The URL can be used to link to this page

2022-02-08 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 3. Approve agenda, with any amendments TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022 - 7:00 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *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 221-258 *B. Approve minutes: January 25, 2022 Regular Meeting 259-269 *C. Approval of Resolution 22- approving public improvement escrow 270-271 reduction request for Villages of Island Park 271 *D. Approval of Resolution 22- approving the major subdivision -final plat 272-277 of Sunset View Villa 273 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. (Limit to 3 minutes per speaker.) 6. Orono Police Sergeant Tim Sonnek presenting the January Activity Report 278-290 Planning Case No. 22- 291-405 Public Hearings - major subdivision -preliminary plat of "Northland Mound" involving vacant parcels generally located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon; a conditional use permit application for a planned unit development in a shoreland area for a 104-unit market rate, multi -family apartment project; and a street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street. Also review of site development plans for Northland Mound and a public lands permit application to allow for the construction to occur on the City parking area immediately to the east of the site PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Applicants: Northland Real Estate Group Requested Actions A. Approval of Resolution No. 22- _Resolution to Approve Vacations in Northland Mound 316 B. Approval of Resolution No. 22-_Resolution Approving the Major Subdivision- 318 Preliminary Plat of Northland Mound Planning C. Approval of Resolution No. 22- _Resolution Granting Approval of a Conditional Use 322 Permit for a Planned Unit Development in a Shoreland Area for Northland Real Estate Group D. Approval of Resolution No. 22-_Resolution Approving Public Lands Permit for use of 327 Public Property for Northland Mound Project E. Resolution of Resolution No. 22Resolution Determining Sale of City Parcels to be 329 Consistent with the 2040 Mound Comprehensive Plan 8. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments/Reports from Council members B. Reports: Finance Department — December 2021 (Preliminary) 406-408 C. Minutes: Docks & Commons Commission —Sept. 16, 2021 409-415 D. Correspondence: 9. Adjourn COUNCIL BRIEFING February 8, 2022 Council meetings are held in the City Council Chambers in the Centennial Building on 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. Government I Mound, MN (cityofmound.com) *** All Meetings At City Council Chambers, Centennial Building *** Upcoming Events Schedule: Don't Forget!! February 8 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) February 8 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting February 15 — 7:00 PM — Joint, Special Meeting Workshop of Planning Commission and Council February 22 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) February 22 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting March 8 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) March 8 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting March 22 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) March 22 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting April 12 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) April 12 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting Aprill9 — 6:30 PM — City Council Special Meeting Workshop, Department Reports April 26 — 6:55 PM — HRA Regular Meeting (as may be required) April 26 — 7:00 PM — City Council Regular Meeting Events and Activities: Subscribe to RAVE messaging tool for emergency notifications and updates RAVE Emereencv Notifications I Mound, MN (citvofmound.com) March 25 — 31 — Westonka Public Schools Spring Break City Offices: City offices closed February 21 — Presidents' Day City Official's Absences Please notify the City Manager in advance of an absence. Inquire 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. 2022 City of Mound Claims 02-08-22 YEAR BATCH NAME 2021 2021AP-6 $ 2021 2021AP-7 $ 2021 2021AP-8-HOISGT $ 2021 2021AP-9-KENGRAV $ 2021 4Q21SACPYMT $ 2021 4Q21BLDGSRCHG $ 2021 020822CITY $ 2021 020822HWS $ DOLLAR AMOUNT 107,509.35 5,536.88 4,189.50 7,455.00 3,172.09 1,256,418.69 172,371.02 TOTAL CLAIMS 1 $ 1,564,661.37 221 Payments Batch 2021AP-6 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 $107,509.35 Refer 100 CARQUEST OF NAVARRE (PAID AP Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 6974-433287 12/72021 AP Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 6974-433922 12/162021 AP Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply TRAILER SEAL ENGINE CLEANER BRITE, PARTS CLEANER DEGREASER CROSSOVER SNOWBROOM, 21" & 22" SILICONE WUPER BLADES-TRUCK#415 PARKS Invoice 6974-434534 12282021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Refer 101 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-41930-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 222-42260-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 101-41910-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 609-49750-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Cash Payment E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 032420 3/102020 Total 02/02/22 2:09 PM Page 1 $24.36 $11.02 $56.45 $91.83 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $238.85 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $1,353.46 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $733.53 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $1,008.00 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $1,270.72 Project 22-3 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL $537.64 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL- DEPOT $282.75 BLDG Transaction Date 3/182020 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Refer 102 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Total $5,424.95 4948 BARTLETT LS E2 GENERATOR NATL $40.91 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL 1717 BAYWOOD SHORES DR. LS $42.90 GENERATOR NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12- 20-21- BILL 4728 CARLOW RD LS GENERATOR NATL $27.82 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL 1871 COMMERCE BLVD NEW LIFT STATION $29.83 GENERATOR NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12- 20-21- BILL 2649 EMERALD DR. LS E3 GENERATOR $36.88 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL 2990 HIGHLAND BLVD LS B1 GENERATOR $37.81 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL 5260 LYNWOOD BLVD. LS GENERATOR $24.80 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL OEM CITY OF MOUND 02/0222 2:09 PM Page 2 Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 4791 NORTHERN RD LS D1 GENERATOR $36.88 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 1972 SHOREWOOD LN LS GENERATOR $27.82 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 3172 SINCLAIR RD LS GENERATOR NATL $37.81 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 1758 SUMACH LANE LS GENERATOR NATL $25.79 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 4922 THREE PTS BLVD LS GENERATOR $36.88 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 3303 WATERBURY RD LS GAS SVC 11-20-21 $27.82 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 5077 WINDSOR RD LS GENERATOR NATL $28.82 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 4783 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE LS GENERATOR $43.96 NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 5330 BARTLETT & LAKEWOOD- LS E4 $42.87 GENERATOR NATL GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 3000 ISLAND VIEW DR GENERATOR NATL $29.91 GAS SVC 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- BILL Invoice 123121-2 12/312021 Transaction Date 4/22019 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $579.51 Refer 103 CENTRAL MCGOWAN, INCORPOR _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies HIGH PRESSURE MEDIUM CYLINDER $8.68 RENTALS- QTY 7 Invoice 0000151332 12/312021 Project 21-3 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies HIGH PRESSURE ACETYLENE MEDIUM $8.68 CYLINDER RENTALS- QTY 5 Invoice 0000151332 12/312021 Project 21-3 Transaction Date 2/172021 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $17.36 Refer 104 COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 79.7 TON $3,677.80 DELIVERED 12-30-21 Invoice 914568 12/302021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $3,677.80 Refer 105 EGAN COMPANIES _ AP Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic CHANGE OUT 26 STREET LIGHTS- COUNTY $5,625.60 RD 15/110 TO LED Invoice JC10230792 1/122022 AP Payment E 101-41910-440 Other Contractual Servic CHANGE OUT 5 PARKING LOT LIGHTS- $1,217.72 CENTENNIAL BLDG TO LED Invoice JC10230792 1/122022 AP Payment E 101-41930-440 Other Contractual Servic CHANGE OUT 3 PARKING LOT LIGHTS- CITY $811.82 HALL TO LED Invoice JC10230792 1/122022 223 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 AP Payment E 222-42260-402 Building Maintenance CHANGE OUT 4 PARKING LOT LIGHTS- FIRE DEPT TO LED Invoice JC10230792 1/122022 AP Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic STREET LIGHT REPAIRS- 2021 FALL MAINTENANCE- INSTALL GFCIS ON POLES, 4 GFCIS @ PARKING RAMP, LED SPOT LIGHT- CENTENNIAL BLDG, LED SPOT LIGHT @ VETERANS PARK, PW BLDG INSIDE WORK Invoice JC10230792 1/122022 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Refer AP Payment 02/02/22 2:09 PM Page 3 $999.63 $8,395.49 Total $17,050.26 107 HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY _ E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners HENNEPIN COUNTY SENTENCE TO SERVE CREWS- GENERAL MTCE PROJECTS OCTOBER THRU DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 1000177763 12/312021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $3,028.24 $3,028.24 Refer 108 HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTIONS _ AP Payment E 101-41410-322 Postage POSTAGE VOTER CARDS- 1ST QTR 2021 $260.01 Invoice 2021-1-2 11/182021 AP Payment E 101-41410-322 Postage Invoice 2021-1-2 11/182021 AP Payment E 101-41410-322 Postage Invoice 2021-1-2 11/182021 AP Payment E 101-41410-322 Postage Invoice 2021-1-2 11/182021 AP Payment E 101-41410-322 Postage Invoice 2021-1-2 11/182021 POSTAGE VOTER CARDS- 2ND QTR 2021 $59.97 POSTAGE VOTER CARDS- 3RD QTR 2021 $87.18 POSTAGE VOTER CARDS 4TH QTR 2021 $91.45 COURIER SERVICE- MATERIALS RETURN $34.89 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $533.50 Refer 106 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATIO _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PW RADIO LEASE & ADMINISTRATION FEE- DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 1000176757 12/302021 Project 21-5 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi FIRE DEPT RADIO LEASE & ADMINISTRATION FEE - JDECEMBER 2021 Invoice 1000176700 12/302021 Cash Payment E 101-42115-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi EMERGENCY MGMT RADIO LEASE & ADMINISTRATION FEE - DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 1000176700 12/302021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total Refer 109 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply BALANCE DUE- MISC PARTS- PUBLIC WORKS- HEAT SEAL, SILICONE SEALANT, COMPOUND, CONNECTORS, NYLON QUICK SLIDE, BATTERY CLEANER, WIRES, PIPE REEL TAPE, RIVETS Invoice 9309018777-2 11/182021 Project 21-3 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total Refer 0 LOFFLER COMPANIES, INCORPOR _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-202 Duplicating and copying CANON C2501F FIRE COPIER -COLOR OVERAGE CHARGES- 10-1-21 THRU 12-31- Invoice 3915891 1/32022 $327.92 $2,205.22 $63.73 $2,596.87 $275.37 $275.37 $104.33 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Cash Payment E 222-42260-202 Duplicating and copying CANON C2501F FIRE COPIER - B & W OVERAGE CHARGES- 10-1-21 THRU 12-31- Invoice 3915891 1/32022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-202 Duplicating and copying PRINTER HP4100 P & I COPIER B & WHT COPIES - 10-20-21 THRU 12-20-21 Invoice 3929348 1/172022 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total 02/02/22 2:09 PM Page 4 $23.01 $72.37 $199.71 Refer 110 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MICE. INC _ AP Payment E 609-49750-400 Repairs & Maintenance WASH WINDOWS INSIDE & OUT 12-27-21 $74.81 Invoice 180197951 1232022 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $74.81 Refer 111 MINNESOTA BATTERYLLC _ AP Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair LSU TRAILER BRAKES- FIRE UNIT#30 $15.00 Invoice 26952 12282021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $15.00 Refer 112 MINNESOTA DEPT PUBLIC SAFET _ Cash Payment E 601-49400-438 Licenses and Taxes EMERGENCY & HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL $25.00 INVENTORY FEE 20221- WELL #3 CHATEAU LN Invoice 2716000182021 1/142022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-438 Licenses and Taxes EMERGENCY & HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL $25.00 INVENTORY FEE 20221- WELL #8 EVERGREEN RD Invoice 2716000202021 1/142022 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $50.00 Refer 113 MNSPECT _ Cash Payment E 101-42400-308 Building Inspection Fees DECEMBER 2021 BUILDING INSPECTION $47,980.54 FEES Invoice 8853 12/312021 Cash Payment G 101-20800 Due to Other Governments DECEMBER 2021 - ELECTRICAL STATE -$26.00 SURCHARGE FEE CREDIT Invoice 8853 12/312021 Cash Payment R 101-42000-32220 Electrical Permit Fee DECEMBER 2021- ELECTRICAL INSPECTION -$344.00 PERMIT FEE CREDITS Invoice 8853 12/312021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $47,610.54 Refer 114 NAPA AUTO PARTS -SPRING PAR _ Cash Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply CURVED HOSE- PARKS TRUCK#415- $48.83 RETURNED FOR CREDIT Invoice 0577-149020 11/302021 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply MUD FLAP STREETS #104-ROAD KING $14.90 TRAILER Invoice 0577-150515 12282021 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply BRAKE AWAY KITS ACCESSORY- STREETS $14.64 #104-ROAD KING TRAILER Invoice 0577-150522 12282021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $78.37 Refer 115 ROMPS TIRE SERVICE, INC. _ AP Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 2 TIRES- STREETS TRUCK#412 $1,473.66 Invoice 210571536 12/152021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $1,473.66 Refer 116 RADDE, MATTHEW C. - 225 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 2021 BOOT ALLOWANCE REIMBURSEMENT- M. RADDE Invoice 123121 12/312021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total Refer 117 STREET FLEET AP Payment E 101-42400-322 Postage COURIER SERVICE TO KENNEDY & GRAVEN -PROPERTY CLOSING DOCUMENTS- E. LIEN 02/02/22 2:09 PM Page 5 $225.00 $225.00 $59.24 Invoice 503815 Transaction Date 12/312021 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $59.24 Refer 120 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PW PKS) _ AP Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies KEYS $1.79 Invoice 178632 12/92021 AP Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies 12 OZ LAVENDER GEL BEADS $21.56 Invoice 178747 12/162021 AP Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies DUST PAN, DIE SILL GREASE, 12 OZ MP $25.41 LUBRICANT Invoice 178656 12/102021 AP Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies 6 PK FLOOD LIGHT BULBS $46.78 Invoice 178821 12222021 AP Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies FEED SCOOP, 26 W FROST GARAGE LIGHT, $42.26 2 PK LINEAR LED BULBS Invoice 178817 12222021 AP Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply UTILITY EXPANSION POLE 3-6', 1 [R $58.45 SAWHORSE BRACKETS, 13 GAL 49L WHITE TOUCH CAN Invoice 178790 12202021 AP Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply 23" WHITE FLUORESCENT LIGHT FIXTURE, $47.04 OUTLET COVER -GREY, BLANK COVER Invoice 178756 12/172021 AP Payment E 101-45200-212 Motor Fuels 2 QTY 110 OZ 50:1 FUEL/OIL $41.38 Invoice 178729 12/152021 AP Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 120 QTY 20 LB BAGS FAST MELT $790.80 Invoice 178666 12/102021 AP Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply 6 PC & 14 pc RECIPROCATING BLADE SET, $94.00 9" AX BLADE, 2X3 ANGLE, 3X5 ANGLE, 1X5 TIE PLATE Invoice 178746 12/162021 AP Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply 4 QTY 12 OZ FLAT GRAY PRIMER $19.76 Invoice 178880 12282021 AP Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies 100 PK BLADE DISPENSER, RETRACTABLE $30.58 UTILITY KNIFE Invoice 178652 12/102021 AP Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply NUTS, BOLTS SCREWS $10.62 Invoice 178791 12202021 Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Refer 119 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762001160 1/32022 $1,230.43 ELECTRIC SVC 12-03-21 THRU 1-02-22 CITY $4,957.21 OWNED STREET LIGHTS Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total Total $4,957.21 Refer 118 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-45200-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 $215.86 226 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Cash Payment E 101-45200-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 101-41930-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 101-41910-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 285-46388-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 Cash Payment E 101-42115-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 762183908 1/42022 ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21- DEPOT BLDG ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 A4:10l 7PL9R0ailf6bADbia[oiYbAbbil ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 I0111*Nl 7PL9R0ailf6bADbiatoiYbAbbil ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 ELECTRIC SVC - 11-20-21 TO 12-20-21 I0111*Nl 7PL9R0ailf6bADbiatoiYbAIDAI Transaction Date 1/312022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 285 HRA/HARBOR DISTRICT 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 20200 Accounts Payable $85,273.08 $6,443.93 $2,817.08 $4,449.02 $6, 541.78 $1,984.46 $107,509.35 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated bythe Computer $107,509.35 Total $107,509.35 02/02/22 2:09 PM Page 6 $108.63 $3,815.32 $1,385.58 $4,285.26 $1,372.01 $1,743.28 $1,743.28 $723.95 $2,817.08 $49.44 Total $18,259.69 Payments Batch 2021AP-7 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 $5,536.88 02/02/22 3:56 PM Page 1 Refer 316 DPC INDUSTRIES, INC. _ Cash Payment E 601-49400-227 Chemicals 150# CHLORINE CYLINDER RENTAL- QTY 12 $120.00 Invoice 82000117-21 12/312021 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $120.00 Refer 249 LOFFLER COMPANIES, INCORPOR _ AP Payment E 602-49450-202 Duplicating and copying KONICA MINOLTA B200 PW COPIER $2.77 OVERAGE CHG 12-10-21 THRU 1-09-22 Invoice 3921831 1172022 Project 21-5 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $2.77 Refer 226 MOUND, CITY OF _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-382 Water Utilities WATER SERVICE 11-30-21 THRU 12-29-21 $67.59 HWS Invoice 020822 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $67.59 Refer 254 OPUS 21 MGMT SOLUTIONS, LLC _ Cash Payment E 601-49400-307 Admin/Finance/Compute DECEMBER 2021 -CIS DATA HOSTING, $1,836.48 PRODUCTION, BILLING, CALL CTR SUPPORT Invoice 211250 1/132022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-307 Admin/Finance/Compute DECEMBER 2021 -CIS DATA HOSTING, $1,836.48 PRODUCTION, BILLING, CALL CTR SUPPORT Invoice 211250 1/132022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-322 Postage DECEMBER 2021- UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE $399.73 Invoice 211250 1/132022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-322 Postage DECEMBER 2021- UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE $399.73 Invoice 211250 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $4,472.42 Refer 256 VERIZON WIRELESS _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $108.37 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $108.36 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $76.36 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $28.33 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $96.03 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 101-41310-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $56.01 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 Cash Payment E 101-42115-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $16.01 22 Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 AP Payment G 101-22816 Personal Cell Phone CELL PHONE CHARGES 12-14-21 THRU 1-13- $34.53 22- S. KIVISTO TO REIMBURSE MESSAGING OVERAGES Invoice 9897265378 1/132022 228 CITY OF MOUND 02/02/22 3:56 PM Page 2 Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $524.00 Refer 257 VERIZON WIRELESS _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi STREETS LEAD WORKER TABLET- $35.01 INTERNET SVC- 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR- RYAN $35.01 PRICH TABLET- INTERNET SVC- 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Project 21-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PUBLIC WORKS DEPT -TABLET- HOT SPOT $35.01 SVC 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Project 21-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi UTILITY LEAD WORKER TABLET- INTERNET $17.50 SVC- SVC 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi UTILITY LEAD WORKER TABLET- INTERNET $17.51 SVC- SVC 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PARKS LEAD WORKER TABLET- INTERNET $35.01 SVC 12-11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi STREETS DEPT TABLET INTERNET SVC 12- $35.01 11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PUB WKS OPEN LINE INTERNET SVC 12-11- $35.01 21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Project 21-5 Cash Payment E 101-42400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi FIELD OFFICER INTERNET SVC 12-11-21 $17.51 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-42115-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi FIELD OFFICER INTERNET SVC 12-11-21 $17.50 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi UTILITY DEPT TABLET- INTERNET SVC 12- $17.51 11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi UTILITY DEPT TABLET- INTERNET SVC 12- $17.50 11-21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PARKS DEPT TABLET- INTERNET SVC 12-11- $35.01 21 THRU 1-10-22 Invoice 9896987830 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $350.10 Fund Summary 20200 Accounts Payable 101 GENERAL FUND $514.33 601 WATER FUND $2,499.58 602 SEWER FUND $2,455.38 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $67.59 $5,536.88 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $5,536.88 Total $5,536.88 229 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Payments Batch 2021AP-8-HOISGT $8,008.84 Refer 369 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP, 1 _ Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs MISC GENERAL PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment G 101-23451 VILLAGES OF ISLAND PAR VILLAGES OF ISLAND PARK BLDG PERMITS - PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment G 101-23468 4843 MANCHESTER ISLAN 4843 MANCHESTER ISLAND PARK CUP - PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment G 101-23401 PC16-24 6639 BARTLETT D 6639 BARTLETT BLVD CONCEPT- SERENITY PROJECT- PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment G 101-23462 PC-21-15 4379 WILSHIRE P 4379 WILSHIRE- LAKEWINDS PARKING LOT - PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 4717 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE PUBLIC LANDS - PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs THREE POINTS CPA & REZONING- MISC PLANNING UPDATES DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Cash Payment G 101-23470 Northland Real Estate-104 u NORTHLAND MOUND PLAT PUD- PLANNING SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 020-002-23 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/32022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total Refer 346 PRISTINE LIGHTING _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic 2021 INSTALLATION OF LED HOLIDAY LIGHTING ON CITY BLVD TREES & ANNUAL TREE LIGHTING TREE- TAKE DOWN, SEASONAL MTCE & STORAGE Invoice 000295 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 20200 Accounts Payable $8,008.84 $8,008.84 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $8,008.84 Total $8,008.84 Total 02/03/22 1:05 PM Page 1 $150.00 $75.00 $75.00 $75.00 $37.50 $37.50 $187.50 $3,172.50 $3,810.00 $4,198.84 $4,198.84 10081 CITY OF MOUND 02/03/22 1:02 PM Page 1 Payments Current Period: Closing 2021 Payments Batch 2021AP-9KENGRAV $4,189.50 Refer 373 KENNEDY AND GRAVEN _ Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs NORTHLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP- $138.75 PURCHASE OF CITY PROPERTY - ADMINISTRATIVE LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment G 101-234404848/4852 LANARK ABATE 4848/4852 LANARK RD ENFORCEMENT $970.00 MATTER -LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment G 101-23454 2396 COMMERCE BLVD HA 2396 COMMERCE BLVD HAZARDOUS BLDG $777.00 MATTER -LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment G 101-23453 5872 GLENWOOD ABATE 5872 GLENWOOD RD HAZARDOUS BLDG $92.50 ABATEMENT -LEGAL SVCS DEEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment E 101-41600-316 Legal P & I MISC PLANNING LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER $686.00 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment G 101-23455 3053 BRIGHTON BLVD ABA 3053 BRIGHTON BLVD HAZARDOUS BLDG $955.00 MATTER LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Cash Payment E 281-45210-300 Professional Srvs DOCK PROGRAM MULTIPLE SLIP $80.00 APPLICATION TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE RE: INDEMNITY, LIABILITY -ADMINISTRATIVE LEGAL SVCS- DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 AP Payment G 101-23464 2631 COMMERCE SUNSET 2631 COMMERCE BLVD- SUNSET VIEW- $490.25 NEVE -PLANNING LEGAL SVCS DECEMBER 2021 Invoice 165928 1262022 Transaction Date 2/32022 Due 12/312021 Accounts Payable 20200 Total $4,189.50 Fund Summary 20200 Accounts Payable 101 GENERAL FUND $4,109.50 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND $80.00 $4,189.50 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated bythe Computer $4,189.50 Total $4,189.50 231 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: January 2022 Payments Batch 4Q21SACPYMT $7,455.00 Refer 4 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SAC CH _ Cash Payment G 602-21825 SAC Deposits SAC CHARGES 4TH QTR 2021- 3 NET SAC CHARGES- 4459 WILSHIRE BLVD, 4978 AFTON RD & 2160 APPLE LN Invoice 012522 1252022 Transaction Date 1/312022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Fund Summary 602 SEWER FUND 10100 U.S. Bank 10100 $7,455.00 $7,455.00 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $7,455.00 Total $7,455.00 01 /31 /22 2:04 PM Page 1 $7,455.00 $7.455.00 OEM Payment Batch 4Q21 BLDGSRCHG CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: January 2022 $3,172.09 Refer 12 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY BLD Ck# 081155E 1282022 Cash Payment G 101-20800 Due to Other Governments 4TH QUARTER BUILDING SURCHARGE 2021 Invoice 12312021 12/312020 Transaction Date 1282022 Fund Summary i1111➢11e1A01:1 wall 01Q 02/03/22 1:20 PM Page 1 $3,172.09 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $3,172.09 10100 U.S. Bank 10100 $3,172.09 $3,172.09 Pre -Written Checks $3,172.09 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $0.00 Total $3,172.09 100cj Payments Batch 020822CITY CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 $1,256,418.69 Refer 300 A-1 RENTAL OF LAKE MINNETONK _ Cash Payment E 101-41910-400 Repairs & Maintenance ELECTRIC SEWER SNAKE-100' & 50' SMALL LINE RENTAL- CENTENNIAL BLDG SVC Invoice 163606-1 1262022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 301 ADVANCED FIRST AID INC Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 0122-898 1/32022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 302 AMERICAN PRESSURE, INCORPO Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 124936 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 303 ASPEN EQUIPMENT LITHIUM BATTERY FOR ORIGINAL POWERHEART AED DEFIBULATOR DEVICE - FIRE DEPT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total 3 QTY 5 GALLON GORILLA WASH- PUBLIC WORKS Project 22-5 I.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 2 QTY RAM ASSEMBLY- STREETS TRUCK #218 Invoice 10234933 1/132022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs PINS, FLAT WASHERS, COTTER PINS - STREETS TRUCK #313 Invoice 10234662 1/52022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 3 QTY- RAM ASSEMBLY- STREETS TRUCK #420 Invoice 10235121 1/192022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 2 QTY SPINNER PLATES-- STREETS TRUCK #412 Invoice 10234826 1/112022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply 12 QUARTS HYDRAULIC FLUID- PUB WKS SHOP Invoice 10234899 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Tota 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 1 $127.60 $127.60 $610.00 $610.00 $294.18 $294.18 $447.00 $167.41 $670.50 $277.10 $250.80 $1,812.81 Refer 304 ASSURED SECURITY, INC. _ Cash Payment E 285-46388-400 Repairs & Maintenance REPAIR BUS DEPOT PARKING DECK INNER $64.00 DOOR -BROKEN CAM DISC N OIL 1300 Invoice 217502 1252022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maintenance REPAIR BACK BAY DOOR LOCK- $64.00 REPROGRAM- @ PUBLIC WORKS SHOP Invoice 217502 1252022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 101-41930-400 Repairs & Maintenance REPLACE STRIPPED DOGGING SHAFT ON $56.20 VD99 PANIC AT PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG Invoice 217502 1252022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-402 Building Maintenance REPLACE STRIPPED DOGGING SHAFT ON $56.20 VD99 PANIC AT PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG Invoice 217502 1252022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maintenance REPAIR OFFICE ENTRANCE DOOR& LOCK- $98.00 REMOVE OIL 1300 FROM DOOR THAW OUT - REPLACE LUBE W/ WEATHER RESISTANT TYPE, Invoice 217502 1252022 Project 22-5 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $338.40 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Refer 367 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-440 Other Contractual Servic C5 PANELVIEW REPLACEMENT @ C5 LIFT STATION- 1-18-22 Invoice 37356 1282022 Transaction Date 2/32022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 305 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS, INC. _ Cash Payment E 101-41920-440 Other Contractual Servic IMPORT RECEIPTS ACCOUNTING COMPUTER SOFTWARE SUPPORT 2022 Invoice 00162458 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-41920-440 Other Contractual Servic 2022 ANNUAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE SUPPORT- PAYROLL Invoice 00162458 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-41920-440 Other Contractual Servic 2022 ANNUAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE SUPPORT- FUND ACCOUNTING Invoice 00162458 1172022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 307 BENIEK PROPERTY SVCS INC. Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic AREA #1 CBD JANUARY 2022 PLOWING Invoice 157683 122022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic AREA #2 TRUE VALUE -RAMP -SIDEWALKS JANUARY 2022 PLOWING & SHOVELING Invoice 157683 122022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic AREA #3 COMMERCE BLVD JANUARY 2022 PLOWING Invoice 157683 122022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Tota Refer 306 BOYER TRUCKS-MPLS Cash Payment E 601-49400-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs IGNITION COIL ASSEMBLY- WATER DEPT TRUCK#316 Invoice 002P7889 1272022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 308 CADY BUILDING MAINTENANCE _ Cash Payment E 101-41930-460 Janitorial Services Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-460 Janitorial Services Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-460 Janitorial Services Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 101-41910-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies IRR7.CSZ9P.YZ:ii«li1YAY3: FEBRUARY 2022 CLEANING SVCS- CITY HALL /POLICE FEBRUARY 2022 CLEANING SVCS- FIRE DEPT FEBRUARY 2022 CLEANING SVCS- PUBLIC WORKS BLDG Project 22-5 FEBRUARY 2022 CLEANING SVCS- CENTENNIAL BLDG CLEANING SUPPLIES- MULTI -FOLD TOWELS, LARGE & MEDIUM TRASH CAN LINERS CLEANING SUPPLIES- MULTI -FOLD TOWELS, LARGE & MEDIUM TRASH CAN LINERS Project 22-5 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 2 $6,373.00 $6,373.00 $195.00 $840.00 $840.00 $1,875.00 $1,615.00 $2,520.00 $10,595.00 $14,730.00 $88.62 $88.62 $550.00 $299.00 $425.00 $425.00 $37.23 $37.23 P�R CITY OF MOUND 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 3 Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 101-41930-210 Operating Supplies CLEANING SUPPLIES- MULTI -FOLD $48.40 TOWELS, LARGE & MEDIUM TRASH CAN LINERS Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies CLEANING SUPPLIES- MULTI -FOLD $26.06 TOWELS, LARGE & MEDIUM TRASH CAN LINERS Invoice 4982663 2/12022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $1,847.92 Refer 309 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-202 Duplicating and copying JANUARY 2022 - COPIER RENTAL- HARBOR $34.40 WINE & SPIRITS Invoice 27963679 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $34.40 Refer 310 CARGIL SALT DIVISION _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials DEICER SALT ICE CONTROL BULK LOAD- $8,722.57 151,040 LBS Invoice 2906791457 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials DEICER SALT ICE CONTROL BULK LOAD- $3,066.53 53,100 LBS Invoice 2906795805 1/102022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials DEICER SALT ICE CONTROL BULK LOAD- $5,699.93 98,700 LBS Invoice 2906854774 1272022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $17,489.03 Refer 311 CENTERPOINT ENERGY (MINNEG _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 5808 GRANDVIEW BLVD LS GENERATOR $40.56 NATL GAS SVC 12-21-21 THRU 1-20-22 Invoice 020822 1252022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $40.56 Refer 312 CINTAS Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4107017234 1172022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4107694219 1/142022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4107694231 1/142022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4109107735 1282022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4109107592 1282022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 4108386140 1212022 Transaction Date 2/22022 MATS, TOWELS, CENTERPULL TOWEL REFILL- PUB WKS SHOP- 1/0722 Project 21-5 MATS, TOWELS, CENTERPULL TOWEL REFILL- PUB WKS SHOP-1/14/22 Project 21-5 MATS, TOWELS, DUST MOP, WET MOP- HWS- 1/14/22 MATS, TOWELS, DUST MOP, WET MOP- HWS- 1/28/22 MATS, TOWELS, CENTERPULL TOWEL REFILL- PUB WKS SHOP-128/22 Project 21-5 MATS, TOWELS, CENTERPULL TOWEL REFILL- PUB WKS SHOP-121/22 Project 21-5 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 313 CLAREY S SAFETY EQUIPMENT, 1 _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair REPLACE LIVE SWIVEL ON FILL STATION- 5K PSI PRESSURE- FIRE DEPT Invoice 197985 1/112022 236 $58.16 $58.16 $56.84 $56.84 $58.16 $58.16 $346.32 $369.97 Transaction Date 2222022 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 314 COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 25.14 TON DELIVERED 1-5-22 Invoice 917386 1/52022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 147.10 TON DELIVERED 1-7-22 Invoice 920296 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 48.90 TON DELIVERED 1-10-22 Invoice 921482 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 315 CORE & MAIN LP Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q169316 1/52022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q172098 1/52022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q191992 1/102022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q176943 1/62022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q252389 1242022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 364 EGAN COMPANIES 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 4 Total $369.97 $1,860.36 $10,885.40 $3,618.60 Total WATER METER COUPLING, HYDRANT EXTENDERS 32 QTY IPERL WATER METER 24 QTY IPERL WATER METER WATER METER PARTS- 22 GAUGE METER WIRE WATER METER PARTS- 12 QTY TRACE WIRE LIDS WTfW TERMINAL- FOR CURB BOX U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic STREET LIGHT REPAIRS- 2022 WINTER MAINTENANCE- SWITCH OUT 10OW LAMPS TO 35W LED ON GREENWAY PATH, WIRED NEW GARAGE DOOR OPENERS & SENSORS FOR 4 DOORS Invoice 10231328 2/12022 Transaction Date 2/32022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 361 EMERGENCY TECHNICAL DECON _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies CLEAN & REPAIR FIREMEN TURNOUT GEAR- PANTS, JACKETS- SEAM TAPE 8 STITCH REPAIR HOLES OR TEARS Invoice 147 1282022 Transaction Date 2/32022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 317 EROSION PRODUCTS LLC Cash Payment E 101-45200-232 Landscape Material Invoice 10780/9-568 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/22022 3' X 100' GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, 6" STEEL STAPLES- SURFSIDE PARK U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 318 FIRE CHIEF, MN STATE ASSOCIAT _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2022 6- MEMBERSHIP DUES MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSN- G. PEDERSON, G. PALM, M. MCCARVILLE, M. JAKUBIK, B. FOSTER, A. DRILLING Invoice 3463 1/162022 237 $16,364.36 $4,695.40 $5,032.85 $3,776.14 $224.93 $402.97 $14,132.29 $0.00 $0.00 $604.50 Total $604.50 $65.00 Total $65.00 $400.00 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 319 FIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES, 1 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 10925 1/112022 Transaction Date 2222022 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 5 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $400.00 2 -LEATHERHEAD 4' AMERICAN HOOK W/D HANDLES, 1 LEATHERHEAD 4' DRYWALL HOOK W/D GRIP U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 320 FIVE TECHNOLOGY _ Cash Payment E 101-41920-440 Other Contractual Servic MONTHLY MANAGED SVC & NETWORK MTCE-FEBRUARY 2022 Invoice 10222-14 2/12022 Transaction Date 2222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 322 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA _ Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 609-49750-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 101-41930-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi PHONE SVC-12-30-21 TO 1-29-22 Invoice 020822 12/302021 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Total Refer 321 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi NETWORK ETHERNET SVC 1-22-22 THRU 2- 21-22 Invoice 022822-2 1222022 Cash Payment E 101-41920-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi NETWORK ETHERNET SVC 1-22-22 THRU 2- 21-22 Invoice 022822-2 1222022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 369 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One -Call Invoice 2000610 1/312022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One -Call Invoice 2000610 1/312022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One -Call Invoice 2010611 1/312022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One -Call Invoice 2010611 1/312022 $291.14 $291.14 $1,290.00 $1,290.00 $0.00 $50.14 $227.21 $193.82 $188.12 $188.12 $475.10 $158.37 $79.18 $79.18 $1,639.24 $150.00 $175.00 $325.00 2022 ANNUAL FACILITY OPERATOR FEE $25.00 2022 ANNUAL FACILITY OPERATOR FEE $25.00 JANUARY 2022 LOCATES $16.88 JANUARY 2022 LOCATES $16.87 104-01 Transaction Date 2/22022 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 319 GRAINGER _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair 3 MULTI -SOCKET OUTLET- HARDWIRE FIRE DEPT Invoice 9181616013 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/2/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 320 HARRISON BAY SENIOR LIVING LL _ 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 6 Total $83.75 D- $9.64 Total $9.64 Cash Payment G 454-20200 Accounts Payable PAY AS YOU GO TAX INCREMENT $54,948.84 FINANCING AVAILABLE AS OF 2-1-22 Invoice 020822 1/142022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $54,948.84 Refer 321 HECKSEL MACHINE SHOP, INC. Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs REPAIR SNOWBLOWER- MATERIAL & SHOP $1,360.00 SERVICE Invoice 109075 1252022 Transaction Date 2222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $1,360.00 Refer 322 HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTIONS _ Cash Payment E 101-41410-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs 5 OMNI BALLOT VOTING MACHINES- 2022 $1,125.00 MAINTENANCE Invoice 22MAINT 1/152021 Cash Payment E 101-41410-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs DS200 - 6 VOTING MACHINES 2022 $1,123.20 MAINTENANCE Invoice 22MAINT 1/152021 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $2,248.20 Refer 323 HOME DEPOT/GECF (P/W _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies MILWAUKEE 18-VOLT LITHIUM -ION- $449.00 BRUSHLESS CORDLESS HANDHELD BLOWER- FIRE DEPT Invoice W881290701 1202022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $449.00 Refer 324 HOWLING WOLF EMBROIDERY, IN _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 QTY - EMBROIDER CITY OF MOUND $23.75 LOGO ON LEFT CHEST OF1/4 ZIP GREEN SWEATSHIRTS- PUBLIC WORKS STAFF Invoice 4831 1242022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 QTY - EMBROIDER CITY OF MOUND $23.75 LOGO ON LEFT CHEST OF1/4 ZIP GREEN SWEATSHIRTS- PUBLIC WORKS STAFF Invoice 4831 1242022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 QTY - EMBROIDER CITY OF MOUND $23.75 LOGO ON LEFT CHEST OF1/4 ZIP GREEN SWEATSHIRTS- PUBLIC WORKS STAFF Invoice 4831 1242022 Cash Payment E 101-45200-218 Clothing and Uniforms 10 QTY - EMBROIDER CITY OF MOUND $23.75 LOGO ON LEFT CHEST OF1/4 ZIP GREEN SWEATSHIRTS- PUBLIC WORKS STAFF Invoice 4831 1242022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $95.00 Refer 3251STATE TRUCK CENTER _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs PARTS- OIL SEAL RETAINER, AXLE SHAFTS, $552.50 MOTOR -BLOWER, TENSIONER BELT, PULLEY IDLER, BELT 8-RIB- STREETS TRUCK#312 Invoice C241360383 1/122022 239 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs PARTS- OIL SEAL RETAINER, AXLE SHAFT - STREETS TRUCK #312 Invoice C241362123 1282022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 326 JUBILEE FOODS Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 013122 1172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 013122 1222022 Transaction Date 2/22022 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 7 $193.00 $745.50 SWIFFER DUSTER KIT, MR CLEAN, GLASS $30.04 CLEANER, CLOROX TOILET BOWL CLEANER, COMET- WHITE VINEGAR- HWS MORTON ACTION MELT- HWS $8.75 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 327 KIRVIDA FIRE- APPARATUS SVC _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair DIAGNOSE & REPLACE DRIVERS SIDE AIR HORN-2007 FREIGHTLINER/MIDWEST FIRE TANKER #35 Invoice 10189 1/52022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair CHECK AERIAL NOZZLE FOR NOT SWEEPING RIGHT- ADJUST- 2016 E-ONE TYPHOON 75' LADDER TRUCK#44 Invoice 10188 1/52022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair DIAGNOSE & REPLACE LEFT FRONT CABINET DOOR SWITCH- 2010 FREIGHTLINER/MIDWEST TANKER FIRE ENGINE #40 Invoice 10190 1/52022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 328 LAKE MINNETONKA COMM. COMM _ Cash Payment E 101-49840-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 020822 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/22022 $38.79 $173.21 $139.98 $251.98 Total $565.17 4TH QTR 2021 PEG ACCESS FEE -$1.96 PER $6,654.20 SUBSCRIBER U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 329 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATI _ Cash Payment E 101-41110-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2022 MUNICIPAL MEMBERSHIP DUES Invoice 2022Q1 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 330 LAND EQUIPMENT, INCORPORAT Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 887377 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 887378 1172022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 889896 1212022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 88825 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 331 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 9309156011 1/62022 Total $6,654.20 $5,003.00 Total $5,003.00 BOLTS, LOCKNUTS $83.20 PLOW BOLTS, CUTTING EDGE, RUBBER $160.04 EDGE BOLTS, CUTTING EDGE, SKID SHOE $367.26 NUTS, SCREWS, BUSHING CHUTES, $159.81 ROLLER GUIDES U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $770.31 MISC PARTS- NYLON STAINLESS LOCKNUTS, HEX CAP SCREWS, REEL PIPE TAPE, SOCKET HEADS- PUB WKS SHOP Project 22-5 240 $102.36 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply BACK UP ALARM- PUBLIC WORKS SHOP Invoice 9309204375 1212022 Project 22-5 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 347 LIEN, ERIC _ Cash Payment G 101-229001555 DOVE LANE 2020 ESCROW BALANCE REFUND- 1555 DOVE LN- 2020 Invoice 020822 1242022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 332 LOFFLER COMPANIES, INCORPOR _ Cash Payment E 101-42400-202 Duplicating and copying PRINTER HP4100 P & I COPIER B & WHT COPIES- 12-20-21 THRU 1-19-22 Invoice 3929348 1/172022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 333 MACQUEEN EMERGENCY Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies Invoice P01501 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/22022 MSA CALIBRATION GAS CYLINDER- FIRE DEPT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 334 MAYER LUMBER COMPANY, INCO _ Cash Payment E 281-45210-220 Repair/Maint Supply CEDAR- 5/4 X 6 X 10 -QTY 18; ROUGH CEDAR 1 X 4 X 8- QTY 12; TREATED WOOD 5 QTY 2 X 4 X 8; STAR 1000 HR DECK 8 X 2- QTY 2- DOCK PROGRAM REPAIRS Invoice 211431 1282022 Cash Payment E 281-45210-220 Repair/Maint Supply CEDAR- 5/4 X 6 X 10 -QTY 35; ROUGH CEDAR 1 X 4 X 8- QTY 24; TREATED WOOD 10 QTY 2 X 4 X 8; - DOCK PROGRAM REPAIRS Invoice 211114 1/182022 Cash Payment E 281-45210-220 Repair/Maint Supply RETURN CREDIT CEDAR- LUMBER - DOCK PROGRAM REPAIRS Invoice 123121 12/312021 Cash Payment E 281-45210-220 Repair/Maint Supply CEDAR- 5/4 X 6 X 10 -QTY 42; ROUGH CEDAR 1 X 4 X 8- QTY 26 LUMBER -DOCK PROGRAM REPAIRS Invoice 211483 1/312022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 335 MEDIACOM _ Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone, Cells, & Radi ORONO PD INTERNET SVC 1-16-22 THRU 2- 15-22 Invoice 020822 1/62022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 336 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTE _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-388 Waste Disposal-MCIS WASTEWATER SVCS FEBRUARY 2022 Invoice 0001134819 1/62022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 368 MIDWEST SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #119; PARTS: BATTERY Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 8 $57.65 $160.01 $711.25 $711.25 $36.19 $36.19 $368.99 $368.99 $743.58 $1,297.20 -$226.20 $1,383.20 $3,197.78 $96.90 $96.90 $71,941.74 $71,941.74 $333.49 MN CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 i Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #313, #216 TOOLCAT, ORDERED ENGINE OIL, UPDATED ELECTRONIC MTCE RECORDS Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #313, #216 TOOLCAT-V-PLOW CUTTING EDGE REPLACEMENT, ASSIST W/#218 PLOW WING ISSUE, ORDERED HARDWARE FOR PLOWS Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #317, #315, #221, #504, #420, #312; PARTS: DUAL SPREAD CONTROLLER Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #312, TRAILER #104 PERFORMED DOT INSPECTION Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #218, #316, #420, INSPECT NO START CODES C5 GENERATOR Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #318, #415, #416, #412 Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MECHANIC SVCS- JAN 2022- TRUCK #316, #318, #312 Invoice 8618 1/312022 Project 22-5 Transaction Date 2/32022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 9 $828.00 $776.25 $1,276.29 $828.00 $828.00 $776.25 $776.25 $6,422.53 Refer 337 MINNESOTA BATTERYLLC _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair 2 QTY 48-680 CCA BATTERIES- FIRE UNIT $160.00 #43 CHIEF'S VEHICLE- 2013 CHEVY TAHOE Invoice 27118 1202022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $160.00 Refer 338 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-438 Licenses and Taxes WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OPERATOR $23.00 CERTIFICATION- RENEWAL- CLASS C LICENSE- B. KRESS Invoice 020822 1/312022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OPERATOR $32.00 CERTIFICATION- EXAM FEE- CLASS C LICENSE- S. PEDERSON Invoice 020822 1/312022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $55.00 Refer 365 MINNESOTA RECREATION AND P _ Cash Payment E 101-45200-434 Conference & Training CERTIFIED PLAYGROUND SAFETY $690.00 INSPECTOR COURSE & EXAM FEE- D. KOSKELA- APRIL 27-29, 2022 Invoice 020822 2/32022 Transaction Date 2/32022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $690.00 Refer 339 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSO _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION TO MINNESOTA RURAL $250.00 WATER TECH CONFERENCE- ST. CLOUD - MARCH 1ST THRU 3RD- R. PRICH Invoice 020822 2/12022 Project 22-5 242 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION TO MINNESOTA RURAL WATER TECH CONFERENCE- ST. CLOUD - MARCH 1ST THRU 3RD- L. PITSENBERGER Invoice 020822 2/12022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION TO MINNESOTA RURAL WATER TECH CONFERENCE- ST. CLOUD - MARCH 1ST THRU 3RD- S. PEDERSON Invoice 020822 2/12022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION TO MINNESOTA RURAL WATER TECH CONFERENCE- ST. CLOUD - MARCH 1ST THRU 3RD- S. KIVISTO Invoice 020822 2/12022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 340 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LA Cash Payment E 601-49400-470 Water Samples Invoice 1126281 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/22022 Refer 366 NAPA AUTO PARTS - SPRING PAR Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-150853 1/42022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-151077 1/102022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-151578 1202022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-151606 1202022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-151603 1202022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 0577-151897 1272022 Transaction Date 4/72021 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 10 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 MONTHLY CHLORINE REPORT & COLIFORM $130.00 WATER TESTS -10 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $130.00 DELVAC 5W40 55 GALLONS- PUBLIC $1,209.45 WORKS TRUCKS RETURN CREDIT DELVAC 5W40 15-$329.85 GALLONS- PUBLIC WORKS TRUCKS SOLENOID & CAMSHAFT SENSOR- WATER $66.26 DEPT TRUCK #316 NAPA GOLD OIL FILTERS-3 QTY- WATER $13.29 DEPT TRUCK #316 SOLENOID - WATER DEPT TRUCK#316 $24.51 PLUG COIL- WATER DEPT TRUCK#316 $32.83 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $1,016.49 Refer 341 NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC. _ Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms MOISTURE WICKING SAFETY GREEN SWEATSHIRTS-QTY 22- HIGH PERFORMANCE LONG SLEEVE SHIRTS SAFETY GREEN- 28 QTY, MESH T-SHIRTS 24 QTY - W/ SCREEN PRINTED MOUND LOGO- PUB WKS & PARKS STAFF Invoice 62335 1212022 Project 22-5 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $1,649.78 $1,649.78 Refer 342 NORTHERN TOOL AND EQUIPMEN _ Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair POWER WASHER PLUG- FIRE DEPT $9.49 Invoice 4061197717 1/192022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair POWER WASHER & COUPLING- FIRE DEPT $106.98 Invoice 4061197697 1/192022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply SPRAY NOZZLE, ADAPTER, IMPACT TOOL, $642.93 STEEL HITCH CARGO CARRIER, MINI AIR MOVER W/OUTLET Invoice 198287 1272022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 1010024�0100 Total $759.40 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Refer 343 OFFICE DEPOT Cash Payment E 101-41930-200 Office Supplies Invoice 220321376001 1/62022 P025310 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies Invoice 212921828001 1172022 P025310 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 212921743001 1/62022 P025310 Transaction Date 2/32022 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 11 COPY PAPER 3 CASES, HIGHLIGHTERS, $191.54 DYMO ADDRESS LABELS, SCOTCH TAPE - CITY HALL NAME PLATE- K. BLIEVERNICHT- PARKS & $13.99 OPEN SPACE COMMISSIONER BASIC GRAY PLANNER BOOKLET- N. $12.99 IVERSON U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 344 ORONO, CITY OF _ Cash Payment E 101-42110-440 Other Contractual Servic 1ST HALF 2022 CONTRACTED POLICE SERVICE Invoice 20141896 1/82022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 345 PLUNKETT S, INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 101-41910-440 Other Contractual Servic PEST CONTROL SVC- QUARTERLY -CENT BLDG Invoice W19014122 1172022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 370 POSTMASTER Cash Payment E 101-41110-322 Postage Invoice 020822 2/32022 Transaction Date 2/32022 Refer 348 REPUBLIC SERVICES POSTAGE CITY CONTACT NEWSLETTER - FEB, MARCH, APRIL 2022 EDITION U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $218.52 $966,607.00 $966,607.00 $112.49 $112.49 $1,165.85 $1,165.85 Cash Payment E 602-49450-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispose FEBRUARY 2021 GARBAGE SVC- PUB WRKS $283.77 Invoice 0894-005595773 1252022 Project 22-5 Cash Payment E 670-49500-440 Other Contractual Servic JANUARY 2022 CITYWIDE RECYCLING SVC $18,650.70 Invoice 0894-005594204 1252022 Transaction Date 2222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $18,934.47 Refer 349 RITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS & DI Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 21-85382 1/122022 Transaction Date 222022 LASER W2S & ENVELOPES, W3, 1099s & $230.27 1096 FORMS U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 350 SAFE ASSURE CONSULTANTS, IN _ Cash Payment E 101-41310-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 101-41500-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 101-45200-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 $230.27 $115.00 $435.00 $350.00 $530.00 $640.00 $2,075.00 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 602-49450-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-434 Conference & Training SAFETY TRAINING & CONSULTING 2022 Invoice 3102 1212022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 351 SOUTHWEST TRAILS ASSOCIATIO _ Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow SW TRAILS ASSOC 2022 SNOWMOBILE MTCE-DNR PMT #1 2022- RECVD 12-28-21 FOR 2022 Invoice 2648 12282021 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 352 SPEEDPRO IMAGING Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies Invoice 8107 1/62022 Transaction Date 222022 Refer 353 SUN NEWSPAPERS-HWS ACCT. Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising Invoice 875378 1/302022 Transaction Date 2/22022 WHITE REFLECTIVE VINYL NAMES- FOLEY, BERENT,FOSTER,BLACKSTONE,FARLEY, LINDER, PALM- FIREMEN JACKETS U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total BEST OF THE WEST LAKE AREA NOMINATION AD 1-29-22 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 354 SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPER -CITY _ Cash Payment G 101-23470 Northland Real Estate-104 u LEGAL NTCE- PUBLIC HEARING JUNIPER RD VACATION- PUBLISHED 1-29-22 Invoice 874005 1292022 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing LEGAL NTCE- PUBLIC NOTICE -ORDINANCE 15-2021- MODIFY PLANNING CASE ESCROW FEES BASED ON COMPLEXITY OF PROJECT & INCREASE EROSION CONTROL & GRADING ESCROW DEPOSIT TO $5000- PUBLISHED 1-29-22 Invoice 870763 1/12022 Cash Payment G 101-23470 Northland Real Estate-104 u LEGAL NTCE- PUBLIC HEARING- FEB 1- PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDER PROPOSED COMP PLAN AMENDMENT & SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR 104 UNIT MULTI FAMILY BLDG- NORTHLAND MOUND PROPOSED BY NORTHLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP- PUBLISHED 1-22-22 Invoice 873103 1222022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 355 SUNBURST CHEMICALS, INC. Cash Payment E 222-42260-216 Cleaning Supplies Invoice 0498507 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/22022 CLEANING SUPPLIES & DISPENSER- FIRE DEPT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 356 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN Cash Payment E 101-41930-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispose GARBAGE SVC JANUARY 2022- CITY HALL & FIRE DEPT Invoice 7597476-1593-9 1/62022 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 12 $400.00 $400.39 $600.00 $5,545.39 $15,284.68 $15,284.68 $105.00 $105.00 $210.00 $210.00 $200.46 $23.13 $92.52 $316.11 $480.46 $480.46 $89.53 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 222-42260-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispose GARBAGE SVC JANUARY 2022- CITY HALL & FIRE DEPT Invoice 7597476-1593-9 1/62022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 357 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE _ Cash Payment E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic LEAK LOCATE @ 6000 HILLCREST 1 -11-22 Invoice 11976 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 358WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIREAND _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-404 Machinery/Equip Repairs MOUNT TRUCK FLOAT- STREETS TRUCK #312 Invoice 898540 1/112022 Transaction Date 222022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 359 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION, LLC _ Cash Payment E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic REPAIR WATERMAIN @ 6000 HILLCREST 1- 11-22 Invoice 5028 1242022 Transaction Date 2/22022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 360 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities Invoice 765451315 1272022 Transaction Date 2222022 Refer 363 ZACKS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 35386 1212022 Transaction Date 2/32022 Refer 362 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 54054438 1/112022 Transaction Date 2/32022 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 285 HRAMARBOR DISTRICT 454 TIF1-1 HARRISON BAY SR HOUSING 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 670 RECYCLING FUND 1790 COMMERCE STREET LIGHTS 12-27-21 THRU 1-26-22 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total WAXED CAR/TRUCK WASH SOAP- 5 PAILS; VEHICLE WASH BRUSHES- 3; RUBBER SQUEEGEES-2- FIRE DEPT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total CLEAN WIPES, BANDAGES, IBU TABS - PUBLIC WORKS & PARKS SHOP Project 22-5 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total 10100 U.S. Bank 10100 $1,060,539.20 $7,667.60 $3,197.78 $64.00 $54,948.84 $19,763.68 $90,362.81 $1,224.08 $18,650.70 $1,256,418.69 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $1,256,418.69 Total $1,256,418.69 246 02/03/22 12:34 PM Page 13 $89.53 $179.06 $340.95 $340.95 $153.76 $153.76 $3,356.25 $3,356.25 $38.53 $38.53 $224.40 $224.40 $58.70 $58.70 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Payments Batch 020822HWS $172,371.02 Refer 200 AM CRAFT SPIRITS, INC. _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 13864 1/182022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight MIX Invoice 13864 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 201 AMPHORA IMPORTS LLC Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 12156 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 12156 1282022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 202 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 3518307 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 324980 1242022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 3516253 1/142022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 3517301 1212022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 324183 1172022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 205 BELLBOY CORPORATION AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 0093382200 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0093382200 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093406600 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0093381300 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093381300 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093335500 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0093335500 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093316900 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0093316900 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093333100 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0093333100 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0093222500 1/132022 WINE FREIGHT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 BEER BEER CREDIT BEER BEER BEER CREDIT Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 1 $148.00 $4.15 $152.15 $288.00 $12.00 Total $300.00 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total WINE FREIGHT LIQUOR FREIGHT LIQUOR LIQUOR FREIGHT LIQUOR FREIGHT LIQUOR FREIGHT LIQUOR MAN $945.48 -$83.68 $898.60 $1,301.70 -$186.50 $2,875.60 $52.00 $1.65 $275.00 $37.95 $2,735.80 $1,974.50 $9.90 $1,034.95 $11.55 $1,099.20 $6.60 $757.75 CITY OF MOUND 02/03/2211:29AM Page 2 Payments Current Period: February 2022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale FREIGHT $13.20 Invoice 0093222500 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $132.00 Invoice 0093197900 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $3.30 Invoice 0093197900 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $3,132.30 Invoice 0093197100 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $42.64 Invoice 0093197100 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $360.00 Invoice 0093168400 1/112022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,133.00 Invoice 0093416100 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $9.90 Invoice 0093416100 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $442.50 Invoice 0093421500 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $19.00 Invoice 0093421500 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $4.95 Invoice 0093421500 1282022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $13,289.64 Refer 204 BELLBOY CORPORATION _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $2,388.95 Invoice 0093293500 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $116.00 Invoice 0093294900 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $677.75 Invoice 0093288800 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $34.65 Invoice 0093293500 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $3.30 Invoice 0093294900 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $3.30 Invoice 0093288800 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $600.00 Invoice 0093263600 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $8.25 Invoice 0093263600 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $3,555.00 Invoice 0093257600 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $39.60 Invoice 0093257600 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $342.50 Invoice 0093238700 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT $4.54 Invoice 0093238700 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $7,773.84 Refer 203 BELLBOY CORPORATION _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies SUPPLIES, BAGS $53.00 Invoice 0104563700 1/132022 248 CITY OF MOUND 02/03/2211:29AM Page 3 Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $22.50 Invoice 0104563700 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MDSE- CORKSCREW $20.25 Invoice 0104599000 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $74.40 Invoice 0104599000 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $151.00 Invoice 0104627500 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies SUPPLIES- BAGS $40.50 Invoice 0104627500 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $56.00 Invoice 0104613300 1212022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies SUPPLIES- SHELF STRIPS $54.00 Invoice 0104642900 1282022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $471.65 Refer 206 BOOM ISLAND BREWING COMPAN _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $530.00 Invoice 11729 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $238.00 Invoice 11659 1/62022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $768.00 Refer 207 BRASS FOUNDRY BREWING CO. _ AP Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $144.00 Invoice 7805 1/112022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $144.00 Refer 208 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MN BEE _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $3,318.15 Invoice 342551957 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $51.00 Invoice 342551958 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $286.20 Invoice 342551959 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $76.50 Invoice 342706595 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $147.20 Invoice 342706596 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $12,808.05 Invoice 342706597 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $3,168.25 Invoice 342622199 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $89.00 Invoice 342622200 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER PICKUP -$25.95 Invoice 360695251 1/42022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER PICKUP -$11.60 Invoice 360695252 1/42022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $19,906.80 Refer 209 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MN WINE _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $898.40 Invoice 342623272 1/192022 249 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 342623269 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 342623271 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 342623270 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 342706045 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 342706047 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 342706046 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 342706044 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 342553671 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 342553672 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 210 BROKEN CLOCK BREWING COOP _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 6000 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 212 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES, L.P. _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT Invoice 2639035 1/112022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2637359 1/112022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2639036 1/112022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT Invoice 2641782 1/182022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT Invoice 2644223 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2641783 1/182022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2641784 1/182022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2644225 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2644224 1252022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 211 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES, L.P 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 4 $5,660.47 $568.00 $35.95 $31.46 $740.00 $4,169.06 $351.00 $1,000.22 $1,000.00 Total $14,454.56 $84.00 Total $84.00 -$516.85 $251.25 $6,309.00 -$299.10 -$110.37 $51.20 $2,948.50 $206.00 $3,042.30 Total $11,881.93 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT-$27.93 Invoice 2646872 2/12022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $117.00 Invoice 2646873 2/12022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $197.60 Invoice 2646874 2/12022 0�9 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 a Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2646879 2/12022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 2647313 2/12022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 213 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO. Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 615567 1242022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 615575 1242022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 614731 1/172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 614691 1/172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 613675 1/102022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 616434 1/312022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 214 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 1521645 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 1525096 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 1529705 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 BEER BEER CREDIT BEER CREDIT BEER BEER BEER U.S. Bank 10100 10100 BEER BEER BEER U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 215 DRASTIC MEASURES BREWING _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 1828 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 216 HOHENSTEINS, INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 474864 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 474864 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 474865 1252022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 471686 1/112022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 473166 1/182022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 217 INBOUND BREWCO _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 12913 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT Invoice 771 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 218 JJ TAYLOR. DISTRIBUTING MINN _ 251 Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 5 $2,525.25 $108.00 $2,919.92 $1,256.00 -$521.34 -$125.50 $404.00 $288.00 $850.00 Total $2,151.16 $176.00 $1,350.20 $199.40 Total $1,725.60 Total $378.00 $378.00 $27.00 $45.00 $382.40 $1,321.50 $1,134.02 Total $2,909.92 $150.00 -$9.16 Total $140.84 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3254161 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3254160 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3267619 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3267618 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3254190 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 219 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 1971816 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1971815 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1971817 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1971814 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1971813 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1971812 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1971811 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 220 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR _ AP Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 1976080 1/192022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1976080 1/192022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1976081 1/192022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1976083 1/192022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1976082 1/192022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1980295 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1980294 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1980296 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1980297 1262022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1977935 1242022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1977936 1242022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1969492 1/102022 252 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 6 $109.50 $2,859.14 $50.90 $6,990.30 $2,997.84 Total $13,007.68 $40.00 $364.70 $696.00 $132.00 $530.48 $2, 811.46 $270.00 Total $4,844.64 $0.00 $7,389.95 $763.52 $599.15 $1,047.70 $308.30 $3,024.50 $548.00 $1,747.50 $454.32 $1,221.00 $1,512.60 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 a AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1969491 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 221 LIBATION PROJECT Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 42483 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 42484 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 42483 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 42484 1262022 Transaction Date 2/12022 LIQUOR WINE FREIGHT FREIGHT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 222 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY _ AP Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 42679 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 223 MARLIN S TRUCKING DELIVERY _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight DELIVERY SVC 1-7-22 Invoice 37798 1172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight DELIVERY SVC 1-13-22 Invoice 37812 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 224 MAVERICK WINE COMPANY _ AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 707917 1/122022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 707917 1/122022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 712623 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 712623 1212022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 716024 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 716024 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 716027 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 716027 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 716030 1282022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 716030 1282022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 227 MINUTEMAN PRESS Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies Invoice 21835 1/172022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Total Total Total Total Total 1,000 BUSINESS CARDS- HWS- R. GUST U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 7 $1,308.60 $19,925.14 $444.00 $824.00 $4.00 $14.00 $1,286.00 $266.00 $266.00 $258.10 $291.45 $549.55 $898.98 $4.50 $411.96 $1.50 $385.98 $3.00 $104.04 $1.50 $60.00 $1.50 $1.872.96 $74.17 $74.17 Refer 225 MODIST BREWING CO. LLC _ 253 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 a Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 28077 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 28376 1262022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 226 MOUND MARKETPLACE ASSOC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-412 Building Rentals FEBRUUARY 2022 COMMON AREA MTCE & INSURANCE HWS Invoice 020122 2/12022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 228 OUTS TATE BREWING COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 1798 1212022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 229 PARLEY LAKE WINERY Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 020822 1262022 Transaction Date 2/12022 WINE U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 230 PAUSTIS AND SONS WINE COMPA _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 152299 1/102022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 152299 1/102022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 152620 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 152620 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 152923 1/172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 152923 1/172022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 153545 1242022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 153545 1242022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 231 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTION AP Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 131806 1/132022 AP Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 132430 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 BEER BEER U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 232 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6340285 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 6340283 1262022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6340284 1262022 Total Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 8 $260.00 $394.00 $654.00 $1,504.18 $1,504.18 $176.00 $176.00 $291.00 $291.00 $370.75 $7.00 $395.00 $8.75 $968.25 $11.25 $372.67 $7.00 Total $2,140.67 $396.50 $658.00 Total $1,054.50 $144.00 $315.00 $868.75 f•�0LI CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 6340285 1262022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 233 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 6337054 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6337055 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 6333687 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6337056 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6333688 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 6333689 1/122022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 234 PRIME ADVERTISING & DESIGN IN _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 2022 ANNUAL WEBSITE HOSTING- W W W.HARBORW INESPI RITS.COM Invoice 79715 1/12022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 235 SHAMROCK GROUP, INC. _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 2717405 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE Invoice 2722648 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 2722648 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 236 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2167505 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2167505 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2167507 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT Invoice 9351391 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT Invoice 9349345 1/102022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT Invoice 9349344 1/102022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT Invoice 9349343 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 248 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2169997 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2169994 1202022 255 Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 9 $238.00 $1,565.75 $3,360.00 $876.36 $647.93 $72.00 $651.00 $400.00 Total $6,007.29 $1,200.00 Total $1,200.00 $50.00 $48.08 $130.05 Total $228.13 Total $4,872.00 $1,145.59 $1,452.00 -$117.50 -$73.40 -$85.68 -$13.50 $7,179.51 $808.00 $1,245.00 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 2169995 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 2169996 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 2169993 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 WINE LIQUOR LIQUOR U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 247 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2173103 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2173100 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 2173099 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 2173101 1282022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2173102 1282022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Total Refer 237 STA-SAFE LOCKSMITHS COMPAN Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic REPAIR BROKEN KEY IN OFFICE DOOR HWS, 3 DUPLICATE KEYS, LOCK, LEVER & CYLINDER Invoice 13015 1/192022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 238 STEEL TOE BREWING, LLC Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 44016 1/102022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total BEER U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 239 SUMMER LAKES BEVERAGE LLC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 3393 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 240 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS, LLC _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 30081 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 30081 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 241 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 0296736 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 0296736 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 0296734 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 0296734 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 0296735 1272022 256 Total 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 10 $3,750.00 $2, 441.65 $1,635.61 $9,880.26 $1,446.00 $3,153.78 $115.00 $3,108.00 $579.05 $8, 401.83 $164.80 $164.80 $339.00 $339.00 $285.00 $285.00 $188.00 $6.00 Total $194.00 $190.00 $5.00 $288.00 $7.50 $120.00 CITY OF MOUND 02/03/2211:29AM Page 11 Payments Current Period: February 2022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0296735 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 242 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 0296274 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0296274 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 0296273 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0296273 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 0295857 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 0295857 1/132022 Transaction Date 2/12022 Refer 243 WINE COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 194522 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 194522 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 194523 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 194523 1202022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 195033 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 195033 1272022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight Invoice 195033 1272022 Transaction Date 2/12022 FREIGHT $12.00 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 LIQUOR FREIGHT WINE FREIGHT WINE FREIGHT U.S. Bank 10100 10100 WINE FREIGHT LIQUOR FREIGHT WINE LIQUOR FREIGHT Total $622.50 $90.00 $2.50 $400.00 $10.00 $208.00 $5.00 Total $715.50 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 244 WINE MERCHANTS _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 7365130 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE CREDIT Invoice 742311 1/132022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 7365131 1/192022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 7364298 1/122022 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 7365853 1262022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 245 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPAN _ Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 3168 1/142022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Refer 246 Z WINES USA LLC - 257 Total $726.00 $9.90 $24.33 $5.00 $492.00 $26.67 $11.55 $1,295.45 $1,067.00 -$84.00 $46.00 $800.00 $2,118.00 $3.947.00 $137.40 Total $137.40 CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 a AP Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 25176 1202022 AP Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 25176 1202022 Transaction Date 2/12022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Fund Summary 10100 U.S. Bank 10100 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $172,371.02 $172,371.02 Pre -Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated bythe Computer $172,371.02 Total $172,371.02 02/03/22 11:29 AM Page 12 $226.00 $7.50 Total $233.50 f►�7f:3 MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 25, 2022 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Centennial Building. 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, City Clerk Kevin Kelly, City Engineer Brian Simmons, Josh Shields, Jeff Wrede, Brian Farrell, Joe Bruns, Don McHugh, Julie McHugh, John Biglow, Michelle Herrick, Jason Zattler, Mary Davis and Sean Carroll. 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 Larson, to approve the consent agenda. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $79,246.87. B. Approve minutes: 01-11-22 regular meeting C. Approve 1-4 Day Temporary On -Sale Liquor License for Our Lady of the Lake's Keg & Cork Fundraiser on March 5, 2022 D. APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 22-14 APPROVING TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE SIGN FOR ARTESSA COOPERATIVE IN HARBOR DISTRICT 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. Dan McHugh, 5621 Bartlett Blvd., said he has questions about the proposed Langdon development including the City property being sold and access through easements in the area. McHugh said he is not opposed to the apartments but he doesn't like the ratio of parking spaces to units in the building. 259 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 John Biglow, 540 Apple Garden Road, Minnetrista, said he is a lay trustee of Our Lady of the Lake Church (OLL) and is at the meeting to represent OLL. Biglow said OLL doesn't object to the sale of the parcels though OLL does question if enough thought has been put into the congestion, parking, safety and aesthetics of the development. Biglow said the main concern is about access to OLL for children attending school and school buses dropping off children. Biglow added OLL has unique traffic flows related to the school, masses, and other events and the development will add commuters from the apartments to the already existing congestion in the area. Biglow questioned if there is sufficient parking planned as the fear is the adjacent lot will not be sufficient and tenants will use OLL as the overflow. Biglow asked if safety vehicles will be able to access the new property and adjacent properties with an influx of new commuters. Biglow asked if there has been sufficient planning with regard to aesthetics, including fencing or buffering from adjacent property owners, including where the dumpsters be placed. Salazar said the purchase agreement will be contingent on approval from the Planning Commission (PC) and the Planning Commission will vet concerns raised by OLL and others prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. Salazar said the PC gave a long list of "to do's" to the developers and the PC will continue to scrutinize the plan. Salazar encouraged the representatives from OLL to attend the next PC meeting on Tuesday, February 1 It. McHugh asked if the City lots were made available to the larger community in an attempt to secure potentially more lucrative offers. Salazar said the parcels have technically been available since a 1999 redevelopment plan was formulated and the City parcels are small and un-buildable by themselves. Hoversten agreed that the parcels are nonconforming to building or construction unless they are combined with adjacent parcels. McHugh was wondering if these parcels are anything like the Dayton owned property which was donated to the Three Rivers Park District to maintain as green space and was wondering if the City parcels could also be left as green space. Mary Davis, 3021 Inverness Lane, asked why this meeting was called today and why this item is on the agenda. Salazar said the developer listened to the discussion at the last Council meeting and has revised the offer to address concerns that were raised. Davis said it was by chance that she found out about this meeting and asked what the hurry is since said she thought the next step was the PC meeting. Salazar said the developer needs to have legal standing on the City parcels as they do with the larger private parcels to go forward with the application as proposed. Salazar said the Purchase Agreement discussion is an item on the agenda to be acted upon then, noting the agenda was properly posted and residents with questions can contact City staff or the council. Davis said it feels as the development has already been pre -approved without the input of the public and said the plan is harder to stop once it has started. Davis said the public does not understand what is being built there and it doesn't make sense to many. Davis said she called the DNR and the DNR said the City would need to get the Watershed District approval for the development as it is so close to the lake. Salazar said the DNR, Watershed District and PC would all weigh in on the development. Salazar said everything is legal and publicized according to state statutes. 260 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Davis said her last point was the City could use other ways to get the news out and found it odd that the PA was on the agenda again. Davis said she called the City because the PC meeting in on caucus night, February 1 It. Holt said he called the City Attorney about that and the attorney said there was no legal prohibition to holding a commission meeting on caucus night even though the City doesn't hold meetings during National Night Out or during elections. Holt said the PC has statutory timelines to get their work done. Hoversten said School Boards and Councils are not allowed to hold meetings during caucuses but there is not the same prohibition for Commissions in statute. Hoversten said City's have to act on planning applications within a 60-day timeline per statute. Salazar noted there is an option for a 60-day extension. Hoversten agreed and said the extension has been noticed and the City will still have to work with urgency to get through these matters within the 120 days allowed. Joe Bruns, 2630 Setter Circle, asked if Hennepin County has done a traffic study at the site. Hoversten said the development doesn't meet the County's threshold for a traffic study but noted the developer provided their own traffic study. Bruns asked how this developer was picked? Salazar said the parcels are privately owned and the property owner's realtor has been marketing the parcels and this developer showed interest. Bruns said he heard the number of studio apartments in the development is near 100 and could lead to subsidized housing which concerns some people. Brian Farrell, 3106 Priest Lane and developer of the proposed project, noted this meeting is about the purchase agreement not the planning application, but he would answer the concerns directly. Farrell said the traffic concerns have been noted and a traffic study commissioned from a group recommended by the PC. Farrell said the parking plan meets the City Code and they aren't asking for additional parking from adjacent properties. Farrell said there was a comment that the development has come out of the blue but he stated they have been working on the plan for five months. Farrell said there has been a thoughtful exchange that shaped the end result based on conversations with the City and their own analysis of the City Code. Farrell said there should be no concerns about subsidized housing as they are not an affordable developer and never have been and construction costs make it almost impossible to have affordable housing without subsides and the developer isn't going to apply for affordable housing tax credits. Farrell said studio apartments house young professionals and single retirees and are usually the first to be rented because the rates are affordable for the amount of amenities. Farrell said there is no intent to obstruct pathways for safety vehicles, noting the main access is the southern point based on PC recommendations and comments. Farrell said they will also add speed bumps and do not enter/monument signage at the south. Farrell said a nautical theme has guided the design and the watershed district has approved the development. Farrell said he grew up in the area and lives in Mound, noting he loves the area and trail and his group appreciates the input of the community. Farrell said the development is a unique product type that provides an option to retain residents who are looking for an attractive rental option and prefer to stay in Mound. Farrell added the development will attract individuals seeking employment at local businesses and who will also support local businesses. Davis, 3021 Inverness Lane, asked if the public has been involved in any meetings with the developer before the PC Meeting on January 4th. Davis asked if the PC meeting can be televised or videotaped. Davis said staff gave a presentation on January 4th in which only three 261 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 people attended. Salazar asked Davis to speak out at the PC meeting so the concerns can be heard in that process and by the PC. Davis said she doesn't think the expense of the project makes sense and the price of the studios and questions the appropriateness of the location. Salazar said the current rental housing in Mound is out dated and this development offers a new high quality option that will be attractive to young professionals. Davis asked if any of the City parcels will be open for public bidding and Hoversten said state statute gives cities a wide degree of freedom to market and dispose of property. Hoversten added this is a market driven redevelopment with no subsidies. Hoversten said these types of City assets are held for adjacent assembly as they are small parcels which are unbuildable on their own. Davis asked about the real estate signs. Hoversten said the City -owned parcels are in addition and add value as the project adds tax value and economic possibilities. Hoversten said Mound is a bedroom community and commercial and retail will only grow if there are more customers in town. Holt said he is on the PC and would like Davis to contact them with concerns which the PC will address prior to coming to the Council. Bruns asked what will happen to local businesses next to the proposed development and noted he thinks the PC Meeting should be moved to February 2nd Jason Zattler, 2345 Commerce Blvd., said he has a problem with the slim transparency and is not happy how this was put together. Zattler requested to be added to the Council and PC meeting agendas email lists and requested any code of conduct for the City Manager and the PC. Zattler said he has talked to the developer and he is not in favor of the apartment building and his disapproval is all about the location. Zattler stated the approval process is all premature as this item has been voted down once already and the developer hasn't gotten a variance to allow the apartment to be built. Zattler said the City parcels should be put up for sale to the general public as he didn't know they were for sale or that they existed in the area. Zattler said City approval of the PA would give tacit approval to the PC. Salazar said the City has the right of approval for property sales and the area has been slated for redevelopment for many years. Zattler said the planning process is backward and the development plan should be done before the PA for the City parcels is complete. 6. Discussion and action to approve color samples for downtown paver sidewalk Replacement Brian Simmons and Josh Shields, Landscape Architect, with Bolton & Menk, said they are here to present options as a follow up to the Council approved downtown sidewalks rehabilitation study. 262 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Simmons said the project will be phased over three years to keep per year costs down. Simmons said the project prioritization included areas the Council earmarked for non-standard sidewalk concrete and Simmons summarized the concrete style options and considerations discussed at the previous meeting: • Colored concrete - no chipping 50-year life cycle • Stained concrete - 50-year life cycle chipping gray concrete underneath color on top • Stamping and ribbons - two types of stamps discussed at previous meeting • Truncated domes at intersections are ADA required and have to be textural for individuals with vision issues, noting there is one decorative cast iron option and plastic options in a number of brighter colors. Simmons said cast iron wears and takes on a patina as it ages Velsor asked why the plans had stamped colored concrete at the southwest corner of the parking garage. Simmons said he would look at that as it may just need standard concrete. Shields presented the following alternative paving options: Concept 1 — combination smooth colored concrete in lighter browns surrounded by stamped pattern to break up the design for contrast. Shields handed out color swatches to the Council. Shields said to focus on the contrast and blending and how areas would wear and whether the types of concrete are readily available. Shields presented images of how the southeast corner of Shoreline and Commerce would look. • Concept 2 - Shields presented a color scheme with more cream and gray tones with the larger areas stamped in a herringbone pattern surrounded by smooth concreate to break up the design for contrast. Concept 3 — gray herringbone stamp surrounding larger smooth texture at main intersection. This idea had the ADA ramp concrete not being colored or stamped. This idea offered more walkable spaces which mixed three colors of standard concrete, noting standard colors make it easier when needing replacement and the ADA ramp area wears at a greater rate than the sidewalk spaces. Shields showed all three options side by side which depicted the materials and patterns in the area, noting the earth tones of the colored concrete are easier to replace than brighter colored concrete. Simmons requested Council input to ensure Staff is executing the Council's vision for Mound. Pugh asked about how the concrete colors affect heat absorption and Shields said lighter colors provide more reflection of heat and darker colors absorb more heat. Simmons noted this would create a small amount of heat in the area. Holt thought Concept 1 doesn't look right and liked the design of Concept 2. Shields noted there are other color options as well. Holt said he prefers the Hailstorm gray and the stamped concrete and not the lighter Champaign color. Salazar said he is worried about replacement and color not matching when replaced. 263 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Shields said stamping will hide minor changes of color with pours from different trucks delivering the concrete. Discussion ensued about the color of the concrete around the ADA ramps and truncated dome and how a lighter color would be easier to maintain. Holt asked about the effect of salt on colored concrete and Simmons said the wear is the same assuming it is properly sealed which is the key to cleaning and maintenance and the removal of salt. Holt said he liked the dark gray color of Concept 3 and would like to see it used with the Concept 2 design. Larson said she was in favor of the neutral colors and asked how the sidewalks were being funded and whether assessments would be charged to property owners or Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds used. Hoversten said no on assessments and noted MSA funds change the bid environment and add additional administrative work as would Met Council funding. Larson wondered about the cost of the project with just standard concrete and questioned the decision to spread it over three years if the colors won't be the same from year to year. Simmons said the estimated costs were in the Council packet when this project was first discussed. Hoversten said the engineering study for the sidewalks is about doing the sidewalk ADA ramps the first year and then doing the rest on an as needed basis in order to keep the City on the balanced funding strategy in place. Larson asked about the City sidewalks outside of the main downtown corners which need repair. Hoversten said there are about 80 panels which need to be replaced and are being done on an as needed basis, one or two slabs at a time. Hoversten said north of the intersection along Commerce is in good condition. Hoversten said east of the intersection to Belmont the concrete goes from decorative to regular concrete all the way to Spring Park and the City needs to figure out how to get that stretch paid for. Larson asked about the safety aspects of the sloped ADA ramps with snow and ice. Simmons said the concrete has a brushed finished for traction and grip. Velsor said the gray colored concrete looks like regular standard concrete after it ages and to go with a darker gray as it looks better. Pugh said the grays are very difficult for her to distinguish as they tend to blend together, so she suggests a sharp contrast to help see the difference. Shields said if the Council likes the Concept 2 design the colors can be done to provide the contrast needed. Shields said they can hone in on the color and have the contractor do a mockup of panels for the Council to view before construction begins to confirm the Council is happy with the color pallet. Salazar asked about the truncated dome replacement life expectancy which Shields said the cast iron will last the length of time of the concrete, noting if the concrete degrades around the truncated dome it could affect it but the wear length should be similar to the concrete. 264 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Shields said they will use the Concept 2 design and Hoversten said to make sure the three colors work well together and have a sharp contrast to aid accessibility for the visually impaired. Salazar he likes Concept 2 and not Concept 3 and the plain concrete will not work with the other colors the Council likes. Holt said he is in favor to get it all done at one time or at least get the whole intersection done in the first year so people can see some progress. Hoversten the next phase will be to put those ideas into a plan and tackle the sidewalks which need the most work due to safety issues, which are the areas in red, but doing more may also be a desirable option. Simmons asked to confirm the Council's preference for colored concrete in neutral champagne on the ADA ramps with cast iron domes, natural bark color with browner tones for the stamped portion with the herringbone stamp and no ribbon/soldier course and all agreed. Shields asked about the timing and what the Council wants to see from staff. Hoversten said there will be detailed drawings after the engineering study and then there will be the plans and specs which will go out to bid. Hoversten said the Council will see the drawings of the intersection for further comment and fine tuning. Simmons said soliciting competitive bids is contingent on the availability of labor and materials so the engineers will come back to the Council with updated engineering estimates prior to bids going out. Pugh asked with so many City projects going on, could the projects be coordinated. Simmons said the Dakota Trail crossing and Artessa build out are being monitored and Hoversten said the private telecommunication repair in 2023 could affect the project. Simmons added the Met Council is doing rehabilitation to their force main in the area prior to Hennepin County (HC) completing the County Road 15 corridor which includes ADA work by HC. Hoversten said all of these entities and the private utilities (gas and media lines) need to get done before the HC County Road 15 resurfacing project starts. MOTION by Holt, seconded Pugh, to select Concept 2 design and color pallet as the preferred option. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 7. Brian Farrell of Northland Real Estate Group requesting Council consideration of revised purchase agreement terms for 3 City parcels adjacent to northeast shore of Lake Langdon Larson said she discussed this agenda item with the City Attorney about a potential conflict of interest and has decided to recuse herself from participating and voting as a Council Member on the proposal. Larson recused herself and left the dias to join the audience. Farrell addressed the Council and stated his group has been working on a redevelopment plan for the property for months including discussions with the City and he sees this as a good opportunity to clean up the parcels in the area by combining them with the private parcels. Farrell said the stand alone City parcels do not hold much value but when combined with the private parcels additional tax value is created. 265 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Farrell noted OLL wasn't against the question at hand which is the sale of the land, but had questions about the site plan of the building and parking and the other areas which OLL could be affected. Farrell said the City parcels would remain green space and would allow the developer to control the process and suggested the City commission an independent appraisal which could dictate the price for the parcels. Salazar said the Council suggested the appraisal would be a good idea in fairness and Farrell said his group would pay the value set by the appraiser. Holt said he wanted the appraisal but asked what would happen if the appraisal comes back at $5,000.00. Farrell said he will pay a minimum of $50K or up to the amount of the appraisal. Holt said he called a couple of realtors and determined the Meisel Trust parcels were listed at $650,000. Holt said it is always good to get an appraisal and he thought the $50K was a little too low for the City parcels. Holt said he would be comfortable with the offer by Farrell to pay a minimum of $50K or the appraised value if higher. Farrell said the tax basis will provide benefit to the City and is the highest and best use for the property. Holt said this agreement would be profitable to both parties. Holt said the parcels are currently valued at less than half of the Meisel property and thinks the parcels could be valued at $100,000.00. Holt said the appraisal is the right thing to do. Hoversten said the contingency can be added to the PA in which the developer would pay no less than $50K for the property. Farrell said the independent value is much different as the city parcels are not developable in their current form. Pugh said she thinks the development will be a good addition to the City but feels the process has been troublesome and seems to set a precedent of the City not being open about the sale. Pugh said the Council needs to create a more transparent process such as a workshop format to more fully inform the entire Council before the vote. Pugh said for that reason she has difficulty in supporting the resolution. Paula Larson, 5713 Lynwood Blvd., and owner of 2316 Commerce Blvd., asked if the appraiser is going to be independent, who will make the selection and whether the City will pay for the appraisal. Salazar said the City will pay for an independent appraisal. Larson talked about her conflict of interest. Larson said Hoversten brought up the 1999 City redevelopment plan and she asked why the City didn't bring up the 1980's plan that she worked on called the beautification of Mound. Larson said Pat Meisel was the Mayor of Mound in 1999 and during this time her husband was also on the Economic Development Committee. Larson said she and a former Mayor and another citizen went to court against Pat Meisel. Larson said the Mayor had a conflict of interest as an owner of commercial property in the redevelopment district. Larson said she and the other two litigants were awarded their attorney fees paid back which is highly unusual. Larson said the 1999 development plan was the Meisel's plan and including the City parcels with the Meisel parcels is completely wrong. Larson said the City needs to create a new development committee to re - look at development in the City and the Meisel property in particular and using the 1990's plan is wrong. Hoversten said the City reserves the right to do as it would like to these parcels as a City. Hoversten added the City can pair the parcels with redevelopment or not. Hoversten said these parcels have been approved for redevelopment for many years and in the current Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). Hoversten said Staff use the Comp Plan as the policy of the City and its intentions to develop a parcel 8 266 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 or not. Hoversten said the City does not have to sell the property and does not need to promote development but the Council approves the Comp Plan which is the vision of the City in regards to development. Larson said she is paying for title research in the sale of the land and the former development of the Meisel property as she thinks there is still a conflict of interest for the Meisel's. Hoversten reiterated that Staff use the Council approved Comp Plan as guidance in pursuing redevelopment in this area. Hoversten added the Comp Plan also informs prospective developers of which areas of the City are available for some kind of development so the developer can bring forward ideas. Larson asked if other offers have been made and Hoversten said no other proposers made application to the City. Larson reiterated this is a perpetuation of a conflict of interest, the Council should create an economic development committee, and the Council should reexamine the development approval process so not just two Council Members review proposals but they come before the entire Council in a workshop format. Hoversten and Larson discussed the requirements of the City once an application is made and the timing of a decision. Salazar said the Comp Plan identifies this area as a redevelopment opportunity noting the Comp Plan was worked on by the community. Larson said the Comp Plan is guidance and the City doesn't have to do this project and the full Council needs to review developments as they are proposed. Larson said the original motion died at the last Council Meeting and she didn't receive notice of the new proposal. Salazar said the request at the last meeting was to get an independent appraisal and that is why this item has come back to the Council with the developer willing to pay the higher of $50K or the appraised value. Larson said the Council must do what is fair and she assumed the redevelopment proposal died when the motion failed at the January 11th meeting. Salazar said a developer needs to have confidence in going forward with an application and the first step is to review with Staff and then the two Council Members on the Development Committee. Larson said the City needs to listen to the people of Mound and questioned why Staff, including City Planning Consultant Rita Trapp, Community Development Director Sarah Smith and Hoversten get to effectively approve a proposal. Hoversten said he and Smith recommend the development to Council, not Trapp. Larson said Trapp and Smith don't live in Mound and Hoversten moved here to take the job and that more City residents should take a look at these proposals instead. Velsor said there were other developers looking at the Meisel parcels and things didn't go any further than that. Hoversten said Trident who built Harrison's Bay Senior Living looked at the area and couldn't make it work. Hoversten said the normal function of an Economic Development Commission is to provide funds for development recruitment activity and the City Council is not putting those funds on the table. Hoversten the City is instead relying on market driven development and not offering incentives to spur development. Hoversten said Lifestyles Communities has also looked into these parcels and there were two other attempts which didn't come to be. Velsor said those properties have been for sale for quite a while. Hoversten said the property has been publically listed for 18 months and has been continuously known to be available for many years. Velsor said if this property has been available why hasn't there been development of this land. Larson said the real estate sign for the property was covered up in plant growth. Fl 267 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 Hoversten said two developers have considered developing the Meisel property since this current listing. Pugh said bringing this item to the Council level without the input of the PC does not work for her and she doesn't understand why the developer didn't go to PC first. Hoversten said developers need to secure the land to know the bottom line of the development before finalizing the application, particularly because other cities offer incentives that Mound does not that can create more profitable developments. Hoversten said Staff is following the process and roles set by the Council and if changes are needed, the Council would have to change the process. Larson said the citizens should be respected and she didn't know about the development until she saw it in the agenda packet. Hoversten said the information is private data until a developer makes a formal application, and Staff just tries to be helpful and accommodating as developers go through their fact finding to see if the project works for them. Hoversten said the 60-day clock starts when an application is offered and at that point the information is made fully public. Hoversten said the two elected officials on the Development Committee also help to accommodate developers and vet the proposals so the proposals are not just being led by appointed Staff. Larson said her voice is hoarse from receiving so many phone calls including two from Minnetrista who are against the development. Salazar said the Comp Plan had PC and citizen involvement in its creation and the development proposal will be vetted by the Planning Commission. Discussion ensued on how the Comp Plan process was open to the public, noting public notices, the City website and meetings were all avenues for citizen involvement. Salazar said the PC is made up of all residents and they will vet the development proposal. Velsor said the Development Committee saw a sketch of the developer's plan which included units, parking and building height and the committee suggested ways to improve the project that the developer could incorporate into the plans. Velsor said he doesn't want to see anything from the developer before the application is brought forward, he wants developments to be deliberated openly, and he doesn't want to be the roadblock to the development before it goes to the PC. Velsor said he wants developers who come to town to have success if they have the right product. Larson said she knows what it is like to start and run a business in town and thinks the Council needs to change the process and listen to constituents instead of Staff. Salazar said the Council should let the PC do their job and encourage people in attendance to go to the next PC meeting where this development will be discussed. Larson said the site has history to it that is rearing its ugly head, noting she knows the property very well and how naturally beautiful it is including the sunsets and she just does not want to see that taken from the City. Hoversten asked Larson how should Staff respond to developers when they contact the City about a development opportunity and Larson said they should be required to do their own due diligence. Hoversten said Staff provide information to all potential customers, including existing property owners and potential developers, as part of fact finding for all sorts of projects. Larson asked how many developers made offers on the recent Harbor District RFQ. Hoversten said four met with staff with one ultimately submitting. Hoversten said two developers only considered detached townhomes that didn't work financially and one other with a multifamily concept withdrew 10 268 Mound City Council Minutes — January 25, 2022 because they didn't think the City would consider multifamily. Hoversten said the Meisel site was also looked at by developers of detached townhomes who couldn't make it work financially. Hoversten said the City needs to be responsive to market driven opportunities that afford developers the necessary profit to be willing to invest. MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Holt, to approve the following resolution. Salazar, Velsor and Holt voted in favor. Pugh voted no. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 22-15 RESOLUTION APPROVING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF THREE PARCELS OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MOUND WITH AND AMENDED PURCHASE PRICE AT THE APPRAISED VALUE NOT LESS THAN $501K 8. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments/reports from Council members/City Manager: Salazar said he received an email indicating some financial good news from our Met Council Representative Chris Ferguson. Hoversten said Federal COVID related transportation funds sent to the Metropolitan Council will be redistributed to cities to make up for the shortage on wheel tax receipts due to the economic downturn. Hoversten said the funds can be used for maintenance or capital and most likely will require a match, noting the amount is estimated at $29K. Hoversten said Ferguson is moving and his vacancy will need to be filled by the Governor. Pugh said it takes about six months to fill those positions, noting it is paid as a part- time position but a %time commitment. Pugh said the Suburban Rate Authority has a utility loan program to do energy improvements that should be made available to households in the future. Pugh said she is the Chair of Age Friendly Minnesota and the 2021 legislative session provided $2M to Age Friendly Minnesota to hire staff and to establish a grant program to cities to start an age friendly community. Pugh said Minnesota is now part of the national age friendly movement and hopefully Mound can take part in this activity. Salazar asked in what way the City could be involved. Pugh said it is a collaboration with other agency groups to do age friendly activities. Pugh mentioned an activity in Northfield which purchased red chairs for elders in the community to use during community events. Hoversten added the following notices: City Hall closed for President's Day, February 21 It The Polar Plunge will take place on January 29th There is a Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop on February 15th B. Reports: Fire Department —December 2021 C. Minutes: D. Correspondence: 10. Adjourn ACTION by Holt, seconded by Pugh, to adjourn at 10:39 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 11 269 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952)472-0604 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Date: February 2, 2022 Re: Release of a Portion of the Public Improvement Escrow for Villages of Island Park Summary Tom Dillon, owner representative from Inland Development Partners for the Villages of Island Park Development, has requested the City accept the sanitary sewer and watermain improvement completed by the development and release the related portion of the Public Improvement Escrow, which was required in the Development Agreement. The requested escrow reduction for the project is as follows: $64,780.63 sanitary sewer $68,555.60 watermain Recommendation Staff has reviewed the request and recommends that the City Council approve the escrow reduction in the amount of $133,336.23. 270 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION APPROVING ESCROW REDUCTION REQUEST FOR VILLAGES OF ISLAND PARK WHEREAS, Tom Dillon of Inland Development Partners, who is the Owner Representative for the Developer of the Villages of Island Park project, has requested that the City of Mound accept the watermain and sanitary sewer utilities and authorize release of the related portions of the Public Improvement Escrow in the amount of $133,336.23 following satisfactory completion of those requirements as identified in the project Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, Mound Staff has reviewed the submitted request and recommends approval. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve and authorize release of a portion of the Public Improvement Escrow in the amount of $133,336.23, as recommended by Mound Staff. Adopted by the City Council this 8'h day of February, 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 271 c ry or mouuo Executive Summary TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Rita Trapp, Consulting City Planner DATE: February 2, 2022 MEETING: February 8, 2022 SUBJECT: Consideration/Action on Major Subdivision- Final Plat for Sunset View Villas SUMMARY The applicant and property owner, Graham Neve, has applied for approval of a major subdivision final plat. The site is generally located on the north/west side of Commerce Boulevard just south of the intersection of Bartlett Boulevard. The 1.36 acre Lake Langdon riparian lot includes both the existing home and an existing four-plex that the applicant is proposing to convert into a duplex. The City Council approved the major subdivision preliminary plat at its September 28, 2021 meeting. The final plat is attached. DISCUSSION • A review of the major subdivision- final plat finds that the final plat is consistent with the major subdivision preliminary plat that was previously approved. • As required bythe final plat process, the City Attorney prepared a title opinionforthe parcels in the proposed plat. The developer is required to address the issues included in the plat opinion Snorts the release of the plat for recording. • The major subdivision- final plat was routed for Staff/Consultant/Agency/Utility review and comment. No objections were received. • The regulations in City Code Sec. 121-76 does not require Planning Commission review of a final plat Snorts City Council action nor is a public hearing required. TIMELINE FOR CONSIDERATION The original deadline for action on the final plat was January 16, 2022. The applicant provided a letter extending the City's timeline for review of final plat to March 17, 2022. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following resolutions. Action on Resolution Approving Major SubdivisionFinalPlat of Sunset View Villa 272 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION — FINAL PLAT OF SUNSET VIEW VILLA PLANNING CASE NO. 21-20 WHEREAS, the applicant and property owners, Graham Neve, has submitted a major subdivision —final plat application to plat the proposed Sunset View Villa plat as described in Exhibit A and as shown in Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the subject site is generally located on the north/west side of Commerce Boulevard just south of the intersection of Bartlett Boulevard, at 2631 Commerce Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to split a 1.36 acre existing parcel that currently has a single family detached home and a four-plex. The proposal would put each building on their own parcel and the project would convert the four-plex into a duplex; and WHEREAS, the major subdivision -final plat is consistent with the major subdivision - preliminary plat which was approved by the City Council by Resolution No. 21-100 on September 28, 2021; and WHEREAS, Staff reviewed the application and recommended approval of the major subdivision -final plat with conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the major subdivision -final plat request at its February 8, 2022 meeting and determined that the proposed plat is consistent with the plans and policies of the City; and WHEREAS, in granting approval of the major subdivision -final plat, the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact: The proposed final plat is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. 2. The proposed final plat is in all respects consistent with the preliminary plat. 3. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. 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 approve the major subdivision -final plat for Sunset View Villa with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for removing the parking area located behind the proposed duplex and establishing vegetation. 273 2. The applicant shall revise and resubmit a preliminary plat with a note that establishes a maximum allowable impervious surface for each lot. Lot 1 shall be listed as 35% and Lot 2 shall be listed as 30%. 3. The final plat drawing labeled as Exhibit B is hereby incorporated into this Resolution. Any improvements shall be in keeping with the final plat. 4. Applicant shall meet all conditions included in the official resolutions approving the major subdivision -preliminary plat, as approved by the City Council on September 28, 2021. 5. The applicant shall satisfy all items included in the Plat Opinion prepared by the City Attorney. 6. The MCES SAC charge for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 7. Sewer and watermain area trunk charges for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current trunk charge for sewer and water, per unit, is $2000.00 each. 8. Sewer connection and water connection fees shall be determined as part of the final plat. The 2020 sewer connection and water connection fees are $240.00 each. 9. Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the final plat application. 10. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all public agency permits including the submittal of all required information prior to building permit issuance. 11. The applicant shall record the resolution(s), the final plat and all other required documents with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s), the final plat and all other required documents will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. Release of the resolutions for recording shall be deemed conclusive proof that all conditions have been met. 12. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action. Adopted by the City Council this 8'h day of February, 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 274 Exhibit A Legal Description (to be inserted) 275 Exhibit B Final Plat 276 3 i Z. a C C O O ?� t� R039 ti cb Cr I CN y x I C',th N cCb a p In. Cb0 S,(Oii 4 n o 0 z;; to � O fAD ? O Z Z (� I ? I U) N UI ti I ni I i 4 I S O ° 3 CbZ cn a k y °c Iv "� fD C In S a O y J F� cb 4 N y Q.CID O rI ra N pp `'C I fop$ I y ap ^•C �- I, n I O to J� i D I p li1 (n� cap O= I I U O 25 Ol i a C s a o a I IOm a O o N o I I (a Cb N I t t Cb 4 `K �0 p• j 4 cSD C3, to t I cOp I y I a I a o I m I j o I N o CX CID I I a I O n I o I N I nt I I I I o I ° o I t 4 I I j Cc) S� I I CID Q I I I T c?p O I I I I o pn OaCb y C O j a Ao N S ,cI I N N I I p a I I ym I c IN O c"E 0 i � \ C. IS H I NO. 110 w� �\ 2 O 0 t Ll b' 0 1 m 2 S0�461W I VO \ a \ It o �.... 0 Cb 21f"E 158,57.Cb A in mg / (lbb r Z a m a yCOv 2g FOF c�icncti 920A? 2 Al i "'�^c soap �s\y ri y aaa oo� O nOj� z r�0 Oy ti Z t a �� R q a 4 J N oz-o n, U1' N O cD 3' 0 j C I�o ao 0 C Cb %I S I J p am Cb Cb Cb az%Q` �a OJ �Q O O•I.Cb 3'"I CID A a j J 0 S ... I •°c°sa I I � N o C I N' I a (b o °a ca J0o 9Cbma I �ZC) cr I o j'N 1 I o C - cb I cb n cd I I 5•U)4�5 ao °a OJ [ °CIS j yQL to I, p n o N m ^• n a J p C N p OCb QU 0 CID Cb J v O y O O O• o y O ° c-, ? � C O0 cb Cb Cb aNar CbI � n <D O p y A?�(, a r N O 0 j cct, a 01 Iv 0 t 2 0 0 vl 0 1 IV N /sy It ~O I �, r'sw S�F` o •9j� �@? nn A r1 W 0 2 N > > fOj y y 0 13 3.w0 O Q;g I Cbao NJ o�° ma I y �t , m 4� �•m mD a� Ra CD yry �. 0O U o I rn 4^. o Om o zr o Cb y o O cn o cb `�° V) J• II CD N IQ to J• MCIA. Ja yU) l o •3 vo`DQZr In`° c03 I 4 cbAJ 0000` p.I I o ao c v'o ° So CI 0 4= ° �O J'm SC rAy ap J'M 13 ,� c j Cb, lb ?xCp� o N. ?r' N H� O O C 4 r_(A r, O� Cb 1 J A c n� IIV O N a y 3 y �\ 0 cb to j y ` III N j J O O? j' T y con °� ° o�`O ia4(n2 N In D a^ j' ycb O Cb J O r A p c=p p Z oa o0oacpn ='o� CbC) I, _ `o aymcbe2Z°o$�o Zr °'C O �aR ?0 4J•z I3 C `�Z A`�ro:E yNJ O N •-. UI n _y„ y n. 0 EG U fC OS H -I 4l j : • ' � O n cep j' o �D CX .p cb `� A cp I A O O Sk O0 ZrZ O <D ° AC �a OL ip Aj N j•N0.J.,, n•L r Cb o ao ° o q a� o 0 J• o -,0c�4 a o �. CID Cb Zr Z y a ° cCCD 1 O O n ^• ^' 7ta �cD rn O Cb s� J Cb cb c?e �, rb J Cb fD W 3 t� c1p 0 0 J C n' y •J.. Cb O• p 0 0 J S? CbcSD ; ° to a ?Za �o N 00t W 4 cD cD rb Z'O + j n a O S O 00 0?`ICto CbIInN a Cb. cep �. � ° y cab R O O ,cAD 0 ' J •+ N >z „• 3 J o Q•O SZIIIII , W N vai m o00 ;JCbcx o O J V) S J cO cp j. O ? Ji`OOcCb a �m moo° VJ' Q 5* 00 3 th Q r Q Cb n 4 0 `1° S cSp ,,, p O I OA UI"%-,y`O A a Cb S I O O •A+•SJ 0. S I c m Jz"o� Cb O :3 Sx A I to CA � O° 2c o t �\Nci Cb �;000?? �. Cb\O o 00% o O o m cb �ycae^ A r (n „cp lb IZ O R U „ Cb I n N 17 n- Ow \ 4ja �Yor4'LO �rr� 0 �, o Qo o4•• l9�9 J J j !yam?, ♦/ �Q\/ \ 9 ro 65 \\ J t T; 0149\�� / 9ti�/ IV O \ / PO . 'rCt am \PIt �\ an 00 ... _... I y� Fin -per 4e I � tg u; Cb mi SA •fl s � � I� I o I a of ry V •9y e' of o� IO I I - I `$sr % !a? �YhSGOi�l �. \ q 'fr I 9�88 ��?v?s• I I it I cue V It \yamrb eo \ej/6 R�7f�f ...13�S1ss3gg6 !®?)7?8 — JI L U I O SurNsY linedbc. per l �• n /•e� - 2 oIi f � I U a \ No f o Afof rotioy' / ^ I / v v, �p bn �a /� iEost line of Cowemment Lot 1, Sec, 23 ]nab `•` // z 5 ♦ /% /: n � n N025051 E 1851,96 v$ aw O N 3 fap JO p• J 0 m w 3 En N O N C O� J J a Ns C � r j• O y r J N J 0. t p � m �. R 01 O j N cD C O+ to O J o '^ R V Orono Police Department Crime Summary Report Cities: MOUND Date Range: 1/12022 12:00:01 AM- 1/312022 1159:59 PM Crime Category: Aggravated Assault 609.713.3(a)(1) Threats of Violence - Cause or Attempt Cause Terror 144.4165 Smoking, Chewing Tobacco, or E-cigarettes Prohibited in Public or Charter School 46-141 (Mound)Noise in residential areas 1 I 1 1 609.352.2a(3) Distribute via Electronic Communication Material that Relates/Describes Sexual Conduct to a Child 1 Crime Category: Burglary/Breaking & Entering 609.582.1 Burglary -1st Degree Crime Category: Disorderly Conduct 609.72.1(3) Disorderly Conduct - Offensive/Abusive/Boisterous/Noisy/Obscene 169A.20.1(1) Traffic - DWI - Operate Motor Vehicle Under Influence of Alcohol 169A.20.1(5) Traffic - DWI - Operate Motor Vehicle - Alcohol Concentration 0.08 Within 2 Hours 169A.26.1(a) Traffic - DWI - Third -Degree Driving While Impaired; 1 Aggravating Factor 169A.27.1 DWI - Fourth -Degree Driving While Impaired; Described 1 1 1 2 1 1 152.092(a) Drugs- Possession of Drug Paraphernalia- Use or Possession Prohibited 2 152.092(b) Drugs - Possession of Drug Paraphernalia - Use/Possession - Violate paragraph (a) two or more times 1 609.52.2(a)(4) Theft -By Swindle 609.527.3(6) Identity Theft - Offense is related to possession or distribution of pornographic work Crime Category: Non -Reportable 168.09.4 Motor Vehicle Registration - Operate Vehicle With Expired Registration 1 69.06.5(a)(1 )(i) Traffic Regulations -Failure to Yield to Vehicle/Pedestrian Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:05:48 PM Report: OR - FBR - Crime Summary Report 2 1 Page 1 of 3 278 169.20.3(b) Traffic Regulation - Driver Fails to Stop for STOP Sign. 169.20.5(f) Traffic Regulation - Driver Intentionally Obstructs Emergency Vehicle 169.791.2(a) Traffic Regulation - Driver Must Carry Proof of Insurance when Operating Vehicle 171.24.2 Traffic -Drivers License -Driving After Revocation 171.24.5 Traffic-DL-Driving after cancellation -inimical to public safety ACPD ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE ACPDD ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE -DEER ACPDFO ACC -VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE -FIXED OBJECT ACPDHR ACC -MOTOR VEH PROPERTY DAMAGE -HIT & RUN ACPI ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PERSONAL INJURY ACPUB ACC -ACCIDENT PUBLIC ADBKADMIN BACKGROUND AL FAIL ALARM FALSE ALFIRE ALARM FIRE ANAL ANIMAL AT LARGE ANDD ANIMAL DANGEROUS DOG ANINJ ANIMAL INJURED/SICK ASFD ASSIST FIRE DEPT ASLI FT LIFT ASSIST ASMOT ASSIST MOTORIST ASOAASSIST OTHER AGENCY ASPUB ASSIST PUBLIC DEATH DEATH INVESTIGATION DISDOM DISTURB DOMESTIC DISFIG DISTURB FIGHT DISHAR DISTURB HARASSMENT DISNEI DISTURB NEIGHBORHOOD DISNOI DISTURB NOISE COMPLAINT DISUNW DISTURB UNWANTED PERSON FIRECO FIRE CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR FIREOTH FIRE ALL OTHER FOPR FOUND PROPERTY JUVPROB JUV-CHILD PROBLEM JUVPROT JUV-CHILD PROTECTION MED MEDICAL MEDCR MEDICAL CRISIS MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH MIS911 MISC FALSE 911 CALL MISBOM MISC OFCR BOMB THREAT Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:05:48 PM Report: OR - FBR - Crime Summary Report Page 2 of 3 279 MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER MISDEER MISC OFCR DEER CAR KILL FOSS PERMIT MISFRA MISC OFCR FRAUD MISIMP MISC OFCR VEHICLE IMPOUND MISINFO MISC OFCR INFORMATION MISLIC MISC OFCR LICENSE PLATE PICK-UP MISLOC MISC OFCR VEHICLE LOCKOUT MISSCAM MISC OFCR SCAM/SWINDLE MISTRES MISC OFCR TRESPASS NOTICE SERVED MISUTL MISC OFCR UTILITIES MISWA MISC OFCR WARRANT ARREST MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK ORDNUI ORD NUISANCE ORD VIOLATION SUSACT SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY SUSPER SUSPICIOUS PERSON Crime Category: Simple Assault 609.2242.1(2) Domestic Assault -Misdemeanor -Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily Harm on Another Crime Category: Theft From Motor Vehicle 609.52.2(a)(1) Theft-Take/Use/Transfer Movable Prop -No Consent Crime M: Weapon Law Violations 609.66.1a(a)(3) Dangerous Weapons -Reckless Discharge of Firearm Within a Municipality 624.714.1a Carry/Possess Pistol w/out Permit - Public Place - Gross Misdemeanor; Second or Subsequent - Felony Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:05:48 PM Report: OR - FBR - Crime Summary Report 5 1 3 1 4 1 3 1 2 1 2 16 1 2 3 1 2 Page 3 of 3 WE Orono Police Department Activity Report - Public (If Juvenile involved, no address provided) Cities: MOUND Date Range: 1/1/2022 12:00:01 AM - 1/31/2022 11:59:59 PM Offense: DISDOM DISTURB DOMESTIC Offense: MED MEDICAL Offense: MED MEDICAL Offense: ACPD ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE Case: OR22000013 Reported: 1/1/2022;5:00:04 PM Address:MONMOUTH RD MOUND Offense: ALFIRE ALARM FIRE Offense: ACPDD ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE -DEER Offense: SUSACT SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000022 Reported: 1/2/2022 201:54 AM Address, COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER Case: OR22000028 Reported: 1/2/2022 9:13:29 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000034 Reported: 1/2/2022'4:06:40 PM Address: UNWOODRIDGE RD MOUND Offense: DISUNW DISTURB UNWANTED PERSON Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case; OR22000040' Reported: 1/2/2022 8:33:09 PM Address; WOODRIDGE R© MOUND ' Offense: DISUNW DISTURB UNWANTED PERSON Offense: 152.092(a) Drugs - Possession of Drug Paraphernalia - Use or Possession Prohibited Case: OR22000057 Reported: 1/312022,11:39:33 AM Address: 10LANGDON LN MOUND Offense: ANAL ANIMAL AT LARGE Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 28 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Page 1 of 10 Offense: DISNOI DISTURB NOISE COMPLAINT Case: OR22000080 Reported: 1/4/20222:24:01 AM Address: kdGRANDVIEW BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR2200008 ; . Reporiedc 1%4/2022 4:48:23 AM ,. Address: COMMERCE BLVD '. `MOUND Offense: 609.72.1(3) Disorderly Conduct - Offensive/Abusive/Boisterous/Noisy/Obscene Case: OR2200008$ Reported: 1 /2022 8:01,59 AM Address: THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: MISLOC MISC OFCR VEHICLE LOCKOUT Case; OR22000096 Reported:,1/4/202211:45:26 AM , Address: VIEW DR - MOUND Y Offense: DISDOM DISTURB DOMESTIC Case: OR22000109 Reported: 1/5/2022'7:41:33 AM, - Address: BARTLETT BLVD & HIGHLAND,BLVD MOUND Offense: ACPDFO ACC -VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE -FIXED OBJECT Case: OR22000111 Reported:,1/5/2022 917:04 AM Address:tS COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000117 Reported: 1/61202211;01:20 AM ` Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000122 Reported: 1/5/20224:21:21 PM , Address; "THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: ASLIFT LIFT ASSIST Case: OR22000132, Reported: 1/6/202210:03:44 AM Address: SHORELINE DR MOUND Offense: MISINT MISC OFCR INTELLIGENCE INFO Case: OR22000133 Reported: 1/6/2022 10:18:57 AM Address: MCOMMERCE,BLVD MOUND Offense: 609.52.2(a)(4) Theft -By Swindle Case: OR22600134 Reported.,1/6/202210.45:45 AM Address: ii lWbSOR RD MOUND Offense: MISFRA MISC OFCR FRAUD Case: OR22�100141 Aeported:,1/6/20221,12:08 PM _ "Address: SUGAR MILS LN MOUND Offense: MISFRA MISC OFCR FRAUD Case: OR22000149 Reported- 1/7/202212:07:50 AM Address: jW COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: SUSPER SUSPICIOUS PERSON Offense: JUVPROT JUV-CHILD PROTECTION Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 282 Page 2 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case: OR22000159 Reported: 1/712022'11:56:15 AM Address: MOUND Offense: JUVABU JUV-CHILD ABUSE 'Case: OR22000161 Reported: VM022 1 1:30:00 AM Address: _ MOUND Offense: 144.4165 Smoking, Chewing Tobacco, or E-cigarettes Prohibited in Public or Charter School Case: OR22000166 Reported: 1/7120212'4:07:33 PM' Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case:.OR22000168 Reportetl; 1/7/2022 5:23:03�PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case: OR22000170 Reported: 1/M022 7:26:57 PM ` Address: MILLPOND LN MOUND Offense: MIS911 MISC FALSE 911 CALL Case: OR22000172 Reported: 1/712022'8:24:57 PM ;. Address: IVESTEDGE BLVD MOUND Offense: ALFAL ALARM FALSE Case: OR22000175 Reported: 1/7/2022 9:38:13 PM Address: JWWILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case; OR22000180 Reported: 1/8/2022 2:09:02 AM Address:BASSWOOD LN ' MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case:OR22000204 Repo rted:1/8/20228:17:07'PM Address: " MOUND Offense: 169.06.5(a)(1)(i) Traffic Regulations -Failure to Yield to Vehicle/Pedestrian Offense: ACPD ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY DAMAGE Case: OR22000208 Reported: 1/9/2022 10:15:16 AM Address: GRANDVIEW BLVD ' MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000209 Reported: 1/9/2022' 10:20:19 AM Address: THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: MISLOC MISC OFCR VEHICLE LOCKOUT Case OR22000216 Reported: 9/q/2022 7:49:24 PM Address: jWCOMMERCE BLVD, _ 'MOUND Offense: ACPDHR ACC -MOTOR VEH PROPERTY DAMAGE -HIT & RUN Case; OR22000229 Reported: 1/10/2022 8:21,21 AM Address: MOUND Offense: 609.527.3(6) Identity Theft - Offense is related to possession or distribution of pornographic work Case; OR22000233 Reported: 1/10/202211:32:06 AM Address: WILSHIRE BLVD ." MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000236 Reported: 1/10/2022 2:50:00 PM Address'. COMMERCE BLVD MOUND;. Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case: OR22000237 Reported: ;1/10/2022 4:42:00 PM Address: MOSHORELINE DR MOUND Offense: ASOA ASSIST OTHER AGENCY Case: OR22000239 Reported: 1/10/2022 6:14:04 PM, Address: CENTERVIEW LN MOUND Offense: MISINFO MISC OFCR INFORMATION Case OR22000240 Reported: 1/10/2022 6:33:29 PM ; Address: I ISLAND VIEW DR MOUND Offense: MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 283 Page 3 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case: OR22000246 .' Reported: 1/10/202210:1,6:12 PM Address: W FAIRVIEW, LN MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000256, Reported: 1/11/2022 8:18:49 AM Atldress:W MILLPOND LN MOUND Offense: ANINJ ANIMAL INJURED/SICK Case: OR22000258 Reported: 1/11/2022 9:29:31 AM Address: HILLCREST RD MOUND Offense: MISUTL MISC OFCR UTILITIES Case: OR22000261 Reported: 1/11/2022 1:06:53 PM Address: 4WRICHMOND RD MOUND Offense: ANAL ANIMAL AT LARGE Case: OR22000267 Reported: 1/11/2022 7;45:42 PM Address:86MAYWOOD RD MOUND Offense: MISWA MISC OFCR WARRANT ARREST Case: OR22000271 Reported: 1/11/2022 8:38:37 PM Address: GALWAY RD MOUND,' Offense: DISHAR DISTURB HARASSMENT Case;'OR22000279 Reported: 1/11/202211.59:18 PM Address: EMERALD DR MOUND Offense: 169.20.3(b) Traffic Regulation - Driver Fails to Stop for STOP Sign. Offense: 169.20.5(f) Traffic Regulation - Driver Intentionally Obstructs Emergency Vehicle Offense: 169A.20.1(5) Traffic - DWI - Operate Motor Vehicle - Alcohol Concentration 0.08 Within 2 Hours Offense: 169A.27.1 DWI - Fourth -Degree Driving While Impaired; Described Case: OR22000283 Reported: 1/12/2022 8:10:50 AM Address: � WOODLYN RIDGE CT MOUND Offense: MISFRA MISC OFCR FRAUD Case: OR22000287 Reported: 1/12/202210:29:14 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case; OR22000296 Reported: 1/12/20221:47:34,PM Address: SHOREWOOD LN MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000297 Reported; 1/12/2022 2:21:32 PM Address: 1�BARTLETT BLVD MOUND Offense: MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER Case: OR22000306 Reported: 1/12/2022 5:50:01 PM Address: J0,GALWAY RD MOUND' Offense: DISHAR DISTURB HARASSMENT Case: OR22000307 Reported: 1/12/2022 6:23:17 PM Address: BASSWOOD LN MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000309 ' Reported: 1/12/2022 8:26:50 PM Address: OLD SCHOOL RD MOUND ' Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000311 Reported: 1/12/202210:57:51 PM Address; COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000313 Reported: 1/13/2022 5:15:14 AM Address: �TONKAWOOD RD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000320 Reported:1/13/202211:19:24 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MISWA MISC OFCR WARRANT ARREST Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 284 Page 4 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case: OR22000329 Reported: 1/13/2022 6:04:05 PM Atldress:O UXEDO BLVD MOUND. Offense: MISINFO MISC OFCR INFORMATION Case: 6R22000331 Reported: 1/13/2022 8,09:50 PM Address: MOW006RIDGE RD MOUND Offense: DISDOM DISTURB DOMESTIC Case:OR22000334Reported: 1/13/2022 9:00:00 PM Address : SHpRELINE,DR MOUND Offense: MISINFO MISC OFCR INFORMATION Case: OR22000341 Reported. 1/14/2022 8:44:06 AM Address: JPWCYPRESS LN MOUND Offense: 152.092(a) Drugs - Possession of Drug Paraphernalia - Use or Possession Prohibited Offense: 152.092(b) Drugs - Possession of Drug Paraphernalia - Use/Possession - Violate paragraph (a) two or more times Offense: 168.09.4 Motor Vehicle Registration - Operate Vehicle With Expired Registration Case: OR22000342 Reported: 1/14/2022 8:58:45 AM Address: JOSHOREWOOD LN MOUND', " Offense: ASPUB ASSIST PUBLIC Case: OR22000344: Reported: 1/14/20221:28:16 PM, Address: JONES LN MOUND Offense: JUVPROB JUV-CHILD PROBLEM Case: OR22b00348' Reported; 1/14/2022 4:24:48 PM Address: TYRONE LN MOUND Offense: DISNEI DISTURB NEIGHBORHOOD Case: OR22000360 Reported: 1/15/202210:46:32 AM Address: JMEDGEWATER DR MOUND " Offense: DISNOI DISTURB NOISE COMPLAINT Case:OR22000368"° Reported: 1/1512022 5:52:09 PM Address�COMMERCE"BEND MOUND. Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000369 : Reported: 1/15/2022 6:11:34 PM Address:" MOUND " Offense: 609.352.2a(3) Distribute via Electronic Communication Material that Relates/Describes Sexual Conduct to a Child Case: OR22000370 Reported: 1/15/2022 6:48:17 PM Address: BARTLETT BLVD & GARDEN LN MOUND Offense: ANINJ ANIMAL INJURED/SICK Case: OR22000372 Reported: 1/15/2022 7:18:20 PM Address: MOGUMWOOD RD MOUND " Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000383 Reported: 1/16/202210:53:14 AM Address:JWLYNWOOD BLVD MOUND Offense: 609.582.1 Burglary -1st Degree Offense: 609.66.1a(a)(3) Dangerous Weapons -Reckless Discharge of Firearm Within a Municipality Offense: 609.713.3(a)(1) Threats of Violence - Cause or Attempt Cause Terror Offense: FOPR FOUND PROPERTY Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 285 Page 5 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case; OR22000396 Reported: 1/16/2022 11:09:08 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000397 Reported: 1/17/202212:28:44 AM Address: WATERBURY RD MOUND Offense: 609.2242.1(2) Domestic Assault -Misdemeanor -Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily Harm on Another Case: OR22000399 Reported: 1/17/2022 8:25:47 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000405 Reported: 1/17/2022 12*41:10 PM Address: 3LD SCHOOL RD MOUND " Offense: MISINFO MISC OFCR INFORMATION Case: OR22000406Reported: 1/1712022 4:44:10 PM ' Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MISTRES MISC OFCR TRESPASS NOTICE SERVED Case: OR22000409 Reported: 1/17/2022 7:38:09 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000415 Reported: 1/17/202210:38:40 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000420 Reported: 1118/202211:02:40 AM Address: 610DORCHESTER RD' 'MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000423 Reported: 1/18/202212:45:58 PM Address:a LYNWOOD BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000433 Reported: 1/18/2022 4:03:22 PM Address:LYNWOOD BLVD, IjW MOUND Offense: ASFD ASSIST FIRE DEPT Case; OR22000440 Reported: 1/18/2022 8:44:29 PM Address: 40WILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: 168.09.4 Motor Vehicle Registration - Operate Vehicle With Expired Registration Offense: 169.791.2(a) Traffic Regulation - Driver Must Carry Proof of Insurance when Operating Vehicle Offense: 171.24.2 Traffic -Drivers License -Driving After Revocation Case: OR22000446 Reported: 1/19/2022 8:02:39 AM Address:MWWESTEDGE BLVD_ MOUND � Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000447 Reported:'1/19/2022 8:12:18 AM Address -"OLD SCHOOL RD MOUND ' Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case: OR22000449 Reported: 1/19/202211:20:05 AM Address: MIN ILSHIRE BLVD MOUND 1 Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000451 Reported: 1/19/20221:36:06 PM Address: WILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: 609.52.2(a)(1) Theft-Take/Use/Transfer Movable Prop -No Consent Case: OR22000457 Reported: 1/19/2022 8:28;21 PM Address: HANOVER RD MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000459 Reported: ;1/19/2022 10:43:26 PM Address: BARTLETT BLVD MOUND Offense: SUSACT SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 286 Page 6 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case: OR22000460 Reported: 1/19/2022 11:20:55 PM Address: OLD SCHOOL RD MOUND Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case: OR22060463Reported: 1/20/2022 8:00:09 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD & AUDITORS RD MOUND Offense: ACPI ACC -MOTOR VEHICLE PERSONAL INJURY Case: OR22000464 Reported: 1/20/2022 8:26:08,AM Address.�HANOVER RD ; " MOUND . Offense: MISIMP MISC OFCR VEHICLE IMPOUND Case: OR22000481 Reported: 1/20/2022 4:02:48 PM Address:1013EDFORD RD MOUND_ Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000483 Reported: 1/20/2022 4:42:18 PM Address: WILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: MISSCAM MISC OFCR SCAM/SWINDLE Case: OR22000485 Reported: 1/20/2022 7:45:03 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000490 Reported: 1/21/2022 4:05:16 AM Address: JAIRVIEW LN MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000496 Reported: 1/21/2022 8:59:43 AM Address: GRANDVIEW BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000504 Reported: 1/21/20221:45:14 PM Address: SINCLAIR RD MOUND, Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000506 ' Reported: 1/21/2022 533:53 PM Address:J�THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: ASLIFT LIFT ASSIST Case: OR22000511 Reported: 1/21/2022 8:11:22 PM Address LAFAYETTE LN MOUND Offense: MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER Case: OR22000512 Reported: 1/21/2022 8:27:37 PM Address WILSHIRE BLVD MOUND : Offense: MED MEDICAL Ease: OR2200©514 : Reported: 1/21/2022 8:33:43 PM ` Address:�COMMERCE BLVD'` MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000515 Reported: 1/21/2022 9:26:52 PM Address;�COMMERCE BLVD A, MOUND, Offense: ASPUB ASSIST PUBLIC Case: OR22000516 Reported: 1/21/2022 9:47:01 PM AddressdMTUXEDO BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case:'OR22000518 Reported:' 1/21/202211:15:22 PM Address: BARTLETT BLVD MOUND Offense: MISDEER MISC OFCR DEER CAR KILL POSS PERMIT Case: OR22000526 Reported: 1/22/2022 9:31:13 AM Address: WESTEDGE BLVD_' . MOUND ' Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000529 Reported: 1/22/20221:29:50 PM. Address: COMMERCE BLVD,, MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 287 Page 7 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case; OR22000535 I Reported: 1/221/2022 5:59:34 PM Address: ILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: DISUNW DISTURB UNWANTED PERSON Offense: MISTRES MISC OFCR TRESPASS NOTICE SERVED Case: OR22000538 Reported: 1/22/2022 8:50:05 PM Address:MCOMMERCE BLVD,,, MOUND Offense: MISLOC MISC OFCR VEHICLE LOCKOUT Case: OR22000539Reported; 1/22/2022 9:40:47 PM Address: DICKENS LN & RIDGEWOOD RD ' MOUND Offense: ASMOT ASSIST MOTORIST Case: OR22000540 Reported: 1/22/2022 10:34:38 PM Address: COLONY LN MOUND , Offense: DISNOI DISTURB NOISE COMPLAINT Case: OR22000542 Reported: 1/22/2022 11:19:28 PM Address:MWILSHIRE BLVD MOUND, Offense: ASPUB ASSIST PUBLIC M Case: OR22000552 Reported: 1/23/2022 5:20:44 AM" Addresst VILLAGE TRL MOUND Offense: MEDCR MEDICAL CRISIS Case' : OR22000553 Reported: 1/23/2022 8:13:38 AM AddressUNSET RD MOUND, Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case: OR22000557 Reported: 1/23/2022 10:05:22,AM Address:COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: ALFAL ALARM FALSE Case: OR22000565 Reported: 1/23/2022 5:11:31 PM Address: LOST LAKE "RD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000567 Reported: 1/23/2022 6:56:41 PM Address:BARTLETT'BLVD MOUND Offense: DISDOM DISTURB DOMESTIC Case: OR22000571 Reported: 1/2412022 1:54:20 AM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL .Case: OR22000577 Reported: 1/24/2022 5.46:38 AM Address: jjjjjfMLSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: DEATH DEATH INVESTIGATION Case:'OR22000500 Reported: A/2412022 2.46:49 PIM ,, - Addr, jjt IXEDOBLVD, MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000591 Reported: 1/24/2022 41:28:22 PM Address; TYRONE LN MOUND Offense: ORDNUI ORD NUISANCE ORD VIOLATION Case: OR22000593 Reported: 1/24/2022 5:19:31 PM Address. FAIRVIEW LN MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000595 Reported: 1/24/2022 6:09:28 PM AddressTUXEDO BLVD MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Gase:.OR22000600 Reported: 1/25l2022 2:01:12 AM Address: CEDAR LN "MOUND Offense: MIS911 MISC FALSE 911 CALL Case: OR22000608 Reported: 1/25/2022 8:53:47 AM' f Address: WESTEDGE BLVD MOUND Offense: ACPUB ACC -ACCIDENT PUBLIC Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 288 Page 8 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case; OR22000620 Reported: 1/25/2022 8:11:05 PM Address: TUXEDO BLVD MOUND Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000627 Reported: 1126/2022 4:29:57 AM Address: EDGEWATER DR MOUND Offense: SUSPER SUSPICIOUS PERSON .Case: OR22000630 Reported: 1/26/2022 7:18:15 AM Address: CHATEAU LN & SHORELINE DR MOUND Offense: FIREOTH FIRE ALL OTHER Case: OR22000631Reported; 1/26/2022 8:09:04 AM Address: WILSHIRE BLVD MOUND Offense: ADBK ADMIN BACKGROUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Offense: MISWEL MISC OFCR WELFARE CHECK Case: OR22000643 Reported: 1/26/2022 2:58:37 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000644 Reported: 1/26/2022 6:0107 PM -Address: THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: ASLIFT LIFT ASSIST Case: OR22000652 Reported; 1/27/202211:36:15 AM Address: Sol OST LAKE RD MOUND ` Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000655 Reported: 1/27/2M22 2:34:39 PM Address OSEWOOD LN� Now MOUND Offense: FIRECO FIRE CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR Case: OR22000659 Reported: 1/2712022 6:42:10 PM Address:COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case:OR22000669 Reported: 1/28/202212:52:37 PM Address: FAIRVIEW LN , ` " MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000677 ". Reported: 1/28/2022 3:27:25 PM " Address: CEDAR LN MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000680 Reported: 1/28/2022 6:02:44 PM Address: TUXEDO ;BLVD & DORCHESTER RD MOUND Offense: ANDD ANIMAL DANGEROUS DOG Case: OR22000688 Reported: 1/29/2022 5:12:52 AM Address:JwCOMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000689 " " Reported; 1/29/2022 7:52:25 AM Address: LOST LAKE CT &SHORELINE DR MOUND " Offense: 171.24.5 Traffic-DL-Driving after cancellation -inimical to public safety Offense: MISLIC MISC OFCR LICENSE PLATE PICK-UP Case: OR22000690 Reported:" 1/29/2022 9:46:38 AM Address: CANARY LN & THREE POINTS BLVD MOUND Offense: 169A.20.1(1) Traffic - DWI - Operate Motor Vehicle Under Influence of Alcohol Offense: 169A.20.1(5) Traffic - DWI - Operate Motor Vehicle - Alcohol Concentration 0.08 Within 2 Hours Offense: 169A.26.1(a) Traffic - DWI - Third -Degree Driving While Impaired; 1 Aggravating Factor Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM 289 Page 9 of 10 Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public Case: OR22,000695 Reported: 1/29/2022 6:04:39 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: MED MEDICAL Case: OR22000707 Reported: 1/29/2022 9:34:29 PM Address: COMMERCE BLVD MOUND Offense: DISFIG DISTURB FIGHT Case: OR22000721Reported: 1/30/202210:50:13 AM Address: ROXBURY LN MOUND Offense: MEDMH MEDICAL MENTAL HEALTH Case, OR22000730 Reported: 1/30/20224:54:08 PM Address:WCENTERVIEW LN MOUND Offense: MISCIV MISC PUBLIC CIVIL MATTER Total Cases: 161 Report Ran: 2/1/2022 1:02:24 PM Report: OR - FBR - Activity Report - Public 290 Page 10 of 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Rita Trapp, Consulting Planners DATE: February 3, 2022 SUBJECT: Northland Mound (Case No. 21-18) Public Hearings — Major SubdivisionPreliminaryPlat; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Planned Unit Development in the Shoreland Area to construct a 104-unit market rate, multi family apartment project; and street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street. Also, review/discussion/consideration of development site plans and a public lands permit to allow for construction to occur on the City owned property immediately east of the site APPLICANT: Brian Farrell, Northland Real Estate Group OWNER: Arthur and Patricia Meisel LOCATION: Property southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail — involves parcels part of"KennedVs Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka" plat MEETING DATE: February 8, 2022 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Mixed Use —Downtown Lakes Mixed Use District ZONING: Mixed Use Downtown (MU -D) Summary The applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has applied for multiple land use and subdivision approvals for the development of a site on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon. The site is located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail. The proposed development will include a 104-unit market rate, multi family building, including one floor of enclosed parking. The applicants are proposing to construct a 104-unit market rate multi family building consisting of 33 studio, 40 one bedroom, and 31 two bedroom units. The project will also have 93 spaces of ground floor enclosed parking. Some of the amenities proposed for the project include a rooftop patio, outdoor terraces, fitness facilities, a dog wash, and a community room. 291 Project Plans Due to file size, the City Council packet contains a site location map and site plan. The application and full plan set is available at this link. Hardcopies of plans will be provided to City Council members upon individual request. Public Hearings The City Council will be holding public hearings for the major subdivision -preliminary plat, conditional use permit for a planned unit development in a shoreland area, and the vacation of the previously platted, but never developed right-of-ways. The notice of public hearings was published on January 22, 2022 in the Laker and posted on the City Hall bulletin board on January 18, 2022. The public hearing notice was also mailed to all affected property owners located within 350 feet of the project area on January 20, 2022. Information was also posted on the City's website on January 20, 2022. It should also be noted that vacation requests that involve right-of-way that extend to public waters must be considered by the MN Department of Natural Resources (Mn DNR). Staff has followed notice procedures including written notification provided on December 7th about the City Council public hearing. MnDNR staff contacted Mound Staff on December 29th to acknowledge receipt of the information and that comment would be forthcoming and in advance of the scheduled City Council public hearing. Staff also contacted MnDNR staff 15 days in advance of the public hearing about the proposed vacation. MnDNR staff indicated that the City had met its notice obligations. Public Comments Received The City received the following comments between February 2, 2022 and 11:00 a.m. on February 3, 2022: Amanda Moodie I am writing once again to implore the city and the developer to take a serious look at the traffic and daily flow of the proposed shared driveway for the property in question near the OLL Church and school. As a parent of two OLL students, I have numerous safety concerns about the shared driveway proposed. This is the primary roadway for access to the school and is used for bus transfers as well as DAILY car lines for drop off and pick up of students. There will no doubt be resident frustration and complaints as well as potential accidents if the driveway is shared. I am also concerned over the nonchalant way the developer states he has built near other Churches ( but not schools) and there has not been an issue with sharing roadways. There is a BIG difference between a Church and a Church with a school. OLL has over 200 kids enrolled for next year. There is DAILY traffic at six different times a day for the three different drop off and pick up times ( middle school, elementary and preschool). These lines can often wrap around the parking lot and extend well past the 292 proposed development entrance and out near the street. If a guest tried to go around the carline in frustration, it would lead them towards where the children cross to get to their parents' car. There are children walking and riding bikes to and from school and crossing that parking lot DAILY. This is not the same as anything else the developer has planned for. A Church has traffic on Weekends only when residents are home and are not coming and going to work. This project is also different as this is not just a parking lot with a separate playground behind the building. It acts as a playground for the school with only a rope separating parking from the playground. Because we DO NOT get much traffic during the day, there has not been a safety risk. It would only take one missed turn into the development for a guest to be forced to turn left through our parking lot and suddenly be driving toward the playground without realizing it. The students play in that space, they don't just simply cross it. They use the space from the school to the grass throughout the day. They have gym outside, take breaks for free play, walk over to their outdoor classroom and of course daily recess. These are kids as small as three years old up to fourteen. We can not risk their safety with this shared driveway. As a concerned parent and resident, I feel the developer and the city need to spend time with the school to see how this space is used. Talk with our principal about flow patterns. Walk through the school and see where students access the playground and cross each day. See where the driveway is roped off etc... Unfortunately, winter is not as accurate of a gauge to measure the constant flow of students. I feel it would be in the developer and the cities benefit to work with the Church/school and not make enemies. Ideally, a COMPLETELY separate driveway would be used. There are 2 additional entrances along commerce that could be considered for accesses even if it were for access during pick up and drop off times. In addition, curbs need to clearly separate the development BEFORE the parking lot. Very specific signage and speed bumps need to be considered. A discussion on how to avoid guests trying to go around pick up lines should be addressed. While I am sure no one wants to redesign a computer model, returning to the drawing board and having an open mind is crucial when it comes to the safety of children. It is easier (and cost effective) to work together as a community NOW rather than to trying to fix the no doubt problems this will create later. Please consider hearing me out and taking my concerns to the developer to consider. This school and Church are pillars on Mound. They have been here for many decades to support this community. We need to make this a copacetic relationship. Thank you for your time, 293 Jo Mueller I would like to express my thoughts on the proposed 104 unit multi -family project. 1) 1 think the density proposed is too high for the already busy intersections in this part of Mound. Proposal is for 104 units = 104+ people or couples or families with, most likely, many more than 104 vehicles. We already have near -misses in Spring, Summer and Fall in the area where the Dakota Trail crosses Hsy 110. Are City planners willing to add that much more traffic congestion into this precarious situation?? 2) 1 think the proposed size of this development is too large for this shoreline environment. The research and proposals behind the allowable density (15 units per acres) in the Comprehensive Plan should be honored, and not compromised for the sake of profit for a developer. Thank you for considering these concerns. Aaron and Meaghan Rasset I would like to take a minute to express my opposition to the multi unit living structure that is trying to be built next to Our Lady of the Lake. My children both attend that school and it is already hard enough getting in and it out of the parking lot as it is today. Now you triple the amount of traffic and add children into the mix this just seems like a recipe for disaster. The flow of traffic simply can not handle that increase in volume trying to get out onto the highway. There will be significant backups and an increased amount of accidents. Also in todays age I don't believe it is the best idea to have a large apartment type structure that close to an elementary school. There are a lot of crazies out there and right now it is a nice safe and secure area back there that is not really accessed by the general public. The children can all feel safe while they are at school along with the parents having a piece of mind that there are no weirdos sitting watching out their window waiting for the right time to abduct a child. Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. Please think about the children when making any decisions. Ginger Skaia My name is Ginger Skaja and I have been a member of the surrounding Mound community for over twenty years. Our eldest is a graduate of Mound Westonka High School and our youngest children attend Our Lady of the Lake Catholic School. Upon attending the Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday, February 1, 2022 1 continue to have questions and concerns about the appropriateness of the proposed apartment complex project. 294 Congestion and traffic flow: As illustrated at the meeting, the complex would have one designated entry and one exit. It became clear to me that those proposing the project recognize there are other means in and out, but did not have ideas on how to manage it. It was my understanding that the burden would fall on the city and business owners, not the applicant. When addressing the exit, which is a shared entry and exit point for OLL church, OLL preschool through 8th grade school, and the local businesses, the presenter on behalf of the city said that "people would figure it out." That plan, or lack thereof, is deeply concerning. It is fair to question traffic studies from 2016 as relevant to this proposal. We've yet to see the impact of closing Auditors Road and the 52 unit development. Parking: 104 units. 127 parking spaces. I recognize the applicant believes their algorithms calculate for this. I question it. I've been a renter in a high end unit. Everyone in a studio had a vehicle, everyone in a one bedroom did and most two bedroom units each had a vehicle as well. Many were rented by roommates whereas each had a vehicle. This doesn't account for visitors. The applicant noted that in past projects they've worked out deals to use other's parking lots during off peak hours. To me, this sounds like they recognize the parking deficit, but want to push on and just hope things will work out after the fact. Safety: I have great concern for students that pass through this parking lot area for drop-off, pick-up, bus transfers to our area schools, and recess. Included in my concern are the families of these students, the teachers, the bus drivers, business owners, business patrons, parishioners and tenants of the proposed complex. There was no clear or credible answer given for these concerns. What is to keep a tenant that doesn't want to wait at the exit point from rushing through the OLL lot to exit near the playground? In terms of the exit point for the proposed tenants, that area is already very tight. There are business entrances on that side as well. Trying to turn left can be difficult as is and adding 104 units worth of people accessing the same point of exit appears unsafe and irresponsible with the current information provided. Again, who does the safety management burden fall on? What could that possibly entail? Traffic lights, police presence etc? 295 I, like so many others, want Mound to be a vibrant and robust community. With that, being mindful that what draws us here, and what is often promoted, is our "small town" feel. Thoughtful and purposeful decision making is critical. The current proposal for this 104 unit complex still has many variables that appear to be inconvenient or difficult to address upfront. The concerns I've listed affect the daily lives of so many people. The information provided at the planning commission meeting demonstrated this project may be better suited elsewhere. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed the land use and subdivision requests at their January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 meetings. The approved meeting minutes from the January 4, 2022 meeting have been included. Also included are the draft minutes from the February 1, 2022 meeting. Community members provided public comment at both meetings. Clarification was provided about stormwater management, snow storage, construction staging, and lighting. Community members expressed concerned about the sufficiency of parking spaces; traffic circulation in the project area — especially with OLL's school; views across Lake Langdon; environmental impacts; and tree removal; As requested by the Planning Commission, the applicant prepared supplemental materials to address these questions and concerns. In its consideration of the project the Planning Commission noted that the application was substantially conforming to the City's regulation. The Planning Commission expressed concern, however, about the potential for traffic conflicts given existing conditions. Commissioners expressed a desire for the City and all involved parties to continue to explore options to address concerns. In addition, the Planning Commission hoped that the City would identify a process by which traffic issues could be reevaluated and addressed once the project was constructed. As the applicant is limited to improvements on their property or where they have rights, such as through the private easement, Staff has included a revised condition related to the design of the private roadway that serves as the project's entry/exit onto Commerce Boulevard, as well as an additional condition which adds clarifying signage at the exit from their garage entry area that clarifies that left turns out of their parking area are not allowed. After consideration of the supplemental information provided by the applicant and staff, the Planning Commission recommended approval of all of the land use and subdivision requests from the applicant. In addition, the Planning Commission made a determination that the sale of public property for the project was consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Supplemental Materials Included in the packet are the presentations slides from Staff. 296 Recommendation Given Staff and the Planning Commission recommendation for approval, the attached resolutions have been prepared for your consideration. 297 2/3/2022 Land Use and Subdivision Requests for Northland Mound CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 8, 2022 City Council Review Process 1. Staff presents about the requests 2. City Council ask questions of Staff 3. Applicant presents 4. City Council ask questions of the applicant 5. Public hearing conducted/public comments received 6. Public hearing/public comment period closed 7. City Council discusses requests amongst themselves 8. Action taken by City Council RM 1 2/3/2022 Public Hearing/Public Comments • Each individual should introduce themselves (name/address) • Comments should be directed to the City Council • Only one person can speak at a time • Comments shall be limited to one - 5 minute time • Commenters should be asked to respect everyone's time by limiting repetition and focusing on new information • The City Council will collect comments from a few individuals and then direct Staff or the Applicant to respond Overview to Project & Requests 299 2 2/3/2022 Location Just west of intersection of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail. Site guided mixed use in 2040 Comprehensive Plan and zoned — Mixed Use- Downtown Proposal • 104 unit market rate apartment • 33 studio • 40 one -bedroom • 31 two -bedroom units I 3 CORI MOUND CC PUBLIC HEARING r -,-I U M r-, r a s�s� 2/3n022 NORTHLAND MOUND CC PUBLIC HEARING 2/3/2022 Requests • Review, discussion and consideration of • Major Subdivision —Preliminary Plat • Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a planned unit development in a shoreland area • Vacation of right-of-way • Public lands permit • Site development plans Preliminary Plat_-_- • Site is 3.0 acres in size • Plat will create one lot 302 5 2/3/2022 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) • Tool for the development of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in a shoreland area • PUD intended to provide flexibility to support development and redevelopment, particularly in mixed use areas • PUDs required for projects in the Mixed Use — Downtown District • Intent for project to establish dimension and design standards • Site meets 1 acre minimum size for a PUD Vacation of Right -of -Way • Applicant is requesting the vacation of platted, but not constructed right-of-way 47� 303 9 2/3/2022 Public Lands Permit • Improvementof parking spaces public ROW immediately east of site • Landscaping • Curbing/stormwater management • Monumentsign Project Evaluation CIS 2/3/2022 Vacation of Rights -of -Way • Evaluation considers whether the right-of-way serves a public benefit • a right-of-way's current use • its potential to provide access, such as to a public water, • the benefit the City receives by putting property back on the tax rolls to facilitate a development/redevelopment project. Comprehensive Plan r a k �:. 13 • 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides site as Mixed Use • Identifies potential uses for the area as commercial and residential, including townhomes and multi -family • Densityis calculated on an area -wide basis. Staff determined that the number of units proposed fits with the number of allowed units in the Downtown Lakes Area 305 6 2/3/2022 �- � Site Plan Setbacks Almost the entire lot is more than 50 feet to the \ OHWL • Applicant is proposing a �. wetland buffer which is under review by MCWD\ i I Site Plan Site Design • Sidewalk shown around 1 building to each entrance • Bicycle racks installed in the enclosed parking area and at entrance " OHWL ` Buffer Setback Setback 'L as-u:�if_ CI. E 2/3/2022 Site Plan Building Height • Max in MU-D is 50 feet • Proposing Primary elevations of 47 feet or less Stair/elevator towers max of 54.5 feet • Cupola height is just under 51 feet at mid- point 307 10 2/3/2022 Traffic and Parking • Analysis completed by Professional Engineer/Professional Traffic Operations Engineer using the industry standard Trip Generation Manual, 111h Edition • Analysis reviewed by City Staff • Trip generation equates to a car entering onto Commerce every few minutes in the AM and every 4 minutes in the PM • Most recent average daily traffic for Commerce is 9,100 passes per day —traffic increase is less than 5%-which is considered de minimus to existing traffic conditions Table y: Trip Generation Calculation Onk Weekda Daily AM Peak PIA Peak In Qut Total N Qut Total Mdti-FamiyResidenhal 104 �wellirgUnds 472 B 30 38 25 1fi 41 Useable Open Space • Required to provide 20,800 square feet of open space for use by residents Applicant meets requirement with 21,014 square feet in balconies, patios, rooftop spaces,& outdoor lawn CI: 11 2/3/2022 Architectural Design • Building fronts should have 2 architectural elements • Building entrance shall have feature to protect peds I 12 2/3/2022 Site Plan Landscaping • Applicant proposing 53 trees - PUD can establish number of trees • Tree survey for western property underway • Staff will require mix of trees • Staff recommending changes to ground cover in some areas Site Plan Utilities • Sanitary sewer available from man holes either to north or south • Water service will need to extend from Commerce Blvd • Stormwater service to be determined in consult with MCWD 310 13 2/3/2022 Staff/Consultant/Agency/Utility Review Comments received from • CenterPoint Energy • Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority • Hennepin County Transportation • Metropolitan Council Interceptor Engineering Services • Three Rivers Park District Staff/Consultant/Agency/Utility Review Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Rules triggered • Erosion Control • Stormwater Management • Wetland Protection • Waterbody Crossings & Structures Applicant will be required to meet MCWD requirements 311 14 2/3/2022 Staff/Consultant/Agency/Utility Review Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Impervious surface The development proposes an impervious surface percentage exceeding that allowed within city code for shoreland residential zones. • Project in mixed -use district, not residential zone • Shoreland regulations in City Code state in business and industrial zones can be up to 75% with approved stormwater management plan • MCWD will approve stormwater management plan • Applicant is proposing 48% impervious surface for site Staff/Consultant/Agency/Utility Review Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Shoreland Density Has not demonstrate that 104 units consistent with shoreland density requirements • Mound is unable to meet shoreland density requirements for projects other than single-family residential as the method for calculating density is based on 10,000 square foot lots • City practice is to use the PUD process to allow for multi -family projects that exceed the shoreland tiering density requirements 312 15 2/3/2022 PC Review and Recommendation • Held public hearing on January 4, 2022 and received public commenton February 1, 2022 • Considered requests at January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 meetings • Discussion included concerns raised by community • Noted that the applicant had addressed requests for information • Expressed concern about traffic circulation but recognized that the issue is an existing condition and outside of the ability of the developmentto address • Unanimous recommendation of approval for all requests • Unanimous determination that the sale of City property is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan 313 16 2/3/2022 Recommendation 1. Hold the public hearings (major subdivision -preliminary plot, CUP and right-of-way vacation) 2. Consider the project -specific requests • Major subdivision -preliminary plat • Conditional Use Permit for a planned unit development in a shoreland area • Vacation of right-of-way • Public lands permit City parcel sale and consistencv with 2040 Como Plan City Council Review Process 1. Staff presents about the requests 2. City Council ask questions of Staff 3. Applicant presents 4. City Council ask questions of the applicant 5. Public hearing conducted/public comments received 6. Public hearing/public comment period closed 7. City Council discusses requests amongst themselves 8. Action taken by City Council 314 17 2/3/2022 Public Hearing/Public Comments • Each individual should introduce themselves (name/address) • Comments should be directed to the Planning Commission • Only one person can speak at a time • Comments shall be limited to one - 5 minute time • Commenters should be asked to respect everyone's time by limiting repetition and focusing on new information The Planning Commission will collect comments from a few individuals and then direct Staff or the Applicant to respond 315 16 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE VACATIONS IN NORTHLAND MOUND PLANNING CASE NO. 21-18 WHEREAS, the applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has submitted an application to vacate previously platted, but never constructed, right-of-way as described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subject site is generally located southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail and involves parcels which are part of Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, the vacations are being proposed to facilitate the platting of the major subdivision -preliminary plat called Northland Mound; and WHEREAS, the rights -of -way 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 February 8, 2022 meeting, the Planning Report for the January 4, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, the Planning Report for the February 1, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, and the submitted application and supporting materials from the applicant; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the requested vacations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested vacations at its January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 meetings and recommended the City Council approve the vacation request; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, the City Council of the City of Mound, after providing proper notice thereof pursuant to state law, held a public hearing on February 8, 2022 on the proposed right-of-way vacations to receive public testimony; and WHEREAS, in granting approval of the requested right-of-way vacations, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: 1. The vacation will facilitate the consolidation and platting of multiple parcels into the Northland Mound plat. 316 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. 4. The right of ways to be vacated shall be legally described, as needed, for the completion of proceedings and resolution. 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 vacations in the Northland Mound plat 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 major subdivisions -preliminary plat of Northland Mound is approved. 3. The City Manager, or designee, and City Attorney are authorized to carry out the intent of this resolution. 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 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 City Manager, or designee, and City Attorney are authorized to carry out the intent of this resolution Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of February, 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 317 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION -PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NORTHLAND MOUND PLANNING CASE NO. 21-18 WHEREAS, the applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has submitted a major subdivision —preliminary plat application to plat the proposed preliminary plat of Northland Mound as shown on Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subject site is generally located southwest of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail and involves parcels which are part of Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to develop one structure with a total of 104 units; and WHEREAS, the site has been guided by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for mixed use as part of the Downtown Lakes Mixed Use Area; and WHEREAS, the site has been zoned Mixed Use - Downtown; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the major subdivision -preliminary plat subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 4, 2022 to receive public testimony on the proposed Northland Mound major subdivision - preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission requested additional information from the applicant and tabled consideration of the request until its February 1, 2022 meeting; and WHEREAS, after further consideration at its February 1, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the major subdivision —preliminary plat request with conditions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462, the City Council of the City of Mound, after providing proper notice thereof pursuant to state law, held a public hearing on February 8, 2022 on the major subdivision -preliminary plat to receive public testimony; and WHEREAS, the City has considered the proposed project as it might affect public health, safety, or welfare and will be imposing conditions upon the approval addressing these considerations; and MR WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the practicality of the request, taking into consideration the present and future development of the property and the requirements of the Zoning, Subdivision Ordinances, and other official controls. WHEREAS, the City Council's decision on the major subdivision —preliminary plat application was made within the timelines included in Minnesota Statutes 462.358; and WHEREAS, in granting approval of the major subdivision -preliminary plat, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: The proposed major subdivision -preliminary plat is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. 2. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type of development and use being proposed. 3. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety, or welfare of the community. 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 approve the major subdivision -preliminary plat for Northland Mound with the following conditions: 1. The plat shall incorporate all properties proposed to be part of the development. 2. The lot area shall be modified to match what is on the site plan. 3. 10-foot drainage and utility easements shall be established around the perimeter of the Property, except along the lake shore. 4. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, conditional use permit and termination of existing City parking easement. 5. A development agreement shall be prepared as part of the final plat process. 6. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the preliminary plat application. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) and termination of City parking easement with Hennepin County. Applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 8. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information for building permit issuance. 319 9. The MCES SAC charge for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 10. Sewer and watermain area trunk charges for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current trunk charge for sewer and water, per unit, is $2000.00 each. 11. Sewer connection and water connection fees shall be determined as part of the final plat. The 2020 sewer connection and water connection fees are $240.00 each. 12 The park dedication fee amount shall be determined as part of the final plat as provided by City Code Sec. 121.121. 13. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission and City Council. Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of February, 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 320 Exhibit A Preliminary Plat 321 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN A SHORELAND AREA FOR NORTHLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP PLANNING CASE NO. 21-18 WHEREAS, the applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for a planned unit development (PUD) in a shoreland area as part of the Northland Mound preliminary plat as described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subject site is generally located southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail and involves parcels which are part of Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to develop 104-market rate, multi -family units including one floor of enclosed parking; and WHEREAS, the site has been guided by the Comprehensive Plan for mixed use as the Downtown Lakes Mixed Use Area; and WHEREAS, the Mixed Use — Downtown District requires a conditional use permit to be approved for a Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, details regarding the requested CUP for a PUD are contained in the Executive Summary Report for the February 8, 2022 meeting, the Planning Report for the January 4, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, the Planning Report for the February 1, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, the submitted application and supporting materials from the applicant; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the CUP to allow a 104-unit, multi- family development in a shoreland PUD subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the CUP application at its January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 meetings and recommended the City Council approve the CUP request with conditions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, the City Council of the City of Mound, after providing proper notice thereof pursuant to state law, held a public hearing on February 8, 2022 on the CUP to receive public testimony; and WHEREAS, the City has considered the proposed project as it might affect public 322 health, safety, or welfare and will be imposing conditions upon the approval addressing these considerations; and WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the practicality of the request, taking into consideration the present and future development of the property and the requirements of the Zoning, Subdivision Ordinances, and other official controls; and WHEREAS, the City Council's decision on the conditional use permit application was made within the timelines included in Minnesota Statutes Section 15.99; and WHEREAS, in granting approval of the CUP, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: The proposed use of the site is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. 2. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type of development and use being proposed. 3. The proposed development is providing adequate utilities and drainage. 4. The proposed development has sufficiently considered access and traffic. 5. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. 6. The proposed project will diversify the types of housing available in the community by providing 104 new multi -family units for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, based on record of this matter and findings contained herein, does hereby incorporate and restate the recitals set forth above and approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow a planned unit development in a shoreland area for Northland Real Estate Group with the following conditions: 1. Revisions as needed to the plan set so that all sheets of the plan show the same project area boundary and site size. 2. No future ("overnight mooring") dock structures or uses shall be allowed onto Lake Langdon, unless allowed pursuant to local and state regulations and appropriate permits have been applied for and obtained. 3. The south access drive shall be improved to typical 4-ton street standards. 4. The building materials and color scheme shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City planning staff. 323 5. Final design of any ADA spaces shall be approved by the Building Official. 6. Plans shall be updated to show the size and drive aisle spacing of the underground parking area. 7. Approval of the easement and public lands permit to allow for construction of a drive aisle, curb, landscaping, and monument sign on the city -owned right-of-way and parking area to the east; City to terminate existing parking easement (Doc. No. 1077373) to allow for construction of improvements pursuant to approved site plan. 8. Add to the site plan the depth of the dead-end parking lot turnaround on the south. The depth shall be at least 7 feet for ease of maneuverability. 9. Ensure all sidewalks are graded for ADA accessibility and railings along retaining walls provided. 10. The applicant shall work with City Staff to identify pedestrian connections to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail and Commerce Boulevard. 11. Outdoor storage of boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles will not be allowed on the site, provided the foregoing shall not prohibit outdoor canoe and kayak racks near the lake. 12. Apartment unit decks and patios shall not be allowed for personal storage purposes, including for bicycles. 13. The landscape plan shall be revised to the satisfaction of the City Planner. This shall include addressing the following: a. The seed mixes shown on the landscape plan need refinement. The Wet Prairie seed mix shown is not appropriate in all areas identified. Drier seed mix is required on sloped areas and areas without wetland soils. In addition, in the basin north of the building the landscape plan should specify use of State Seed Mix 34-262 (Riparian South and West) instead of the currently proposed Wet Prairie. b. Revise the landscape plan to include a strip at least one mower's width wide of no mow fescue or pollinator lawn mix along the sidewalk on south of building to indicate "cues to care" and so that tall native plants are not flopping over onto sidewalk. C. A tree survey shall be provided that shows which trees are being preserved and what will be installed to meet the 1 tree per dwelling unit requirement. 324 d. Revise the proposed mix of trees to ensure that at least 25% are deciduous and 25% are coniferous. Also diversify the mix of deciduous and coniferous species to increase site landscape resiliency from species specific pests and disease. 14. Ensure the erosion control plan includes silt fence and the use of an erosion control blanket for seeded area of 3:1 slopes or greater. 15. Provide additional information, including an image, of the lighting fixtures proposed. 16. All signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 119 and applicant is required to obtain all required permitting for future signage. 17. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, termination of existing City parking easement, and major subdivision -preliminary plat. 18. A Development Agreement, to be prepared by the City Attorney, shall be required for the project and prepared as part of the final plat. 19. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the conditional use permit application. 20. The applicant shall be responsible for securing all required local, state, and federal permits and approvals. 21. This conditional use permit is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: (to be inserted). 22. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 23. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of February 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk Mayor Raymond J. Salazar 325 Exhibit A Legal Description (to be inserted) 326 RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR USE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR NORTHLAND MOUND PROJECT PLANNING CASE NO. 21-18 WHEREAS, the applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has submitted an application for a public lands permit to allow for improvements on public lands immediate adjacent to the Northland Mound project; and WHEREAS, the subject site is generally located southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail and involves parcels which are part of Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to improve the adjacent public lands with parking, curbing, landscaping, traffic directional signage, and a monument sign; and WHEREAS, Section 62-11, requires City Council approval by a majority vote for construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park or commons; and WHEREAS, details regarding the request are contained in the Executive Summary Report for the February 8, 2022 City Council meeting, the Planning Report for the February 1, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, the Planning Report for the January 4, 2022 Planning Commission meeting and minutes, and the submitted application and supporting materials from the applicant; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the Public Lands Permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested public land permit request at its January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 meetings and recommended the City Council approve the public lands permit request; and WHEREAS, in granting approval of the requested public lands permit, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: 1. The proposed construction of the curb and landscaping will improve the City right-of-way from existing conditions. 2. The separation of vehicular movement on the project site from the City right-of-way will benefit safety. 327 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 public lands permit for the Northland Mound project with the following conditions: 1. Concurrent approval of the major subdivision -preliminary plat and conditional use permit. 2. Prior to commencing any future building, site, or land alteration activities, the final construction plans related to the proposed project shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any other local permits (i.e. building permit, grading permit, etc.) that is required for the project. Adopted by the City Council this 8th of February 2022. Mayor Raymond J. Salazar Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 22- RESOLUTION DETERMINING SALE OF CITY PARCELS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, Northland Real Estate Group has made an offer to purchase 3 City -owned parcels to be developed as part of the proposed Northland Mound project; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at its January 25, 2022 meeting, voted to approve a purchase agreement with Northland Real Estate Group for the 3 City -owned parcels; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 462.356 requires that the Planning Commission review and make findings to the City Council related to a proposed acquisition or disposal of publically-owned property regarding consistency with the City's approved comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed sale was evaluated under the 2040 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, Staff's evaluation of the proposed sale of the parcels is included in the Planning Reports for the January 4, 2022 and February 1, 2022 Planning Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Reports include Staff's recommendation to sell the parcels due to the community benefits and finding the proposed sale to be consistent with the 2040 Mound Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its February 1, 2022 meeting, reviewed the proposed sale and determined that the sale is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as the plan contemplates redevelopment of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's evaluation of the proposed sale of the parcels is included in the Executive Summary Report for the Northland Mound project applications that was included in the February 8, 2022 City Council meeting materials for consideration; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound hereby approves the sale of 3 City parcels to be included in the plat of Northland Land and makes a determination and findings that the sale is consistent with the 2040 Mound Comprehensive Plan. This recommendation is based on the following findings of fact: 1. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan contemplates redevelopment of the subject property. 329 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Manager or designee to prepare and execute all required documents to undertake and complete the sale of the City parcels. Adopted by the City Council this 8'h day of February 8, 2022. Attest: Kevin Kelly, City Clerk Raymond S. Salazar 330 MINUTE EXCERPTS - DRAFT MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 1, 2022 Chair Goode called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. SWEARING IN OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS by City Manager Eric Hoversten Drew Heal was sworn in. ROLL CALL Members present: Chair David Goode, Kevin Castellano, Jon Ciatti, Jason Holt, Samantha Erickson, Drew Heal, Jake Saystrom, and Jason Baker Staff present: Consultant Planner Rita Trapp and Secretary Jen Holmquist. Members of the public: Scott Picha 2273 Cottonwood Ln; Cathi Dioszeghy 5900 Beachwood Rd; Jeff Wrede 29 Summit Court, St. Paul; Brian Farrell 2106 Priest Lane, Johan Chemin Danielson 6039 Beachwood Rd; Joe Harrison 5625 Grandview Blvd; Nancy Paulson 5860 Lynwood Blvd; Rusty Stockinger Our Lady of the Lake Parish; Scott Golo 4360 Wilshire Blvd; Jason Zattler 2345 Commerce Blvd; Kirk Lau 2636 Wilshire Blvd; Jim Myers; Ginger Skaja 5975 Maple Forest, Minnetrista; K. Miller 4716 W. Arm Rd, Spring Park; Mary Davis 3021 Inverness Ln; Jane Anderson 5060 Edgewater; Michelle Herrick 2630 Westedge Blvd. BOARD OF APPEALS Planning Case No. 21-19 Public Hearing — Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Modify Density in The Downtown Lakes Mixed Use Area in the 2040 Mound Comprehensive Plan Applicant: Northland Real Estate Group Trapp explained that the Downtown Lakes Area is designated mixed -use. The Comprehensive Plan guides each area as to how many units are allowed. Trapp explained how density is calculated. She stated that there was vacated right of way in the Downtown Lakes Area that was not included in the original calculations for developable land. This proposal, as well as the Artessa project, included right-of-way that hasn't been constructed but is developable if vacated. When those areas are included, the density remaining is 110 units so this 104-unit project meets allowable density. Ciatti requested a visual of the previously uncalculated areas for this project. Trapp provided a graphic showing the areas requested to be vacated. 331 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Baker asked for clarification regarding why the vacated right of way near the Artessa development is included. Trapp explained the density is calculated based the entire Downtown Lakes Area, not on a project by project basis. Holt asked if another project were proposed, would a comp plan amendment be required. Trapp confirmed one may be needed depending on the number of residential units proposed. Saystrom asked about the DNR density concerns. Trapp explained that any multi -family project will fall outside of those DNR guidelines. The way the MnDNR calculates density would not support anything other than single family in Mound given the City's land constaints. She pointed out that Harrison's Bay, Artessa, Village By The Bay could not meet the DNR guidelines. Trapp said the city strives to meet all other DNR requirements like minimum open space and impervious surface but the density will never be met with a multi -family project. Saystrom asked about stormwater management. Trapp said the agency for that is MCWD and the city requires that the project meets MCWD stormwater requirements. Trapp asked for a formal withdrawal. Brian Farrell, 3106 Priest Lane, stated that the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment is withdrawn as the project meets the Comprehensive Plan as proposed. Planning Case No. 21-18 Public Hearing - Review/recommendation on major subdivision -preliminary plat and site development plans of "Northland Mound" involving vacant parcels generally located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon; also review/recommendation of a conditional use permit application for a planned unit development in a shoreland area for a 104-unit market rate, multi -family apartment project, a street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street; a determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the potential sale of city - owned parcels; and a public lands permit application to allow for the construction to occur on the City parking area immediately to the east of the site Applicant: Northland Real Estate Group Goode outlined the process of the meeting. Trapp summarized the project. She noted that the January presentation included a detailed review of the project.. The information presented at this meeting will answer and address missing information or questions from the previous meeting. Trapp explained the location of the proposed project andnoted that this is in a mixed -use district. The proposal includes a 104-unit market rate apartment project. The major subdivision - preliminary plat is the foundation when you have numerous parcels and are trying to create an 332 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft area for development. The other items included in the application are the conditional use permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in a shoreland area, vacation of right-of-way, sale of public property, public lands permit and the site development plasn. Trapp then summarized the nature of each of the applications. The preliminary plat will create one lot on the 3-acre site. Trapp explained that the City Council approved the sale of the public properties with conditions. The revised plans include the properties the city has agreed to sell. A conditional use permit for a PUD is required for any project, in Mound's mixed -use area. State statute requires the Planning Commission make a determination that the sale of public land is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This determination will be a separate motion from the other land use requests. The public lands permit is how the city allows the construction/maintenance of projects on public property. This application is to improve the public parking immediately to the east of the property and will allow the installation of the landscaping, curb for stormwater management and a monument sign at the entrance of the property. Trapp provided the applicant supplemental information graphic as provided for the terraces in the open space on the lawn. Additional information on traffic and parking was provided. Trapp shared a graphic that showed the planned movement through the site to and from Commerce. The entrance to the north will be a one-way entrance, with signage stating as such. The main entrance will be on the south side with two-way traffic. The developer increased the drive aisle to 25 feet to meet code requirements. Trapp noted that the parking meets code requirement there will be 93 enclosed spaces and 34 surface spaces. A traffic study was completed using the industry standard Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition. Trapp explained how trip generation is calculated and what is meant by peak hour trips. This project would generate 472 additional daily trips. This project is anticipated to generate 38 total trips in the AM peak and 41 total trips in the PM peak. This equates to one car about every 1-2 minutes. Trapp said the applicant continues to work with MCWD and the City regarding the wetlands. Since the January meeting, a portion of Wetland 1 has been determined to be incidental, while the remaining were not. The applicant will be required to work through the permitting process and meet the guidelines set forth by the City and MCWD. An example of this are the wetland buffers shown on the revised site plan. 333 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Trapp provided unit sizes and noted that these will be in flux until construction commences. Trapp noted that the applicant is aware that they must meet the minimum guidelines and current proposal does that. A revised landscaping plan was submitted. Trapp noted the applicant is in the process of doing a tree study so additional information will be provided. Trapp explained that landscaping is often an ongoing discussion throughout a development project and that the condition included states that the applicant needs to satisfy city staff. Usable open space is required to be 20,800 sq. ft. and the proposal met it with 21,014 sq. ft.. Agency review: The supplemental information from the applicant was provided to consulting agencies. The City has only received additional or revised comments from the MnDNR. MCWD noted the rules triggered are erosion control, stormwater management, wetland protection, waterbody crossing and structures. Applicant will be required to meet the MCWD requirements. They are still working through the process but MCWD doesn't believe there any major concerns requiring a significant change to the project. That is customary for a project this size. DNR noted that the impervious surface percentage exceeds what is allowed in the city. Trapp noted that the shoreland regulation in the city code state in business and industrial zones can be up to 75%with approved stormwater management. City practice has been that the mixed use districts are part of the business and industrial zones. The applicant is proposing 48% impervious surface for the site and a sophisticated underground stormwater management system. The other DNR comment is that the density is too high. Trapp noted that Mound is unable to meet shoreland density requirements for projects other than single-family residential based on the way they calculate density. Historically Mound recognizes the DNR requirements. However, in knowing we can't meet the density requirement, the city focuses on the other elements to minimize impact on the lake. Staff recommendation is that the applicant has responded to initial question and concerns and staff recommends approval of the land use and subdivision requests. Baker asked about the traffic study. He asked if the traffic study included the other new project near this proposed. Trapp stated the traffic study is based on the individual project. Baker noted that the challenge is getting on to Commerce. Trapp concurs. She noted that any new development will add traffic. Baker wondered at what point would a traffic light be considered. Trapp doesn't have that information but she doesn't believe this would warrant that. 334 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Baker asked if the building height will require a variance. Trapp stated the PUD can take care of the small overage on the stair towers. The majority of the building height is within code. Baker asked if there is concern with the traffic right near the trail. Trapp noted it is a "right in" and it's signed. Baker asked how to prevent people from using the right of way between the buildings. Trapp noted that the City could look at signage. Baker wondered why the supplemental parking is not near the building. Trapp noted that the area Baker is asking about is existing public parking. Trapp notes the applicant will be improving and striping. However, they are not part of the parking calculations for the project. Holt asked if the landscaping could be flipped so the spots face the development. Trapp explained this area is not parking for the apartments but rather public parking that is intended to be retained. Baker noted the parking from the apartments could bleed into this area. Trapp agreed it is possible. It is public parking on city right-of-way and the city participates in the maintenance of those spots. Holt asked for clarification if this parking exists currently. Trapp noted it's there, at the edge of the woods but it's not striped. Saystrom asked if the access point on the north is existing. Trapp noted all of the access points already exist. Saystrom thought from the January discussion the south access did exist. Trapp explained that the access and the adjacent building are on private property. It has an easement over it, in conjunction with the three adjoining entities. This private easement stands in perpetuity. Saystrom wanted clarification if there is guaranteed access for this project, as that was not established at January's meeting. Trapp confirmed. Baker asked if any parking spaces will be lost. Trapp stated that it has not been a topic of discussion as part of the review, but she believed the parking will remain. Holt pointed out that there is not a lot of room in that access with parking on either side, including 2-way traffic. Trapp agreed it will be tight but noted this is presently used as 2-way. Castellano wondered if there is a net increase of spaces in the area of public land the developer will be improving. Trapp noted the area will remain the same size but that stripped spaces will improve the efficiency of how people park. Erickson asked about the traffic study but wondered if the study data was based on information from 2016. Trapp explained that the 2016 data was the most current data that exists because it is only studied every few years. Trapp said there will be short windows where traffic may be noticeably higher, but the amount of the increase was not of concern for the engineers. Erickson wondered if the numbers are realistic. She knows traffic will be a concern for this project. Trapp noted the studies are based on industry standards. She understands that no matter what is proposed there will be cause a concern for increased traffic. 335 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Ciatti said he counted the cars in the parking lot at OLL during Saturday mass and during Sunday service. He noted Saturday 100 cars left in 6 minutes. On Sunday 200 cars left in 8 minutes. He noted there were no major backups. Ciatti conceded that the weekend traffic may look different during the week day, but for perspective, 200 cars leaving that area did not cause issues. Holt asked what the 472 number in the graphic is. Trapp noted that is the average total number of trips anticipated in a 24-hour period. The peak times are highlighted on the graphic because it is anticipated that those time blocks will generate a higher number of trips. Holt noted that there 127 stalls and that seems to not give a spot to every unit. Trapp noted not everyone will be parked at the same time. Holt stated that a letter in the packet from the developer outlined that the church can be used for overflow. Trapp said that was a question for the developer. Holt asked about the park dedication fee. Trapp said that is a City Council item that is part of the final plat process. She didn't have an exact number of what the project will generate but it is 10%of the value of the land. Holt asked what type of lighting will be lakeside. Trapp noted the city has guidelines and the applicant has provided a photometric plan. She noted that because this is residential living the lighting will be focused on keeping people safe but not disturbing them. The lighting will dissipate as it reaches the property lines, as required. Holt noted that the balconies are visible from the lake. He asked what's allowed. Trapp noted a condition of the CUP will be that the balconies cannot be used for storage of personal items to include paddle boards, bikes and other items besides typical patio furniture. Additionally, boats, trailers and recreational vehicles will not be allowed in the parking lot, either. Holt asked about the trees. He asked if the current trees can be preserved. The city doesn't have a tree preservation requirement. Trapp said the developers will have to remove a large amount of the current inventory of trees to make room for the project. The applicant is currently completing a tree survey on the western portion of the site. Trapp noted that they will be required to provide a certain number of trees with a diversity of species so disease and or pests will not wipe out all of the trees. Holt asked how wetland 4 will be preserved. Trapp replied the developer is working with the city and MCWD to address wetland impacts for the entire project. While not preferred, wetland impacts can be allowed if certain steps are followed and mitigation provided.. Baker asked about the incoming traffic and how people would be prevented from using the shared business parking. Trapp said we can't really prevent it. Erickson wondered whose 336 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft responsibility it is to monitor that area. Baker wondered if a curb or other barrier could be added to prevent cross traffic. Saystrom noted that if it is a city right of way, why prevent it? Baker said eliminating the option is a discussion to have. Trapp outlined that there is a shared agreement with the businesses in that area. She noted the city and businesses contribute financially to the maintenance. Holt asked about a square of property on the church property. Trapp pointed out that is within the easement area. The church owns the area, but there is an easement with the church and two other property owners. Holt pointed out a letter was received from the church noting The Incredible Festival may be affected. Trapp noted that the easement would require that that area needs to remain open. She noted it is challenging to to account for every situation at every hour of the day. Holt addressed the church's concern for people cutting through and exiting through their south access point. He pointed out that people cut through. Holt asked how bus drop off works. Trapp said she is not familiar with that process and that would be a question for one of the members of the public. Goode asked for additions questions. Hearing none he invited the developer to the mic. Brian Farrell from Northland Property Group stated that this project has been in the works for several months. A lot of work has gone into the proposal. They are proud of the project. He believes this will be a compliment to the city. He lives here. He grew up here. He looks at towns a little differently as a developer. He recognizes that some residents don't want any change but he noted things are always changing. He said this housing product does not currently exist in Mound. It is highly amenitized rental project. This project will appeal to empty nesters who may want to have a place in town but allow for travel. The other target is young professionals. They work in the area and use the lakes and trails. This demographic doesn't want to own. They like low maintenance. The focus is on a walkable community. What that does is help local businesses. He recognizes the city's commitment to local businesses. This project was laid out carefully. He explained that the soils are bad and it will be an expensive fix but the parking is all on site. He noted that he and his family live here and believes the project would be a nice addition to the city and could help the community grow. He welcomed questions. Goode asked if there is a plan for snow removal. Farrell noted that the plan is to use the open space areas to the west and north of the parking areas. If needed, they will remove the snow from the property. The easement to the south, along with the easement to the east are already in place. He said they are open to discussion regarding how to deter parking. He said they reoriented the entrance to the complex based on comments received. He noted the right of way in question is 337 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft not their land. The main signage will be to the south. He said they are open to curbing that area. He noted discussions have happened with the church. He stated they will install "Resident Parking Only" on their side and they will entertain installing "Church Parking Only" on the church side. The intention is to be fully parked on their own site. Holt asked if they build this will they own it forever, or even for 5 years. He replied their intention is Long Term Hold. The strategy is to develop it and stabilize it and keep it. Holt asked how many other projects they own. Farrell replied they constructed 300-400 units last year. Holt asked about the reference regarding the Victoria Flats included is their response to the January PC meeting. That project has 5 full time children. He wondered if a similar amount is expected. Farrell confirmed, with perhaps a few more as that project has 80 units. Holt noted the paragraph regarding "affordable housing" and asked how it works. Is there a way to put resident's minds at ease that this will not be affordable housing in 10 years? Farrell noted that subsidies come from government agencies and take a lot of effort to secure. He explained that you need to have professionals on staff to secure and incorporate those subsidies from the start of the project. Farrell understands the concern. He encouraged people to travel and see the other areas. He noted some retail/commercial have benefited from their projects. He reiterates he has no intention to be affordable. Holt asks about the 300-400 other projects; how many are affordable housing. Farrell said zero. He noted that is just not their business. There are larger agencies that specialize in that type of funding and they can't compete with them. Holt asked why so many units? Farrell noted you can't do 10 individual units. It's not possible on this site. There are economies to be gained from scaling the number of units higher. He also noted that fewer units would likely have had a bigger footprint than this project. Holt asked if the original proposal had a different unit count. Farrell answered they had indicated to the city that they were targeting 95-105. He said a lot of developers won't touch a project that is less than 150 units. He noted they could have requested more with the acquisition of the additional city property but they knew the city didn't have an appetite for that many units. Holt said a lot of resident comments state this feels too big for this town. Farrell agrees this is big for Mound. The only way to afford the nice amenities is to spread the costs between more units. He believes this project will help Mound stay healthy. Holt asked how hard it would be to have fewer studios and more 1-bedrooms. Farrell noted that there are multiple factors considered in determining the unit mix. He solicis input from the architect who has experience with multiple multi -family projects. They also have a market consultant who provides input on their target market and their desired unit size and rents.. Holt asked what the difference in cost is to rent a studio vs. 1-bedroom. Farrell noted that it would be about $200-300 more. Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Farrell said the trail is an attractive amenity. He noted that the amenities will include elements like the countertops being rock,stainless appliances and tile floors. He stated this will be similar to the Victoria project. Holt asked about the lake. The proposal does not include a dock, but it isn't ruled out. They will use what they are allowed by right. Goode opened the public hearing. Yohan Chemia 6039 Beachwood Road. He thinks the developer is claiming to be the savior of our dead city. Health of a community isn't just density. Chemia believes the comparison to Victoria is not valid as that city is a dead residential area. He stated there is nothing wrong with affordable housing. Yohan noted the 50 feet building height is tall and the building will be visible from all over the city. He believes there is one level missing from the diagram. He said the residents on the lake will not want to look at it. He noted that the pillars will have to pierce the area around the development for stabilization. He thinks the sewage in the lake may enter the water source through this construction. He thinks the foundation work pounding will affect surrounding buildings. He asks why there's no solar panels or charging stations for electric cars. He doesn't understand the math on the % parking spot for a studio. He doesn't believe the traffic study. He outlined an item from the applicant narrative that they want to connect to the Dakota Rail trail but that Three Rivers Park District has said they can't. Jane Anderson 5060 Edgewater Drive. She mentions unit sizes. She knows everyone wants a vibrant and robust city. The schools are good and we own the most lake shore. She stated we have more rentals than surrounding cities. She thinks we want to perpetuate being a bedroom community. She wonders if we want to make more bedrooms or bring in commerce. She doesn't think the parking requirements make sense. She believes 155 cars will be competing for 127 stalls. She says everyone will be there at night. The bigger picture, with the other development in the area, is all the traffic at the one stop light. She thinks it will be dangerous at that intersection. Kathy Dioszeghy Langdon Lake. She has lived here for 27 years. The lake is small, shallow and the water is bad. The highly amenitized building will be her view. She pays a lot of money to live on this lake and there's going to be rooftop grills, fire pits and a pool? She stated she can see the stop light from Commerce in the winter. This will be much more visible. She can't imagine what she will have to look at all year round. She is concerned with the docks, boats, paddle boards. She doesn't think this little lake has the capacity for 104 more people. Dioszeghy said they find tires and trash in the lake all the time. They pick it up. They put alum in the lake to clean it up and it never works. She is concerned with the big structure. The lake is already struggling. She doesn't know if the study included how it will affect the residents on the lake. She wants a lighting study to see what is going to glare at her. Scott Picha 2273 Cottonwood lane.. He doesn't know how they can move forward when nothing is put together. It's all theoretical. He doesn't trust any traffic study because Hennepin County and the city worked on the road by the post office. They figured out it was too much 339 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 10 traffic and bikes can't cross so they were going to re -do it. They haven't. He pointed out the traffic issues will fall on the tax payers. He noted the salt in the snow mounds will go into the lake. He said he likes improvement to the community, but this project doesn't make sense. He thinks someone is going to make a lot of money, leave town and this will be an empty building. Chris Carlson 5950 West Branch Road, Minnetrista-He owns property in the city. He drives through town a lot. He thinks of Mound in long term. He spoke to someone at Hennepin County who told him the current traffic levels would cause expansion to 110 if the county had the time and the money. He went door to door for a different project asking why residents live here. The overwhelming answer was the small town. He has spent time with the businesses near this development. He thinks there is issues between the city and the business owners with the city owned space that never got resolved. He noted his son's friends live in apartments. There are parking lot horror stories. People park where ever they can. They don't care what the signs say. He noted the developer said this is the type of project they do. He wondered why. He said he built a duplex on Spruce Road and it's profitable. He asked residents if they would accept higher density to get more business. The answer was no. He noted the trees on the site add to the character of the city. He said the developer made a lot of good points but that doesn't mean we need to accept this in Mound. He thinks residents want to remain a bedroom community. Michelle Herrick 2630 Westedge. She owns property on Langdon Lake. She will be looking at this project. The trees do create a buffer. She can see the traffic lights in the winter. Her biggest concern is the water quality on the lake. The lake was treated with alum to attempt to seal the muck on the bottom. The water level was so low the past summer. The water quality is bad. She has pulled out dangerous items such as glass, beer cans, plastic and pet waste from the lake. The run-off is completely covered with algae. The city used to treat this, they don't any more. Her understanding from city manager is the algae is from run-off and lawn fertilizers. The bottom is solid muck. She doesn't know what the answer is, but is hopeful they will talk to the DNR. She is not necessarily against this project. She understands change happens. She thinks the city will have serious issues with water quality and noted this lake contributes to Lake Minnetonka. She said previously there were not going to be any docks and now the developers want docks. She is very very opposed to that. She said it's a quiet small lake with a lot of wildlife. Joe Harrison 5627 Grandview Blvd- His concern is public utilities are already bad. He wonders how it will affect the water in town that he already can't drink. Ginger Skaja 5975 Maple Forrest, Minnetrista-Her kids are in Mound schools and her two youngest attend OLL. She has lived in the area since 1999. She has seen the change. She didn't learn about this project until recently. Her primary concerns are congestion with traffic and parking and how it will impact the school and church. She is concerned that to hear the answer is "people will just figure out the parking' is concerning to her. She thinks there needs to be a plan. The spots that are there are tight. She thinks it's a safety issue. She thinks more retail/commercial is needed. Not Residential. She said aside from Surfside park and school O Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 11 functions, there are no city amenities she uses with her family. She takes her kids elsewhere. She thinks we need to draw young families here with amenities/parks. Businesses bring vibrancy to a community, not residential. Safety is number one. Once the Auditor road project is done this will be too much. Baker asked Skaja for clarification on the drop off procedure of OLL. Several residents who are familiar with it provided how drop off/pick up for parents and bus transfers. Rusty Stackinger 4743 Organza Drive, Min netrista-Representing OLL. He looks forward to collaborating with the developer if the project moves forward. He doesn't want someone else's problems to become an OLL problem. He mentioned the letter sent from OLL and confirmed it was sent to the commissioners. He pointed out they aren't just a church, there is a lot of school activity through out the entire week. The site serves 120+ kids and 30-40 staff. Overflow parking is a huge concern for them. They do not want to police that. He said the church is not interested in a parking agreement. The safety regarding the bus service and traffic at the proposed entrance is concerning. Jason Zattler 2345 Commerce -Business owner. He noted the comments he submitted that were part of the supplemental information received after packet deadline. He stated the comments from OLL prove that the developer is already seeking a parking agreement so that proves they know parking is not sufficient. He said the applicant representative is a professional and he will tell you what you want to hear. Zattler stated that he, along with two other business owners, own most of the public parking lot. He said they have the option to recuse the use of that parking lot. He knows the parishioners of the church use those spaces. The city will force their hand to make that not public. If this moves forward they will request the city install curb and fence because they didn't ask for this and it will create liability issues. He is not willing to have his parking be public parking if there are 104 units back there. He asked the commissioners to put themselves in his shoes as a business owner, as parishioners, as students and parents coming in and out of there. He cited an example of an accident that happened last week due to the traffic. The traffic study is hogwash. He wondered how the commissioners would feel if that were their family. This is bigger than what the city needs. Ciatti asked about the parking agreement. Zattler explained that it's an annual agreement with the city to make that parking available to the public. He promised that if this goes through, it won't be allowed anymore. He also won't allow construction equipment to cross his parking lot for the development. Mary Davis 3021 Inverness -She thinks the traffic study is weird. She said it's unlikely that people will go through the OLL parking lot now but when someone moves into a spot they will want to go through there. She noted the roped off area is for the kids on the playground. The pedestrians, bikes, busses and cars are not being taken into consideration with the traffic. She thinks it's too big. It will dwarf anything near it. She clarifies if the project was originally condos. Staff noted that the project has always been rental apartments. 341 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 12 Zattler asked how the city will deal with the drainage. He said changing the current landscape will change how it drains. He pointed out that if they remove themselves from the parking agreement, it's forcing them, as owners, to figure out what they're going to do for snow removal. Where is all that snow going to go? Picha noted he lived here 30 years and was told by city council, public works, parks department that that land could never be built on. He doesn't understand how it suddenly isn't wetland that can never be built on. He spent a lot of money on that lake, trying to clean it up. Goode closed the public hearing at 9:48. Trapp returned to address some of the concerns brought up. She agreed that the info regarding the trail conflicts. Three Rivers said a direct connection is not possible. She noted that hasn't been addressed but said the original graphic that showed a direct connection to the subject property will most likely not be possible. Trapp stated the building will be one level of parking and three additional levels. The description may have been confusing, but this building will be 4 total levels. This was confirmed with the applicant's architect. Trapp pointed out that right now there is not storm water management on site. The developer is proposing an underground storage treatment system that will address both runoff rate and water quality. She noted that this developer will have to meet higher standards than other recent projects in town because it is starting from green space, not a redevelopment site. Trapp stated she cannot speak to what someone stated 30 years ago. She said there is an active wetland delineation for this project. It was reviewed by a panel that included staff, MCWD and other agencies. This is the representation of what exists today. The snow storage for the shared parking will have to be addressed as they have been using someone else's private property for storage. The property owner has a right to develop the land they own. Zattler stated it is not stored on the private property, it's on the public property. Chris Carlson noted the green space is a buffer for the run-off for the existing parking lot. How will the run off effect that? Jeff Wrede Momentum Design Group —They are architect for the design group. The lighting will be bound by the city code to stop the light levels at the property line. They use house side shields that reduce the glare. There is a trend that is eliminating balcony lighting. They can discuss it. Farrell pointed out that one resident said they don't need new restaurants and another stated they would like more restaurants. The developer feels that commerce driven retailers and 342 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 13 businesses tend to demand a certain level of density. This project will benefit the existing local businesses. Farrell touched on the water quality concerns. They will have to have the watershed approval prior to moving forward. The goal is to have an attractive body of water. He recognizes that this land has been a dump site. Having development could actually eliminate that dumping on a previously unmonitored site. Patrick Sarver 4231 Abbot Ave., Mpls. - All storm water will be treated prior to discharging into the lake. The drainage on the current site will be picked up by the storm sewer and routed around so as not to inhibit the storm water to continue to drain in that direction. Farrell addressed the concerns about the sidewalks and other improvements that are needed. He noted by increasing the tax base it will be a benefit for the town to use the tax dollars elsewhere. He stated the bus transfer concerns are out of their control. He doesn't see why the current system would change. They are happy to help if they can. They are just as concerned with resident safety as everyone else. He said this developer likes putting projects in communities where the residents are involved and passionate about where they live. That's why his family lives here. This developer wants to offer a housing option that isn't currently available in Mound for other residents to become passionate members of the community. Holt asked about the pylons, wondering if the pounding will affect the surrounding properties. Farrell responded that in other communities they have built where the ground is denser and more tightly packed. They have built a 200-unit project and shared walls and those buildings are okay. Holt asked how construction vehicles will be staged. Farrell said they will have to remain on their own property unless they have a written agreement with another entity. He believes they have enough space and would never violate adjoining property owner's rights by storing their equipment there. Holt stated he lives on this lake and he will be looking at this property. He said the tree buffer is important. He loves the lake and uses it frequently. He can see everything from his living room. The church lights are already so bright. Farrell stated they want to make it attractive for their residents, as well. He said this lighting has low luminesces that dissipate. Holt wonders if trees could offer a buffer. Farrell noted the building is not right on the lake. He believes a sight line study could be added. 343 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 14 Trapp noted a concern about run off from the current parking lot. The drainage will not join with the project's system. It will go into a separate swale and will still be treated and filtered before going into the lake. A resident would like an example of lighting. Goode offered that the resident should connect with the developer for that information. Trapp outlined the applications before the commission and noted the staff recommendations. She said conditions can be added based on the commissioners' discussion.. Holt asked if more parking spaces for the project site is possible. Castellano thought parking signage for the project site and neighboring businesses might be a good condition. Ciatti would like a condition regarding the school pick up/drop off. Saystrom pointed out the developer followed the rules that the city requires and it seems unfair to make additional parking as a condition. Saystrom said the applicant is not asking to use the parking spots where the busses go. Baker's biggest concern is regarding the flow of traffic. What will the city do if it is worse than expected? He would like an answer from Hennepin county if a street light is even possible. Erickson pointed out most of the unknowns are around traffic. She isn't sure if the wetland issue is resolved. Trapp stated the wetland standards are what the standards are. The developer will have to meet the standards or the project can't be built. Trapp said there is not enough time for the City to wait for the wetland issue to be resolved before taking action. They will continue to work through it. Saystrom stated that the conditions need to be specific for what additional information is being requested in order for the developer to answer. Trapp pointed out that some of the issues being brought up are existing conditions and should not necessarily be the responsibility of the developer. Baker wondered what happens with the parking agreement if the commercial properties back out. Trapp noted the burden should not be on the developer to address a parking agreement they are not involved with. Trapp summarized that an additional condition could be that the developer will work with the city to identify potential alternatives to address traffic and circulation through this area. MOTION by Saystrom to recommend approval of the requested land use and subdivision requests based on the findings of fact and conditions identified by staff for each request, and to include the additional condition to identify potential alternatives for traffic and parking management; seconded by Castellano. MOTION carries unanimously. MOTION by Heal that the proposed sale of public land for the Northland Mound project is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan; seconded by Ciatti. MOTION carries unanimously. CMS PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting Planner Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: January 27, 2022 SUBJECT: Northland Mound (Case No.21-19) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to noodibythe density in the Downtown Lakes Mixed Use Area in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan APPLICANT: Brian Farrell, Northland Real Estate Group OWNER: Arthur and Patricia Meisel LOCATION: Property southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail — involves parcels part of "Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka" plat MEETING DATE: February 1, 2022 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Mixed Use ZONING: Mixed Use Downtown (MU-D) At its January 4, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered multiple land use and subdivision applications for the development of a site for 104 apartments on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon. As part of the land use and subdivision application review, a need for a Comprehensive Plan Am endmentwas identified. Subsequent to the January meeting, the applicant submitted a request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment and public hearing notices were distributed in accordance with state and city requirements. As noted previously, the City of Mound evaluates density on an area wide basis. For mixed use areas such as the Downtown Lakes area, density is evaluated based on the area identified as having the potential to redevelop in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. In its preparation of materials for the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Staff identified that the developable acres previously used for the purposes of determining the allowable unitswithin the Downtown EakesArea did not include the recently vacated right of way from Old Shoreline Road in the Artessa project or the proposed vacated right of way for this project. The vacated rights of way total 56,713 square feet or 1.3 acres. When these additional acreages are included, the number of allowable units for this project increases to 110 units. As this project is proposing 104 units, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not needed and the request can be withdrawn. 345 PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting Planner Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: January 27, 2022 SUBJECT: Northland Mound (Case No.21-18) Redew/discussion/ consideration of Major Subdivision - Preliminary Plat; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Planned Unit Development in the Shoreland Area to construct a 104unit market rate, multi family apartment project; street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street; a determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for sale of city owned property; and a public lands permit to allow for construction to occur on the City owned property immediately east of the site APPLICANT: Brian Farrell, Northland Real Estate Group OWNER: Arthur and Patricia Meisel LOCATION: Property southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail — involves parcels part of "Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka" plat MEETING DATE: February 1, 2022 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Mixed Use ZONING: Mixed Use Downtown (MU-D) Planning Commission members are requested to bring their January 4'h Planning Commission packets to the meeting. Alternately, members may individually contact Staff and request on electronic copy of the report and support materials related to this request be forwarded by email. OVERVIEW At its January 4, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered multiple land use and subdivision applications for the development of a site on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon. At that meeting the Planning Commission tabled consideration of the requests to its February 4, 2022 meeting and request the applicant to provide more information 346 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 about access, traffic, wetlands, and market. At its February 4, 2022 meeting the Planning Commission will be considering the following land use and subdivision requests: • Major Subdivision -Preliminary Plat • Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a planned unit development in a shoreland area • Vacation of right-of-way • Determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for sale of city -owned parcels • Public lands permit for construction on the City owned parcel immediately east of the site EXTENSION OF TIMELINE FOR REVIEW Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days unless an extension for review is requested. The 60-day timeline currently expires on or around January 31, 2022. The City executed an extension of its timeline for review to on or about March 31, 2022. This deadline also is the 120-day timeframe for the major subdivision -preliminary plat request. PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the major subdivision -preliminary plat at its January 4, 2022 meeting. The public hearing was closed at that meeting. The Planning Commission has the discretion to receive public testimony at its February 4, 2022 meeting. City Council According to City Code, the City Council is required to hold the public hearings for review of the conditional use permit and major subdivision/preliminary plat (Sections 129-38 and 121-61). Also, a City Council public hearing is required for consideration of the vacation request. The City Council public hearing was set for February 8, 2022 based on MnDNR notification requirements for a vacation of right-of-way that extends to a public water. Staff has followed required MnDNR notice procedures including written notification provided on December 7tn and a phone notification on January 24, 2022 to discuss the requested vacation. Public Comments Received The City received no comments or emails by 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, January 27, 2022. Any comments received after that time will be presented as part of the February 1' Planning Commission meeting. Page 2 347 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 APPLICANT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION In an effort to provide the Planning Commission information to support its consideration of the land use and subdivision requests, the applicant has prepared supplemental exhibits which address issues identified at the January 4, 2022 meeting. Due to file size the Planning Commission packet contains a site location map and site plan. The application and full plan set is available at this link. Hardcopies of plans will be provided to Planning Commission members upon individual request. The following highlights the information submitted and plan changes included in the revised submittals: Site Plans Sheets X003 Site Plan, X007 Floor Plans, and X010 Enlarged Amenity Spaces show additional detail about the plans for the terraces leading from the garage roof patio to the grass. These plans show gardens/plantings with some seating. Traffic and Parking • The plans were revised to show where the one surface parking stall originally intended is located to meet the parking requirements. These parking spaces are all located on the project site. Planning Commissioners should note that as part of the public lands request the project includes improvement of the 19 public parking spaces and curbing to the immediate east of the project site and behind the Commerce Blvd commercial properties. These parking spaces will remain for public use and are not part of the proposed spaces calculated to meet parking standards. • Drive aisles adjusted to 25 feet from the 24 feet previously shown to meet requirements • Sheet X002 Site Context and Vehicular Movement were updated to show proposed vehicular movement in and out of the site. This includes showing that the access from Commerce just south of the Dakota Rail Regional Trail is a one way into the site and that the access on the south side is a two-way access point. For the development site, the changes include having the north entrance by the enclosed parking being one way only out of the property with a speed bump and wrong way signage. Two-way traffic would otherwise be allowed in the drive aisles. • A Trip and Parking Generation Summary was provided. The summary shows that the proposed development is anticipated to generate 472 daily trips with 38 trips in the AM peak hour (8 entering and 30 exiting) and 41 trips (25 entering and 16 exiting) in the PM peak hour. This would generally equate to a car entering onto Commerce every few minutes in the AM and every 4 minutes in a PM peak hour. The current (2016) traffic count (Min DOT Traffic Mapping Application) for this segment of Commerce Blvd is 9,100 passes per day so the overall impact of the project is less than 5% increase and de minimus to any existing traffic conditions not caused by the project. Page 3 348 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 Renderings • Updated the main entry rendering to show a slight change in materials • Added a rendering showing the view from Lake Langdon Shoreland Tiering An updated shoreland tiering diagram was submitted that includes tier area calculations for the proposed properties to be acquired. Landscape Updated plan to add trees and clarify limits of lawn area Utility Plan Update stormwater sewer layout so as to not impact wetland #3 Signage and monument location Updated page X002 Site Context and Vehicular Movement sheet to show a monument sign at the main entry of the development (south driveway) on the City right-of-way and on the private property on Commerce Boulevard where access will be provided. Market Information In their January 14, 2022 letter responding the January 4th Planning Commission Meeting Concerns, the applicant indicated that they have been in contact with their Primary Market Demand Provider, View Point Consulting Group, and Steven Scott Management, a well-known property management company. The information provided from the applicant states that the "predominant market for newer market rate mulitstory apartment buildings in the Twin Cities Metro Area has been single persons of all ages. In response the unit mix in most newer market rate apartment buildings consist of a high percentage of studio and one -bedroom units versus two- and three -bedroom units." It is also noted that while there are some families with children in these types of projects, most families prefer less dense housing, such as rental townhomes. A precedent example of a recently constructed project in Victoria cited has five full-time children. STAFF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Amendment As noted previously, the City of Mound evaluates density on an area -wide basis. For mixed use areas such as the Downtown Lakes area, density is evaluated based on the area identified as having the potential to redevelop in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. In its preparation of materials for the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Staff identified that the Page 4 349 Northland Mound - PC Report -January 27, 2022 developable acres previously used for the purposes of determining the allowable units within the Downtown Lakes Area did not include the recently vacated right-of-way from Old Shoreline Road in the Artessa project or the proposed vacated right-of-way for this project. The vacated rights -of -way total 56,713 square feet or 1.3 acres. When these additional acreages are included, the number of allowable units for this project increases to 110 units. As this project is proposing 104 units, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not needed and the request can be withdrawn. Wetlands Since the January Planning Commission meeting, Bolton & Menk, the City of Mound's consultant, completed review of the incidental wetland request by the applicant's wetland consultant. The review determined that a portion of Wetland 1 is incidental but that Wetland 4 would not be considered incidental. This determination will be used by Bolton & Menk and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) to determine how wetlands on the site can be impacted and what buffers need to be established. Site Access The Applicant has provided evidence of appropriate easements over the private access drive to run with the private parcels subject to this application. The easements include obligation that any improvement of the drive necessary to meet the needs of subsequent development of the subject private parcels by future owners be made at the sole cost of those future owners. The City will require improvement of the drive to typical 4-ton street standards for intended use as part of the subdivision improvements identified in forthcoming Development Agreement language. Unit Sizes The Applicant has provided information about anticipated unit sizes that demonstrate that all units will be larger than the minimum required by the City Code. Landscaping The applicant submitted an updated landscape plan to address previous concerns about the lack of trees. The applicant has also indicated that the site is being surveyed so additional information will be forthcoming about what is being preserved and what is being removed. As noted previously, City code requires that multi -family residential projects provide 1 tree per dwelling unit. For this project this would be 104 trees. The applicant is currently proposing 53 Page 5 350 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 trees, however, it is anticipated that there are trees on the western portion of the property that will be preserved. Staff notes that through the PUD the City can establish a site specific number of required trees. It is recommended that once the existing and proposed trees are known, the landscape plan should be revised to ensure that at least 25%of trees are coniferous and 25% are deciduous as is required by City Code. It is also recommended that more diversification in tree species within the deciduous and coniferous categories be included to prevent significant loss of trees from future pests or diseases. At this time a condition is recommended that would require the landscape plan to meet City Planner requirements. Useable Open Space The applicant provided additional information about useable open space on the site. As Planning Commissioners may recall, the Mixed Use -Downtown District requires at least 200 feet of private usable open space per unit. With 104 units, this development would be required to have at least 20,800 square feet of private useable open space. The following are the updated calculations provided demonstrating that the project will meet requirements: Type of Useable Open Space Square Footage Private Balconies 4,298 Private Patios 1,069 Rooftop Patio (seating, fire pit, pergola with fireplace/TV) 3,827 2na Floor Amenity Deck (seating, pergola with fireplace/TV) 2,387 Outdoor Patios (including terraces) 4,833 Outdoor lawn 4,600 Total proposed 21,014 Signage As noted above, the updated X002 Site Context and Vehicular Movement sheet shows a monument sign at the main entry of the development (south driveway) on the City right-of-way and on the private property on Commerce Boulevard where access will be provided to the site. The construction of a monument sign on the City property will be addressed through the public lands permit, while the other proposed monument sign on Commerce Boulevard will be located within the private easement. Both signs will need to meet the sign requirements of Chapter 119 and be located so as to not impact traffic visibility. Disposal/Sale of City Property As previously presented, the applicant has requested the City consider the sale of three properties that are adjacent to the project. The City Council considered the request at their Page 6 351 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 January 25, 2022 meeting and approved the purchase agreement for the properties. These properties have been included as part of the revised submittals under consideration by the Planning Commission. As part of the potential sale of City -owned properties, MSS 462.356 requires that the Planning Commission review and make findings to the City Council about the consistency of the proposed disposal with the City's approved comprehensive plan. Staff notes that all of the properties requested to be sold for the project are guided mixed use in the Comprehensive Plan. Vacation of Rights -of -Way The applicant has requested the vacation of right-of-way that extends through the property. As noted previously there are two rights -of -way in the project vicinity, one which bisects the property and one which extends along the Lake Langdon shoreline. In evaluating the vacation requests, the City considers whether the right-of-way serves a public benefit. This may include a right-of-way's current use, its potential to provide access, such as to a public water, or the benefit the City receives by putting property back on the tax rolls to facilitate a development/redevelopment project. It should also be noted that vacation requests that involve right-of-way that extend to public waters must be considered by the MN Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR). The City has not yet received formal comments from the MnDNR. STAFF / CONSULTANT / AGENCY / UTILITIES REVIEW The supplemental information received from the application were forwarded to involved departments, consultants, agencies, and private utilities for review and comment. As of the preparation of the packet, additional comments have only been received from the MnDNR. However, Staff did follow up with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for an update regarding their permitting process. MCWD Staff has shared that the proposed project triggers the District's Erosion Control, Stormwater Management, Wetland Protection, and Waterbody Crossings & Structures rules. MCWD is awaiting revisions and additional information from the applicant. As with other development projects, the applicant will need to meet the requirements of MCWD. Wes Saunders -Pearce, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources The City received a follow-up comment letter from the MnDNR on January 28, 2022. The following are the two concerns of the MnDNR expressed in the letter. Staff has provided additional information for Planning Commissioners for clarification. Impervious surface. The development proposes an impervious surface percentage exceeding that allowed within city code for shoreland residential zones. Staff notes that the project is in a mixed -use district rather than a residential zoning district as stated above. The City's shoreland provisions state "Impervious surface Page 7 352 Northland Mound - PC Report - January 27, 2022 coverage in lots in the business and industrial zones shall not exceed 30 percent of the lot area. In business and industrial zones that are included within areas covered by an approved stormwater management plan, impervious surface coverage shall not exceed 75 percent of the total lot area. "City practice has been that the mixed use districts are part of the business and industrial zones referenced. The applicant will have an approved stormwater management plan with MCWD so the maximum impervious surface is 75%. The applicant is proposing 48% impervious for the site. Density. Density calculations should be provided for the Northland Mound PUD. The plat was be divided into tiers. However, no calculations are available to demonstrate the proposed 104 units are consistent with shoreland density requirements. As noted in the previous Planning Commission report, the City of Mound is unable to meet shoreland density requirements for projects other than single-family residential as the methodology for calculating allowable units is based on a single-family lot size of 10,000 square feet. City practice has been to use the PUD process to allow for multi- family projects that exceed the shoreland tiering density requirements. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the requested land use and subdivision requests based on the findings of fact identified for each request. Staff has identified recommended conditions for the conditional use permit and the preliminary plat. These may be subject to change through the review process. Vacation of Right -of -Way Findings of Fact 1. The vacation will facilitate the consolidation and platting of multiple parcels into the Northland Mound plat. 2. Due to the redevelopment of the area, the purposes for which the dedications were originally made are no longer needed. Public Lands Permit Findings of Fact 1. The proposed construction of the curb and landscaping will improve the City right-of- way from existing conditions. 2. The separation of vehicular movement on the project site from the City right-of-way will benefit safety. Page 8 353 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 Disposal /Sale of City Property Under Minnesota Statutes Findings of Fact 1. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan contemplates development of the project area. 2. Sale of the property will provide for improvement and enhancement of the public land in the subject vicinity of the Downtown Lake Mixed Use Area. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Findings of Fact 1. The proposed use of the site is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. 2. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type of development and use being proposed. 3. The proposed development is providing adequate utilities and drainage. 4. The proposed development has sufficiently considered access and traffic. 5. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. 6. The proposed project will diversify the types of housing available in the community by providing new apartments for the City of Mound. Conditions 1. Revisions as needed to the plan set so that all sheets of the plan show the same project area boundary and site size. 2. No future ("overnight mooring") dock structures or uses shall be allowed onto Lake Langdon. All required permitted shall meet local and state regulations. 3. The south access drive shall be improved to typical 4-ton street standards. 4. The building materials and color scheme shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City. 5. Final design of any ADA spaces shall be approved by the Building Official. 6. Plans shall be updated to show the size and drive aisle spacing of the underground parking area. 7. Approval of the easement and public lands permit to allow for construction of a drive aisle, curb, landscaping, and monument sign on the city -owned right-of-way and parking area to the east. 8. Add to the site plan the depth of the dead-end parking lot turnaround on the south. The depth shall be at least 7 feet for ease of maneuverability. 9. Ensure all sidewalks are graded for ADA accessibility and railings along retaining walls provided. 10. The applicant shall work with City Staff to identify pedestrian connections to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail and Commerce Boulevard. Page 9 354 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 11. Outdoor storage of boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles will not be allowed on the site. 12. Apartment unit decks and patios shall not be allowed for personal storage purposes, including for bicycles. 13. The landscape plan shall be revised to the satisfaction of the City Planner. This shall include addressing the following: a. The seed mixes shown on the landscape plan need refinement. The Wet Prairie seed mix shown is not appropriate in all areas identified. Drier seed mix is required on sloped areas and areas without wetland soils. In addition, in the basin north of the building the landscape plan should specify use of State Seed Mix 34-262 (Riparian South and West) instead of the currently proposed Wet Prairie. b. Revise the landscape plan to include a strip at least one mower's width wide of no mow fescue or pollinator lawn mix along the sidewalk on south of building to indicate "cues to care" and so that tall native plants are not flopping over onto sidewalk. c. A tree survey shall be provided that shows which trees are being preserved and what will be installed to meet the 1 tree per dwelling unit requirement. d. Revise the proposed mix of trees to ensure that at least 25% are deciduous and 25%are coniferous. Also diversify the mix of deciduous and coniferous species to increase site landscape resiliency from species specific pests and disease. 14. Ensure the erosion control plan includes silt fence and the use of an erosion control blanket for seeded area of 3:1 slopes or greater. 15. Provide additional information, including an image, of the lighting fixtures proposed. 16. All signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 119 and applicant is required to obtain all required permitting for future signage. 17. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, and major subdivision -preliminary plat. 18. A Development Agreement, to be prepared by the City Attorney, shall be required for the project and prepared as part of the final plat. 19. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the conditional use permit application. 20. The applicant shall be responsible for securing all required local, state, and federal permits and approvals. 21. This conditional use permit is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: (to be inserted). 22. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 23. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Page 10 355 Northland Mound - PC Report - January 27, 2022 Major Subdivision -Preliminary Plat Findings of Fact 1. The proposed major subdivision -preliminary plat is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. 2. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type of development and use being proposed. 3. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety, or welfare of the community. Conditions 1. The plat shall incorporate all properties proposed to be part of the development. 2. The lot area shall be modified to match what is on the site plan. 3. 10-foot drainage and utility easements shall be established around the perimeter of the property. 4. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, conditional use permit and comprehensive plan amendment. 5. A development agreement shall be prepared as part of the final plat process. 6. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the preliminary plat application. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolutions(s) with Hennepin County. Applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 8. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information for building permit issuance. 9. The MCES SAC charge for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 10. Sewer and watermain area trunk charges for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current trunk charge for sewer and water, per unit, is $2000.00 each. 11. Sewer connection and water connection fees shall be determined as part of the final plat. The 2020 sewer connection and water connection fees are $240.00 each. 12. The park dedication fee amount shall be determined as part of the final plat as provided by City Code Sec. 121.121. 13. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission and City Council. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW As noted previously, the scheduled date for City Council public hearings and consideration of the requests is Tuesday, February 8, 2021. This date was set because of the required Page 11 356 Northland Mound — PC Report — January 27, 2022 notification timeline to the MnDNR related to the vacation of rights -of -way that extend to public waters. Page 12 357 Eli S LYNWOOD BLVD - LYNW ODD OLVD sHOPELINEDP �LYNW DOD RLVD— SHORELINEDP o o r I -fo ' iq --.1 OMEUNE r m ,�FUDITORs PD 01 Y 1 J. All ... I 80..a.o ioo Y-.r Fb.aw,in o© rzmz 0 a iDD MD K D QDF.' Site Location Map 358 13 z MIGG NLVSl'lOdV9NNlV4'),VAA)RJVd 19111WH B)IV'l AAtlzctl �o dnomo mvis3 IV3N aNVIHIMON Z. zl.1�2 1. w (L 0 Z D Us) z 1�c L b1. z zi o ZW 0 CO r% z 7-4 ok 1 T- 0 z z z E V9S9G NVY '(3Nnovy "(wla aoNavyvioo xxxx ffow co () -. N � 0 Q q N E N( vi 0 0, 73 z rr. -iiinwONnow Aiiwv=i• 2 LY CY w 103rolid 65 z Lr -j 0 z -4 9 9 9 fn z it po: M 0 CY Li T. z M Z' lz Imino v am, )NUSIX3-1.,-, .0 u V) z NOIS dOl 0 z <lHW-tLS6= 133a15 94 I z2 _1 M — — — — �OMG 3 0 w 1 0 Z W 23 ON3yyn000 L '0 N 'H 'V L) w Ch zllz ---------- -- H 9,2z — — — — )FvMiaTs CN N K R I w m o� n ^\ ^ lS\ \ �g �.\� ---- / _ /r------ a 3 tt z z a 0 00 w z 0 ul w < In 0 9*9 Va 10 0 C,4;r.\\\\\\ w fjI �aa� vi�.' 50 \13 \\ \= F 6 ° ao�\��\ zc}0N�� U z 03 z 3: 0 z \-4, a oIdS\^asa 6\J�\dS0\\\\\\�\c\� s\\\\\\\ \\I �\ o\\\_� I i F- x co 0 "J C14 �N 0 M (L & Cf) > V) z 0 w 0 0 < OJ0 LU u N U M\,. z > 2P Ell V) V)OU 0 Z 0 LU z I O� \\� \ ELI cn NUM o P" Z LLI En =1 3: 0En 0 < �-- izo r----- u D F )n_ 01- (L D M Ix IL � I salru —s— HO— a7 ZIT - - - - - - -- —11"Viraie -io U- 0 '0 LU Z LU -J�e2 — a- M I Of x ko ,W- N- co 0 - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0 0 �e Ld z F- 0 :v -411w, —ft A flj4 MEN .... ......... 19 -91, ♦ - - - - - - - - - - - M 61 nii' N ---------- \ ............ ri A I ME g J-0 Mir 7J W N S 2 NO 0 I IS' IN rAL ciry or moomn © e PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting Planner DATE: February 1, 2022 SUMECT: Request to amend agenda to add comments received for Northland Mound (Case No. 21-18) Staff requests the Planning Commission am end tonight's agenda under Item 4 Review and approval of agenda, including any amendments to add the following additional pages to the packet starting with page 18a to receive the public comments submitted since the Planning Comm ission packet was prepared. 360 Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received Public Comments for Northland Mound (PC Case 21-18) Rodney Beystrom Sarah about 1/2 hour ago I typed out on the Facebook page of the Mound Westonka Bulletin Board page my opinion of the proposed Apt. complex project in downtown Mound. I didn't know the Planning Commission meeting would be held the same night as the caucuses and at the same time also. )-: Can you copy or print off my remarks on the Mound Westonka Bulletin Board Facebook page and have it as a citizen's commentary in the meetings regarding this project ? I am in favor it and it's better we have something like this here than someplace 5 miles from here or whatever. Thank you and I appreciate it if you could. I have a very busy day on Monday and Tuesday for retyping my commentary out again. [PC Member please note that Mr. Beystrom dropped off a print off from the Mound Westonka Bulletin Board. Staff has compiled just Mr. Beystrom's comments at the end of this document] John Biglow My name is John B. Biglow, one of the Lay Trustee's of Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church (OLL) and I submit the following concerns/comments for dissemination to the members of the Mound Planning Commission, and to be made part of the public record. Our Lady of the Lake does not object to the Project but does have the following concerns/comments for your consideration. Concern #1: CONGESTION Due to the unique nature of the flow of traffic to and from OLL, in particular school buses, parents bringing children to and from the school, and parishioners attending mass, as well as the community attending events including the Incredible Festival, the safe access and egress from OLL will be affected by the influx of new resident commuters. Proposed actions/requirements for the development: In addition to the Commissioned Study on Traffic, the implement of speed bumps, or other devices or signage to practically control the new increased use. With placement of speed bumps, and signage, we would be looking to prevent, within reason, the likelihood, of increased exiting speeds, or any cut throughs through the OLL parking lot. In addition, because the parking lot is roped off during school playground time, these types of safety mechanisms or warnings would be especially important. Concern #2: PARKING If insufficient parking is planned for the development, then OLL will be negatively affected. The tendency of overflow parking to migrate into the surrounding properties is likely. OLL has the largest lot next to the development, and in cases where there are 2 vehicles owned by the Tenants of the Development, or their guests, then the public parking available between the 361 Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received Development and the Commerce store front parking lots will be insufficient to handle the increase in resident commuters, family and guests. Proposed actions/requirements for the development: In addition to the developments plan for parking for its tenants, the Development should install the necessary Curb and Landscaping that clearly demarks the allowable parking for the Development and separates OLL's parking lot. A treed boulevard or berm on the southernmost boundary of the Development with OLL would clearly show the separation of parking options. In addition, deployment of signage for their tenants for allowable parking, and designations that parking is not allowed in the OLL parking lot, nor overnight parking in the public parking spaces adjacent to the Development. Concern #3: SAFETY Due to the involvement of a school, and children of elementary and middle school age, the increase in the congestion as stated above, brings a concern regarding the school parking lot use by the Development tenants as a drive through egress option, and accessibility for emergency vehicles. There is also a concern about the added traffic exiting onto and off of Commerce Blvd with multiple entry points, and a Pedestrian Cross Walk. Proposed actions/requirements for the Development: In addition to the above -mentioned speed bump and signage, a concerted management of the Tenants regarding prohibition of parking outside of designated areas, or storage of refuse containers only within the complex's garage will help avoid blockage through the area. In addition, the city could introduce traffic controls or warnings to prevent accidents with vehicles, bicycles, and foot traffic in that section of Commerce Blvd. Concern #4: AESTHETICS The area is a natural area, and the Development will change the appearance and view of the nature and the lake. It will be important as the community comes to OLL for events, that there is a sense of harmony with the natural surroundings. Proposed actions/requirements for the Development: The landscaping and the interior storage of waste containers as well as the deploying of signs disallowing areas of smoking, or raucous behavior on the southernmost boundary of the Development with OLL. Anne Boehle I am writing in opposition of the large apartment complex development near Lake Langdon. As a 12 year resident of Mound, I frequently use the Dakota trail near Lake Langdon and am concerned of the environmental Impacts of such a large development as well as the construction of an unsightly building obstructing the beautiful picturesque setting which I believe is a draw of this small community. Instead of more rental units in our area how about improving the business developments in existing structures? We have enough rental units in the community. 362 Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received Gus and Irene Knott I am against the proposal. The area would become congested with all the coming and going. We do not need more apartment buildings in Mound. We need to clean up what we have! Amanda Moodie I am a concerned Our Lady of the Lake Catholic School Parent and Church parishioner. I would really like to know where the property proposed will fall In regards to the school. I want to know that the entrance and traffic will be specifically partitioned and segregated from the commonly driven parent path and recess area. I want to be sure that there will not eventually be complaints from their residents in regards to parent pick up and drop off but mostly that the kids will be safe. I'd like to see a segregation and partition that forces residents and guest to enter from another driveway with no potential for drive through traffic from residents and guests. The developers may not be aware that the pick up and drop off traffic for the school enter from commerce blvd. along the current building where Magic Taylor is located and wraps behind the church to the rear entrance rather then the opposite side near the play ground. That entrance is for school buses away from the car traffic for student safety. In addition, school recess takes place in this back parking lot. Students are out there with little disruption to play each and every day. There can NOT be any potential for increase In Car flow! I I I know change is hard and that Mound in particular tends to knock down the idea of high rises as it did the project across the street. I am concerned about student safety and about complaints regarding pick up and drop off traffic. I don't want increased traffic from this proposed building. We need to be ensured that the developers have school safety in mind and that there will be a designed segregation to discourage any flow through the school parking lot at any time of the day. I would encourage the city to meet with the principal Becky Kennedy and spend a day with the school to see the pick up and drop off as well as the schools daily flow. The kids are through that parking lot all the time and we CAN NOT have any increased risk of child injury or death with increased traffic. Melanie Neubarth This is a horrible ideal How's the city planning new development when the city of Mound should be working on our current problems. How's the water situation? How's are we planning for safety? Traffic? Kids? I don't think Mound needs a multi family unit. 363 Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received We live here because we love the small town. We should be conserving our lake, keeping up on what we currently have. Solving current concerns. Putting something like that in swamp land is the dumbest thing ever. We can't get good water to current residents so let's add more residents. Totally opposed! Anna Peters I have been to many city meetings and have talked to many of the council members and mayor over the years. Mound has been a place I call home for a long time. Are you from around here? Do you live in Mound? It's a wonderful small town and if you ask the tax paying residents, that is the attribute they love most. What type of incentives does the city get for putting more low income transient housing in? We all know that is not best for our city or our schools. Kassie Ricke Please include these comments for tonight's meeting. While I would love to see growth in the Mound that would enhance and bring more business to our downtown area, however this location is very problematic. To have 104 apartments, with 31 of them being two bedrooms, thus adding additional cars to the proposed apartment parking, would create huge traffic and congestion concern. 1. The entrances to the proposed site is off parking lots, not a street or boulevard. 2. With the site surrounded by private businesses and a church/school, I would be concerned that their parking spaces would be filled by visitors to the proposed apartments. 3. It could potentially create the parking lot at OLLto become a thorough fare. 4. Safety for students and parents of OLL at pick up and drop off times as 104+ cars will be added to the area. Jason Zattler On behalf of the business owners on Commerce Blvd that will be affected by the Northland Group apartment building, we are sincerely requesting you not recommend the approval of this apartment building to the Mound City Council. Our offer: Before your meeting Tuesday evening, please come down to the site location and meet with the building owners that are affected and see firsthand the issues we have this this project. Please give Jason a call at (612) 201-4316 to arrange. To begin the city Comp 2040 plan only has another 90 units (14 over said 104 unit) for the city COMP 2040 plan. 1 realize this can be amended, but these long-term city plans are there to not be amended. It is a long-term plan and view for the overall vision of the city. In addition, the city has already approved another senior co-op condo/apartment building with 52 units in the open area along Auditors Road (Across the Street from us). CM Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received Auditors Road will then be closed for drive through traffic that is also going to cause traffic issues that include server accidents and potentially kill our residents. Second issue is the DNR and Met Council review. There may be an update to this at the next meeting. 1 don't know where this now stands with the DNR or the Met Council. Third issue the apartment only has 93 enclosed parking spaces for 104 units. With a 104 units it will need conservatively 160+ parking spaces) which means two things. There is not enough parking and there will be 160+ cars leaving along the already very conjected road between the southern business building and Our Lady of the Lake (Not to mention another 100+ cars from the already approved 52-unit build approved across the street.) We all know there are minimum parking requirements on paper that have been put in place to meet a minimum of parking as the requirement, but the reality is much different. A Major issue with the proposed traffic study that is going to be put forth it will not account for the 52 unit building that has already been approved. There will be another 75+ cars existing at the some location that is planned for this large apartment building. Not to mention, the businesses traffic, Church traffic and School traffic. This is a large safety concern that the planning commission and city council needs to seriously consider. When the first person gets hurt or dies, there are going to be some figure pointing at the planning commission and city council. Forth issue, besides the congestion of the traffic flow in and out of an already busy area for Our Lady of the Lake parents and students going to school. You also have the school buses 9 months of the year that flow in and out of the some area with the transfer of students from bus to bus in the some area as proposed apartment. Fifth issue is the business owners and building owners along Commerce Blvd next to Our Lady of the Lake. The building owners own the very large parking lot in the back. They have the Central Business Agreement (CBD) with the City of Mound to allow the parking lot in the back as "Public Parking. " These owners provide a service to the residents of Mound to allow for overflow parking for the Our Lady of the Lake Church. Parking and some staging for the City of Mound Parade among other local community events. The business owners will remove themselves from the public parking agreement from the City of Mound. They are concerned with a host of issues that includes the drive through of the area, use of the parking area for tenants and its guesses of the proposed apartment building, the overuse of the asphalt and liability. Asphalt is not cheap. If the Planning Commission approves this apartment building. The owners would request the City of Mound put up curb and/or a 6' Foot fence for the business to keep the parking private and prevent any liability suite and parking from occurring. The business did not ask for this. Sixth issue is the snow removal for the business owners along Commerce Blvd. Some years when we get a substantial amount of snow and the snowbanks can be 20 to 30 feet high. Where are the owners of these business going to put that volume of snow and 365 Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received at what expense to the owners? It is very costly to have snow moved to a separate location. What about the consideration for the businesses and owners that already contribute financially along with their time to this community? We ask the planning commission and city council look beyond just this apartment building and what it does to the local businesses. Seventh issue is water and drainage. Water is already an issue for current building owners as it relates to the sump -pumps they have in buildings and natural drainage of the large parking lot. There is a concern on the current water saturation on the land as it stands today and could cause more ground saturation and heaving of the ground and as a result cracking of the asphalt parking lot. This could be another burden to the business and owners from a building perspective and financially. Eighth issue is the land is really a swampy area and the potential builder has already admitted that they cannot have a basement and would have to build a 4-story building with the first level for 93 covered parking spaces. Another issue they admitted to, was a good portion of the building would have to be placed on underground pylons that would have to be pounded into place. Where is all the large construction equipment that would be brought in enter and placed? How are they going to get it in and at what cost to the new asphalt parking lot that was just put in at the building owners and city expense? The only legal road entry is the small road that the city owns right next to the Dakota Rail Trail. There have been no request for easements to the business or building owners to bring in this large equipment. Nineth issue is what this kind of apartment housing would do to the school district. It would probably add another classroom full of kids in an already very full school district where some kids in their own district are already being turned away. Where is the consideration for the current residents of Mound and their children? In our opinion the builder is looking at putting 'Market Rate" apartments in again ... 33 Studio apartments, with the remaining a mix of 1- and 2-bedroom apartments. The builder's pitch is a high amenity or "High End" apartment building, 1 have never heard of a "High End" studio apartment? Why do they put in studio apartments? Purely economics, more rent per square foot for the owner. And the people who rent studio apartments are those that can't afford a 1 Bedroom. This is once again a blind for more Section 8 housing/voucher housing. The Studio apartments are priced as such that a voucher would nearly pay for the monthly rent. The builder is going to come in and build this massive apartment building on two and half acres and get all the tax breaks from Mound Residents and make a bunch of money and then sell it in a few years, or let Met Council take over and the Mound residents are going to be stuck hold the handbag with more cost for police due to crime, more school district costs, more congestion and other expenses. C.. Northland Mound — PC Report — February 1, 2022 — Additional Public Comments Received The stakes are high and the above challenges significant as it relates to this location. As a planning commission representative for the residents and business owners of the City of Mound, 1 respectfully request you give this a true objective view vs. the subjective review. 1 ask you not to recommend the sale of city owned parcels of land, vacating the road, or approve the location of this 4-Story Apartment building with 33 Studios, 40 one - bedrooms, 31 two -bedrooms units on approximately 2.5 acres of land. If the City of Mound wants to see more house behind the businesses, then put in a half a dozen townhomes. The seems much more appropriate for the area in question. Not a 4 Story Apartment Complex with 104 units. 367 :5,d)"a ILRN�✓i,(/G C o,VSuu�N f NKF1' oil ,c . Rodney Beystrom Lorrie Gedker Ham Be remindful this is a great project but not necessarily cheap housing but it will be competitive standard prevailing market rate but nice and new with gorgeous studio units that many senior and young working professionals are currently taking advantage of in different localities Rodney Beystrom Anne Marie Boehle Lake Langdon years ago when things were thought of differently was the cesspool that the City of Mound discharged all of it's sewage, or some of it at least, into it. That all changed of course when people got smarter and regional sewage lines were developed. Lake Langdon has cleaned itself up greatly since then. This project would have no more of an impact on Lake Langdon than the Our Lady of the Lake Church does and probably much less than the other established parcels and businesses along that way. Nothing is going to get dumped into the lake from this project. Also as far as view blockage at that spot on the trail it would be very limited, brief and miniscule for a limited footage area and certainly not in a detrimental way. It's going to be a gorgeous place to live for those there looking at the water and also right out their door being able to access the Dakota Trail for a walk. Citizens of Mound this is a great project to get behind. Also if the DNR had it's way everyone with access to any body of water would have to trudge through cattails to get there. This is NOT, I repeat, is NOT the Boundary Waters Canoe area and people can enjoy our natural resources in a way that is accessible but at the same time respectful of the surroundings in a safe environmental way. Believe it because it is true. I suppose Lord Fletchers and Maynards and other establishments and Marina's should be closed down and curtailed also huh? 369 Rodney Beystrom Sal Paradise Not everyone living there would he driving a car. Given that consideration the parking should be adequate. Like Reply id O 1) Rodney Beystrom I have stated this before, and I will state it again, this project is a great opportunity for the City of Mound from a variety of standpoints: It will greatly enhance the potential for downtown Mound business success with an increased customer base for the retail outlets and banks, etc. It will bring people into Mound to visit and hang out and eat and shop here. It will enhance Mound's tax base far into the future and help spread the taxes needed to a broader base helping alleviate increases for others who own property in Mound....... good for Mound revenue badly needed. It will allow a nice place to live for people next to the Dakota Trail with a wonderful view of Lake Langdon and to be able to kayak and enjoy nature in such a way. Many seniors now who have been widowed or are widowers no longer want to own and have demonstrated increased desires in rental housing and especially nice studio type apartments. Many of these people don't care to drive too much anymore or not at all and this location is ideal for them for shopping and banking by walking to their destinations. Young professionals are looking for this type of living and it would be popular with Langdon Lake and the Dakota Trail right out your front door. Even Excelsior nor Wayzata have such complexes that are in the realm of being affordable at such nice locations. This project would be a win -win for the City of Mound and its constituents and businesses. As businesses grow and people frequent the area more there is the great potential of more investors wanting to locate to Mound with new business opportunities. Mound is very fortunate to have this space that a property owner and developer would want to create such a great opportunity for the community as well as themselves. We should be thankful and hope that they do it. 370 Rodney Beystrom Siobhan Larsen Excelsior doesn't have the location in their downtown for something like < this. But from my understanding they now regret not allowing or for making it more difficult for that Hotel to be put in with it's businesses below between the The... See more Like Reply 1d Rodney Beystrom Why the laughter? It's a fact. Get to know the Mayor. Have you ever spoken to him? Spent time in meetings? Contributed ideas? Or without facts just impolitely scorn? Be a part of the solution and not the problem. Rodney Beystrom Julia Mafalda Scalise Julia, Planning Commission meetings and any commission meetings are scheduled a year in advance on a regular schedule. The caucuses are a separate issue obviously and coincidence has it they fell on the same night......... not planned - my heavens.... caucuses being every two years and planned by the respective parties. Ray Salazar is in charge along with the Council over the city and Eric H. reports to them. I am not sure what the conflict of interest exactly is but if it is valid then it's prohibited to keeps things up and above board. Like Reply 22h Rodney Beystrom Gina Anderson Your negative speculative narration here has no merit. You're anti -growth evidently in regards to smaller community development and your assertions of what you think would take place is mind blowing and very narrow minded. I personally ... See more _ 371 MINUTES EXCERPTS MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 4, 2022 Chair Goode called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. SWEARING IN OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS by City Manager Eric Hoversten David Goode and Kevin Castellano were sworn in. Drew Heal was absent. ROLL CALL Members present: Chair David Goode, Kevin Castellano, Jon Ciatti, Jake Saystrom, Jason Holt, Allen Andersen Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Consultant Planner Rita Trapp, and Secretary Jen Holmquist. Members of the public: Scott Picha-2273 Cottonwood Rd, Jason Zattler-2345 Commerce Blvd, Jeff Wrede-27 Summit Court, St. Paul, Patrick Sapier-4231 Abbot Ave, Minneapolis, Paula Larson-5713 Lynwood Blvd, Mary Davis-3021 Inverness Lane. BOARD OF APPEALS Planning Case No. 21-18 Public Hearing - Review/recommendation on major subdivision -preliminary plat and site development plans of "Northland Mound" involving vacant parcels generally located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon; also review/recommendation of a conditional use permit application for a planned unit development in a shoreland area for a 104-unit market rate, multi -family apartment project; a street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street; a determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the potential sale of City - owned parcels; and a public lands permit application to allow for the construction to occur on the City parking area immediately to the east of the site Applicant: Northland Real Estate Group Rita Trapp outlined the planning case which includes the public hearing for land use and subdivision requests for Northland Mound submitted by the applicant Northland Real Estate Group. The project is located west of Commerce and south of the Dakota Rail Regional Trail. This site is guided mixed used in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and is zoned Mixed -Use Downtown. The lot is 2.4 acres on Lake Langdon. It consists of undeveloped land and previously platted, but unconstructed, right of way. The applicant proposes 104-unit, market rate, multi- family apartment building. The proposal includes 33 studios, 40 one -bedroom and 31 two - bedroom. 372 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft The application includes the major subdivision -preliminary plat and conditional use permit for a Planned Unit Development in a Shoreland Area. Planned Unit Developments (PUD) require a conditional use permit. Additionally, the Mixed -Use Downtown District specifically requires a PUD is used with any development or redevelopment project. Right of way vacation is being requested. The applicant has requested the sale of public property, to include three properties. State statute requires the Planning Commission to determine if the sale or disposal of public property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The public lands permit request involves the construction of curb and driveway. the site development plans are included with the request, as well. The applicant requested the vacation of platted but not constructed right of way. Staff has confirmed that the applicant is requesting vacation for all of the former rights of way. The applicant is requesting to purchase three City -owned properties. Currently only one City owned property is included in the application drawings. The addition of the two other properties will change the acreage, as presented. Existing conditions include four wetlands. A delineation is under review by the City's consultant. The applicant believes a portion of wetland 1 and all of wetland 4 are incidental wetlands. There are requirements surrounding impacting or buffering wetlands. The City in consultation with MCWD will determine whether the wetlands are incidental, the impact that the proposed development will have on the wetlands, and how impacts can be mitigated or if the applicant can purchase credits to off -set the impact. A determination by the City's consultant has not yet been made. The site is mixed use as is guided in the comprehensive plan. This project is in the Downtown Lakes Area. The density for mixed -use areas is calculated on an area -wide basis, looking at Downtown Lakes in its entirety. Currently the density is 8-15 units per acre. There is another development, which is already approved, that also impacts the allowed density. That development includes 52 units, leaving 24-90 units remaining for the Downtown Lakes area. A comprehensive plan amendment will be required in order to allow the 104 units, as proposed. The preliminary plat is 2.4 acres. This will increase if the City approves the sale of the public land. The plat would create one lot. Easements will need to be platted around all sides, as well, so the plat, as proposed in the application, will need to be revised. The Conditional Use Permit is the tool for planned unit developments. A PUD establishes the project dimension and the design standards. A PUD is required to be a minimum of 1 acre. The applicant meets the minimum requirements. 373 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Staff has recommended that setbacks be incorporated into future plans. Almost the entire lot is more than 50 feet from the OHWL. The applicant is proposing a wetland buffer of 37.5 feet. That is part of the wetland review process and no determinations have yet been made. One of the goals when adopting the Mixed -Use Downtown District was to have a pedestrian friendly environment. This included buildings being at the front of a lot, facing the street with most of the building being closer to the property line within a specific setback area. That is not being proposed in the case. This is a unique site and there is no road out front and access is only coming from the east. If parking were behind the building it would be on the lake which would not allow the development to take advantage of the lakefront. So, this may be the most appropriate design, relative to the site. Trapp outlined the sidewalks proposed on the surround of the site. Some work needs to be done on how to access the Dakota Rail Regional Trail and Commerce Blvd. The connections will need to be public as Dakota Rail Regional Trail will not allow a private connection to a regional trail. The Mixed -Use Downtown District has bicycle parking requirements. Bike racks are proposed on 80 of the underground parking stalls, as well a hoop bike rack at the entrance of the building, for visitors. Useable Open Space is a new concept that was added when the Mixed -Use Downtown District was created. In the past, open space usually included setbacks, front and side property lines which did not provide open space that residents could use. It is required at 200 sq. ft. per unit. Based on 104 units that equals a requirement of 20,800 sq. ft. and this will be accomplished by private decks/balconies, rooftop and garage community areas, terraces, and outdoor lawn. Trapp requests the Commissioners consider if the outdoor lawn meets the requirement, as it was intended. The proposal does include usable indoor space but Staff determined that did not qualify for this requirement. Architectural design requirements for the district include that building fronts should have 2 architectural elements, exterior walls greater than 50 feet need to have visual relief using one architectural feature, Multi -story buildings shall distinguish the ground from upper floor with one feature and the building entrance shall have a feature to protect pedestrians. Trapp noted that Staff has expressed concern about the first floor of concrete masonry block around the enclosed parking. They are proposing an architectural feature that creates a wave design on the front fagade but nothing specifically on the different elevations. The visibility of the heating and cooling units is another of Staff's initial concerns. Building height maximum is 50 feet. The primary elevations are proposed at 47 feet or less, however the stair elevator tower is 54.5 feet and the cupola height is just under 51 feet at its mid -point. There is a precedent with the transit ramp to allow a higher element. 374 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Access and traffic discussions continue. It is likely that the entrance would be on the south side across from Auditor's Road. That area is owned privately, not by the applicant. Potentially the public right of way could be used as an entrance. That was designed as an alley or access point to the parking behind. The final design would need to be approved by Hennepin County. No traffic study has been completed to date. Parking code requires %space per studio unit, 1 space per 1 bedroom and 2 spaces per 2- bedroom unit. Code requires enclosed parking when the site allows. The applicant has used the maximum building footprint to provide enclosed parking. Staff has requested dimensions. There is parking proposed to the east or front of the building. Trapp outlined that the drive aisle runs north to south, extending to the public right of way. This is the purpose of the public lands permit. Trapp stated the drive aisle is proposed at 24 feet, code requires 25 feet, however, with just 1 row of parking there would not be two cars trying to back out into the same area. Applicant is intending to provide 127 total parking spaces. Landscaping code requires 1 tree for each unit for a multi -family development. The applicant is proposing 36 trees. Staff will require a mix of tree species. Staff recommended changes to ground cover in some areas due to ground conditions. The additional City properties, if added, may allow for more landscaping and the preservation of trees. Sanitary sewer is available from manholes to the north or the south. Water service will need to be extended from Commerce Blvd. Storm water service will need to be determined in consultation with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Shoreland tiering information was received after the planning report was complete and is still under review. Shoreland rules require that we do a density determination based upon the amount of land in each tier. Each tier is 267 feet in depth from where the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level is. Trapp discussed the formula for determining what is required. Trapp noted that it can be difficult to meet tiering requirements for any projects that are not standard single- family lots. Maximum allowable impervious surface is 75%. The applicant is proposing 60%. Trapp noted that could be adjusted based on the sale of the City parcels. Trapp said the applicant is proposing one above ground filtration system and two underground filtration systems. These systems will need to meet the MCWD requirements. Trapp summarized the consulting agency comments: CenterPoint has no issues. 375 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority had no concerns other than no construction may occur on their property without consultation. Hennepin County Transportation will want to be included in the improvements discussion, as well as the discussion regarding access onto Commerce Blvd as it is a county road. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services has no major issues. The MnDNR reviewed the project based on the shoreland management rules and recommended denial. That is based on the lack of information and said the setbacks and elevations weren't shown clearly and don't meet the minimum. They cited that 50% of the project must be preserved as open space and this project is not there. Density calculations won't meet shoreland rules. They also noted screening and minimizing the view from public water. Trapp stated the City has the ability to deviate from the DNR's recommendations. Three Rivers Park District noted the trail crossings can't connect directly to the private property. All trees and shrubs need to be planted at least 10 feet from the edge of the trail. They noted a steep ditch. Trapp discussed the process for disposal/sale of City -owned property. Applicant has requested the sale of three properties adjacent to the project. One of the properties is proposed to be used for parking and circulation purposes. The other two would presumably be used as open space. In 2019 the City adopted a policy that identifies the following considerations, determining whether the parcel is developable, evaluation of whether and undersized parcel could be conveyed to an adjacent property owner, assessment of the potential for use of the property for public benefit. City Council will consider the applicant request for the sale of those three properties at the January 11 meeting. Trapp stated that per state statues the Planning Commission is requested to make a determination if the disposal or sale is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Trapp discussed the request for vacation of rights of way. The City evaluates if the right of way provides a public benefit. City Council will hold the public hearing at the first meeting in February. Trapp noted in her conclusion that the recommendation by Staff is to table the requests to a future meeting so the applicant may provide additional information and address issues identified by the Planning Commission. Trapp asked for questions. Ciatti asked for direction about the Planning Commissions role for the right-of-way that is along the lake. Trapp stated it is a City Council decision. If the vacation request were a stand-alone request, it would go directly to the Council. However, with a large development like this, Staff 376 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft likes to have a conversation with the Planning Commission. Goode wondered what the purpose of the right of way down the lake was. Trapp answered it was proposed to serve those lots. He asked if it was originally intended to provide access to the lake. Trapp is not aware of what the original intention was. Saystrom asked about a steep ditch. He wonders if that was in the right of way or on the subject property. Trapp says that is a good question for the applicant. Saystrom wondered what kind of precedent it will set if the City allows a higher roof. Trapp clarified that the measurement is to the midpoint and that most of the roof will meet height requirements. Castellano asked if there are parameters or guidelines for the upcoming traffic study. Trapp said studies are fairly standard. Saystrom wondered if City Staff will review and agree with the study. Trapp stated there are standards and calculations that are required and she notes City Staff will review once the study is complete. Castellano asked if the commenting agencies will also need to agree with the study. Trapp confirms it is standard practice to provide all additional information, including traffic studies, to all agencies and allow them to comment. Trapp noted the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has started their preliminary review and will need additional information provided by the applicant. More information will be available at the next meeting. Saystrom asks about the 50 percent open space vs. common space. Trapp stated open space is setback, and other unbuilt land by Shoreland Regulations. Useable open space is part of the Mixed -Use District rules and is not necessarily "green space" but rather outdoor, recreational, usable area to be provided for residents. The Open Space can be balconies or decks. The applicant said every unit will have a patio or balcony. There is a rooftop and a garage rooftop space. There is seating outdoors and fire -pit, congregation areas. The outdoor lawn area would put them over the requirement. Ciatti wondered if the parking lot can be permeable materials. Trapp said it can be, but the applicant is not proposing that. This project is under the maximum requirements. Trapp believes the filtration will be under the parking lot. Holt asked for clarification on one of the presentation graphics in regards to parking. Trapp stated the area in question is already public parking. The parking pad simply drops off and there is no curb to help direct run-off water. Water just sheets off toward the property. The applicant is proposing to put curb and grass/irrigation in that area. There is an application for an easement to do the construction on public lands and to allow them access, as well. Holt asked how will they control traffic. Trapp says that is still under discussion. Holt talks through how he believes the flow will go. Castellano asked if the hope is to avoid an access right 377 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft by the trail. Trapp stated neither of the potential spots was designed to be an access. Castellano asked for confirmation that the preferred access would be to the south. Trapp noted that there is an area that is privately owned that is currently being used to access the area. That private owner is the same owner who is selling the land to the developer for this project. That "access" land is not part of this sale. Holt stated he thinks this is going to create a lot more troubles. He can't see an option where there can be any control. People will take the path of least resistance. Holt asked if the building height would trigger a comp plan amendment. Trapp said the PUD is able to address the height request. Trapp stated that an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan will be needed to have this many units on the site. Downtown Lakes Mixed Use area allows 8-15 units per acre. As new development occurs, it leaves lesser units allowed in the district. Artessa project has already been approved, to use some of the units allowed in the district. Any new development can use the remaining allowable units. Holt asked about the architectural elements and requirements. Trapp outlined what is being proposed and explained how they apply. Holt asked if they are asking for docks. Trapp stated that the applicant has not requested docks but the shoreland regulations would not allow an extensive dock system. Saystrom asked about City growth expectations. Trapp said she does not know exact percentages. The density proposed in the comprehensive plan was figured in. Castellano asked if the unit mix should have fewer studios and more 1-bedroom units. Trapp said there is nothing that dictates how the mix of units should be. She noted the applicant has not provided the unit sizes and that information will be forthcoming. Trapp suggested that is a good question for the applicant. Castellano wondered if changing the unit mix would help with parking. Trapp discussed the parking standards. She stated the applicant has met the minimum requirements. Castellano thinks parking issues could be resolved if more 1-bedroom units were built, thus reducing the total number of units. Ciatti asked about the open space and wondered how much under the applicant proposal currently is. Trapp stated they need 50% and she believed, as proposed, they are just over 40 percent, noting that calculation does not include the City owned parcels. Ciatti asked about the "screening" issue identified by the MnDNR. Trapp says more discussion is forthcoming but a multi -family apartment project on the lake makes the screening issue challenging. CIE Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Goode asks for additional questions. Hearing none he invited the applicant's representative to speak. Jeff Wrede, Momentum Group, 27 Summit Court, St. Paul. — He stated they are offering a high - end rental project which offers different rental options for someone who would not want to own. No retail or commercial businesses will be displaced. The project cleans up an unused space and would bring more residents into the City. He outlined the amenities that will be available. This will be a high -end apartment. He believes the local business will benefit from the development. The applicant is excited about the lakefront project and the designers took care to use nautical colors. He explained the 1st floor is parking because of the vicinity to the lake and can't do underground parking. This is why it's a four-story building. He recognizes and understands the issues that have been brought forth and the team is looking forward to working out those details. He said the developers are excited about the views, the high -end rental housing with close proximity to the bike trail and to downtown. Wrede addressed the useable open space. Wrede stated he anticipates the lawn area will be used by residents for lawn games. The tiers step down from the outdoor patios allow handicap access. They will use HVAC with custom color and they can hide the vents/grills. The architectural breaks will include vertical breaks to add interest. The client wanted a 2-story options. Some of the 2-bedroom units are 2 stories. This also breaks up the height of the building. The amenity deck also aids in breaking up the size and mass of the project horizontally and vertically. Wrede does not have any information regarding docks. Wrede said the unit mix is right on for industry standards. He believes there are too many 2- bedroom units, if anything. Holt asked about a previous project. Wrede states there is a lower percentage of 2-bedrooms in most of his other projects. Holt asked what is attractive about studio units. Wrede stated its affordability. He said studios typically go to divorcees. Holt asked about Section 8 housing. Wrede said no. That's not an option for the project. The rents will be too high, with studio apartments being $1,500. Wrede stated these types of projects are very expensive to build and this one, in particular, with the geo-piers they will have to put in the ground is not cheap. Holt wondered if Section 8 vouchers is something they would do 10 years from now, if rentals were low. Wrede stated that has never been a part of the discussion with the client. Wrede assured that market rate means market rate for a high amenity project like this. 379 Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Wrede noted that additional trees can be added to the project. Saystrom noted the rooftop is nice and wonders why they don't add another on the other side of the "L" shaped building. Wrede stated it comes down to the money. He outlined the elevators/staircases/fire exits are all expensive and only one is being proposed. Wrede cited several amenity examples how the amenities are so desirable. Holt asked about a community room. Wrede confirms there will be one, he thought it was over 1,200 sq. ft. Saystrom asked about the underground amenities. Is there storage space? Wrede states bike storage will be provided in front of the parking space. There have not been any discussions about a storage loccer, but it is an option. Holt asked if every unit will have a balcony. Wrede confirms some will have balconies, some patios. Wrede noted the challenge of the water table, the parking will be the first floor, then the amenities will be on the second floor. An inviting, 2-story, open to below entry has been proposed with a staircase leading from first floor to second. Holt asked if there is a playground. Wrede said no, but they are open to discussion. Ciatti asked if the unit reduction is a possibility if comprehensive amendment is not approved. Wrede noted that because the soils are going to be so expensive there is not a lot of room to reduce the units and still make the project profitable. Saystrom asked how many children at a grade -school age might be residents and how will it impact the school system. Wrede will reach out to management companies and ask for that information. Wrede noted that the improvements to the City -owned parking is not intended to supply parking for the residents to this project. Those spots will remain available for the public. They are making the improvements to help control the water run-off that dumps from the subject site and to direct it where it should go. Patrick Sarver 4231 Abbot Ave, MPLS- He reiterated the significant amount of stormwater infrastructure that will be buried on the site. This infrastructure will capture/treat the stormwater. He noted this isn't an amenity that is very visible but it is expensive and it treats the run off. Holt asked how the stormwater is treated. Sarver explained that it captures, holds and filters the water, allowing it to filtrate through and discharge at a slower rate as it runs off. C:I Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 10 Saystrom asked if the system is passive and not mechanical that would require maintenance. Sarver said a sand buffer will provide filtration prior to discharge into the lake. There is a bay that can be cleaned out ensuring the system performs as intended. Goode asks for questions for the applicant. Hearing none he opened the public hearing. Jason Zattler 2345 Commerce Blvd. Mr. Zattler owns one of the commercial properties by this proposed development. He, along with other business owners, own the parking lot that abuts the subject site. The group put $100,000 into replacing the parking lot recently. He has never heard of high -end market rate studio apartments. He believes this is low income housing. Zattler does not think this is a good project for this site. He noted the issues that are still outstanding and he appreciates the Commissioners bringing up those items. He said one issue that has not been mentioned is snow storage. On heavy years the snow is 20-30 feet tall. He wonders where all that snow will go if this project moves forward? Zattler thinks the number of parking spaces provided will not be enough. He outlined how the property line abuts up to his parking lot. He is sure the overflow parking will be in his lot. He also believes construction equipment will cause damage to their current parking. He noted that the traffic running past his office is already congested. He can't see how adding another 100 cars won't affect that. He knows parking studies can spin the information. He agreed the schools are at capacity and surrounding communities are sending kids to the district, too. Zattler reiterated he does not think this is a good project for this site. He stated he, along with other commercial owners, will probably withdraw from the public parking agreement if this project goes through. This would leave no parking for the public and they will have a tow truck on hand to tow vehicles because pavement is too expensive to replace. Ciatti asked where the snow is currently stored. Zattler stated it goes right up to the wood line. Zattler also wanted to point out that the school buses drop off students right in that area because there isn't enough room at the church. He agrees with the earlier discussion that there is no good access point at this site for an apartment building. Zattler summarized that he grew up, went to school, lives, works and owns a business in this town. It's important to him to speak out about this. Andersen asked if he would welcome any multi -family residential. Zattler said no. Anderson asked what kind of development Zattler envisions for that space. He replied a park or storage facility would be acceptable. He noted Lake Langdon used to be a sewer drainage spot and he doesn't think it's that desirable. CM Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 11 Zattler conceded that there has been much discussion and he recognizes it's not an easy answer but he hopes the City will take some time to consider it. Anderson pointed out that projects like Zattler suggested would not be profitable and that if there is a developer who is willing to put the money into this land and the City, it deserves consideration. Zattler replied he doesn't think we should put something there, just to put something there. He thinks the DNR recommendation should be followed. He said Commissioners swore an oath to follow state rules. The DNR is the state. Zattler said this is not the project for this site. There are too many unknown issues to allow this project to go through. He noted a lower basement in his building gets water in it all the time. He thinks changing the land and landscape will affect that, his pump will run more, his basement will have more water. He gave an example of how another business owner had to make improvements after the trail was built. Mary Davis, 3021 Inverness - She stated she took a class that outlined how crime increases when more people live together. She pointed out that another project has been approved on the island. Davis wonders where the growth comes from? She asked if there is really that many people wanting to come to Mound? She doesn't think residents want more housing. She stated we are a bedroom community. The noise level on Commerce is really bad. She doesn't think people will want to sit out on their deck and hear that noise. She asked where the trash cans will go? She pointed out trash haulers and school busses for this many more people will be mayhem. Scott Picha, 2273 Cottonwood Lane - He stated that he knows we need larger entities here to generate more tax revenue. He believes this town could be similar to Wayzata. He noted we have many dead ends and not many areas for development. When he moved in 30 years ago the City said nothing could be built on the subject property because of the wetlands. He doesn't understand how the City can now say "maybe it's not wetland". He thinks leadership is wishy- washy, having rules for some but not for all. He stated the information provided in the mailed notice is not sufficient. He used the graphics to orient the location of the proposal area. He asked who owns the properties on the graphic that show possible access points. Trapp replied that one is City owned and one is privately owned. He believes there is a liability issue to have a building there, with that many people. Smith offered that the privately -owned land in question is owned by the same property owner who will sell the land for this project. He thinks the number of units being proposed is too many. He doesn't believe the mailed notification has enough information and the proposal the City has presented doesn't have enough information. He doesn't understand why this meeting is even being held when the public doesn't have enough information to determine what is going on. Smith explained that Staff is required to provide mailed notice, 10 days in advance of the hearing. The graphic from the applicant was included along with instruction on how to view the full proposal and full color plans on the City's website in the letter. C1M Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 12 Picha suggested the Commissioners think about what will happen in 10 years since the City is already changing the 2040 plan. He does not believe the surrounding area is viable for all the traffic. He doesn't think we need parks. He asks the applicant if a feasibility study has been completed. Picha believes the set back and elevation numbers have "been fudged". He stated the DNR and the watershed district will be firm but when you have money and a City wants to bring money in some of that stuff gets set to the side. He believes we'll have a vacant building in 10 years and everyone will be wondering how this project even got built. Applicant Wrede stated no feasibility study was completed. He doesn't know if a market study was done. Wrede offered information regarding the site the access question. He stated the applicant is in conversation with the owner of the privately -owned parcel for an easement on that land to provide access. Picha returned to explain what a feasibility study is and how they work. They are different for every community. He wonders how much money the City will spend collecting trash. He is upset that the City is allowing the wetlands to be adjusted but they can't plow all the way to the end of his street. He reiterated that there is not enough information. He doesn't think it's a bad idea, but he thinks there are a lot of things missing that need to be clarified. Paula Larson -5713 Lynwood and 2316 Commerce is her commercial building. She has lived here 61 years. She lives across the trail from this proposed development. She said she isn't going to get into the gory details of this piece of property, the acquisition of the property, the wetlands of the property, what was there before the current property owners bought it. She will hold all of her documents and bring her comments at the City Council meeting. As a citizen she stated she did not get a notice of the meeting. She said it is a perpetual problem that she doesn't get notified. Smith explained that notice addresses are generated though Hennepin County based on property tax owner information. Larson stated she believes the notice is faulty for this public hearing since she didn't get one. Trapp and Smith retrieved the mailing list and Larson was on the list. Smith stated a notice was prepared for the names on the list and the envelopes were brought to the post office as required. Larson stated she is going to make some comments at the council meeting and she will be prepared for it. It will include history of what's gone on including the litigation she was involved in. Goode closed the public hearing at 9:18 p.m. He asked if there are any questions for Staff. Holt noted Auditor's Road will be closed with another development. He can't understand how eliminating an existing access will not affect traffic. He thinks that is an important point that needs to be considered. Trapp noted that according to Hennepin County they welcome consolidation which is one of the reasons that spot was targeted. C1W Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 13 Saystrom noted that objectively this is one of the better proposals he's seen in his time on the Commission. He thinks the amenities are good. He noted the challenges on the site are many. He said the community spaces are good too. He agrees with some of the other comments. He thinks "making nice" with neighboring properties should be a part of the conversation. He recognizes that this proposal is an early stage and tweaks will be made. He thinks the developers know their business and if the only the property is viable is if the City allows concessions/variances the community will be in an uproar. He would like to see 1 stall per unit. He thinks density is too high. He thinks the building height is a non -issue. He says the traffic study will be important. Trapp asked the Commissioners what things they want to see when the project comes before the Commission next. Ciatti has an issue with the comp plan amendment. He recognizes the neighbors have issues but doesn't think the Planning Commission is in a position to resolve any of those. He noted in general they need to have a better concept for what will happen with the traffic. Andersen believed the applicant conformed to the code pretty closely. He asked if the wetland information will be available at the next meeting. Trapp believes it is expected in the next couple weeks. Anderson believes that will answer a lot of questions. Andersen's final note was the biggest concern is the traffic/entrance/exit issue. Saystrom asked what's next? If the case is tabled tonight, what is expected in February? Trapp stated the preliminary plat, sale of public lands, right of way vacations, public lands permit, site development plans will be discussed and a recommendation will be sought. She explained that all pieces are wrapped up together because it doesn't make sense to do any one item if the others won't be approved. Ciatti asked if that would include a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Trapp said no. That would be an additional public hearing if the applicant needed to request an amendment. Saystrom summarized his thoughts. The big -ticket items, for him were, DNR Compliance, eliminate comp plan, harmony of neighboring business and traffic. Holt added a school impact report and the market study on if this many units is wanted in Mound. Ciatti asked who is involved in the Public Land Sale. Trapp stated the land transaction involves the City owned land being sold to the developer. The private property sale is completely separate and the City is not involved in that. Goode asked if a recommendation is expected from the February Planning Commission Meeting. Trapp confirmed that is the hope based on additional information being received. CM Planning Commission Minutes - Draft 14 Andersen asked, if the City Council votes to move forward with the sale of the property, will that change the calculations for open space and other unknowns. Trapp confirmed. MOTION by Ciatti to recommend tabling Planning Case 21-18 to the February 1 meeting to allow the applicant to respond to the issues raised by Staff, Planning Commission, agencies and the public; seconded by Holt. MOTION carries unanimously. Goode offered that if any additional items come up, please direct questions directly to Sarah Smith so they can be included in the next meeting. C1M PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting Planner Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: December 29, 2021 SUBJECT: Northland Mound (Case No. 21-18) Public Hearin¢— Major SubdivisionPreliminaryPlat; and review/discussion/consideration of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Planned Unit Development in the Shoreland Area, right of way vacation, determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for sale of city owned property, and a public lands permit to allow for construction to occur on the City owned property immediately east of the site APPLICANT: Brian Farrell, Northland Real Estate Group OWNER: Arthur Paul Meisel LOCATION: Property southwest of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail —involves parcels part of "Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwold Park, Lake Minnetonka" plat MEETING DATE: January 4, 2022 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Mixed Use ZONING: Mixed Use Downtown (MU-D) The applicant, Northland Real Estate Group, has applied for multiple land use and subdivision approvals for the development of a site on the eastern shore of Lake langdon. The site is located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and Dakota Rail Regional Trail. The applications requested include a major subdivision preliminary plat; conditional use permit for a planned unit development in a shoreland area; street vacation of a previously platted, but never constructed street; a determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the potential sale of city owned parcels; and a public lands permit to allow for the construction to occur on the City parking area immediately to the east of the site. The applicants are proposing to construct a 104-unit market rate multi family building consisting of 33 studio, 40 one bedroom, and 31 two bedroom units. The project will also have 93 spaces of ground floor enclosed parking. Some of the amenities proposed for the project include a rooftop patio, outdoor terraces, fitness facilities, a dog wash, and a community room. RM Northland Mound - PC Report - December 29, 2021 Project Plans Due to file size the Planning Commission packet contains a site location map and site plan. The application and full plan set is available at this link. Hardcopies of plans will be provided to Planning Commission members upon individual request. REVIEW PROCEDURE The applications under review include the following land use and subdivision requests: • Major Subdivision -Preliminary Plat • Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a planned unit development in a shoreland area • Vacation of right-of-way • Determination of consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for sale of city -owned parcels • Public lands permit for construction on the City owned parcel immediately east of the site 60-Day Land Use Review Process Timeline Requirement 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 2, 2021 as provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 645.15. The 60-day timeline expires on or around January 30, 2022 unless an extension is executed by the City. An extension of the review period can occur if agreed to by the applicant. 120-day Major Subdivision -Preliminary Plat Timeline Requirement Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, local government agencies are required to approve or deny subdivision requests within 120 days. For the purpose of Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, "Day 1" is determined to be December 2, 2021 in accordance with MS. 645.15. The 120-day timeline expires on or around March 31, 2022. An extension of the There are no timeline requirements for action on vacation, public lands permit applications or requests for sale of City property. Page 2 387 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Public Hearings Planning Commission City Code Section 121-61 requires that a public hearing for review of the major subdivision/preliminary plat be held by the Planning Commission. The public hearing notice was published in the Laker on December 18, 2021 and posted on the City Hall bulletin board on December 14, 2021 and on the City website on December 17, 2021. The public hearing notice was mailed to all affected property owners in the project area or located within 350feet of the plat of Kennedy's Subdivision of Lot 56, Lynwood Park, Lake Minnetonka, per Hennepin County property information on December 17, 2021. City Council According to City Code, the City Council is required to hold the public hearings for review of the conditional use permit and the major subdivision/preliminary plat (Sections 129-38 and 121-61). A City Council public hearing is required for consideration of the vacation request. Public Comments Received Comments or emails received by 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 28, 2021 were included in the Planning Commission agenda packet for the January 0 Planning Commission meeting. Comments received after that time will be presented to the Planning Commission at the meeting. Information submitted will be made part of the public record. The City received the following comments about the project: LaMarr Barnes — 4857 Island View Drive Sa ra h, My name is La Marr Barnes, and I reside at 4857 Island View Drive in Mound. I have some comments and concerns about the Northland Mound Development. First - the city has apparently suggested a lower parking requirement from the code for this development. As I understand it, the general city requirement is 2 - 2.5 parking spaces per unit. This proposal only has 0.75 parking spaces per studio, 1 parking space per single bedroom, and 2 parking spaces per double bedroom. I think this is inadequate. While it is admirable to assume that the residents will not require cars to access local shopping, it is realistic to assume most residents will have a vehicle for other purposes including commuting to a job. This will create pressure to use the parking behind the existing buildings and the Our Lady of the Lake church parking for over -flow. At a minimum, 1 space per studio, 1.5 spaces per single and 2 per double should be required - as I am certain some of the units will have more than one occupant and more than one vehicle, and of course to allow for some marked visitor spaces and the required number of handicapped spaces which may or may not be fully utilized. This would be a minimum of 155 spaces instead of the 127 proposed - and I think this is still very aggressive and Page 3 388 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 probably inadequate. I think the developer should remove some of their rooftop areas to make room for parking. Second - I am concerned about the main access being the space just north of Our Lady of the Lake church. I suspect this will not be a problem most of the time, but I am very concerned about the safety of high traffic in this area during the Incredible Festival held by OLL each fall. I think the added easement in the OLL property may force a reduction in the footprint for the festival and that the pedestrian traffic entering the festival from the north will have increased hazard from the traffic entering the new development. Has any other access been considered as the main access? I am in support of new multi family residential construction in Mound - and hope a way to complete this development can be found. However, I also think the parking is very inadequate and will result in un-needed conflict with residents and potential issues during important community events. James Dolan —2280Cottonwood Lane Received December22, 2021 1) Stormwater runoff concerns 2) Shoreline management concerns 3) Not in favor of docks, piers, or boat docking 4) Prefer quiet lake as it now is 5) Walkway around bldg intersecting trail would be nice. East & west exit/ent. Received December23, 2021 Dear Sarah: After looking at the "Northland Mound" project at City Hall 12-22-21, 1 would like to offer the following comments: Two main areas of concern — runoff/pollution of Lake Langdon and the ability of public utilities to provide adequate services to 104 units plus another 52 units in the "Artessa" site. A) Lake Langdon — Runoff/Pollution 1) Removal of all existing trees/vegetation that now provide a natural filter for pollutants 2) Large building with flat roof = fast flowing roof drains 3) Plans show significant grass area with new tree plantings = grass clippings/fertilizer/& pesticide runoff. Suggestion: Replace grass areas with prairie grass plantings. Lake benefits and property has reduced outdoor maintenance. B) Utilities— Excel, Centerpoint, Sewer & Water, Media.com 1) Excel — Power supplied from Mound Substation which is boosted to the east side from Wayzata & the west from Waconia. The west line is south of trail & north of this development. The Waconia line suffers numerous blown fuses at the pole just south of my home. Without Excel fixing this, this line would remain a problem. The additional electrical load of 156 units could be substantial. Page 4 389 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Example: Electric motors, bath exhaust fans, kitchen vent hoods, heating/air conditioning, ventilation of garage, makeup air units. Most electric motors require 3x the running amps to start them. 2) Centerpoint (Gas) —With 156 units within a block of each other, reassurance that sufficient natural gas volume/pressure is available. During the last polar vortex northern Henn Co ran short of gas for heating. Note: Centerpoint wasn't the supplier. 3) Sewer/water— Believe sewer is not a problem because of recent upgrades. Not so with water. The last time a well was shut down, the iron oxide went threw the roof. Would guess many softeners required service/replacement. 4) Media.com —They have been upgrading their fiber optic cable system. Would guess they have adequate bandwidth available. Confirmation would seem prudent. C) My comments might seem to be negative. I have no objections to this project moving ahead. I do think it should conform to watershed requirements and that it meets Mound's hardcover rules. Going forward, I think the following should be verified: 1) Protection of Lake Langdon 2) Adequate utilities available 3) Professional review of all plans, especially mechanical and electric 4) Building inspections by qualified persons familiar with a project like this. P.S. I would like Lake Langdon to say a quiet lake with limited recreational activities. Ex: No public boat landings. Jordan Pagel —5759 Lynwood Blvd Hello Sarah, I just received the notice in the mail about the proposed 104 unit building near our home at 5759 Lynwood. It appears this is directly behind our house. We strongly oppose anything that would block our lake view behind our house. It's hard for me to tell where the proposed building would end via the online proposal documents. Per the emails above, I've reached out about the specific city owned lot that is behind our house. I'm planning on submitting a request (per the newly adopted policy you mentioned) for this lot as my family would like to add that to our current lot in order to add a dock and a small hangout area (patio/fire pit) by the water. We want to keep that lot available for eventual transfer to adjacent owner (us) or purchase. Please let me know if you can assist with my concerns. STAFF / CONSULTANT / AGENCY / UTILITIES REVIEW Copies of the request and supporting materials were forwarded to involved departments, Page 5 390 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 consultants, agencies, and private utilities for review and comment. A summary of the comments received is provided below: Chuck Meyers, CenterPoint Energy No issues or concerns at this time. Jessica Galatz, Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority Sarah, thank you for the notice of the new development north of the Dakota Rail corridor west of Commerce Blvd. in Mound. We don't have any objections / concerns regarding the development but would like to inform the developer that any use of HCRRA property must receive prior written permission. This includes temporary construction uses and improvements/amenities, e.g., connector trail. Jason Gottfried, Hennepin County Transportation We were able to review this morning (12/07) with our plat review committee staff and offer the following for your team's consideration: • This roadway segment (Commerce Blvd) was last overlaid in 2016, and we have a planned overlay of the Commerce Blvd segment north of Shoreline Dr scheduled to be overlaid in 2023 • This segment of Commerce Blvd south of Shoreline Dr should be considered for a future 4 to 3 lane conversion with Dakota Trail crossing enhancements to be determined (interested in hearing the city's thoughts on the future of this segment?) • With as many as five potential connections to existing driveways along Commerce Blvd, we request additional details for this site's projected traffic circulation patterns. We will need to know where turning movements (residents/deliveries, etc) will be directed? We prefer to guide them away from the trail crossing area. • We see this development as an opportunity for access improvements along this congested portion of Commerce Blvd.. Perhaps this development could focus on 1-2 shared driveways (Across from Auditors Rd?) to make improvements to. This might allow for access consolidation with neighboring parcels, or removal of excess driveways on segment of Commerce Blvd • We recommend the site plan include a direct pedestrian access with Dakota Rail Trail Page 6 391 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Chris Remus, Metropolitan Council Interceptor Engineering Services Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced. Our MCES 6-MO-650 interceptor is just north of the property in question. My only comment is that during construction, the contractor is not parking equipment or storing materials near our MH- 5, which is between the existing and transformer and the trail, such that it impedes access to the structure. Others groups within Metropolitan Council may still provide comments if necessary. Wes Saunders -Pearce, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources The purpose of this letter is to comment on the application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the PUD referenced above. The DNR respectfully recommends denial of the CUP request for the proposed development as described in the application. This recommendation stems from significant shoreland design deficiencies within the preliminary plat. The project is not designed in accordance to State Rules 6120.3800 and Section 129-381 of the city's zoning code. Most notably, the application fails to adequately address the following items: • Setbacks. Shoreland setbacks must be shown as well as floodplain overlay districts and elevations. • Open space. At least 50 percent of the total project area must be preserved as open space. Areas designated as open space should be identified on the plat and preserved by some type of easement, covenant or deed restriction to ensure the long-term preservation and maintenance of those areas. • Density. Density calculations should be provided for the Northland Mound PUD. The plat should be divided into tiers by locating lines approximately parallel to the line that identifies the OHWL at intervals proceeding landward. • Screening. Parking areas must be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screening from view from public waters. Structures, parking areas, and other facilities must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands Danny McCullough, Three Rivers Park District Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Northland Development. The Park District has the following comments: 1. Any local trail connection to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail must be through a public trailway. The Park District does not permit private trail connections to the regional trail system. It is preferred that a trail connection be established on public ROW, and the city would be the "owner/operator" of the trail connection itself (portions of the trail outside of the HCRRA ROW). Page 7 392 Northland Mound —PC Report —December 29, 2021 2. If a trail connection is established, the Park District and the City would need to enter into a Trail Connection Agreement that would stipulate agreed upon ownership and operation of the local connection. 3. The Park District (Representative -Danny McCullough) would like to be involved with concept development as the project progresses and attend portions of any meetings between the developer and the city that pertain to the local trail connection. 4. With the addition of over 100 apartments to this area, trail crossings at Shoreline Drive and at Commerce will likely need a more thorough review (Shoreline Drive crossing is already under a "re -visit" for trail crossing improvements. I have one more comment regardingthe Northland Development: TRPD Comment: All trees and shrubs should be planted at least 10 feet from the edge of the trail. Knowing that these will mature and then be within 3 to 4 feet of the trails edge. We also want to avoid any berry or nut producing plants, these typically end up on the trail. They tend to be undesirable for the trail users and add additional maintenance to the trail. There is a steep ditch along this area so this will need to be reshaped and kept open for drainage. Overview to Project Components The applicant is proposing to construct a 104-unit multi -family building on the shore of Lake Langdon. The site will involve the replatting of 14 lots that were part of a previous subdivision. In addition, the site was historically platted with two rights -of -way that were never constructed, one which extended between the previously platted lots and one right-of-way that extended along the shoreland. The applicant is proposingto vacate the portions of right-of-way that are circled in red in the graphic below. Staff will be confirming with the applicant about whether the portion of the right-of-way circled in green is requested to be vacated. Clarification will be provided to the Planning Commission at the meeting on Tuesday. MOM m L - —1—T--'rr.I it `'Ij - Ica wrmxuxe • # ___ O :: _ 1 Page 8 393 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 The applicant has also requested to purchase three parcels from the City that are located immediately adjacent to the site. These parcels (14-117-24-44-0056, 14-117-24-44-0057, and 14-117-24-44-0062) total 17,695 square feet or 0.38 acres and are shown circled in the graphic below. At this time the applicant's submittal materials incorporates one of the three City - owned lots in their plat (shown with a star on the graphic below). If the other two parcels are to be incorporated in the project the application materials will need to be updated to reflect those parcels as well. The site includes four wetlands. A wetland delineation was submitted by the applicant and reviewed by the City's wetland consultant. The delineation report indicates that a portion of Wetland 1 and all of Wetland 4 are incidental wetlands, meaning a wetland that was created in a non -wetland area by actions not intended to create a wetland (examples include, but are not limited to, drainage ditches and water quality improvements). This determination means that impacts to these wetlands do not need to be avoided or replaced. More information about how the site plans impact the remaining wetland areas on the site will be described later in the development review evaluation. Page 9 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 The applicant has also requested a public lands permit to allow for the construction of a curb, decorative landscaping and water management on the eastern edge of the City -owned parking lot which is located in the right-of-way immediately east of the proposed project. The applicant has stated that the parking lot currently drains onto their site and the proposed improvements would address this issue. Staff will be seeking clarification on the intended long-term responsibility for the proposed landscaping and improvements. DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL REVIEW Comprehensive Plan The project area is designated as Mixed Use in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. As described in the future land use table on page 32, mixed use is "meant to support a variety of commercial, residential, and public uses." The designation was intended to provide flexibility so that property owners have options when considering redevelopment. To provide further clarification of the City's intent, each mixed use area has its own one -page description of the intent, character and approach to mixed use. As seen in the attached summary, the Downtown Lakes mixed use area was shown as having the potential for both residential or commercial, with both townhomes and multi -family being considered appropriate. The City of Mound evaluates density on an area -wide basis. For mixed use areas such as the Downtown Lakes area, density is evaluated based on the area identified as having the potential to redevelop in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and any areas proposed to be redeveloped as part of an application that may not have been previously identified. It also considers any recently approved projects. In the Downtown Lakes area, there were 9.53 acres identified for potential redevelopment. With a density of 8 to 15 unit per acre, the anticipated number of units for Downtown Lakes would be 76 to 142 units. In 2020, the City approved the Artessa development project with 52 units, leaving 24 to 90 units remaining for the Downtown Lakes area. With 104 units, the proposed Northland Mound has more density then was anticipated for Downtown Lakes in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be needed for the project to be approved as proposed. At this time the applicant has not submitted a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Disposal/Sale of City Property As noted above, the applicant has requested the City consider the sale of three properties that are adjacent to the project. One of the parcels is being proposed to be used for parking and circulation purposes while the other properties are currently not shown in the plat or site plan. In 2019 the City adopted a policy regarding the evaluation of requests to consider the sale, release, or conveyance of City -Owned parcels of land. Considerations identified in that policy include the determining whether the parcel is developable, evaluation of whether an undersized parcel could be conveyed to an adjacent property owner, and assessment of the potential for use of the property for public benefit. It is anticipated that the City Council will consider the applicant's request at their January 11th meeting. As part of the potential sale of Page 10 395 Northland Mound - PC Report - December 29, 2021 City -owned properties, MSS 462.356 requires that the Planning Commission review and make findings to the City Council about the consistency of the proposed disposal with the City's approved comprehensive plan. Staff notes that all of the properties requested to be sold for the project are guided mixed use in the Comprehensive Plan. Vacation of Rights -of -Way The applicant has requested the vacation of right-of-way that extends through the property. As noted previously there are two rights -of -way in the project vicinity, one which bisects the property and one which extends along the Lake Langdon shoreline. In evaluating the vacation requests, the City considers whether the right-of-way serves a public benefit. This may include a right-of-way's current use, its potential to provide access, such as to a public water, or the benefit the City receives by putting property back on the tax rolls to facilitate a development/redevelopment project. It should also be noted that vacation requests that involve right-of-way that extend to public waters must be considered by the MN Department of Natural Resources (Mn DNR) to include written notification provided at least 60 days prior to the City Council public hearing which is required for the vacation. Staff has followed the required notice procedures including written notification provided on December 7tn about the City Council public hearing to be held for the vacation request which is scheduled for Tuesday, February 8, 2022. MnDNR staff contacted Mound Staff on December 29'to acknowledge receipt of the information and that comment would be forthcoming and in advance of the scheduled City Council public hearing. Preliminary Plat (Sec. 121-61 through Sec. 121-64) Northland Mound encompasses a site that is approximately 2.4 acres in size. The plat establishes one lot for the entire site. The plat also shows that the applicant is requesting a landscape, maintenance, and construction easement to the east of the site on the City -owned right-of-way. It should also be noted that the plat includes one of the three City -owned properties the applicant has requested to purchase. As required by the City Code Chapter 121 (Subdivisions), the applicant shall place drainage and utility easements along the perimeter of the property. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) A conditional use permit is required for the planned unit development area in the shoreland district (Sec. 129-195/129-387). A conditional use is defined in the Zoning Code as a use that requires the approval and issuance of a conditional use permit. The intent is that through the conditional use permit the City establishes the conditions that the development should meet to ensure that it fits its location. Use (Sec. 129-139) Section 129-139 lists permitted, conditional and accessory uses for the Mixed Use- Downtown District. The proposed apartment multiple -family dwelling is listed as a permitted use. Page 11 396 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Lot Size and Site Plan (Sec. 129-195 and Sec. 129-139) This site size meets one (1) acre minimum required size for a PUD. The applicant is proposing 104-units on a 2.4 acre site. The site plan proposed shows that the building is setback significantly more than 50 feet from the Ordinary High Water Line (OHWL). The site plan also shows a proposed 37.5 foot wetland buffer setback for the building. The MCWD is the permitting agenda for wetlands. The placement of the building relative to the front property line reflects the uniqueness of the site rather than the regulations of the Mixed Use -Downtown District. Generally, the City seeks to have buildings located close to the street with parking to the side or behind. However, as this a lakeshore lot that is only accessed from the east, the applicant is proposing to set the building farther back from the front property line so as to allow for parking along the front of the building and multiple entrances/exits to the enclosed parking, as well as to reduce the amount of impervious surface required for vehicular circulation. The setbacks proposed can be approved through the PUD process. Site Design (129-139) The Mixed Use -Downtown District requires the provision of sidewalks and pedestrian connections so that residents do not need to use the driveway for movement. The applicant has provided a sidewalk around the building to every pedestrian exit. The initial submittal included a connection to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail. However, Three Rivers Park District does not allow for direct, private connection to a regional trail. The applicant, Three Rivers, and the City will need further discussion about how pedestrians can be connected to the regional trail and to Commerce Boulevard. District regulations also require interior and exterior bicycle racks and storage be provided. The applicant has indicated that 80 of the parking stalls will have wall mounted bike racks which accommodate 2 bicycles. The applicant will also provide one outdoor hoop bike rack near the front entry for five visitor bicycles. The Mixed Use -Downtown District requires at least 200 feet of private usable open space per unit. With 104 units, this development would be required to have at least 20,800 square feet of private useable open space. Staff will be confirming the following table with the applicant and may have updated calculations for the Planning Commission to consider at the meeting: Type of Useable Open Space Square Footage Unit deck/balcony (minimum of 60 sq. ft. per unit) 6,240 Roof deck (seating, fire pit, pergola with fireplace/TV) 3,955 Garage roof patio (seating, pergola with fireplace/TV) 2,407 Terraces (A to D) 4,631 Outdoor lawn SF To Be Clarified Total proposed 17,266 (To Be Confirmed) Page 12 397 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Architectural Design (Sec. 129-139) The Mixed Use -Downtown District includes minimum requirements for architectural design and building materials. The applicant has included some information about materials in the submittal and has been requested to bring material samples to the Planning Commission meeting. The table below summarizes the architectural design requirements of the Mixed Use - Downtown District and notations about what is being proposed in the Northland Mound development. Summary of Requirement Northland Mound Proposal Building fronts should The applicant is proposing a two-story glass entry with awnings include a minimum of two over the first floor. To the right of the entry is a tower with architectural elements cupola. The front fagade also includes three different types of material between the four floors, a cornice along the top of the roof, decks for each unit, and two foot vertical offsets on each side of the decks. Exterior building walls The fagade proposed has variation in the color and material greater than 50 feet in between floors. It also has vertical offsets, though the offsets length must have visual are only two feet deep instead of four feet deep as noted in the relief using at least one regulations. architectural feature Multi -story buildings shall The ground floor of the structure is the enclosed parking and is have the ground floor proposed to be a concrete masonry unit. Staff has expressed distinguished by the concern about the wall mass on each of the fagades. Relative to upper floor with at least the front fagade, the applicant has indicated that the design one architectural element feature shown on the architectural rendering on the first page of the architectural submittal is a wood patterned aluminum extrusion that is installed on the wall in a wave -like manner to provide an artistic interpretation of lake life. Staff has also requested the applicant provide additional information about the individual heating/cooling units shown on the architectural renderings as currently they are noticeable in the building facades. Building entrance shall The primary building entrance is shown with an awning over the have a feature that entrance. protects pedestrians from Page 13 398 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 Summary of Requirement I Northland Mound Proposal the rain and sun Impervious Surface Coverage (Sec. 129-139) Section 129-139 states that the maximum impervious surface shall be 75%. The applicant is proposing an impervious surface coverage of 60%for this development. Building Height (Sec. 129-139) The maximum height of a building in the Mixed Use -Downtown District is 50 feet. The applicant is proposing that the predominant height of the building will be about 47 feet. However, small sections will be higher than 50 feet. This will include the west fagade elevator tower at 54.5 feet and the stair tower at 52 feet. On the east fagade the height to the mid -point of the proposed cupola would be 50 feet, 8 inches. Unit Size (Sec. 129-199) The City has established minimum unit sizes for its residential developments. Staff has requested the applicant provide the size of the units for evaluation. Additional information will be forthcoming. Shoreland Planned Unit Development Site Suitability (Section 129-387) As part of its shoreland regulations, City Code requires projects to be evaluated for density. This evaluation is a difficult provision to comply with for downtown areas as the density evaluation is based on the single-family lot size of 10,000 square feet. The evaluation also does not take into consideration the reduced impact of multiple stories or a comprehensive stormwater management system such as is proposed for this site. For this project, Staff's calculated a base density of approximately 10 units and requested shoreland tiering information be provided by the applicant. The planned unit development would establish that 104 units are allowed. The shoreland planned unit development provisions also require that 50%of the site be open space. According to the site plans submitted, the applicant is proposing open space of 40%. Staff will be clarifying how much of the site will be open space if the City -owned parcels are acquired. Additional information about open space will be presented to the Planning Commission at its meeting. Parking. Access and Circulation (Section 129-103 and 129-323) Site Access, Entry and Exit Additional detail has been requested by the County and City regarding the practical entry and exit corridor(s) for the project. The apparent, most -practical approach to the proposed property appears to be opposite the Auditors intersection on CSAH-110 (Commerce Blvd) and generally to the South of the proposed project. This corridor is a private road and not specifically included in any of the application materials. The access provided via the general parking area entry at the north end of the parking east of the project area is a parking lot drive aisle and not designed to roadway standards and insufficient in current form to assume this Page 14 399 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 degree of traffic loading and functionality. This access point would enter CSAH 110 (Commerce Blvd) via the narrow access immediately south of the Dakota Trail. Additional refinement and detail regarding entry/exit to the project property along with any resulting land agreements should be provided by the Applicant. Final access plan should be reviewed by Hennepin County. All entry and access improvement related to the project will be incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements determined in future Development Agreement activities. Traffic A traffic study has been requested from the applicant but was not available at the time of the Planning Commission packet. Staff will provide to the Planning Commission when it is available. To adequately complete a traffic study and determine impacts from entry/exit from CSAH 110 (Commerce Boulevard), the Applicant will need to define/refine the principal, practical approach and access to the developed site. Once complete, the Study should be coordinated with Hennepin County in order to provide their evaluation of overall project impact on the County roadways. Parking City Code requires at least 0.75 spaces per studio, 1 space per 1 bedroom, and 2 spaces for 2+ bedroom units for a multi -family residential project. Based on the proposed mix of units, the applicant is required to provide at least 127 spaces. The applicant is proposing to provide 93 enclosed spaces and 34 surface spaces for a total of 127 spaces. This will include a few compact spaces both in the garage and in the southern parking lot. Staff will be clarifying with the applicant about the surface parking spaces as only 33 are shown on the recent site plan. Staff notes that the applicant is proposing 24-foot drive aisles instead of the 25-foot required by code. Given that there are not parking spaces located on both sides of the drive aisle Staff feels the width proposed can be sufficient for maneuverability and could be approved as part of the PUD. Additional information about the size and drive aisle spacing of the underground parking needs to be provided by the applicant. The drive aisle extending north -south along the east of the building does cross onto the City - owned right-of-way/parking area to the east of the site. The applicant has proposed an easement and public lands permit to allow for construction to occur on the City -owned parcel. As noted previously, the applicant is proposing the drive aisle, a curb, and landscaping separating the drive aisle and the City -owned parking spaces. Landscaping (Sec. 129-317) The proposed landscape plan that has been reviewed by the City's consulting Landscape Architect. City code requires that multi -family residential projects provide 1 tree per dwelling unit. For this project this would be 104 trees. The applicant is currently proposing 36 trees so the plan is short 68 trees. Through the PUD the City can establish a site specific number of required trees. Staff suggests the applicant provide information about where additional trees could be planted and where trees may be being preserved on the site. In addition, the landscape plan should be revised to ensure that at least 25%of trees are coniferous and 25% are deciduous as is required by City Code. The Landscape Architect also recommends more diversification in tree species within the deciduous and coniferous categories to prevent Page 15 400 No land Mound —PC Report—Decemb 29,2021 sign ifica nt loss of trees from future pests or diseases. Glare (Sec. 129-318) The applicant has submitted a photometric plan that shows combination of building, bollard, and pole lighting. In general, the photometric plan does not show too much illumination extending beyond the property boundaries. The applicant should provide add it ion al information demonstrating that the lighting is hooded as required by code. Refuse (Sec. 129-315) The undergrou nd parking a rea floor plan shows a trash collection a rea for the bur ilding. Utilities 1. Pu blic san itary sewer is available via man holes E152 to the north end of the pa rking lot a rea east of the project site, or ma nhole E151 to the South as shown in the d lagra m below. It is anticipated the completion of this connection will be part of the subdivision improvements determined in Tutu re Development Agreement activities. 2. Water service is available at its nearest point in Commerce Blvd. Aloation and a Iign ment for extend ing water service ma in, a ppropriate land agreements over the pipe will need to be determined by the Applies nt a nd incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements determined in future Development Agreement activities. 3. The area is serviced by lay -of -land surface drainage and the proposed project will be required to preserve existing functionality for upla nd areas or incorporate sufficient a pacfty into project improvements. There a re no esta blished undergrou nd storm dra in Team res in the area. If determined necessary by the project, the Applies nt will need to incorporate the designs into the Civil requirements for the project. All stormwater work related to the project will be incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements determined in Tutu re Development Agreement activities. 4. The MCES SAC cha rge for the project sha 11 be determined as part of fina l plat which shall be the responsibility of the applies nt. A MCES Sewer Availability Cha rge determination Page 16 401 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 letter shall be provided by the applicant. 5. Sewer and watermain area trunk charges for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current trunk charge for sewer and water, per unit, are $2000.00 each. 6. Sewer connection and water connection fees shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current sewer connection and water connection fees are $240.00 each. Wetlands As noted previously there are four wetlands on the site. The wetland delineation shows that a portion of Wetland 1 and Wetland 4 are incidental and can be impacted without replacement. The site plan shows that a portion of Wetland 1 will be impacted and the applicant is proposing to purchase wetland credits off -site. The site plan also shows a small portion of Wetland 2 will impacted but that the impact is considered incidental. Wetland 3 is not proposed to be impacted and a 37.5 foot wetland setback/buffer is proposed. The proposed impacts to the wetlands will be evaluated by the City's wetland consultant and any conditions recommended incorporated in the future. A wetland application was submitted on December 5, 2021 and is under review by the City's wetland specialist at Bolton & Menk. The project is required to obtain all required permitting from the MCWD needed for the project related to their wetland rules. Stormwater Stormwater management will be reviewed and approved by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The applicant will be required to meet MCWD requirements pertaining to stormwater run-off rate, water quality, and erosion control. The applicant is proposing an underground storage chamber to address water quality and manage the run-off from the site. The project is required to obtain all required permits from the MCWD needed for the project related to their stormwater rules. Park Dedication As provided by City Code Sec. 121-121, a park dedication fee, in lieu of land dedication is recommended by Staff. The required park dedication amount shall be determined as part of the final plat. The code requires the submittal of 10%fee for park fee dedication. Signage No signage information was included with the application materials. Any signage will need to meet sign requirements of Chapter 119. Staff requests that information about signage be provide so it can be included in any PUD approvals. Page 17 402 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 RECOMMENDATION Given the complexity of the project and the issues identified in this planning review, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing, review the project and provide feedback to the applicant, and then table all of the requests to a subsequent meeting to allow the applicant to respond to issues raised by Staff, Planning Commission, agencies, and the public. To assist in subsequent reviews, Staff has begun an initial list of conditions. This list includes issues identified in the planning review, as well as standard conditions. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 1. The lot area on the plans shall match what is on the plat. 2. No future ("overnight mooring") dock shall be allowed onto Lake Langdon. 3. The building materials and color scheme shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City. 4. Final design of any ADA spaces shall be approved by the Building Official. 5. Plans shall be updated to show the size and drive aisle spacing of the underground parking area. 6. Approval of the easement and public lands permit to allow for construction of a drive aisle, curb, and landscaping on the city -owned right-of-way and parking area to the east. 7. Add to the site plan the depth of the dead-end parking lot turnaround on the south. The depth shall be at least 7 feet for ease of maneuverability. 8. Ensure all sidewalks are graded for ADA accessibility and railings along retaining walls provided. 9. The applicant shall work with City Staff to identify pedestrian connections to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail and Commerce Boulevard. 10. Outdoor storage of boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles will not be allowed on the site. 11. Apartment unit decks and patios shall not be allowed for personal storage purposes, including for bicycles. 12. The landscape plan shall be revised to the satisfaction of the City Planner. This shall include addressing the following: a. The seed mixes shown on the landscape plan need refinement. The Wet Prairie seed mix shown is not appropriate in all areas identified. Drier seed mix is required on sloped areas and areas without wetland soils. In addition, in the basin north of the building the landscape plan should specify use of State Seed Mix 34-262 (Riparian South and West) instead of the currently proposed Wet Prairie. b. Revise the landscape plan to include a strip at least one mower's width wide of no mow fescue or pollinator lawn mix along the sidewalk on south of building to indicate "cues to care" and so that tall native plants are not flopping over onto sidewalk. Page 18 403 Northland Mound - PC Report - December 29, 2021 c. Evaluate how additional trees can be added or preserved on the site to meet the 1 tree per dwelling unit requirement. d. Revise the proposed mix of trees to ensure that at least 25%are deciduous and 25%are coniferous. Also diversify the mix of deciduous and coniferous species to increase site landscape resiliency from species specific pests and disease. 13. Ensure the erosion control plan includes silt fence and the use of an erosion control blanket for seeded area of 3:1 slopes or greater. 14. Provide additional information, including an image, of the lighting fixtures proposed. 15. The applicant shall provide signage information that can be incorporated into the approvals. 16. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, major subdivision -preliminary plat, and comprehensive plan amendment. 17. A Development Agreement, to be prepared by the City Attorney, shall be required for the project and prepared as part of the final plat. 18. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the conditional use permit application. 19. The applicant shall be responsible for securing all required local, state, and federal permits and approvals. 20. This conditional use permit is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: (to be inserted). 21. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution(s) with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 22. Applicant should ensure the preliminary plat and site plan include proposed building setbacks. 23. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Major Subdivision -Preliminary Plat 1. The plat shall incorporate all properties proposed to be part of the development. 2. The lot area shall be modified to match what is on the site plan. 3. 10-foot drainage and utility easements shall be established around the perimeter of the property. 4. Concurrent approval of the right-of-way vacation, public lands request, conditional use permit and comprehensive plan amendment. 5. A development agreement shall be prepared as part of the final plat process. 6. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the preliminary plat application. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolutions(s) with Hennepin County. Applicant is advised that the resolution(s) will not be released for recording Page 19 404 Northland Mound — PC Report — December 29, 2021 until all conditions have been met. 8. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all local or public agency permits including, but not limited to, the submittal of all required information for building permit issuance. 9. The MCES SAC charge for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 10. Sewer and watermain area trunk charges for the project shall be determined as part of the final plat. The current trunk charge for sewer and water, per unit, is $2000.00 each. 11. Sewer connection and water connection fees shall be determined as part of the final plat. The 2020 sewer connection and water connection fees are $240.00 each. 12. The park dedication fee amount shall be determined as part of the final plat as provided by City Code Sec. 121.121. 13. Additional conditions from Staff, the Planning Commission and City Council. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW The scheduled date for City Council public hearings and consideration of the requests is Tuesday, February 8, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. Page 20 405 City of Mound Cash Balances Reporting As of 01-31-21 As of 02-28-21 As of 03-31-21 As of 04-30-21 As of 05-31-21 As of 06-30-21 As of 07-31-21 As of 08-31-21 As of 09-30-21 As of 10-31-21 As of 11-30-21 As of 12-31-21 General Fund(101) 2,714,248 2,557,277 2,337,945 2,198,175 2,052,593 954,729 1,401,880 1,120,737 1,484,950 1,289,873 1,102,807 4,308,711 Coronavirus Relief Fund (203) - - - - - - - - - - - - Area Fire Services (222) 1,104,977 1,121,927 1,163,649 1,147,350 1,004,933 1,291,431 1,293,067 1,262,207 1,312,191 1,273,309 1,235,192 440,674 Dock Fund (281) 415,780 429,905 435,962 440,329 441,092 442,471 419,609 417,798 416,639 415,332 408,680 399,745 Harbor District(285) 110,426 124,159 173,366 166,338 164,156 176,716 228,568 223,830 222,159 207,787 198,904 195,460 Debt Service Funds(3XX) " 2,599,470 2,494,274 2,519,055 2,532,564 2,570,265 3,993,626 4,631,731 4,555,311 4,592,735 4,617,237 4,658,734 5,255,503 Captial Project Reserve Funds Replacement 1,886,206 2,144,604 2,051,500 2,040,670 2,032,939 2,257,249 2,285,175 2,281,175 2,278,101 2,278,918 2,281,189 2,272,691 403-Cap Reserve - Vechicles&Equ 205,188 207,779 207,779 207,779 165,956 505,956 467,318 465,697 465,708 465,708 465,708 457,559 404-Community Investment Fund (279,756) (40,547) (39,966) (26,981) (36,897) 98,378 83,592 69,289 94,273 73,500 43,032 37,170 405-Cap Reserve City Buildings 52,870 65,775 65,775 65,775 65,775 140,775 139,861 139,861 139,377 139,377 139,377 137,500 427-Street Maintenance Fund 518,557 338,511 338,511 338,512 338,511 338,511 360,472 241,158 196,391 186,258 151,911 116,505 454-TIF 1-1 Harrison Bay 11,536 11,536 11,536 11,536 11,536 11,536 17,648 17,600 17,600 17,600 17,600 78,653 475-TIF 1-3 Mound Harbor District (140,806) (147,522) (147,854) (160,041) (165,198) (167,805) (170,611) (174,252) (174,433) 520,097 516,876 516,762 Subtotal Capital Funds 2,253,795 2,580,136 2,487,281 2,477,250 2,412,622 3,184,600 3,183,455 3,040,528 3,017,017 3,681,458 3,615,693 3,616,840 Enterprise Funds Liquor(609) 461,088 461,700 460,554 507,772 568,815 628,236 635,313 659,130 684,621 698,797 731,182 864,276 Water(601) (3,613,286) (3,981,086) (3,939,720) (3,855,232) (3,775,638) (4,039,907) (3,490,244) (3,390,063) (4,124,252) (3,931,879) (3,767,949) (3,547,890) Sewer(602) 1,199,469 1,271,502 1,271,802 1,319,364 1,370,832 1,570,688 1,492,220 1,568,350 1,665,433 1,576,191 1,614,862 1,678,368 Storm (675) (1,269,352) (1,266,395) (1,270,474) (1,262,570) (1,257,883) (1,250,992) (1,287,749) (1,279,426) (1,304,705) (1,294,207) (1,286,137) (1,276,227) Recycling(670) 185,346 199,345 185,381 184,276 181,355 164,851 196,197 194,259 193,787 210,614 195,022 192,526 Subtotal Enterprise Funds (3,036,735) (3,314,934) (3,292,457) (3,106,390) (2,912,519) (2,927,124) (2,454,263) (2,247,750) (2,885,116) (2,740,484) (2,513,020) (2,088,947) Pooled Investments/CDs(884) 10,876 10,940 (765) (1,672) (2,304) (2,833) (3,417) (3,661) (4,047) (4,273) (4,677) (3,004,041) BALANCE 6,172,837 6,003,684 5,824,036 5,853,944 5,730,838 7,113,616 8,700,630 8,369,000 8,156,528 8,740,239 8,702,313 9,123,945 " Debt Service Fund Balance - prepaid special assessments S:\FINANCE DEPT\R EPORTS\2021\CASH BALANCES 406 CITY OF MOUND REVENUE - BUDGET REPORTING DECEMBER 2021 Pie l! L` r Percentage of Budget 100.00% t ''GG DECEMBER 2021 YTD PERCENT FUND BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED SEP OCT NOV DEC GENERALFUND Property Taxes 3,626,958 3,084,489 3,612,626 14,332 99.60% - - - 3,084,489 Business Licenses & Permits 27,250 50 19,926 7,324 73.12% 50 400 - 50 Non -Business Licenses & Permits 209,200 49,136 226,252 (17,052) 108.15% 18,860 16,207 11,535 49,136 Intergovernmental 349,206 156,573 343,146 6,060 98.26% - - - 156,573 Charges for Services 226,750 43,306 259,852 (33,102) 114.60% 21,461 19,716 17,266 43,306 City Hall Rent 40,000 3,668 41,621 (1,621) 104.05% 3,668 1,977 3,668 3,668 Fines & Forfeitures 28,000 1,754 25,594 2,406 91.41% 2,135 1,250 1,882 1,754 Special Assessments 15,000 2,845 11,084 3,916 73.89% 1,219 - 4,958 2,845 Street Lighting Fees 40,000 3,333 39,525 475 98.81% 3,336 3,267 3,337 3,333 Franchise Fees 397,000 10,831 312,571 84,429 78.73% 10,775 75,558 20,800 10,831 Transfers 200,000 - 200,000 - 100.00% - - - - Miscellaneous 203,000 34,897 226,621 (23,621) 111.64% 2,841 951 478 34,897 TOTALS 5,362,364 3,390,882 5,318,818 43,546 99.19% 64,345 119,326 63,924 3,390,882 OTHER FUNDS Area Fire Services 1,335,863 56,987 1,425,936 (90,073) 106.74% 130,244 206,011 39,031 56,987 Docks 162,600 451 172,403 (9,803) 106.03% - 120 - 451 Transit District Maintenance 151,655 - 151,161 494 99.67% - - - - Water Utility 2,030,000 303,998 2,949,830 (919,830) 145.31 % 233,346 200,580 190,375 303,998 Sewer Utility 2,476,119 218,345 2,817,710 (341,591) 113.80% 257,638 266,631 178,478 218,345 Liquor Store 3,110,000 384,337 3,874,786 (764,786) 124.59% 321,440 315,551 289,279 384,337 Recycling Utility 196,100 15,251 197,596 (1,496) 100.76% 15,246 14,480 15,159 15,251 Storm Water Utility 155,000 11,574 139,090 15,910 89.74% 11,618 12,558 11,557 11,574 Investments - 99 16,356 (16,356) n/a 1,871 1,922 1,378 99 PRELIMINARY YEAR END BALANCES 407 SAFINANCE DEPTIREPORTS12021\REVENUES DEC CITY OF MOUND EXPENSES - BUDGET REPORTING� r4-�Q,� DECEMBER 2021 Percentage of Budget 100.00% DECEMBER 2021 YTD PERCENT FUND BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED SEP OCT NOV DEC GENERAL FUND Council 83,589 14,427 85,933 (2,344) 102.80% 3,015 10,312 3,986 14,427 Promotions 61,500 - 60,000 1,500 97.56% - - 30,000 - City Manager / City Clerk 190,720 20,602 178,961 11,759 93.83% 14,003 14,197 14,228 20,602 Elections 3,100 28 2,595 505 83.71% 42 30 32 28 Finance 488,332 50,411 472,250 16,082 96.71% 35,094 36,215 34,997 50,411 Assessing 128,000 1,041 128,041 (41) 100.03% - - - 1,041 Legal 90,206 2,652 58,401 31,805 64.74% 3,636 17,476 752 2,652 Centennial Building 54,023 2,926 33,575 20,448 62.15% 2,514 4,772 1,685 2,926 City Hall - Wilshire 54,914 2,682 47,943 6,971 87.31% 3,068 5,486 2,759 2,682 Computer 41,500 4,351 38,960 2,540 93.88% 2,072 11,280 (1,486) 4,351 Police 1,883,978 220 1,846,931 37,047 98.03% 231 967 221 220 Emergency Preparedness 46,657 3,897 42,178 4,479 90.40% 2,689 3,429 2,871 3,897 Planning & Inspections 500,319 43,057 468,253 32,066 93.59% 43,028 46,014 42,998 43,057 Streets 829,612 68,437 683,660 145,952 82.41% 44,270 57,837 43,404 68,437 Parks 497,567 40,604 469,327 28,240 94.32% 41,188 38,952 26,252 40,604 Transfers 695,970 38,830 465,969 230,001 66.95% 38,831 38,838 38,826 38,830 Cable TV 42,300 - 21,554 20,746 50.96% - - 6,939 - Contingency 64,000 342 9,779 54,221 15.28% 675 947 1,577 342 TOTALS 5,756,287 294,507 5,114,310 641,977 88.85% 234,356 286,752 250,041 294,507 OTHER FUNDS Area Fire Services 2,148,064 108,041 1,436,345 711,719 66.87% 94,537 259,279 86,178 108,041 Docks 146,057 9,886 58,582 87,475 40.11% 1,159 1,326 745 9,886 Transit District Maintenance 72,910 3,443 65,404 7,506 89.71% 1,671 14,371 7,708 3,443 Capital Projects - 38,902 87,333 (87,333) n/a 5,774 6,364 - 38,902 Capital Replacement - Equipment 123,000 8,149 111,496 11,504 90.65% - - - 8,149 Community Investment Reserve - 5,862 132,025 (132,025) n/a - 21,038 33,013 5,862 Capital Replacement - Buildings 55,000 1,877 2,791 52,209 5.07% - - - 1,877 Sealcoating 20,000 90,251 311,622 (291,622) 1558.11% 44,766 10,134 34,346 90,251 TIF 1-1-Harrison Bay - - 55,051 (55,051) n/a - - - - TIF 1-3 - Mound Harbor - - 40,533 (40,533) n/a 181 5,470 3,221 - Water Utility 1,939,276 147,944 2,323,734 (384,458) 119.82% 111,336 131,144 117,638 147,944 Sewer Utility 2,262,531 195,851 2,843,289 (580,758) 125.67% 171,103 388,828 235,730 195,851 Liquor Store 611,519 62,168 627,512 (15,993) 102.62% 51,058 54,459 44,720 62,168 Recycling Utility 198,055 15,250 183,221 14,834 92.51% 15,250 755 29,745 15,250 Storm Water Utility 407,800 21,315 357,839 49,961 87.75% 21,485 22,371 21,312 21,315 PRELIMINARY YEAR END BALANCES n 1: MOUND DOCKS AND COMMONS COMMISSION MINUTES September 16, 2021 The Mound Docks and Commons Commission met on Thursday, September 16, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Centennial Building at 5341 Maywood Road in Mound. Present: Vice Chair Susan Gardner, Commissioners Heidi Peterson, Linda Muller and Dave Olson and Council Representative Paula Larson. Absent: Chair Derrick Hentz, Linda Muller Others Present: Administrative Services Director Catherine Pausche, Administrative Services Coordinator Kevin Kelly, Michael Lattery, Pam Lattery, Jennifer Dekarski, Steven Billington, Bobbie Shearer, Susie polder, Kevin Peterson, Ted Breckheimer, Rodney Beystrom, Tom Delacy, Amanda Lindent, Julie Bowman, Phil Bowman, Karl Weisenhorn, Jeff Jesberg, Barry Blievernicht Vice Chair Susan Gardner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Agenda. MOTION, by Peterson, seconded by Olson, to approve the agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 2. Approval of Meeting Minutes — March 18, 2021. MOTION, by Olson, seconded by Peterson, to approve the minutes from the March 18, 2021 DCC Meeting. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3. Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present: Ted Breckheimer, 6333 Alwin Circle, said he is a 46-year resident and he is looking for sympathy and fairness from the Dock Program. Breckheimer said he has owned a boat with his sister for 19 years and he said he was a share on a dock in Black Lake many years ago. Breckheimer said his sister had an opportunity to be a share on a dock in Harrison's Bay for the last ten years and became the Primary this year when her share left the Dock Program. Breckheimer said after nineteen years he had to change the title of the boat to his sister. Breckheimer said his concern is that his sister is older than him and both are in their seventies and would like to stay at the dock if something happens to his sister and he would lose his dock. Breckheimer said he would like to be grandfathered in as a share on the dock. Kevin Kelly said Breckheimer was never on any official paperwork and there has been no record of Breckheimer in the dock program for at least the last 10 years. Kelly said shares had to be from the same household sharing a residence and Breckheimer wouldn't have been allowed to be to share as his sister was the share for that dock. Kelly said Breckheimer was never a share on the Harrison Bay dock, noting his sister was not providing the DNR for years. ,M DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 Peterson asked if anyone else is sharing at this time and Kelly replied no that Breckheimer's sister is the primary on the dock which she became this year. Pausche asked if there is evidence of them both being on the title at one point and Breckheimer said he could obtain that information. Kelly recommended to Breckheimer to get on the wait list and get into the dock program that way. Kelly added the share program was ended this summer by the City Council. Olson asked Breckheimer whether he was able to use the boat and dock this season and Breckheimer affirmed that he did. Discussion ensued regarding the location of the dock and if he was a Mound resident and whether Breckheimer should get on the wait list next year. Olson requested that staff prepare a summary and recommendation and return in November. Carl Weisenhorn, 1733 Bluebird Lane, said he wanted to respond to the previous speaker's plight and said he believes the spirit of the overall management objective is to emphasize control over the number of BSUs. Weisenhorn said the previous speaker was not adding another BSU and should just need to show he was partner using the dock. Barry Blievernicht, City Dock Inspector, introduced himself as the current dock inspector for the City of Mound and said he enjoyed his first season. 4. DCC Member Term Renewal Kelly noted Heidi Peterson has agreed to be reappointed and will be sworn in for another term in January of 2022. 5. Discussion on conduct and 'guest' use of docks Kelly said there has been an uptick in complaints on behavior of participants and their guests. Kelly noted the bullet pointed examples in the DCC packet were more serious issues which were dealt with using the 'one strike you are out' approach which yielded improvement. Kelly said the staff memo was intended to give the DCC a flavor of some of the issues that have occurred this season. Kelly said dual ownership of a boat is only allowed for people living in the same household, noting the licensee in question ultimately complied with by modifying the DNR watercraft registration but complaints were received about other family members using the boat when the licensee wasn't present. Gardner said in all the years she has been here, there was nothing in the code or enforced about unescorted guests. Kelly said there is ambiguity on whether the licensee has to be present with their guest and in this case the DNR registration is in resident's name. Kelly said he understands the frustrations of the neighbor when people they don't know are on the commons but it is difficult for staff to monitor the 400+ sites in the dock program and guests using docks is occurring elsewhere in the dock program. Gardner said she does not think it is the responsibility of the DCC or staff to monitor behavior and just can't be there to do so. Olson said the primary should take responsibility for any poor behavior of their guests. 410 DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 Peterson said the commons is meant for more than the dock licensee to use and Kelly clarified the dedicated commons agreements are different. Kelly said the commons are public land and there is not any recourse in code for staff to respond to except for removing licensees from the program for more ongoing or extreme issues. Kelly said the City has limited tools for enforcement which is why he starts with persuasion before invoking the more extreme disciplinary steps of potentially revoking the license. Kelly said he has been working with this particular resident to comply and again noted the DNR was not in his name initially but he ultimately complied. Gardner said that the Dreamwood neighborhood is supposed to have an Advisory Board to handle these types of disputes and issues noting the initial Board that was created has since been disbanded as there seems to be no interest. Kelly said he also tried to see if Dreamwood residents would reform the Advisory Board but it has not happened. Peterson suggested inviting Dreamwood residents via a letter to consider participation on a newly formed advisory board/committee. Gardner said the conclusion was that if the Advisory Board doesn't exist Dock Administration can only be expected to enforce the regular dock program regulations. Mike Lattery, 1720 Dove Lane, said Kelly's summary of the behavior of the new Dreamwood license holder was a gross understatement of what is transpiring and diminishes the City's responsibility to enforce the city code. Lattery read a prepared statement and said just because there is no Dreamwood Advisory Board the City doesn't have the right not to enforce, noting the settlement agreement is an agreement with the city authorizing an easement to allow fee simple property owners to have access to the lake. Lattery said it usually works pretty well unless we are at odds with the city, noting this individual is openly sharing the watercraft with non-residents. Discussion ensued on share status of the individual Dreamwood docks, but then it was clarified that the issue at hand is whether this licensee is sharing with non -household parties who are not on the dock license. Lattery said he reached out to one user of the dock and met a person named 'Nick' who is not in the family of the licensee and is not a resident of Mound and who claimed he owns a % share of the boat at the dock. Lattery said the program is designed for the licensees and the residents of a home in the neighborhood or City to enjoy. Lattery thinks it is untenable for this type of sharing with non-residents to occur. Peterson said it is easier for staff to enforce nuisance behavior and asked if there is something that can be done through the Dock Program rules and not just the Advisory Board. Gardner said if the dock and a boat are in the resident's name they can allow it to be used by others and there is nothing in the settlement agreement for the Dreamwood neighborhood which addresses this. Gardner added the person named 'Nick' stuck his foot in his mouth when he talked about the ownership of the boat. Lattery quoted City Waterways Code Section 78-102 section (b) which states docks are personal in nature and can only be used by you or a resident of your household and mentions the dock should not be sub -let. Lattery said the new Dreamwood resident is sub -letting his dock and the City should enforce its code. Peterson said she believes the code means you can't rent the dock and let another person put their boat on the dock, but it is harder when the license and the DNR are in the resident's name. Gardner said she and her husband allow their kids and 411 DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 grandkids to use their boat without them being present, noting she would expect them to behave properly while doing so. Lattery said the new Dreamwood resident is abusing his dock program status and told Lattery "you tell the City to tell me where I can't do this." Gardner said it won't be solved tonight and that we will need to continue to work on it. Kelly said he will reach out to the individual involved. Staff confirmed that the information provided by Lattery prior to the meeting was shared in advance with the members of the DCC. Phil Bowman, 1717 Finch Lane, said he believes this situation should be justification enough to revoke the license and we shouldn't be allowing a 'my boat club' situation on the commons. Bowman said the City should be more aggressive with people. Bowman said he is willing to be the abutter on the Dreamwood advisory board noting Carl Weisenhorn said he may also be interested in the advisory board as a non -abutter. Bowman said he and Weisenhorn were on the Advisory Board at its inception and know how it should be run. Carl Weisenhorn, 1733 Bluebird Lane, said he likes the terminology that Phil used and noted this is not a boat club and the intent of the original settlement agreement was to limit the BSUs and make sure the people using boats are family. Kelly said he will address this individual issue once again. Gardner said it is a grey area when people let their friends use their boat and she agrees that an arrangement resembling a boat club is not good and shouldn't be allowed by the resident saying 'I am just letting my friend use it' which Gardner said is an overreach. Larson asked if right now someone is misbehaving what would it take to pull the license if they have been warned. Kelly said what he has been doing now is progressive discipline, noting everyone wants the City to be the hammer when it comes to the actions of others. Kelly gave the example of a primary share that was way late, given one grace, and was late again the next year and lost his license which he said was spelled out in the code and easier to enforce than behavior. Larson asked if a license has ever been revoked for behavior and Kelly said not while he has been here (2015). Larson asked what happened with the person who put out a Facebook ad trying to rent out their dock. Kelly said that was stopped and noted the offender was a renter at an abutting property. Larson clarified there have been three lawsuits regarding commons use and said she is concerned about "guests" traversing not just on the commons but on private property. Kelly noted this is conveyed through here -say, which makes it difficult to enforce and Kelly said he tries to work with licensees to rectify mistakes they may have made. Pausche clarified that Dreamwood isn't a commons any longer but is an easement and the intent is for neighborhood users to walk on property owner's private property to get to their watercraft and leave. Pausche said staff are not condoning the Dreamwood residents behavior and this is why she would like the Council to focus on limiting the number of BSUs as allowing extra BSU's can encourage people trying to monetize the dock program. 412 DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 Kelly said he has to balance his response and focuses on behavior noting there are plenty of examples where people are complying with the DNR requirement but everything would tell you that they are not the primary users of the dock (based on age of the dock holder and type of boat), which makes him focus on the individuals causing problems. Kelly noted the dock holder in question has only been on the dock for two months and people are telling him to strip the license. Olson asked Kelly to try the carrot approach and report back in November. Larson asked if the Advisory Board has any power and/or if neighbors have to go back to the Court for changes to the settlement agreement to which Gardner said the Advisory Board has no real authority, and any changes to the settlement agreement would have to be through the court. Pam Lattery, 1720 Dove Lane, said this particular group of people are bringing guests and driving on the street and parking illegally on the wrong side of the street against traffic. Pausche asked that the Lattery's call the police in the event of parking violations. 6. Dredge Committee Update/Avalon Channel Lake Bottom Survey Kelly said he was hoping the study would have been completed by this meeting, and clarified the study area is referring to the Denbigh Commons along Denbigh Road. Kelly said the main complaints regarding dredging come from the boaters in this area and the area in Jennings Cove. Kelly said the Dredge Committee toured both areas and brainstormed what the criteria should be for the City to participate in a dredge project and the lake bottom study objective is to determine what makes up the composition of the lake bottom. Kelly said the study will be completed when the vegetation dies down. Olson said that information and the cost estimate will be key. Gardner asked when a last dredge was done in the City and Kelly said 2008 at Jennings Cove. Peterson said she did talk to Kelly about why Jennings wasn't included in the lake bottom study and she said the answer was that Jennings is reverting back to the marshland it originally was. Kelly added there seems to be a twenty year cycle to the dredging of Jennings Cove and there isn't a direct storm water outflow into Jennings Cove directly from the street. Gardner asked if dredge costs solely come out of the dock program and Kelly said there has been private property owner participation in the past. Pausche said the storm water fund had paid for a portion of the rip -rap projects but noted the storm water fund was over tapped in previous years, noting navigability is a boating issue. Olson noted low water years must also be taken into account as this year has been. Rodney Beystrom, 4466 Denbigh Road, said he has lived in his house for 34 years and he recalls the last dredge took place after the 1988/89 drought of the century. Beystrom noted storm drains contribute significantly to the delta and he recalls City fire fighters doing training behind the Island Park Skelly causing the water to fly 10 feet in the air from the storm drains entering into the lake. Beystrom said he is just emphasizing the storm drains definitely contribute to the sediment. Beystrom said one non -abutter couldn't even use his 16' aluminum boat. Beystrom said his neighbor measured water depth at three feet in this area. Beystrom added that many of the boats need at least three feet of water to float, noting he has to push his boat out into the canal and raise the motor to even get it started. 413 DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 Beystrom said cattails have been growing and are also disrupting navigation. Beystrom said if the City would be regularly dredging the area there wouldn't be a problem most likely. Olson said the rules for dredging have changed and where the material is hauled can also make it cost prohibitive. Kelly said the study will help determine that. Kelly noted both of these areas were marsh prior to the original dredging. Tom Delacy, 4458 Denbigh Road, said his property used to be part of the dock program but it was taken to court and they now own to the shoreline. Delacy said he believes the private owners would participate financially in a dredge. Delacy noted the dredgers have been doing the dredging from the ordinary high water mark, but he has MCWD paperwork that says a dredge can go to a depth of 923.6' elevation. 7. 2022 Fees Discussion Pausche said staff have been attempting to simplify license fees into one -line item to make receipting easier for staff and the costs more straight -forward for license holders. Pausche noted the request for the fee increases is to keep pace with ongoing costs of multiple slip installation and removal and other costs to the dock program. Discussion ensued regarding cost increases with the multiple slip contract over the years which is attributable to labor dynamics and general increases in lake services. Mike Lattery, 1720 Dove Lane, said it appears the City doesn't have the funds allocated to give the docks program adequate resources. Lattery said he knows there can be push back regarding fees and the City should give this important program the resources it needs. Olson asked Lattery if thinks the fees should be higher which Lattery said he believes the dock program needs to create greater reserves. Peterson said one objective is to keep the dock program affordable. Larson said the Council knows they are losing out on funds but people already are paying taxes and it comes down to a balancing act. Olson said he joined the DCC to ensure the program is stabilized and noted that Mound will never be a Plymouth as it is a bedroom community but he likes to see a dock program where a little guy can pay a reasonable fee and have the same access to the lake as the owner of a 40-footer. MOTION by Larson, second by Olson, to recommend the dock program fee increases as recommended by Staff. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 8. Shares and Wait List Code Amendments Approvals Kelly summarized the code changes approved by the City Council which include existing dock shares being grandfathered in with wait list applicants now being required to be in the top 40 of the waitlist before they can be a primary license holder and share a dock. Kelly said the early chance to get into the dock program from the wait list is removed and shared docks will have two primary license holders with the same rights and the secondary status will not continue. Kelly said grandfathered shares can still assume a dock if the primary leaves the program or the share can request a separate site after 15 years at the same dock. Kelly said dedicated neighborhood dock licensees have to wait until they get into the equivalent of the top 40 of where they would be on the wait list to be able to move into the general program. 414 DCC Minutes — September 16, 2021 Ryan Coatney, 5037 Woodland Road, asked where he can find the information on the settlement agreements and the program as a whole as he sees his neighbors get into the dock program earlier than he has. Kelly said the lawsuits which created the dedicated neighborhoods stemmed from how the neighborhoods were dedicated in the original plat of the neighborhood; either dedicated to the general public or to the residents of the neighborhood. Kelly said Coatney lives across the street from the neighborhoods which are in a dedicated settlement area and therefore is only eligible for the regular dock program. 9. Reports Larson made a comment about the Three Points area and how the streets were named. Larson said she worked for an attorney who was on a street naming committee on the Planning Commission when they named the streets after birds. Larson said he was a bird lover so all the streets there are named after birds. Larson said the Commerce Place shopping center will remain a commercial property and she is happy to say the parking lot is finally being improved there. Larson said Mound Marketplace repaired the main fountain area near the intersection of Commerce and Shoreline, Stonegate Center has improved the parking lot and the new Dominos location has been upgraded and looks great. Larson said the Council is still trying to address the Williams Store site. Larson said the Council approved the traffic study for the Shoreline Drive and Dakota trail crossing and will be looking for Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District to participate in the trail improvement. Larson said the sale of the property along Auditor's Road will close shortly and there will be a 52-unit cooperative housing project built at the site. Larson said the said the east city entrance sign will be upgraded while the other City entrances will be evaluated. Larson said Minnesota State Representative Kelly Morrison is addressing the Council at the next meeting. Beystrom asked Larson about the UTV/ATV discussion noting only 1-2 percent of residents own them. Larson said the Council closed the discussion with the current status quo. Larson said UTV/ATV's are technically illegal on city and county roads per state statue and can only be allowed with express permission from the City. Larson noted no tickets have been issued but there has been one particular instance that raised the level of concern but in the end it was thought best not to overreact to one situation. MOTION, by Olson, seconded by Peterson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:59 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Submitted by: Kevin Kelly 415 2022 City of Mound Claims 02-08-22 YEAR BATCH NAME 2021 2021AP-6 $ 2021 2021AP-7 $ 2021 2021AP-8-HOISGT $ 2021 2021AP-9-KENGRAV $ 2021 4Q21SACPYMT $ 2021 4Q21BLDGSRCHG $ 2022 020822CITY $ 2022 EGAN INVOICE #10231328 $ 2022 020822HWS $ DOLLAR AMOUNT 107,509.35 5,536.88 8,008.84 4,189.50 7,455.00 3,172.09 1,256,418.69 4,226.79 172.0371.02 TOTAL CLAIMS $ 1,568,888.16 96V J h (_e-nn e'n � -POL)t b Orn i 4,e,d i n-v o " c.-e, s 2— CITY OF MOUND Payments Current Period: February 2022 02/04/22 1:27 PM Page 4 -- -SL5. Transaction Date 2/22/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $369.97 Refer 314 COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 25.14 TON $1,860.36 DELIVERED 1-5-22 Invoice 917386 1/5/2022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 147.10 TON $10,885.40 DELIVERED 1-7-22 Invoice 920296 1/7/2022 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK COARSE HWY MIX- 48.90 TON $3,618.60 DELIVERED 1-10-22 Invoice 921482 1/10/2022 _ Transaction Date 2/2/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $16,364.36 Refer315 CORE &MAIN LP Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies WATER METER COUPLING, HYDRANT $4,695.40 EXTENDERS Invoice Q169316 1/5/2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies 32 QTY IPERL WATER METER $5,032.85 Invoice Q172098 1/5/2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies 24 QTY IPERL WATER METER $3,776.14 Invoice Q191992 1/10/2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies WATER METER PARTS- 22 GAUGE METER $224.93 WIRE Invoice Q176943 1/6/2022 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies Invoice Q252389 1/24/2022 Transaction Date 2/2/2022 WATER METER PARTS- 12 QTY TRACE WIRE LIDS W/TW TERMINAL- FOR CURB BOX U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total Refer 364 EGAN COMPANIES Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic STREET LIGHT REPAIRS- 2022 WINTER MAINTENANCE- SWITCH OUT 100W LAMPS TO 35W LED ON GREENWAY PATH, WIRED NEW GARAGE DOOR OPENERS & SENSORS FOR 4 DOORS $402.97 .p IY'1J4- 1�I A-s l0li $4,226.79 on 04167 Invoice 10231328 2/1/2022 Transaction Date 2/3/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $4,226.79 Refer 361 EMERGENCY TECHNICAL DECON Cash Payment E 222-42260-219 Safety supplies CLEAN & REPAIR FIREMEN TURNOUT $604.50 GEAR- PANTS, JACKETS- SEAM TAPE & STITCH REPAIR HOLES OR TEARS Invoice 147 1/28/2022 Transaction Date 2/3/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $604.50 Refer 317 EROSION PRODUCTS LLC Cash Payment E 101-45200-232 Landscape Material TX 100' GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, 6" STEEL $65.00 STAPLES- SURFSIDE PARK Invoice 10780/9-568 1/13/2022 Transaction Date 2/2/2022 U.S. Bank 10100 10100 Total $65.00 Refer Y m 318 FIRE CHIEF, MN STATE ASSOCIAT Cash Payment E 222-42260-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2022 6- MEMBERSHIP DUES MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSN- G. PEDERSON, G. $400.00 " PALM, M. MCCARVILLE, M. JAKUBIK, B. j2qIo.cem� FOSTER, A. DRILLING O 2—d 9 — ZZ Invoice 3463 1/16/2022 ge- X/ t 5 e-'Ot Z 3 1 QxKn0►N:111MLiLIII ad:1aas] PIA s_1aaa.pill • TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Rita Trapp, Consulting Planner DATE: February 8, 2022 SUBJECT: Requestto amend agenda to add comments received for Northland Mound (Case No. 21-18) As provided under Agenda Item No. 3, Staff respectfully requests the City Council amend tonight's agenda to add the following additional pages to include the comments for the proposed Northland Mound project applications that were received afterthe February 8^h City Council packet was prepared. Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received Agency Comments for Northland Mound (PC Case 21-18) Grant L. Wilson, MnDNR Thank you for your letter to Commissioner Strommen regarding this proposed road vacation. Your letter was forwarded to me for review and comment, as required by M.S. 412.851. M.S. 412.851 indicates that "No vacation shall be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so." In response "The commissioner must evaluate: (1) the proposed vacation and the public benefits to do so; (2) the present and potential use of the land for access to public waters; and (3) how the vacation would impact conservation of natural resources." Our charge is to evaluate the proposed vacation using M.S. 412.851 criteria. With these criteria in mind, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) concludes that the proposed vacation does not clearly state how the vacation is to the public benefit. Lake access is vital to community as future land use and population growth can cause a scarcity of these necessary amenities. The DNR is not in favor of the vacation and would encourage the city to preserve public access on or near the proposed development. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed vacation. DNR does not plan to attend the public hearing. Please send us the results of the hearing and the city's final decision on this road vacation. Public Comments for Northland Mound (PC Case 21-18) Ann Chemin It has come to my attention that another colossal structure has been proposed to the City of Mound. There are many monumental concerns being traffic, adverse effects to the environment and many points from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan being ignored. We have not yet felt the traffic concerns of the first development that will be built across the street. To begin another extensive project before the other one has even been built doesn't make sense. To have two compact living spaces so close together with Audit Road being eliminated creates augmented traffic for one intersection. There isn't any room for redirection of traffic. Not to mention rush hour, school buses, pedestrians, etc. In addition, there is already concern for users of the Dakota Trail in which this apartment building will only exasperate the issue. The highest volume of traffic crashes are at the intersection of Lynwood Blvd/15 and Commerce Blvd/110 and a few other high crash sites near this intersection. With Auditors future closure, many Ace Hardware customers will not be able Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received to use this road to return south west without either crossing 15 (which is a crash site) or drive clear around using 125. There isn't an easy way to drive into and out of this area and many may opt to shop outside of Mound due to the inconvenience. Knowing that the "DNR reviewed and in the report did not recommend the approval to build the apartment building" is a huge red flag on many levels. This area proposed for building is a wet land. "The State law applies to all wetlands, including those on private property, to achieve "no net loss" of wetlands. In general, wetland protection laws regulate activities in or near wetlands that can negatively affect the wetland through draining, filling, or excavating." "The potential builder has already admitted that they cannot have a basement and would have to build a 4-story building with the first level for 84 parking spaces. Another issue they admitted to was a good portion of the building would have to be placed on underground pylons that would have to be pounded into place." Another topic is parking. Above ground parking has been proposed within the building which obviously won't fit all the tenant's vehicles. Where will the overflow of cars park? The business "owners own the very large parking lot in the back. They have an agreement with the city of Mound to allow the parking lot in the back as public parking." The owners would most likely remove the public parking and drive through, because the owners are responsible for the asphalt, liability etc." Reviewing the past city council meetings, the responses from the city government seem similar to the ones that passed the 55+ senior apartments across the street (which hasn't been built yet). The city council members continue to be dazzled by the "newness" and amenities of the proposed development and are forgetting the key points mentioned in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as follows; "Our commitment to preserving the natural environment ensures everyone can enjoy the community's four lakes and numerous wetlands, varied topography, open spaces and parks." "It is important for the vision to maintain the idea of preservation of the natural environment." "Small town feel" with a relaxed, friendly atmosphere." "Open spaces and natural areas should be preserved for informal play and natural resource protection." "Safety continues to be a concern at intersections throughout the community." "Maintain the area around and along Shoreline Drive and Commerce Boulevard as the focus of Mound's commercial activity with a mixture of retail, offices, services, and entertainment." Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received "Ensure that new development and redevelopment projects on sites with sensitive natural features, such as poor soils, high ground water, poor drainage, or steep slopes, are properly managed to prevent potential hazards to the site and/or adjacent properties." "Buildings should "step down" in height adjacent to residential neighborhoods and the lake front." "Views across Lake Langdon & Lost Lake should be maximized for buildings away from the shoreline." "The floodplains associated with these lakes are defined as the areas where surface flooding has the statistical likelihood of occurring once every 100 years. The floodplain can be divided into two areas: the floodway and flood fringe. The floodway is the area where absolutely no development should take place. The flood fringe is suitable for development if proper filling and flood proofing is conducted as part of construction. As shown in Figure 2.3, most of the floodplain areas border the lakes and are directly linked to fluctuating lake levels. The Federal Regional Elevation establishes floodplain elevations for the three major lake systems in the community. The 100 year lake elevations are as follows: Lake Minnetonka = 931.0; Dutch Lake = 940.0; Langdon Lake = 935.0. Structures are required to be elevated above these 100 year flood elevations to protect their integrity and occupants in a flood event. The Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation for each lake is as follows: Lake Minnetonka = 933.0; Dutch Lake - 942.0; Langdon Lake = 937.0." Wetlands "Wetlands usually consist of peat and mucky soils covered with marshy vegetation. These areas experience a seasonal to permanent wetness with the water table lying within two feet of the surface. Wetlands serve as natural components of the overall storm water management system by holding water during heavy rains until evaporation or percolation occurs. Wetlands also serve as natural filters by removing impurities as the water passes through them prior to entering the underground water table. Wetlands also serve as a valuable habitat Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received for wildlife, providing food and cover. Many of these areas are presently used as public open space. As shown in Figure 2.4 the most intensive wetland networks lie in the Lake Langdon, Emerald Lake and Lost Lake areas. The city has established a set of wetland management requirements to ensure the continued functional and aesthetic preservation of these areas." " Continue evaluation of site plans and development proposals for potential impacts to the community's natural resources and to identify potential mitigation actions." " Internal circulation for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles is a priority for the Downtown Lakes Mixed Use Area." " Protect access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems and support development of distributed solar energy systems that are in keeping with the community's character." " Examine the existing Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to ensure that they adequately include solar energy protection measures." "The City should consider making information available pertaining to design criteria for solar access." " Monitor and enforce ordinances and policies that affect housing to ensure that they are reflective of community policy." I would like to express my dismay and frustration in the city government to even consider another project for developer profit rather than the small town feel residents move here for and want for the city. There are countless comments about the community wanting the small town feel and I haven't seen anyone say that massive apartment buildings are needed in the downtown commercial area. The last proposed enormous apartment building where the beautifully refurbished Commerce Blvd shopping mall stands was cut down by the community. It's absolutely discouraging that the city government has not learned from this. Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received I'm positive that Mound citizens would conceive a better use of this natural space than a massive building. Johann Chemin-Danielson Thanks for your time reading my arguments concerning the proposed building project on Langdon lake. 1. Sales Pitch is a scare tactic - People move to Mound for the quite aspect - The builder repeats ad nauseam how Victoria is a great example: Victoria has become featureless and unattractive - The builder heralds his project as a savior or Mound's businesses. Shopping from new residents to Mound will be marginal. Do the businesses really need rescuing? 2. Height of the structure: - The flat roof part of the proposed structure will stand at 990' above the sea level (5_floor_plan_and_amenities.pdf). Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received The structure would: - Box in the trail and kill the peacefulness of the trail (see pictures above) + notice the overbearing brick wall view from the trail Block the view to the lake. This goes against the 2040 Comprehensive plan for the Downtown Lake area (p42): "Views across Lake Langdon & Lost Lake should be maximized for buildings away from the shoreline" - Kill the small town feel of Mound (see what has happened to Victoria) - Bear over other buildings in the area Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received Be an eye -sore to whomever is looking across the lake, which is paradoxical and hypocritical: the location was chosen for the view, but at the same time it is damaging the view that others are currently enjoying. 3. Construction impacts on aquifer and surrounding structures - Pillars need to be pounded through the muck of that former sewer lake into the bedrock for stability of the building. We don't know at this point what chemicals are present in the sediments or water of Langdon lake. - Aquifer located right under the lake: if bedrock is fractured, these chemicals would leech into the drinking water. - Vibrations from pounding pillars will be felt by surrounding buildings and infrastructures, and possibly causing damages. The city shall investigate these points prior to accepting any proposal. 4. No integration with future needs for solar energy - Building design not done in accordance with the 2040 comprehensive plan (p. 46): "consideration of solar access will occur during redevelopment efforts and on an individual basis." - Huge flat rooftop that must be designed to harvest solar power: that will also use as a shading system for the building and therefore diminish energy needed to cool off the building. If the project is accepted, the building structure MUST be made nowto withstand the weight of solar panels (present and/or future) - No design for electric car charging stations in the garage The city shall mandate that solar panels be installed. 5. Transit and parking - The "Trip and Parking" document does not line up with common sense: 135 cars at least for all the residents, yet "only" 30 out trips in the morning hours!! I That means that 105 people are staying at home and not going to work. - Future mitigation for the flow of cars entering Commerce Blvd will become a liability for the city. Remediation will be a burden to taxpayers. Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received Anna Schmidt I am writing to express concern over the development being discussed the corner of the OLL parking lot. I work for the church and have children in the school. It is already a nightmare during pick up and drop with regards to traffic on 110. With the strip mall and their customers, OLL parishioners/staff and the school coming and going is very difficult. How do we plan to NOT make it worse? The street crossing of the Dakota Trail is already dangerous.. how will this effect that? Also, the Incredible Festival.. how will that work? The church will not be cancelling the Incredible Festival from their parking lot. How will that work with the apartments and all the cars? I am very concerned not just for the eye sore but for the traffic this is going to cause in an already congested area. Jameson Smieia I support a variety of housing for all. I prefer more mixed use and less apartment buildings for our city, given the shear number we have of the latter already. However I see that this proposed project is located at a distance from the major roadways through town, which is an improvement over some of the other projects presented to our city in the recent past. I also think a lot of work has been done to give it a more attractive appearance and include amenities that other projects have not included in the past. I know a lot of comments and concerns have already been submitted related to this project, but I believe I have one unique concern that might not have been addressed yet: I noticed this project consists of 33 studio, 40 one -bedroom, and 31 two -bedroom units. That's means slightly more than 70%of the units will be 1-bedroom or less. Other communities surrounding the Twin Cities have previously learned that too high of a concentration of single bedroom rentals in one community, let alone one specific complex, can correlate to higher instances of community issues (crime being one of them). They have developed strategies for more diverse housing stock, both at the community level as well as at the project level. While likely not an issue with the currently envisioned new build, I am concerned that as this property ages over time it might suffer from the lack of housing diversity our community needs, as has been seen in other communities in Minnesota. I've attached an excerpt and a link from the city of Brooklyn Park referencing an extensive study they had done in 2005 in this regard. Please review and take that into consideration for approval of this project. Perhaps the unit mix of other successful multi -family housing complexes (i.e. the Mist or other Weidner Apartment Homes) could be used as a quick reference in this regard. Northland Mound — CC Report — February 8, 2022 — Additional Comments Received Thanks for listening and good luck with the decision. I appreciate your service to our community. https://www.brookIVnpark.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Chapter 4 Housing.pdf North and Mound —CC Report —February 8, 2022-Additional Comments Received 4.11" dHoussWAncenhy Brooklyn Park is committed to endorsing neighborhoods showing signs ofdecbne. After exuarive summary input and dcWlcd oudy, Brooklyn Park csrabear Oshcd a soff of apartmentdemobtion in concentrated some, coupled with the action of new affordable housing in less dense areas of the city. ]fie City Council initially appointed a task force in 20(M to embak on AHEAD (Apartment Housing Enhancement and Dispers0, which sought as accomplish decentralization of existing concentrated renal housing in the Zane Avenue condor. A significant portion of the financing required m implement the ommormidations of AHEAD relied on a bond issue "noting a referendum our. The vote failed m November of 2004. In December of 2005, in a common; effort ot address decenionnemon, the Council approved the Stable Neighborhoods Acton Plan (SNAP), a proactive approach to the stabilization of its neghborhoods near Zane Avenue. V lulc the overarching goal of SNAP was to improve Brooklyn Park within the regional housing marketplace, more specific directives of the plan were aimed at defining an appropriate housing mix for current and From, residents, in addition to offering development standards for the evaluation and guidance of rime housing development. A component of SNAP included a speculative market sandy, conducted by Maxfield Research in 2005. Below are a few of the highlights of the principle findings of the study: • Unit Mix: Them is a high concentration of mnmr-occupied units (80%af the and umber of units) and a high proportion ofoec-bedroom units AM) in the study area and the city as a whole. Excluding Huntington Place and Huntington Poinee there is a balance bowmen one and uvo-bedmom (48 percent each). • Unit Distribution: 75% percent of au ream) units are sioered in buildings of20 or mom wits. In other suburban communities, the range is between 43.1 and 61.5 percent. There is also a high proportion of 1-unit attached housing (19.30/,) compared curb surrounding communities. 4-13 • Vacancy Rafts: Vacancy rates among mral preforms was 6.6 percent(July 20055,a figure sightly above the 6.0 fattens found return the Twin Cities Memo Area (2 Quarter 2005). • Age of Housing Slack: Over 41 percent of the housing stock and more dean 95 Percent of ohm mood units were butt around the same note pate 1960; and early 19)0s). This compares with may 48 percent of Brooklyn Park housing stock overall. Fundammrally, ohm SNAP study found that neighboahoods were less stable due to a high concentration of outdated housing and 1-bedroom units Changes in demographics and motor demand suggest the need for modem unit types and less concentration of moral In the area The following is a summary of the SNAP gods: • Cma mare Musing choices including single family that arc not split level and are affordable at various levels. • Crate appropriam housing for scoters that offer angle lead coin and devater access. This includes ownership and moral. • Crate moral apartment housing with both 2- and lbedrooms and multiple bathrooms; and rental housing (non-apartnens) with 4 bedrooms and multiple bathrooms. Come larger Hrchens in larger units. • Reduce has appropriate) the number of apartment buildings as part of redevelopment concept. • Reduce the number of apartments in Zane counter. • Budd new housing within the SNAP arm