
0%
$
91%
_
$ 6096090
75
2"Water Bervlm Pie
LF
10
$ 6500
$ 650.00
000
_
$
600
$ 39000
_191400
600
$ 39000
0%
_$
$
_
0%
$
100%$
39000
76
Water Bervlm Casing
LF
150
$ 1000
$ 150000
000
$
1200
$ 12000
1200
$ 12000
100% _
$ 12000
0%
--
$
0%
$
77
_
6 DIP Watermain CL52
LF
12➢0
$ 5➢➢0
$ 6000000
000
_
$
1 2245➢
$ 6122500
12245➢
$ 6122500
3%
$ 103675
0%
_
$
97%
$ 5938825
78
8" D IP Watermain CL52
T
1550
$ 5200
$ 8060000
000--
$
149200-
-$ 7758400
--149200
$ 7758400
59% -
$ 4577456
- 0%
$
41%
$ - 31,809.44
79_
10"DIP Watermain CL4
LF
1700
$ 6000
$ 1OT00 000
000
$
173700
$ 10 222➢➢0
173700
$ 10422000
0%
$
$
100%
$ iW Yl➢.00
80
10 Watermain (Pipe Burs)
LF
500
$ 7500
$ 3750000
_
000
$
000
$
000
$
0%
0%
$
100%
_
$
81
8"Watermain Castl
LF
50
$ 12000
$ 6,00000
000
_
$
5000
$ 6,00000
_
50.00
$ 6➢0000
50%
_$
$ 3➢0600
_
0%
$
50%
$ 300000
82
Watermain LOU Be
L88
2500
$ 600
$ 1500000
000
$
283500_
$ 1701000
2835.00
$ 1701000
20%
$ 340200
0%
$
80%
$ 1360800
83
_
4 Inch Polystyrene Insulation
BV
975
$ 4000
$ 3900000
000
_
$
13370
$ 534800
13370
$ 534600
_
93%
$ 491364
_ _
0%
_
$
]%
$ 37436
84
Class Rip Pap at FE Outlets
CV
100
$ 6500
$ 650000
000
$
6024
$ 391560
6024
$ 391560
93%
$ 364151
]%
$ AS Lot
0%
$
85
cDine
Pum
LF
218
$
$ 1240000
000
$
30000
$ 2656➢0
30000
$ 255600
88%
$ 233]20
]%
$ 185.92
5%
$ 13280
86_
Sump Said
Bump Pump Said ice Line and Box
EA
8
000
$ 31500
$
000
$
000
$
000
$
$
]%
$
5%
$
87_
Rep air Exs ng Tile Lines
LF
500
$
750000
$ ]10000
_
000
$
$
$
93%
91%
]%
$
0%
_
$
88
15Inch Corruated Pie Flared EndAron
EA
1
0000
$ 12500
$
000
$
200
$ 20000
200
_
$
93%
_$
$ 186
]%
$ 14
0%
$
69
15Inch Corrugated Pipe Flared End Apron
EA
$ 15000
62500
$ 130000
000_
$
100
$ 145➢➢0
100
4000
$ 1.45➢.00
93%
$ 14185➢
]%
$ 8750
0%
$_
90
Inch Pipe Flared End Apron
EA
_12
$ 15➢➢0
$
000
__.
$
300
300
$
300
300
$ 4000
9%
$ 4185➢
-
315➢
$ 3000
0%
$_
91..,.
15 PC Counei
nd.A
151 M1RC Rountl/Pr M1Pp FI tlEntl Ap
EA
_2
2
$ 75➢➢0
50000
$ 15➢000
000 -
_
$
300
25➢00
$ 225➢00
300
$ 225➢.00
0/
$
00
100/
$ 225➢00
0/
_
$
9'2
zamm RC liouod2Arm Pipe Flared End Apron
EF,
3
$ 180000
$ 540000
011d"""'
$ """'
200 """$
360000
""'i00
$ 3,600'00
93% ""$'
334800
.
"""' ]%
$
0%
$ ""
91
12 Inch RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 Class V
LF
-105
$ 3500
$ 367500
000-
$
10600
-$ 371000
10600
$ 371000
1%
$ 3710
- 0%
_"'25200
$
99%
$- 36290
94
18InchPCPi eSewerDesi n3006CIasV
LF
$ 4200
$ 2777000
000
$
499.00
$ 1890400
499.00
$ 18600.00
$ ]]BA40
$ ID5]880
8%
$ 159680
95.
1&IncM1 RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 CIasV
LF185
185
$ 42➢0
$ ]A000
000
$
21200
$ 8904➢0
21200
$ 8904.00
100
100%
890400
0%
0%
$
0%
$_.
96
24 Inch RC Council Pipe Sewer Design 3006
W
95
$ 9500
$ 9025.00
000
$
_
4000
$ 380000
4000
$ 300000
__$
100%
$ 300000
0%
$
0%
$
Class 11IA
9]
15Inch PE Pipe Sewer
LF
735
$ 2500
$ 1837500
000_
$
66600
$ 16650➢0
66600
$ 1665000
100%
$ 1665000
0%
$
0%
$98
18 Inch PE Ppe Sewer
LF
365
$ 30➢0
$ 1095➢00
000
$ 495➢00
16500
$ 4,5000
93%
$ 4505➢
]%
$ 3465➢
0%
$99
Construct Came Sl utlure Des nR-0 'z3
LVF
38
$ 5➢0➢0
$ 18,95➢.00
000
$ 19,235➢0
3847
$ 19p5.00
0%
$
61%
$ 1208745
33%
$ 634755
100
Construct Drainage Structure Desgn 48"402➢
LVF
15
$ 45➢➢0
$ 657000
000
$ 2619➢0
582
$ 261900
40%
$ 1D4760
60%
$ 157140
0%
$101
Co nsruct Danag Structure Desgn 48' 4022
LVF
118
$ 480➢0
$ 5664000
000
T
$ 6782400
14130
$ 6702400
8%
$ 542592
61%
$ 4137264
31%
$ 2102544
102
Co nnep to Edsin Storm Pie
EA
20
$ 1,000➢0
$ 2800000
000
$ 5,000➢0
500
$ 500000
82%
$ 410000
0%
$
18%
$ 90000
103
Energy Dspater(12 I rch Ppe)
EA
1
$ 35➢0➢0
$ 35➢000
000
$
000
$
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$104
Energy Dspater(15 I nor Ppe)
EA
3
$ 3800➢0
$ 1140000
000
$ 1140000
300
$ 1140000
0%
$
33%
$ 376200
67%
$ 763800
105
Skimmer 15InchPi e
EA
3
$ 2500➢0
$ 750000
000
$ 750000
300
$ 750000
0%
$
33%
$ 2p]500
61%
$ 5025.00
106
24 Inch PVC Formmain
LF
983
$ 18500
$ 181,855.00
000
$
963.00
$ 17815500
963.00
$ 178155.00
100%
$ 178155.00
0%
$
0%
$
iW
i81nch PVC Formmain
LF
$ 14000
$ 3691-40000
000
$
2667000
$ 372778000
2662700
$ 372778000
100%
372778000
0%
$
0%
$__
108
16 Inch PVC Formman
LF
_26410
$ 7500
$ 8850000
000
$
100000
$ 7500000
100000
$ 75COO 00
100%
_$
7500000
_
0%
$
0%
$__
109
14 Inch PVC Formmain
LF
_1180
680
$ 6000
$ 40,80000
000
$
611 ➢0
$ 40260➢0
611 ➢0
$ 40260.00
100%
_$
$ 40260.00
_
0%
$
0%
$
110
121nch PVC Formmain
LF
3160
$ 5000
$ 15900 000
000
$
311200
$ 15560000
311200
$ 15560000
100%
$ 15560000
0%
$
0%
$
111
10 Inch PVC Formmain
LF
1340
$ 4200
$ 5628000
000
$
131700
$ 5531400
131700
$ 55314 00
100%
$ 5531400
0%
$ -
0%
$
112
6Inch PVC F m
LF
1505
$ 40➢0
$ 602➢000
000
$
151400
$ 6056000
151400
$ 60560.00
100%
$ 60 r56000
0%
$ -
0%
$
Formman .........
5...
....30
.....
$ ..00
$ 1,170.0.0.
0,0.0.......
$.............
114
6 Inch DIP CL52 Formman
LF
55
$ 5000
$ 2750.00
000
$
2900
$ 145000
2900
$
100%
$ 145000
0%
$
0%
$
115
121nch Casin (o 6lnch Formman
LF
1505
$ 7500
$ 11287500
000
_
$
146800
$ 110h0fco
1468.00
_.1450.00
$ 110]0000
100%
$ 11010000
0%
$
0%
$
116
6" Formmain Gate Valve and Box
EA
$ 200000
$ 600000
000
$
200
$ 400000
200
$ 400000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 400000
117
_
8 Inch PVC Wye for Sanitary Hewer
EA
_3
]
$ 30000
$ 210000
_
000
$
000
$
000
$
100%
_
0%
$
0%
_
$
118
6Inch PVC Sent Hewer Bery m-8DR26
LF
_
120
$ 12500
$ 15,00000
000
_
$
22450
$ 2806250
22450
$ 28D6250
67%
_$
$ 1800188
_
0%
$
33%
$ 926063
119
8Inch PVC Gravity Sanitary Sewer -SIDE 35
LF
$ 9500
$ 71725.00
000_
$
67400
$ 6403000
$ 6403000
100%
$ 64D3000
0%
$
0%
$_
120
Conned to Easing Sanitary Service -
EA
_755
$ 25000
$ 175000
000_
$
400
$ 100000
_67400
400
$ 100000
100%
$ 100000
-_ 0%
_
$ -
0%
$_
121
Conn ad Service to 151 nor RCP
EA
_]
3
$ 75000
$ 2250.00
000
_
$
300
$ 2,25➢➢0
300
$ 24000
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 2OIL 00
122
Conn ad to Exiling Sanitary Man hole
EA
1
$ 500000
$ 500000
000
$
500
$ 2500000
500
$ 2500000
100%
$ 2500000
0%
$
0%
$
123
_
CCTV Sewer Inspection
LF
77500
$ 150
$ 11625000
_
000
$
4858656
$ 7287984
4858656
$ 7207984
100%
7207984
_
0%
$
0%
_
$
124
_
Cit Gavit Banit Sewer Cleanin
LF
38000
$ 350
$ 133,00000
000
_
$
1997170
$ 6990095
1997170
$ 6195
UPS
_$
$ 6990095
_
0%
$
0%
$
125
Deb UsDws osal
TON
150
$ 11000
$ 1650000
000
$
105. 55
$ 1157750
105.25
$ 11 ]1.5➢
100%
$ 11 T1.5➢
0%
$
0%
$
121
481nch Diameter Sanitary Bawer Manhole
LVF
$ 40000
$ 21 160.00
000
$
4990
$ 1996000
$ 19960.00
100%
$ 19960.00
0%
$
0%
$_
iZ]
601ncM1 City LB Meter Manhole
LB
_53
1
$ 2f1000➢0
$ 2f100000
_
000-
$ -
100
$ 2f100000
_4990
100
$ 2fIf1y10000
0%
$
- 0%
_
$ -
100%
$ 2f100000
iW
R place City Gravity Sanitary Manhole Casing
EA
27
$ 130000
$ 3510000
000
$
000
$
000
1
$
40%
$
0%
$
60%
_
$
embly
129
Adjust City Gravity So nitary Manhole _
EA
3
$ 75000
$ 225000
000
$ _
900
$ 675000
900
$ 671000
88%
$ 594000
]%
$ 47250
5%
$ 33750
130
Cit eanitar Structure Marker Pos
EA
2
$ 15000
$ 30000
000
$
000
$
000
$
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$
rwow��e�°mwrvweiem. rm-, siuumnn. Paget of
-483-
SPIS 7122, 8151 Rehab. M025A, M026, W38 Improvements
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
CONTRACTAMOUNT
PREMOUSEARNINGA
ART THI
S ESTI MATE
TOTAL
ART EARNED
MCES
H nnep
---
n County
Mound
---Amount--
UNITT
OTC
I UNIT PRICE
I MOUNT --
OTC
MOUNT
OTC
AMOUNT
OTC
MOUNT
%
Amount
%
Amount
% I
131
MCES Dual FormmanARVSlrudure
EA
]
$ 125a00000
$ 87500000
000
$
6]5
$ 84375000
675
$ 84375000
100%
$ 84375000
0%
$
0%
$
132
MCES Dual Formman CO Structures Ml&M5
EA
2
$ 10000000
$ 2➢000000
000
__.
$
190
$ 19000000
190
$ 190➢0000
1ol
$ 190➢0000
0%
__.
$
0%
$
133
MCES Dual Fmmmain CO Slrudure Rol
LS
1
$ 10500000
$ 105000.00
000
$
100
$ 105000➢0
$ 105➢F000
100%
105➢F000
0%
$
0%
$__
134
MCES Dual Formman CO Slrudure M]
LS
1
$ 11000000
$ 11000000
000
$
095
$ 1045➢000
_1➢0
095
$ 1045➢000
100%
_$
_$ 1045➢000
_
_ 0%
$ _
0%
135
MCES Dual Form llrconnect Structure
EA
2
$ 125,00000
$ 25➢,00000
000
$
190
$ 2375➢0➢0
190
$ 23750000
100%
$ 23750000
0%
$
0%
$
136
MCES Dual Formmain Wye 9 Structure
LS
1
$ 17500000
$ 17500000
000
$
1➢0
$ 17500000
100
$ 175➢0600
100%
$ 175➢0600
0%
$
0%
$
137
Mnnelruta ARVStructure
EA
$ 800000
$ 800000
000
$
100
$ 800000
$
100%
$ Bp0000
0%
_
$
0%
$
138
M 1uta CO S1 d
EA
_1
1
$ 40000➢0
$ 4000000
000
_
$
_
100
$ 4000000
_100
100
_.Bp0600
$ 40DOO 00
100%
$ 40DOO 00
_
0%
$
0%
$
139
........... .............
Minnelrista LAG Connection SUudum
.....
LS
....
1
............
$ 7500000
............
$ ]500000
............
000
.............
$
..........
100
...
$ 7500000
.........
100
.......................
$ 75➢0000
......
100%
... ...........
$ 75➢0000
0%
.....
$
..
0%
..........................
$
140
Mnnelruta L56C ctonStrudure
LS
1
$ 12000000
$ 12000000
000
$
100
$ 12000000
100
$ 12➢CF000
100%
$ 12➢CFO 00
0%
$
0%
$
141
Mmnelruta LS]C act on Structure
LS
1
$ 9000000
$ 9000000
000
_
$
100
$ 9000000
1➢0
$ 90➢0600
100%
$ 90➢0000
0%
__.
$
0%
$
142
Discharge Structure(MH) 8
LS1
$ 12500000
$ 125000.00
000
$
100
$ 12500000
100
$ 125➢0000
100%
125➢0000
0%
$
0%
$_.
143
Mi nettles Lift Station 9 Went -ell and Pump
�.
1
$ 14500000
$ 14500000
000
$
_
100
$ 14500000
100
$ 145➢0000
__$
100%
$ 145➢0000
0%
$
0%
$
Im mvemeLS
144
TunnelW dual IF Inch formmain In 60 to 66 He
W
280
$ 200000
$ 56000000
000
$
131 98
$ 26396000
131 98
$ 253960.00
100%
$ 253960.00
0%
$
0%
$
asing
145
Tunnel w/ single 18 inch(ormman in 30 inch Casing
LF
610
$ 100000
$ 610 000 00
000
$
53500
$ 53500000
53500
$ 535➢0000
100%
$ 535➢0000
0%
$
0%
$
146
Tunnel Pi151a.2Ai0.5
LS1
$ 30000➢0
$ 30000.00
000
$
1➢0
$ 30000➢0
1➢0
$ 30p0600
100%
30p0600
0%
$
0%
147
Tunnel Pi Ste.2 21
LS1
$ 12000➢0
$ 1200000
000
$
_
000
$
000
$
100%
_$
_
0%
$
0%
1A8
Tunnel Pi 51a.51 L59
LS
1
$ 2➢000➢0
$ 2➢00600
000
$
_
100
$ 2f100000
100
$ 20➢0000
__$
100%
$ 20➢0000
_
0%
$
0%
$
10.9
Tunnel Pi151a.5Ai5]
LS
1
$ 12500000
$ 12500000
600_
$
1➢0
$ 125000➢0
$ 125_➢0600
100%
$ 125➢0600
0%
$
0%
$_
15➢
Tunnel Contact Grouting 60 inch Casing
LF
280
$ 5➢➢0
$ 1A00000
000_
$ _
000
$
_1➢0
000
$
100%
$
-_ 0%
_
$ -
0%
$_
151
Tunnel ConhctG tin 30.inch Casn
LF
610
$ 4000
$ 2440000
000
$
305.00
$ 122➢0➢0
305.00
$ 1220000
100%
$ 1220600
0%
$
0%
$
14
Tunnel Ba�Il Gmuling 60.incb Casing
LF
280
$ 15000
$ 4200000
000 _
$
too00
$ 1500000
too00
$ 15➢F000
100%
$ 15➢F000
_ 0%
$
0%
$ _
15J
Tunnel Backlll Gmu1 ng 30 ncM1 Cas ng
LF
610
$ 5000
$ 3050000
000
$ _
53500
$ 2675000
_53500
$ 2675000
100%
_$ 2675000
_ 0%
$
0%
154
Batllell Tunnel Moniiorin
LS
1
$ 50,00000
$ 50,00000
000
$
087
$ 4350000
087
$ 4350000
100%
$ 4350000
0%
$
0%
$
155
Channel Crossing Tunnel Monitoring
LS
1
$ 2000000
$ 2000000
000
$
000
$
000
$
100%
$
0%
$
1 0%
1 $
Pont Repair by Chemical Grout
EA
35
$ 160000
$ 5600000
000
$
3500
$ 5600000
3500
$ 56➢0000
100%
$ 56➢0000
0%
$
0%
$
r156
]
361ncM1 Pre liner
LF
106
$ AO➢0
$ A2A600
000
__.
$
10600
$ A2A000
106➢0
$ A24600
100%
$ A24000
0%
__.
$
0%
$
15➢
A21ncM1 Pre Lner
LF
]98
$ 11➢0
$ BA800
000
$
]9800
$ BA800
]9800
$ B,A800
100%
$ BA800
0%
_
$
0%
$
159
36IZc ClPP lining
LF
106
$ 300➢0
$ 3180000
$
600
$
600
$
100%
$
_ 0%
$
0%
$ _
160
A21ncM1 CI PP L.ning
LF
798
$ 20500
$ 16359000
000
$ _
]9000
$ 16195000
_7_9000
$ 161 ,50 00
100%
_$ 161 ,50 00
_ 0%
$
0%
161
Re-estabINM1Sery eConnection
EA
1
$ 1,10000
$ 1,10000
000
$
100
$ 1,10000
100
$ 1]0600
100%
$ 1,10000
0%
$
0%
$
162
Gmui Rae9ablisM1etl Servlm Connection
EA
$ 500000
$ 5000.00
000_
$
1➢0
$ 5000➢0
100
$ 5➢0600
100%
$ 5➢0600
0%
$
0%
$_
163
Manhole Rehabilitation 42 Fiberglass Insert
EA
_1
$ 1200000
$ 21600000
000
$
1800
$ 21600000
1800
$ 2126➢0000
100%
$ 216➢0000
-_ 0%
_
$ -
0%
$_
A
M M1 R M1 tifii 1 5A Fb gl i
EA
_18
3
$ 1300000
$ 3900000
000 -
_
$
200
$ 2b 00000
200
$ 2bpOB00
100%
$ 2b➢0000
0%
$
0%
_
$
15
Manhole Rehati li)afon-66"Fberglass) Heart
EA
1
$ 15,000�00
$ 15000�00
00.0.....
$
1➢0
$ 15000➢0.
......1➢0
$ I3DOO �00
100%
$ 15➢0000
0/
�
0%
166
Atlit tonal ManM1ole Chem ml Groutn�
GAL
_22➢
$ 15➢➢0
$ 3300000
000_
$ _
000
$
000
$
100%
$
-_ 0%
_
$ -
0%
$_
16!
Re babililated Manhole Grade Slab
EA
18
$ 150000
$ 2700000
000
$
1700
$ 2550000
1700
$ 255➢000
100%
$ 255➢000
0%
$
0%
$
168
Common Leave iion
CV
38200
$ 1400
$ 53400000
000
$
3698A00
pi
CBSE 0
pi
9A%
$ 486709.44
0%
$
6%
$ 31,066.56
169
Anogade Excavaion(W
CC
19100
$ 1200
$ 2292➢600
000
1578500
$ 18942➢➢0
1578500
$ 18942➢.00
94%
$ 178➢5480
0%
$
6%
$ 113652➢
1]0
Gnteele Fabric Type V for Road subgade
SC
5➢600
$ 200
$ 1172➢000
000-
$
5357300
-$ i0714600
5357300
$ i0714600
89%
$ 9535994
- 0%
__.
$
11%
$- 1178606
171
Roatl Sub atle Pre araiion
SV
58600
$ 600
$ 35150600
600
$
56A1300
$ 338,A]8➢0
56A13➢0
pi
89%
$ 301245 42
0%
$
11%
$ 3]23258
iW
G%o:e le Fabric Type I for Wapping of
SC
36260
$ 200
$ 5252➢.00
000
$
000
$
000
$
100%
$
0%
$
0%
$
Coarse/Lghtweight Aggregates
173
Coarse FllerA re ate
TON27014
$ 2950
$ 79691300
000
$
291832
pi AA
291832
pi
949/.
$ 8092501
0%
$
69/.
$ 5165.43
1]A
lightweight Ago regate
TON
1000
$ 14100
$ 141 ➢0600
000
$
1000➢0
$ 14100000
100000
$ 141 ➢0000
100%
$ 141 ➢00➢0
0%
$
0%
$
1]5
_
Select Granular Borrow (CV) -
TON
23628
$ 135➢
$ 31897800
_
000-
$ -
2➢08605
$ 35216168
2➢08605
$ 35216168
96%
$ 333C7521
- 0%
_
$ -
4%
_
$ 1408647
176
Class Aggregate Base
TON
32067
$ 2000
$ 64134000
000
$
4123955
$ 82479100
4123955
$ 82479100
92%
$ ]5800]72
0%
$
8%
$ 65983.28
177
Biummous Paichm
S✓
900
$ 3500
$ 3150000
000
$
172338
$ 6031830
172338
$ 6031830
100%
$ 6031830
0%
$
0%
$
17_8_
Cc nwete Patching-Wnter _
SC1300
$ 6000
$ ]8000.00
000_
$ _
000 __$
_000
$ _ _
100% _
$
_ _ 0%
$ _
0%
$_
179
Bituminous Non Wearing Course Mx SPNW M30B
TON
1550
$ 5150
$ 79825.00
000
$
151026
$ 7777839
151026
$ 7777839
43%
$ 334"71
0%
$
57%
$ 44333.68
.............
181
............. .............
Bituminous Wearing Course Mix SPWEA340B
.............
SV
.............
$
.............
$
.............
.............
$
...........$
.0
$ 6853600
....10
.......................0
$ 6853600
.............
.............
$ 25929.48
0%
.............
$
...............................
5]%
$_ 343]i➢0
181
Bituminous V4ka=ing Course Mix SPWEA240B
TON
5250
525
$ 100➢0
000
5250000
$ 45➢000
000 _
000-
$ -
685600
68536
$ 6853600
68536
68536
$ 68y53600
93%
91%
$ 63]3848
- ]%
$ -47974
0%
$_
182
Bituminous Non Wearing Course Mix SPNW B330B
TO
10020
$ 5300
$ 531 ➢60.00
000
$
768442
$ 40727426
768442
$ 40721426
100%
$ 407214 26
0%
$
0%
$
183
Bituminous Wearing Course Mx SPWEA A340E
TON
9500
$ 6500
$ 61750000
000
$ _
903123
$ 58702995
903123
$ 587D2995
38%
$ 223➢7138
_62%
$ 363 ,58 57
0%
$.
184
Bituminous Non Wearing Course Mix SPNW M30B
TON
330
$ 5800
$ 19140.00
000
$
353.03
$ 2047574
35303
$ 2047574
100%
$ 2047574
0%
$
0%
$
185
Bituminous Wearing Coarse Mix SPWEB
TON
330
$ 5900
$ 1947800
000
$
15560
$ 918040
15560
$ 918840
100%
$ 918040
0%
$
0%
$
2empoary
186
Temporary Bituminous Non Wearing Coarse Mix
TON
1500
$ 5300
$ 79500.00
000
$
152079
$ 80 601➢]
152079
$ 8050187
100%
$ 8050187
0%
$
0%
$
SPNW M30B
187
Rmove Frozen Sal
TON
3750
$ 2500
$ 91 ]5➢.00
000
$
000
$
000
$
100%
$
0%
$
0%
$
188
Hydraulic Soil Stabilization
TON
500
$ 138000
$ 69000000
600
$
5➢600
$ 690000➢0
5➢600
$ 690p0600
100%
$ 690p0600
0%
$
0%
$_
189
_
Topsol Borrow -
CV
$ 2f1➢0
$ 19000000
_
000
$
1077
154580
5_IIT129
$ 10154580
90%
$ 9139122
- ]%
$ ]10821
3%
$_ 304637
.,190
P iM rk.pg Sp I..,..,
LS..,,,.11.
_A5➢0
$ 25000➢0
$ 25000.00
0
00....,..,.
_
$
1..,..,..,.
133 ..,....
$ 3325➢O0.
......... 133
$ 334000.,
91/ ....
$ 309225➢ ...........
]/
$ 23Z15➢
0/
$
$......
rwow��e��mwrvweiem.anmmsn�uvm�ems9 rmsn�siuumnm Page3 of4
- 484 -
SPIS 7122, 8151 Rehab. M025A, M026, W38 Improvements
ITEM No.
DESCRIPTION
CONTRACTPMO NT
PREMOUSFARNINGA
ART THI S ESTI MATE
TOTAL ART EARNED
UNITT
OTC
I UNITPRICE
I AMOUNT--
OTC
AMOUNT
OTC
AMOUNT
OTC
AMOUNT
191
PavementMarking Sngle Lne4Wde
LF
29255
$ 100
$ 29255.00
000
$
254
$ 25 L500
2545200
$ 2545200
192
Pavement Markn Double LlneA VNtle eaM
LF
232b0
$ 15➢
$ 3489000
000
$
538'300
$ 65A95➢
4385300
$ 65,A95➢
191
TaIRe9oation_ Asphalt Resurtamr..
SV
2900
$ 700
$ 2➢30000
000
$
n
$
000
$
194
Guardrail
LF
1830
$ 2400
$ 43 920 00
_
000
_
$
117700
$ 2➢24800
$ 2824300
195
Concrete Pavement 4 Inches
SY
130
$ 8500
$ 11,050.00
000
$
000
$
_11A00
000
$
196
C ncrete Pavement 6lnMes
SV
700
$ 9700
$ 61,90000
000
$
115670
$ 11219990
115670
$ 11219990
197
Concrete Curb&_Gutter
LF
16800
$ 13➢0
$ 218
_
000
__.
$
1859972
$ 24179636
1859972
$ 24179636
198.
_
C t Step,....
SF....
180
$ 95➢0
$ 1045➢:00
000.......
$
9735.......$
924825.
9735
$
199
.........
Or ding Timber Staimay, and Landscaping-CSAH
LS
1
$ 50,00000
$ 5➢,00000
000
..........
$
100
$ 50,00000
......
100
..924825..
$ 5➢➢0600
44 / Eagle BluRRtl
0
Se,,,,,AA
SF
1450
$ 3000
$ 4350000
000
$
1834]0
$ 5504100
1834]0
$ 55➢41 ➢0
201
Chan Link Fence
LF
630
$ 3600
$ 2268000
000
$
16200
$ 583200
16200
$ 503200
202
Wood Privacy Fence
LF
230
$ 7500
$ 1725000
000
_
$
18800
$ 1410000
$ 1410000
Rei2arcetl TumMt Drivablew/Seed Mix25151 or
_
_18800
203
35
Sy
131
$ 4700
$ 25,145.00
000
$
49000
$ 23,030➢0
49000
$ COOED 00
204
Permanent Flezamat Blanket wSeetlMix 36211
SC
-440
$ 2400
$ 1056000
000-
$
14]]0
-$ 354480
14]]0
$ 3554480
Permanent Erosion Control Blanket, Category3N, w/
205
es i151
Sy
1000
$ 125
$ 1,250.00
600
$
145000
$ 1,81250
1450.00
$ 181250
PermanentErosion Control Blanket Category3N
2➢6
w/react Mt 1 35241 0136211
gy
1000
$ 150
$ 1,500 00
0 00
$
554400
$ 831600
554400
$ 831600
2➢8
Permanent HytlmMulM wSeed MN2Mix1 151
SV
$ 100
$ 3-0 387
000
$
4240900
$ 5-6 89225240900
4240900
$ 5240900
2➢9
Permanent HytlmMulM wSeetl Mxi
SC
3240
$
$ 324000
000
_
$
$
$
Permanent HytlmMUIM,wSeetl Mix24141,35241,
_
2➢9
of 36211
S.
9300
9{060
$ 05➢
050
653000
$ 4653B00
B00
$
3513{.60
56330
781680
$ 1],816➢0
56330
3513{50
$ 1]01680
701680
210
Wetland Restoration wSeetlMix 332b2 or34181
SC
-240
$ 100
$ 240 00
000--
$
000 -
-$
--000
$
211
Classi R Ra -L read ore Re9oaTon
CV
1000
$ ]5➢0
$ 7500000
000
$
192➢
$ 144000
192➢
$ 144000
211
Trss Plant ng_
FA
$ 1000➢0
$ 3300B00
000
$
400
$ 4000➢0
400
$ 4➢_OO 00
213
Tanseni Mt ration Allow once
^^
__33
1
$ 45➢000➢0
$ 45➢00600
000
$
_
100
$ 45➢00000
100
$ 45➢ 0600
Protect No 802829 .ter ms .. Pay Estimate s Total
Contact No. 17P209
Data
Contractor: Caplinger and Sons, Inc
Address 511 Central Avenue South
DO Boza3]
Permit Tnvama h,the FB,mata To
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
OTV
CONTRACT AMOUNT
UNIT PRICE
AMOUNT
OREM GUS EARNIN
OTV
GS
AMOUNT
ART
I Or
ITT ESTI MATE
I AMOUNT
TOTAL
OTC
ART EARNED
I AMOUNT
iiiona Ay statueMound P Pan)_
OB
Ra se CaAn sMmnein9a
1
_
LS
$ 2400➢0
$ 240600
100
$ 2p0000
_
000
$
_Of
1
$ 2p0600
10
Mound Sewer Line Addition
1
LS
$ 22,15➢➢0
$ 22,15➢.00
100
$ 22,15➢➢0
000
$
100
$ 2215➢.00
GRAND TOTALS x
MCES
%
Amount
Hands n County
- % Amount
Mound
% I ---Amount--
86%
$ 2108872
14%
$ 356328
0%
$
839/.
$ 1459699
179/.
$ 1118252
0%
$
100%
$
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 2824800
0%
$
0%
$
319/.
$
]%
$ _.
0%
$...
93%
$ 104 345 91
7%
$ 795399
0%
$
63%
$ 15233171
22%
$ 5319520
16%
$ 3868742
100% ...$.
.. 924825
_. 0%
......
$ .......
0%
$...
......................
100%
$ 50➢0600
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 55➢N 00
0%
$
0%
$
100%
503200
0%
$
0%
$_
100%
_$
$ 1410000
_
0%
$
0%
$
100%
$ 23 D3000
0%
$
0%
$
93%
$ 3 296 66
- 7%
$ - 24814
0%
$-
90%
$ 163125
0%
$
10%
$ 18125
83%
$ 690220
7%
$ 58212
10%
$ 83160
89%
$ 50p410
7%
$ 398246
4%
$ 227569
100%
$ 240900
0%
$
0%
$
93%
$ 1656962
7%
$ 124718
0%
$
91%
$ 13392➢
]%
$ 10080
0%
$
91%
$ 372000
]%
$
0%
10
4SO OO 00
_
0%
_28000
$
0%
$
v Subtotal $ 69072647 It 1➢24,63850
Administrative tee 0%) $4835085 $7172470
Less previous Invoices $ $ 089,01125)
Total paymem amount $ 731 $ I07,352.03
founded CountTotal Mound Total Minnetri9a Total
$ $ 89]522➢ 1$ 2400➢0 I$92,1522➢
rns.—au mmrvweimmTram sus..—.. Paged ota
-485-
2415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
(952)472-0604
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director
Date: March 3, 2021
Re: Consideration/Action on Resolution to Amend Resolution No. 19-80 that
Approved Vacations in the Harbor District
Summary
At its March 9, 2021 meeting, the City Council will consider action on a resolution amending
Resolution No. 19-80 that approved vacations in the Mound Harbor plat and created Lot 1,
Block 1 and several Outlots, including the property commonly known as Outlot A, that is
proposed to be sold.
Mound Staff, in cooperation with the City Engineer and Attorney, are working with the
Hennepin County Surveyor with regard to plat checking prior to recording of the mylar for the
Mound Harbor final plat. The proposed amendment clarifies the intent of the original
vacation of the easement for Auditor's Road described in Document No. 2664608 and does
not change the original action. The clarification is required by Hennepin County because the
roadway, as constructed and travelled, exceeds the boundaries described in the easement
document for the roadway in several locations along its path.
Council Action Requested.
Staff recommends approval of the attached draft resolution amending Resolution No. 19-80.
RESOLUTION NO. 21-
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 19-80 THAT APPROVED
VACATIONS IN MOUND HARBOR DISTRICT
PLANNING CASE NO. 19-06
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 19-
80 that vacated various existing right-of-way, alley, and drainage and utility
easements located on the property that was being platted by the City as Mound
Harbor (the "Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, the notice of public hearing for the vacation stated that the City was
vacating the existing right-of-way, alley, and drainage and utility easements
within the Mound Harbor plat; and
WHEREAS, the intent of the City was to vacate all easements that were within
the Mound Harbor plat as new easements will be dedicated to the City in the
Mound Harbor plat; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the vacations was held on November 12, 2019;
and
WHEREAS, the Resolution was adopted on November 12, 2019; and
WHEREAS, one of the vacations that was authorized by the Resolution was the
vacation of Auditor's Road; and
WHEREAS, the vacation of Auditor's Road was described in the Resolution as
being the easement set forth in Document No. 2664608 which was legally
described in paragraph 2 of Exhibit A of the Resolution (the "Easement"); and
WHEREAS, portions of Auditor's Road as it is currently constructed and traveled
lie outside of the area of the Easement, as shown on the attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, by vacating Auditor's Road, the City Council intended to not only
vacate the area legally described in the Easement but also any area that may be
outside of the easement area as evidenced by the notice of public hearing which
read the "existing right-of-way, alley, and drainage and utility easements within
the proposed plat"; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby adopts this Resolution to amend Resolution
No. 19-80 to clarify that the Resolution not only vacated the easement portion of
Auditor's Road but Auditor's Road as it is constructed and traveled: and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Mound does hereby amend Resolution 19-80, as follows:
1. That paragraph 2 of Exhibit A of the Resolution shall be amended to
include the following language: "and all portions of Auditor's Road that
lie outside of Street Easement (Document No. 2664608) that are
constructed and traveled, as shown on the attached Exhibit B.
2. That the attached Exhibit A to this Resolution shall be attached to
Resolution 19-80 as Exhibit B.
3. The City Clerk or designee shall record a certified copy of this
Resolution with the County Recorder and Registrar of Titles.
Adopted by the City Council this 9th of day of March, 2021.
Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk
Mayor Raymond J. Salazar
BOOM
Exhibit A
,;.
m
RESOLUTION NO. 19-80
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE VACATIONS IN MOUND HARBOR DISTRICT
PLANNING CASE NO. 19-06
WHEREAS, the applicant, the City of Mound, has submitted an application to
vacate multiple easements and right-of-way as described in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the vacations are being proposed to facilitate the platting of the
major -subdivision preliminary plat called Mound Harbor; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is generally made up of 17 parcels located north of
Lost Lake, south of the Dakota Rail Regional Trail, west of Shoreline Drive, and
east of Commerce Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the parcels are encumbered by dedicated right-of-way and multiple
easements for street, highway, utility, wall, ingress/egress, and drainage
purposes; and
WHEREAS, the plat is being used to consolidate multiple city -owned parcels and
extinguish these existing easements and right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the right-of-way and easements being proposed for vacation are not
being actively used for the purposes set forth in the original dedication; and
WHEREAS, details regarding the requested vacations are contained in the
Executive Summary Report for the November 12, 2019 meeting, the Planning
Commission report for the October 1, 2019 meeting, the submitted application
and supporting materials from the applicant, and the October 1, 2019 Planning
Commission meeting minutes; and
WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the requested vacations subject to
conditions; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, the City Council of
the City of Mound held a public hearing on November 12, 2019, after providing
proper notice thereof pursuant to state law, at which time all persons desiring to
be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak
thereon; and
- 491 -
WHEREAS, in granting approval of the requested right-of-way and easement
vacations, the City Council makes the following findings of fact:
1. The vacations will facilitate the consolidation and platting of multiple
parcels into the Mound Harbor Plat.
2. Due to the redevelopment of the area, the purposes for which the
dedications were originally made are no longer needed.
3. Easements for private utilities can be maintained or provided.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Mound does hereby incorporate and restate the recitals set forth above and
approves the right-of-way and easement vacations in the Mound Harbor District
and hereby authorizes Staff to prepare all the required documents to complete
the vacations, subject to the following conditions:
1. The City Clerk or designee shall record a notice of the completion of
the proceeding for the vacations with Hennepin County.
2. The preliminary plat of Mound Harbor is approved.
3. The easements to be vacated shall be substantially as shown in
Exhibit A. The City Manager, or designee, and City Attorney are
authorized to incorporate the legal descriptions in Exhibit A to be
included in the official resolution
4. The City Manager, or designee, and City Attorney are authorized to
carry out the intent of this resolution.
Adopted by the City Council this 12th of November, 2019.
Attest: Catherine Pausche. Clerk
Mayor Raymond J. Salazar
- 492 -
EXHIBIT A
Parcels
Document
Encumbered
Legal Descriptions (only that part in
Number
Type
(1-17)
quotes) set forth below as follows:
McNaught's 2"'
Alley
10
Vacation No. 1
Addition
2664608
Street and utility easement
14, Alley
Vacation No. 2
2664608
Street and utility easement
5, 6, 9, 10,
Vacation No. 2
(shown for reference)
14, 15, 16,
17
2989131
Alley opening
10
Vacation No. 3
3323702
Sewer utility easement
3
Vacation No. 4
1656002,
H.C.S.A.H. No. 15, Plat 68
Road parcel
Vacation No. 5
5011089
(Shoreline Drive)
-493-
Legal Descriptions for Vacations per Resolution No. 19-80
1. Alley easement per dedication in plat: "Entirety of Alley, McNaught's 2°d Addition to Mound, Lake Minnetonka."
2. Street Easement per Doc No. 2664608: "That part of Lot 5 and the west 50.00 feet of Lot 6, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 170
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, which lies southeasterly of a line 47.50 feet northwesterly of the following described line:
Commencing at the southwest corner of Section 13, Township 117, Range 24; thence on an assumed bearing of North 02 degrees 43 minutes
32 seconds East along the west line of said Section 13, a distance of 364.00 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence South 87
degrees 16 minutes 28 seconds East 75.00 feet; thence northeasterly 529.41 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a
radius of 675.00 feet and a central angle of 44 degrees 56 minutes 17 seconds; thence North 47 degrees 47 minutes 23 seconds East, tangent
to last described curve, 49.98 feet and said line there terminating."
Road/Alley easement per Doc No. 2989131: "That part of Lot 7, Auditor's Subdivision No. 170, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to
the recorded plat thereof, lying south of the center line of the alley separating Lots 1 to 6, inclusive, and said Lot 7 in Auditor's Subdivision
No, 170 and between said center line extended to the easterly line of said Lot 7 and a line drawn 20 feet south of, at right angles to and
parallel with said center line of said alley so extended, extending from Marion Street, being the Northwesterly corner of the property herein
described and the Easterly line of said Lot 7, excepting and excluding the platted alley, including the easement for lateral support as set forth
in Document Number 2989131."
4. Sewer easement per Doc No. 3323702: "All of Lot 4, McNaught's Addition to Mound, Lake Minnetonka, except the South 29.3 feet thereof."
5. Road ROW easement per Doc Nos. 1656002 and 5011089 (Torrens and Abstract ROW Plat document numbers, respectively), transferred to
the city's road jurisdiction by Doc No. A10620984: "All that part of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 15 as designated and
delineated on HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 15, PLAT 68, according to the duly recorded plat thereof, which lies
easterly of a line drawn parallel with and 60 feet easterly of the west line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 117, Range 24
and westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the intersection of the southerly extension of the west line of the east 17.40 feet
of Lot 33, "Koehler's Addition to Mound", Lake Minnetonka, according to the duly recorded plat thereof, said 17.40 feet being measured
along the most southerly line of said Lot 33, with the north line of said Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 15 as designated and
delineated on HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 15, PLAT 68; thence easterly along said north line for 32. 71 feet to the
actual point of beginning of the line being described; thence southeasterly, deflecting right 44 degrees 05 minutes 35 seconds for 28.40 feet;
thence southeasterly, deflecting left 13 degrees 16 minutes 54 seconds for 96.04 feet more or less to the south line of said HENNEPIN
COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 15, PLAT 68, and said line there terminating."
...
Orono Police Deoartment
Crime Summary Report
Jurisdiction(s): MOUND
Time Period: 2/1/2021 12:00:00 AM - 2/28/2021 11:59:00 PM
CRIME CATEGORY
Aggravated Ass
Domestic Assault -Misdemeanor -Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily Harm on Another
Counterfeiting/Forgery
Give Peace Officer False Name/Birthdate/ID Card
Ming Under the Influent
Traffic - DWI - Refuse to submit to chemical test; Breath or test refusal or failure
1
1
1
Traffic - DWI - Third -Degree Driving While Impaired; Refuse to submit to chemical test
1
False Pret
Fraud in Obtaining Credit-Money/Property Obtained -Sentence Under 609.52 subd. 3
1
Theft -By Swindle
1
Domestic Assault -Misdemeanor -Commits Act to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death
1
Theft-Take/Drive Motor Vehicle -No Owner Consent
1
ACC -ACCIDENT PUBLIC
2
ACC -MOTOR VEH PROPERTY DAMAGE -HIT & RUN
1
ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE
2
ACC -VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE -FIXED OBJECT
1
ALARM BUSINESS
1
ALARM FALSE
3
ALARM RESIDENCE
1
ASSIST IN LOCATION
1
ASSIST MOTORIST
1
ASSIST OTHER AGENCY
2
ASSIST PUBLIC
6
DISTURB DOMESTIC
4
DISTURB HARASSMENT
4
DISTURB NEIGHBORHOOD
1
Printed: 03/022021 12:46 Page 1 of 3
CRIME CATEGORY
DISTURB NOISE COMPLAINT
1
DISTURB THREAT
1
DISTURB UNWANTED PERSON
1
FIRE GAS ODOR/LEAK
1
FIRE SINGLE DWELLING
1
FOUND PROPERTY
2
LIFT ASSIST
4
LOST PROPERTY
1
LOST/MISSING PERSON
1
MEDICAL
27
MEDICAL CRISIS
1
MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH
4
MEDICAL -OVERDOSE
1
MISC FALSE 911 CALL
3
MISC OFCR INFO ID THEFT -TRANS CARD FRAUD
3
MISC OFCR INFORMATION
8
MISC OFCR SEARCH WARRANT SERVICE
1
MISC OFCR TRESPASS NOTICE SERVED
1
MISC OFCR UTILITIES
1
MISC OFCR VEHICLE LOCKOUT
2
MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK
20
MISC VANDALISM
1
PARKING VIOLATIONS
1
SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY
1
SUSPICIOUS PERSON
1
Traffic - Careless Driving - Operate any vehicle carelessly on street or highway
2
Traffic Collision - Failure to Notify Owner of Damaged Property
1
Traffic Regulation -Uninsured Vehicle -Driver Violation
1
Traffic -Drivers License -Driving After Revocation
1
Theft-Take/Uselfransfer Movable Prop -No Consent
5
Disseminate Pornographic Work - Minor under age 13
1
Printed: 031022021 12:46 Page 2 of 3
- 496 -
GRAND TOTAL: 138
Printed: 031022021 12:46 Page 3 of 3
-497-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Sarah Smith, Community Development Director
Rita Trapp, Consultant Planner
DATE:
March 4, 2021
SUBJECT:
Request for Substantially Similar Use Determination
APPLICANT:
Dane Vocelka
OWNERS:
Samuel C. & Shea F. Steadman
LOCATION:
West Tenant Space in Lost Lake Commercial Building Addressed
as 5439 Shoreline Drive (PID No. 13-117124-34-0132)
MEETING DATE:
March 9, 2021
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
Mixed Use
ZONING:
Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District
Review Summary and Overview
Dane Vocelka, on December 29, 2020, submitted a written request for evaluation of a
proposed tattoo studio use at 5439 Shoreline Drive in City of Mound, as provided in City Code
Sec. 129-71, that the use is "substantially similar" to the list of uses included in the Pedestrian
Planned Unit District (PUD) zoning regulations contained in Mound City Code Sec. 129-139. Mr.
Vocelka has signed a letter of intent for the tenant space and provided a copy to the City. As
part of the request, the applicant has submitted supporting information to help outline the
proposed studio and proposed business operation and has also included proposed conceptsfor
the building interior.
The subject property is commonly known in Mound asthe Lost Lake or Caribou building. The
proposed tenant space, which is the most west of the subject spaces, has previously been used
as a chiropractic office, a health/wellness office and most recently as a CBD boutique retail
store. To Staffs knowledge, no building exterior or site alterations are contemplated with the
proposed reuse of the space. The original Lost Lake project was approved by Conditional Use
Permitthat established the Planned Unit Development. Details regarding the request are
included in the Planning Report dated January 6, 2021 which has been included as an
attachment.
MM
60-Day Land Use Application Review Process
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to
approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. Within the 60-day period, an automatic
extension of no more than 60 days can be obtained by providing the applicant written notice
containing the reason for the extension and specifying how much additional time is needed.
On February 25, 2021, the City of Mound executed an extension for 60-days for Council action
on the request. With the City's extension, the deadline for action on the request is on or
around April 28, 2021.
Notification
A letter was forwarded by US Mail on March 3, 2021 to adjacent property owners and the
building tenants to notify them of the City Council's consideration of the request at its March
9, 2021 meeting.
Staff Review and Recommendation
Staff's evaluation is that the proposed commercial service use (tattoo studio) is substantially
similar to the current category of "retail sales and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned
Unit Development District based on the following findings:
1. A tattoo studio provides a personal service to a customer and is commonly found in
commercial areas.
2. Business activities include over the counter retail sales of art items and apparel.
3. The middle tenant in the Lost Lake commercial building is a dry cleaner which also
provides personal services to customers.
Planning Commission Meeting Overview and Recommendation
The request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its February 2"d meeting. Staff
provided an overview of the request from the applicant and also explained the provisions in
City Code Sec. 129-71 regarding substantial use evaluation which are new regulations put into
the code in 2018. The new regulations require Planning Commission review and City Council
approval for uses that are not contained in the land use table. Staff informed the Planning
Commission that while the request does not require a public hearing, staff did notify
surrounding property owners as a courtesy. Staff also informed the Planning Commission that
the Villas of Lost Lake HOA had requested that the Planning Commission table consideration of
the request so that they had an opportunity to prepare a formal comment. Members of the
Planning Commission discussed that the proposed tattoo studio use also includes retail
activities which is permitted in the PED-PUD District. The Planning Commission considered the
request from the HOA and determined that there would be an opportunity for the HOA to
,••
provide comments at the City Council meeting. Based on its review, the Planning Commission
unanimously voted that its determination was that the proposed use from Mr. Vocelka is
substantially similar to the "retail sales and service" category in the Pedestrian Planned Unit
Development District regulations.
Supplemental Information
Staff spoke with Villas of Lost Lake HOA Board President Doug Williams on March 3" about the
upcoming March 9tn meeting. A letter is forthcoming from Mr. Williams, on behalf of the Villas
of Lost Lake HOA, requesting the Council defer the matter to its upcoming meeting so they
have time to prepare a formal letter for the Council. Mr. Williams indicated that they HOA has
concerns and objections to the proposed use and wants the opportunity to present their
concerns to the Council regarding the matter. Council members are advised that Staff
informed Mr. Williams from the HOA about the anticipated March 9tn City Council meeting
following the February 2"1 Planning Commission but did not confirm the March 9tn date until
March 3'.
- 500 -
RESOLUTION NO. 21-
RESOLUTION NO. 21-_REGARDING SUBSTANTIAL USE
DETERMINATION FOR PROPERTY AT 5439 SHORELINE DRIVE IN LOST
LAKE COMMERCIAL BUIDING
WHEREAS, the applicant, Dane Vocelka, on December 29, 2020, submitted a
written request for evaluation of a proposed tattoo studio use at 5439 Shoreline
Drive in City of Mound, as provided in City Code Sec. 129-71, that the use is
"substantially similar" to the list of uses included in the Pedestrian Planned Unit
District (PUD) zoning regulations contained in Mound City Code Sec. 129-139.
Mr. Vocelka has signed a letter of intent with for the tenant space and provided a
copy to the City; and
WHEREAS, the applicant submitted supporting information to help outline the
proposed studio and proposed business operation and also provided proposed
concepts for the building interior along with the written request; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is commonly known in Mound as the Lost Lake
or Caribou building. The original Lost Lake project was approved by Conditional
Use Permit that established the Planned Unit Development; and
WHEREAS, details regarding the substantial use request from the applicant are
contained in the Planning Report dated January 29, 2021 for the February 2,
2021 Planning Commission meeting, the February 2, 2021 Planning Commission
meeting minutes, the Executive Summary Report dated March 4, 2021 for the
March 9, 2021 City Council meeting and the submitted application and
supporting materials from the applicant, and
WHEREAS, Staff's evaluation was that the requested use from the is
substantially similar to the "retail sales and services" category in the Pedestrian
Planned Unit Development District; and
WHEREAS, the request from the applicant was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its February 2, 2021 meeting. The Planning Commission
unanimously voted that the proposed use from the applicant is substantially
similar to the "retail sales and services" category in the Pedestrian Planned Unit
Development District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local
government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within
60 days. Within the 60-day period, an automatic extension of no more than 60
days can be obtained by providing the applicant written notice containing the
reason for the extension and specifying how much additional time is needed. On
- 501 -
February 25, 2021 the City of Mound executed an extension for 60-days for
Council action on the request. With the City's extension, the deadline for action
on the request is on or around April 28, 2021. Therefore, the City Council's
decision on the application was made within the timelines included in Minnesota
Statutes 15.99; and
WHEREAS, in granting approval of the substantial use determination that the
tattoo studio use is substantially similar to the current category of "retail sales
and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District
based on the following findings:
1. A tattoo studio provides a personal service to a customer and is commonly
found in commercial areas.
2. Business activities include over the counter retail sales of art items and
apparel.
3. The middle tenant in the Lost Lake commercial building is a dry cleaner
which also provides personal services to customers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Mound does hereby approve the substantial use determination and does
incorporate and restate the recitals set forth above to allow the tattoo studio use
in the tenant space in the Lost Lake commercial building located a 5439
Shoreline Drive located in the Pedestrian -Planned Unit Development District.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, the City
Council's approval of the request is based on information contained in the record
including but not limited to, the applicant's request and submitted information, the
Planning Report, the Planning Commission's review and recommendation and
the Executive Summary Report.
Adopted by the City Council this 9th of March, 2021.
Attest: Catherine Pausche, Clerk
Mayor Raymond J. Salazar
- 502 -
Review of Request from Dane Vocelka
for
Substantial Use Evaluation
Under City Code Sec 129-71 for Tattoo
Studio Use in
Pedestrian Planned Unit Development
District List of Allowed Uses
CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 2, 2021
-503-
Overview
Dave Vocelka has letter of intent with property owners to lease the western
tenant space in the Lost Lake commercial building for a tattoo studio use and
custom fishing rod / guide service business. Mr. Vocelka is requesting a
substantia l use determination under City Code Sec.71(b) that atattoo
studio is similar to uses in City Code Sec. 129-139 for the Pedestrian District
Summary of the Staf's review is included in the Planning Report for the Feb
2nd Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission review took place Pao
at its February 2, 2021 meeting. Details are contained in the February 2nd
Planning Commission minute excerpts
The February 2nd Planning Commission meeting agenda was amended to 1 1
include a Staff Memorandum that included comments received from Steve
Johnson, 2209 Lost Lake Court, also Doug Williams, President of the Lost Lake,11e
Villa HOA, who requested the Planning Commission defer discussion to the �� 4next meeting so the HOA could forward a response for the homeowner's
association R i
RA
t
Review/Summary
• A zoning amendment was approved in 2018 which added new language into the City Code to address uses not listed in the zoning districts. The
determination whether a use is a "substantially similar use" requires review by the Planning Commission and action by the City Council. As part of
its recommendation, the Planning Commission is to evaluate whether the use should be classified as a permitted use or conditional use. If the City
Council finds that the proposed use is not substantially similar to an allowed use, an applicant may submit a separate application to seek an
amendment to the text of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Tattoo studios are required to be licensed by Hennepin County.
• The adjacent or "middle" tenant space has been in use as a dry cleaner since the mid-2000's.
• Retail sales and services is a broad term that generally encompasses both the sale of goods for personal or household use and the providing of
services to meet personal needs. Examples of such uses would include a retail store, florist, nail salon, learning center, etc. The terms are combined
as often a business may both provide service and sell products, such as a hair salon that also sells hair products. In addition, the operation and
traffic are similar in character for both types of uses with most such businesses serving customers during daytime and early evening hours.
• A tattoo studio seems to fit the retail sales and services use as it provides a service to an individual.
• Studio activities include the display and sale of art items and apparel for the studio; also promotion of Mr. Vocelka's custom fishing rod and guide
service.
• Mailed notice was sent to property owners per Hennepin County property records on March 3rd.
• 60-day deadline timeline for action was on February 27th unless an extension is executed by the City of Mound. The City of Mound, on February
25th, executed a 60-day extension for action on the request.
-505-
Staff Evaluation
Staffs evaluation and recommendation to the Planning Commission in the Planning Report
is that the proposed commercial service use (tattoo studio) is substantially similar to the
current category of "retail sales and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned Unit
Development District regulations based on the following findings:
1. A tattoo studio provides a personal service to a customer and is commonly found in commercial areas.
2. Business activities include over the counter retail sales of art items and apparel.
3. The middle tenant in the Lost Lake commercial building is a dry cleaner which also provides personal services to customers
Planning Commission Recommendation
Based on its evaluation,the PlanningCommission unanimously voted that its determination was
thatthe proposed use is substantiallysimilarto the "retail sales and services" category in the
Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District regulations.
Discussion /Next Steps / Actions
1. Applicant Introduction and Comments
2A. Discussion / action on draft resolution to approve the request
2B. Consideration of request by Villa HOA to defer City Council consideration to upcoming meeting
MINUTE EXCERPTS
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
Chair Goode called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
ROLL CALL
Members present: David Goode, Jason Baker, Jon Ciatti, Samantha Erickson, Allen Andersen,
and Jason Holt.
Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, City Consultant Rita Trapp and
Secretary Jen Holmquist.
Members of the public: Steve Schwanke, 100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; August Bruggeman,
100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; T. Cody Turnquist, 100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; Ralph
Kempf, 4663 Wilshire #310; Kevin and Deb Larson, 4525 Denbigh Road; Jann Olsten, 3028
Pelican Point Circle; James Vettel, 4578 Denbigh Road; Paul Levin, 12630 Porcupine Ct., Eden
Prairie; Dave Henderson, 3018 Pelican Point Circle; Danielle Rousselange, 236 25th Street SE,
Buffalo; Dane Vocelka, 236 25th Street SE, Buffalo; Tim Lowe, 601 96th Street West
Chanhassen; Rodney Beystrom, 4466 Denbigh Road; Jay Stemler, 4496 Denbigh Road, (Illegible
name), 906 Liberty Lane, New Prague; Lynn Pinoniemi, 4560 Denbigh Road; Aaron Teal, 21353
Forest Hill Road, Richmond; Lee Breskler, 2544 N Saunders Drive, Minnetrista; Tom Rozman
and Dana Ryeller, 4225 Denbigh Road; Mary Stimson and Kosta Moore-Kentos, 2551 38th Ave
NE, St. Anthony; Ryan Love and family, 783 Riesgraf Rd, Carver; Drew Veelhoer, 248 Main
Street E, Richmond; Jacob Guggenberger, 22994 Chapel Hill Rd, Cold Spring; Bob Ayer, 5475
Lost Lake Lane; Kelli Gillespie -Coen, 4400 Tuxedo Boulevard; Justin Davis and Patrice Mcdeid,
6320 Yosemite, Excelsior; Kelly and Shaun White, 3513 Lyric Ave, Wayzata.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
MOTION by Baker to approve meeting agenda, as amended, seconded by Ciatti. MOTION
carried unanimously.
- 507 -
BOARD OF APPEALS
Review of request for evaluation of tattoo studio as substantially similar use at 5439
Shoreline Drive in Lost Lake commercial building as provided by City Code Sec. 129-71
Applicant: Dane Vocelka Owner: Samuel C. & Shea F. Steadman
Smith outlined that the request by Dane Vocelka is for a review by the planning Commission, as
provided by city code section 129-71, to determine whether the proposed tattoo studio is
substantially similar to the retail sales and service land use category in the Pedestrian Zoning
District. The applicant is proposing a tattoo studio that would also include some retail sales of
custom fishing rods and advertising for his fishing guide services. Planning Commission review
is needed as a tattoo studio is not specifically listed as a permitted or conditional use
Smith noted that while the City is not required to hold a public hearing, as a courtesy, public
notices were mailed to surrounding neighbors to make them aware of the Commission's
discussion today. These notices were sent to the surrounding townhomes and the other
commercial properties in the building.
Smith noted that tattoo studios are required to be licensed by Hennepin County Department of
Health. The mix of the current uses include Caribou Coffee, a dry cleaners and the western
most space, proposed to be the tattoo studio, which would also include retail sales of custom
fishing rods and advertise for his fishing guide services.
Staff's evaluation is that this is consistent with what is normal and customary for retail sales
and service. Smith stated that this is a substantially similar use to the current category in the
Pedestrian District based on the findings of fact.
Smith noted that comments from Steve Johnson, 2309 Lost Lake Court, and the Lost Lake Villas
Homeowner's Association were added to the agenda by an agenda amendment. The Villa
Homeowner's Association letter requested the Planning Commission defer discussion to an
upcoming meeting so they could be in attendance and have time to submit a formal position
on behalf of the Lost Lake Villa HOA.
Smith outlined that it while it is not a public hearing it has been customary for comments to be
taken and comments would become part of the record. The applicant should also be allowed
to share his business plan and respond to any questions from Commissioners.
Baker wondered if every request will require the planning Commission to make a
determination if new retail or service is considered a substantially similar use. Smith explained
that staffs evaluation is that this use is a similar use but the language as written has tight
definitions. If it's not a use that has been seen before, the planning Commission will be asked
to make a determination. Baker points out that he believes the sale of fishing equipment
would just be considered retail. Smith noted that the tattoo service is the portion that is in
question.
Dane Vocelka, 236 25" St SE Buffalo. He grew up just north of town. This business is tattooing,
selling custom rods and fishing guide services. His business is small and he wants to keep it that
way. The professional appearance of his studio will be different from the stereotypical tattoo
studio. He noted that the tattoo studio will have 3 artists, at most, and it is limited by his
license. It will not be open 24 hours; it is a high end, professional business.
Ciatti asked if Vocelka has talked to the town home association. Vocelka said no. He is happy to
listen to their comments.
Holt noted the applicant's letter says regular business hours. He clarifies, would that be the
hours that Caribou is open. Vocelka noted he's a family man and wants to be home with his
family at the end of his work day. This is not a late night business model. He would hope to be
closed by 5 or 6 pm.
Vocelka said The Harbor Tattoo Studio is the working name. His clientele come from all walks of
professional life. His clientele tend to come from word of mouth and many travel great
distances to receive his services. No neon signs or sandwich boards will be outside of the
building. Holt noted there would not be a lot of parking required. Vocelka confirms there will be
no more than 3 artists. Even when three artists are present, there would be minimal traffic.
No members of the public in attendance chose to comment.
Erickson asked for clarification if the Commission has the option to approve the request. Smith
says yes that is an option. Baker noted that he believed this is a retail service and the HOA
would have the opportunity to speak at the city Council meeting.
MOTION by Andersen that the proposed commercial service use (tattoo studio) is substantially
similar to the current category of "retail sales and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned
Unit Development District, subject to conditions and findings of fact; seconded by Ciatti.
MOTION carried unanimously.
- 509 -
22415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
(952)472-0604
Staff Memorandum
To: Planning Commission
From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director
Date: February 2, 2021
Re: February 2, 2021 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Item No. 3 Approval
of the Agenda with any Amendments --Additional ISupplemental Information for
Agenda Item No. 5 B for Zoning Request forSubstantial Use Determination
Request
As provided under Agenda Item No. 3 (Approval of the Agenda, with any Amendments), Staff
respectfully recommends the February 2, 2021 meeting agenda be amended to add additional
information for Item No. 5 to include comments received on February 2, 2021:
Steve Johnson — 2309 Lost Lake Court
I am a resident of the Lost Lake Villas and live directly across from the commercial property being
proposed for use of a tattoo parlor.
First I would like to express that we just had a CBD store in that location and they used giant free standing
signs that were placed out by the entrance to the complex that made our area look like an entrance to a
carnival. I called the city on that issues and they said it was permitted. So I would ask this discussion to
also limit how advertising is allowed.
This area is mixed use and making sure the right mix is important. I don't believe a tattoo parlor is the
rightfit for a small unit commercial property which includes a Caribou Coffee and a dry cleaners.
There are 27 residential townhomes in Mounds Harbor District right next to the commercial property that
we share the some entrance. We are currently dealing with trafficfrom Caribou each day where traffic is
backed up on to county road 15 and cars blocking the main entrance into the complex and the ability to
exit the townhouse area.
A tattoo parlor does not reflect what the make up is of thatsmall commercial property nor the residential
homes. Making sure the correct fit and conformity for property values and commercial use is very
important.
As the planning commission looks at this proposal would ask you to discuss if this is the type of business
that conforms in this small complex and residential area and how will it affect others as well as property
values.
I am not in favor of a tattoo parlor at this location.
Thankyou
Stevelohnson
2309Lost Lake Court
-510-
Doug Williams —Lost Lake Villas HOA President
Sarah,
Thanks for taking my call. I am the Lost Lake Villas HOA President. I am out of state and unable to attend
tonight's meeting.
We just received the letter regarding the tattoo parlor request to become a part of the Lost Lake re-
development planning. The neighborhood association would like the City to defer this discussion until a
following meeting to permit the residents through the Association to present our position and concerns in a
formal response. Please communicate this to the appropriate parties as I am out of state. Thank you very much
for your consideration of the concerns of the neighborhood home owners.
Doug Williams, President
Lost Lake Villas HOA
/s/ Douglas J. Williams
New/Additional Information
Staff Memorandum dated February 2, 2021 Pages 40 a and 40 b
- 511 -
PLANNING REPORT
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Sarah Smith, Community Development Director
Rita Trapp, Consultant Planner
DATE:
January 29, 2021
SUBJECT:
Request for Substantially Similar Use Determination
APPLICANT:
Dane Vocelka
OWNERS:
Samuel C. & Shea F. Steadman
LOCATION:
West Tenant Space in Lost Lake Commercial Building Addressed
as 5439 Shoreline Drive (PID No. 13-117124-34-0132)
MEETING DATE:
February 2, 2021
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
Mixed Use
ZONING:
Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District
Review Summary and Overview
Dane Vocelka, on December 29, 2020, submitted a written request for evaluation of a
proposed tattoo studio use at 5439 Shoreline Drive in City of Mound, as provided in City Code
Sec. 129-171, that the use is "substantially similar" to the list of uses included in the Pedestrian
Planned Unit District (PUD) zoning regulations contained in Mound City Code Sec. 129-139. Mr.
Vocelka has signed a letter of intent with for the tenant space and provided a copyto the City.
The subject property is commonly known in Mound asthe Lost Lake or Caribou building. The
proposed tenant space, which is the most west of the subject spaces, has previously been used
as a chiropractic office, a health/wellness office and most recently as a CBD boutique retail
store. To Staffs knowledge, no building exterior or site alterations are contemplated with the
proposed reuse of the space. The original Lost Lake project was approved by Conditional Use
Permitthat established the Planned Unit Development. CUP amendment(s) have also been
approved following original project approval. The project also received Specific Sign Plans)
approvals.
Along with the request, the applicant has submitted supporting information to help outline the
proposed studio and proposed business operation and has also included proposed conceptsfor
the building interior.
512-
60-Day Land Use Application Review Process
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to
approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. Within the 60-day period, an automatic
extension of no more than 60 days can be obtained by providing the applicant written notice
containing the reason for the extension and specifying how much additional time is needed.
For the purpose of Minnesota Statutes Section 15.99, "Day 1" is determined to be December
30, 2020 as provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 645.15. The 60-day timeline expires on or
around February 27, 2021 unless an extension is executed by the City. An extension of the
review period under Minnesota Statutes Section 15.99 can occur if agreed to by the applicant.
City Code Sec. 129-71 Allowed Uses (Excerpts) and Review Process
(a) Limited. Only those uses specifically identified in this chapter as being allowed in a particular zoning
district as a permitted use, conditional use, or accessory use are allowed within that zoning district, unless the
City Council determines the use is substantially similar to an allowed use as provided in this section.
(b) Substantially similar uses. The City Council recognizes there may be uses that are of a substantially
similar type and have similar impacts as the uses the city has specifically named as being allowed within a
particular zoning district. These substantially similar uses are essentially the some the named uses and so should
similarly be allowed within the some zoning district. Therefore, the City Council determines it is reasonable to
provide a process for an owner to seek a determination from the City Council as to whether a proposed use is
allowed as being substantially similar to a use expressly allowed in the some zoning district without requiring the
owner to seek a text amendment to this chapter. Without limiting the general prohibition of uses not specifically
identified as being allowed in this chapter, an owner proposing to undertake a use the owner believes is
substantially similar to an allowed use in the some zoning district may submit an application to the city for a
determination on whether the proposed use is allowed. As part of the application, the owner shall describe the
proposed use, identify the allowed use within the some zoning district as the owner's property is located the
owner believes is substantially similar to the proposed use, and a description of why the uses are substantially
similar. The city shall forward the complete application to the Planning Commission for review and a
recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission recommends a determination that the use is
substantially similar to an allowed use, itshall also indicate whether the proposed use should be classified as a
permitted use, conditional use, or accessory use within the zoning district. The City Council shall make the final
determination on whether the proposed use is substantially similar to an allowed use and, if so, whether the use
is allowed as a permitted use, conditional use, or accessory use. If allowed, the ownershall be required to apply
for any required permits based on the City Council's classification of the use and any other applicable regulations.
The city shall maintain a record of all uses the City Council determines are allowed as being substantially similar
to named uses and will work to incorporate those uses into the appropriate list of allowed uses in this chapter. If
the City Council finds a proposed use is not substantially similar to an allowed use, the owner may submit a
separate application to seek an amendment to the text of this chapter to name the use as an allowed use within
the zoning district.
-513-
City Code Sec. 129-139 PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District (Excerpts)
(a) Purpose (PED-PUD). The pedestrian planned unit development zoning district is intended to provide a
range of retail and service commercial, office, institutional, public, open space, and attached high density
residential uses that are organized and planned in a manner that is pedestrian friendly. The mixed use concept
embodies traditional town planning concepts to create an urban environment allowing arrangements of mixed
residential and commercial uses. A high degree of aesthetic detail is to be provided in building and site design to
promote a village community atmosphere.
(b) Permitted uses. The permitted uses for the PED-PUD district are as follows
(1) Adult establishments.
(2) Professional offices.
(3) Retail sales and services.
(4) Restaurants (Class I, II and III) excluding drive -through.
(5) Drugstore.
(6) Public and institutional uses.
(7) Public and private parks.
(8) Multifamily dwelling units.
(9) Townhouses.
(c) Conditional uses. The conditional uses for the PED-PUD district are as follows:
(1) Banks with drive -through services.
(2) Restaurants (classes I, II and III) including drive -through services. The provisions of
section 129-326, pertaining to drive-in business development standards, shall not apply
to drive -through services in the pedestrian district. Drive -through services in the
pedestrian districtshall comply with the performance standards provided in this
subsection:
a. Stacking spaces. Unless approved by the City Council as part of the pedestrian
planned development unit development project following review and favor
recommendation of a traffic circulation plan by the city engineer, at least two
stacking spaces must be provided per drive -through lane. Required width for
vehicle drive aisles may not be allocated toward stacking spaces or stacking
lanes.
b. Stacking space dimensions. Each stacking space must be a minimum of nine
feet by 18 feet in size.
C. Design. Each drive -through lane must be clearly defined and designed so as not
to conflict or interfere with pedestrian movement or other vehicular traffic
using the site and not to conflict with access for drive aisles, fire lanes, or street
-514-
ingress/egress.
d. Screening. All elements of the drive through service area, including, but not
limited to, menu boards, orderstations, teller windows, and vehicle lights from
the stacking lanes, must be screened or appropriately landscaped from
adjacent residential uses, if appropriate.
e. Speakers. In addition to meeting the requirements of the noise regulations
included in this Code, if within 300 feet of residential properties, speakers must
not produce noise that exceeds 75 dBA as measured five feet from the speaker.
Hours of operation. Restaurant drive -through windows must not be operated
between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. unless alternate hours are
approved by the City Council as part of the conditional use permit.
g. Liquor. No liquor may be dispensed or sold at a drive -through window for class
III restaurant.
h. Conditional use permit criteria. The provisions of section 129-38 are considered
and satisfactorily met
(3) Brewery, Brewpub, Taproom, Microdistillery, or Cocktail Room. The provisions of section 129-329
shall apply.
Notification
A letter was forwarded by US Mail on January 28, 2020 to adjacent property owners and the
building tenants to notify them of the Planning Commission's review of the zoning request for
a substantially similar use determination.
Discussion
• A zoning amendment was approved in 2018 which added new language into the City
Code to address uses not listed in the zoning districts. The determination whether a
use is a "substantially similar use" requires review by the Planning Commission and
action by the City Council. As part of its recommendation, the Planning Commission is
to evaluate whether the use should be classified as a permitted use or conditional use.
If the City Council finds that the proposed use is not substantially similar to an allowed
use, an applicant may submit a separate application to seek an amendment to the text
of the Zoning Ordinance.
Tattoo studios are required to be licensed by Hennepin County. No other personal
services that require licensing are included in Mr. Vocelka's proposed business plan.
• The adjacent or "middle" tenant space has been in use as a dry cleaner since the mid-
2000's.
• Retail sales and services is a broad term that generally encompasses both the sale of
goods for personal or household use and the providing of services to meet personal
needs. Examples of such uses would include a retail store, florist, nail salon, learning
-515-
center, etc. The terms are combined as often a business may both provide service and
sell products, such as a hair salon that also sells hair products. In addition, the operation
and traffic are similar in character for both types of uses with most such businesses
serving customers during daytime and early evening hours.
• A tattoo studio seems to fit the retail sales and services use as it provides a service to an
individual.
• Studio activities include the display and sale of art items and apparel for the studio; also
promotion of Mr. Vocelka's custom fishing rod and guide service.
Staff Recommendation
Staff's evaluation is that the proposed commercial service use (tattoo studio) is substantially
similar to the current category of "retail sales and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned
Unit Development District based on the following findings:
1. A tattoo studio provides a personal service to a customer and is commonly
found in commercial areas.
2. Business activities include over the counter retail sales of art items and apparel.
3. The middle tenant in the Lost Lake commercial building is a dry cleaner which
also provides personal services to customers.
City Council Consideration.
In the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission, it is anticipated that
the request will be considered by the City Council at an upcoming meeting with date to be
determined.
-516-
Sarah,
Attached is a letter of intent that has been drafted with the building owner of the address 5439 Shoreline Dr
Mound, MN 55364.
1 am formally writing to the City Council to determine if this location and use would be substantially similar to a use
currently listed in the zoning district (Pedestrian). Permitted either as an allowed use or conditional use shall be
achieved because of the following:
- A high degree of aesthetic detail will be provided in building and site design to promote a village community
atmosphere that is professional and friendly. This will encourage business growth and community support.
- The exterior of the business to remain the same other than a signage change to meet the requirements of Sec.
129-139. PED—PUD Pedestrian planned unit development district signage G.3.
- The permitted uses for the PED—PUD district are as follows:
2.
1. (1) Adult establishments.
2. (2) Professional offices.
3. (3) Retail sales and services.
All of which reside in relation to a professional Tattoo Studio which will also remain within the permitted uses as
stated by Hennepin County.
- Additionly, meeting the requirements of the noise regulations included in this Code; if within 300 feet of
residential properties, speakers must not produce noise that exceeds 75 dBA as measured five feet from the
speaker. Our atmosphere is highly professional and will remain respectful in accordance to these requirements.
- Hours of operation will remain appropriate and not exceed the hours of Drive through windows. 10pm-6am. Will
likely post 10am - 6pm as business hours
Also included are Images of the proposed area aethstetic to act as a placeholder to demonstrate the professional
atmosphere under review: see remaining 1PEGS.
I will also drop off a hard copy of this proposal with attached copies of the Intent and aethstetic.
Thank you so much for your consideration,
Dane Vocelka
State Licensed Technician 310630
618.541.2078
-517-
From: Dane Vocelka
To: Sarah Smith
Subject: Re: Zoning Request for Substantial Use Detennination for Lost Lake commercial Building (West Tenant Space) -
Priority Response Requested.
Date: Friday, January 29, 2021 9:54:14 AM
Sarah and Council,
To summarize the proposed use and further describe the list of uses follow:
Permitted use (1) references the proposed business as an adult establishment. "The
Harbor Tattoo Studio" would be an 18+ establishment requiring anyone participating
in receiving a tattoo to be of legal age. Although artwork and merchandise will be
sold to those of all ages, the main focus of the business is to provide a professional
environment for tattoo recipients. Which moves us to the second reference -
Permitted use (2) mentions Professional offices. This reference can be further
explained as a professional service performed or a consultation given. This business
is required by the county to be recognized as a professional establishment meeting
the requirements of ordinance 23 (Adopted by the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota). This ordinance is enacted to
establish standards to protect health, safety and general welfare of the people of
Hennepin County through regulation of the persons owning body art establishments,
the individuals performing body art procedures, and the establishments where body
art procedures are performed.
The third permitted use (3) retail sales and services relates to the sale of art items
and apparel. The business will have relatable product that is tasteful and professional
to the consumers. Also, being this close to the lake helps the sale of our Vocelka
Fishing and Customs business. Custom rod sales and guides trips (services) will be
advertised to the diverse clientele that both the tattooing world and fishing industry
has to offer. In multiple ways, there is a distinct interaction with both business that has
a demographic of similar interests that brings them to my attention.
Other business that you can reference in different cities include the following:
The Canvas Tattoo Studio in Eden Prairie, MN (where I currently work as a licensed
body art technician)
httn://thecanvastattoostudio. com/eden-prairie/dane-vocelka/
hitp-//thecanvastattoostudio.com
Stronghold Tattoo Studio in Duluth, MN (frequently visit to guest appear)
hUt s://strongholdtattoostudio.com
Guide Services and Business
hops-//pj h fishingguide.com
httns://www.facebook.com/vocelkafishing�
-518-
Hopefully this will answer any related questions you may have prior to our engagement on the
2nd of February. I will be happily present and prepared to discuss any related material with the
city and the community.
Hope everyone has a great weekend!
Dane Vocelka
-519-
/CFf', I
al
A
521 -
22415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
(952)472-0604
Staff Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Sarah Smith, Comm. Dev. Director
Date: March 9, 2021
Re: March 9, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting Agenda - Item No. 3 Approval of the
Agenda with any Amendments -- New/Additional Information forAgenda Item No. 7
for Zoning Request forSubstantial Use Determination at 5439 Shoreline Drive in Lost
Lake Commercial Building
Request
As provided under Agenda Item No.3 (Approval of the Agenda, with any Amendments), Staff
respectfully recommends the March 9, 2021 meeting agenda be amended to add additional
information for Item No. 7 to include comments recently received:
Steve Johnson — 2309 Lost Lake Court
Mayor Salazar, I am a resident and board member of the Lost Lake townhouse Association. Our
President Doug Williams, who is currently in Florida was contacted by the city today
Wednesday March 3 during the morning hours in reference to a proposal of a tattoo parlor
that is going to the city council for a vote on March 9th on occupancy at the Lost Lake
commercial property.
Our board is against this business going in and being next to our residential homes.
We were advised that we had until tomorrow morning to put in our objection to this.
We are asking for the council to reconsider this request and to rescheduled the vote which
would allow our association a proper timeframe to respond back to the City Council. Giving us
less than a 24-hour notice of this seems extremely unreasonable.
Respectively
Steve Johnson
2309 Lost Lake Court.
Jennifer White —5445 Lost Lake Court
Ms. Jennifer White called to express her concern about the proposed business and potential
conflicts which adjacent residential uses including increased traffic/parking issues including
larger vehicles/trailers. She also inquired about the proposed hours of operation especially with
regard to the adjacent residential townhomes and possible impacts.
New/Additional Information
Staff Memorandum dated March 9, 2021 Page 522 A
BOLTON
& MENK
Real People. Real Solutions.
March 9, 2021
WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THE
DRINKING WATER IN MOUND IS:
RELIABLE
AFFORDABLE
SAFE
(DI
Water System at a glance:
• 2 (active) Wells
• 2 Water Towers 750,000 gal storage
• 48.5 miles of distribution network
• sizes 4" to 16"
• Originally installed 50's-60's
• Cast iron; brittle & corroded
• Replacing with ductile iron and PVC: flexible & stable
• Programmed with street projects; only dig once
-525-
1p1
To Ensure Our Water is Reliable
• Capitol Improvement Projects have focused on system RELIABILITY
• Investments guided by 2007 Water System Improvement Study & CIP
• The age, condition, and material of pipes can contribute to the water
quality, but are not the primary factors ,'M
• The same topography that makes Mound a ' I
livable lake community also contributes to the REPORT
need for more infrastructure per capita and 01&
HYDRAULIC MODEL OF THE
per acre than other communities WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
P"Pu dfbr
CITY OF MOUND
-526- 1 1
To Ensure Our Water is Reliable
^'$30 Million Dollars invested in water system from 2005-Present
• Pipe Network Redundancy and Efficiency
• Eliminating dead ends
• Replacing High-failure/Critical Link Cast Iron Water Mains
• Improved system performance and management practices
• NONE of these improvements remove Iron or Manganese, which
causes the discoloration
-527-
To Ensure Our Water is Reliable
"$30 Million Dollars invested in water system from 2005-Present cont'd
• Sources and Storage Capacity:
• Developed Well 8 to replace Wells 4 & 7 due to aquifer arsenic level
• Replaced "Silver Bullet" tower at Chateau
• Island Park transmission mains to decommission Devon tank
• Fire Protection Flow Rates (1000 Gal/Min Hydrant Flow)
• Looping transmission into peninsular areas (under lake)
• Pipe size upgrades
-528-
To Ensure Our Water is Reliable
Fire Flows
IpI
I
0 .
16:0,
To Ensure Our Water is Affordable
• Past capitol projects to improve the distribution system have been
financed by bonds (city debt)
• The City makes debt payments solely through water rate revenue
• The current rates are a reflection of work that has been completed
• Capital investments for continued RELIABILITY are reflected in long
range planning, rate planning, and forecasting
• Bartlett WMN (county road, not city street)
• Lynwood WMN (country road, not city street)
• 4" on Three Points
• Water Tower Coatings
- 531-
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
• The metrics for Safe begin with source (well) water chemistry, and
ends at the point of use (the faucet)
• The Safe Drinking Water Act & the Groundwater Protection Act
define safe in terms of compounds and contaminants
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• Minnesota Pollution Control Authority (MPCA)
• MN Department of health (MDH)
2021 Monitoring Schedule
WlIli71 _ _ x°u,e, vwsoinome
Imo_ NX 1BB IY [fi
&crvl FRI.
• We test the water, and report: ��rnmrEaiop; a DWI i
• City Well Composition —Annual
• Lead/Copper sampling —Annual
°xm� �,°�i � i
• Chlorine — Monthly
4n1 WiN A K K x I x
AXe.X
• Fluoride — Daily �u.nr�,aXnNruX., i i
i lvn eY4NFY Y.rI el�
u��G �nn'grsY�n�Nrtpi%bxrnnlTe[Eu1Mpe VmIAn CtAIrm NMyq�m
532 m:rya n.r oemmarym FmMMg2enn SEE gEV A8F91GFfOgM EINF —wa^ rtswoo�u°nnnn ORMgiION,
.. �mnmdamxwwRwm
N. ou
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
Compounds that can be unsafe (TESTING & REGULATED LIMITS):
Arsenic
Lead
Copper
Petroleum Products
Volatile Organic Compounds
Test results reported in
Consumer Confidence
Report
Compounds that may be present (TESTING BUTNOTREGULATED):
Calcium Hardness
Magnesium
Manganese
Iron
IDiscoloration
- 533 -
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
• We need discuss Manganese
• We are aware that manganese exists in our source
water: both Well No 3 and No 8. based on testing
• We previously did not test for manganese levels
• The MDH first tested for Manganese in Dec 2020
• levels detected above standards Mound Sample Results
• Performed by an independent lab
Resampling was performed in January 2021 pol.=microgramsper liter
An�
Sample Location
Mn (pi
12/7/20
Mn jpelj
12/14/20
Well#3Entry Point
672
724
f4735
WeIINREntryPaint
451
4%
Resampling was performed in February 2021
• Performed by an independent lab
• Reported to Department of Health
• Test results confirmed by Department of Health
• Samples were taken directly at the wells and at homes
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
Manganese Continued
• Because the MDH Health Advisory Limit was exceeded, this
presentation is accompanied by a resolution to inform and advise
customers of Mound Water
• The levels of manganese detected to not constitute an immediate
health risk or any measures such as a boil order
• Consuming large amounts of manganese for long periods of time, can
have health risks
• Infants from 0-12 months are more susceptible
• Other municipalities in the metro are experiencing similar levels
• The proposed notification answers questions
about Manganese and who is at risk as some potential short-term
solutions (bottled water)
• Long term solutions are discussed later in this presentation
- 535 -
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
Source Water Composition
• Source water contains manganese: range of 0.47-0.70 mg/L
• Health advisory limits
• 0.10 mg/L infants - Health -Based Value
• 0.30 mg/L adults - Health Advisory Level
• Public notification Recommended by MDH
• Source Water contains iron: 0.92 mg/L
• Secondary standard 0.30 mg/L (exceeded)
• No contamination limit, health advisory, or health -based value
• Can cause staining to laundry and fixtures
- 536 -
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
Source Water Composition - Continued
e Source water has high hardness 21-24 grains
e Classified as very hard
e No standard for hardness
e Previous issues with high arsenic
e The well containing high arsenic is currently offline
e Plan to decommission
Minnesohe Oepar
Final Report PublaHe
Environmental Lob
601 Robert SC N., I
SI. Paul, I.
POISI0: 1270031
Resultswere produced by Minnesota Depadmenl of Health, exwo where noted,
Balch BOL0457 EPA200 Series Prep
eYnN1ePLOtli�BJ{11 PnPmetl.ILlerN 111E MelyaJ.ILiBA01a�.IB
Replflrg Epee Souse RPD
W/* RedI Limn AnLevd %tlJll %AEC XRECLMq PFD Jml InIL
Mempnen W WrL ACC
LCa19aLW1-091) P.,m 1L1ArN11:1e M.M lV01511
Raponnl spee Souse APD
M.M. ReeJl _, e'u� _...._.. %AEC %REC L'mna wn ..... IK
To Ensure Our Water is Safe
• How do we handle Manganese?
• Consider a municipal treatment solution
• Iron removal is accomplished at the same time
• Filtration
• You may already be removing it with Your refrigerator, home or
water softener filter if You have any of theca in nlnra
• Bottled water for certain uses
T
• Infants that are formula fed
- 538 -
Residential Treatment
Resident Side Removal options
Filtration Ion Exchange Softening Reverse Osmosis
(softener salt or iodine)
Average systems cost from $250 - $2000+ per home
- 539 -
Future Treatment Considerations
• Finishing treatment processes come after ensuring:
RELIABLE, AFFORDABLE, SAFE
• Finishing targets
hardness, discoloration,
red/black
sediment/fines
• Clear connection
to customer perception
of value...
and safety
• Affect on laundry, fixtures/appliances, skin/haircare
• We have OPTED OUT of finishing to focus on the above priorities
• It remains appropriate to check our work periodically
- 540 -
Treatment Scenarios
1. Centralized Treatment Plant
2. 2 filtration plants
3. 2 lime softening plants
4. Iron and manganese sequestering
5. Continue to monitor
- 541-
Scenario 1
Centralized treatment slant
• One plant, on a central site
• Requires new piping from each well to the plant
• Would require a dedicated site
• Cost to construct is prohibitive
• Capitol Cost $50 million+
• Not considered viable at this time
This is what we would build if we were building Mound from
scratch, today
- 542 -
Scenario 2
Construct 2 filtration plants, one at each well site
• Remove manganese and iron
• Challenges
• Sites are limited, but this is much smaller footprint than Scenario 1
• Residents still responsible for finishing (hardness)
• Benefits
• Manganese and iron issues eliminated
• Capitol Cost
• $12-$18 million
• $250-275 per year in water rate increases
- 543 -
Scenario 3
Construct 2 lime softening plants, one at each well site
• Remove manganese andiron
• Remove hardness
• Removes other contaminants found in lower levels
• Challenges
• Larger treatment plan footprints
• Benefits
• Residents no longer responsible for finishing (hardness removed)
• Capitol Cost
• $26-$36 million
• $550-$600 per year in water rate increases
- 544 -
Scenario
Iron and manganese sequestering
• Controls how these compounds appear and oxidize in the water
• Does NOT remove iron or manganese
• Effectiveness of this method declines with water age "half-life"
• Benefits
• Least costly treatment option, works within existing equipment
• Challenges
• Manganese and Iron levels are not reduced
• May still see "rusty water" if there is detention in the system
• Capital cost
• $150k 250k
- 545 -
Scenario 5
Continue Testing and monitor Manganese Levels
• We can do nothing to the water if we choose, and comply with the
MDH advisory requirement
• This is not the recommended course of action
• Benefits
• No cost
• Challenges
• Manganese not reduced
• Water chemistry could continue to change
• Capital cost
• $0.00
- 546 -
Treatment Funding Options
Possible Funding Options:
• Pay for treatment using water rates
• Apply to existing State Funding Sources
• Minnesota Public Funding Authority (PFA)
• Clean Water Revolving Fund
• Drinking Water Revolving Fund
• Legislative/future Funding
• A water treatment study is necessary to apply for the state funding
sources
• Accompanying Resolution to direct an engineering study
-547-
BOLTON
& MENK
Real People. Real Solutions.
March 9, 2021
CITY OF MOUND
RESOLUTION NO. 21-
RESOLUTION DIRECTING ENGINEERING STAFF TO NOTIFY RESIDENTS AND MUNCIPAL
WATER CUSTOMERS OF THE PRESENCE OF MANGANESE IN CITY WATER THAT EXCEEDS
THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ADVISORY LIMIT
WHEREAS, The Minnesota Department of Health has issued a Health Risk Advisory for manganese in
the drinking water supply; and
WHEREAS, Subsequent testing has shown consistent levels of manganese in water directly from city
wells in January and February 2021; and
WHEREAS, The concentration of manganese detected is designated by the Minnesota Department Of
Health as exceeding a Health Based Value that is likely to pose little or no risk to human health, and is
not a water emergency; and
WHEREAS, The recommended course of action from the Minnesota Department of Health is to notify
municipal water users and residents of manganese in the water supply, educate the customers, and
take action to reduce exposure;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota:
That notification be provided to municipal water users and residents of the Health Risk Advisory and
begin an education campaign that includes but is not limited to the City newsletter and the City website.
Adopted by the City Council this 9'h day of March 2021.
Attest: Catherine Pausche, City Clerk
Mayor, Ray J. Salazar
1
-549-
CITY OF MOUND
RESOLUTION NO. 21-
RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT ON
WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
WHEREAS, The City of Mound has notified it's residents and municipal water users to the
presence of manganese exceeding the Minnesota Department of Health health advisory limit;
and
WHEREAS, the City intends to apply for available sources of state funding to participate in a
potential water treatment project; and
WHEREAS, the preparation of a study will assist the council in determining whether the
proposed improvement is necessary, cost effective, and feasible;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,
that the Water Treatment Facility Improvements, be referred to Bolton & Menk, Inc. for study
and that they are instructed to report to the Council as to whether the proposed improvement is
necessary, cost effective, and feasible.
Adopted by the City Council this 9'h day of March 2021
ATTEST:
Catherine Pausche, City Clerk
Raymond J. Salazar, Mayor
- 550 -
O& MLNK
Real People. Real Solutions.
March 4, 2021
City of Mound
Attn: Eric Hoversten 2415 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
RE: Water Treatment Study Proposal
Dear Mr. Hoversten:
2638 Shadow Lane
Suite 200
Chaska, MN 55318-1172
Ph: (952) 448-8838
Fax: (952) 448-8805
Bolton-Menk.com
As requested, we have prepared a scope of services and estimated fee for preparing a Water Treatment
Study in the City of Mound.
In response to the discovery of high levels of Manganese in the City Wells, we have determined a
potential demand for the city to pursue municipal water treatment above and beyond what is already being
performed and have provided five scenarios for council discussion and action. This proposal is an
extension of that action and represents the next step in the process in determining the scope and size of
the treatment facilities, the type of treatment processes, and preparing application for various state
funding opportunities.
Scone:
We are proposing to perform a study, with the intent to deliver the following:
o Locations and size of proposed Treatment Facility(ies)
Proposed package filter plant primarily to remove iron and manganese
o Estimated site layouts and any potential property purchase
o Estimated cost of improvements
o Prepare initial submittals for state funding opportunities.
Fee Estimate:
Based on the above scope, the fees for this work are proposed at a not -to -exceed total of $27,500 billed on
an hourly basis. Please let me know if you have questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Brian D Simmons, P.E.
City Engineer
Https. //boltoumeuk-my, sharepolnt com/personal/brlans=bolton-menk com/Documents/Mound/2021-03-03 Council Packet/2021-03-04 Water Treatment Proposal.docs,
Bolton & Monk is an
City of Mound Cash Balances Reporting
As of 01-31-20 As of 02-28-20 As of 03-31-20 As of 04-30-20 As of 05-31-20 As of 06-30-20 As of 07-31-20 As of 08-31-20 As of 09-30-20 As of 10-31-20 As of 11-30-20
General Fund (101) 2,508,848
Coronavirus Relief Fund (203)
205,400 - - - - - - - - - -
Area Fire Services(222)
1,104,977 - - - - - - - - - -
Dock Fund (281)
415,780 - - - - - - - - - -
Harbor District(285)
110,426 - - - - - - - - - -
Debt Service Funds (3XX) **
2,599,470 - - - - - - - - - -
Captial Project Reserve Funds
401 Infrastructure/Street Replacement
1,886,206 - - - - - - - - - -
403-Cap Reserve - Vechicles & Equip
205,188 - - - - - - - - - -
404-Community Investment Fund
(279,756) - - - - - - - - - -
405-Cap Reserve City Buildings
52,870 - - - - - - - - - -
427-Street Maintenance Fund
518,557 - - - - - - - - - -
454-TIF 1-1 Harrison Bay
11,536 - - - - - - - - - -
475-TIF 1-3 Mound Harbor District
(140,806) - - - - - - - - - -
Subtotal Capital Funds
2,253,795 - - - - - - - - - -
Enterprise Funds
Liquor (609)
461,088 - - - - - - - - - -
Water (601)
(3,613,286) - - - - - - - - - -
Sewer (602)
1,199,469 - - - - - - - - - -
Storm (675)
(1,269,352) - - - - - - - - - -
Recycling (670)
185,346 - - - - - - - - - -
Subtotal Enterprise Funds
(3,036,735) - - - - - - - - - -
Pooled Investments/CDs (884)
10,876 - - - - - - - - - -
TOTALALLFUNDS -CASH BALANCE
6,172,837 - - - - - - - - - -
** Debt Service Fund Balance - prepaid special assessments
S:\FINANCE DEPT\RE PO RTS\202 1 \CASH BALANCES - 552 -
CITY OF MOUND
REVENUE -BUDGET REPORTING
JANUARY 2021
Percentage of Budget 8.33%
FUND
BUDGET
JANUARY2021
REVENUE
YTD
REVENUE
VARIANCE
PERCENT
RECEIVED
JAN
GENERALFUND
Property Taxes
3,626,958
-
-
3,626,958
0.00%
-
Business Licenses & Permits
27,250
2,801
2,801
24,449
10.28%
2,801
Non -Business Licenses & Permits
208,200
10,973
10,973
197,227
5.27%
10,973
Intergovernmental
349,206
-
-
349,206
0.00%
-
ChargesforServices
206,750
19,129
19,129
187,621
9.25%
19,129
City Hall Rent
40,000
1,961
1,961
38,039
4.90%
1,961
Fines & Forfeitures
28,000
-
-
28,000
0.00%
-
Special Assessments
15,000
-
-
15,000
0.00%
-
Street Lighting Fees
40,000
3,224
3,224
36,776
8.06%
3,224
Franchise Fees
418,000
131,580
131,580
286,420
31.48%
131,580
Transfers
200,000
200,000
200,000
-
100.00%
200,000
Miscellaneous
203,000
755
755
202,245
0.37%
755
TOTALS
5,362,364
370,423
370,423
4,991,941
6.91%
370,423
OTHER FUNDS
Area Fire Services
1,335,863
86,183
86,183
1,249,680
6.45%
86,183
Docks
162,600
60,041
60,041
102,559
36.93%
60,041
Transit District Maintenance
151,655
13,776
13,776
137,879
9.08%
13,776
Water Utility
2,030,000
157,900
157,900
1,872,100
7.78%
157,900
Sewer Utility
2,476,119
203,732
203,732
2,272,387
8.23%
203,732
Liquor Store
3,110,000
267,608
267,608
2,842,392
8.60%
267,608
Recycling Utility
196,100
14,338
14,338
181,762
7.31%
14,338
Storm Water Utility
155,000
11,512
11,512
143,488
7.43%
11,512
Investments
-
2,511
2,511
(2,511)
n/a
2,511
- 553 -
CITY OF MOUND
EXPENSES - BUDGET REPORTING
JANUARY 2021
Percentage of Budget 8.33%
JANUARY2021 YTD PERCENT
FUND BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED
GENERALFUND
Council
83,589
9,563
9,563
74,026
11.44%
Promotions
61,500
-
-
61,500
0.00%
City Manager / City Clerk
190,720
12,969
12,969
177,751
6.80%
Elections
3,100
12
12
3,088
0.39%
Finance
488,332
35,596
35,596
452,736
7.29%
Assessing
128,000
-
-
128,000
0.00%
Legal
90,206
-
-
90,206
0.00%
Centennial Building
54,023
613
613
53,410
1.13%
City Hall - Wilshire
54,914
2,340
2,340
52,574
4.26%
Computer
41,500
5,578
5,578
35,922
13.44%
Police
1,883,978
920,796
920,796
963,182
48.88%
Emergency Preparedness
46,657
3,249
3,249
43,408
6.96%
Planning & Inspections
500,319
21,716
21,716
478,603
4.34%
Streets
829,612
39,317
39,317
790,295
4.74%
Parks
497,567
27,142
27,142
470,425
5.45%
Transfers
695,970
38,830
38,830
657,140
5.58%
Cable TV
42,300
-
-
42,300
0.00%
Contingency
64,000
7,363
7,363
56,637
11.50%
TOTALS
OTHER FUNDS
Area Fire Services
Docks
Transit District Maintenance
Capital Projects
Capital Replacement - Equipment
Community Investment Reserve
Capital Replacement - Buildings
Sealcoating
TIF 1-1-Harrison Bay
TIF 1-2 - Metroplains
TIF 1-3 - Mound Harbor
Water Utility
Sewer Utility
Liquor Store
Recycling Utility
Storm Water Utility
am
9,563
12,969
12
35,596
613
2,340
5,578
920,796
3,249
21,716
39,317
27,142
38,830
7,363
5,756,287 1,125,084 1,125,084 4,631,203 19.55% 1,125,084
2,148,064
130,014
130,014
2,018,050
6.05%
130,014
146,057
735
735
145,322
0.50%
735
72,910
324
324
72,586
0.44%
324
-
-
-
-
n/a
-
123,000
123,000
0.00%
-
-
-
n/a
-
55, 000
55,000
0.00%
-
-
-
n/a
-
-
n/a
-
-
n/a
-
-
-
-
-
n/a
-
1,939,276
291,196
291,196
1,648,080
15.02%
291,196
2,262,531
337,324
337,324
1,925,207
14.91%
337,324
611,519
37,980
37,980
573,539
6.21%
37,980
198,055
755
755
197,300
0.38%
755
407,800
66,39,�54 -
66,374
341,426
16.28%
66,374
- 555 -
z
2
H
O
a
W
H
L)
Q
z
LJJ
m
F-
a.
W
0
LJJ
LL
z
O
r
N
O
N
m
G
L
7
O
d
a+
.21
L
d
LL
C
d
N
C
O
Q
4)
V
C
d
cm
L.
cd
G
W
0
(O 6 O�
co
co
0 0 0
0
0 0
O
M
M
O
CD
LO
❑
N
L)
O 0 O
'V '
O O
W Lo O
O O
O
�
L
c-
O
Cl)
O
N
O
N
00 M
CS
7
O
CO O
CC) 00
U) co
O 0
(0Lo
0 0
0 0
O
CN
(O
O
�-
O
C)
LO
w
LL
N
!d
O 0 O
� 'It �
� 0 0
(O 0 0
0 0
CDr-
L
c-
O
M
r
C
�
U
0 (M O
N co 0
0 0 0
M O
N O
O
LO
O
0
0
CD
(O
It
`
V(O
O
�- N O
O CD O
�- W O
CD
0)N
O
CD
(0
N
N
0
O (M O
N M 0
0 0 0
M O
N O
O
't
0
0
0
0)
(O
ii
N
�p
(O O
N 0
0 0 0
00 O
r- O
O
O
N
O
O
M
r
�
U
co -
0.
a)
N
`�
0) U
0) U
O
0)
0)
(D+U'
W
�
d
v
`
v
m
J
~
���LL������rj)
L) O_
0 O
Q U
- U O
���J-�
� 0�
LL
do
0ri)
Q
H
U
p
p
❑)
❑
m W
�/]
~
m
❑
❑
Y
❑
U
❑
°o
Q
a
m
a
a
J
U
p
w
LU
z
H
2
�
U
Q
r
H
M
N
Lo
Lf)
M
�
�
M
N
U
U
Q
z
w
a
O
i
Y
0
g�
0
m
}❑
�oU)
0
o
a
2
g
U)
�U)<
W
o(/)wg
—
W
W
¢¢FQwQ
D
w
��
>4W
W
❑w
W
U
w
O
0
W
H
W
w
Q
U
W
O
(n
J
LL
000
CM
O
N
O
N
C
0 000
0 M
O
M
N
O
N
t LO
r+
0 O
cM
Q
U
J ❑
J W
>_wU
z W 0 O
Z U _
Z J J J
c Q U
z C� pQ0
Q Q J z
a ¢Dz
D
2
U)
w w I- co c c
U.p r r r r r r
2
C Ln
a) 2
rn o> Cc>'�
c O C — c
C
Z 0 O j 0 O O
Y c
00
E a) E
H o��m�c`a
Z> o Q U Q
O
� w w �
O O a a> a
Q a) O N a N
U U V a U
C C O C
f0 UU MU
U
cn
O
a)
c
`O
U
Z
a)
F-p iL j L LL lL O LL
O
U `m ccE m
W Q Q Q Q - Q
E
_N
Q
W
LL W IL U- LL U- IL LL
N
m
{)
a a M
a > a >
> c c m > m
m m O
)
co ca a) a)
N aJ J ` a `
LU
p m Q o= o
a 00U U
r N
N r
a a a a a a
C C C C C C
O O O O O O
r r r r r r
W N N N N N N
O O O O O O
a N N N N N N
c\- M M 0000 c\•-
O r N N N N co
r r r r r r
ul
a' p OOLOOMu�
Z r N (V CM Cl)
LL
O
N
LLi
N
N
r
LO
N
N
N
O
CM
(O
r
00
r
O
(M
O
r
N
N
N
O
r
00
N
0)r
(O
M
M
7
O
a
a
a
O
O
O
O
CL
aaa
O
0aaa
0a
0
-0ao-a
O
a
�
(L)
V-
m
Vt!
a)
a
c
0
m
V
a)
v
a)
.>
t
(L)
V�
a)
(L)
m
>
aaa
°a°Q
a
s
a°
C
L
co�a
`=
a�a
~O
Cl)
C
to
c
U)
C
cu
c
3
m
C
m
c
w
C
c
O
m
c
c
O
0
C
0
c
0
C
F-
Co
w
C
N
�I-f-ZYHF-F--0E-
Id
(0
O
O
N
2
N
O-
c`0
a
m
0
HHZ
0
O
�F-
N
c
a)
a)
C
U
C
f0
U
U
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
m
a)
m
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
m
a)
a)
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
7
U
3
U
7
U
ti
v1
a)
m
a)
to
a)
w
a)
w
m
rn
a)
vi
a)
to
a)
v�
m
w
a)
v7
m
u�
a)
m
a)
m
a)
w
a)
v7
a)
N
m
�
V)
is
U
�
m
a)
3a
ca
oama
°)a>a_mCa
aa
mFh
M
a)m
(0mmm
a)mm
—J
N-
2
�-
N`
N
J
`J
U
2
E
a
�
O
N
C
N
C
N
E
C
N
~
m
�m
MMX
f0>
>N
O�X�X�
pm
O3:
i>>
(0
L)
N
2(O
(MOX,)
C)
�C
��C
qco
E
O
U
a
c
a
c
a
c
-0-0
C
C
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
C
a
c
a
C
a
C
a
C
a
c
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
7
O
m
O
7
O
r
N
Co
r
N
C)
r
N
Cl
r
N
O
r
N
CD
r
N
r
N
O
r
N
O
r
N
O
r
N
O
r
N
Cl
r
N
ClO
r
N
r
N
CD
r
N
C)
r
N
C)
r
N
CD
NN
N
N
N
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
Q
N
N
N
N"
N
N
Q
N
N
N
N
co
co
CO
M
O
O
r
N
r
r
�
r
f�
r
00
r
m
N
M
N
N
LO
N
U')
N
00
N
r
co
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
N
M
U.,
(O
00
O
r
N
r
Cl)
r
r
r
N
N
d
N
O
N
00
N
O
M
M
0
M
Harbor
Wine 8 Splrlfs '
A RY 202120211
DATE
SALES
CUSTOMERS
AVERAGE TICKET
'21
'20
'21
'20
+/-
'21 '20
+/-
'21
'20
+/-
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
1
11,432
429
27
Sunday
2
9,929
423
23
Monday
1
3
5,186
3,355
55%
204
177
15%
25
19
34%
Tuesday
2
4
5,960
3,365
77%
240
185
30%
25
18
37%
Wednesday
3
5
8,369
4,576
83%
311
219
42%
27
21
29%
Thursday
4
6
8,139
6,043
35%
290
270
7%
28
22
25%
Friday
5
7
13,972
15,094
-7%
450
508
-11%
31
30
4%
Saturday
6
8
13,136
14,593
-10%
423
487
-13%
31
30
4%
Sunday
7
9
10,609
1,093
871%
399
54
639%
27
20
31%
Monday
8
10
3,889
0
182
0
21
Tuesday
9
11
6,070
0
245
0
25
Wednesday
10
12
6,815
0
258
0
26
Thursday
11
13
8,751
3,494
150%
290
158
84%
30
22
36%
Friday
12
14
14,257
12,126
18%
434
457
-5%
33
27
24%
Saturday
13
15
12,972
9,913
31%
426
377
13%
30
26
16%
Sunday
14
16
5,630
4,348
29%
232
216
7%
24
20
21%
Monday
15
17
5,758
4,339
33%
226
208
9%
25
21
22%
Tuesday
16
18
7,159
4,879
47%
255
230
11%
28
21
32%
Wednesday
17
19
6,730
5,019
34%
269
258
4%
25
19
29%
Thursday
18
20
8,444
6,226
36%
309
259
19%
27
24
14%
Friday
19
21
25,168
12,308
104%
588
440
34%
43
28
53%
Saturday
20
22
11,068
10,782
3%
371
438
-15%
30
25
21%
Sunday
21
23
5,705
4,041
41%
223
205
9%
26
20
30%
Monday
22
24
6,103
4,730
29%
236
231
2%
26
20
26%
Tuesday
23
25
5,918
5,126
15%
249
245
2%
24
21
14%
Wednesday
24
26
6,409
5,049
27%
269
243
11%
24
21
15%
Thursday
25
27
7,535
6,527
15%
265
279
-5%
28
23
22%
Friday
26
28
14,458
11,532
25%
478
455
5%
30
25
19%
Saturday
27
29
11,642
19,826
41%
406
607
-33%
29
33
-12%
Sunday
28
5,458
222
25
TOTAL - February
251,310
199,745
25.82%
8,750 8,058
8.59%
28.72
24.79
15.87%
Sales
Customer
Avg Ticket
' 2021
' 2020
' 2021
' 2020
'2021
'2020
January
267,685 206,266
30% 9,572
9,060
6% 28
23
23%
February
251,310 199,745
26% 8,750
8,058
9% 29
25
16%
March
0 303,365
-100% 0
9,433
-100% ####
32 ####
FIRST QTR
518,995 622,008
-17% 18,322
27,498
-33% 28
23
25%
- 558 -
MINUTES
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
Chair Goode called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
R01 I rAl I
Members present: David Goode, Jason Baker, Jon Ciatti, Samantha Erickson, Allen Andersen,
and Jason Holt.
Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, City Consultant Rita Trapp and
Secretary Jen Holmquist.
Members of the public: Steve Schwanke, 100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; August Bruggeman,
100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; T. Cody Turnquist, 100 Lake Street West, Wayzata; Ralph
Kempf, 4663 Wilshire #310; Kevin and Deb Larson, 4525 Denbigh Road; Jann Olsten, 3028
Pelican Point Circle; James Vettel, 4578 Denbigh Road; Paul Levin, 12630 Porcupine Ct., Eden
Prairie; Dave Henderson, 3018 Pelican Point Circle; Danielle Rousselange, 236 25th Street SE,
Buffalo; Dane Vocelka, 236 25th Street SE, Buffalo; Tim Lowe, 601 96th Street West
Chanhassen; Rodney Beystrom, 4466 Denbigh Road; Jay Stemler, 4496 Denbigh Road, (Illegible
name), 906 Liberty Lane, New Prague; Lynn Pinoniemi, 4560 Denbigh Road; Aaron Teal, 21353
Forest Hill Road, Richmond; Lee Breskler, 2544 N Saunders Drive, Minnetrista; Tom Rozman
and Dana Ryeller, 4225 Denbigh Road; Mary Stimson and Kosta Moore-Kentos, 2551 38th Ave
NE, St. Anthony; Ryan Love and family, 783 Riesgraf Rd, Carver; Drew Veelhoer, 248 Main
Street E, Richmond; Jacob Guggenberger, 22994 Chapel Hill Rd, Cold Spring; Bob Ayer, 5475
Lost Lake Lane; Kelli Gillespie -Coen, 4400 Tuxedo Boulevard; Justin Davis and Patrice Mcdeid,
6320 Yosemite, Excelsior; Kelly and Shaun White, 3513 Lyric Ave, Wayzata.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
MOTION by Baker to approve meeting agenda, as amended, seconded by Ciatti. MOTION
carried unanimously.
REVIEW OF JANUARY 5, 2021 MEETING MINUTES
MOTION by Baker to approve the meeting minutes from January 5, 2021 as written, seconded
by Erickson. MOTION carried unanimously.
- 559 -
BOARD OF APPEALS
Public Hearing for major -subdivision -preliminary plat of "Villages of Island Park" for property
at 4451 Wilshire Boulevard; also review of rezoning and conditional use permit for
townhomes and for a planned development area in the shoreland overlay district
Applicants: Steve Schwanke of Inland Development Partners, LLC and Turnquist
Properties Inc.
Goode outlined the process, including the planning case presentation and public hearing.
Trapp described the public hearing and the role of the planning Commission as an advisory
board. Any recommendations will be followed by a public hearing at the City Council, as well.
The project is located west of the Tuxedo Blvd and Wilshire Blvd intersection. The site is
currently zoned B-2 General Business District. The site was formerly the location of a
bar/restaurant that was closed in the early 1990s. The site has been vacant/undeveloped and
the applicant has been looking for a redevelopment project for a number of years.
The applicant is seeking several land use and subdivision requests. They are proposing to
construct 18 townhome units. Each unit would be individually accessed. Wilshire and Tuxedo
are the access roads. Garages are interior so a passerby would see front doors. There is a slope
on the site that the applicant is using as a design feature. The applicant is working to preserve
as many of the existing trees located on the west side as possible. The project will develop 17 2-
bedroom units that are nearly 1,400 square feet in size and have a two -car garage. Also
proposed is 1 ADA unit that will be just over 700 square feet in size and will have an oversized
one -car accessible garage.
This site is guided as Mixed Use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Development can be
commercial, residential, or both. The density proposed is allowed as the allowable density is 7-
15 units per acre. This site is 1.26 acres and would allow for 8-18 units to be constructed on the
site.
The preliminary plat is how the individual lots are created. The applicant is seeking to combine
the existing two parcels and then create individual lots for each building and an outlot on the
rest of the site. The project is proposed as rental so the having multiple units on one lot is
appropriate.
The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from B-2 General Business District to R-3 Multiple
Family Residential. This is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for the townhouses as well as for developing the
area for the residential shoreland planned development area (PDA).
-560-
The intent of a planned development area is that the dimensions are established and approved
for as part of the site development plans.
The site is 1.26 acres and meets the minimum size for a PDA. Setbacks proposed are 17.2 feet
on Tuxedo, 18.7 feet on Wilshire and more than 50 feet of setback on the west side of the
property which is near the tree line and the residential homes. Utilities are already established
on this site and are of no concern.
The square footage of each of the 17 units is well above what is stated in the code. The ADA
unit is slightly under code requirements, but the proposed size seems reasonable due to the
uniqueness of the ADA. It is proposed that 50%of the site will be open and each of the
buildings will remain under the maximum building height of 35 feet.
The site has two driveway accesses proposed with one located on Wilshire and one located on
Tuxedo. There will be 7 visitor parking spots and an ADA accessible guest parking spot, as well.
Relative to stormwater, the impervious surface cover is 50%. This is a reduction from existing
conditions. The MCWD manages stormwater and this project is under review. The applicant will
need to meet the requirements MCWD outlines. The City defers to the MWCD to make sure
stormwater is being managed properly. Preliminarily they have noted that some adjustments to
the site plan may be required related to volume control. The applicant may have to include
some infiltration and that may be accomplished by the open space already on the site.
Department/agency review comments are as follows:
Hennepin County: The proposed driveway locations are acceptable but the County wants
additional info about sufficient sight distances. No right of way is requested but Hennepin
County suggested the need for drainage and utility easements. Requests to regrade along
Wilshire to help with drainage.
Mound Fire: The layout is positive for access as the buildings are accessible all the way around
and the buildings will be sprinkled. Hydrant locations are acceptable. They requested the
turning radius be evaluated to allow a ladder truck to make a turn, if needed.
Trapp noted that the public hearing notice was sent to a larger area than was required so
everyone could be aware of the requests. Comments received are primarily included in the
packet, however, comments received after the packet was distributed was distributed to
Planning Commission via email prior to the meeting and handed out at the meeting. The
comments received were incorporated into the official record as part of the agenda
amendment approved earlier in the evening.
As noted in the packet, Staff has recommended approval of the requests with conditions. The
conditions and proposed findings of fact are provided for Planning Commission consideration.
- 561 -
Baker asked what is included when the proposal is described as "50%open". For example, if
parking included? Trapp said parking is not included, it is just the landscaped areas are
considered open space. The site is also 50% impervious for hard cover that includes buildings,
parking and sidewalks.
Ciatti asked about the size for the ADA unit. How much below the minimum required square
footage will the unit be? Trapp believed it's less than 100 square feet.
Erickson asked how the comments from the consulting agencies and public will be addressed.
Trapp said the applicant received the comments and the applicant is responsible for addressing
the issues. If the city feels the changes are not met prior to the city Council meeting, staff will
add them as conditions of approval.
Erickson also asked if any traffic studies were completed. Trapp said traffic was evaluated by
Hennepin County Transportation, City Engineering and Public Works. Trapp noted that a traffic
study would be requested if one of the agencies determined the project met the merits. Given
that this project is only 18 units, it wouldn't trigger enough of an increase in traffic to require a
traffic study. Traffic will continue to be evaluated.
Baker asked about the 2040 Comprehensive Plan in regards to the mixed use category. Trapp
stated that the original comprehensive plan amendment establishing this site as mixed use was
approved in May 2018. The comprehensive plan adopted in January of 2020 affirmed the mixed
use designation. Baker noted that the future land use map for this area identifies it as medium
density. Trapp said that mixed use was always the guide even before the 2040 plan was
adopted. Trapp noted that Staff will review the 2040 future land use figure to ensure it is
consistent with approvals.
Steve Schwanke — Inland Development Partners at 100 Lake Street West in Wayzata. He noted
there will be a presentation to address some of the issues already discussed. He introduced the
team attending the meeting.
T. Cody Turnquist 2000 Chestnut Road in Edina - He is a third generation property owner in the
city. His family has enjoyed watching the growth in Mound. The subject property was
purchased by his grandfather in 1989. It was a 4,800 square foot bar/restaurant with parking.
He outlined that in 2001 they demoed the building, though the foundation and parking area
remains. The city used the land for storage while Tuxedo was refurbished. The City restored the
site after that project. The family continues to maintain the property. In 2018, the
comprehensive plan was changed to mixed use allowed them to reimagine what was possible
on the site for redevelopment.
The intent is to create a tasteful development nestled between two busy roads. The site is
surrounded by an active auto and marine shop on one side and single family homes on the
other. They really took the time to try to find the best use for the property.
- 562 -
Schwanke reiterated the desire to create a tasteful transition between the commercial and
residential portions of the area. While they explored single family development with potential
builders, there was no interest for a single family development here in part due to the relatively
small size of the site.
They worked with a market research firm and found a market gap for market rate, rental
townhomes. There has been no such project for more than 30 years. This project will be
targeted two demographics. A lot of consumers aged 55 plus are looking for this type of
property. This age group wants to downsize, are looking to travel and get away from the lawn
maintenance and snow removal that comes with home ownership.
Another demographic interested in this type of residential product is the aging millennials. They
aren't ready to own but need a home that gives them a house like feel.
Within these two groups are renters with disposable income who don't want to own a home
but also don't want apartment living. This type of renter is a renter by choice, not by necessity.
There is not product like this in the area. The people who want this are forced to look in other
communities. This kind of market rate, high end, rental town homes provides a product that is
desired and the transition between commercial and residential that the area needs.
Tim Whitten of Whitten Associates, 4159 Edmonton Place, Minnetonka. Whitten noted they
were careful with the design to ensure every unit had a 2 car garage to cover the parking
requirements. They also placed the front doors toward the street to provide a pleasing
aesthetic. The varying units per building will also provide architectural interest. The sidewalks
go to front door and connect throughout the development.
Whitten noted that they paid special attention to the existing trees. They have worked with the
site design to keep as many trees as possible and to work with the grading challenges. They
adjusted the townhomes to match the grade of the site. Open space is 50% of the site most of
which is manicured and maintained green space.
Whitten presented a unit diagram showing how the three levels are configured. The ADA unit is
designed to be accessible and has an oversized garage. A loft space was added to the ADA unit
so the total square feet is greater than the requirement.
The townhome design has a steeper roof, giving the project a classic, upscale look. Garages are
all enclosed. The siding is paintable and comes with a variety different size panels to create a
unique look.
Turnquist discussed the interior finishes. From the garages, residents enter into a mud room
with vinyl plank flooring which extends to the next level. Custom cabinets and Corian counter
tops, tile back splashes, stainless steel appliances with an optional gas range upgrade. Upstairs
will be carpet. Bathrooms will be vinyl plank or tile. Each unit has its own laundry, as well.
-563-
Clark Wicklund of Alliant Engineering, 733 Marquette Avenue in Minneapolis addressed some
of the public comments. Historically the site was 60% impervious and the stormwater drained
to Tuxedo to the south and Wilshire to the north, with most flowing to the right of way and
received by two catch basins on Wilshire. Proposed conditions are 50% impervious, a 10%
reduction. Proposed internal storm sewer between structures will be underground with water
flowing underground to the north to the catch basin on Wilshire. Applicant is working with
MCWD to meet their requirements.
Tree preservation is adamantly hoping to keep as many existing trees as possible. The proposed
conditions exceed the requirements, preserving 67% of existing trees.
Wicklund discussed the transportation concerns. Fire trucks and emergency vehicles could pass
through the site, as well as trash removal vehicles. Trip generation for 18 townhomes will
generate 132 trips daily as compared to a primary use of a sit down restaurant (previous use)
which would generate 561 trips daily. Current layout provides access to both Wilshire and
Tuxedo. This allows for flexibility as drivers will find the path of least resistance.
The trip generation proposed results in 66 trips daily to each roadway, an increase of less than
3% on each roadway. You typically have to reach at least 10% increase to trigger any traffic
studies. What is being proposed is way less than if the site were commercial. Traffic is not a
concern. Snow storage will not be a problem with the 50% open space.
Goode asked if the Commissioners have any questions for the applicant.
Jason Holt asked if the applicant considered selling the townhomes instead of renting.
Schwanke believes the pricing needed to sell them would not be possible. He is comfortable
with the rental market and is sure there is a demand for this product.
Holt asked how much rent is. Rates range from $2,400-$2,900 per month plus additional fees
for pets or other.
Holt wondered if additional parking would be available because he doesn't believe there is
enough parking for visitors. He also wonders where will the kids play?
Schwanke said that each unit has two covered spots in their garages. No parking is allowed in
the drive area. On -site visitor parking is sufficient based on other projects they have developed.
Holt notes that if the 8 visitor spots are full additional visitors would have to park on the street.
Holt asked how long the property was for sale. Turnquist said the family offered the property
for sale 6-8 years ago. It was on the market for about a year.
Holt asked if Tuxedo will have a turn lane because if not, the area will get backed up. Trapp said
the county department of transportation, the city engineer and city public works department
have all looked at the proposal and no recommendations were made to change anything.
- 564 -
Goode opened the public hearing.
Rodney Beystrom, 4466 Denbigh Road. He's lived here 34 years. Mr. Beystrom noted that he
was at the meeting at city hall a couple years ago when preliminary discussions were begun. He
felt that at that time no one was in favor of the project being rentals. Mr. Beystrom expressed
concern that based on his experience these rental properties may eventually become section 8.
While he is not opposed to the design of the project, he is opposed to rentals as he feels that
they devalue surrounding properties, people don't want to live next to them, and they cause
higher crime rates. Mr. Beystrom indicated that he would be comfortable if it was a 55 and over
rental. He stated that he doesn't understand why this project couldn't be owner occupied. He
also noted that where Wilshire and Tuxedo come together, you can barely make that turn. He
believes something would have to be done to that intersection to make that turn easier. He
expresses his gratitude to the Commissioners for their hard work.
Ralph Kempf, 4363 Wilshire Boulevard. Mr. Kemp indicated that he lives across the street. He
thinks this is a great improvement over the prior suggestions to use the property. He likes that
this proposal has less density. He remembers public discussions where residents were saying
they didn't want riff raff in Mound. He thinks those residents should not have that concern with
this project. Mr. Kemp expressed concern about parking and traffic patterns. He has driven this
area quite often. Tuxedo is the main artery that drains the island. He believes this road has
about 1/3 more traffic that Wilshire does. None of the graphics show the almost blind
intersection because of the garage buildings on the side of that curve. He believes the
intersection is scary and he is surprised that the consulting agencies didn't have any comments
on that. Mr. Kemp also noted the Lakewinds driveway is just a half of a block beyond the
Tuxedo entrance of this complex and right across the street is the driveway to Pelican Point.
The commuter traffic on Tuxedo is fast moving and he proposes considering a u-shape to make
two accesses on Wilshire. This would give a traffic control option. Mr. Kemp noted that parking
is inadequate for Lakewinds and is continual problem. He worried that the proposed visitor
parking spaces will not be enough. He would encourage the developer to attempt to add some
additional visitor parking.
Jann Olsten, 3028 Pelican Point Circle. Mr. Olsten agreed with the prior issues raised with rental
for this project. He expressed concern about safety and traffic. He thinks packing the maximum
allowable density is too much. He expressed concern about whether the no parking in front of
the garages is going to be enforceable and how deliveries and fire trucks could get through if
someone is illegally parked. He also asked about how recreational vehicles will be handled.
Mr. Olsten stated that he believes that because of the characteristics of the property the
density should be pulled back from the number units being proposed. His biggest concern is for
safety. Wilshire and Tuxedo are busy with cars regularly exceeding the 35 MPH speed limit. He
suggested that increasing the amount of traffic by 2% is too much at 132 trips a day. Mr. Olsten
stated that he believes that the proposed development does not allow for safe entry to the
busy roadways. This proposed development is positioned as such that you can't see oncoming
-565-
traffic. He believes cutting off the access and reducing the number of units to 10 or 12 would
make it more attractive and safer.
Rodney Beystrom returned to add to his earlier comment that directly across the street on
Wilshire is the entrance for the auto repair. He also added that immediately east of the site on
the north side of Wilshire is a street called Cardiff. He said this is the only access to the Denbigh
neighborhood. With the high speeds of traffic, it's already hard to get out. Other cars need to
wait until you turn out before they can go in because the road there is so narrow. He is
concerned that there would be a significant conflict to accessing that neighborhood.
Jann Olsten returned asking for clarification about park dedication regulations. Trapp replied
that park land dedication is handled separately from what is being discussed tonight as a
subsequent phase of the approval process. She also added that in Mound park dedication
requirements are typically met by a cash dedication instead of a land dedication. In response to
a follow up question about how park dedication funds are used, Trapp clarified that according
to state statute the park land dedication fees can only be used to improve the City's park
system. It can't be used to address traffic concerns.
Mr. Olsten asked for clarification as to the status of the bylaws, home owner associations,
articles of incorporation and protective covenants. Trapp noted that these documents are part
of the development agreement phase of the project which does not happen until the City
Council considers the final plat. Mr. Olsten noted that he would like the record to reflect that
he hopes that when it gets to that point that the neighbors have some input.
Tina Rozman, 4552 Denbigh Road. She has lived here 8 years and traffic conditions are
awful/dangerous. She noted hers is a very active neighborhood. Pedestrian traffic has not been
addressed. She believes it's a death trap. She thinks people are not taking these risks seriously.
Cars go way too fast and people are already at risk. She requested a traffic study to determine
how to make this area safe whether this project proceeds or not.
Jay Stemler, 4476 Denbigh Road. Mr. Stemler noted that the developer is marketing to
millennials; he wondered where the kids are expected to play? This is a highly congested area.
Kelli Gillespie -Coen, 4400 Tuxedo Blvd. Ms. Gillespie -Coen is the owner of the property next
door and also has experience in real estate brokerage. She agrees with the market
demographics. She noted that those demographics don't typically have children. She stated
that in her experience there is a big demand for rentals. Some people need temporary housing
while building homes and others want to try out the area to see if it's a city they want to live in.
She owns rental units that rent at these price points. She has typically seen renters in these
demographics take care of their properties. Having a for sale product typically only works if the
city has given substantial subsidies. That's not feasible in this market.
- 566 -
In regards to the traffic, she knows people just drive too fast. She is cautious and she has never
had a problem. She thinks the drivers need to pay attention and a traffic study can't account for
them. Rentals don't always decrease property values. She was at the 2018 meeting. Residents
made it clear they wanted mixed use. She knows that everyone wants commercial but,
ironically, that would cause more traffic issues. She hopes people won't get caught up on the
small stuff. Business owners in this town want higher population in the city. She has had
discussions with property owners of this proposed project. They aren't going to tarnish their
reputations by promising one thing and providing a different product.
Goode asked for additional comments. Hearing none he closed the public hearing.
Baker noted that the zoning of R-3 requires a minimum of 2 parking spaces, he wonders if
mixed use has a minimum. Trapp says parking is based on the individual uses not on the mixed
use district designation.
Ciatti noted he heard two main themes. The first one is that rental units will tarnish the area.
He noted, however, that Lakewinds has rentals. A member of the audience states that they are
condominiums and a lot of the owners use them as investments and do rent them out. Ciatti
noted that given that, adding 18 rental units to the area is of no concern. Traffic is the other
major theme. Adding the number of trips discussed, he would tend to rely on the professionals
who determine the trip generations and the increase does not seem large. He noted traffic
does move fast and there is a blind spot. He wondered if there is a right turn only option that
could be established. Sidewalk and pedestrian safety is being addressed by the city Council but
he is unsure if this particular area is included in that discussion.
Goode asked if the Commission is ready to take action or is more information needed. Ciatti
said he is comfortable proceeding. Holt said he is not comfortable after hearing all the
comments of the people who will be neighbors to this property if the project proceeds. He
doesn't know if this is the right project for this land. He thinks 18 units are too many and
parking is an issue. There are a lot of things to be figured out and he doesn't think it's ready.
Baker thought it was a nice design. The setback on Tuxedo is more than the commercial
property next to it. He noted the buffer between the residential neighborhood. The setback on
Wilshire is good. But he does wonder if what is being proposed is too much for the land. The
traffic does allow people to make the right turn. He liked the idea of possibly putting both
accesses on Wilshire. He believed in general that corner needs a stop light.
Baker noted that he heard the negative connotations regarding the units being rentals but
doesn't believe this product could survive as section 8 housing. He doesn't believe the 8 visitor
parking spaces is enough. He liked the green space and noted that additional parking would
take away from that.
Erickson stated, if a vote is held this evening, she would vote no as traffic and safety have not
been explored. She lives in this area and the pedestrian piece is not being met. It is a highly
-567-
active neighborhood. Traffic studies completed on a sunny July day will provide different results
than when traffic is higher during ice fishing season. She doesn't feel confident that pedestrian
and traffic safety has been considered. She has no issue with the property holding rental units.
She wonders if any recommendation could have conditions that a traffic study be required.
Goode summarized the concerns he noted from the discussion: 1) Concern about the number
of units. Suggestion is to reduce the number of units. 2) The traffic pattern of the units
themselves and inadequate parking, on site. 3) Not enough study on traffic and safety. Ciatti
pointed out that some of the comments focus on this proposal, however the developer should
not be responsible for fixing existing traffic problems.
Trapp outlined Planning Commission options. Commissioners can table the request to seek
additional information, recommend approval or deny. If the Commission recommends
approval, there are conditions provided in the planning packet and Commissioners are able to
add conditions as they see fit. If the Commission denies, it is requested that a summary be
made of the findings of fact relative to the denial. Trapp reiterated Ciatti's comments that the
Commission should consider if the concerns are based on existing conditions or the application.
She noted that if the item is tabled, then the Commission needs to choose a date to discuss the
topic, most likely the March 2, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting.
Trapp noted that the preliminary plat and the CUP go hand in hand. They should not be voted
on separately. One motion can be made for all the recommendations.
Schwanke noted that he will focus on the items, in question, that would pertain to their project.
He is as concerned with getting things right, as the neighbors are. He asked that the
Commission identify all the issues they would like the applicants to work on and they will
prepare that for the future meeting. He also stated that if they are allowed to become new
neighbors in this neighborhood, they would be very active in rectifying existing issues.
The Commissioners discussed the reasons for tabling the discussion.
MOTION by Holt to table the discussion due to number of units, traffic/pedestrian safety,
parking, and rental concerns. The discussion will be tabled to March 2, 2021, Seconded by
Baker. MOTION carried unanimously.
Smith noted for the members of the public who are in attendance, that while the issue has
been tabled, and the applicant will have the chance to respond to the issues presented, the
public hearing portion of the meeting is closed and additional notice letters are not required to
be mailed. She reminds everyone that city staff is available for questions via phone or email.
Review of request for evaluation of tattoo studio as substantially similar use at 5439
Shoreline Drive in Lost Lake commercial building as provided by City Code Sec. 129-71
Applicant: Dane Vocelka Owner: Samuel C. & Shea F. Steadman
Smith outlined that the request by Dane Vocelka is for a review by the planning Commission, as
provided by city code section 129-71, to determine whether the proposed tattoo studio is
substantially similar to the retail sales and service land use category in the Pedestrian Zoning
District. The applicant is proposing a tattoo studio that would also include some retail sales of
custom fishing rods and advertising for his fishing guide services. Planning Commission review is
needed as a tattoo studio is not specifically listed as a permitted or conditional use
Smith noted that while the City is not required to hold a public hearing, as a courtesy, public
notices were mailed to surrounding neighbors to make them aware of the Commission's
discussion today. These notices were sent to the surrounding townhomes and the other
commercial properties in the building.
Smith noted that tattoo studios are required to be licensed by Hennepin County Department of
Health. The mix of the current uses include Caribou Coffee, a dry cleaners and the western
most space, proposed to be the tattoo studio, which would also include retail sales of custom
fishing rods and advertise for his fishing guide services.
Staff's evaluation is that this is consistent with what is normal and customary for retail sales
and service. Smith stated that this is a substantially similar use to the current category in the
Pedestrian District based on the findings of fact.
Smith noted that comments from Steve Johnson, 2309 Lost Lake Court, and the Lost Lake Villas
Homeowner's Association were added to the agenda by an agenda amendment. The Villa
Homeowner's Association letter requested the Planning Commission defer discussion to an
upcoming meeting so they could be in attendance and have time to submit a formal position on
behalf of the Lost Lake Villa HOA.
Smith outlined that it while it is not a public hearing it has been customary for comments to be
taken and comments would become part of the record. The applicant should also be allowed to
share his business plan and respond to any questions from Commissioners.
Baker wondered if every request will require the planning Commission to make a determination
if new retail or service is considered a substantially similar use. Smith explained that staff's
evaluation is that this use is a similar use but the language as written has tight definitions. If it's
not a use that has been seen before, the planning Commission will be asked to make a
determination. Baker points out that he believes the sale of fishing equipment would just be
considered retail. Smith noted that the tattoo service is the portion that is in question.
-569-
Dane Vocelka, 236 25" St SE Buffalo. He grew up just north of town. This business is tattooing,
selling custom rods and fishing guide services. His business is small and he wants to keep it that
way. The professional appearance of his studio will be different from the stereotypical tattoo
studio. He noted that the tattoo studio will have 3 artists, at most, and it is limited by his
license. It will not be open 24 hours; it is a high end, professional business.
Ciatti asked if Vocelka has talked to the town home association. Vocelka said no. He is happy to
listen to their comments.
Holt noted the applicant's letter says regular business hours. He clarifies, would that be the
hours that Caribou is open. Vocelka noted he's a family man and wants to be home with his
family at the end of his work day. This is not a late night business model. He would hope to be
closed by 5 or 6 pm.
Vocelka said The Harbor Tattoo Studio is the working name. His clientele come from all walks of
professional life. His clientele tend to come from word of mouth and many travel great
distances to receive his services. No neon signs or sandwich boards will be outside of the
building. Holt noted there would not be a lot of parking required. Vocelka confirms there will be
no more than 3 artists. Even when three artists are present, there would be minimal traffic.
No members of the public in attendance chose to comment.
Erickson asked for clarification if the Commission has the option to approve the request. Smith
says yes that is an option. Baker noted that he believed this is a retail service and the HOA
would have the opportunity to speak at the city Council meeting.
MOTION by Andersen that the proposed commercial service use (tattoo studio) is substantially
similar to the current category of "retail sales and services" in the PED-PUD Pedestrian Planned
Unit Development District, subject to conditions and findings of fact; seconded by Ciatti.
MOTION carried unanimously.
OLD/NEW BUSINESS
Discussion/recommendation regarding annual review of Planning Commission Work Rules
MOTION by Baker to reapprove the work rules for calendar 2021 as written with the change to
location seconded by Holt. MOTION Carried unanimously.
City Council Liaison/Staff Report
Smith reminded the Commission about the March special meeting workshop with the Council
which is an annual event. New Commission members completed Planning Commission training
in January. Building permit volume remains busy. Staff is working on the final plat for Mound
Harbor for recording.
- 570 -
Baker asked about Serenity Hills. Smith says the approvals that were granted have expired and
would have to come back as a new proposal.
Holt gave the Council report. They are working on the Dakota Trail in the safety at the cross
walk. They are working with the Three River Parks District and Bolton and Menk.
Water quality presentation will be coming up at a future City Council meeting in February or
possibly in March.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Holt to adjourn at 10:12 pm; seconded by Baker. MOTION carried unanimously.
Submitted by Jen Holmquist
- 571 -