Loading...
2012-05-22 CC Agenda PacketPLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. CITY OF MOUND MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Mound, through teamwork and c ation, provides at a reason" oast, duality services That respond to the needs of all citizens, fostering a safe, at(ractive and flourishing community. • AGENDA ....... ..... ............. ..... MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY MAY 22 2012 - 7:00 PM REGULAR MEETING MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature 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. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. Page 1. Open meeting 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda, with any amendments 4. *Consent Agenda *A. Approve payment of claims 1140 -1162 *B. Approve An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 08 -2003 Implementing 1163 -1164 an Electric Franchise Fee on Northern States Power d/b /a Excel Energy for Providing Electric Service within the City of Mound (extend sunset date) • *C. Approve An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 05 -2003 Implementing 1165 a Gas Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco for Providing Gas Service within the City of Mound (extend sunset date) *D. Approve Pay Request No. 5 from Minger Construction, Inc, in the amount 1166 -1167 of $18,236.92 for work completed on the 2011 Lift Station Improvement Project, City Project No. PW -11 -03 *E. Approve Liquor License Renewals, contingent upon receipt of all required 1168 forms, fees and certificates of insurance *F. Approve Permits for Spirit of the Lakes Festival (with fee waivers) 1. Application for Temporary On -Sale Liquor License: July 14, 2012 1169 2. Application for Temporary On -Sale Liquor License: July 19 -22, 2012 1170 3. Application for Parade Permit: July 21, 2012 1171 -1172 4. Application for Temporary Sign Permit: 1173 -1177 *G. Approve Resolution Approving Expansion Permit for 2650 Lakewood Lane 1178 -1195 *H. Approve Resolution Amending Resolution No. 03 -12 Approving Sign Area 1196 -1198 Variance and Modifying Condition to Allow Use of Color for Tenant Signage • Area Identification Sign at Mound Marketplace PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. *I. Approve Resolution amending and Replacing Resolution 08 -103, 1199 -1205 Approving Variance for 1558 Dove Lane • *J. Approve Resolution Designating Handicapped Parking on a Portion of 1206 -1207 Hanover Road 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. (Limit to 3 minutes per speaker) 6. Approve Resolution Expressing Appreciation to City Attorney John Dean 1208 7. Roger Brandel, representing CenterPoint Energy, presenting the Community 1209 Partnership Grand Check in the amount of $1,000.00, for Fire Department Pagers 8. Consideration of Proposed Walgreens Redevelopment Project Applications /Requests 1210 -1341 from Semper Development for Certain Parcels in Vicinity of Southwest Corner of Commerce and Lynwood Boulevards: A. Public Hearings - to consider applications from Semper Development for rezoning (from B -I Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District), conditional use permit (Planned Unit Development including a Walgreens with a drive - through window) and preliminary plat -major subdivision (Conner Green Addition including site development plans) • B. Public Hearing — to consider application from Semper Development to vacate public alley in project area C. Consideration of specific sign program request and subdivision exemption and final plat applications Requested Actions 1. Action on Resolution granting approval of a subdivision exemption 1216 -1217 2. Action on Resolution granting approval of an alley vacation 1218 -1219 3. Action on Ordinance approving rezoning of certain parcels from 1220 -1222 B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District 4. Action on Resolution granting approval of conditional use permit 1223 -1226 for a planned unit development 5. Action on Resolution granting approval of preliminary plat/major 1227 -1229 subdivision for Conner Green Addition 6. Action on Resolution granting approval of final plat/major sub- 1230 -1233 division for Conner Green Addition 9. Discussion on Resolution Supporting Further Research of the Concept of a 1342 -1343 Cooperative Fire Protection Area that Services 100% of Mound, Minnetrista, • St Bonifacius and its Existing Contracted Service Areas PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 10. Action approving minutes: April 11, 2012 special meeting 1344 -1345 May 1, 2012 special meeting 1346 -1347 • May 8, 2012 regular meeting 1348 -1350 May 15, 2012 special meeting 1351 11. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments /reports from Councilmembers /City Manager B. Minutes: Docks & Commons Comm — Apr 19, 2012 1352 -1353 Planning Commission — Apr 3, 2012 1354 -1361 Parks & Open Space Comm — May 10, 2012 1362 -1363 C. Reports: D. Correspondence: Letter from Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 1364 E. Article: Public Health & Prevention Experts Recommend Against 1365 Privatization of Retail Alcohol Sales in Places that Currently have Government Control 12. Adjourn C, isNote: This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. More current meeting agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: www.cityofinound.com. COUNCIL BRIEFING May 22, 2012 • Upcoming Events Schedule: Don't Forget! May 22 – 6:30 – HRA regular meeting (John Dean's last meetings) May 22 – 7:00 – CC regular meeting June 2 – 3:00 -12:00 – Fire Department Fish Fry and Dance July 10 -22 – Spirit of the Lakes Festival/Mound Centennial June 12 – 6:55 – HRA regular meeting June 12 – 7:00 – CC regular meeting June 26 – 6:55 – HRA regular meeting June 26 – 7:00 – CC regular meeting July 10 – 6:30 – HRA regular meeting July 10 – 7:00 – CC regular meeting July 24 – 6:30 – HRA regular meeting July 24 – 7:00 – CC regular meeting Aug 7 – Night to Unite Aug 4 – Tour de Tonka passes through Mound Aug 14 – 7:00am- 8:00pm -- Primary Election Aug 18 – Dog Days Event (animal expo with vendors and education —bring your dog to Auditor's Road) Oct 13 – 8:00 -12:00 – Recycling Day Nov 2 – Seasonal Hours end Nov 4 - Daylight Saving Time ends Nov 15 – 6:00 – Tree Lighting Ceremony • City Hall Closings May 28 Memorial Day July 4 Independence Day Sept 3 Labor Day City Official's Absences May 19 -26 Kandis Hanson -- Vacation Music in the Park June 14 July 12 June 21 July 19 (Spirit of the Lakes /Kiddie Parade /Boots & Badges Safety Fair June 28 July 26 c • KI 10 10 City of Mound Claims as of 05-22 -12 YEAR BATCH NAME DOLLAR AMOUNT 2012 0509CITYMAN $ 30,676.10 2012 0516CITYMAN $ 81584.03 2012 0517CITYMAN $ 3,883.34 2012 052212CITY $ 54,142.20 2012 052212HWS $ 51,188.71 TOTAL CLAIMS $ 148,474.38 -1140- CITY OF MOUND 05/09/12 2:23 PM Page 1 Payments Current Period: May 2012 Batch Name 0509CITYMAN User Dollar Amt $30,676.10 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $30,676.10 $0.00 In Balance Refer 1 HANDS, MARK Cash Payment E 101 - 41110 -431 Meeting Expense REIMBURSE MILEAGE & PARKING ST. PAUL, $23.43 MET COUNCIL MTG. M. HANUS 5 -7 -12 Invoice 050912 5/8/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $23.43 Refer 2 MINGER CONSTRUCTION, INC. - Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -500 Capital Outlay FA PAY REQUEST #4 WORK COMPLETED 1 -7- $9,322.54 12 THRU 4 -27 -12 ON 2011 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PIN 11 -03 Invoice 050912 4/27/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 3 MINNCOMM UTILITY CONSTRUCTI Total $9,322.54 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -500 Capital Outlay FA PAY REQUEST #2 WORK COMPLETED 3 -31 $21,306.13 THRU 4 -27 IVD WINDSOR RD WATERMAIN LOOP PROJECT PIN 12 -07 Invoice 050912 4/27/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $21,306.13 Refer 4 MINNETONKA MUD COFFEE CAFE Cash Payment E 101 - 41310 -431 Meeting Expense Invoice 050912 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -431 Meeting Expense Invoice 050912 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -431 Meeting Expense CELEBRATE GREATER MOUND LUNCH MTG $8.00 5 -10 -12 K. HANSON CELEBRATE GREATER MOUND LUNCH MTG $8.00 5 -10 -12 S. SMITH CELEBRATE GREATER MOUND LUNCH MTG $8.00 5 -10 -12 J. COLOTTI Invoice 050912 5/8/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $24.00 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $39.43 601 WATER FUND $21,306.13 602 SEWER FUND $9,322.54 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $8.00 $30,676.10 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $30,676.10 Total $30,676.10 -1141- r� U • • MOUND, MN 05/15/12 2:01 PM Page 1 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Batch Name 0516CITYMAN User Dollar Amt $8,584.03 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $8,584.03 $0.00 In Balance Refer 1 BEN/EK PROPERTY S VCS INC. _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -440 Other Contractual Senvic SNOWPLOW COMMERCIAL AREAS: $3,361.50 COMMERCE BLVD, PARKING RAMP & BOULEVARD 2/29 & 3/1/12 Invoice 138900 3/15/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,361.50 Refer 5 BRIDGE REALTY Cash Payment R 601 -49400 -36240 Refunds and Reimbur REIMBURSE OVERPAYMENT OF FINAL $102.87 UTILITY BILL @ 4900 BEDFORD RD Invoice 05162012 5/9/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $102.87 Refer 2 LAKESHORE WEEKLY COMMUNIC Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -340 Advertising REISSUE PYMT DUE TO LOST CHECK 3 X T' $424.00 4 -COLOR AD 3 -6 -12 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS Invoice 00128716 3/6/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -41500 -351 Legal Notices Publishing REISSUE PYMT DUE TO LOST CHECK $216.00 ACCOUNTANT AD 3 -13 & 3 -20 -12 • LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS Invoice 6243 3/13/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $640.00 Refer 6 MADER, RANDY Cash Payment R 601- 49400 -36240 Refunds and Reimbur REIMBURSE OVERPAYMENT OF FINAL $73.41 UTILITY BILL @ 2135 OVERLAND LANE Invoice 05162012 5/9/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $73.41 Refer 3 RITTER, BONNIE Cash Payment E 101 - 41310 -434 Conference & Training REIMBURSE MILEAGE CLERKS CONF & $151.52 LOSS CONTROL WKSHOP - ST.CLOUD, CLERKS MTG BLAINE, B. RITTER MARCH & APRIL Invoice 05162012 5/14/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $151.52 Refer 4 SIMPLEX GRINNELL Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -440 Other Contractual Servic HWS MOTION DETECTOR REPAIR 10 -20 -11 $358.75 INVOICE 50% CONCESSION RESOLUTION Invoice 67133378 10/24/2011 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $358.75 Refer 7 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,200.00 Invoice 1738885 4/2/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight WINE $11.50 1738885 4/2/2012 •Invoice Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,211.50 Refer 8 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF M -1142- MOUND, MN 05/15/12 2:01 PM Page 2 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $320.37 Invoice 1762875 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,189.46 Invoice 1771675 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $281.33 Invoice 1802421 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $161.45 Invoice 1771704 5/10/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,952.61 Refer 9 THYSSEN -KRUPP ELEVATOR COR Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -440 Other Contractual Servic ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CITY HALL 12 -1- $731.87 11 THRU 2 -29 -12 Invoice 115139 12/1/2011 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $731.87 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $4,460.89 601 WATER FUND $176.28 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $3,946.86 $8,584.03 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $8,584.03 Total $8,584.03 -1143- 1x11 u • C7 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 $1,836.06 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -321 Telephone & Cells PHONE SERVICE 4 -30 -12 THRU 05 -29 -12 $115.89 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 $676.31 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -321 Telephone & Cells PHONE SERVICE 4 -30 -12 THRU 05 -29 -12 $535.68 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -321 Telephone & Cells PHONE SERVICE 4 -30 -12 THRU 05 -29 -12 $908.76 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -321 Telephone & Cells PHONE SERVICE 4 -30 -12 THRU 05 -29 -12 $378.65 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -321 Telephone & Cells PHONE SERVICE 4 -30 -12 THRU 05 -29 -12 $227.19 Invoice 05222012 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,532.66 Refer 2 MOUND POST OFFICE Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -322 Postage MAY 2012 UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE $175.34 Invoice 051712 5/17/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -322 Postage MAY 2012 UTILITY BILLING POSTAGE $175.34 Invoice 051712 5/17/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $350.68 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $1,836.06 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $227.19 601 WATER FUND $608.10 602 SEWER FUND $676.31 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $535.68 $3,883.34 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $3,883.34 Total $3,883.34 -1144- MOUND, MN 05/17/122:12 PM Page 1 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Batch Name 052212CITY User Dollar Amt $54,142.20 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $54,142.20 $0.00 In Balance Refer 1 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATIO _ Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -418 Other Rentals RADIO LEASE & ADMIN FEE APRIL 2012 $160.00 PUBLIC WORKS Invoice 120438113 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $160.00 Refer 2 XCEL ENERGY _ Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -381 Electric Utilities STREET LIGHTS 2 -3 -12 TO 3 -2 -12 $4,933.70 Invoice 420541843 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,933.70 Refer 3 MNSPECT _ Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -308 Building Inspection Fees APRIL 2012 BUILDING INSPECTION FEES $7,195.48 Invoice 5770 5/1/2012 Cash Payment R 101 -42000 -32220 Electrical Permit Fee APRIL 2012 ELECTRICAL INSPECTION - $124.00 CREDIT Invoice 5770 5/1/2012 Cash Payment G 101 -20800 Due to Other Governments APRIL 2012 ELECTRICAL INSPECTION - $50.00 STATE SURCHARGE FEE CREDIT Invoice 5770 5/1/2012 • Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -308 Building Inspection Fees APRIL 2012 FIRE INSPECTION FEES $162.50 Invoice 5772 5/1/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7,183.98 Refer 4 ASSURED SECURITY _ Cash Payment E 281 -45210 -220 Repair /Maint Supply VILLA DOCKS - CUT KEY BY CODE & $53.70 DUPLICATES Invoice 63156 3/2/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $53.70 Refer 5 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply FLOAT SWITCHES W /50 FT OF CABLE FOR $119.43 SPARES Invoice 24608 5/7/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $119.43 Refer 6 B/FFS, INC PORTABLE RESTROO _ Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -410 Rentals (GENERAL) PORTABLE RESTROOM DELIVERY, RENTAL $257.85 & SVC APRIL 13 TO MAY 1 SKATEPARK Invoice W460303 5/2/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $257.85 Refer 7 BILDEAUX SERVICES -. Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -434 Conference & Training CHAINSAW SAFETY TRAINING SEMINAR 4-4- $568.00 12 Invoice 052212 4/4/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $568.00 Refer 8 CENTERPOINT ENERGY (MINNEG • Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 PARKS BLDG $187.82 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 -1145- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 2 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 CITY HALL $387.55 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 $23.21 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 PUBLIC $233.97 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms WORKS BLDG $25.69 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 LIQUOR $49.72 Invoice 1006679365 4/9/2012 STORE Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 $216.47 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 DEPOT BLDG $82.13 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 $299.15 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 POLICE DEPT $65.69 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -384 Refuse /Garbage Disposa GAS SERVICE 3 -20 THRU 4 -18 FIRE DEPT. $65.69 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,072.57 Refer 9 ELECTRIC PUMP _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply Invoice 0047142 4/25/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Refer 10 CENTRAL MCGOWAN, INCORPOR _ Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice Transaction Date 5/1512012 Refer 11 ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT AN _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 9807 5/11/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 9781 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Refer 12 FERGUSON WATERWORKS _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply Invoice S01360497 4/30/2012 PO 23979 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 LIFT STATION PUMP PARTS: GASKETS, $601.89 NUT, LOCKS, HEX, STUD Wells Fargo 10100 Total $601.89 HIGH PRESSURE CYLINDER RENTAL Project 12 -3 Wells Fargo 10100 Total GB LOCK VALVE ASSEMBLY, VICKERS SPRING, BOLT EYES, FOR TYMCO SWEEPER #304 Wells Fargo 10100 Total 20 T -10 BOTTOM CAP GASKETS - METER PARTS Wells Fargo 10100 Total $16.67 $16.67 $146.38 $52.97 $199.35 $16.17 $16.17 Refer 13 G & K SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -9 -12 $23.21 Invoice 1006679365 4/9/2012 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -9 -12 $25.69 Invoice 1006679365 4/9/2012 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -9 -12 $33.78 Invoice 1006679365 4/9/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials MAT SVC & SHOP SUPPLIES 4 -9 -12 $216.47 Invoice 1006679365 419/2012 Project 12 -3 • Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $299.15 Refer 14 G & K SERVICES _ -1146- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 3 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -23 -12 $23.21 Invoice 1006701245 4/23/2012 Refer 16 G & K SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -23 -12 $25.69 Invoice 1006701245 4/23/2012 Invoice 1006723266 517/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -23 -12 $33.78 Invoice 1006701245 4/23/2012 UNIFORM SVC 5 -7 -12 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials MAT SVC & SHOP SUPPLIES 4 -23 -12 $216.47 Invoice 1006701245 4/23/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $299.15 Refer 15 G & K SERVICES _ $33.78 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -30 -12 $23.21 Invoice 1006712357 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -30 -12 $32.65 Invoice 1006712357 4/30/2012 Invoice 1006723266 5/7/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -30 -12 $33.78 Invoice 1006712357 4/30/2012 Total $299.15 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials SHOP SUPPLIES & MAT SVC 4 -30 -12 $246.80 Invoice 1006712357 4/30/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $336.44 Refer 16 G & K SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 5 -7 -12 $23.21 • Invoice 1006723266 517/2012 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 5 -7 -12 $25.68 Invoice 1006723266 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 5 -7 -12 $33.78 Invoice 1006723266 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials SHOP SUPPLIES & MAT SVC 5 -7 -12 $216.48 Invoice 1006723266 5/7/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $299.15 Refer 17 G & K SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -460 Janitorial Services MAT SVC 5 -7 -12 $55.88 Invoice 1006723261 5/7/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $55.88 Refer 18 G & K SERVICES _ Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 4 -30 -12 $44.66 Invoice 1006712359 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -210 Operating Supplies MAT SVC & SHOP SUPPLIES 4 -30 -12 $62.47 Invoice 1006712359 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORM SVC 5 -07 -12 $40.15 Invoice 1006723267 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -210 Operating Supplies SHOP SUPPLIES 5 -7 -12 $56.80 Invoice 1006723267 5/7/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $204.08 Refer 19 HAWKINS, INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -227 Chemicals 150 LB CHLORINE CYLINDER RENTAL $15.00 • Invoice 3333033 4/27/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $15.00 -1147- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 4 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Refer 20 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 17A HYDRANT WAT LOWER OPEN NUT $67.21 Invoice 4740055 5/1/2012 PO 23969 Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $67.21 Refer 21 HENNEPIN COUNTY /NFORMATIO _ Cash Payment E 361- 47000 -300 Professional Srvs Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -418 Other Rentals RADIO LEASE & ADMIN FEE APRIL 2012 PD $1,214.03 Invoice 120438034 4/30/2012 Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,214.03 Refer 22 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS OF _ Cash Payment E 367 -47000 -300 Professional Srvs Cash Payment E 101 - 41600 -450 Board of Prisoners APRIL 2012 PER DIEM AND PROCESSING $548.37 E 366 -47000 -300 Professional Srvs FEES Invoice Transaction Date 5/15/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $548.37 Refer 23 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER _ Cash Payment E 101 - 49999 -300 Professional Srvs ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $52.75 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 401 -43109 -300 Professional Srvs ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $9.00 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS •Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 351 - 47000 -300 Professional Srvs • Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 368 -47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 369 - 47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 361- 47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 362 - 47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 363 -47000 -600 Debt Sry Principal Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 367 -47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 366 -47000 -300 Professional Srvs Invoice 671500 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/15/2012 ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $750.00 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $7.50 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $412.50 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $270.00 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $300.00 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $208.50 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $369.00 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $178.50 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR $67.50 PROCESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,625.25 Refer 24 HOIS/NGTON KOEGLER GROUP, I _ Cash Payment E 101 -42400 -300 Professional Srvs MOUND MISC PLANNING SVCS APRIL 2012 Invoice 007 - 001-48 5/4/2012 -1148- $166.00 MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 5 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment G 101 -23256 2650 Lakewood Ln - Grunow 2650 LAKEWOOD LANE GRUNOW $62.25 Refer 28 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC _ PLANNING SVCS APRIL 2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials DRAWER, ROLLERRACK STAND SAFETY Invoice 007 - 001 -48 5/4/2012 GLASSES, SWIVEL CRIMP, BRAKE CLEAN, Cash Payment G 101 -23246 PBK SIGN VARIANCE #11 -1 PBK SIGN VARIANCE MOUND $20.75 DETECTOR BATTERY CLEANER MARKETPLACE PLANNING SVCS APRIL 2012 Invoice 9300817228 5/7/2012 Project 12 -3 Invoice 007 - 001-48 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials THREAD CRIMP $0.00 Cash Payment G 101 -23255 2125 Commerce- Animal Hos 2125 COMMERCE BLVD ANIMAL HOSPITAL $62.25 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials TARP STRAPS, RECIP BLADES, HOSE PLANNING SVCS APRIL 2012 CLAMPS, FENDER WASHER, SELF DRILL Invoice 007 - 001 -48 5/4/2012 SCREWS, PLUG PIPE ADAPTER, PIPE CAPS, Cash Payment G 101 -23247 WALGREENS #11 -10 SEMP WALGREENS SEMPER COMP PLAN AMEND $2,622.61 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total PLAN SVCS APRIL 2012 Refer 29 LOBE TECH, INCORPORATED _ Invoice 007 - 005-47 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials LUBRIPLATE GREASE AND FMO 350 AW $332.33 Cash Payment G 101 -23247 WALGREENS #11 -10 SEMP WALGREEN SEMPER LAND USE PLANNING $1,971.25 SVCS APRIL 2012 Invoice 007 - 005-47 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,905.11 Refer 25 JANI -KING OF MINNESOTA, INCOR _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -460 Janitorial Services MONTHLY CONTRACT CLEANING PUBLIC $267.19 WORKS MAY 2012 Invoice MIN05120326 5/1/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -460 Janitorial Services MONTHLY CONTRACT CLEANING CITY HALL $540.30 MAY 2012 Invoice MIN05120320 5/1/2012 • Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $807.49 Refer 26 JESSEN PRESS INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 101-41110-350 Printing CITY CONTACT NEWSLETTER 12 PG, APRIL $1,623.00 MAY JUNE 2012 EDITION, PRINT, FOLD,MAIL Invoice 32561 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,623.00 Refer 27 /NDELCO PLASTICS CORPORATIO _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -227 Chemicals HIGH PRESSURE PVC CHLORINATOR $8.13 PARTS, BUSHING, NIPPLES Invoice CIT057 5/4/2012 PO 23911 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $8.13 Refer 28 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials DRAWER, ROLLERRACK STAND SAFETY $236.94 GLASSES, SWIVEL CRIMP, BRAKE CLEAN, SILICONE SEALANT, HAND CLEANER, ACID DETECTOR BATTERY CLEANER Invoice 9300817228 5/7/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials THREAD CRIMP $0.00 Invoice 9300820741 5/8/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials TARP STRAPS, RECIP BLADES, HOSE $403.72 CLAMPS, FENDER WASHER, SELF DRILL SCREWS, PLUG PIPE ADAPTER, PIPE CAPS, Invoice 9300787949 4/24/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $640.66 Refer 29 LOBE TECH, INCORPORATED _ • Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials LUBRIPLATE GREASE AND FMO 350 AW $332.33 Invoice 2040456 4/25/2012 -1149- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 6 . Payments Current Period: May 2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $332.33 Refer 30 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS _ Cash Payment E 10143100 -224 Street Maint Materials 1/4 WOOD CHIP $839.07 Invoice 10338607 4/30/2012 "r..,.,—f;— n. +a rilanniq walls Famn 10100 Total $839.07 Refer 31 MERTZ, CRAIG M. LAW OFFICE _ Cash Payment E 101 -41600 -304 Legal Fees Invoice 0000413 5/5/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 41600 -304 Legal Fees Invoice 0000413 5/5/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 PROSECUTION SVCS APRIL 2012 HENN CTY INFO TECH ACCESS TO MNCIS FEE Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,766.96 $48.09 $6,815.05 Refer 32 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY A _ Refer 38 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS, INC. _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -434 Conference & Training DRIVING SAFETY SCHOOL D. NICCUM 4 -26- $386.00 Cash Payment 12 ST. CLOUD 6 MONTH SIRENS (3) MTCE FEE 7 -1 -12 Invoice 629430 -2800 4/26/2012 PO 23866 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $386.00 Refer 33 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTRO _ Invoice 32984 5114/2012 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -438 Licenses and Taxes WASTEWATER CERTIFICATION RENEWAL $23.00 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 GIESE $753.12 •L. Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 Refer 39 KIVISTO, SCOTT _ Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -438 Licenses and Taxes WASTEWATER CERTIFICATION RENEWAL $23.00 Cash Payment S. KIVISTO TUITION REIMBURSEMENT SPRING 2012 Invoice 052212 5/8/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $46.00 Refer 34 MULCH STORE, THE _ Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -232 Landscape Material CONTRACTED HARDWOOD MULCH FOR $67.33 Invoice 052212 MOUND BAY Invoice 8114808 4/27/2012 • Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $67.33 Refer 37 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD _ NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAI _ Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -220 Repair / Maint Supply 2 GATE VALVE BOX RESERVES $117.80 Invoice 4774894 5/8/2012 PO 23983 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $117.80 -1150- Refer 38 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS, INC. _ Cash Payment E 101 -42115 -329 Sirens /Phone Linesl 6 MONTH SIRENS (3) MTCE FEE 7 -1 -12 $753.12 THRU 12 -31 -12 Invoice 32984 5114/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $753.12 Refer 39 KIVISTO, SCOTT _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -434 Conference & Training TUITION REIMBURSEMENT SPRING 2012 $696.00 NORTH HENNEPIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE S. KIVISTO Invoice 052212 5/16/2012 • Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $696.00 Refer 40 NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAI _ -1150- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 7 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -440 Other Contractual Servic SUNSET LIFT STATION REPLACE POWER $314.13 CORD PUMP #2 Invoice 5752 5/2/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -440 Other Contractual Servic SUNSET LIFT STATION PULLED PUMP #1 $200.00 REPOSITION POWER CORD Invoice 5747 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $514.13 Refer 41 NORLINGS LAKE MINNETONKA LA _ Cash Payment E 675- 49425 -440 Other Contractual Servic LANDSCAPE MTCE SVCS COMMERCE $545.84 RETENTION POND 4 -24 -12 Invoice 26728 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $545.84 Refer 42 OFFICE DEPOT _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -200 Office Supplies COPY PAPER, ASTROBRIGHT, LAMINATING $162.40 POUCHES, COUNTERFEIT SCANNING PENS Invoice 609113412001 5/8/2012 PO 23428 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $162.40 Refer 43 OFFICE DEPOT _ Cash Payment E 101 - 42400 -200 Office Supplies INK CARTRIDGE PLANNING DEPT $21.08 Invoice 607620845001 5/3/2012 PO 23980 Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -200 Office Supplies PLASTIC SPOONS $18.34 Invoice 607620845001 5/3/2012 PO 23980 Cash Payment E 101 - 41910 -200 Office Supplies FINE POINT SHARPIE MARKERS $5.55 Invoice 607621395001 5/5/2012 PO 23980 Cash Payment E 101 -41110 -210 Operating Supplies CITY ATTORNEY NAME PLATES $16.01 Invoice 607621396001 517/2012 PO 23980 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $60.98 Refer 44 PREMIUM WATERS, INC. _ Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -210 Operating Supplies CITY HALL HOT & COLD WATER COOLER $121.52 RENTALS (2) MAY THRU JULY 2012 Invoice 604558 -04 -12 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -210 Operating Supplies PUB WORKS HOT & COLD WATER COOLER $60.76 RENTAL MAY THRU JULY 2012 Invoice 614851 -04 -12 4/30/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 101-42110-430 Miscellaneous POLICE DEPT HOT & COLD WATER COOLER $121.52 RENTALS (2) MAY THRU JULY 2012 Invoice 614850 -04 -12 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $303.80 Refer 45 SIGN AGE, THE _ Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -340 Advertising 2 CELEBRATE GREATER MOUND CITY $210.00 BANNERS - HARBOR WINE & SPIRITS Invoice 052212 5/14/2012 PO 23429 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $210.00 Refer 46 SUN PATR/OIT NEWSPAPER _ Cash Payment G 101 -23247 WALGREENS #11 -10 SEMP ALLEY VACATION HEARING NOTICE PUB.5- $38.59 5 -12 WALGREENS - SEMPER PROJECT Invoice 1105382 5/5/2012 Cash Payment G 101 -23247 WALGREENS #11 -10 SEMP RE- ZONING HEARING NOTICE PUB.5 -12 -12 $77.18 WALGREENS - SEMPER PROJECT Invoice 1106800 5/12/2012 -1151- • C7 MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 8 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment G 101 -23247 WALGREENS #11 -10 SEMP ALLEY VACATION HEARING NOTICE PUB.5- $66.41 12 -12 WALGREENS - SEMPER PROJECT Invoice 1106797 5/12/2012 Transaction Date 5/1612012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $182.18 Refer 47 SUSSMAN, MICHAEL E. _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -431 Meeting Expense EXPLORER AWARDS MTG W /PARENTS, $33.01 REIMBURSE M. SUSSMAN BEVERAGES, SNACKS, PAPER GOODS Invoice 052212 5/2/2012 Transaction Date 5116/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $33.01 Refer 48 TRUE VALUE, NAVARRE _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials INSERT ADAPTER $4.26 Invoice 252470 5/4/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4.26 Refer 49 TRUE VALUE MOUND (POLICE) _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies SPRAYER, CLEANER, VACUUM BAGS $32.01 Invoice 092472 4/4/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies GLASS CUT /MEASURED $32.06 Invoice 092473 4/4/2012 Payment E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies CLEANING WIPES, DOG /CAT REPENNENT $40.06 •Cash Invoice 092960 4/23/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -210 Operating Supplies HAND WIPES $16.02 Invoice 093154 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -322 Postage FED EX SHIPPING $16.73 Invoice 093154 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $136.88 Refer 50 US HEALTH WORKS _ Cash Payment E 101- 41500 -305 Medical Services PRE EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL ADAM $112.00 FLAHERTY Invoice 0007420 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $112.00 Refer 51 VIDEOTRONIX, INCORPORATED _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -205 Computer Hardware /Soft REPAIR VIDEO EQUIPMENT SYSTEM $231.25 POLICE DEPT Invoice SVM21203022 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $231.25 Refer 52 VANCE BROTHERS _ Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials STREETS CRACK FILLER CRS -2 480 G $617.42 Invoice 22122 5/10/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $617.42 Refer 53 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -440 Other Contractual Servic LEAK LOCATE SVC @ BAYWOOD SHORES $313.25 LANE & DRIVE 4 -27 -12 Invoice 3187 5/10/2012 • Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $313.25 Refer 54 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE AND _ Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -221 Equipment Parts STIGA TIRE TUBE $15.86 Invoice 680185 5/3/2012 -1152- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 9 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2b12 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $15.86 Refer 55 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION, LLC _ Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -400 Repairs & Maintenance WATERMAIN REPAIR @ BAYWOOD LANE 4- $1,840.00 27 -12 AFTER HOURS & TRACTOR BACKHOE Invoice 3249 5/11/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,840.00 Refer 56 ZINK, RICHARD _ Cash Payment G 101 -22801 Deposits /Escrow REFUND FORCED MOW INVCE PYMT $53.44 ASSESSED TO 2012 TAXES @ 6112 BARTLETT BLVD. R. ZINK Invoice 052212 5/16/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $53.44 Refer 57 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PW PKS) _ Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply ROLL COVER, PAINT BRUSHES, DECK STAIN $64.29 Invoice 092791 4/17/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials SAWZA BLADE $16.02 Invoice 092981 4/23/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply CONDUIT, COUPLING, ELBOWS, GRAY PVC $29.12 Invoice 093030 4/25/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply ACCESS FITTING $8.54 Invoice 093031 4/25/2012 MOUND BAY PARK Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply SCREWS, NUTS, BOLTS $3.80 Invoice 093074 4/26/2012 114 MM HOLE SAW $36.33 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -210 Operating Supplies LINED COW GLOVES $13.92 Invoice 093152 4/30/2012 -1153- Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment Parts SILICONE SPRAY TRUCK #105 $4.81 Invoice 093152 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials DRILL BIT $10.67 Invoice 092494 4/5/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -223 Building Repair Supplies WHITE GFCI OUTLET $19.23 Invoice 093097 4/27/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials 50LB OIL ABSORBENT $27.77 Invoice 093051 4/25/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $198.17 Refer 58 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PW PKS) _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -220 Repair /Maint Supply CONDUIT, ACCESS FITTING & ELBOW, - $22.41 RETURN Invoice 093189 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -220 Repair/Maint Supply NIPPLES LIGHT POLE $3.18 Invoice 093197 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -210 Operating Supplies TRIMMER LINE $8.02 Invoice 093204 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 601 - 49400 -210 Operating Supplies TRIMMER LINE $3.73 Invoice 093202 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply COATED CABLES, WIRE ROPE, PARTS FOR $43.59 MOUND BAY PARK Invoice 093222 5/2/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 114 MM HOLE SAW $36.33 Invoice 093224 5/2/2012 -1153- • • MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 10 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials FLAT ALU BAR - SHOP $9.61 Invoice 093228 5/2/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $82.05 Refer 59 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PIN PKS) _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -210 Operating Supplies YELLOW POLY ROPES $20.28 Invoice 093245 5/2/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 4 OZ START YOUR ENGINES $12.81 Invoice 093246 5/2/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -210 Operating Supplies WHITE NYLON CORD $34.16 Invoice 093271 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -45200 -220 Repair /Maint Supply 9V ALK BATTERY FOR DEPOT $4.80 Invoice 093286 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials COULING, INSERT ADAPTER $13.87 Invoice 093316 5/4/2012 Project 12 -3 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials COUPLING RETURN -$5.56 Invoice 093320 5/4/2012 Project 12 -3 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $80.36 Refer 60 TRUE VALUE, MOUND (PW PKS) _ Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -210 Operating Supplies •Invoice 093386 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 093394 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 101- 45200 -220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 093441 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice 093567 5/11/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Refer 61 CARQUEST OF NAVARRE (P/IM _ Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -226 Sign Repair Materials Invoice 6974 - 180425 4/1912012 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply Invoice 6974 - 180585\ 4/23/2012 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply Invoice 6974 - 180775 4/25/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 43100 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 6974 - 180776 4/25/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice 6974 - 180863 4/27/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -43100 -210 Operating Supplies Invoice 6974 - 180863 4/27/2012 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply Invoice 6974 - 180995 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 601- 49400 -220 Repair /Maint Supply •Invoice 6974 - 181043 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 6974- 179053 3/28/2012 FOAM TAPE, FOAM SEALANT $23.48 FOAM TAPE $8.54 GFI OUTLET COVER AND UREA PLATE FOR $31.47 DEPOT CLEAR FILM TAPE SHOP $8.53 Project 12 -3 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $72.02 ADHESIVE CLEANER SIGN SHOP $15.07 PISTOL GREASE GUN $54.53 WELL #3 PARTS $1.81 STREET DEPT HYDRAULIC SPILL 25LB $38.96 DIATOMACEOUS CQ PROPANE CYLINDER SHOP $14.20 Project 12 -3 WELL #3 TANK HEATER $78.85 WELL #3 GENERATOR PARTS $66.93 VICTOLEX SHEET $8.09 CREDIT INVOICE -$8.91 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells F_1154- 10100 Total $269.53 MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 11 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Refer 57 MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSON, L _ Cash Payment E 101 - 49999 -430 Miscellaneous LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES APRIL 2012 $756.02 Invoice 052212 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 101- 49999 -430 Miscellaneous ARBITRATION & ADMINISTRATIVE $3,693.60 HEARINGS LABOR RELATIONS APRIL 2012 Invoice 052212 5/1/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,449.62 Refer 58 MINNESOTA CITY /COUNTY MANA _ Cash Payment E 101 - 41310 -433 Dues and Subscriptions ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL K. $132.87 HANSON Invoice 052212 5/16/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $132.87 Refer 59 OFFICE DEPOT (POLICE) _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -200 Office Supplies COPY PAPER, BLACK INK, LASER $154.17 CARTRIDGE FOR SQUAD ROOM Invoice 609365144001 Transaction Date 5/9/2012 PO 23867 5/16/2012 Refer 62 CARQUEST OF NAVARRE (P/M _ Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 6974 - 181116 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice 6974 - 181247 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 602 - 49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice 6974 - 181248 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 6974 - 181116 5/1/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -230 Shop Materials Invoice 6974 - 181299 513/2012 Cash Payment E 602- 49450 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 6974 - 181488 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -221 Equipment Parts Invoice 6974 - 181572 5/8/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $154.17 GENERATOR PARTS, OIL FILTERS, $54.78 CLAMPS, FUEL FILTERS, TIRE MACHINE FOR SHOP $15.98 Project 12 -3 SAFETY VALVE ASSEMBLY SHOP $15.04 Project 12 -3 AIR FILTER FOR'09 FORD F550 #109 $7.55 MINI REGULATOR TIRE MACHINE FOR SHOP $33.85 Project 12 -3 AIR FILTERS, OIL FILTERS, #195 VAC -CON $54.45 HYD FITTING FOR VAC -CON $2.08 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $183.73 Refer 63 BERENT, BRIAN _ Cash Payment E 222- 42260 -212 Motor Fuels REIMBURSE B. BERENT FOR FUEL FOR $11.15 POLARIS 6 X 6 RETURN FROM MUTUAL AID CALL TO LLFD Invoice 052212 5/7/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $11.15 Refer 64 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY _ Cash Payment E222-42260-210 Operating Supplies COFFEE, CREAMER, COCOA $115.00 Invoice 1016466 5/16/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $115.00 Refer 65 FILTRATION SYSTEMS, INCORPO _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -402 Building Maintenance REPAIR FILTRATION SYSTEM $122.90 Invoice 47049 5/2/2012 Cash Payment E 101 - 42110 -402 Building Maintenance REPAIR FILTRATION SYSTEM $122.91 Invoice 47049 5/2/2012 -1155- • r� MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 12 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $245.81 Refer 66 GRAINGER (IKM) _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -210 Operating Supplies ANGLE PLUG, CORD REEL 50 FT $612.73 Invoice 9823526653 5/9/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $612.73 Refer 67 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATIO _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -418 Other Rentals RADIO LEASE & ADMINISTRATION FEE $755.19 APRIL 2012 Invoice 120438033 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $755.19 Refer 68 HOME DEPOT CREDIT (FIRE) _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -210 Operating Supplies EMERGENCY LIGHTING KIT $44.64 Invoice W154094034 5/2/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $44.64 Refer 70 LOFFLER COMPANIES, INCORPOR _ Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -202 Duplicating and copying KONICA MINOLTA C652 MAIL ROOM COPIER $132.43 BLACK & WHITE COPIES OVERAGE 4 -13 THRU 5 -13 Invoice 1403631 5/14/2012 Cash Payment E 101 -41910 -202 Duplicating and copying KONICA MINOLTA C652 MAIL ROOM COPIER $48.14 • COLOR COPIES OVERAGE 4 -13 THRU 5 -13 Invoice 1403631 5/14/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $180.57 Refer 71 JUBILEE FOODS _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -431 Meeting Expense FIRE COMMISSION LUNCH 5 -16 -12 $74.18 Invoice 0095 5/15/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $74.18 Refer 72 LOUKA TACTICAL TRAINING _ Cash Payment E 101 -42110 -434 Conference & Training DEVELOPMENTAL MARKSMAN CLASS J. $175.00 SZCZEPANIK JUNE 7TH Invoice 052212 5/16/2012 PO 23868 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $175.00 Refer 73 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LA _ Cash Payment E 601 -49400 -470 Water Samples COLIFORM - WATER " MONTHLY CHLORINE $77.50 REPORT Invoice 603828 5/14/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $77.50 Refer 75 MYERS, TONY _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -331 Use of personal auto REIMBURSE T. MYERS MILEAGE & PARKING $36.64 FOR COURT TRIAL TESTIMONY @ HENN CTY GOVT CTR 5 -8 -12 Invoice 052212 5/16/2012 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -434 Conference & Training isInvoice 052212 5/16/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Refer 76 NAPA AUTO PARTS - SPRING REIMBURSE & MEALS T. MYERS MILEAGE $206.64 TO LIVE BURN TRAINING ST. CLOUD 5 -5 & 5- 6 -12 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $243.28 - -1156- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 13 Payments is Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -409 Other Equipment Repair CALIPER W /HARDWARE, BRAKE PADS '99 $155.85 FORD F250 TRUCK Invoice 804736 4/5/2012 REPAIR EMERGENCY BACKUP GENERATOR Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -409 Other Equipment Repair RETURN BRAKE CALIPER - $118.98 Invoice 805231 4/11/2012 • Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $36.87 Refer 77 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASS _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -208 Instructional Supplies STANDARD FOR PROFESSIONAL $39.10 Invoice 092713 4/14/2012 QUALIFICATIONS FOR FIRE INVESTIGATOR Transaction Date 5/17/2012 2009 EDITION $9.61 Invoice 5505372Y 4/28/2012 PO 23373 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $39.10 Refer 78 RICE, JASON _ ADJUST FIRE STATION GARAGE DOORS Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -401 Building Repairs REIMBURSE J. RICE PARTS PURCHASED $25.53 Transaction Date FROM INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS TO Wells Fargo 10100 Total $126.03 Refer 82 VIKING TROPHIES, AWARDS & RE _ REPAIR EMERGENCY BACKUP GENERATOR Cash Payment E 101 - 42110430 Miscellaneous @ PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG. $175.36 Invoice 052212 5/14/2012 Cash Payment E 101- 42110 -402 Building Maintenance REIMBURSE J. RICE PARTS PURCHASED $25.53 FROM INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS TO REPAIR EMERGENCY BACKUP GENERATOR @ PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG. Invoice 052212 5/14/2012 • Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $51.06 Refer 79 TRUE VALUE MOUND (FIRE) _ Cash Payment E 222 -42260 -210 Operating Supplies MED STORAGE CASE $9.61 Invoice 092713 4/14/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9.61 Refer 81 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR COMP _ Cash Payment E 222 - 42260 -402 Building Maintenance REWIND SPRINGS, LUBRICATE AND $126.03 ADJUST FIRE STATION GARAGE DOORS Invoice 368456 4/27/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $126.03 Refer 82 VIKING TROPHIES, AWARDS & RE _ Cash Payment E 101 - 42110430 Miscellaneous J. MCKINLEY RETIREMENT GIFT: CHERRY $175.36 SHADOW BOX, SUBLIMATED PLATE & MOUNTING OF BADGES, PATCHES, PINS Invoice 108035 5/8/2012 PO 23865 Cash Payment G 101 -22801 Deposits /Escrow EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD J. $250.00 MCKINLEY RETIREMENT GIFT: CHERRY SHADOW BOX, SUBLIMATED PLATE & MOUNTING OF BADGES, PATCHES, PINS Invoice 108035 5/8/2012 PO 23865 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $425.36 Refer 83 MOUND, CITY OF _ Cash Payment E 60949750 -382 Water Utilities WATER SERVICE 4 -3 -12 THRU 5 -1 -12 HWS $42.56 Invoice 052212 5/17/2012 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total - $42.56 Refer 84 UTILITIES REDUCTION SPECIALIS _ -1157- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 2:12 PM Page 14 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 602 -49450 -321 Telephone & Cells 50% OF PUBLIC WORKS PHONE LINE $221.23 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $2,444.40 REFUND - SAVINGS FROM REMOVAL OF TAX $53.70 Invoice 50 2/21/2012 Project 12 -3 $300.00 Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $221.23 Refer 86 FIRST STATE TIRE RECYCLING _ 367 G.O. 2004 - A Improvements • 368 G.O. 2005 - A Improvements Cash Payment E 670 - 49500 -460 Janitorial Services 05 -12 -12 CLEAN UP EVENT TIRE $512.00 $9.00 601 WATER FUND RECYCLING- DISPOSE OF 205 TIRES 602 SEWER FUND Invoice 82426 5/12/2012 $520.56 670 RECYCLING FUND Transaction Date 5/17/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $512.00 Fund Summary Pre - Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $54,142.20 Total $54,142.20 • -1158- 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $38,948.32 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $2,444.40 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND $53.70 351 2001 -C G.O. Improvement $7.50 361 G.O. 2007 - A Improvements $300.00 362 G.O. 2008 - B Improvements $208.50 363 G.O. 2009 - A Improvements $369.00 366 2003 -A G.O. Improvement $67.50 367 G.O. 2004 - A Improvements • 368 G.O. 2005 - A Improvements $178.50 $412.50 369 G.O. 2006 - A Improvements $270.00 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $9.00 601 WATER FUND $3,448.97 602 SEWER FUND $5,845.91 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $520.56 670 RECYCLING FUND $512.00 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $545.84 $54,142.20 Pre - Written Checks $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $54,142.20 Total $54,142.20 • -1158- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 9:59 AM Page 1 Payments Current Period: May 2012 WREMEM Batch Name 052212HWS User Dollar Amt $51,188.71 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $51,188.71 $0.00 In Balance Refer 1 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE WINE Invoice 72695100 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $210.30 Invoice 379213107 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $1.00 Invoice 379213107 5/10/2012 WINE Invoice 72695200 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $58.68 Invoice 379212406 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX CREDIT Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $1.00 Invoice 379212406 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $270.98 Refer 2 BELLBOY CORPORATION _ Cash Payment E609-49750-210 Operating Supplies BAGS, SACKS $175.30 Invoice 86706900 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $27.60 Invoice 86706900 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -255 Misc Merchandise For R MERCHANDISE SHAKER SET $46.00 Invoice 86706900 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $118.00 Invoice 73413300 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $1.55 Invoice 73413300 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,892.40 Invoice 73408200 5/4/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $24.80 Invoice 73408200 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,285.65 Refer 3 BELLBOY CORPORATION Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 72695100 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 72695400 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 72695400 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 72695200 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 72695000 4/30/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX CREDIT Invoice 86684400 4/30/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo Refer 4 BELLBOY CORPORATION _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 73496100 5/11/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT Invoice 73496100 5/11/2012 -1159- $270.00 $9.30 $288.00 $378.00 $270.00 - $35.75 10100 Total $1,179.55 • • $1,337.75 • $13.95 MOUND, MN 05/17/129:59 AM Page 2 • Payments Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $44.00 Invoice 86737900 5/11/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $6,247.65 Invoice 73424700 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $27.60 Invoice 86711900 5/7/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7,670.95 Refer 5 BERNICKS BEVERAGES AND VEN Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $124.80 Invoice 51684 5/9/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $660.20 Invoice 51685 5/9/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $376.00 Invoice 13208 5/12/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,161.00 Refer 6 COCA COLA BOTTLING- MIDWEST Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa COCA COLA PRODUCTS MIX $188.96 Invoice 0118054216 5/10/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $188.96 Refer 7 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $343.00 Invoice 1018986 5/7/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $45.00 Invoice 4089 5/4/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $388.00 Refer 8 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $3,092.35 Invoice 649980 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $72.80 Invoice 649981 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $225.90 Invoice 650348 5/11/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,714.00 Invoice 650970 5/15/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,105.05 Refer 9 JJ TAYLOR. DISTRIBUTING MINN Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,421.70 Invoice 1767102 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609- 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER CREDIT -$6.10 Invoice 1756962 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $25.50 Invoice 1767103 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $80.00 1767093 5/4/2012 •Invoice Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2,521.10 Refer 10 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR -1160- MOUND, MN 05/17/12 9:59 AM Page 4 Payments • Current Period: May 2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,786.00 Invoice 689760 5/11/2012 • Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $98.50 Invoice 688436 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,740.05 Invoice 690013 5/15/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $78.50 Invoice 690012 5115/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $38.00 Invoice 690012 5/15/2012 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 60949750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $930.00 Invoice 00772943 5/11/2012 Invoice 0056171 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9,926.50 Refer 17 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS, INC. - $7.50 Invoice 0056171 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -210 Operating Supplies REGISTER PAPER ROLLS, PRINTER $117.66 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 RIBBONS Refer 19 Invoice 27802 5/10/2012 Cash Payment Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $117.66 Refer 18 VINOCOPIA, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $321.29 Invoice 0056352 5/8/2012 • Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $10.00 Invoice 0056352 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $144.00 Invoice 0056352 5/8/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $115.25 Invoice 0056537 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $2.50 Invoice 0056537 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $496.00 Invoice 0056171 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $7.50 Invoice 0056171 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,096.54 Refer 19 WINE COMPANY _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $704.00 Invoice 299154 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $11.55 Invoice 299154 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $452.00 Invoice 298597 5/3/2012 Cash Payment E 60949750 -265 Freight FREIGHT $8.25 Invoice 298597 5/3/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,175.80 Refer 20 WINE CONNECT _ • Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -340 Advertising MAY 2012 HWS WEBSITE $95.12 Invoice 969 5/1/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells F: -1161- 10100 Total $95.12 • MOUND, MN 05/17/129:59 AM Page 5 Payments Current Period: May 2012 Refer 21 WINE MERCHANTS _ Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $534.50 Invoice 408470 5/9/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $534.50 Refer 22 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MN BEER _ Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,926.05 Invoice 895923 5/9/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -254 Soft Drinks /Mix For Resa MIX $78.00 Invoice 895924 5/9/2012 Cash Payment E 609 - 49750 -252 Beer For Resale BEER $4,619.00 Invoice 897894 5/14/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $7,623.05 Refer 23 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MN WINE SP/RI Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -253 Wine For Resale WINE $511.55 Invoice 743248 5/10/2012 Cash Payment E 609 -49750 -251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,247.86 Invoice 743247 5/10/2012 Transaction Date 5/16/2012 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,759.41 Fund Summary • 10100 Wells Fargo 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $51,188.71 $51,188.71 Pre - Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Computer $51,188.71 Total $51,188.71 • -1162- MEMORANDUM May 16, 2012 To: City Mayor and City Council From: Catherine Pausche, Finance Director Re: Electric and Gas Franchise Fee Ordinance Amendments To extend the period of the Sunset Clause The City Council approved two ordinances in 2003 establishing a $2.00 per meter franchise fee for electric and gas utility customers. The electric and gas franchise fees are currently $2.75 per meter per month. The approved /amended ordinances now contain the following language: Sunset Clause - This Ordinance shall automatically sunset on December 31, 2012, unless the City Council acts to renew or extend the fee at least six (6) months prior to the sunset date. The City Council may unilaterally renew or extend the fee on the same terms and conditions. Without waiver of any rights under Minnesota law, the City Council shall seek agreement from Company if the City intends to change the fee rate or fee design. • Although there has been some support from council members to eliminate franchise fees, both the natural gas and electric franchise fees have become a steady source of revenue, including when Local 40 Government Aid was eliminated for Mound, and during the most recent period of levy limits and the unallotment of the Market Value Homestead Credit. Since implementing the franchise fees in 2003, budgeted and actual revenues have been as follows: Staff recommends the approval of the attached ordinances to extend the sunset dates until December 31, 2013, recognizing the fees cannot be totally eliminated at this time. The amount of the fees for 2013 will be discussed and can be amended during the 2013 budget discussions that will take place in September. • Please feel free to contact me with any questions. -1163- Per Xcel Center Point Meter Budget Actual Budget Actual 2004 $2.00 95,000 107,578 95,000 89,435 2005 $2.00 100,000 108,996 90,000 89,820 2006 $2.00 105,000 107,838 90,000 91,157 2007 $2.00 110,000 111,307 90,000 91,128 2008 $2.00 108,000 109,193 90,000 91,401 2009 $2.00 108,000 109,085 90,000 90,697 2010 $3.00 162,000 160,423 135,000 136,155 2011 $2.75 147,000 152,828 125,000 125,781 2012 $2.75 147,000 ? 125,000 ? Staff recommends the approval of the attached ordinances to extend the sunset dates until December 31, 2013, recognizing the fees cannot be totally eliminated at this time. The amount of the fees for 2013 will be discussed and can be amended during the 2013 budget discussions that will take place in September. • Please feel free to contact me with any questions. -1163- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. -2012 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 08-2003 IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER D /B /A EXCEL ENERGY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND The City of Mound does ordain: That Section 1, Subd. 8 of Ordinance No. 08 -2003, be amended as follows: Subd. 8. Sunset Clause. This Ordinance shall automatically sunset on Dennmher 31 2912, December 31, 2013 unless the City Council acts to renew or extend the fee at least six (6) months prior to the sunset date. The City Council may unilaterally renew or extend the fee on the same terms and conditions. Without waiver of any rights under Minnesota law, the City Council shall seek agreement from Company if the City intends to change the fee rate or fee design. Passed by the City Council this 22nd day of May, 2012. • Mayor Mark Hanus Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Published in The Laker on the 2nd day of June, 2012. Effective on the 3`d day of June, 2012. C, -1164- CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. _ -2012 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 05-2003 IMPLEMENTING A GAS FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO FOR PROVIDING GAS SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND The City of Mound does ordain: That Ordinance No. 05 -2003, Section 1, Subd. 8, be amended as follows: Subd. 8. Sunset Clause. This Ordinance shall automatically sunset on Der.embeF 31, 2012 December 31, 2013, unless the City Council acts to renew or extend the fee at least six (6) months prior to the sunset date. The City Council may unilaterally renew or extend the fee on the same terms and conditions. Without waiver of any rights under Minnesota law, the City Council shall seek agreement from Company if the City intends to change the fee rate or fee design. Passed by the City Council this 22 t day of May, 2012. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Mark Hanus • Published in The Laker on the 2nd day of June, 2012. Effective on the 3`d day of June, 2012. • -1165- Consulting Engineers & Surveyors • 2638 Shadow Lane, Suite 200 - Chaska, MN 55318 -1172 Phone (952) 448 -8838 • Fax (952) 448 -8805 www.bolton- menk.com May 17, 2012 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: 2011 Lift Station Improvements City Project No. PW -11 -03 Pay Request No. 5 Dear Ms. Hanson: • Please find enclosed Pay Request No. 5 from Minger Construction, Inc. for work completed on the 2011 Lift Station Improvement Project from April 28, 2012 through May 11, 2012. We have reviewed the contractor's request, verified quantities and recommend payment in the amount of $18,236.92 to Minger Construction, Inc. Sincerely, BOLTON & MENK, INC. Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E. Mound City Engineer DLFldlp cc: Carlton Moore, Director of Public Works Catherine Pausche, Director of Finance • FAMOUN\021031141Pay RequestsUr of Reedn Pay Request 5, 5,17,12.doc DESIGNING FOR A SETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer -1166- DATE: 5/14/2012 CONTRACTOR'S PAY REQUEST NO. 5 CONTRACTOR Minger Construction, Inc, 2011 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS OWNER City of Mound CITY PROJECT NO. 11.03 ENGINEER Bolton & Monk, Inc. • BMI PROJECT NO. C12.103114 FOR WORK COMPLETED FROM 4MM012 THROUGH 5111/2012 TOTAL AMOUNT BID ...................... ...... ....., .. .....I... ......... .........I $ 213,096.50 APPROVED ALTERNATE BID .. .............. .............. .................. ......... $ CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT....... .............................................. ............. $ TOTAL, COMPLETED WORK TO DATE ... ............:...., . ..»........, ............................... .................- .........,..,. $ TOTAL, STORED MATERIALS TO DATE,....... ........ ........ ............................. ............... .. ................... $ DEDUCTION FOR STORED MATERIALS USED IN WORK COMPLETED...... ........................ ...... ... ............... $ TOTAL, COMPLETED WORK & STORED MATERIALS, ............................................... ......... ........... .. $ RETAINED PERCENTAGE ( 5% ) - ............ ........., ......... ............... $ TOTAL AMOUNT OF OTHER DEDUCTIONS .................................. ............... .. ......... ........ . NET AMOUNT DUE TO CONTRACTOR TO DATE............................... ......... I ...... I ........ .•.. $ TOTAL AMOUNT PAID ON PREVIOUS ESTIMATES ......... ................................ .... ......... ............... $ PAY CONTRACTOR AS ESTIMATE NO. 5......... .................. - l—I..............•.......... 1,390.DO 214,386.50 204,680.46 204;6W.46 10,234.02 184,446.44 176,209.52 ...............• $ 18,236.92 Certificate for Payment I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, all items quantities and prices • of work and material shown on this Estimate are correct and that all work has been performed in full accordance with the terms and conditions of the Contract for this project between the Owner and the undersigned Contractor, and as amended by any authorized changes, and that the foregoing is a true and correct statement of the amount for the Final Estimate, that the provisions of M. S. 290.92 have been compiled with and that all claims against me by reason of the Contract have been paid or satisfactorily secured. Contractor. Minger Construction, Inc. PO Box 236 2471 Galpin Court, Suite 110 Chanhassen,,W 5 17 By Name Title Date'. CHECKED AND APPROVED AS TO QUANTITIES AND AMOUNT: BOLTON & MEW, =38 SHADOW LN, SUITE 200, CHASKA MN 5.5318 By 1Ld:�GLrl�L� , PROJECT ENGINEER Daniel L. Faulkner Date 111 7 �f APPROVED FOR PAYMENT. Owner: CITY OF MOUND By •Nettle Tills Date -1167- f AAL") • 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MN 55364 -1687 PH: (952) 472 -0600 FAX: (952) 472 -0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com DATE: May 17, 2012 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bonnie Ritter SUBJECT: Liquor License Renewals The following liquor licenses renewals have been received for approval. License year is July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013. Please consider approval contingent upon receipt of all required forms, fees and certificates of insurance. Thank -you. On -Sale Liquor ($5,000 /yr fee) Al & Alma's Supper Club Corp. Willette Companies, LLC (dba Carbone's Pizzeria Bar & Grill) • Sunday On -Sale Liquor ($200 /yr fee) Al & Alma's Super Club Corp. Willette Companies, LLC (dba Carbone's Pizzeria Bar & Grill) American Legion Post 398 Club On -Sale Liquor ($500 /yr fee) American Legion Post 398 Off -Sale 3.2 Malt Beverages ($150 /yr fee) PDQ Food Stores, Inc. Northern Tier Retail, LLC (dba SuperAmerica #4194) • -1168- ® printed on recycled paper NAME OF I ADDRESS Minnesota Department of Public Safety ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT DIVISION • 444 Cedar Street Suite 222, St. Paul MN 55101 -5133 (651) 201 -7507 Fax (6S1) 297 -5259 TTY. (651) 282 -6555 W W W.DPS.STATE.MN.US APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A 1 TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TION 6/dv-DATE ORGANIZED TAX EXEMPT NUMBER >1i ✓Q/� C 23 oZo 7 B -lx 7S c CITY STATE ZIP CODE j (A« v a /% 1 5536V NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION BUSINESS PHONE HOME PHONE (9p) - DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD �U y yt a 01 TYPE OF ORGANIZATION ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME ADDRESS nRr.AAII7 CA f-; r-'.R La-1-TO ki Location license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe zw1AfC4 1,V od�i1///du., a "/"'/ W a /L%O CI,4.*e 6Q y fall, �d[/ Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor service? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. Will the applicant carry liquor habili t�suran�e? If so, please proAde the carrier's name and amount of coverage.. /t'l� ✓1 r7 PSy � l�Sf U i c��y Pct ea CA. rX APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY/ ��y p /yy u DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT lep Ala LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED DIRECTOR ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT I NOTE. Submit this form to the city or county 30 days prior to event. Forward application signed by city and /or county to the address above. If the application Is approved the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division will return this application to be used as the License for the event PS-09079 (12109) • -1169- U C, • tttal► Minnesota Department of Public Safety ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT DIVISION 444 Cedar Street Suite 222, St. Paul MN 55101 -5133 (651) 201 -7507 Fax (651) 297 -5259 TTY (651) 282 -6555 W W W.DPS.STATE.MN.US APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A 1 TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TYPE OR PRINT INRORMATION .;,��1►;:;:• ter; >��: NAME OF / 1 �1- XTip �l N� D DATE ORGANIZED TAX EXEMPT NUMBER �3�0 7 3 S ET ADDRESS � STATE ZIP CODE 55',x,6 </ NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION B BUSINESS PHONE HOME PHONE DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD ?u� �0 aV ► a dale T TYPE OF ORGANIZATION ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME A ADDRESS ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME A ADDRESS C-�l re's i'.P LQ�10 �-► ( (pO,�_/ e�rt 7/7'c. 4-fu 04(> /0W //0 �- �i�/�� ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME A ADDRESS Location license will be used. if an outdoor arcs, describe Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor service? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. & r Gt/ /',t u a:±V S� r: S X2/3 S C<� f►,rn��C� l vd0 ,�'1y c�.. Ss'T 6 �/ WIII the a ,pplicant liquor liabilt l uranfj�? If so, please prov'de the carrier' name and amount of coverage � 9n�' 7 7`7 � APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY / ' L /Y y 0-r DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT l e.,R44 l -/- lVa ry e,- LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED DRECTOR ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT NOTE: R-6...1e Obi. r . -..- .1L -S' -- c •• "'a c.ly Or county av days pnor to event. Forward application signed by city and/or county to the address above. If the application is approved the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division will reniro this application to be used as the License for the event -1170- PS -09079 (11/09) CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 PARADE PERMIT ie?tlej,/ bda ✓ee- o� �e �� a�►Y� NO LIQUOR OR BEER MAY BE USED IN ANY OF THE CITY PARKS, BUILDINGS OR STREETS. Group is to remove all litter and trash and provide a deposit to insure cleaning up of the parade mute. Date of Parade ja,1u.Wa V Ju /y v21 c2 U1 o2 Area to be Us (Streets to be used as Parade��r9qute, Parade Line -up Area, etc. — include map if a propraite) a rack 11;1e S u Vl 4v o aq1 R,,� c7,,404 / ' A 4ra� e 10S a� ice' hlaA 10 "1' Pa n�� v,� l�✓�m��c� G1,z �ua/i �I .Poo�O o.��il,e �rP, Time Frame 10 — 11.3pal" Expected Attendance Organization Representative's Name -(oh H 6e l -a ... Address A) V 72/Q/� &4:/ /'/04�� 1W 6-5-56 V Telephone No. Home: Work: Drivers License Number IV E1411:249 41V 7//:3 -1171- Spirit of the Lakes 2012 19f1V1f .. www.SpiritoftheLakes.com Festival Contact Information: 952.334.6551 infodilspiritofthelakes.com Proud to be the Official Celebration of the City of Mound 100 Year Anniversary! May 2, 2012 Carolyn M. Fackler Permit Engineer Hennepin County Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340 -5421 RE: Spirit of the Lakes Festival Dear Ms. Fackler: This letter is my request for a permit to temporarily close the following roadway for the parade • for the Spirit of the Lakes Festival. The parade is to be held on Saturday, July 21, 2012. This closure will occur. from 9:30am to 12:00pm. CSAH 110 between Highland Boulevard and Auditors Road Please note that in this small stretch of roadway, CSAH 110 is also:.: referred .to. as both Bartlett Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. Traffic control and signing shall be the responsibility of the City of Mound Police, Park and Public Works Department. Thank you in advance. If you have any questions or suggestions, pleasefeel free to reach me at 952- 250 -4828. Sincerely, Kristin Beise Board Member Spirit of the Lakes Festival • rWW.5pW*Vft%dAkU.CM 5341 Maywood Road City ot Tound Mound, MN 55364 • Planning and Buddh� Department (952) 472 -0604 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith Date: 5/17/2012 Re: May 22, 2012 City Council Consent Agenda Item — 2012 Spirit of the Lakes Temporary Sign permit SUMMARY John Collotti of Mound Harbor Wine & Spirits, on behalf of the 2012 Spirit of the Lakes Committee, is requesting approval of a temporary sign permit(s) to allow placement of temporary signage associated with the 2012 Spirit of the Lakes Festival being held in July. In summary, the following signs were requested on the application. Banners — locations on public and private property per attached map (with owner permission) for a period exceeding the 15 day allowance (June 13 to July 23) • Portable or electronic sign boards on public property for a period exceeding 10 day allowance (July 13 to July 23) Two "over the road" banners Details regarding the request are contained in the attached permit application and proposed location map. Additionally, following receipt of the permit application, an additional request was made by City Manager Kandis Hanson, on behalf of a student group assisting with the festival, to allow the use of special event signs for a period beyond the standard five (5) day allowance (June 13 — July 23). Waiver of the temporary permit application fee is also being requested. SIGN REGULATIONS 1. Pennant / Banner. City Code Section 119-4 (i) (3) allows temporary banners and pennants employed for special events as long as they are removed within (15) days unless an alternate schedule is approved by the City Council. 2. Portable Signs. City Code Section 119 allows for the placement of portable signs and is eligible for administrative approval in most instances subject to conditions, including a 10 -day allowance. Portable sign placement on public property requires approval by the City Council. Special Event Yard Signs. City Code Section 119 -(i) (6) allows the placement of special event signs subject to the provisions in the City Code which regulates garage sale signs. A permit is not • required. -1173- • C7 RECOMMENDATION. City staff recommends that the City Council approve the temporary sign permit for the 2012 Spirit of the lakes Festival as requested, to include extended time periods for banners, electronic or portable signs, over the road banners and special event signs and also grants permission for sign placement on public property subject to the following conditions: 1. As applicable, the applicant shall work with Staff to evaluate all proposed sign locations. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining permission from the current property owner for sign placement on private property. 2. Submittal of a temporary permit application and waiver of the involved fee. 3. The City shall reserve the right to regulate hours of operation for any illuminated sign so as to prevent the creation of a nuisance, if applicable. 4. The applicants obtain permission from all private property owners prior to placement. 5. All signage is removed immediately following the event. 6. No signs can be placed within any County Road right -of -way unless approval is granted by Hennepin County. 7. No sign shall be placed in the sight triangle or obstruct vehicle or pedestrian traffic. Sign placement shall be subject to field modification by Mound Staff, if needed. • Page 2 SIM11 _ ctr+r � Mourm 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952 - 472 -0600 Fax 952 -472 -0620 SEASONAL, BANNER, & PORTABLE SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION SITE Property Address one Business Name Name S2 ;,-i4" Olt � ea,& 4C Phone Email i-aA (0SX;i, APPLICANT Phone C/5.) ASS/ Fax Other llui 1- �/'b7li' OWNER Name Phone Fax Other SIGN /� / , Company Name A7 f�'- l CONTRACTOR Address a 1.3 5✓h�vrP��v /Z�. / � , Oc L Contact Pearson Jah ✓+ v { Email.] o �n ev 101; evc ;4y )t-Mou. -d, Phone Fax Other oce ULy %,ode Gnapier iia-4 ❑ Seasonal Sign $25 - Dates from to Size feet x feet = sf Message • RE vylk7 Seasonal Signs - Seasonal signs of a temporary or portable nature may be used in the non - residential districts to • promote or advertise on- premise seasonal services or merchandise. Such signs shall be limited to a maximum of thirty -two (32) square feet and shall not be left in place for more than a two (2) month period. Permits and fees R'q;149 � l' shall be required for all seasonal signs, and permits may be issued no more than two (2) times per calendar year per business. �& Banner /Pennant $25 - Dates from 6113 to 7/23 Describe event f5o f / Ju/ Sign locations (list or attach map) _W- eWo %t/; /S ir?, shrimp / „ moo a / (,/ Z &c o✓�q/r /u- /�/vr Go✓r,.� -� ��c o �/���'h�✓rV '1 �1�.� / ,� /L o qV Temporary banners and pennants employed for grand openings or business establishments, special events or promotions and holidays are not exempt from permits and fees and shall be removed within fifteen (15) days upon permit issuance unless an alternate schedule is approved by the City Council. Temporary banners and pennants are prohibited from being placed upon any decorative fencing unless the banner or pennant is used in conjunction with a government, a quasi - public function, or similar - related special event. Permits for banners and Q ap • �� pennants can be issued no more than four (4) times per calendar year. Portable Sign (no fee) - Dates from / 3 to 7 3 Number of signs - 3 Sign locations (list or attach map) Lyca �e4 1�a u 15eG�C1 16Za/ 14. 171-- ` 2K74oj`v a,14 f a// 50 }• ” La 4,(1?a4 Jti /y Describe sign (message, materials, etc.) - o a, P✓� �r�� o. 1 sa y 7G 191-vr0 oP'1e QvP;ir f Z 0 '0 d':�2 5 1175- • Portable Signs used for the purpose of directing the public may be permitted under the following conditions: (a) Said sign is coincidental to, or used in conjunction with, a governmental unit or quasi - public function; • and (b) The period of use of said sign shall not exceed ten (10) consecutive days; and (c) Signs shall not be used more than four (4) times during a calendar year; and (d) Signs shall be placed on the premises of the advertised event and /or on such other premises following approval of a temporary sign permit by the City of Mound. Administrative approval of a portable sign permit is permitted if the following conditions are met: 1. The sign is not being placed on public property. 2. Written permission from the property owner of record is provided if being located off - premises. 3. The criteria reference in subsections (a), (b), and (c) above are met. 4. The proposed location of the sign is reviewed and deemed acceptable by Mound Staff, which shall include the Police, Planning, and Engineering Departments, based on the following criteria: • The sign is not being placed in the road right -of -way. • The sign does not obstruct the sight triangle for pedestrian or vehicular traffic. • Placement of the sign does not create any potential traffic or other related hazard; and (e) Portable sign placement on public property requires City Council approval; and (f) Such signs shall require the issuance of a permit but will be exempt from all fees; and (g) In the instance of a multi -use facility, only one seasonal sign may be placed on the premises at any one time. Applicants are advised that incomplete applications or insufficient information can delay the processing of the permit request or may result in the application being rejected. Please fully complete all involved sections of the application and provide as much detail as possible, including, but not limited to, the proposed locations of signs, using addresses or landmarks, and written permission from the property owner for off -site locations. C7 DATE C� (OFFICE USE ONLY) SPECIAL CONDITIONS & COMMENTS: RECEIVED BY & DATE PLANS CHECKED BY APPROVED BY & DATE COPIED APPROVED ZONING -1176- ' � F 4 "4' e CL'fro d 4 x° �s3 � ........ ..... ._._.....,_..,.. .�e. .,... .. .;,. ..., ... .._ ....��...._ ,..,.,. _...,... „„_a_ -477- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 0 Executive Summary TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: May 16, 2012 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit Application — upper deck construction /lower deck replacement ADDRESS: 2650 Lakewood Lane APPLICANT /APPLICANT: Randy and Amy Grunow PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 12 -13 (Note: revised 511512012 to correct PC Case Number) ZONING: R -1 REQUEST At its May 14, 2012 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed an expansion permit application from Randy and Amy Grunow to allow an exterior remodel /addition project which includes replacement of the existing lower level deck and steps and construction of a new 5'x 20' upper deck on the lakeside of the house. The existing lower deck has a nonconforming setback on the lakeside of 36.2 FT. The code requires a minimum setback of 50 feet from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark. • PROJECT BACKGROUND Details regarding the project are contained in Planning Report 12 -13 and the application materials that were submitted for the proposed project have been included as attachments. PLANNING COMMISISON REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend Council approval of the requested Expansion Permit application as recommended by Staff, subject to conditions. A draft resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included. The 5/14 Planning Commission meeting minutes (draft) have also been included. -1178- RESOLUTION # 12- RESOLUTION APPROVING EXPANSION PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2650 LAKEWOOD LANE P &ZCASE WHEREAS, the applicants, Randy and Amy Grunow, submitted a request for an expansion permit to allow an exterior remodel /addition project which includes replacement of the existing lower level deck and steps and construction of a new 5'x 20' upper deck on the lakeside of the house. The existing lower deck has a nonconforming setback on the lakeside of 36.2 FT. The code requires a minimum setback of 50 feet from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark; and WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned R -1; and WHEREAS, the subject property fronts Lakewood Lane on the north side and Lake Minnetonka on the south side and includes a single family house, which includes a lakeside deck proposed to be replaced in the same location. The existing steps located on the south and east sides are also being replaced but redesigned as a wrap around • step system. In addition, the proposed upper level deck, for the master bedroom, which is being constructed over a portion of the existing lower deck portion of the house, is also requested, but does not extend beyond the existing nonconforming setback condition on the lakeside; and WHEREAS, in City Code Section 129 -2, an expansion permit is defined as follows: Expansion permit means a permit which is granted by the City Council for the expansion or enlargement of a nonconforming structure in accordance with Section 129 -40. ; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 129 -40 (a) outlines the criteria for granting expansion permits and are described as follows: Sec. 129 -40. Expansion Permit. (a) Criteria. An expansion permit for a nonconforming structure may be issued, but is not mandated, to provide relief to the landowner where this chapter imposes practical difficulties to the property owner in the reasonable use of the land. In determining whether practical difficulties exist, the applicant must satisfy the City Council that the following criteria exist: • -1179- (1) the proposed expansion is a reasonable use of the property considering: • a. function and aesthetics of the expansion. b. absence of adverse off -site impacts such as from traffic, noise, odors and dust. c. adequacy of off - street parking. (2) exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion are unique to the property and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have had no control. (3) the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (4) the expansion would not adversely affect or alter the essential character of the neighborhood. (5) the expansion requested is the minimum needed. and; WHEREAS, details regarding the application are contained in Executive Summary No. 12 -13, Planning Report No. 13, the submitted application and supporting materials that were submitted by the applicant; and WHEREAS, Staff recommended approval of the expansion permit subject to conditions; and • WHEREAS, the expansion permit was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its May 14, 2012 meeting and recommended Council approval as recommended by Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the expansion permit to allow the exterior remodel /addition project as requested subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. 2. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit application is approved. 3. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 4. An expansion permit granted will automatically expire and be of no further force and effect if no building permit has been issued within one year of the date of approval of the expansion permit unless an extension is approved pursuant to the regulations contained in City Code Section 129.40 which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 5. 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 prior to building permit issuance. -1180- 6. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for • recording until all conditions have been met. 7. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided. 8. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees associated with the land use application have been paid unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. 9. All new construction must meet the code in all regards with the exception of the requested expansion permit approval. 10. No materials shall be stockpiled in the 50 -FT lakeshore setback or 100 -year floodplain area(s). In recommending approval of the requested Expansion Permit, Staff offers the following findings of fact: 1. The requested upper deck is being constructed over a portion of the existing footprint of the existing deck. The lower level deck is being constructed in the same location. 2. Conditions of City Code Section 129 -40 (a) are being met. • The expansion permit is hereby approved for the following legally described property: (to be inserted) Adopted by the City Council this 22nd day of May 2012. Attest: City Clerk Mark Hanus, Mayor -1181- U • MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 14, 2012 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, Douglas Gawtry, David Goode, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Pete Wiechert, and Councilmember Ray Salazar. Absent: Kelvin Retterath. Staff present: Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander, Planning Consultant Rita Trapp from HKGi. Others present: Eric Beazley (Minnetrista), Bob Boese (Mound), Jackie Piepkorn (Mound), Brian Pellowski (Minnetonka), Randy & Amy Grunow (Mound), Amy Nelson (Corcoran), Dean Trongard (Independence), Bruce Soden (Mound), Dan DeNasku (Mound), Chase Miller (Mound), Scott Logeln (Waconia) BOARD OF APPEALS Case No. 12 -13 Expansion Permit for Upper Deck Construction Location: 2650 Lakewood Lane Applicant: Amy and Randy Grunow • Trapp introduced the application. The applicants are requesting to allow an exterior remodel /addition project that includes replacement of the existing lower level deck and steps and construction of a new upper deck. The existing lower deck has a nonconforming setback on the lakeside. The expansion permit requirements were discussed. r� David Paquette, applicant's builder, 3730 Shady Oak Road — Desire is for a small "sitting deck" off the second floor. The lower deck's surface is the primary replacement as the structure remains sound. MOTION by Ward, second by Gawtry, to recommend approval of the expansion permit with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. -1182- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 PLANNING REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: May 9, 2012 SUBJECT: Expansion Permit Application — upper deck construction /lower deck replacement ADDRESS: 2650 Lakewood Lane APPLICANT /APPLICANT: Randy and Amy Grunow PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 12 -13 (Note: revised 511512012 to correct PC Case Number) ZONING: R -1 REQUEST The Planning Commission will review an expansion permit application from Randy and Amy Grunow to allow an exterior remodel /addition project which includes replacement of the existing lower level deck and steps and construction of a new 5' x 20' upper deck on the lakeside of the house. The existing lower deck has a nonconforming setback on the lakeside of 36.2 FT. The code requires a minimum setback of 50 feet from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark. SITE CONDITIONS • The subject property fronts Lakewood Lane on the north side and Lake Minnetonka on the south side and includes a single family house, which includes a lakeside deck proposed to be replaced in the same location. The existing steps located on the south and east sides are also being replaced but redesigned as a wraparound step system. In addition, the proposed upper level deck, for the master bedroom, which is being constructed over a portion of the existing lower deck portion of the house, is also requested, but does not extend beyond the existing nonconforming setback condition on the lakeside. REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 129.40 outlines the criteria for granting expansion permits in the City of Mound. As the Planning Commission may recall, these are new provisions which were adopted and went into effect in October 2010. Per City Code Section 129.2, an expansion permit is defined as follows: Expansion permit means a permit which is granted by the City Council for the expansion or enlargement of a nonconforming structure in accordance with Section 129 -40. 60 -DAY PROCESS 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 is executed in accordance the state regulations. The expansion permit application was submitted on April 3, 2012 and deemed to be complete for review. • -1183- • NOTIFICATION City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified by mailed notice. Planning Commission members are advised that this activity was completed on May 10, 2012. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Copies of the application were forwarded to all City departments for review. All written comments which were received are summarized below: City Engineer Dan Faulkner As long as no new hardcover is being added, I have no comment. City Attorney John Dean Assume the deck is nonconforming and that that hardcover is not affected by the addition of the upper floor deck. HKGi Consultant Planner Trapp Suggest applicant clarify the hardcover calculation information as well as confirm whether the deck and steps count towards hardcover. Public Works Supervisor Hanson No comment. Building Official Scott Qualle No comment at this time. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS • A copy of the application and related materials was forwarded to the involved agencies for review including the MnDNR and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. • DISCUSSION The submitted site and building plans also depict an existing lakeside deck to be reconstructed in its current location with a modified step system to be constructed on the south and east sides. The existing deck is nonconforming because it does not meet the required 50 -FT lakeshore setback from the OHWM. Under statute and the code, in all likelihood, this project could have been done with a with a building permit. However, as part of the project a new upper deck (5'x 20') is proposed to be constructed over a portion of the existing lower deck therefore an expansion permit is required. 2. A full copy of Ordinance No. 06 -2010, which includes the zoning amendments adopted in October 2010 related to variances /nonconformities /expansions, is on file with the City and will be provided upon request. A copy of City Code Section 129 -40 (a) which includes the Expansion Permit description and criteria has been included. The existing site is over the 40 percent hardcover allowance by 68 SF. The applicant's contractor has confirmed that both the decks /steps will not count towards hardcover as they have the required % inch separation. Therefore, hardcover is not affected by the project. -1184- 4. The code allows steps a 2 foot setback from all property lines. Staff's review is that the proposed • wraps around steps qualify for the 2 -foot setback. 5. The upper floor deck will be constructed to be accessed from the master bedroom. The plans show that the existing patio doors will access the new deck. 6. Effective September 1, 2011, new Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules related to wetlands, floodplain, erosion control are in effect; also others. These rules are now under the jurisdiction of the MCWD as rules regulatory authority and permitting was officially turned back to the District by the Mound City Council on August 23, 2011. Applicant was advised to contact the MCWD related to the new regulations and applicable permits that may be needed to undertake the proposed remodel /addition project. Future building permit release will be conditioned upon the applicant providing receipt of the MCWD permit(s) issuance, as applicable, and or receipt of written confirmation from the MCWD that no permit(s) is needed for the project. Members are advised that MCWD Regulatory Program Manager Steve Christopher reviewed the materials and indicated that the project does not trigger MCWD rules. RECOMMENDATION. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approve an expansion permit for construction of an addition at 2650 Lakewood Lane subject to the following list of minimum conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. • 2. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the expansion permit application is approved. 3. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 4. An expansion permit granted will automatically expire and be of no further force and effect if no building permit has been issued within one year of the date of approval of the expansion permit unless an extension is approved pursuant to the regulations contained in City Code Section 129.40 which shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 5. 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 prior to building permit issuance. 6. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. 7. No building permit will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided. r � IL_J -1185- • 8. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees associated with the land use application have been paid unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. • C -I 9. All new construction must meet the code in all regards with the exception of the requested expansion permit approval. 10. No materials shall be stockpiled in the 50 -FT lakeshore setback or 100 -year floodplain area(s). In recommending approval of the requested Expansion Permit, Staff offers the following findings of fact: 1. The requested upper deck is being constructed over a portion of the existing footprint of the existing deck. The lower level deck is being constructed in the same location. 2. Conditions of City Code Section 129 -40 (a) are being met. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW In the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission at its May 14, 2012 meeting, it is anticipated that the application will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at either its May 23, 2012 or June 12, 2012 meeting. -1186- J r EXPANSION PERMIT �' °FMOU APPLICATION 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 C°® Phone 952 -472 -0600 FAX 952- 472-0620 Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of applicat%; a. Case No. /Z —43 Plpace tvne or mint leaibiv 1. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No `Kl. if yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 0 I 2. Detailed desdrription of proposed construction or alts I 1 nC- I M o:i\A_, l e c c G 5 Expansion Permit Information (6127/2011) Page 4 of 6 -1187- (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): • 0 n L0� w9a nA )na-ap -&wkk�hO-'M61 SUBJECT Address PROPERTY LEGAL Lot Block DESC. Subdivision PID # d l v 117— 1 _ — % { ' jQ0 I I-- Ong. R1 R1A R2 R3 B1 B2 B3 (Circle one) PROPERTY Name Email h, M-' /✓,r � Q ms&' �2M OWNER 55 3LtL 1 ' AyplAddress tL�4 �,Y -CAl Phone Homeg5j X39 " 05d 9 Work& -�5iQ- 493e0 Fax u N►-- Name Cb a Email , IZ C-6 Vy"CAS4, Al (IF OTHER �.. q 7' THAN Address3 OWNER) phone Home `%7 D 3 `{ work `%33 - ?30 Fax FSV -IQ2 `' ^.3433 1. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No `Kl. if yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 0 I 2. Detailed desdrription of proposed construction or alts I 1 nC- I M o:i\A_, l e c c G 5 Expansion Permit Information (6127/2011) Page 4 of 6 -1187- (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): • 0 Case No. •3. Please complete the following information related to the properly and building's conformity with thn zoning regulations for the district in which it is located including the expansion permit request. P I IF I , SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED EXPANSION (or existing) Front Yard: ( ®S E W) ft. 72 ft. ft. Side Yard: ( N SQF W) ft. 512- ft. ft. Side Yard: (N S E ) ft. % 5' "- ft. ft. (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Lakeside: ( N(PEW) ft. y2. 7 ft. ft. (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. _5O ft. ft. Lot Size: sq ft R5 7S sq ft sq ft Hardcover: sq ft 3t# 98 sq ft sq ft 104. Does the present use Hof the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes ('A-, No ( ). If no, specify each non - conformity: 5. Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances justifying the expansion unique to the property such as lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since enactment of this chapter have no control? Please check all that apply: ( )too, narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) too small ( ) drainage (Aexisting situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape () other: specify �. 1, il V'r Please describe: i • Expansion Permit Information (6/27/2011) Page 5 of 6 -1188- Case No. • 6. Were the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes { ), Noj. If yes, explain: 7. Were the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances created by any other person -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No If yes, explain: 8. Are the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances for which you f request list some other properties peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes X, No ( ). are similarly affected? D min I certify that ail'of the above statements and the statemencontained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the variance information provided. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized Official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Owner's Applicant's Signature X. Expansion Permit Information (6127/2011) Page 6 of 6 Date Date �G • } 1©01 • wFa� Q��m �a920 =Y�w $ aA 0 o��pOy� N9 x ��t7im -ICy(10 ZO��Z rmZO yy EOw °m y y � ��my�paz LD,D -. llw YK F Z DDSZ p�� t~Zil PH C O mF m H0 �c / ' - %, p ;tFCA T. RECT APR 3 2012 HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. � DAM J. PAQUETTE PLAN FOR: _ P'"ideirt c 7 8329 CENTRAL AVENUE NE m ; SPRING LAKE PARK, MINNE5011A 55432 lion- 7 56 -6069 fax i�i�) 786 -5850 ai3o Snag ow Roan Panty ISM SPRING LAKE PARK LUMBER BCONSTRUCTION BLDG. CONSTRU COMPANY w4 -wr". MN 553 : P.e„ (D, Zp g DATE: __. Paa (W2) 93l3o3a g RECT APR 3 2012 HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. � DAM J. PAQUETTE PLAN FOR: _ P'"ideirt c 7 8329 CENTRAL AVENUE NE m ; SPRING LAKE PARK, MINNE5011A 55432 lion- 7 56 -6069 fax i�i�) 786 -5850 ai3o Snag ow Roan Panty ISM SPRING LAKE PARK LUMBER BCONSTRUCTION BLDG. CONSTRU COMPANY w4 -wr". MN 553 : P.e„ (D, Zp g DATE: __. Paa (W2) 93l3o3a F - Tf A x o� z c�_�a „yam aOmm sgp €m2 ° .9a� om�wa � a�,= "gym �mK �� 'agm ooi y-cQ w�C2 '0 92 O 0 a amo �v A o H0 OT N O N C> m A x z O z A N A o � 4 S 0 J11 s N p x � O N N �F C7 RECD APR 3 2012 HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. I I �" r ident E President 6329 CENTRAL AVENUE NE 1 5PRING LAKE PARK, MINNE50Th 55432 (763) 786 -6069 fax (93) 786 -5850 I I 3130 `uh ^EY OM Pow P w, (962181438D0 DArE: SPRING LAKE PARK LUMBER BLDG. CONSTRUCTION CO PANY n+im.mnxe, .u+ss3os Brats. t662l zo3 -sosi ht 1962)99390E3 • r- c�_�a „yam aOmm sgp €m2 ° .9a� om�wa � a�,= "gym �mK �� 'agm ooi y-cQ w�C2 '0 92 O 0 a amo �v A o H0 OT N O N C> m A x z O z A N A o � 4 S 0 J11 s N p x � O N N �F C7 RECD APR 3 2012 HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. I I �" r ident E President 6329 CENTRAL AVENUE NE 1 5PRING LAKE PARK, MINNE50Th 55432 (763) 786 -6069 fax (93) 786 -5850 I I 3130 `uh ^EY OM Pow P w, (962181438D0 DArE: SPRING LAKE PARK LUMBER BLDG. CONSTRUCTION CO PANY n+im.mnxe, .u+ss3os Brats. t662l zo3 -sosi ht 1962)99390E3 • • 0 • r-- H fK `0 2 x rD lit. Lev &m LW&Wtowf 6)14.104 ('[4- PA ,�?a=4 \j fiveN L..C.A. tit„ DL 6j-" L &*% Twin U (Z `Lu LtaM LLLL Larson Larson Spec(sity Stnrr.KUres hw 5931 Hobe Lure White Bear Lake, Mim mote 55110 901 429 0141 Fax: 661 429 6761 www.n4Wredl lcomc=Lnst I ,5 IHOC*-) 1p p GwLPAA . 'S /�tQS bry t3AS C 1 *2 ' t� cvwvcl - Prtu i hereby certify that thi: Plan. speclHrmtion, or report was PrePued by nre or aurae. ray dMect s ProTesslorrsl Enpiraer the Isws of the State of Mimrssota Prfera G �L / / =/0�2 ucprse :7631 -1192- Cam. No. 6 7 REM APR 3 2012 HARDGQVER CALCULATIONS ZIA (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY P;DDESS: 2 C 5 0 Z,A1<f4aQ'0A .G-lAIf OWNER'S NAME: 14..Nf./i t4 A 04 _OT AREA SQ. FT. X.30% = (for all lots) ........................ :............... L07 AREA SQ. FT. X 40% _ (for Lots of Record) ............................ xis:inc Lots of Record may have 40 irercent coverage providod .-that tech.nique$ are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225, Subd. ved by the (see back). A plan must be submitted and appro Building Official. LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT HOUSE X = X TOTALHOUSE ..................... ...........................:... 9¢7 DETACHED BUILDINGS X = (GARAGE /SHED) X = ' TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS.;R!! G, ,. �50 DRIVEWAY, PARKING X 5& rax= I2ri3 ,AREAS, SIDEWALKS; ETC. X :. ,.. Zb TO`fAL 13RIVEWAY, ETC .......... ............:�...:........:.... DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. X '^ Opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are nqt X counted as hardcdver. X TOTALDECK ......................... ............................... X= X = k.oc� tL TOTAL OTHER .................... �. . a". �• :.:. ..... ......... TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE .................... ............................... UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) ..................................... ............................... PREPARED BY G oAlOrt t -1193- 4-5 DATE Revised 08/06/03 RECD APR 3 2012 is March 19, 2012 Deck Specifications Randy and Amy Grunow 2650 Lakewood Lane Mound, MN 55364 i3u bnaay uaK KOM Minnetonka, MN 55305 Phone (952) 933 -3930 Cell (612) 723 -5248 Fax (952) 933 -3033 E-mail djpaquetteecomcast.net www.paquefteconstruction.com Area 1— Existing Deck Replacement (see drawing) Deck — Grade Level —12' X 20' a. Remove the existing decking, benches, skirting and steps (2). (Salvage framing) b. Reframe two new sets of steps using 2 X 12 treated stringers. 1. East side —full width —12 ". 2. South side 7' wide. c. Reframe treated structure due to upper level deck columns. (Make necessary modifications.) d. Supply and apply 5/4" X 6" Azek decking to existing framed deck surface, as well as, two sets of steps. • e. Install 1 X 12 Azek skirting to the perimeter of deck and steps. f. Supply and install low maintenance lattice to perimeter of deck. g. Rails west and south — see drawings. h. Finish posts to match. i. Clean site and haul all related debris. j. Permit and inspection as needed. Area 2 — Upper Level Sitting Deck (S� X_2 dam) *Construct a 5' X 20' sitting deck off the master bedroom per the following (see drawing) a. Install two new post footings. b. Install two new columns and replace tow existing columns. c. Install a new beam — steel beam. d. Construct a 5'6.1.-,X 20' sitting deck. e. Supply and install Azek decking, skirting and deck columns. f. Railing — see drawing. g. New columns would be wrapped in Azek or cedar with lattice and trim. h. Install flashing and new course of siding. i. Paint new columns and siding. j. Clean site and haul debris. • k. Permit and inspection. -1194- w LAKEWOOD S860 0 i I I 1 LAKE MllYlUCTnKlieA 01 C7 - 1195 -' RECD APR L3 2012 ..�:4........... 202 Z n EXISTING w GARAGE � I ao 0 I � � c I o `� O � N i m I 5.2 I DECK p 12.2 A 0 THRESHOLD EIEV■936.7 w 0 EXISTING HOUSE ° ..... j...,•.:,...... 10.0 #2650 1. BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVi928.8 L L4 �i IQ o THRESHOLD (� O I ELEV -936.7 o I 20.6 I +" ° ° ° ..............•• °• PROPOSED & UPPER DECK ExisTiNC DECK PROPOSED DECK STEPS 1 p A, o N 86 °34'40- W LAKE MllYlUCTnKlieA 01 C7 - 1195 -' RECD APR L3 2012 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 • (952) 472 -0604 • U Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Date: May 17, 2012 Re: Action on Resolution —sign area variance and variance amendment for Mound Marketplace area identification Summary The variance application from Mound Marketplace for requested modifications to the area identification sign at the shopping center was considered by the Council at its May 8, 2012 meeting. Based on the Council's action Staff has prepared a draft resolution based on the Council's action to approve the sign area variance and variance modification to include the use of color on the tenant boards on the identification sign which has been included on the 5/22 agenda for consideration and action by the Council. -1196- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 12- • RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-12 APPROVING SIGN AREA VARIANCE AND MODIFYING CONDITION TO ALLOW USE OF COLOR FOR TENANT SIGNAGE ON AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN AT MOUND MARKETPLACE PI D: 14 -117- 24-44 -0067 P & Z CASE # 02 -41 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 03 -12 was adopted by the Mound City Council on January 14, 2003 and approved a variance application from Mound Marketplace to allow construction of a (25) foot area identification sign near the north entrance located along the west side of Commerce Boulevard subject to conditions which included the use of reverse cut copy (white letters on a black and /or dark board); and WHEREAS, the applicant, Brian Pellowski, on behalf of Mound Marketplace LLC submitted a request to amend the variance to allow an additional tenant board for H &R Block and to allow the use of color for all of the tenant boards. The requested additional tenant board requires variance approval as the sign area exceeds the 120 SF maximum allowance per code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its February 21, 2012 meeting, reviewed the variance and amendment requests and voted to recommended approval. WHEREAS, at its March 13, 2012 meeting, the City Council, tabled its review and action on the variance application, as requested by the applicant, Brian Pellowski, additional • time for the applicant to prepare additional information for the Council related to the request. Additionally, the applicant, granted the City a 60 -day extension pursuant to MS 15.99 for action on the requested variance application; and WHEREAS, the City's deadline for action on the variance request is June 16, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at its May 8, 2012, meeting voted three in favor and two opposed to direct Staff to prepare a resolution to approve the sign area variance and unanimously voted to direct Staff to prepare a resolution to approve the variance amendment to allow the use of color for the tenant boards on the Mound Marketplace area identification monument with such resolution to be considered at the May 22, 2012 City Council meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council does hereby approve the sign area variance for the additional tenant sign for H &R Block and variance amendment request to allow the use of color for all of the tenant boards on the Mound Marketplace area identification sign. 2. Conditions 1, 3, 5, and 6, contained in the original resolution (Resolution No. 03 -12) which read as follow shall remain in effect: - The height of the area identification sign is allowed at 25 feet. • -1197- The building permit for the new sign shall not be issued until the • - variance is recorded at Hennepin County Application shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the City's review of the land use request. The sign material shall be architecturally compatible with the materials used in the Mound Marketplace project. 3. The other conditions described below are hereby removed: - Reverse cut copy (white letters on a black and /or dark board) shall be used for the tenant signage. - The variance shall expire after one (1) year unless an extension is granted pursuant to City Code Chapter 350.530, Subd. 2(E). 4. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lot 1, Block 1, Mound Visions 2nd Addition. 5. The applicant shall be responsible for recording the resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. Adopted May 22, 2012 • Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mark Hanus, Mayor -1198- 5341 Maywood Road City of Mound Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472 -0604 ' • ' Building Department • Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Date: 5/17/2012 Re: Request for Reaffirming Variance for 1558 Dove Lane — New Garage Summary. The property owner of 1558 Dove Lane has requested that the City Council reaffirm the variance for a garage construction project that was previously approved. Background. At its October 28, 2008 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08 -103 which approved a variance to allow construction of new garage at 1558 Dove Lane. The resolution included a condition that the variance was valid for a one -year period which was a requirement in the City Code at the time. When the recodified City Code was adopted in 2009, the one -year validity clause was removed. Requested Action /Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution to reaffirm the Council's 2008 variance approval subject to the original conditions with the exception • that the one year timeframe for use of the variance is removed. Recording of the new resolution is also required. In the event the Council determines the variance is null and void, the applicant would be required to seek approval of a new variance which would include going through the standard process as outlined in the City Code which includes both Planning Commission review and City Council action. • -1199- • RESOLUTION # 12- RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING RESOLUTION NO. 08-103 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1558 DOVE LANE P & Z CASE # 08-14 PID # 12- 117 - 24-43 -0004 WHEREAS, the City Council, at its October 28, 2009 meeting, adopted Resolution No. 08 -103 which approved a variance for the property at 1558 Dove Lane, subject to conditions, to allow construction of a 20 by 22 foot garage; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 08 -103 was recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on January 23, 2009 and therefore is of record; and WHEREAS, due to unforeseen circumstances, the project was not undertaken by the property owner and one of the conditions in Resolution No. 08 -103 stated that the variance was valid for a one (1) year period in accordance with a provision in the City • Code; and WHEREAS, the one (1) year period for variances was removed as part of the City Code recodification project that was adopted in 2009. • NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby reaffirms its approval of the variance as approved by Resolution No. 08 -103 to allow construction of a new detached garage subject to the original conditions with the exception of the 1 -year timeframe for use of the variance which requirement is hereby removed. This variance is approved for the following legally described property: LOT 4, BLOCK 3, WOODLAND POINT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INCL ADJ PART OF WAURIKA COMMON Adopted May 22, 2012 Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mark Hanus, Mayor -1200- To: The City of Mound From: Lana Golembeski • Date: April 17, 2012 Re: Variance at 1558 Dove Lane, Mound, Mn When I moved into this residence in 2009, I could not afford to add on the garage. I would really like to reinstate that variance and now put up a garage. I am requesting that you reinstate that variance. Thank you so much for your help in this matter!! Sincerely, Lana Golembeski 1558 Dove Lane Mound, Mn 55364 Email: zetalanaRme.com -1201- • CERTIFICATE City of Mound STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) I, the undersigned, being duly qualified and the City Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota, hereby attest and certify that: 1. As such officer, I have the legal custody of the original record from which the attached and forgoing extract was transcribed. 2. 1 have carefully compared said extract with said original record. 3. 1 find said extract to be a true, correct and complete transcript from the original minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City held on the date indicated in said extract, including any resolution adopted at such meeting, insofar as they relate to: RESOLUTION NO. 08-103 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1558 DOVE LANE P &Z CASE #08 -14 PID #12- 117 -24-43 -0004 • Said meeting was duly held, pursuant to call and notice thereof as required by law on the 28th day of October, 2008. WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk, and the seal of said City, this 15th day of January, 2009. -1202- n. Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 08 -103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1558 DOVE LANE P & Z CASE # 08 -14 PID # 12- 117 -24-43 -0004 WHEREAS, the applicant, Tom Parker, has submitted a request for a 4 foot variance to the front yard setback in order to construct a 20 by 22 foot garage; and WHEREAS, the property is located at the terminus of Dove Lane at Lake Minnetonka. This existing lot of record was originally platted as part of the Woodland Point Subdivision. The zoning is R -1A, Single Family Residential; and WHEREAS, the property, according to Hennepin County data, currently has a house which was built in 1928; and WHEREAS, the front of the property has been deemed to be Dove Lane resulting in non - conforming existing conditions including lot depth and the existing home's front and rear yard setbacks; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes the following development standards for this existing lot of record: Lot Area Lot Width Lot Depth Front Yard Setback (house) Required Proposed /Existing 6,000 sq. ft. 7,505 sq. ft. 40 feet 168 feet 80 feet 40 feet 20 feet 3.6 feet -1203 - Variance 40 feet (existing) 16.4 feet (existing) • is • Rear Yard Setback (house) • Side Yard Setback (house) Front Yard Setback (garage) Rear Yard Setback (garage) Side Yard Setback (garage) OHWL Setback Hardcover (maximum 40 %) • 0 and 15 feet 11 feet 4 feet (existing) 6 feet 39+ feet - 20 feet 16 feet 4 feet (proposed) 4 feet 4 feet - 4 feet 6 feet - 50 feet 80+ feet - 3,002 sq. ft. 1,754 sq. ft. - WHEREAS, Staff has reviewed the application and recommended approval of the variance with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application at its October 13, 2008 meeting and recommended approval, subject to conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the 4 foot front yard setback variance to allow the construction of a 20 by 22 foot garage, as requested by the applicant, based on the following findings of fact: a. The property configuration significantly impacts the buildable area for the garage. This includes the lot being only 40 feet deep and the existing location of the home on the property. b. The applicant has minimized the variance needed by locating the garage on the rear setback line. C. The conditions of City Code Chapter 350.530 are being met. 2. The variance is hereby approved subject to the following conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission: a. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. b. No future approval of any development plans and /or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. C. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. d. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all permits. -1204- 2 e. 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. 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. g. No building permits will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution(s) and easement(s) has been provided to the City by the applicant. h. No building permits will be issued until any and /or all fees associated with the land use application have been paid unless an escrow deposit of sufficient amount is on file with the City. All runoff from the garage must not be directed towards the neighbor's property. Structures shall not be built into the required front, side and rear yards. A foundation survey is required if a proposed building is within 5 feet of the required minimum front/side /rear setbacks. K. The conditions of City Code Chapter 350.530 are being met. 3. This variance is approved for the following legally described property: 0 LOT 4, BLOCK 3, WOODLAND POINT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INCL ADJ PART OF WAURIKA COMMON 4. The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350.530, Subd. 2 (E). Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of October, 2008. /s/ Bonnie Ritter Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk /s/ Mark Hanus Mark Hanus, Mayor -1205- 3 Irmo ICE O Date: May 16, 2012 To: From Subject: MOUND POLICE 2415 Wilshire Blvd. Telephone (952) 472 -0621 Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch (763) 525 -6210 Fax (952) 472 -0656 City Manager /City Council Police Chief Mooney Handicapped Parking Designation EMERGENCY 911 On 5 /15 /12eceived a call from Lenora Lundquist who resides at 4917 Hanover Road. She is handicapped and needs;to use Metro Mobility and the assistance of friends and family to leave her home. Given her physical limitations, she needs to have the street adjacent her front walkway clear for the Metro Mobility Vehicle or others to pick her up. She said her neighbors are very considerate of her needs and avoid parking in front of her house. However, on occasion visitors to the neighborhood parkin front of her house, making it nearly impossible for her to get out. I contacted Paul Colton at Metro Mobility who confirmed that Ms. Lundquist is • registered with them, and uses their service regularly. He said they need at least 40 feet along the curb to safely park, load, and exit the pick up area for their clients. Having made a visual assessment of the street, I am recommending the City Council designate the South side of Hanover Road, between the driveways at 4917 and 4927 Hanover Road reserved for Handicapped parking, per the attached resolution. This Handicapped Parking restriction would remain in effect only as long as Ms. Lundquist resides at 4917 Hanover Road. • -1206- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 12 -_ • RESOLUTION DESIGNATING HANDICAPPED PARKING ON A PORTION OF HANOVER ROAD WHEREAS, Ms. Lenora Lundquist of 4917 Hanover Road has requested designation of handicapped parking in front of her home; and WHEREAS, this designation would allow the access by Metro Mobility and others who aid Ms. Lundquist access to her residence; and WHEREAS, this designation is recommended by the Police Department due to lack of other access for handicapped transportation, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota hereby designates the area between the driveways at 4917 and 4927 Hanover Road as Handicapped Parking Only, to remain in effect only as long as Ms. Lundquist is a resident at 4917 Hanover Road, BE IT ALSO RESOLVED that the City Council hereby directs City Staff to facilitate the appropriate signage for the designated Handicapped Parking area and enforce it as such. Adopted by the City Council this 22nd day of May, 2012. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Mark Hanus -1207- • • • CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 12- RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO CITY ATTORNEY JOHN DEAN WHEREAS, John Dean of Kennedy & Graven Chartered, has served the City of Mound as its legal counsel from 1996 to 2012; and WHEREAS, Mr. Dean has made the decision to retire from the practice of law on May 31, 2012; and WHEREAS, over time this longstanding relationship has resulted in a deep mutual professional and personal respect between the City Council, the City Manager, other City Staff, and Mr. Dean; and WHEREAS, Mr Dean can be credited as a member of the Team that jump- started and drove Mound redevelopment, leaving a proud legacy; and WHEREAS, Mr Dean has 'a heart' for Mound and volunteers annually for the Spirit of • the Lakes Festival; and WHEREAS, Mr. Dean's sense of humor and light heartedness has always ensured that there was a bit of fun in the day to day work, even while deliberating over difficult situations, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does wish to express its sincere appreciation to Mr. John Dean for his service to the City of Mound over the years, and to wish him the very best in his retirement. Adopted by the City Council this 22nd day of May, 2012. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk C, Mayor Mark Hanus -1208- �CenterPointm Energy April 17, 2012 Ms. Kandis Hanson City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd Mound, MN 55364 800 LaSalle Avenue PO Box 59038 Minneapolis, MN 55459 -0038 Dear Ms. Hanson: Thank you for submitting an application for a CenterPoint Energy Community Partnership Grant. I am pleased to inform you that a grant in the amount of $1,000 has been awarded to the City of Mound for fire department pagers. We would appreciate the opportunity to present the Community Partnership Grant check at a council meeting in May or June. Would please provide the following information and fax to Community Relations at 507-387-1997. May June council meetings: (1) Dates(s): 'TUv6O(U1, 0101 � (2) Time: T`00 P m Location: Ct, p� 1'VIOVYI�, 53(1 �a�cvo °��, n�o�v�, �'!oV S53Gy (3 ) (4) Name of contact and phone number to schedule attendance: U i c;L, vUtbct, rn ov r 16(c 1e�oi- , �a - y�; -3555 We will coordinate with a CenterPoint Energy representative to attend and present the Community Partnership Gran t check. Congratulations, and thank you for making safety a top priority in your community. Sincerely, MW Jean Krause Director, Community Relations cc: Fire Chief Gregory Pederson -1209- • • • Offices in 470 U.S. Bank Plaza Kennedy 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis Minneapolis, MN 55402 Saint Paul (612) 337 -9300 telephone Graven (612) 337 -9310 fax St. Cloud www.kennedy- graven.com C H A R T E R E D Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer CORRINE A. HEINE Attomey at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9217 Email: cheine©kennedy- graven.com MSBA Board Certified Real Property Specialist May 22, 2012 Ms. Sarah Smith City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE. Plat Opinion for CONNE.R GREENADDITION Our File No. MU200 -154 Dear Ms. Smith: At your request, I have reviewed five separate title commitments, Nos. NCS- 476258 -MPLS, NCS- 476260 -MPLS, NCS- 476262 -MPLS, NCS- 476266 -MPLS, and NCS- 476269 -MPLS, all of which were issued by First American Title Insurance Company, with effective dates as noted below (the "Commitments "). The Commitments purport to cover the following described properties (collectively, "the Property ") proposed to be platted as CONNOR GREEN ADDITION: 2251 Commerce (NCS- 476258 -MPLS. effective 4/2/12 at 7:30 a.m.) That part of the East 125 feet of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying North of line drawn West perpendicular to the East line of said Lot 52 from a point on said East line distant 46.5 feet South from the Northeast Comer of said Lot 52. 2261 Commerce (NCS- 476260 -MPLS. effective 4/4/12 at 7:30 a.m.) Beginning at a point on the East Line of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park," Lake Minnetonka, distant 47 feet South of the Northeast corner of said lot; thence West at right angles to said East line a distance of 125 feet; thence North parallel to said East line a distance of 0.5 feet; thence East at right angles to said East line a distance of 125 feet to a point on the East line of said Lot 52 distant 46.5 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning; ALSO, 404356v2 CAH MU200 -154 5/22 HANDOUT ITEM NO. 8 Ms. Sarah Smith May 22, 2012 Page 2 That part of Lot 52," Lynwood Park ", Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 52, distant 47 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Lot; thence West at right angles with the East line of said Lot 52, a distance of 125 feet; thence South and parallel with the East line of said Lot 52, a distance of 32 feet; thence East to a point on the East line of said Lot 52, distant 79 feet South of the Northeast corner of said lot; thence North along the East line of said Lot 52, a distance of 32 feet to the point of beginning, EXCEPT the South .4 feet thereof. 2271 Commerce (NCS- 476262 -MPLS, effective 4/2/12 at 7.30 a.m.) That part of Lot 52, " Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 52 distant 58 feet North from the Southeast corner of said Lot; thence West perpendicular to said East line a distance of 125 feet; thence North parallel with said East line a distance of 40.4 feet; thence Easterly 125 feet to a point on said East line distant 40.4 feet North of the point of beginning; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2281 Commerce (NCS- 476266 -MPLS, effective 4/2/12 at 7.30 a.m.) Parcel 1: Lot 1, Block 1, Dakota Rail 2 °d Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: That part of Lot 52, " Lynwold Park ", Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said lot; thence North along the East line of said lot, 58 feet; thence West perpendicular to said East line 125 feet; thence South parallel with said East line to the South line of said lot; thence Easterly to the point of beginning. 5631 -5665 -5701 Lynwood (NCS 476269 -MPLS effective 4/2/12 at 7.30 a.m.) Parcel 1: The West 79.02 feet of the East 154.02 feet of that part of Lot 52, " Lynwood Park ", Lake Minnetonka described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly line of said Lot, 125 feet West, measured at right angles from the East line thereof; thence Southerly parallel with the East line of said Lot to the South line of said Lot; thence Westerly along said South line to a point distant 125 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Northerly parallel with the West line of said Lot to the North line of said Lot; thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning. Parcel 3: The East 75 feet of the following described tract: That part of Lot 52, " Lynwood Park ", Lake Minnetonka described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly line of said Lot, 125 feet West, measured at right angles from the 404356v2 CAH MLJ200-154 Ms. Sarah Smith May 22, 2012 Page 3 East line thereof; thence Southerly parallel with the East line of said Lot, to the South line of said Lot; thence Westerly along said South line to a point distant 125 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Northerly parallel with the West line of said Lot to the North line of said Lot; thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning. In addition to reviewing the Commitment, I have reviewed a copy of the CONNER GREEN ADDITION plat prepared by Corner Land Surveying, Inc. Based on my review, I have the following comments: The following described land is proposed to be included in the plat, and is reportedly owned by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority, but I have not received any title evidence to verify that ownership: That part of Government Lot 8, Section 23, 'Township 117, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota further shown and depicted on HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY PROPERTY MAP NO. 47 described as follows: BEGINNING at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence on an assumed bearing of South 87 degrees 52 minutes 45 seconds West along the south line of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka a distance of 135.53 feet; thence South 03 degrees 09 minutes 54 seconds West parallel with the easterly line of said Lot 52 a distance of 21.35 feet; thence North 87 degrees 53 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 137.47 feet to the westerly line of said Lot 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence North 02 degrees 02 minutes 30 seconds West along said west line a distance of 21.28 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING 2. With respect to the. Property covered by the Commitments, the plat indicates that Semper Holdings Mound, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, will sign as the owner, but that entity is not the owner of the Property according to the Commitments. I assume that the current owners propose to convey their interests in the Property to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC prior to the recording of the plat. Accordingly, the following instruments must be recorded prior to the plat, and copies of such instruments must be provided to the City: a. With respect to 2251 Commerce: Deed from John H. Tombers and Patricia R. Tombers, husband and wife, conveying said land to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC. 404356v2 CAH MU200 -154 Ms. Sarah Smith May 22, 2012 Page 4 b. With respect to 2261 Commerce: Certificate of Trust for the David A. Deters Living Trust, dated March 8, 2007; Affidavit of Trustee; Trustee's Deed by David A. Deters, Trustee, under the David A. Deters Living Trust, dated March 8, 2007, conveying said land to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC; release or satisfaction of the mortgage in favor of Gerald J. Brinkman, Trustee of the BAPS Plan & Trust, or a consent to plat executed by said mortgagee. C. With respect to 2271 Commerce: Deed from Five Sigma, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, conveying said land to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC; release or satisfaction of the mortgage in favor of Community Pride Bank, or a consent to plat executed by said mortgagee. d. With respect to 2281 Commerce: Deed from John E. Royer and Marie K. Royer, husband and wife, conveying said land to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC. e. With respect to 5631 - 5665 -5701 L wood: Deed from Peter S. Goshgarian and spouse, if any, conveying Parcel 3 as described in that commitment to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC; Deed from Lakestone Management, L.L.P. conveying Parcel 1 as described in that commitment to Semper Holdings Mound, LLC; release or satisfaction of mortgage now held by U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for the registered holders of WAMU Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007 -SL2, Commercial Mortgage Pass - Through Certificates, Series 2007 - SL2, or a consent to plat executed by said mortgagee. NOTE: The Commitment for this property also includes a Parcel 2, which is not part of the proposed plat. 3. Real Estate taxes must be paid in prior to the recording of the plat. 4. Levied special assessments should be either paid or reapportioned to the appropriate new tax parcels pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.071. 5. The plat abuts a county road. Review of the plat by the Hennepin County Highway Department is required pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 505.03. In addition, it is noted that the following parcels are subject to easements in favor of Hennepin County: 2251 Commerce (see Schedule B -II, paras. 11 and 14), 5631 -5665 -5701 Lynwood (Schedule B -II, para. 14). 6. A public alley easement encumbers the following parcels: 2251 Commerce (Schedule B -11, para. 12), 2261 Commerce (Schedule B -II, para. 11), 2271 Commerce (Schedule B -II, para. 12), 2281 Commerce (Schedule B -II, para. 13). It appears that the easement is proposed to be vacated prior to recording the plat. 404356v2 CAH MU200 -154 Ms. Sarah Smith May 22, 2012 Page 5 7. The property at 2281 Commerce is subject to a conditional use permit. The City should determine whether that` conditional use permit should be revoked or terminated by agreement. 8. The property at 5631 -5665 -5701 Lynwood is subject to a sidewalk easement in favor of the City. The City should determine whether the easement is still needed. This letter does not purport to set forth every matter relevant to a determination of whether title to the property is marketable, and no one should rely upon it for that purpose. The sole purpose of this letter is to identify required signatories to the plat and related issues of interest to the City in connection with platting, as evidenced by the Commitments. Sincerely, Corrine A. Heine CAH :jms cc: John B. Dean 404356v2 CAH MU200 -154 5569 Morningview Terrace Minnetrista, MN 55364 May 22, 2012 The Honorable Mark Hanus, Mayor for the City of Mound Distinguished City Council Members Mound City Council 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Mn 55364 Atten: Public Hearing Set for May 22, 2012, Item #8, Walgreen Relocation & Expansion Project, Mound City Hall Dear Mayor Hanus & Distinguished City Council Members: I would like to make some comments with regard to the Relocation & Expansion of Walgreen's to the opposite side of Commerce Blvd from where it is now located. I am making these comments as a resident, taxpayer, property owner, and as a customer of Walgreen's. 1 do not represent a marketing group, developer, or any other outside interest. I have been a customer of Walgreen's most of my life. For the past 40 years Walgreen's has given me, what I think is superior customer service as well as a large assortment of name brand products of excellent quality. Walgreen's, as you may know, is one of the largest pharmaceutical retail chains in the country. It is also one of the most efficiently run retail chains. For the past 6 years, I have purchased over $300.00 a month in prescription drugs from the Mound Walgreen's and its predecessor Thrifty White. That adds up to allot of money. In addition to prescription drugs, I have also purchased many other items including vitamins, toiletries, cosmetics, household products, cleaning supplies, and stationary. For this reason I am a big supporter of Walgreen's relocating and expanding on Commerce Blvd in Mound. In regards to the size of the store, the layout of the store, the size and access points for the parking lot, among other ancillary issues, I trust the City of Mound will use a pragmatic approach in working with Walgreen's or its representatives. This is a great opportunity to really meet the needs of all Area residents, many of whom are senior citizens. It would be unfortunate for everyone if Walgreen's moved out of town. It would hurt the economy of Mound and deal a serious blow to the health of its citizens. Respectfully submitted, C WliC. oIm Citizen 5/22 HANDOUT ITEM 8 • Executive Summary H K :1si TO: Mound City Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting City Planner Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: May 17, 2012 SUBJECT: 12 -04 to 12 -09, 12 -11, Semper Development Requests REQUEST SUMMARY The applicant, Semper Development, has submitted development plans for the redevelopment of the corner of Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. The application materials include a request for rezoning, preliminary plat for major subdivision, vacation, subdivision exemption, conditional use permit (CUP) , specific sign program and final plat. The site area is 1.30 acres or 56,494 square feet. It • involves the removal of an existing 15 -unit apartment building and four commercial buildings. The redevelopment of this site is entirely private with willing sellers. The project includes the construction of a 14,378 square foot Walgreens and plans for a 1,010 square foot future tenant building. It is Staff's understanding that the intent for the future tenant building is a restaurant/bistro but an owner has not yet been identified. The development also involves a land transfer between the applicant and the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) to modify the amount of right -of -way surrounding the Dakota Rail Regional Trail located immediately south of the project site. • PROCEDURAL ITEMS Public Hearings. Section II of the April 3d Planning Commission Planning Report outlines a number of procedural items regarding this application including review timeframes and city department, consultant and agency review and comments. As noted in that section, the City Council will need to hold a public hearing for the rezoning, conditional use permit, preliminary plat, and alley vacation. All necessary public hearing notices have been published, noticed and mailed in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes and City Code. 12_1 1Q Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (61� 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 60-Day Land Use Application Review Process. Pursuant to Minnesota State • Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. The CUP, rezoning, variance and signage plan were received on or around March 1, 2012. A letter of completeness was sent to the applicant on March 21, 2012. The 60 -day timeline expired on or around April 30, 2012. 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. The City of Mound executed an extension for action on the land use and related applications for an additional 60 -days on April 25, 2012. Therefore, the current deadline for action on the land use applications is June 29, 2012. Members are advised that the applicant withdrew the variance on April 13, 2012. 120 -day Subdivision Review Process Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, local government agencies are required to approve or deny subdivision requests within 120 days. The preliminary plat, final plat and subdivision exemption requests were receive on or around March 1, 2012. A letter of completeness was sent to the applicant on March 21, 2012. The 120 -day timeline expires on or around June 29, 2012. An extension of the review period can occur if agreed to by the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission reviewed this case at their April 3rd meeting. A public hearing for the preliminary plat was held in accordance with Mound City Code. The included Planning Commission minutes summarizes comments presented at the meeting. Discussion among Planning Commission members included topics such as the amount of windows on the facades; the location, size and amount of signage; amount of impervious surface; number of building entrances; and whether site illumination will affect adjacent properties. After the public hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission passed a number of motions and a resolution related to the proposed redevelopment project. While details of the motions are provided in the April 3rd Planning Commission minutes, a summary of the actions is provided below: Action Request Action Taken Affirmative Negative Motion Rezoning Recommend Approval 6 1 Motion Subdivision Exemption Recommend Approval 7 0 Motion Preliminary Plat Recommend Approval 6 1 121211 -1 Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 • • • Motion Alley Vacation Recommend Approval 7 0 Motion Final Plat Recommend Approval 5 2 Motion Conditional Use Permit Recommend Approval 5 2 Resolution Determination of vacation conformity with Amended Comp Plan Passed 7 0 Motion Specific Sign Program Recommended Approval 5 2 SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS After the April 3rd Planning Commission meeting the applicant has withdrawn the request for a variance for the project. Further consideration of a variance is therefore not needed by the City Council. The applicant has also made revisions to the development plans to respond to comments and direction received at the Planning Commission Meeting. None of the changes affect the rezoning, vacation, preliminary plat or final plat requests. All changes are focused on the conditional use permit and specific sign program. The • revised plans were distributed by email on 4/13 to department, consultants and agencies for review. No comments about these revised plans have been received to date. • Please refer to the April 3rd Planning Commission Planning Report for detailed analysis on the proposed development plan. Analysis on the revised sections of the plans is provided below: Building Facade — Window Area The PED -PUD regulations require that the front facade be comprised of 45 to 65 percent window area, while exposed side and rear facades have a minimum of 25 percent window area, landscape or use of building fenestration. As noted in the Planning report, one of the challenges of this site is that the north, east and south elevations all exposed for public viewing and thus require some architectural design features. In response to the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has revised the elevations as follows: 1212121 Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 • While the applicant has increased the amount of windows on the north and east facades, the building as proposed still does not meet the minimum requirement of 45 to 65% windows. The City Council may wish to have further discussion about this requirement. Based on the Planning Commission recommendation, Staff has included a condition in the Conditional Use Permit resolution waiving this requirement as long as • no windows are removed from the building and the trellis landscaping is maintained. Building Entrances The Planning Commission discussed whether a second entrance should be required on Commerce or Lynwood Boulevards. It was felt that second entrances are an important component for the pedestrian friendliness of Downtown and pointed to second entrances at True Value Hardware and in Mound Marketplace. A motion requiring a second entrance was proposed and withdrawn due to a lack of a second. In the discussion the applicant noted that the design of the building with its extensive windows on Commerce and Lynwood Boulevards would enable the replacement of the windows with a door if needed in the future. Landscaping The Landscape Plan has been revised to add one Red Oak tree along the south edge of the parking lot. With this tree, the applicant has met the PED -PUD requirement of a minimum of 25% of the vehicular use area to be covered by tree -canopy when the trees are calculated to be two- thirds mature size. With 24,060 square feet of vehicular use area, tree canopy should be covering 6,015 square feet of it. With the revised plan, tree canopy will cover 6,462 square feet. .7 11213 -1 Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 Increased Amount Clear Spandrel Total of Glazing since Glazing Glazing Glazing PC Meeting Fa ade (sq. ft) (sq. ft) (sq. ft) (sq. ft North (Lynwood Blvd 924 200 1,124 60 East (Commerce 0 662 662 50 Blvd South Trail 15 616 631 140 West 679 288 967 0 Parkin Lot While the applicant has increased the amount of windows on the north and east facades, the building as proposed still does not meet the minimum requirement of 45 to 65% windows. The City Council may wish to have further discussion about this requirement. Based on the Planning Commission recommendation, Staff has included a condition in the Conditional Use Permit resolution waiving this requirement as long as • no windows are removed from the building and the trellis landscaping is maintained. Building Entrances The Planning Commission discussed whether a second entrance should be required on Commerce or Lynwood Boulevards. It was felt that second entrances are an important component for the pedestrian friendliness of Downtown and pointed to second entrances at True Value Hardware and in Mound Marketplace. A motion requiring a second entrance was proposed and withdrawn due to a lack of a second. In the discussion the applicant noted that the design of the building with its extensive windows on Commerce and Lynwood Boulevards would enable the replacement of the windows with a door if needed in the future. Landscaping The Landscape Plan has been revised to add one Red Oak tree along the south edge of the parking lot. With this tree, the applicant has met the PED -PUD requirement of a minimum of 25% of the vehicular use area to be covered by tree -canopy when the trees are calculated to be two- thirds mature size. With 24,060 square feet of vehicular use area, tree canopy should be covering 6,015 square feet of it. With the revised plan, tree canopy will cover 6,462 square feet. .7 11213 -1 Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 • Signage The applicant has made revisions to the Walgreens free - standing sign (monument sign). As shown on sheet A2.1 A, the sign is now proposed to be 5 feet in height with a sign area of 23 square feet. The area of the sign is the same; however, the electronic reader board that had been previously proposed has now been removed. As noted in the Planning Commission Planning Report, freestanding signs in the PED -PUD District are to be less than 6 feet in height and less than 6 square feet in area per face. Revisions were also made to the free - standing sign (monument sign) for the future tenant building. As shown on sheet A2.1 C, the sign is now proposed to be 4 feet 8 inches in height instead of 6 feet. The applicant has lowered the sign at the request of Staff to improve site lines. At the request of Hennepin County, the applicant has also evaluated how sight lines are affected by the two monument signs. The results of that analysis is presented on the preliminary site plan, sheet C1.4. This analysis has been shared with Hennepin County and City Engineers for their review and comment. Both the City and Hennepin County have requested that the freestanding sign on Commerce Boulevard be moved two feet closer to the building to improve the sight lines for those using the adjacent driveway. This will eliminate the need for cars to be as close to the sidewalk area to see both • directions on Commerce. A condition addressing this request has been included in the Conditional Use Permit resolution. • The applicant has also removed the proposed wall sign on the north fagade of the future tenant building. The removal of the sign was part of Staff's recommended conditions for the Planning Commission. Council consideration and action on the specific sign program has been included in the Conditional Use Permit resolution. Lighting The applicant has made revisions to the site's photometric plan shown on the Lighting Analysis sheet. The applicant is proposing eight lights throughout the site: three mounted on the wall on the south side of the building to illuminate the drive - through window area; one in the northern island of the parking lot; three along the west edge of the parking lot and one on the south edge of the parking lot. The lights mounted on the building will be 20 feet high while the lights in the parking lot will be 32 feet high. 1 1214 -1 Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 All of the lights are of similar rectangular box design with a 250 watt high pressure sodium light. They meet the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America's criteria for full cutoff design, thus reducing nighttime light pollution. The lights long the parking lot have a sharp cutoff angle to reduce illumination extending to the 5701 Lynwood Boulevard apartment building. Mound City Code Section 129 -318 requires that glare from light should not be greater than 1.0 footcandles from the adjacent street centerline or 0.4 footcandles from the property line adjacent to a residential property. The photometric plan as proposed meets these criteria. Additional lighting may be requested for the future tenant building. A new photometric plan would be required if that should occur. • Questions were raised at the Planning Commission meeting regarding the proposed lighting for the tower. Sheet A2.1 A notes that the upper tower windows will have back -lit white translucent glass. In the daytime this will look like spandrel glass with a slight green tint. At night it will have a gentle glow. There will be no measurable illumination on the site below, which is why the lights for the tower are not noted on the photometric • plan on sheet E0.1 A. PUBLIC COMMENTS Since the April 3rd Planning Commission meeting the City has received a letter from Planning Commissioner George Linked and also has also received a few inquiries about the project. Written comments received about the project including those presented to the Planning Commission have been included. STATUS OF METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REVIEW OF COMP PLAN AMENDMENT The Community Development Committee of the Metropolitan Council recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment request at their May 7, 2012 on a 5 to 4 vote. The full Metropolitan Council will be considering the request at their Wednesday, May 23rd meeting. Given that the City of Mound will be acting on the Semper Development requests in advance of the full Metropolitan Council meeting, each resolution for your consideration includes clauses requiring an approval of the Metropolitan Council for the project to proceed. RECOMMENDATION As both the Planning Commission and Staff recommended approval of the requests, Staff has prepared the attached resolutions for your consideration. Staff recommends • approval of the resolutions with their findings of fact and conditions. 141215! Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 .7 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #12- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has submitted a subdivision exemption application requesting approval to subdivide PID # 14117 - 24340050; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) consented to the subdivision exemption application; and WHEREAS, the application is associated with the Walgreens redevelopment project which is to include the portion of the parcel being divided off; and WHEREAS, upon the subdivision a portion of the parcel will be conveyed to Semper Development for purposes of inclusion in the Conner Green Addition plat; and WHEREAS, the subdivision exemption application was reviewed and recommended for approval • by Staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed subdivision exemption and recommended City Council approval on April 3, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the proposed subdivision exemption request at their May 22, 2012 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the subdivision exemption application to subdivide a portion of PID # 14117 - 24340050 based on the following findings of fact: a. The additional cost imposed by the use of the subdivision process for purpose of dividing the subject parcel in two is not necessary given that a portion of the parcel will be part of a concurrent major subdivision plat. b. The use of the subdivision exemption provision will not be detrimental to properties in the vicinity. 2. The subdivision exemption is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. Approval of the rezoning, final plat, conditional use permit, and vacation applications concurrently submitted by the applicant. -1216- b. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with the subdivision exemption request. • c. The applicant shall record this resolution with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that the resolution will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. Release of this resolution for recording shall be deemed conclusive proof that all conditions have been met. d. The City's approval of the subdivision exemption application shall be contingent upon approval of the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. 3. The subdivision exemption is approved for the following legally described property: - insert legal - Adopted this 22 "d of May, 2012 Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1217- Mark Hanus, Mayor 0 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #12- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF AN ALLEY VACATION WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has submitted an application to vacate the alley located behind 2251, 2261, 2271 and 2281 Commerce Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the alley only serves the adjacent properties; and WHEREAS, there are no public utilities located in the alley; and WHEREAS, the applicant or others consenting to the application own all of the land abutting the alley; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the vacation request at their April 3, 2012 meeting • and voted to recommend to the City Council that the vacation be approved subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission passed a resolution at their April 3, 2012 meeting determining that the vacation request was in conformance with the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, the City Council of Mound held a public hearing on the vacation request on May 22, 2012 and provided proper notice thereof pursuant to state law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City determines that the requested vacation is in the interest of the public. Among other factors, vacation of the alley results in the orderly development of the adjacent land, increases commerce in the downtown area and increases the tax base of the City. 2. The City does hereby approve the alley right -of -way vacation request submitted by Semper Development subject to the following conditions: A. The applicant shall be pay all costs associated with the vacation request. • B. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemption, final plat and conditional use permit applications. -1218- C. The applicant shall resolve with all utility companies the removal and /or relocation of any private utilities located in the alley right -of -way. • D. The City's approval of the alley vacation shall be contingent upon approval of the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. E. The applicant shall record the notice of the completion of the proceedings with Hennepin County. The applicant is advised that said notice will not be released for recording until all conditions have been met. Release of the final plat for recording shall be deemed as conclusive evidence that conditions have been met. 3. This vacation request is approved for that portion of the public right -of -way described below: The public alley as shown on various documents which is located on the east 12.00 feet of the west 13.00 feet of the east 125.00 feet of Lot 52, Iynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted this 22nd of May, 2012 Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1219- Mark Hanus, Mayor .7 • • • CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE #12- ORDINANCE APPROVING REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM B -1 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND R -3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PEDESTRIAN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has made an application to rezone the subject properties (the "Subject Properties ") as follows: PID # Address 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD ; and WHEREAS, the property is proposed for development with commercial and park uses consistent with the proposed zoning district; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has adopted a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide certain areas to Pedestrian and Park (the "Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan "); and WHEREAS, the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan has been referred to the Metropolitan Council for its review and action; and WHEREAS, such review and action is pending; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District is consistent with the guided Pedestrian and Park land use in the Amended Mound • Comprehensive Plan; and -1220- WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning is compatible with land uses surrounding the subject property; and • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed rezoning and recommended City Council approval on April 3, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the proposed rezoning request at their May 22, 2012 meeting; and WHEREAS, after its consideration the City Council found the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of the City Code and laws of the State of Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the rezoning request for the Subject Properties from B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development based on the following findings of fact: a The proposed rezoning is compatible with the land uses surrounding the Subject Properties. b The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Amended Mound • Comprehensive Plan submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review. 2. The rezoning of the Subject Properties is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a Approval of the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. b Approval of the subdivision exemption, final plat, conditional use permit, and vacation applications concurrently submitted by the applicant. c Payment of all related costs for the review of the rezoning application. U -1221- 3. This rezoning is approved for the Subject Properties from the current • zoning as hereinafter shown to the proposed zoning as hereinafter shown: PID # Address Current Zoning Proposed Zoning 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD R -3 PED -PUD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD B -1 PED -PUD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD I B -1 PED -PUD Adopted this 22nd of May, 2012 • Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk • -1222- Mark Hanus, Mayor • CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #12- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has submitted an application for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) in the Conner Green Addition for the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project as described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located at the southwest comer of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard in Downtown Mound; and WHEREAS, the application and development plans have been submitted in a manner to comply with the standards of the Pedestrian Planned Unit Development (PED -PUD) District and other applicable Zoning Ordinance regulations that may apply; and WHEREAS, the property is proposed to be rezoned as part of other related project development approvals from the current B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to • Pedestrian Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the proposed development includes 1.30 acres that is proposed to be subdivided into two (2) commercial lots and one (1) outlot to be used for regional trail purposes; and WHEREAS, planned unit developments are processed using a conditional use permit. With the proposed Walgreens development, the conditional use permit will address both uses on the site and design standards; and WHEREAS, City Code Subsection 129 -139 lists the permitted and conditional uses for the PED- PUD District; and WHEREAS, the applicant has proposed the Walgreens drug store have a pick -up window where patients can drop off and pick up prescriptions. The applicant has indicated that customers will not be able to purchase any other items through the pick -up window and all communication will occur only at the window; and • -1223- WHEREAS, a drug store is on the list of permitted uses. Also on the permitted use list are Class • I, II and III restaurants which do not have a drive - through. Conditional uses in the PED -PUD District are banks or restaurants with drive - throughs. The City Code does not distinguish between pick -up windows and drive - throughs. Therefore, Staff has concluded that the pick -up window proposed is classified as a drive - through and would be considered a conditional use. As required by City Code, the applicant has met the following criteria for a drive - through: • The applicant has provided two stacking spaces 9 feet by 18 feet in size for the drive - through lane. • The drive - through lanes are clearly defined and designed in the best possible way given the site design. • The drive - through is located such that the fronts of the cars will be facing away from the adjacent residential uses. No menu boards or order stations are needed for the Walgreen's pick -up window. • The drive - through shall not be operated between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. ; and WHEREAS, the applicant is also proposing the construction of a future tenant building in the southeast corner of the development. It is Staffs understanding that the intent for the building is a small restaurant/bistro. The Conner Green Addition plat intends that the two sites will share access, parking and maintenance. However, the development of the future tenant building is not included in this conditional use permit and will need to be addressed as an amendment to the conditional use permit at a future time; and • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the conditional use permit application for the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project at its April 3, 2012 meeting and recommended Council approval, subject to conditions, as recommended by Staff, and • WHEREAS, building and site related details including but not limited to materials, landscaping, and signage, about the proposed Walgreens project are contained in the Executive Summary, Planning Report, submitted applications and materials provided by the applicant; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing at its May 22, 2012 meeting to receive public testimony on the proposed conditional use permit application for the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project; 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 WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the practicality of the preliminary plat and development plan, taking into consideration the present and future development of the property and the requirements of the Zoning, Subdivision Ordinances and other official controls. -1224- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: • 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the conditional use permit for the Conner Green Addition based on the following findings of fact: a. The Conner Green Planned Unit Development is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. b. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for type of development and use being proposed. c. The proposed development is providing adequate utilities, drainage, and parking. d. The proposed development has sufficiently considered traffic impacts and access. e. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. 2. The conditional use permit for a planned unit development is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. Speakers for the drive - through window shall not produce noise that exceeds 75 dBa as measured five feet from the speaker. b. The drive - through window shall not be operated between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. c. The future tenant building to be located on Block 1, Lot 1 shall not have a • drive - through window. d. Overall impervious surface coverage on the site shall be limited to 82 %. e. Waiver of the building material provision identified under Section 129 -139 Subd (f) (2) for the Walgreens building as long as the material used is brick. f. Waiver of the building fagade requirements identified under Section 129 -139 (f) (1) for the Walgreens building as long as no windows are removed from the building and the trellis plantings are adequately maintained to break up the fagade of the building. g. The applicant provides bike racks as proposed adjacent to the Walgreens and future tenant building. h. The City reserves the right to reevaluate parking on the site should the City, in its reasonable judgment, determines that a problem exists. This may include the review of a CUP amendment if deemed appropriate. i. The applicant move the future tenant freestanding sign on Commerce Boulevard two feet closer to the building to ensure adequate sight lines. j. Access, parking, and maintenance for the future tenant building must be provided in a manner which is appropriate given the shared use of the site and is consistent with City standards. k. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemption, vacation and final plat applications. I. Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the conditional use permit application. m. Applicant shall submit all required information upon submittal of the building • permit application. -1225- • n. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all permits. o. No building permits will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided unless the resolution is filed by the City and an escrow of sufficient amount is on file with the City. p. Future use of Outlot A, which is proposed to be transferred to the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA), shall be the same as the current public use of the Dakota Regional Railroad Trail. q. The applicant shall record 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. Release of the final plat for recording shall be deemed as conclusive evidence that conditions have been met. r. The City's approval of the conditional use permit shall be contingent upon approval of the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. 3. The specific sign program for this project, as revised by the applicant, is hereby approved as part of the conditional use permit. Adopted this 22nd of May 2012 LJ Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1226- Mark Hanus, Mayor CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #12- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT /MAJOR SUBDIVISION OF CONNER GREEN ADDITION WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has submitted a preliminary plat application to plat the proposed Conner Green Addition subdivision; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located at the southwest corner of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard in Downtown Mound and involves the following parcels: PID # Address 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD ; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the 1.30 acre property into two (2) lots and one (1) outlot; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to use the two (2) lots for commercial purposes; and WHEREAS, the outlot is being proposed to be transferred to the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority for purposes of right -of -way around the Dakota Rail Regional Trail; and WHEREAS, the property is proposed to be rezoned as part of other related project development approvals from the current B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the City of Mound has adopted a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide certain areas to Pedestrian and Park (the "Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan "); and WHEREAS, the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan has been referred to the Metropolitan Council for its review and action; and • is WHEREAS, such review and action is pending; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested to pay fees in lieu of parkland dedication; and • -1227- . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its April 3, 2012 meeting to receive public testimony on the proposed Conner Green Additional major subdivision; and WHEREAS, after its review the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the preliminary plat request subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing at its May 22, 2012 meeting to receive public testimony on the proposed Conner Green Addition major subdivision; and WHEREAS, the City has considered how the proposed project might affect public 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 preliminary plat and development plan, taking into consideration the present and future development of the property and the requirements of the Zoning, Subdivision Ordinances, and other official controls. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the preliminary plat based on the following findings of fact: a. The proposed preliminary plat is consistent with applicable development plans • and policies of the City of Mound. b. The physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type of development and use being proposed. c. The proposed development has adequately addressed the potential environmental impact of the subdivision. d. The proposed development has sufficiently considered traffic impacts of the subdivision. e. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. f. The preliminary plat drawing labeled as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated into this Resolution and all improvements shall be as shown on the plans or as modified under the approval of the City. 2. The preliminary plat is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. The Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan shall be approved by the Metropolitan Council. b. The approval of the subdivision exemption application for Parcel #14 -117- • 24 -34 -0050. -1228- C. The approval of the rezoning, vacation and conditional use permit applications concurrently submitted by the applicant. • d. Payment of park dedication fees in the amount of $4,600 prior to the release of the final plat for recording. e. Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the preliminary plat application. f. The applicant shall record 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. Release of this resolution for recording shall be deemed conclusive proof that all conditions have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the applicant and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality, all in compliance with Minnesota State Statute Chapter 462 and the City of Mound Code of Ordinances. Adopted this 22 "d of May, 2012 Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1229- Mark Hanus, Mayor L� • CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION #12- RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT /MAJOR SUBDIVISION FOR CONNER GREEN ADDITION WHEREAS, the applicant, Semper Development, has submitted a final plat application for the proposed Conner Green Addition subdivision; and, WHEREAS, the subject site is located at the southwest corner of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard in Downtown Mound and involves the following parcels: PID # Address 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD ; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the 1.30 acre property into two (2) lots and one (1) outlot; and WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to use the two (2) lots for commercial purposes; and WHEREAS, the outlot is proposed to be transferred to the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority for purposes of right -of -way around the Dakota Rail Regional Trail; and WHEREAS, the property is proposed to be rezoned as part of other related project development approvals from the current B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple • Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development; and -1230- WHEREAS, the City of Mound has adopted a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide certain areas to Pedestrian and Park (the "Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan "); and • WHEREAS, the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan has been referred to the Metropolitan Council for its review and action; and WHEREAS, such review and action is still pending; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing at its April 3, 2012 meeting to receive public testimony on the proposed Conner Green Addition major subdivision; and WHEREAS, after its review the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the preliminary and final plat request subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing at its May 22, 2012 meeting to receive public testimony on the proposed Conner Green Addition major subdivision; and WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the practicality of the final plat taking into consideration the requirements of the City, giving particular attention to the lot arrangement, water supply, sewer disposal, drainage and the present development of adjoining lands and the requirements of other official controls; and WHEREAS, said final plat is in all respects consistent with the preliminary plat, and the • regulations and the requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Mound. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: The City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the final plat based on the following findings of fact: a. The proposed final plat is consistent with applicable development plans and policies of the City of Mound. b. The proposed final plat is in all respects consistent with the preliminary plat c. The proposed development will not negatively impact the public health, safety or welfare of the community. d. The final plat drawing labeled as Exhibit A is hereby incorporated into this Resolution and all improvements shall be as shown on the plans or as modified under the approval of the City. C7 -1231- • 2. The final plat is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. The City Attorney shall examine title to the property and shall render a title opinion to the city showing the ownership of the property. b. The approval of the subdivision exemption for Parcel #14- 117- 24 -34- 0050. c. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemption, vacation, preliminary plat, and conditional use permit applications. d. Payment of park dedication fees in the amount of $4,600.00 prior to the release of the Final Plat for recording. e. Drainage and utility easements, as required by the City Engineer, shall be provided and shown on the final plat. f. Any and /or all conditions included in the official resolution approving the conditional use permit for the project. g. As applicable, payment of all required utility fees at the current approved rates prior to release of the resolution. h. As applicable, the installation of new water and sewer service must be completed prior to release of the Resolution or some type of acceptable financial guarantee provided, such as a cash deposit, letter of credit or performance bond, to cover the cost of utility service • i. connections prior to the release of the Resolution for recording. Any curb, gutter and streets which are disturbed because of construction including but not limited to installation of the water service, sewer service and small utilities, shall be replaced. j. An approved Hennepin County permit will be required for any construction taking place within Hennepin County right -of -way. A copy of the Hennepin County permit shall be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of any and /or all construction. k. Applicant shall pay for all costs associated with the final plat application. I. The applicant shall record 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. Release of the final plat for recording shall be deemed as conclusive evidence that conditions have been met. m. The applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all required local or agency permitting. Including, but not limited to, a demolition permit, building permit, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit(s) to include the submittal of all required information. n. The City's approval of the final plat shall be contingent upon approval of the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council. -1232- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the • certificate upon said plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the applicant and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality, all in compliance with Minnesota State Statute Chapter 462 and the City of Mound Code of Ordinances. Adopted this 22 "d of May, 2012 Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1233- Mark Hanus, Mayor • • NOTICE OF MOUND CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER REZONING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT -MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY SEMPER DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPOSED WALGREENS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mound City Council will meet in the Council Chambers at Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:00 PM, or as soon as possible thereafter, on Tuesday, May 22, 2012, to hold public hearings to consider applications for rezoning (from B -1 Central Business District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District), conditional use permit (Planned Unit Development including a Walgreens with a drive - through window) and preliminary plat - major subdivision (Conner Green Addition including site development plans) submitted by Semper Development for certain parcels located at the southwest comer of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard which includes the following properties (or portions thereof): PID ADDRESS 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD • 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD In addition to the public hearings referenced above, several other applications and /or requests related to the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project will be considered including, but not limited to, specific sign plan, subdivision exemption and final plat. Additionally, a public hearing for review of a request to vacate a public alley in the project area will also be held. Information regarding the applications and proposed project are available for viewing at City Hall during regular office hours or by appointment. All persons appearing at said hearings with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting By: Jill Norlander, Planning and Building Inspections Published in the Laker on May 12, 2012 • -1234- CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF AN ALLEY • NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound, will meet on Tuesday, May 22, 2012 at 7:00 PM, or as soon as possible thereafter, to hold a public hearing to consider a request from Semper Development to vacate a public alley as described below: The public alley as shown on various documents which is located on the east 12.00 feet of the west 13.00 feet of the east 125.00 feet of Lot 52, " Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The proposed alley vacation is being requested as part of the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project which includes several properties in the southwest corner of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard in Mound. Copies of the application and related materials are available for viewing at City Hall or upon request. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above matter will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Jill Norlander Planning and Inspections Administrative Assistant Published in the Laker on May 5, 2012 and May 12, 2012 • • -1235- • April 16, 2012 To - Mound City Mayor, Council Members, and staff From - George Matthew Linkert IV, Planning Commission, 5017 Avon Dr, Mound, MN 55364 612- 245 -1030 Re - CUP on Walgreens Developement I voted against the approval of the Walgreens Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at the Planning Commission's meeting on April 2nd. The Planning Commission rushed through the discussion for this proposal. Mound deserves to have this project done in a manner which allows success for Walgreens and for our community to realize added benefits for this highly visible and important block. While Walgreens is making some adjustments to our unique community, they are fairly inconsequential in my opinion. The key problem I think is a lack of vision and and utilization of the Dakota Rail Trail and the people and potential customers who use it. Pedestrian Access • Walgreens mentioned several times about this proposal's 'pedestrian friendly features' but imagine a pedestrian coming here from the trail, and having to walk across the parking lot, and drive thru, plus just having to walk completely around the building to get to the entrance. • -1236- M15 I r.7!i 0 Vt 34 MWING SPACES W CT•J ss FCC 1346.00 t244 Mr tv, Mound has unique access to the Dakota Rail Trail... how many other towns besides Wayzata have its commercial/retail center right on the trail?! - Spring Park it's almost 1000 feet (on busy roads) to Tonka Bar and Grill, and a half mile to Lord Fletchers. - It's a 1000 feet on a busy road to Culvers in Navarre. - St. Boni is lucky to have the Bistro of course but everything else on Main Street is over 1000 feet (uphill) off the trail. �1 -1237- But as has been pointed out, what does the ped /bicyle traffic see when they get to Mound? The • Parking Ramp, a bank drive thru, a parking lot, an empty field... why would Walgreens try to cut itself off from this potential business ?! Would we let them do that? So pay careful attention to the landscaping between the parking lot and trail. Half of this is to deter trail users from the Walgreens parking lot, and it was mentioned a couple times they were discouraging trail users from parking here. These are essentially walls, and ways Walgreens is separating itself from other local businesses and this unique location on the Dakota Trail. This is not a place or business that is inviting pedestrians. Walgreens will benefit from people parking on their lot to use the trail, and run into their front door to get a granola bar. Second entrance on Lynwood /Commerce Blvd - The mayor had the right idea at the January Council meeting about Walgreens placing a 2nd entrance on the Commerce side. This entrance would be somewhat more convenient to trail users. Like the True Value, it doesn't have to be open all the time, but it is a way for Walgreens to invite customers from businesses across the street to come to Walgreens, and invites Walgreens customers to easily run across the street to do other business. Walgreens repeatedly cited "security issues" with a second entrance. If Mound True Value can handle a second entrance, I'm confident Walgreens can as well. Walgreens also suggested that a second entrance could be added at a later date. This is foolish, and short sighted. Insist Walgreens install a second entrance so it's future store managers can make that decision. • More retail- -1238- This was only lightly discussed at the Planning Commission, but one of the biggest issues with • the project is the drive - through. The space used for the drive through is half of what the building takes up! Imagine for a moment what else this space could be used for like another restaurant or retail space. 59- Cox IL e� E W r Jf Al AL ,. .. O.. — i � Y �� � •:'_......... •i.' a .1l� r ���'• � . r ss; K s x � :� f �:• . !M.! q,a t �7:_ � 4 -�:,a �� :.� ^*fit „ •:: 1 ,- "." �NCrr? ` 1• ts�! ss t �rA) i A 'Sr;@ • s� s i _� .j +S� 5i f� S. D; 3 s3 ets �.. ^� Xi �.Y 4' c e�"<C�,s:;•s'�' w,^I _ i _ k > ^'.r � �i v _ v� �i:r.3cx'�`.V✓.�Y ham. r x'M y 3.. r �3 ;: � �.•s y � .t�. 5: � - {•:� "br: i •Y•' •� .':r .i�;. :t xt; %r 4 s.. . [ ?s ;+'�' "a s '� ..�..51 :5 $i r % ;::',ti•r f' ,.b -.} �l 1' ,T.4.� a<2 b' - , a v: .,..� i fisA_A _..lr- I I think this corner can handle more than Walgreens and a tiny restaurant, especially if the drive thru space can be reduced in size. The little jewel of this proposal is the restaurant. Clearly Walgreens is surprised how popular this idea is... why isn't it clear to them that they, and Mound would benefit from an expansion of this idea ?! Giving people options will give people more reasons to come back to shop. This would also increase property values and give the city more bang for the buck. Other details - Walgreens little seating plaza on the intersection is a nice idea... but misplaced. Do we really • -1239- want to sit on the sidewalk on Commerce and Lynwood? This is similar to the circle seating area east of the parking ramp, the one that surrounds that military service monument. Do you ever see anyone sitting there? I think the only reason people sit outside Carbones is because they are set up high, away from traffic, and have food and drink brought to them. I think these plazas need to be placed on the trail side of the block, with a view of the trail. That would be 'pedestrian friendly'. Interesting video looking at Public Plaza design - hftg:!Noutu.be /FbO5l NbDkQc Good article about "places" - http: / /www.streets.mn /2012 /04/05 /place -and -non- place 1p acel I saw the traffic study done on the intersection... but it solely looked at vehicle traffic. Shouldn't the city also study Pedestrian and Bicycle traffic as well? Especially in the Pedestrian District. What the City of Mound can do- Solutions Drive Through solution #1 - Have a parking spot or two near the building devoted to Pharmacy and employees walking those deliveries to the vehicles. Possible enhancements could be the use of surveillance cameras to monitor for customers, and mobile devices to ease transactions. This will be cheaper, and much better use of space. Drive Through solution #2 - Have drive through to Commerce similar to Crow River Bank drive through, with access only for windows. Only one lane of one way traffic. Drive Through solution #3 - Have a 3rd lot drawn up on the drive through space so future • development can make better use of the space. Capitalizing on Downtown city space - Put a 2nd retail or restaurant near the Future Tenant Building and eliminate or greatly reduce the drive through access. The city has the right to maximize the development here, including collecting property taxes. The bigger the parking lot and drive through is allowed, the less money the city will take in on this development. Pedestrian Friendly solution #1 - 2nd entrance on Commerce side of building. I don't care if they block it off like Mound True Value, but it's necessary. A future Walgreens manager watching potential customers walking by on Commerce may realize the value of this addition. Pedestrian Friendly solution #2 -'Seating Plazas' moved to trail side of property, and the whole south side of the property opened up to trail users. Sidewalk solution - Have Walgreens /City build sidewalks with green buffer between sidewalk and street. Street parking solutions - Reduce driving lanes on Commerce, and put in street parking. This creates more buffer for sidewalk users, and will give trail users an easier and safer way to cross Commerce as well. Auto traffic may be slowed, but it will only be moments. TEDx10001-akes - Chuck Marohn - The important difference between a road and a street - h ://youtu.bg/- 6XRiatA N9M • Final Thoughts -1240- This development is an important one for Mound. Having Walgreens build on this intersection is • giving us a chance to show people how we value our businesses and community for decades to come! We want Walgreens to be successful, and to enhance the rest of our community. Both Walgreens, and Mound needs to think differently on how to develop this block. There has got to be more to building on this valuable intersection than just being sure the building is in the right location, and that it looks 'right'. We need to maximize the dollar value here for the city, and creating a situation where Mound and any business that builds here will be successful. Both Mound and Walgreens need to think outside the box, as this clearly is not a cookie cutter situation. Let's slow down a bit, and plan and build a successful place. • • -1241- 0 SEMPER DEVELOPMENT April 13, 2012 Sarah Smith Community Development Director Mound MN. Re: Variance Application Dear Sarah, I'M APR 13 201 2 We would like to withdraw our application for the variance for parking. We are no longer including the second apartment building in our project, and as such, and at your direction, we are no longer in need of a variance for an existing condition that exists on a property that is no longer a part of our project. Please terminate the variance application. • John Kohler, RA Minnesota Colorado . ................... . ... _._..._. 80 South Eighth Street -1242- 8000 Fast Prentice Avenue IDS Center, Suite 1275 Suite C -3 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 p. 612.332.1500 1 f. 612.332.2428 p. 303.825.7800 / f. 303.825.7801 MINUTE EXCERPTS • MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 2012 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, Douglas Gawtry, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath, and Councilmember Ray Salazar. Absent: Pete Wiechert and David Goode. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander, Planning Consultant Rita Trapp from HKGi. Others present: David Deters; John Rozen; Mike Bain, 4684 Manchester Rd; Vernon Brandenburg, 4446 Wilshire Blvd; Blaze Fugina, Laker; John Kohler, 80 So 8th St #1275, Mpls; Alan Catchnall, 2277 W Hwy 36, Roseville; Johann & Mila Chemin, 6039 Beachwood Rd; Ross Langhans, 2561 Wexford La; Mitch Madson, 2561 Wexford La; Todd Mikkelson, 1350 No Arm Drive, Minnetrista; John Tombers, 1736 Baywood Shore Dr. BOARD OF APPEALS Public Hearing — Conner Green Addition (Walgreens) • PC Case No. 12 -04 to 12 -09 and 12- 11Preliminary Plat; Rezoning; Subdivision Exemption, Variance, Conditional Use Permit, Vacation, Final Plat and a Specific Sign Program Location: SW corner of Commerce and Lynwood Boulevards Applicant: Semper Development Chair Ward opened the Public Hearing. Consultant Planner Trapp introduced the requests from Semper Development. She indicated that developments in this district follow the Planned Unit Development process. Trapp reviewed each aspect of the development in detail as outlined in the Planning Report dated March 30, 2012. Linkert asked if Met Council says "no" do we do this all again. Trapp wasn't sure how the applicant would proceed if the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is denied. Linkert wondered if the City was compensated for the alley vacation. Trapp indicated that it was not. Linkert confirmed that the variance for the parking lot on the apartment building was not needed and wanted to know if the commission would vote to deny or not address it at this point. Smith thought we would let the developer address this issue; he may withdraw it. Linkert wanted an explanation of the park dedication provision. Trapp related that the City Code requires 100 of the total land area or the • -1243- . cash equivalent. Land doesn't make sense in this case. Policy has been that it is based on tax value not sale amount. Ward asked what the purpose was for the subdivision exemption. Trapp said it was the only way to change a property boundary without re- platting the whole Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority property and doing all the title work and related actions. Ward asked why the commission is being asked to make a recommendation on the preliminary plat as well as the final plat on the same night. Trapp explained that the preliminary plat requires a public hearing at both the Planning Commission and City Council. Final plat is only addressed at the City Council level and needs to be the same as proposed in the preliminary plat. In this case, there is limited ability to change property lines or other details from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat so the applicant is requesting that both be considered concurrently. Linkert wondered if it was a minor or major matter that the drive up window is under the "restaurant" section rather than "retail" section of the code. Trapp replied that Staff believes that the drive through window reference in the code applies to either and has informed the applicant of that determination. Linkert asked about the elevation change on the property. Trapp said it was about 5 feet. John Kohler (Semper Development) — Kohler reviewed their requests. He indicated that • the parking variance for 5701 Lynwood Boulevard is not needed. It was interesting to note that the design of the smaller building is a takeoff of the railroad station theme. Salazar thought that windows needed to be added to the east and north elevations. Kohler said the design was an effort to break up the span of wall to minimize the massive building. Salazar suggested they also add windows to the trash area to improve look. Salazar thought the size of the signs overall were fine given the size of the building. He was concerned with the Walgreens monument sign and felt that in regard to the reader sign, public service information would be fine; but it should not be used as advertisement. The bistro monument sign was discussed. Kohler indicated that the bistro building will be sold and that there is significant interest right now. Walgreens will maintain everything but the sidewalks. Salazar asked if they could add one more tree. Kohler said that wasn't a problem. Salazar asked about the storm water plan. Kohler thought everything was in place. The MCWD was at the initial developer meeting. They are awaiting final comments from them. Linkert wants them to think about another entrance on the Commerce side of the building. He suggested switching the sidewalk and greenspace such that the sidewalk is closer to the building with greenspace adjacent to the street. Smith said the sidewalk • and greenspace arrangement is based on the downtown design plan. Salazar said that -1244- there would be a security issue with another entrance /exit and it would cut into the • stockroom area. Retterath felt that, since hardcover is limited to a maximum of 75% in the business districts this site should be limited to 75%, not the 81.2% proposed. Kohler said they could probably meet the 75% at the expense of some of the seating /plaza areas. Retterath felt there was a significant amount of Spandau glass. He was also concerned about light pollution on the residential side with lit towers. It was not neighborhood friendly. He questioned the 5 foot setback along the bistro building. Trapp indicated there are no mandated setbacks in the Pedestrian District; whatever is agreed upon. Site elevations were also discussed in relation to pedestrian access from the Commerce side. Trapp reviewed the written communications received. Tom Casey requested no action be taken until the Metropolitan Council decision is made on the comp plan amendment. Peter Johnson was supportive of moving the applications on to the Council for approval. He was concerned if the bistro construction was delayed that it would look bad from his property on the south. He also questioned whether the past storm drain issues on Commerce were adequately addressed. According to Trapp, Public Works Director Moore thought it had been taken care of a few years ago but would check on it. Public Comments • Johann Chemin (6039 Beachwood Rd) 1) 54 parking spaces are too many; district should have a pedestrian focus but Walgreens is focused on cars. 2) Storm water treatment system not environmentally friendly. 3) Use of solar panels to offset electrical consumption should be encouraged as a good example for the community. 4) Parking lot equals heat; could use more trees; utilize existing trees. 5) Bistro building 6 foot monument is a safety concern; bikes won't see the traffic or be seen; city liability; put bistro building further west. 6) No integration of the pedestrian in the architectural design; all car oriented; visually see the butt instead of the front of the store. 7) Building is a cookie cutter; square; big box; steeple design will be dated in 10 years. Bistro building design is attractive. 8) There seems to be signage frenzy. 9) South view is not appealing to trail users; rather than fake 2nd level try a real 2nd level. Ward indicated that any written comments received will be entered into the record. Kohler: drive up window was redesigned with Hennepin County's input and with safety in mind; in his experience the tower design is unique to Mound; Ward asked Kohler about the bistro monument blocking traffic sight. Kohler said sight line is fairly significant. • -1245- • Salazar asked about saving trees. Kohler replied that the trees are primarily in the middle of the sight; none in perimeters that would work. Salazar asked about adding windows on the north and east sides of the Walgreens building; also the south side. Peter Goshgarian (100 Orono Orchard Rd, Wayzata) He's excited about the plan. His question was about the tower, screening, and lighting spill -out to the remaining apartment building. Kohler demonstrated the elevation and tree plan. The light can be shut off after hours or permanently, if there's a concern. Retterath added that the shoebox style parking lot lights shine down rather than out. Goshgarian asked if they could have flexibility if it becomes an issue for the apartment building. Kohler said it's easy to add shields. John Royer, Jr. (2281 Commerce Blvd) He thinks the building design is gorgeous. In addressing Mr. Chemin's remaining questions, Kohler indicated that the pedestrian entry is a loss prevention issue with the front door. It needs to serve both parking lot and pedestrians from Lynwood. Salazar suggested more windows on and south side and southeast corner. Linkert asked about passive storm water systems. Kohler said that systems like rain gardens require elevations within the site that don't exist. • MOTION by Salazar, second by Penner, to close the public hearing. MOTION carried unanimously. C� Ward would like to see the reader board on the Walgreens monuments lower, more trees, which Kohler stated was acceptable, and more design on the east and south side. Much discussion about the monument sign being too tall and too large; driving distraction with the reader board; monument sign is redundant with the signage on the building; suggest eliminating the reader and raise it slightly. A second look was given to the monument sign for the bistro building. It was recommended that the sign on the north side be removed and that the monument sign for the bistro be limited to 12 square feet. Retterath urges the commission to recommend the minimum size allowed for both locations. Linkert thinks that Mound should insist on a second entrance off Commerce Boulevard. Retterath agrees. Kohler indicated that there are windows there so, in some time in the future, a door could be cut in. MOTION by Linkert to table until the next meeting. MOTION died for lack of a second. -1246- MOTION by Bergquist, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the rezoning with • conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Comprehensive Plan hasn't been formally approved by the Metropolitan Council. MOTION by Ward, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the Subdivision Exemption with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Penner, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Conditional Use Permit hasn't been approved yet. MOTION by Salazar, second by Ward, to recommend approval of the Resolution by the Mound Planning Commission Determining Conformity with Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan Regarding Vacation and Conveyance as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Salazar, second by Penner, to recommend approval of the alley vacation with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Linkert, second by Retterath, to table action on remaining applications with • Walgreens making improvements to their plan as suggested. MOTION defeated. Retterath and Linkert approved; Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar against. MOTION by Salazar, second by Bergquist, to recommend approval of the Final Plat with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar approved; Linkert and Retterath opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Metropolitan Council has not approved the Comp Plan Amendment and the Conditional Use Permit has not been approved. Reason for voting in opposition from Retterath: Final Plat is the last say of the Commission and he doesn't see why it can't be postponed briefly. Trapp added 2 conditions to the CUP staff recommendation as follows: 19. The City reserves the right to reevaluate lighting from signage and site lights should it become a problem, particularly to the residential property to the west. This may include additional screening of lights or signage. 20. Addition of windows on the north, east and south elevations as discussed. Retterath, again, thinks that the Commission should insist on a limit of 75% Hardcover. • Salazar reiterated that the City requested the impervious pavers as well as the seating -1247- • plaza areas. He said Walgreens indicated that they could remove some of that, but grass would get trampled. Trapp reminded the Commission that, in this district, the requirement says 75% or as approved. There is flexibility in this district. Linkert believes strongly in the second entrance. • 0 MOTION by Linkert to recommend requiring a 2 "d entrance on Commerce /Lynwood be created. MOTION withdrawn. MOTION by Gawtry, second by Salazar, to recommend Conditional Use Permit approval with conditions 1 through 20 as recommended by Staff and the addition of the words at least (one tree) to condition No. 8. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar approved; Retterath and Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Would like to see a second entrance; drive through was not addressed; it was rushed thru and we should have spent more time. MOTION by Ward, second by Penner, to recommend approval of the specific sign program subject to the conditions as recommended by staff and reduce the monument reader board portion of the sign. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar; Linkert and Retterath opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Building and monuments could be smaller; safety hazard. Reason for voting in opposition from Retterath: Same as Linkert. -1248- � J • C7 I* I* F-7 ll� \�\ �/ \ \ . \� 10 0 I N P °fig �g4 " > g m _a 7$m4° _ `sod m° Qz g£ p y g� o�TA Z IN p III AV RA Ig P ill y:3 YAK 12 a �$$ _ A �o < `Q\ 1l n� ' r1i O V � s Q N 8 v in i. il v r z �N1�� — ` 2 P g X� s cRANOHEw BLVD � V mot~ "' , Cm Z y m 'O $ wuNTr Ro tto 6 O v) 5 (j) 0 iy Lose \ /� \� /��� \ /► \J� n LAKE ��( nL1 \.. �:. (/1 � � • , ^' y S � O Srj2 R R nl �1 s � Y r-I- m g z � O n >�vs=� r a will m =" _ _V�= _��e� O Z. C) <� F- r 's Z g _ s I z; $=g �o +V�m� p'�ft S� Ells COVER SHEET Engineering " ^ CADD PLOT: STORE NUMBER #15150 Associates, Inc. . 2eutaRn/rnv� -i DRAWN BY: WALGREENS • ..A R %HUL ==I RS SURVEYORS �N DATE: t310/I2012 2251 COMMERCE BLVD. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS I NTIS 5 '^ MOUND, MINNESOTA 2277 NEST HIGHWAY 36, SUITE 200 (651)697 -0800 V , REVIEWED: No DATE SY DESCRIPTION ROSEWLLE, MN 55113 FAX (651)697 -0804 A. caT... REVISIONS REVISION: 0 • m F XS < a6 ffA 81. OU6 9WAob 8 b : Mix MHz lz MFk WHO F I WHO 0 x W =fib lip %nzr ssip-. O �S� U) 0 0 Z 0 F S w 0 0 • i 1 4 S � o z a 9gi s B 3s ��N�tl�b lk UP a _�° �gF «Lo 0 'NOISLI3M i090- c69(l99) XV3 £llS9 NW 3TIL13SO8 0080- c69(l99) 006 31MS '9£ AVMHOIH 1S3M cL66 S15LL N3105 1V1N3WNOLL\N3 • S10311HOLIV 3dVOSONVI 52/0A3i121l15 S2I3NNVld 52133N1'JN3 •out `saleioossy Bul raau/6u3 I m F XS < a6 ffA 81. OU6 9WAob 8 b : Mix MHz lz MFk WHO F I WHO 0 x W =fib lip %nzr ssip-. O �S� U) 0 0 Z 0 F S w 0 0 • i 1 4 S � o z a 9gi s B 3s ��N�tl�b lk UP a _�° �gF «Lo r 4 J W O 0 F J 0 0 FS F 0 ff i • -'a3m3ulaa ViOS3NNIW 'ONf10W ----- •OA18 33UMNOO IW i �31V0 SN332 OIVM r 'J.9NMVtla MgW1139Wf1N3MOIS :101daavo NVId N01111OW30 J / it N ll r 4 J W O 0 F J 0 0 FS F 0 ff i • s i • -'a3m3ulaa ViOS3NNIW 'ONf10W ----- •OA18 33UMNOO IW i �31V0 SN332 OIVM r 'J.9NMVtla MgW1139Wf1N3MOIS :101daavo NVId N01111OW30 • s i 0 0 0 9 A 1�1 A Cl ; La m A 1 A1 Q�oy N � �xzs 4A'! m A z ..,,......, 0 t 3 m Vi m. v r m 7 � 7 7 B r•Dn � o � C� o� D ( I I, 1 � a I 5 E I Lr r TItlM JO o" 01 0/8 .� E € � �I (dLL) Al aJ 1 1 o i 4 Mw t p Y mRp a goy Z NET D � so 11011 001011 Jill Cp6 > A mm F A � Z T s� N I6' r� 0 © I; I, II O O ' O 1O �I 3 z l� Qa w IN fi I �Z V O 9 A 1�1 A Cl N g y�j Z � 1�1 La m A 1 A1 Q�oy N � O w m Vi m. v r m 7 � r•Dn � o � C� o� D I Lr r � O b F 3 s 1 I i i t i " O N LITA v at at ° i x v� J at m ' Z x v7 x = � O 1 T i � o v o i1i D i O m 0 t 6 ,00m�o °.wn' O O ;m D LL�S! z FIn 44�g�; r rl� c °3 >, m i ° °� �iR �b aF is94y° °i�PRisg O Q1 �m °P m < 77°Ann4° O �g�^F °� °Z$�i�gn 2��Q�gin o yF�m og I I n g i m ° o °° q �m �g Pf v wgggnQ z< °��' y 4oy>E� �'> ¢33dtn gym' �°�a °geB5�ms ��^6 CGS 9 �° ap `: o _ Laipp 02 3 Rm41 zpi °Q3�m�R N° 4p :� ;_ °> s = m Qa a Cam° ° i�^ N� _� v 5. T M m S ° i � ui .. °yl Aj $ °a�F=QQo4�n N is 4 b _ =g o � P "- S`•£ii¢�€ S $ :� >i 'o E ° >' c in /'1 Z ? q 1^ o S F Si 4 � 8 i 5 zg£tvq�g�v m °_ ` yy 4 y�F�yy�j�1j gQQ�gj G m 3 o F1 A tl 0� O m z PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN CADD PLOT: STORE NUMBER #15150 Engineering n ? ^, PR° Associates, Inc. DRAwNev: WALGREENS ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 2251 COMMERCE BLVD. LANDSCAPE A CHI NN MEN AL SCIENTISTS DATE: �-2o -f i 2277 WEST HIGHWAY 36, SUITE 200 (651 )697 -0800 REVIEWED: MOUND, MINNESOTA NO DATE ev DESCRIPTION ROSEVILLE, MN 55113 FAX (851)697 -0804 W A. cArcNV°a. REVISIONS REWSION: 0 • 0 NOISM3M Y080- L69(!S9) XV3 £1199 NW 'Y"1A330F1 0080- L69(lS9) OOZ 3110S '9£ AVMHDI14 153M LLZL '911N IQS 'IV1N3iVNO21l/�N3 S1O311HOLIV 3dVJSONV7 SMOA3r�L1I75 SL7WIId SN33NION3 'Out `SaleposSv 6uUaauifiu3 ' • Eli Ii i affH d °Scab ��YIF a " "3-, C ff €bi a 8�8 a i gbZ €�� p i DI a 9113 V29 OUR )� 8 >6 N F -Ov g Ys ��a..��i ` >rdH �a N § Rg zai s��H 3 r°��'WK �o ��gb "R}a€ g�� $b <' $qmob <� F- L z8ak" LLJ Z j> °ate m I II § €ebsFa bebae is Z sbs'b j�S � < - �iSyk `" o � I i x 11 x � rc � �S� 8 � >'e>�� » II i � �at<u €N ■ se: n pia I d �w 4z W ° >�x ._.. .._ ... ..i , A 79 .a f Y VIOS3NNIN'ONf1ON ii ;31VO ) 'OAIB 3ON3NYVOO LSzz (V SN33NE)IVM 09M# U38Nf1N MdO1S 101d 0 0VO NVId `JNIOVNO B i 1n i S U as a s� rs� �S o 5,0 gg �� g �4 �Z I g 8 r � d . r 6�� 0 d a gy g N n + m� s; m M55�sO 0 s`o �w 4z W ° >�x ._.. .._ ... ..i , A 79 .a f Y VIOS3NNIN'ONf1ON ii ;31VO ) 'OAIB 3ON3NYVOO LSzz (V SN33NE)IVM 09M# U38Nf1N MdO1S 101d 0 0VO NVId `JNIOVNO B i 1n i S U as a 0 0 0 m to a 0 bi m i 0 zo NO3.09 ;HN -PpP °�.I.N- �" s BRS� P a o z z r x - P P m t M x gig m k m� zF o� ' ~z > L pp ; a o°z as Q S & trtg ` `>� S2" =� m m II I ul i _�-� z pi~ z1i1^ 8 � i 08� € g �c o �� Fi € o °c�" $im � z I ccm o ° 4 $ $ *> �^ 4 gg :>s2 €� I fil �� 3� >� BgQ i s8a x "WEN 61 4 � m 8x� � � �y� m � x I � e �mp c ; `S �wo �� a eo r� � � r� $QQ" ��� QQ� �0�8 �� � 3 =m d ~o" ° Am ��~ �+�" Y A f��A C �� 2" KS A L pp pll < N°A Z Q O I Fj 3 o� 9� N > a o z II o� g< v < �sy' m 4" 1sl" 4 °'�Z 9�PR �� ~8 w p I 1 _ ° i19 � ��� �� 3d ^: �$9,i �i '4"� R >i � $ .. � no>"� Si o o �n � 7 c � >m � <T9 v $ m c = q > s° $' c ; t L z -1 9 5 3� ° �gm c " am a o^ g s �aRg 7 >� "� g ill; �" E p G� �< >> $rte ° ��3 6� $ C, � zn e = $�� g � � � $ �� $� �"° A-22, €� g E g � `3 `� � 4 zoo s m>^ P� g- s �_ ^�� Ag yQ s�� �� 5 � >~ �, a e I Y 2 i �° Nod ° "" C 5 IQ 1Q " ISI = > g g1j gg 5o 3 m tgg � � n RA 92g 4 g- ~� =C `NA S � 9° ag � 9 S n� PEP R; �8 � 1001 � °m4� � � 4 mm >z �3 m � R�> � " $ < c � � m�I �� f° 4 E4�^ E yEFo >9 >� sad Q$ g�� gig on �g ;m<_ �a� Ng 1:1 Ry to ma3i gm g8y P'i6i ° iri Q$>° ■P� iy + lid mmF�$ ." "7ms 3 E _ ` ; �> o� > 8yg b'; = >gr €� m I � 4 �7 H P Ev v ~g F 2 - �2 li•~ C ° iiyz z 4 8 ` g4 z iA is i co oc Tn Pf REWSION: 0 go g 4 M g ?mom o o So° g g vyg `)=PLO" S EROSION CONTROL PLAN E Engineering LAN A H1 NV NM N L l N DESCRIPTION R 2277 WEST HIGHWAY 36, SUTE 200 (651)697 -(7 2 RSURVE • 0 NOISN3N >080- L69(1 S9) XV3 fllS9 NW JT11A3sOH 0090- L69(!69) OOZ 3L ns •9f AVMH9IH JS-W LLZZ MRS15LLN310S 'IVjN3WN0MNN3 S1J �NHJNV 3dVJS0NV -, Z i1LI7S SL3NNV-Id S2/33N- •ou/ `se4eioossy BuuGeu/fiu3 FE W S>3 9 Si h _ a1e� w� t2 359 %. _ a N 1tl N C S v 5 i p; i szc~id�k' a u; g W� x w a y I F . • E� �W Olt N M.— w z 45 gAd WMA sA r UR i= ,1 M O A Maa G H W J Z) MOR Io V1OS3NNIW'0Nn0W -03M3N3a Ln :31 "0 •0n193O213wwOD l9ZZ CTO Cif- I SN338E)IVM :Ashbm "c ' — 091St #2139Wm 32101$ =1O1d OOVO NVId unun d y I F . • E� �W Olt N M.— w z 45 gAd WMA sA r UR i= ,1 M O A Maa G H W J Z) MOR Io V1OS3NNIW'0Nn0W -03M3N3a Ln :31 "0 •0n193O213wwOD l9ZZ CTO Cif- I SN338E)IVM :Ashbm "c ' — 091St #2139Wm 32101$ =1O1d OOVO NVId unun 'I PIN L2 g£g 4 CC-) All 9 m 'r rn ill -pill z is 0 4 < 21 pill T. 1! z G 7 r"n JR IR G -Vol 1 .5 log za 4 1 pl il, AIM 2 Z L.� � >; I w•a,� A -s,� S � is ... qIU I� � I a I VT z L > "Ti 'M Ax. rri > > m Fn w NIII ,S 0 z1:1 x 0 z > KINV1 > SN 44• MIN. > Tr 'r xvi -.1.99 i IR H 4R '11 4N 99 4999 9 E 1.41 122211 A —T (.'-• M.) n gRg V. > 0. 7 C/) m >1 IN a R1, 1 1 4 A r- C) r- Irn rn 0 -0 ?4 p 9d D+ rn� z > z > >1 > r -0 L2 < rn m m I —T 11 rn rA :>j t>j Z F Fn z 0 m m r 0 z C0 z > 7=T- m i14= R, �17 Asp pa C co Z Avk 0 Z DETAILS CADD PLOT'. STORE NUMBER #15150 Engineering 0 Associates, Inc. DRAM BY: WALGREENS 4'R.-11 ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS DATE: V�12 2251 COMMERCE BLVD LAN b­SCA-PE-A-9UHITECrS - ENVIRONMENTAL SCIEN77STS Cn 2277 EST HIGHWAY 36, SUITE 200 (651)697-0800 MOUND, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION ROSEWLL& MN 55113 FAX (651)697-0804 REVISIONS REWSION 0 • 0 NOIS1438 4090— z69(1S9) XV3 £1159 NW 317L13SO8 009O— L69(1S9) OOZ ILMS •9f AVMH91H 1S3N CLZZ LLN310S 1V1N3WNO2INN3 S1O311HO21V 3dVOSONVI 5HQA3i121/15 SL3NNV7d Sl133NION3 •ou/ `sa�eioossy Bulaaeuifiu3 leaes 3riyy 150 8 - "Will §W� k°° tYYd 1� yt w a $b b c 5, PiIs, all�����,11110 1151 5 2 " _i r € b _ a ae a Y, �b RAI D WIN 5 i 6 i' •b u L WI N „ a w :3 cr 3� ��yyggg i� 9 ':I R '5 y a i .8 ai PH ;11.11 fill 0 r5 a • J i a z� o. Uz 9 0 156 !is� 4 2 6 �g 8 i w i l l 1111 ; RN O m i 0 1 �yy yq3 VI �VL' 4 QWs'j iZ �b t = Ilk PE NIT it ■ iM121 i !,, iI� G � • J i a z� o. Uz 9 0 156 !is� 4 2 6 �g 8 A Jill r w ma r o 3 L a o 0 0 i l 5501 �Z H IN g � •� 1 144,g11 i1 .114 t4b pp 15 i a RN gg E 51911 ■ uw. T A s ..o I ••u 1 (n �1I 1111 _ II II i IIII M uw I �+ur 96 ¢s an9 9 Ic �� zu N A Jill r w ma r o 3 L a o 0 0 i l 5501 �Z H IN g � •� 1 144,g11 i1 .114 t4b pp 15 i a RN gg E 51911 A s a Y p.. 1 z F �Y a 03 • V1OS3NNIN'ONf1ON 'OAl9 3Oa3NNOO Mz SN33NE)IVM :AS N 0MW 839Nf1N 3801S 101d SlIV13O s 11 b r� '1 W us �o IL T 1 � T U 11 lob < a Z L a E, R11111.4 � --!j z i) / bWr6 :s a�� i a 11 lob < a Z L a E, R11111.4 � --!j z i) / bWr6 :s a�� 0 0 0 0 :NOIS6131 SNOISIA32! AaWMA9 O i090- L69(!S9) XV! £1I99 NW 37WUS0M NOLLdIH3930 Ae 31Va ON V10S3NNIW'ONnovq 0090- L69(169) OOZ 31UIS '9£ AVMNDI14 1S3M LLLZ •�v (� MM �ISLL N31O5 7V1N3YVN02IIAN3 510311HDLIV 3dVOSONV7 'OA1830213WW00 LSZZ r� 5210A3ANl15 SLI3NNV7d 52133NION3 SN33U01VM =A8 NMVN.. L `Sal2[�OSSd 09L51 #LI38Wf1N 3i101S 101d"GtlZ U 6uPeOUI6u3 8IIV130 SN33110IVM z � O a $� H �O3 °°��i5 i ba � <•°y W W a Film Z ac cn s z E 0 0 0 z z 0 "y? {I —II m III of i U —�I Wo 9 I o. III uF III W W O O h Z M _I I I_ N o o Y- �. O W.91 zl<� 1= v 60$ a s i�4 k °�FyB��rcL" � w b ° 5 a, � ■ 'r•{.+: ,:i. III o cy m 1 J d V. I II o U. 1CI. G > 50°Nf109 A15YC1E A �z • fWll -3AY10 iv A-S -.S a m = t O O O O 00 x NITLIA ll 111111: W €� _� LU UJO. >n mob i I -III W �g s wZ . a O o ° LJ f 0 Will i 11lL! a -III —I 000 a §��>s;$ �$$qY �� us V) W`x cZ$Z <Wd W BLaW W L 8+� I�J - --FH� Ld rag LLJ �`Ly�83 Z ^ �♦ __r- z mY3 N I� `v i i _ Z JA Q �� i� o d w m a `v - -�i Z �� w O fri G Y �� a V i LLI �AYIs cV n v�Y�a�o o yo J aW ° :�RIN 0� LEA, - 31 ���iU Ngbl N i r b �z Z z� 3 "5= b (N0 'ro 0 0, Fo '0 0 to 0 0;4g WHOM ulffiL Ob Ld Y 3�' haR "Fa aRO< N - a$` I l 1. O a $ < Q v < }�" o P BX; Elm Hs = a a Q rc`ii ASi <¢ ° w d K O °eo oe °oo evo °e° popeye °o$oOOOO m dd y R A <a Z °zlz< v �' �€ �Lq'I1 '��`� m� N yVIN �Z Q 0. ><< i k 7gR =ai=i �Fl �4 g� �< 'U NZ� O Lx 9 b o yla g rz Ix w�° ro pp it 'g� >F C >3 8 rt =g Ord <� W%H i5 R 4Ra ���s - <'ey� i off' 35� q, ow F51 14 jim-- i WOW it '^ JIN I Unh lag Ld rag LLJ �`Ly�83 Z ^ �♦ __r- z mY3 N I� `v i i _ Z JA Q �� i� o d w m a `v - -�i Z �� w O fri G Y �� a V i LLI �AYIs cV n v�Y�a�o o yo J aW ° :�RIN 0� LEA, - 31 ���iU Ngbl N i r b �z Z z� 3 "5= b (N0 'ro 0 0, Fo '0 0 to 0 0;4g WHOM ulffiL Ob Ld Y 3�' haR "Fa aRO< N - a$` I l 1. O a $ < Q v < }�" o P BX; Elm Hs = a a Q rc`ii ASi <¢ ° w d K O °eo oe °oo evo °e° popeye °o$oOOOO m dd y R A <a Z °zlz< v �' �€ �Lq'I1 '��`� m� N yVIN �Z Q 0. ><< i k 7gR =ai=i �Fl �4 g� �< 'U NZ� O Lx 9 b o yla g rz Ix w�° ro pp it 'g� >F C >3 8 rt =g Ord <� W%H i5 R 4Ra ���s - <'ey� i off' 35� q, ow F51 14 jim-- i WOW it '^ JIN I Unh lag 0 0 C7 e • m z zo� > I. Z `�1 3 7 i fir' j O EJ \ F ..... x .a I I i I R N N N I / � N R SIM 9a I 1 II N R II 6� N R N II N N fl N II sv„ svD svD svo R R N N II N fl R R II p R II I� z — - - -n�I ------ 11 \ 11 ` V. ' II _.. EI It USE &T� i II '• _ R II • T Ii - - - -- i It A J� II __ IIOp " I II i t It I _ a�:t I ggg gs III -- m �pIlj I r All k p p �6 • II � f AIII g D m�� `v °a z rn ztq 0 TIT m g > . m 0 \i rn..1 In - ::a V `heY ray i *T i Z s , Co F E CE #g D� 1 _ _w ... i,. .. n E B :t Ooh ®oi� - m = < � v ° � r m a u J O w 8 Z c> y p 1 4 0 O io 8f F.mgs.ij' _ '81MUK� 1p ' � F Ns��€ � A z r \�; $ vxi o c > 9 o; -N+ o 0 IN <�I^ � 31 I =zz MA > > $� >� >vZ�xzr���� i m]m y>N "no 81}� c �IN �$� Q �o I °ER .a� <��T s� s gq � � <zm ' m m �R $ Ig o 1_ z� �x 11 on �Fd> � ��� "' !d > ;\ m O 6"rA�$ I cl ..° y? =�O B °FAQ �` ° z 4 R. (A O 171 ���$_ ° -_ 'y a���q� z D $ o�� >��� egg A 7; N 4 N +t w ♦• 2 O Z Vim° ° > ° f + > P Pi fA r, A O Z - LANDSCAPE PLAN CADD PLOT: Engineering STORE NUMBER #15150 r 4RP -P BY: WALGREENS Associates, Inc. -" 1 DRAM BY: K�� ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS N ATE: ]3/DI /2074 2251 COMMERCE BLVD. LAN A A •H ENN MENIAL l N ENEWED: MOUND, MINNESOTA NO DATE BY DESCRIPTION 2177 NEST HIGHWAY 36, SUITE 200 (651)697 -0600 _cATCNPOOL REVISIONS R£V150N: 0 N 55113 FAX (651)697 -0804 w m N ♦ m m is m 0 �; Zz e 2 m m Y A 0 in 4: Z �' f,Q N m pQg� 8� 8i gi �f O WE Wi 4 �f O y� �Z A r`i RPr11 o CA Z OA On m� S11 r>OQT NQiZ ii �l N 4p1 ppN � N\ � �� Xg mr OCp9= D O p i1 yOr mN9 p+� By +� 041 Nj T1 v ?p> �•• v pNp it RI NN$ N�p p•m7 O� °12 N 0A AC py D �� D O O y5 A� �� w � 4�1� y11w ti °o gN ppo Sc P>m Z�gz mw mm z t)y c)y �Ig oa O J c Q CO ®o❑ m o � � N FZ EFw a Q N LLI Lo W 3 o o m z x z e u NU2 O d� N ya § °q o LL o Z Q W w,pi m a5 £far m F i z ail z =N e3 % N O i >Z W m w u1 tf R R O V 3 .n q_ F Jm7 W QZ �i>> E i O m< �- O =� != m U W 30i N a 4a Q ij W 0 CL LL z N; Z� i < N N M III W N Z Z Z t,7 IL U U 4 U K N N O LL WQ N .. = FIx r o °w W W o rc a N o g ; a a S U iZ a a �o zoz i u O O o W 3 5 v 3 5 rc o Y N c4 ya ttl i5 Z M G H N Nib.!n F� ff oaC W is g oT`e z z W ° "3 e a -� ,`�, d � a 00000000 00000 0 I` IySI7e �� 6!s d d Ydl e �izi aid �i� I I 1 I I I I I I I I I O O I I 0 3 ® Oaa as O � Y ® u ® Oar m °0 ® ° W V � 3 � ® > ® o z z 0 0 J W W W I F i j N 0 aib O I z alI� W I j j I a4 i sl ■ !�. y!i� • r m I'. al'. m � IW ti i a a 0 a � m a a r m a 41 .I'R m ca ,I eR ° jio C4 m m S I I T I I O = 1 I Q O O a a 0 El EF3 a r 4 .-,gv ® O - �a O �>r tia TR G B G 1 I I I _ I I I I I I I Is I$ - °Ik 41a .I� [QC ¢ F p 95P E I I I I I I I I I I I I 18 n " all z m fa R _ �n N y 0 _ E O °m O O =� T o p°y O p z • N .. a N A C A o i m z O o w O 1 v o 0 0 G : m i Z i i I� n m O A r o *L < D N �8 _r m ' °e $ r_ m �m z 1" ((1��I Cm�0 z Dm ''� ¢�z bOd® : s �i pn Q `< 3 ~ ha v X Z�'n y A Z < m z y m x�e : { A M�0 A A ~ O D Z O O Z .71 p£ G� Zo T Z N A A A PIP m ? o mgB m °! m czi m $g i o a $ m m �_ r`_�r99 "�_ O C m N o f ig 0 1 GZi 1 T 2 Z ? 8 g �n I/j� p Z p m N Z IVJV iV ❑ ❑ ® Now ®o❑ $ o m ci �N $= e 3 0 o o S i o Qr o .�- NUz W w � � � N U U ❑ $ ds LL. o? o LL o Z¢ w wo7N w m z z �E_ ; w w O z co Wpp F O1 z z SN` g�' " y m N O f w ix>z o m 3 F c{ z U w o =e " �i ¢ z 'o am0 w w; w w a SE i F W m ti i O z Sn� ! U W �a ❑o ~ R ~ E wKi�� �� ®QQQ �s� p 30 uy p o rc a F H ° °s �° h H r 3 ly LU a LL v$ o v K _ w n a w U N N w o wW uz »o ii aaaa LLo �f°o 0 p� fe o w o N w� 3 .�,' U i a a ¢ o O O rc �O® O® Z O N $ 8 S $Id $I W i ❑ _ m a a3 a d4 g s e (-)®00 @0 LEJ 41¢ .�i �i? bly $I I ^I I j I �99 j I J I m I W R ^ $ O I tl j I j I = j �jF �16 �14 W W bl" hl•. hls H bl� $jam 81� W e 3 W R J J � � M u » i It blh ' I I y I 1 � I I OR I I ® I I I I Ky F _ J a F a O Z � O F � - a _ a > � W J W W = U3 I I I '61� hl •. hl r alb $IW b� � ■ J Y u » Z "s • m 0 s N 8 N 4 m 2 O -1 O m m i m 0 u M� m 3� n �V V) ® ❑O _ Ln < N c ? N E O Z i A m N A ° m r7. w � v _ � ¢ $ m 0 m m � � a > F o Fryi F m >gjs sS ggqo I A s m � � o 0 m o Pm9� € -o TM TM o£AO M IK'A s z m m CwF o f1 i Q m -4 vom �S aw O A A A m �� Z0 Z m 2S 1S � 3 ai 0 3 m O o m ° 0 a .l 5 m N� $ z n z m a m ao® 15 b g s � s b f n �V V) ® ❑O zmo Ln < N c ? N E O °ym i A A ° m r7. o m m 0 i ° N p N > F m ;s m I A s z ;pi z o 0 m a i s z m m CwF o f1 i Q m -4 vom �S aw O A A A m �� Z0 Z m b b b r O 3 ai 0 3 m O o m ° 0 a .l 5 m N� $ z n z m a m • • a; g C s e a e e e e e e b e e C a e e e b b e e C C g e e b C p a e b b a a b a a a b b b b b a o b b b a s a a v a b n ° b b g b b b g b b o a a b g b b bme b g g B g a C b a g e b a b e C 9 b a o b b b b a a b + ++ a ++ C a a a s °PRCOERTY' LINE a a Or 9 C £? g b C o b b C? C +> C C G CIl C r !f � x C C C L L b g a B a b a+ p+ � b i f g b 5 b B b b o e L C C L C >? d? g b M O g C C ta a s g g b b b o ? 9? C C MM b C C C C Ztj a a b b e e b b be + f., b C a b b b dog a g e g e g g g I b a a b b C b g g g g 9 9 9 9 9 g OPERTY LINE o b a a b a a b b o + w a b b a b b a a a e b b a a b a b ++ L L w> e CUh4ME5REE' BL�/D' b a a a b b a C a v a o g a g e a e e e e b C i Q z 0 W, �F g @pR 8 � 5 o D � rn + if a x o � ; A F i 3 � u- � a �a M"I m Mpg V) ® ❑O O Ln < N c N E O E E £ w 3 3 3 i 0 m A ° m r7. o m m m m i ° N 4 IT 9 o w > N � r � T ;s m I A s Z z D z o 0 0 0 0 N ° n ° P ro f1 i Q 3 C y{pP P 8� aw O A A A m S b b b r O m fig F b b b b � u- � a �a M"I m Mpg V) ® ❑O O Ln < N c rt� y�1 3 O E E £ w 3 3 3 n0n A ° m r7. o i ° N 4 IT 9 o w O N � r � m I A s 0 0 n X O ro f1 i Q 3 C y{pP P 8� aw O is � u- � a �a M"I m Mpg ® ❑O ® ❑$ c rt� y�1 3 OR n0n m ° m r7. i ° N 4 IT 9 o w ms m 0 6 b A N Z C 2 oy o O :� (D -0 C y{pP P 8� aw m is m S b b b r O m fig F b b b b K z m ao® b g b b b b � u- � a �a M"I m Mpg ® ❑O ® ❑$ rt� y�1 3 OR n0n m ° m r7. i ° N 4 IT 9 o w in Z C 2 oy o O :� (D -0 C y{pP P 8� m w 00n i m S i r O m fig F < w K z m ao® l0 1, 0o ON M V l 0 M M M f i M M M 00000000 } W J 00000000 woQ N Z p s` ZO �^ W V: V: vvv Z� UL Wz (�� q�yp�F Z m�$y F ulU NNNNNNNN O a w v m U ° L �aa�°+o H i E'er o O WWC J O .n = pa 'o0 �g °ow Q E1 m- E J L J Z C vW Z a 011 z a: v r,o ��_�_�_vv_v_v W Z O F Y wK m d A Z W 0 O i H1UON V) w- F b °- E i € r I # *k 11 0 Z C a« 1/1 U c W u E q c E ce O f� o _ _ 0_ f� m_ o_ 0_ /� ■LL 1' O 2. O t O L K U O O d U O: d d Q. ♦2 d f1 Q. + + + + + + • W m o CO }� ao o',omc Z Z z o �aJ �2 a M ry U $i z W oa Ln } a ° ° w W N > � CC z G 0 i + Q0z + -° �rom�•a `°$'"rro °rv,y oa °� L�ni„og S.° `; psc rnm n rn',`roE a a i�c°�io c -mod$ ��cro`o £r �= rooY occ rWV 1O1 or_ A = x.: $ �E g rE r Vciec i °rro n3c -i i roa i "�o V d� °v Z6 c m ,.; fz':ia =EEO t�zn 3QS ° S; v 5 E m °° ro E o$ -`° E = 3? o E i s n v E °° °O1n' E ro ' io u io °- E c� cg' ^3 >iP.'o xz.° E m oro _`ct $H$N °m "ro E a=^jO yam �� c bm3� o o'a' c 'od ed o' 0`^^r u _ coo m can Z c �= zms3 e� -Ecs= w qo u �qq.m�E v `Y u= ai' °w °M ?� ? A nom'^ ` _Z F m „�rm F s'ro F, au =� awnc0r.°� _ m orn ~OC ° �35oz .. „w 6:3NO3 rc A '.°.°one g „r°, ro `9n i °z zc zpz c° a °a F`mE E L m v��Ln�9 vc `c „_- dog�3 =gpto ?v� °ate "A,�o B6.'`m faW pOygt� �vLC ��otl°ol� caa �i°O noN`oa < `p VL'i ne ° orA M °m roLL ro� n ro - _ r ra roan =��aqA caE °ltd° u sdA _ _ Sao o�� I'- - a - a m o�oo°t' u nwo$ 10 �0�� d H`oNC d - -�F ° oo,� og�000 �a°NOOe oco F LO�Eu °m3taoemc =E° F ° -nud c -�° F ceo_ `m °ego b ee mks O °n��Z o&'mro3E ro n 6E z p °nr A -°L ``::r �a = -O� ti ? w c c d rov :s romiz Qmy °'�=� E _tz Vanicv^' E o"�� E °ro.3ae E vat z_o �o „Eii u O E ��z �V' ` a�= rn °a o` ouc < or.. b 3no r?dit,e? < £ r�,rvlo < o3 dtm a `� ° -Vu a ;pO ova cozW o Z �° c °c; >° „ .°.c9 ° ° z ° °?? ° do `aL $�ms'Su - bo �z LL ^ °<` =o a d� „c _ ��E room '-+ C- o��iaro 3 r -a E `o o° o�c a��9 =rco`� _ co L-m lq« ro�p orN9_ °v oo3A3nr c rv'�F� �3o doo o w nG °`-r n g z9 �° x °Od °qNC °3E °_- ° -"`�'r €rvro °° €o- m ;iYt Yt%` ;moo orvz oo:miz a W o ro” aaV d dL' - r om.a ovoo° °mZ „ „i{=s °aAz ° 3r ��°nd oroJz Ny9on�d rory �GV aYZg 3 �>wrocac °° s` ° rom° „ °c a ° o ro „ m 0 oe O tT nt •• J3£`gnr pr- �a2''3g =O ,„y �Y ni -°tl A'� �^ �8` �., aep�iJ✓ i w' Ex� r o^<, n._. ?Ti o ° yy co�Lit ^5 0� c�3 O_ U >9` ?`oi °o °oo,id °iHC oc`� NW rmi u7n� 3n° czud «tlN °-' o..z 3 -nEE 'S »a =_ a,go Z o - _ ` e - _ _ ac �z_A a��z rowo °o ^ °c Q�p `; 'c 'i ra--� oc Z V. = c o u O nom- °^ `mod - E'ov s`'S ..oQ °9�Y.°. =c °cam q�ro u,cu �Etl,�ym N ° _GZ ° ='m” ia� rc i nit a'a r J.y.• L•�n °� V '° na ° n v G. �v°0 a ` w Ov N�r.e c pa `o y, z wmt ov „ N e % om zc.s„ �Gn X V E »"' 'n .._., 9r .. nu �1 ;;Es - 5° W �z� �d o �rE �t 3 p[ avJ v =° °'° °"°ro"w°e'° °u=° V�goros w °r.ipn'a v�.°��05{: O1so 9`9c °fo„ z�Z < yy�� L4 f° „,o `ez i „roO icuS v f wz i� x U F `ro •n, .� F -rO ro a- ro g r„ o i e; u4 s b m ° ^° 2' c E e t x` c i E c$ c c c 0 ce`Y °w�dod mE�Om° ro - ma„cr9N -d�do m n9�cu° mm abd Oo`o Z me eEE E��� N'E E Le mn �vAdi ndi° w O« �` 3° °� °tea- `?3 °m- = a'oJ „ °o° ,e V c�irv"o=c „ o.� e�ro m��ma€ a °i r ee roL':�i9r rY zm,,;ro _�” ? `J$Da -n° ^a� vVm �aad° "e �R1. 1, �6� wom on O of < ,9 ciz °o° ? o� <ex`4a� °�� o° Qri° c «„`m b� fat° i3 =--aa- = '`Y _ i.. .a m:n ov V- x O roE �o�ri �.: uo u uo uo -„i O rvn dYu J �i �-Oe t °z °5w?vro a5 m• t rz z °? =o£i.% �i Est' Iz 'aa�i �i `o .. tea -- Q 1=u° z.-_ ^_ z^ - z° _ z.. _ z.-_^ z d ro 4 CQj C°o� CUj COQ CWT CLL�CU� Cij Ell rJ + T \ I "1' -� '4La 'Lill 'fl '035 i0 15tl3 3 .... �'�_ N1 65'8L91 - _ M,1S,6gf05 35 3 i0 MYI -. r '0A 78 - 7- M7AlV6 O OLI '00 N"(I' ONf10i 4La 'I 'M ��I�IiH gg tlTNp13MW II J ��1 y' • M.4S,BgL05 '03s n a3na00 f/I a CxkS iq. A.P.9,160XOS 3Ttl'1 .rave � �..5A s�� - Ln3l.rmou �o3 '1 aromwt 'LS 10, In ZS ;' w . 0(• - 1 Ne#JN3H OHf10j 8 i0 3111 Isva 8iS 4La 'LIIl 41 O3"a 'X O 8 i0 a3<+aOJ STS _. -_cif 6Z \ c. \ - r I I v I I O d 9 3� Co � In j O a CO S9 -- O V W 0 N II C o T z N Z u o � a Z < ru xm w H<uIm x O z K V 2 4 Fj UUU < z m ZJ� W z�z -z z a Ti u Viz.,°„ a ooW �WH z rC W ° z �uLs i� S. oiu= nz�k v' 0,v =06$ Z om i ZRu OI W,°., 0 2 TCw U x °oggz-- Q oo� Z d w a5 oc',o ?Iz Y m F- wozQOa 0 �z> - z N�ogz> Z Z o°�E a s mT m } V Z w azw�a W� O z aJ �6= c, + + + zW ZwZZ >� Z 0 z ru >_ � C u 06 �wko3��uu°u g R vw I x CN o w z ri`I . xz g �w p b zLLz w �Y ���a > 'POxw z 62 tzz��zW w za zz r�z� ,UL oa of 3xxul'14u���i J p. + q a z8t2_ -. 0 ZQH o w mZ o z X . °- O a �oNOtx�gosi��z� Z z$uzaeoQa >zoogt3oo�� m$wx0� zswuozz E�oE� °>oz��40�o5G�� orr a >zzwoS a ao O �zrSIiNWF<zT <n"c1a �Nz u�HU„�oa�p >OoeeG<Vz O �f�E'xoz= mstNo3=YF j HLL 0r��i1�33 i1 o�=5s3owe�FZ� u a � U v O m C� o Z U 0- a o a zo Z Z oo o =t -H O O �CZ zao UO OJ a �a Y j .. ti Ho O op0 3iN 4 mQ >� n a Z < ru xm w H<uIm x O z K V 2 4 Fj UUU < z m ZJ� W z�z -z z a Ti u Viz.,°„ a ooW �WH z rC W ° z �uLs i� S. oiu= nz�k v' 0,v =06$ Z om i ZRu OI W,°., 0 2 TCw U x °oggz-- Q oo� Z d w a5 oc',o ?Iz Y m F- wozQOa 0 �z> - z N�ogz> Z Z o°�E a s mT m } V Z w azw�a W� O z aJ �6= c, + + + zW ZwZZ >� Z 0 z ru >_ � C u 06 �wko3��uu°u g R vw I x CN o w z ri`I . xz g �w p b zLLz w �Y ���a > 'POxw z 62 tzz��zW w za zz r�z� ,UL oa of 3xxul'14u���i J p. + q a z8t2_ -. 0 ZQH o w mZ o z X . °- O a �oNOtx�gosi��z� Z z$uzaeoQa >zoogt3oo�� m$wx0� zswuozz E�oE� °>oz��40�o5G�� orr a >zzwoS a ao O �zrSIiNWF<zT <n"c1a �Nz u�HU„�oa�p >OoeeG<Vz O �f�E'xoz= mstNo3=YF j HLL 0r��i1�33 i1 o�=5s3owe�FZ� z O oS Z U 0- o a zo Z Z oo -H O O �CZ zao 'z� Y z <m0 .. ti Ho 3iN °o mQ >� n OZ °mm = ww0 z U O !Q20 z�Zawif °M ec °pu m 'u 38�a m�rc�s z�So + a Z < ru xm w H<uIm x O z K V 2 4 Fj UUU < z m ZJ� W z�z -z z a Ti u Viz.,°„ a ooW �WH z rC W ° z �uLs i� S. oiu= nz�k v' 0,v =06$ Z om i ZRu OI W,°., 0 2 TCw U x °oggz-- Q oo� Z d w a5 oc',o ?Iz Y m F- wozQOa 0 �z> - z N�ogz> Z Z o°�E a s mT m } V Z w azw�a W� O z aJ �6= c, + + + zW ZwZZ >� Z 0 z ru >_ � C u 06 �wko3��uu°u g R vw I x CN o w z ri`I . xz g �w p b zLLz w �Y ���a > 'POxw z 62 tzz��zW w za zz r�z� ,UL oa of 3xxul'14u���i J p. + q a z8t2_ -. 0 ZQH o w mZ o z X . °- O a �oNOtx�gosi��z� Z z$uzaeoQa >zoogt3oo�� m$wx0� zswuozz E�oE� °>oz��40�o5G�� orr a >zzwoS a ao O �zrSIiNWF<zT <n"c1a �Nz u�HU„�oa�p >OoeeG<Vz O �f�E'xoz= mstNo3=YF j HLL 0r��i1�33 i1 o�=5s3owe�FZ� 0 0 0 3oz xsnu+ v, n1 o•Z 3o c� •<c aNaw nzn zi �O cw Z ^v _w 3� - =mn_ ° >qo^,D Nio ? °^• zm ? ASH »A o� F _Q o 3 0 n w 'c c z o y .a1 '° o n o A z o^ O w ^= N z »» a c n n a °^ -nom w �'o ay,°„n -� oa °.' °. �T'w »�o•�'^ o,v f =•� oo �i °, ?N o 'nom no.. a n' a •2n nAm z� »D �L; yams = °wJ o'^n�5. » °a -nuo ^ «�� �Ao,°..^' •�i >m �^ m w G 3nti oxR ^'? spy q »N» ono °i °r'o ..< n °n S m' ° n (n!�- _ n Q n 3 rmn' n o _ �m aMy y'w° Om on �o owl gU^m'G zsr'o fnv�.a o - o .. a »�o^ yN ��o o+ °.Nda° fan w vn^ oJO 0 3? >> Mo �g�io° S^ Od w^ �onnx �°, og� ?, r n �n� _ ^-^• cm m e v n .. ^ m x o_ r o A m$ n ^Ono '< A n 'o F^ a z om .m.. A� ? ?N -°^°� �'m >-OC O'N^x; ^m c,^„n': .'o, 3nN ow - ^° r°n•2L ��On inn ^ 3o 3 i a O npy°,F as 3c nn a,w,F aa^ ^'< o _ ai - a ^wAtio v� ° �w ;"^ cn'n S' ^ ° ^''nn °�^,° �?o mn ?,o ° p z� d°o po o A Un - -�� is °.,ox m'Tic n °mo -ao °,� � S', m �o y.�.� Oo = 3 wwC'.c o. = o Ndd z��� -n ��n� _ ^ n �a O Ooo� m g �^ �c�•2 Anse y.mx i�'n� o,g„o, 3 m�cNFti n� ^a ini c= =o S.A oz e'• °o3 an o _c Z M °O m ro^ex 'n o.y'•� T�^nn a�^° loon °w^'a3 a s gn wo ° a zoo �D a n« y •2 a nC�m00 va,S o� ^i`5.. °Ono o. 3 n 2 0 3 o o n M o o w o N? w n w x tier m . < pW0n No�,'� 0 oN �qa p o m oz > >3 z o O z 3 T s O o T z 0 p N w o n? z^ n z 3 ;�3 f T as »� zss o 3 -o ^nom. o s no,n� a o nz �zH £o oj °d �n' �;-Z, 1O �,a s� a N ^O_ c-,o., 'wn n' °c n �+ �` !� ° ? S o - o £ Z nr m^ c o Na env Gn -o- Am ^nn g��'•'' .°.�s�° v < ° o- '°ion Woo z o N" �a on g I.s wo o�S maxd o m °m -`&m g R A °�� rn Z y� V w u N n b= z N O j O a n ? O -� coSV �n� ew^ L o O wwon �'o C) m m Z _ D n w O O n m O Sm £ e'c ; nT-ib ;z tinin ar- 3z gnlnw+ m O non'o3) nd HOc� n�I �sw ii nE o =o s 3 . o� ., -zm�? _ o >^ 1 P� sn a3 vrn� w <m 'n.Nws•,� 3 �w.�0 wo57. noneo Nv an�0 °o 3n �o w?O o �� N �vAi n Nm °nnZ 3P 3 3�; rc n m v wP 2s3�m o mf w3 I To poi =ztn" 'd �Fz �n ^�wSc PT m °c n^ n z m ^ �ii 1x �= sF •w^•Q H� < <,. {^" ;O n?I aj am zvo z c A 'L D 'o"K m c £ n n-nID Cn d�no �3 io wn o ooi m �o "•Z APP� ^pO-z '_'^ f mA cm Z°' v n < a � ow °c Q'3^ z m � o .z< mr— o ,q 0 i� ii n 7 ; Tn yy�g°» op o 2 Z ^'mu po J of 3 <. v - n'f° ° - „a �o O •' G i OO G n3 v o m n m y^ n= a z n O O ^: o o. F p3^� rI c z z w a w ° O ^ < H >> ? N I v c 3�� �n3 ^•cP •°- O n n O n o.'. o.. �a w c _ ur In IF o- 3 m n �wycp 9, �? w c a ie <mac �u nN ^nc 5o � 3�n° n n o 0 3 O 7 H o I o 0 ^33 °,< m am 3 o n o w° o < r ^ 3 a u,aN n n3w p a n a ? w c ?o,'",c o � n L O O OO i � � T N f— Z O O D Q z W W moo �J DC w Z Z O U 6S 9. \ M, 15,60.£OS - --- iN3JONOW '07 NIdiPN3H 0Nf10,1 'bLD 'Lill 'bl 735 10 23N3O7 b/I 3 \1 I II I I I I i � a o� �w U 3D 0 5 Z a� W � a � ua u H J D Na 60 Z 00 g h II 13 >Zpry aw za °a00 . I a I„ 7530 00 b _ 7 b °s n ��0w�w3 _j - _______ .S9 ______ i o a^ z I°. r °o V 2 LL Z�NVI a N J z Q Z U Oxv uu1- °� °'z O�+�o Q =Z —1 ?jl` V Z 0 V0O� f l ° I u 222Zo "Sm7Zo 6S 9. \ M, 15,60.£OS - --- iN3JONOW '07 NIdiPN3H 0Nf10,1 'bLD 'Lill 'bl 735 10 23N3O7 b/I 3 \1 I II I I I I i � a o� �w U 3D 0 5 Z a� W � a � ua u H J D Na 60 Z 00 g h II 13 >Zpry aw za °a00 . I a I„ 7530 00 b _ 7 b °s n ��0w�w3 _j - _______ .S9 ______ i p tzj a^ aZ °'3 I FEW NM So J �l� ti I CO o 0 7 C3 Cc — II / a II I � s IfL n� I I ii I I ii° I u° I I �'gi I I'h I � I II I I I II u II n II �� I I ii II II II II I II I ill II III I I � I III , I III I I� Z Z W 2 0 Z & . Z U W t ^ ?O ry \+ z m , N = p[ Z Z ? jZ mm ry K Op a W oa o Z W t Dv O N • ° wu oa ? cC W W w Z� N 0 Z uS ----- -1- - -- I 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — •• • -� W21 'Lill 41 '735 40 V/1 3S 3H1 dO 3N1 1SV3 -. — I �. i I1 3 - y i i♦ - v i M•6S,6C6£OS T vxol3Nmw J ..�lb7d �I r .... 3AV1 ��Aavd 1- r r, s'� s °'B) Dawn OW '09 'a - -- EE'80Z' - -- --- i O'IOMN-L 'ZS 10'1 j.�j �'S' Nd3MAH CMYIO4 a -- !0 341 LSb3 i N 80 S 'bU 'L111 'M '73S - ,1O D3ND07 MS 9L'991 — I -� os — L_ — — - - - - - -- --; I j tu1.P9,60xJ ' 60'0l I I I I I loN I 1 O = n� i p tzj a^ aZ °'3 I FEW NM So J �l� ti °o_ f” =OQ Q =Z —1 ?jl` V Z QW < LL�Z=� f l ° I z'maW� moa°a°s wu oa ? cC W W w Z� N 0 Z uS ----- -1- - -- I 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — •• • -� W21 'Lill 41 '735 40 V/1 3S 3H1 dO 3N1 1SV3 -. — I �. i I1 3 - y i i♦ - v i M•6S,6C6£OS T vxol3Nmw J ..�lb7d �I r .... 3AV1 ��Aavd 1- r r, s'� s °'B) Dawn OW '09 'a - -- EE'80Z' - -- --- i O'IOMN-L 'ZS 10'1 j.�j �'S' Nd3MAH CMYIO4 a -- !0 341 LSb3 i N 80 S 'bU 'L111 'M '73S - ,1O D3ND07 MS 9L'991 — I -� os — L_ — — - - - - - -- --; I j tu1.P9,60xJ ' 60'0l I I I I I loN I 1 1 O O <uZ Zzr a^ I FEW NM — I -� os — L_ — — - - - - - -- --; I j tu1.P9,60xJ ' 60'0l I I I I I loN I 1 1 O O <uZ Zzr a^ I FEW NM I 1 g gZi ' ' I I I I I i wh� I I I I O Aavd 01OMN1 'LS 101 ` a `•' 1\ 3 I I I(�!j I 3 3H1 ,10 d-U1 153M I r r l • O M M•04.90.ZON R R I 1 1 1 Z > 9 � � � a ap I I I > _ N _ 7530 Ob'Ob N 1 i ;1 I i p pppp I I - N � 3 x O I i 11 ' zoo I I o � I f 1 I I I ________ _______________ I , I 1 I I ' I I I I , I ' 1 I I I I -- I � I I I INiN6V3 w„n °N ;SYN,E] — -- - - - - -- M „6S, I y °sa Zzr a^ I FEW NM ________ _______________ I , I 1 I I ' I I I I , I ' 1 I I I I -- I � I I I INiN6V3 w„n °N ;SYN,E] — -- - - - - -- M „6S, I y °sa Zzr a^ I FEW NM 11 I+ zz oz' M „OE,ZOoZOM Co I I I 7 � M � II I � I I - I I NOU IN3WWOW m-1'IOd Dad VWAMU 97V1 .72Vd — OIOMNl, 'ZS l.Ol ,10 3N11 153M 341 H11M 1311v'w 3N1 -, — — — — -- — — — f l — — — — — -- — — I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I w�� I w I I�Zg� I aN° I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w�� I w I I�Zg� I aN° I I I I I I I I I • • March 26, 2012 ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ■ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 2277 West Highway 36, Suite 200 Roseville, MN 55113 (651) 697 -0800 Fax (651) 697 -0804 www.ceieng.com Sarah Smith City of Mound Community Development Director 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Hardcover /Landscaping Calculations for Walgreens #15150 Dear Sarah, RECD MAR 2'6 2012 Attached is a break down of impervious /pervious calculations for the remaining apartment building and the Walgreens Development: Apartment Building (Total Site = 16,638SF): Impervious: Building = 4,046 SF Shed = 35 SF Sidewalks = 444 SF Bituminous parking lot and drive = 6,791 SF Total = 11,316 SF or 68.01 % Pervious: 5,322 SF or 31.99% Walgreens Development (Total Site = 56,494SF): Impervious: Walgreens Building = 14,591 SF Bistro Building = 1,010 SF Conc. Sidewalks = 2,512 SF Paver Sidewalks = 1,676 SF Bituminous parking lot and drives = 26,102 SF Total = 45,891 SF or 81.2% Pervious: 10,603 SF or 18.8% Providing Consolidatf_1269 Development Services CALIFORNIA 0 TEXAS ■ ARKANSAS & MINNESOTA N GEORGIA 0 PENNSYLVANIA Landscape Calc's: Vehicular Use Area: 24,060 SF - This was calculated per the attached PDF, including all parking stalls & drive lanes. • Interior Landscaping Requirement: 24,060 SF x 5% = 1,203 SF Interior Landscaping Provided: 2,075 SF - This was calculated per the attached shaded PDF, to include all parking lot islands, and 5' adjacent the parking stalls along the west and south sides. Per Code, nothing was included within the setbacks along Lynwood Road. Shade Area Requirement: 24,060 SF x 25% = 6,015 SF Shade Area Provided: 7,386 SF - Per Code, "mature tree height according to typical nursery standards times 0.66 equals canopy spread ". CEI assumed both the oak and maple at 60' (figuring smaller then typical due to parking lot plantings). This doesn't take into account for any afternoon shade the evergreens will provide for the entire row of parking along the west property line. 60'x 0.66 = 39.6' diameter Area for each tree = (3.14)(R2) = 1,231 SF x 6 trees = 7,386 Sincerely, CEI Engineering oci es Inc. a Alan Catchpo PE Department Leader U -1270 - 0 • PLANNING REPORT -7-1 TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Rita Trapp, Consulting City Planner Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: March 30, 2012 MEETING DATE: April 3, 2012 APPLICANT: Semper Development REQUESTS: Preliminary Plat for Major Subdivision (Public Hearing), Rezoning, Subdivision Exemption, Variance, Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Vacation, Final Plat, Specific Signage Program CASE NUMBERS: 12 -04 to 12-09,12-11 LOCATION: Corner of Commerce Blvd and Lynwood Blvd PROPERTY ID: (8 parcels) 14- 117 -24 -34 -0050 14- 117 -24 -44 -0033 14- 117 -24 -44 -0034 14- 117 -24 -44 -0036 14- 117 -24 -44 -0037 14- 117 -24 -44 -0038 14- 117 -24 -44 -0039 14- 117 -24 -44 -0064 ZONING: R -3 and B -1 to PED -PUD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PED -PUD and Park under review by Metropolitan Council I. BACKGROUND The applicant, Semper Development, has submitted development plans for the redevelopment of the corner of Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. The application materials include a request for rezoning, variance, preliminary plat for major subdivision, vacation, subdivision exemption, conditional use permit (CUP) and final plat. The site area is 1.30 acres or 56,494 square feet. It involves the removal of an existing 15 -unit apartment building and four commercial buildings. The redevelopment of this site is entirely private with willing sellers. The project includes the construction of a 14,378 square foot Walgreens and plans for a 1,010 square foot future tenant building. It is Staff's understanding that the intent for the future tenant building is a restaurant/bistro but an owner has not yet been identified. The development also involves a land transfer between the applicant and the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCCRA) to modify the amount of right -of -way surrounding the Dakota Rail . Regional Trail located immediately south of the project site. 123 No-1271-'d Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338 -0800 Fax (612) 338 -6838 p• 2 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 • II. PROCEDURAL ITEMS The applications under review include both land use and subdivision requests. As a Planned Unit Development (PUD), dimensional and design standards are regulated through a conditional use permit (CUP). This process enables the City Council to establish conditions for the operation of uses which are in the best interest of the surrounding area or the community as a whole. Section 129 -38 of the City Code states that the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety, morals and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands. It also provides criteria which the City may use in evaluating a proposed conditional use. 60 -Day Land Use Application Review Process Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. The CUP, rezoning, variance and signage plan were received on or around March 1, 2012. A letter of completeness was sent to the applicant on March 21, 2012. The 60 -day timeline expires on or around April 30, 2012. 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. Because the applications were submitted in conjunction with a preliminary plat additional time may be taken if determined necessary. 120 -dav Subdivision Review Process Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, local government agencies are required to approve or deny subdivision requests within 120 days. The preliminary plat, final plat and subdivision exemption requests were receive on or around March 1, 2012. A letter of completeness was sent to the applicant on March 21, 2012. The 120 -day timeline expires on or around June 29, 2012. An extension of the review period can occur if agreed to by the applicant. Public Hearino City Code Section 121 -61 requires that a noticed public hearing of the preliminary plat be held by the Planning Commission. It is the only one of the applicant's requests that requires a public hearing at the Planning Commission. The public hearing notice was published in the Laker on March 24, 2012 and posted on March 20, 2012. The Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all affected property owners located within 350 feet of the entire redevelopment area on March 22, 2012. is -1272- p. 3 • #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 City Department, Consultant and Agency Review and Comments The applications and accompanying submittals were routed for City department, consultant and agency review on March 5, 2012. Subsequent application materials submitted in advance of the Planning Commission meeting were also forwarded electronically to the same departments, consultants and agencies. These follow -up submittals included a revised plat where the 5701 Lynwood Boulevard parcel was removed from the redevelopment project and changes responding to a March 14, 2012 City Department Meeting with the applicant. Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing related to the preliminary plat -major subdivision and vacation information was also provided to the private utility companies on March 22, 2012 and March 27, 2012. Comments received are summarized below: Public Works Superintendent Jim Fackler No comments. Fire Chief Greg Pederson No questions at this time. • Hennepin County — Bob Byers Refer to letter dated March 27, 2012 which has been included as an attachment. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) —Steve Christopher Mr. Christopher participated in the March 14, 2012 meeting with the applicant. The applicant was advised at that time that they are able to submit an application to start the MCWD review process at any time. Mediacom — Chris Thompson Mediacom has utilities that will be impacted running through the alley and along Lynwood that will need to be addressed. Inquired if there was going to be any sort of easement along the old alley. This inquiry was forwarded to Semper Development. Frontier Communication — Steve Storo Requested contact person /project manager information for the Walgreen's project which was provided. -1273- p. 4 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 • City Council Review If a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission at its April 3, 2012 meeting, it is anticipated that the application will be forwarded to the City Council for review and action at the April 24, 2012 City Council meeting. A public hearing will be held at the City Council meeting for the rezoning, conditional use permit, preliminary plat and alley vacation. All necessary public hearing notices will be published and noticed in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes and City Code. III. DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL REVIEW A. Rezoning ( #12 -04) The applicant has requested the site be rezoned from B -1 and R -3 to Pedestrian Planned Unit Development District (PED -PUD). According to the district purpose statement, the PED -PUD District is intended to provide a range of retail and service commercial, office, institutional, public, open space and high density residential uses that are planned in a manner which is pedestrian friendly. The district is intended to have a high degree of aesthetic detail in building and site design. Currently, the area of Downtown Mound east of Commerce Boulevard and • south of Lynwood Boulevard is also designated as PED -PUD. The request to rezone this development to PED -PUD is appropriate given its location in downtown Mound at the main intersection of the community. The request to rezone Outlot A being transferred to HCCRA is also appropriate. Public and private parks are permitted uses in the PED -PUD District. While the rezoning request is appropriate, it is important to note that the rezoning will not be able to occur until the Metropolitan Council approves the previously submitted Comprehensive Plan Amendment request. That amendment, which would reguide the majority of the site to the Pedestrian Land Use District and the parcel being transferred to the HCCRA to Park, is currently under review by the Metropolitan Council. The proposed reguiding will be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council's Community Development Committee on Monday, April 2, 2012 with consideration by the full Metropolitan Council anticipated for Wednesday, April 11, 2012. The status of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is noteworthy as the property cannot be rezoned until the amendment is approved due to a requirement in Minnesota State Statutes that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map be consistent. B. Vacation ( #12 -09) The applicant has requested the vacation of the alley located off of Lynwood Boulevard immediately behind the businesses of 2251 to 2281 Commerce Boulevard. The vacation is needed as the proposed Walgreens will be developed over that portion of • -1274- p. 5 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 the site. The alley currently serves the adjacent property. While there are no public utilities in the alley, the City has received notification that there is at least one private utility (Mediacom) in the alley. The applicant and utility company are currently addressing this issue. Frontier Communications is also in contact with the applicant. Minnesota State Statutes Section 412.851 authorizes cities to vacate alleys if it appears to be in the interest of the public to do so after a public hearing. The public hearing will take place at the City Council meeting and will involve two weeks published and posted notice, as well as mailed notification 10 days in advance. City Staff recommends that the alley vacation request be approved as it is needed in order for the proposed redevelopment to occur. The City Attorney is currently working with the applicant and their title company to determine how the alley was originally conveyed to the City. This clarification is needed to determine the needed wording of the recommendation by the Planning Commission and format of the resolution for the City Council. Additional information in this regard will be provided at the meeting. C. Variance ( #12 -07) • A variance request was submitted as part of the initial application materials to address the potential change in the amount of parking available for the 15 -unit apartment building at 5701 Lynwood Boulevard. At this time parking is shared between 5701 and 5665 Lynwood Boulevard through a shared parking and access agreement. The sale of the 5665 Lynwood Boulevard property for the redevelopment project will extinguish those agreements. In assessing whether a variance is needed, Staff notes that the amount of parking on the 5701 Lynwood Boulevard parcel itself will not change as a result of this redevelopment. In addition, the property is not involved in the redevelopment project as it is being retained by its current owner. Staff therefore believes a variance is not needed to address 5701 Lynwood Boulevard's lawful non - conforming parking situation. D. Subdivision Exemption ( #12 -08) A subdivision exemption is required as part of the subdivision process to split off a portion of the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority ( HCCRA) property #14- 117 -24- 34 -0050, address unassigned, so it can be incorporated into the Conner Green Addition preliminary plat. The subdivision exemption will be processed concurrently with the preliminary plat. In section 121 -33, the City's subdivision regulations allow the City Council to approve a subdivision exemption when the requirement of creating a plat is an unnecessary hardship for the applicant. Staff recommends that the subdivision exemption be approved as it is reasonable that a portion of the HCCRA parcel should -1275- p. 6 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 • be split off so it can be a part of the property transfer and incorporated into the preliminary plat. E. Preliminary Plat for Major Subdivision ( #12 -06) The preliminary plat organizes the property into two lots and one outlot. Block 1, Lot 2 is the largest lot which will have the Walgreens. Block 1, Lot 1 is the lot for the small future tenant building. Outlot A is the portion of the plat which will be transferred to the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCCRA) as part of the property exchange. It is Staff's understanding that the future tenant building will be sold to a separate owner than the Walgreen's portion of the site. The preliminary plat separates Lots 1 and 2 at the back of the curb around the future tenant building. It is the intent of the developer that Walgreens will be responsible for all maintenance, upkeep and snow removal for the parking lot and drive aisle. As a condition of approval, City Staff needs to see the format of the proposed agreement to be used between Walgreens and the future owner of Lot 2 to ensure it adequately provides for shared parking and maintenance of the site. As clarification, the 5701 Lynwood Boulevard parcel which was previously intended to be a part of this plat has been removed since the original March 1, 2012 application submittal. The property will not be purchased by Walgreens but will be retained by its . current owner. Thus, it has been determined that it should not be included in the plat and a modified plan was submitted on March 19, 2012. Park Dedication City Code Section 121 -121 requires that 10% of land or an equivalent amount of cash be set aside for general park purposes as part of every plat or subdivision. City policy has generally required park dedication for those portions of a development project which were not previously developed. This is based on the assumption that park dedication was previously dedicated as part of the original development process. For this project, the 0.31 acre parcel at 5631 Lynwood Boulevard is the only part of the development that is undeveloped. According to the Hennepin County Property Information Search website, the 2011 taxable market for 5631 Lynwood Boulevard was $46,000. Using the City's rate of 10% of the taxable market value, the amount of park dedication needed for this plat is $4,600. F. Final Plat for Major Subdivision ( #12 -11) The applicant is also requesting concurrent review of the final plat. There is nothing in the City Code that prevents the preliminary plat and final plat from be processed concurrently. At this time, Staff recommends approval of the final plat. However, should there be changes to the preliminary plat as part of the review process, consideration of the final plat should be delayed until it can be appropriately updated. • -1276- p. 7 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 G. Conditional Use Permit - CUP ( #12 -05) As noted previously, planned unit developments are processed using a conditional use permit. With this development, the conditional use permit will address both uses on the site and design standards. Use Section 129 -139 lists permitted and conditional uses for the PED -PUD District. A drug store as is proposed is on the list of permitted uses. Also on the list are Class I, II and III restaurants which do not have a drive - through. Conditional uses in the PED -PUD District are banks or restaurants with drive - throughs. The applicant has proposed the Walgreens drug store have a pick -up window where patients can drop off and pick up prescriptions. It should be noted that customers cannot purchase any other items through the pick -up window and all communication will occur only at the window. City Code does not distinguish between pick -up windows and drive - throughs. Thus, Staff concludes that the pick -up window proposed is classified as a drive - through and would be considered a conditional use. As required by subsection a -h, the applicant has met the following criteria for a drive - through: • The applicant has provided two stacking spaces 9 feet by 18 feet in size for the • drive - through lane. The drive - through lanes are clearly defined and designed in the best possible way given the site design. • The drive - through is located such that the fronts of the cars will be facing away from the adjacent residential uses. No menu boards or order stations are needed for the Walgreen's pick -up window. • The drive - through shall not be operated between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The applicant is also proposing the construction of a future tenant building in the southeast corner of the development. It is Staff's understanding that the intent for the building is a small restaurant/bistro. Given the location of the building on the site, there is not sufficient room for that building to have its own drive - through window. In particular, there is not adequate and safe vehicular movement area within the parking lot for two drive - throughs on the site. This issue was noted both by City and Hennepin County Staff as part of the Traffic Study. Staff therefore recommends that one of the conditions of approval be that the building on Block 1, Lot 1 not be allowed to have a drive - through window. The applicant is advised that without a drive - through window a restaurant is considered a permitted use in the PED -PUD District. Use of Outlot A, which is to be transferred to the HCRRA, for parks /trail use is • appropriate. -1277- P. 8 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 Bulk Requirements The PED -PUD District does not have any specific setback requirements for structures on non - shoreland lots. Rather, setbacks are as agreed to in the PUD. The site plan shows that the Walgreens will be set back from the property line at least 19.14 feet from Lynwood Boulevard and 10 feet from Commerce Boulevard. It is important to note that the property lines are not located at the edge of the pavement on either street so the building will feel farther from the street than these setbacks would indicate. The proposed small future tenant building is proposed to be setback 20 feet from Commerce and 5 feet from the southern property line. These setbacks seem appropriate as this building is intending to be oriented to the regional trail located immediately south of the redevelopment. The maximum recommended amount of impervious surface is 75 %, though it can be higher if approved by the PUD. The applicant is proposing 81.2% for this development. While high, Staff does note that all of the stormwater is being proposed to be managed on -site with underground treatment systems. The management of stormwater will need • to be approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Staff also notes that the following site design features have increased the imperviousness: 1) The concrete sidewalk from Lynwood Boulevard to the front door is rather extensive given the grade changes in that area of the site. The lengthy connection is needed to meet ADA requirements. 2) The use of the standard impervious city pavers along Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard to match the design on the other three corners of the intersection. 3) The creation of three plaza seating areas on Lynwood and Commerce Boulevards that will be an asset to the pedestrian character of Downtown 4) The outside seating area provided around the future tenant building to support a restaurant/bistro use that serves the adjacent regional trail. Given these important pedestrian design features and the lack of opportunity to increase greenspace on the site, Staff recommends that the maximum impervious surface coverage for the development be 82 %. The proposed Walgreens and future tenant building are both well under the maximum height of 50 feet for a commercial building in the PED -PUD District. -1278- p. 9 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 Building Facade The PED -PUD District has two building facade criteria: building materials and window area ratio. The predominant exterior material for street facing elevations is required to be wood lap siding. As shown in the included elevations, the applicant is proposing the majority of the facades for the Walgreens building be a combination of brick with stone banding. Clapboard siding is used for the entrance area on the northwest corner of the building along Lynwood Boulevard. Clapboard siding is also the primary building material for the future tenant building. Given that brick is an upgrade, Staff recommends that the clapboard siding requirement be waived for the Walgreens building in the development. Please note that sample building materials were delivered to Staff on March 28, 2012. These samples will be brought to the Planning Commission meeting to be part of the review process. The PED -PUD regulations require that the front facade be comprised of 45 to 65 percent window area, while exposed side and rear facades have a minimum of 25 percent window area, landscape or use of building fenestration. The Walgreens building as proposed has window area on the north facade of about 34% and on the east of • 28 %. The west elevation has a window area of about 41 %. The south fagade, where the drive -up window and pharmacy are located has window area of 15 %. The Walgreens Building is designed with a combination of window area, landscaping and fenestration to break up the building fagade. This includes the use of trellis to break up the building facade. Should the City wish to meet the PED -PUD regulations, additional windows would need to be added to the north and east facades. Otherwise, the condition can be waived as part of the PUD. As can be seen in the elevations, the window area for the future tenant building exceeds the requirement. Parking and Circulation Parking regulations for the PED -PUD District are provided for in Section 129 -139. Parking is considered a shared system within the pedestrian district. Thus, there are not specific parking minimums or maximums prescribed for any use. The regulations require the developer to determine parking demand based on the tenant mix and design accordingly. The applicant has provided 49 standard and 5 accessible parking stalls for a total of 54 spaces. All spaces provided meet the City's minimum size of 9 feet by 18 feet. Parking is located along the western and southern boundaries of the site. There are three • accessible spaces nearest to the front door of the Walgreens and two accessible spaces adjacent to the future tenant building. There is one row of parking located -1279- P. 10 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 • between the drive aisles within the parking lot. In determining the number of parking stalls to provide, the applicant has provided as part of its Traffic Impact Study an analysis of typical parking demand for Walgreens. This analysis examined four existing Walgreens locations in Minnesota. Based on that data, the peak weekday parking demand for Walgreens is 1.58 stalls per 1,000 square feet of building space, while the peak Saturday parking demand is 1.47 stalls per 1,000 square feet. These rates result in a peak parking demand of 23 stalls on weekdays and 21 stalls on a Saturday. This parking analysis would indicate that the proposed 54 stalls will likely be sufficient for both a Walgreens and the future tenant building. If parking becomes an issue, a reexamination of the conditional use permit may be needed. In this review other parking options or uses of the buildings may be examined. Access to the site will be from entrances on both Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. These entrances have been located as far from the intersection as possible. At this time both access points will be have full movement into and from their adjacent streets. The Traffic Impact Study for the Walgreens Store has been reviewed by both City Staff and Hennepin County. Neither agency had any concerns with the proposed traffic generated by the site or the accesses proposed. As a result of this redevelopment, restriping of Lynwood Boulevard will occur to add a left turn lane into • the site. There is sufficient right -of -way for this to occur. Consideration in the site design has also been given to non - motorized transportation. The sidewalks and plazas along Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard are designed to be pedestrian friendly. The concrete sidewalk adjacent to the future tenant building has been extended to the west to reach a proposed bike rack area and facilitate access to the regional trail to the south. The applicant has also proposed in the narrative the addition of bike racks adjacent to both buildings to support bicyclists. Landscaping A Landscape Plan (Sheet L1) is provided with planting schedules and ground cover for the site. For commercial development, Section 129 -317 requires one tree for the greater of every 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area or 50 feet of site perimeter. For this development, the greater requirement results from the perimeter of the lot (965/50 = 20 trees). The applicant has provided 12 coniferous and 8 deciduous trees to meet this requirement. The plan also provides 251 shrubs and perennials for the site. In addition there will be plants associated with the trellis areas proposed along Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. (See the north and east elevations on Sheet A2.1A.) Additional landscaping requirements are identified in the parking section of the PED- PUD District. For each 100 square feet of vehicular use area, five square feet of interior • landscaping area is to be provided outside of the required eight foot setback areas from -1280- P. 11 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development . March 30, 2012 the right -of -way. The proposed development has 24,060 square feet of vehicular use area so 1,203 square feet of interior landscaping is to be provided. The Landscape Plan shows 2,075 square feet. This is primarily located in the landscaped area between the parking lot and the western property line. The PED -PUD District also requires a minimum of 25% of the vehicular use are to be covered by tree canopy when trees are calculated at two -third mature size. With 24,060 square feet of vehicular use area, tree canopy should be covering 6,015 square feet of it. The applicant has proposed four Red Maples and four Red Oak for the site. The applicant states that they have met this requirement by providing 7,386 square feet of shade area. Staff disagrees, calculating 5,607 square feet in shade area. The difference between the applicant and Staff is due to a difference in assumption of the mature canopy spread of the trees. The applicant is assuming a 60 foot spread, while Staff is assuming a 50 foot spread for the Red Oak and a 40 foot spread for the Red Maple. Staff recommends that one more tree be added along the southern boundary by the parking lot to address the deficiency. Screening and Buffering City Code Section 129 -316 requires businesses to provide screening along any property • boundary with residential property. As shown in the Landscape Plan, screening is provided along the property line with 5701 Lynwood Boulevard through the use of coniferous trees and shrubs along the entire parking lot. It is also important to note that the 5701 Lynwood Boulevard is higher than the Walgreens site so vehicular lights from the parking lot should not directly shine onto the site. Zoning regulations also require screening of any trash areas on the site. The applicant has proposed to enclose the trash area within an extension of the building. It will be accessed by an overhead door. The best view of the trash enclosure area is on the west elevation. Trash receptacles for the future tenant building have not yet been addressed as the building is in concept design phase at this time. This issue will need to be addressed as part of the building permit review process. Grading /Storm water The elevation of the site drops from approximately 949 in the northwest corner to 943 in the southeast. The Grading Plan is provided on Sheet C1.5. Storm water management on the site will occur through the use of an underground storage system located in the southwest corner of the parking lot. Water will then be discharged into the ditch located to the west of the Walgreens property. The storm water management system will need • to be reviewed and approved as part of the permitting process with the Minnehaha -1281- p. 12 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 is Creek Watershed District (MCWD). While not directly involved in the redevelopment project, Staff did request the applicant to provide additional information regarding how storm water from 5701 Lynwood Boulevard will be addressed. Currently, this site drains to the southeast towards the Walgreens site. Staff requests additional information demonstrating that this off -site storm water can be handled by Walgreen's system. Utilities Private utilities for the project will connect to public water and sanitary sewer mains. The Walgreens building is served from a watermain in Lynwood Boulevard and a sanitary sewer main in Commerce Boulevard. The future tenant building is served by water and sanitary sewer mains in Commerce Boulevard. The redevelopment will require a reevaluation of the Metropolitan Council's Sewer Area Charge (SAC) and Water Area Charge (WAC). The applicant will be responsible for all SAC and WAC charges for the project as part of the building permit. The applicant will also be responsible for City sewer and water connection charges as part of the building permit process. Sianane Regulations for signage are specifically provided in Subd (g) of the PED -PUD District. • These regulations state that a development project may vary from these standards as long as a specific sign program for the redevelopment project, which is located in a redevelopment plan, is approved by the City Council. The applicant is requesting the City Council approve the following sign program for the proposed redevelopment: Walgreens Building 1. Wall Signage — the applicant is proposing two styles of wall signage. The first is the "Walgreens" script on the north, east and south elevations. On the north and east elevations the sign will be 5' 9.5" high and 26' long for a total of 78 square feet each. On the south elevation, the sign will be 4'8" high and 21' long for a total of 52 square feet. The second type of wall sign is the "W" script which is to be located in three locations, one at the northeast corner and two at the northwest corner above the entrance of the building. The two "W" signs above the entrance are 4'3" high and 6' wide for a total of 26 square feet each. The "W" at the northeast corner is smaller, 3' high by 4'3" wide for a total of 13 square feet. The PED -PUD District signage regulations allow one wall sign per facade on a public right -of -way. Given this development's location on the regional trail, it is reasonable that there will be signage on the north, east and south elevations. It is • -1282- p. 13 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 also reasonable that the applicant may wish to have some sort of sign to identify the location of the entrance. The proposed size and area of the signs also exceed the PED -PUD regulations, which is lettering height of no greater than 12 inches and area of no more than 24 square feet. Members are advised to review the elevations paying particular attention to whether the signs seem proportional or if reductions in sign size are needed. 2. Drive -thru sign — a 1.8 square foot drive -thru sign is proposed on the west elevation. 3. Exit sign — a 1.8 square foot exit sign is also proposed for the east and south elevations 4. Freestanding Sign — a 46.2 square foot monument sign is proposed for the area east of the entrance into the parking lot from Lynwood Boulevard. The sign is proposed to be 6'10" high and 8'8" wide. The top 2'8" is proposed to be an electronic readerboard with a 2'8" high sign. Freestanding signs in the PED -PUD is District are to be less than 6 square feet in area per face and no more than 6 feet in height. There is no reference to electronic readerboard signage in the PED - PUD District regulations. These types of signs are permitted in other districts in the community but are limited to providing a community service such as time, date, temperature, weather or similar public service information. At this time there are no window or door signs proposed in the sign program. Should Walgreens seek any additional signs, the sign program will need to be reconsidered and approved by the City Council. Overall, the applicant's sign program exceeds the sign standards established for the PED -PUD District, both in the number of signs and the size of the signs. As previously stated, however, PED -PUD regulations do allow for the approval of a specific sign plan for projects in a redevelopment plan area. Future Tenant Building Development plans for the future tenant building identify three wall signs approximately 20 square feet in area each on the south, east and north elevations of the building. No sign is proposed for the west elevation. As stated previously, PED - PUD regulations limit wall signage to one per facade on a public street. Applying these regulations would limit wall signage to the east elevation. As with the . Walgreens building, a sign on the south elevation is reasonable so as to advertise the business to the regional trail users. However, Staff recommends that the sign on -1283- p. 14 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 the north elevation be removed from the sign program as it seems unnecessary given the freestanding sign that is also proposed. PED -PUD regulations also limit the area of the wall signs to 5% of the building facade area or 24 square feet whichever is less. For the south elevation this would be a sign area maximum of 21 square feet, while the east elevation would have a maximum of 12 square feet. The proposed sign program has signs 10' in length and 2' in height for a total of 20 square feet. Given that the east elevation is so small, Staff recommends that the east elevation sign be reduced in size for in keeping with PED -PUD regulations. As noted previously, a freestanding sign is proposed for the entrance on Commerce Boulevard. This sign is proposed to be 23 square feet in area, which is more than the six square feet allowed in the PED -PUD District but would be similar in size to the freestanding sign for the Walgreens Building on Lynwood Boulevard. The proposed six foot height for the freestanding size is in keeping with the maximum height of the regulations. Staff recommends that the sign program for the future tenant building be modified to address the concerns raised by Staff. Given that the tenant for the building is not yet identified it is likely that the sign program will need to be further revised. A review of • the individual sign program for the future tenant by the City Council would need to occur at that time. In their letter dated March 29, 2012, Hennepin County noted that the plans now include a monument sign at both entrances to the development. The applicant was requested to confirm that site lines will not be obstructed due to these signs. Additional information should be provided to the City and Hennepin County in regards to this request. IV. RECOMMENDATION A recommendation on the Conner Green Addition Preliminary Plat and Site Development Plan submittal package includes the following actions for each submittal application. Please note that the conditions proposed are preliminary and subject to change as review and discussion of the development project continues. • -1284- p. 15 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development • March 30, 2012 Rezoning ( #12 -05) Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the rezoning application as submitted with the following conditions: 1) Approval of the subdivision exemption, preliminary plat, conditional use permit and vacation applications. 2) Payment of all related costs for the review of the rezoning application. 3) 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. Variance (# 12 -07) Staff recommends the applicant withdraw the variance application as Staff believes it is not needed. In the event it is not withdrawn, the City will need to act upon application in accordance with timelime provisions in MS 15.99. Subdivision Exemption ( #12 -08) • Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the subdivision exemption request as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the rezoning, preliminary plat, conditional use permit and vacation applications. 2. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. 3. 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. Conditional Use Permit - CUP ( #12 -05) Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the conditional use permit request as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Speakers for the drive - through window shall not produce noise that exceeds 75 dBa as measured five feet from the speaker. 2. The drive - through window shall not be operated between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. • 3. The building located on Block 1, Lot 1 shall not have a drive - through window. 4. Overall impervious surface coverage on the site be limited to 82 %. -1285- p. 16 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 5. Waiver of the building material provision identified under Section 129 -139 Subd (f) (2) for the Walgreens building as long as the material used is brick. 6. The applicant provides bike racks as proposed adjacent to the Walgreens and future tenant building. 7. The City reserves the right to reevaluate parking on the site should it become a problem. This may include the review of a CUP amendment if deemed appropriate. 8. The landscape plan be revised to add one more deciduous tree to the site to address the amount of tree canopy over vehicular use areas. 9. The specific sign program be revised as identified. 10. The applicant demonstrates to the City and Hennepin County that the freestanding signs proposed will not obscure sight lines. 11. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemption, vacation and preliminary plat applications. 12. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the conditional use permit application. 13.Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and /or all permits. 15. No future approval of any development plans, building and /or related permits are included as part of this action in the event the variance application is approved. • 16. No building permits will be issued until evidence of recording of the resolution at Hennepin County is provided unless the resolution is filed by the City and an escrow of sufficient amount, is on file with the City. 17. Future use of Outlot A, which is proposed to be transferred to the HCRRA, shall be the same as the current public use of the Dakota Regional Railroad Trail. 18. 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. Specific Sign Program Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the the specific sign program subject to the modifications referenced in the Planning Report along with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the related applications from Semper Development. 2. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of all required permitting, and approvals, including but not limited to, future tenant building signage. • -1286- p. 17 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 Preliminary Plat for Major Subdivision ( #12 -06) Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the Conner Addition preliminary plat as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the subdivision exemption for Parcel #14- 117 -24 -34 -0050. 2. Approval of the rezoning, vacation and conditional use permit applications. 3. The applicant must provide in a format acceptable to City Staff the agreements that will be used by Walgreens for the future tenant on the site. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the preliminary plat application. 5. 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. Vacation ( #12 -09) Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the • alley vacation request as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemptions, preliminary plat, and conditional use permit applications. 2. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance request. 3. 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. Final Plat for Major Subdivision ( #12 -11) Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the Conner Addition final plat as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Payment of park dedication fees in the amount of $4,600.00 prior to the release of the Final Plat for recording. 2. The applicant must provide in a format acceptable to City Staff, the agreements that will be used by Walgreens for the future tenant on the site. 3. Drainage and utility easements, as required by the City Engineer, shall be provided and submitted in a form so as to allow for recording at Hennepin County • and shall be subject to review and approval by the City. -1287- P. 18 #12 -05 to #12 -09, #12 -11 Semper Development March 30, 2012 • 4. Payment of all required utility fees at the current approved rates prior to release of the resolution. 5. The installation of new water and sewer service must be completed prior to release of the Resolution or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as a cash deposit, letter of credit or performance bond, to cover the cost of utility service connections prior to the release of the Resolution for recording. 6. Any curb, gutter and streets which are disturbed because of construction including but not limited to installation of the water service, sewer service and small utilities, shall be replaced. 7. An approved Hennepin County permit will be required for any construction taking place within Hennepin County right -of -way. 8. Approval of the rezoning, subdivision exemption, vacation, preliminary plat, and conditional use permit applications. 9. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the final plat application. 10. 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. • • L� • NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE CONNER GREEN ADDITION .SUBMITTED BY SEMPER DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPOSED WALGREENS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mound Planning Commission will meet in the Council Chambers at Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon as possible thereafter on Tuesday, April 3, 2012 at 7:00 PM to hold a public hearing to consider the preliminary plat -major subdivision and site development plans for the Conner Green Addition submitted by Semper Development that is part of the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project located at the southwest comer of Commerce Boulevard and Lynwood Boulevard and includes the following properties below (or portions thereof): PID ADDRESS 1411724340050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1411724440033 5631 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440034 5665 LYNWOOD BLVD 1411724440036 2281 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440037 2261 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440038 2251 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440039 2271 COMMERCE BLVD 1411724440064 2281 COMMERCE BLVD In addition to the public hearing for the preliminary plat, several other applications and /or requests related to the proposed Walgreens redevelopment project will be reviewed and discussed including, but not limited to, rezoning, conditional use permit, vacation, variance, specific sign plan, subdivision exemption, and final plat. Information regarding the application and proposed project is available for viewing at City Hall during regular office hours or by appointment. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting By: Jill Norlander Planning and Building Inspections Published in the Laker March 24, 2012 -1289- PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT — SOUTHWEST CORNER OF • COMMERCE AND LYNWOOD, MOUND, MN. We are proposing to redevelop the southwest corner of Commerce and Lynwoo .uANR 2 proposal is for a new retail /commercial development with a total square foot area of 2 ®'� approximately 15, 400 square feet. Our development is anchored by a new Walgreens Pharmacy to be located on the hard corner and a possible second building of approximately 1,000 square feet located on Commerce Boulevard adjacent to the existing trail system. Vehicle access to the site would come from both Commerce and Lynwood. The access driveways would be located as far away from the intersection as practical. Our concept site plan provides parking for 54 cars on site. The present commercial structures have minimal on site parking. The Walgreens Pharmacy will have a pick -up window for the pharmacy. This window as well as the service door will be located on the south side of the proposed building. The pick -up window (Drive -Thru) will only be operated between the hours of 6:00am and 10:00pm and the audio system associated with the window will not exceed a volume of 75dBA at a distance of 5 feet from the speaker. The building entry is located in the northwest corner of the building in a location that serves both the pedestrian and automobile customers. A bike rack will also be provided near the front entry for bicycle riders and trail users. Bicycle parking will also be provided adjacent to the smaller building located adjacent to the bike trail to encourage riders to visit this development and adjacent retailers. • This project should fit well into the existing setting of Mound. The current Retail /Commercial buildings on the site have little to no parking of their own. The proposed development will provide 54 parking spaces on site for the two uses. Some of the parking will be designated for short term parking only to prevent trail users from taking over the parking lot. The access driveways to the development will be located as far away from the primary intersection of Commerce and Lynwood as practical to allow for a safer traffic flow on and off the site. The Hennepin County traffic engineering department has done a preliminary review of the project and their comments regarding the location of the proposed Drive -thru at the Pharmacy and limiting the development to only one drive -thru for the project have been incorporated into the site design. A full traffic study is being submitted with this project for review by the county engineers as well as the city staff and their consultants. The western apartment building is being left as it is today allowing it to stand as a multi family residential buffer between the single fancily residential area to the west and the proposed development to the east. The parking and access to the apartment building that will remain will stay as it is today in location and number of parking stalls. The proposed time line for this project is based upon approval of the entitlement phase of the development in April or May of this year and a construction start later in the spring. The Walgreens portion of the construction including all of the parking areas and landscaping would be completed late in 2012 or early in 2013. • -1290- 0. • 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952 - 472 -0600 FAX 952 - 472 -0620 ZONING AMENDMENT APPLICATION REGV RAR Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. 1 2012 City Council Date: rlease TVDe or Applicant I Name Info Case No. Planning Commission Date: Email OXMI1ZoW t* ti2tJ�1/.4G Address AO S ?. 01270' M1NAi&r je2,V Phone Home & A . Work &2- M •/3ao Fax -loll • V31-241,26 • FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING • /29 It is requested that Section 3W: 132 of the Mound Zoning Ordinance be amended as follows: V I J l /1i • �� ✓ T • T 1- r. r 79C SovZALUIZ57" CtW -)4-,*L. eDC- C ©ryi�rl,�lZerE .4�,� �r/.0 ycrao y Zoning Amendment Information (1/20/2010) Page 4 of 5 -1291- FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP / ZONING. DISTRICT COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING It is requested that the property described below and shown on the attached site plan be rezoned from zone f.3/ 3 to zoned Address & Address Sf , A C,4 Rsi -rs Legal of Subject Lot Block Property Addition PID# Current Zoning: R1 R1A R2 B2 B3 (Circle one) mvi-7IlPtIv 2Q+u Owner of Name Ste' AZWP.'Ji D .54lFAT Email Subject Site Address Phone Home Work Fax Present Use of IJ.S-CS .4,u10 M4 ALVi a 4 T Property 1W .oIWIT.ia.v -rti ✓t ?iau cry eouv l Reason for o Amendment mu Az IV S .t>T �L'W 0 • I certify that all of the statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided and that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Applicant's Signat Date 2+ 2Ct //n. Owner's Signature Sj5fi , l-nt -A W M Ag7 54123 eC47 Date Av rvo►21VA2-, VU C7 Zoning Amendment Information (1/20/2010) Page 5 of 5 -1292- . LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION City of Mound, MN Planning Department RECID MAR 5341 Maywood Road 1 2Al2 Mound, MN 55364 RE: Proposed Walgreens — SWC Commerce and Lynwood To Whom It May Concern: I/We are the owners of record of the property located at: 2281 Commerce Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota My address is: 2281 Commerce Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota 55364 Phone: 952- 472 -1243 Fax: N/A E -Mail: N/A • I/We authorize and support the submittal of any and all applications which may include but not limited to the site plans, surveys and building elevations and plats that may be required for the redevelopment of the above noted property by Semper Development, Ltd. and its assigns. Please accept this Letter of Authorization as our acknowledgement that we are fully aware of and support this redevelopment of our property and that no other parties consent is required. Sincere I A razed Signature Printed Name Authorized Signature Printed Name • -1293- Title Title LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION City of Mound, MN /� Planning Department 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Proposed Walgreens — SWC Commerce and Lynwood To Whom It May Concern: 1 /We are the owners of record of the property located at: 5631, 5665, 5701 Lynwood Boulevard; Mound, Minnesota My address is: Lakestone Management LLP, 500 Lake Street, Suite One, Excelsior, MN 55331 Phone: 612 - 250 -8488 Fax: N/A E -Mail: pgosh @msn.com I /We authorize and support the submittal of any and all applications which may include but not limited to the site plans, surveys and building elevations and plats that may be required for the redevelopment of the above noted property by Semper Development, Ltd. and its assigns. Please accept this Letter of Authorization as our acknowledgement that we are fully aware of and support this redevelopment of our property and that no other parties consent is required. Sincerely Autho1>11<19nature Printed Name Authorized Signature Printed Name Title Title -1294- 7 C7 • • LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION City of Mound, MN 'Pell U //�� Planning Department -" //��4,9 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Proposed Walgreens – SWC Commerce and Lynwood To Whom It May Concern: ]/We are the owners of record of the property located at: 227I Commerce Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota My address is: Five Sigma LLC, 8089 Globe Drive, Woodbury, MN 55125 Phone: 612- 332 -8020 Fax: N/A - 8 co E -Mail: j igs @glebe.EBU • I /We authorize and support the submittal of any and all applications which may include but not limited to the site plans, surveys and building elevations and plats that may be required for the redevelopment of the above noted property by Semper Development, Ltd. and its assigns. Please accept this Letter of Authorization as our acknowledgement that we are fully aware of and support this redevelopment of our property and that no other parties consent is required. Sincerely - 2Vt::__ — A th -iz d ignature JL� �j Y/ e_— Printed Name �Ie 7 NOLA ao e.✓ Title Authorized Signature Title Printed Name • -1295- 110, LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION 0 City of Mound, MN Planning Department ,+Q J 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 014? RE: Proposed Walgreens — SWC Commerce and Lynwood To Whom It May Concern: I/We are the owners of record of the property located at: 2261 Commerce Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota My address is: 145 Turnham Road, Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 952- 473 -2698 Fax: N/A E -Mail: N/A I/We authorize and support the submittal of any and all applications which may include but not • limited to the site plans, surveys and building elevations and plats that may be required for the redevelopment of the above noted property by Semper Development, Ltd. and its assigns. Please accept this Letter of Authorization as our acknowledgement that we are fully aware of and support this redevelopment of our property and that no other parties consent is required. Sincerely Authorized Signature Printed Name Authorized Signature Printed Name 66'1:1 Title Title i� U LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION • City of Mound, MN Planning Department 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Proposed Walgreens — SWC Commerce and Lynwood To Whom It May Concern: 5�r�\ N0 ex �o�")_AD,1 top � I/We are the owners of record of the property located at: 2251 Commerce Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota My address is: 1736 Baywood Shores Drive, Mound, Minnesota 55364 Phone: 952- 472 -1297 Fax: N/A E -Mail: N/A • I/We authorize and support the submittal of any and all applications which may include but not limited to the site plans, surveys and building elevations and plats that may be required for the redevelopment of the above noted property by Semper Development, Ltd. and its assigns. Please accept this Letter of Authorization as our acknowledgement that we are fully aware of and support this redevelopment of our property and that no other parties consent is required. Sincerely Authorized Signature Title t;9,//,v -7c__�; i? e rg Printed Name Authorized Signature Printed Name • -1297- �vjA Title John Kohler From: J . Michael. Noonan @co.hennepin.mn. us • Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 1:07 PM To: sarahsmith @cityofmound.com Cc: John Kohler; Joseph.Gladke @co.hennepin.mn.us Subject: Land Exchange between HCRRA and Semper Developme�� This is further to our telephone conversation on November 4th and our brief discussion of the above noted matter. Semper Development and the HCRRA have had discussions with respect to a proposed land exchange in the vicinity of Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. This exchange would have the HCRRA exchanging with Semper certain lands. The plan attached to this email illustrates the nature of the proposed land exchange. I am writing to advise that the HCRRA is supportive of this exchange and consent to the advancing of a comprehensive plan amendment and all other planning applications. It is recognized that the land in question will have to be plated at some time in the future. The parties to the exchange have agreed to prepare a Land Exchange Agreement. I trust this provides what is required by the City. Please let me know if you require anything further. JMN J. Michael Noonan I Sr. Administrative Manager, Real Estate Division I Housing, Community Works & Transit 701 Fourth Avenue South, Suite 400, Minneapolis MN 55415 -1843 1 MC L608 I Office 612.348.8537 1 Fax 612.348.9710 1 J. Michael .Noonan @co.hennepin.mn.us P Please consider the environment before printing this e -mail. Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney- client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. • -1298- 1 • EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION The West 79.02 feet of the East 154.02 feet of that part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park ", Lake Minnetonka described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly line of said Lot, 125 feet West, measured at right angles from the East line thereof; thence Southerly parallel with the East line of said Lot to the South line of said Lot; thence Westerly along said South line to a point distant 125 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Northerly parallel with the West line of said Lot to the North line of said Lot; thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning; and, That part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northerly line of said Lot, 125 feet West, measured at right angles from the East line thereof; thence Southerly parallel with the East line of said Lot, to the South line of said Lot; thence Westerly along said South line to a point distant 125 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Northerly parallel with the West line of said Lot, to the North line of said Lot; thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning; except the East 154.02 feet of the above described property; • and, The East 75 feet of the following described tract: That part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park ", Lake Minnetonka described as follows:. Beginning at a point on the Northerly line of said Lot, 125 feet West, measured at right angles from the East line thereof; thence Southerly parallel with the East line of said Lot, to the South line of said Lot; thence Westerly along said South line to a point distant 125 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Northerly parallel with the West line of said Lot to the North line of said Lot; thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning; and, Beginning at a point on the East Line of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park," Lake Minnetonka, distant 47 feet South of the Northeast corner of said lot; thence West at right angles to said East line a distance of 125 feet; thence North parallel to said East line a distance of 0.5 feet; thence East at right angles to said East line a distance of 125 feet to a point on the East line of said Lot 52 distant 46.5 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning; ALSO, That part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park ", Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: • Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 52, distant 47 feet South of the -1299- Northeast corner of said Lot; thence West at right angles with the East line of said Lot • 52, a distance of 125 feet; thence South and parallel with the East line of said Lot 52, a distance of 32 feet; thence East to a point on the East line of said Lot 52, distant 79 feet South of the Northeast corner of said lot; thence North along the East line of said Lot 52, a distance of 32 feet to the point of beginning, EXCEPT the South .4 feet thereof; and, Parcel 1: Lot 1, Block 1, Dakota Rail 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; Parcel 2: That part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park ", Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said lot; thence North along the East line of said lot, 58 feet; thence West perpendicular to said East line 125 feet; thence South parallel with said East line to the South line of said lot; thence Easterly to the point of beginning; and, That part of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 52 distant 58 feet North from the Southeast corner of said Lot; thence West perpendicular to said East line a distance of 125 feet; thence North parallel with said East line a distance of 40.4 feet; thence Easterly 125 feet to a point on • said East line distant 40.4 feet North of the point of beginning; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and, That part of the East 125 feet of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying North of line drawn West perpendicular to the East line of said Lot 52 from a point on said East line distant 46.5 feet South from the Northeast corner of said Lot 5 2. and, (THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT OF RECORD) That part of Government Lot 8, Section 23, Township 117, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota further shown and depicted on HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY PROPERTY MAP NO. 47 described as follows: BEGINNING at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence on an assumed bearing of South 87 degrees 52 minutes 45 seconds West along the south line of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka a distance of 135.53 feet; • thence South 03 degrees 09 minutes 54 seconds West parallel with the easterly line of W11112 • said Lot 52 a distance of 21.35 feet; thence North 87 degrees 53 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 137.47 feet to the westerly line of said Lot 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence North 02 degrees 02 minutes 30 seconds West along said west line a distance of 21.28 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. -1301- VACATION 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 APPLICATION Phone 952- 472 -0600 Fax 952 -472 -0620 RECD MAR Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. z��� Planning Commission Date City Council Date Please tvne nr nrinf cloorh. Case No. APPLICANT Name g=ff t qA Email 40(ho 'WA & Address $• Q1` 57'. %2TS J1'jAyvRj6,> j�gu �'6'.S/prl Phone (Home) (Work) �O /Q• 3$?• iTO� (Cell) 47%9 ' $ • $Q00 144 E -Mail Address sfA1 AqW • GolN Fax e#12 • 313-2.121/12b Adjacent Address i .029'rWC/i%W 4000 -r,1 ADJACENT PROPERTY Name of Business Lot Block (APPLICANT'S PROPERTY) Subdivision PID# Circle: R -1 R -1A R -2 ID 19 B -2 ?' ZONING DISTRICT AREA TO BE VACATED CAb=rr W1 o o L tY Sev �2 1YJ LYD• REASON FOR Quo�u 77+ E l'1 ,0 y 9,0MO eW at ?,9C -- REQUEST IS THERE A PUBLIC Alb No /z�G�G .c! �ii0 /S . ?;�w X20 NEED FOR THIS �� L LAND? I certify that all of the statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided and that I am respo sible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this applic ti UDgAl 4969k- Print Applicant's Name Applicant's Signature Date Print Applicant's Name Applicant's Signature Date Vacation Information -1302- (1/20/2010) Page 4 of 4 40 • • 0 EXHIBIT ___ PUBLIC ALLEY VACATION NORTH LINE OF LOT L YNWOOD BL VD. PUBLIC ALLEY PER o -- 52, " LINWOLD PARK" OOC. NO. 2838170 3 i LAKE MINNETONK9 589 °40'53 "W ���� __ 370.13 z Vn Z� - - - -- 125" - - - - - -- I z - ikCn -/ - --- ---- O "y I aN V ;i:�.:� ? ofo r� W w 14 I �� _ _ WEST LINE OF THE -- n `; C11 ; i(� ;� - EAST 125 FEET OF Q LOT 52, LINWOLD o rn PARK N J o ° !44 i0 C- \; --- - - - - -- - 13" I-"- -- -- - - - - -� I""- -- -;- - - - - -- .. 200 - "--- - - - - -- \125 - - - - - -- 7q ' ------ -- - - - - --' - - - -- � 1\ S8 75245 "W t' d' I 137.47 o S87 °53'20 "W "w ,.� 132.82 , S87 °52'45 ' W SOUTH LINE OF LOT 52, "LINWOLO PARK" LAKE MINNET _ - - ;; d't II � AREA = 2,165 SQ.FT. DENOTES PUBLIC ALLEY NORTH TO BE VACATED SCALE: 1 ` = 60' LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PUBLIC ALLEY TO BE VACATED: The public alley as shown on various documents which is located on the east 12.00 feet of the west 13.00 feet of the east 125.00 feet of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. -1303- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 APPLICATION Phone 952 -472 -0600 FAX 952 - 472 -0620 RECV IVAR Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Planning Commission Case No. Please type or print the following information: PROPERTY Subject Address Sm 4202!CAftQ 449475. INFORMATION Name of Business LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot(s) Block Subdivision The applicant is: Owner —Other /�/ PID# ZC Email JiZOA140FA C�A') GOIK APPLICANT Name r,IYL,pQiL•Qay&L.0PJ")&V7- 9rJxt/, ,QIT�rAl.' -)OYA) leW Address � -s 8 w syme 7 01276 /s'!/ A JQ5 . �'Aj $,SyIIQ Phone Home A10 612 • SM • f SOa Cell V"Q - 61 Q • 6 Q vo E -Mail Address CJgCWAA&Z Name d$ A7rAC1tif "Work @ . C410kFax (D /�' 3 •2Tm 0 Email OWNER (if other than Address applicant) Phone Home Work Cell Name / XN /JU Email A e-471W zb06 CCI *Ar V Ceiy ARCHITECT, SURVEYOR, Address 22'77 ,e �Ylv1/ 3(O, #260. Axsey /ZG,rc OR ENGINEER Phone Office 6S/• t'047. O$00 Cell Fax &57 ° btT 7. 090y ZONING Circle: R -1 R -1A R -2 R -3 B -1 B -2 B -3 DISTRICT nn Z 7b PAW 0*52 -. Description of Proposed Use: S C, 7a.41inA0 cl ivy- 72�t/ AgUp I.� /�v co Loc„4zw � Ti,� �tI�S+�i� TH.4I2•�.oc�d �3vitz�..uc� .9.ua m ,a��ss 7�� • VWZ4 WWFA -,7 a' 7W )OSO 3T.P✓,WV .OA7.Q>c7- Conditional Use Permit Info -1304- (1/20/2010) Page 4 of 5 r� • • Planning Commission Case No. EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke /odor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts. 4 ,OAc 144-r - T2v �.ds If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guars tees for the completion of the proposed development. Estimated Development Cost of the Project: $. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, () no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. Application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or explanation given why this is not the case. Print Applicant's Name SOFA ATZA46 L.4"1"rMg Print Owner's Name 21 Q >2- Signature Date oA A7-w &e,#r&r/o0 . Owner's Signature Date Print Owner's Name Owner's Signature Date City Code Section 129 -38 relating to Conditional Use Permits must be reviewed by the applicant. If applying for a two family dwelling, City Code Section 129 -102 must be reviewed by the applicant. Conditional Use Permit Info (1/20/2010) Page 5 of 5 -1305- 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 5364 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION APPLICATION Phone 952 -472 -0600 FAX 952 -472 -0620 • City Council Date: jj��Caas��e No. Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of appWARIiaii. PROPERTY Subject Address � A�.4G�� �r. �"'�� ,�Z_ INFO EXISTING Lot(s) Block Subdivision LEGAL DESCRIPTION PID# Plat # PROPOSED A. Lot(s) 5" A-r -rAG450J S7y*C-rS Block LEGAL DESCRIPTION B. Lot(s) Sr AT TACA1,19 51-61"S Block ZONING Circle: R -1 R -1A R -2 R-3 B- B -2 B -3 -OW - - DISTRICT hV 4 -rlrv4 ra& 3 . PROPERTY Are there existing structures on the property? yes / Do the existing structures comply with the zoning ordinance for setbacks, hardcover, etc.? yes / no APPLICANT The applicant is: owner _ other )< email oxcw torB 0, SQMfiff& F e-V . Go^ Name SCM> t/L Yf i,C�, 02/�fFr�t>"l' A-MA/1 C)MA) K04tZfZ -. Address $0 e_w 40 SS�JOr2 Phone Home J✓,A • Work &A2 ` 2*2 -71'000 Fax t014 •334 •'Zy?55 OWNER Name S r E A717=14, 14i email (if other than applicant) Address Phone Home Work Fax GoRiufCRSrfaurC ,0.0 SoAO& jr.e SURVEYOR/ Name__Ay^t�/: �ty �URMWS tom email OQA) e[ GSSvRwty.AAET ENGINEER Address 2 0© �if E'�tit/ 7' .S-s►, 5�e�W�tc.C._, �tN . ssoe2 Phone Work Fax 005-1 - -17S • 8g710 Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution numbers) and provide copies of resolutions. Ctt+pe4i -r A e&P c.aYio.4us A-41V &Fwq svt9A'1l'T. . Application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or explanation given why this is not the case. I certify that all of the statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided and that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound r the p e f i specting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. 0 Applicant Signatum Date � f �g 1J'2 • Owner's Signature VIM 4-MAC4W AV rWGAVZA1T16A2 , Date -1306- Subdivision Exemption Application (1/20/2010) Page 4 of 4 • • EXHIBIT ___ HCRRA - SEMPER LAND SWAP ------------------------------------------------------- Z U�N �d(n w �a3 L YNWOOD BL VD. AREA = 2,903 SQ.FT. DENOTES HCRRA PROPERTY TO BE DEEDED TO SEMPER DEVELOPMENT AND INCLUDED IN THE PLAT AREA = 2,785 SQ.FT. DENOTES PLATTED OUTLOT TO BE DEEDED FROM SEMPER DEV. TO THE HCRRA 0 NORTH SCALE: I" = 60' HCRRA PARCEL (THE FOLLOWING UNRECORDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS TO BE DEEDED FROM THE HCRRA TO SEMPER DEVELOPMENT) That part of Government Lot 8, Section 23, Township 117, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota further shown and depicted on HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY PROPERTY MAP NO. 47 described as follows O m V W O J BEGINNING at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence on an assumed bearing of South 87 degrees 52 minutes 45 seconds West along the south line of Lot 52, "Lynwold Park" Lake Minnetonka a distance of 135.53 feet; thence South 03 degrees 09 minutes 54 seconds West parallel with the easterly line of said Lot . 52 a distance of 21.35 feet; thence North 87 degrees 53 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 137.47 feet to the westerly line of said Lot 1, DAKOTA RAIL 2ND ADDITION; thence North 02 degrees 02 minutes 30 seconds West along said west line a distance of 21.28 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. -1307- 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 5364 Phone 952 - 472 -0600 FAX 952.472 -0620 Planning Commission Date City Council Date MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION RECD Case No. R AR 7 2012 FEES MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION. CHECK BOX TYPE OF APPLICATION FEE Name of Proposed Plat SKETCH PLAN REVIEW S200• LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRELIMINARY PLAT $350 +$15 per lot' x FINAL PLAT $350+$15 per lot " �C CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/ PDA $350' X ESCROW DEPOSIT $5,000' OWNER VARIANCE $200" Address TOTAL $ SOSC " CALL THE MOUND PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO CONFIRM CURRENT FEES. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE. PROPERTY Subject Address 5rF A- ZT4G/ISO aS,�irtnEZS . INFO Name of Proposed Plat EXISTING Lot Block Subdivision LEGAL DESCRIPTION PID# Zoning: R1 R1A R2 R3 B1 62 B3 (Circle one) APPLICANT The applicant is: owner_ other Email L7- C OP4 Name ., t4ww 9—omwe Address go C. yS ?. I27s' AAWAJIACA .f. MA). '6S Phone Home N /i9 Work 4/1. 53? • J$16 4D Fax 6/Z • a y. • wigs s Name fpgA A7M04W ISA*'c'dY Email OWNER (if other than Address applicant) Phone Home Work Fax Name arrA/-' A7W 'Y5;VA+WCS Email bi41J U 0,&,SV4V +A%.l, SURVEYOR/ Address tot, R. C4SxWU2 .52'4 s77&U.1AT7 &e _ 40 Ss��2 ENGINEER Phone Home /d3 Work &r/' 2 75-- $r%(ag Fax �DSI •�7� $Q�� Major Subdivision Information (1/20/2010) Page 5 of 6 -1308- • • • • Description of Proposed Use: 72PZ #&A2r5,i 50.8-kyVA -00) W244 ,4166x) FCC -7D, f F],C T,t9>. S -CJ-,-w— . -7ZI& vx e S EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoketodor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts. If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable gua antees for the completion of the proposed development. Estimated Development Cost of the Project: $ _ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS: Number of Structures: Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: sq. ft. Number of Dwelling Units /Structure: Total Lot Area: sq. ft. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, (A no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. ib Application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or explanation given why this Is not the case. I certify that all of the statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided (including Section 121 of the Mound City Ordinance) and that 1 am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for t of ins g, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. (�� 9�2� - 2 49 12 Print Applicant's Name Applicant's Signature Date S6e A- K -MCAIM te=0 J CA 4V rA 1r- --trid AJ Print Owner's Name Owner's Signature Print Owner's Name Major Subdivision Information (1/20/2010) Page 6 of 6 Owner's Signature -1309- Date Date P. 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 952 - 472 -0600 FAX 952 - 472 -0620 VARIANCE APPLICATIO%�� MAa X Application Fee and Escrow Deposit required at time of application. Planning Commission Date City Council Date Please tune or print leaihly Case No. 2012 • SUBJECT Address C SIG A77,4CAWQ gAWg '. PROPERTY LEGAL Lot Block DESC. Subdivision PID # Zoning: R1 R1A R2 R3 B1 62 B3 (Circle one) PROPERTY Name .5)06 A7TA cWADO 65r. Email OWNER Address Phone Home Work Fax APPLICANT Name 125g Email OXOM e 8 - <WMOMQl V. aoA41 (IF OTHER THAN Address 80 .5. 86' s mover 0473-, /(�t,w,y, ►pot✓s,JLj,,� , SSS/o2 OWNER) W112- Phone Home .VIA Work 332 • !S'o o Fax 612. 322. 2112% 2. pas an application ever peen mace Tor zoning, variance, conaitional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? Yes ( ) No ( ). If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): 10 Variance Information -1310- (2/3/2012) Page 4 of 6 Case No. • 3. Do the existing tructures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning 9 pY 9 district in which it is located? Yes (;K) No ( ). If no, specify each non - conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): gg , °Tb -040e A ,5r Oc 01/2 XA_)O W&JWOi,4, , S" A—MA04 iO Ayr�1 A1Xe A VS . SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE (or existing) Front Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Side Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Rear Yard: (N S E W) ft. ft. ft. Lakeside: (N S E W) ft. (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. • Lot Size: sq ft sq ft sq ft Hardcover: �5we.4 -o7A44,oW sq ft sq ft sq ft 4. Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes ( ), No Q(). If no, specify each non- conforming use: 7 sr a .472ailIXcJl1T /3tlltA�itx3 DES .Tarr /�At 7i�.fc • 13V n6!�ha a .crr- ti AS /T 13 nw4y . 5. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) too small ( ) drainage S4, situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify Please describe: —7511S 'Vi9Ak4,yc/L 13 7b PocomeNT is /NCLU.tiR_,O 1N VE — PAFiIG _7r1'O;1. Variance Information -1311- (2/3/2012) Page 5 of 6 Case No. 6. Was the practical difficulty described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in is the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes ( ), No X. If yes, explain: 7. Was the practical difficulty created by any other human -made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes ( ), No (2e). If yes, explain: s 8. Are the conditions of practical difficulty for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ,X), No ( ). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? .45sauwmp L!i { r 7' Lola I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I acknowledge that I have read all of the variance information provided. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Owner's Signature Applicant's Signati Variance Information -1312- (2/3/2012) Page 6 of 6 Date Date 74 J2 C7 0 DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES OWNERSHIP AND ADDRESSES PROPERTY ADDRESS/ PID# OWNERSHIP RE: 2271 Commerce Boulevard PID# 14- 117 -24 -44 -0039 Five Sigma LLC c/o Caryn and Jeff Myhre 8089 Globe Drive Woodbury, MN 55125 651- 332 -8020 jmyhrea- globeuniversity.edu SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION RE: 2261 Commerce Boulevard PID# 14- 117 -24-44 -0037 David Deters 145 Turnham Road Maple Plain, MN 55359 952 -473 -2698 SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR • LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION r] RE: 2251 Commerce Boulevard PID# 14- 117 -24-44 -0038 John and Patricia Tombers 1736 Baywood Shores Drive Mound, MN 55364 952 -472 -1297 SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION RE: 5631, 5665 & 5701 Lynwood Blvd. PID# 14- 117 -24-44 -0033 14- 117 -24-44 -0034 Mr. Peter Goshgarian 14 -117 -24-44 -0035 J-4w%v V? Lakestone Management, LLP 500 Lake Street, Suite 1 Excelsior, MN 55331 952 -401 -7605 grgosh(a-msn.com SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION -1313- DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES CONTINUED • PROPERTY ADDRESS PID# RE: 2281 Commerce Boulevard PID# 14- 117 -2444 -0036 14- 117 -24 -44 -0064 Mr. John E. Royer John's Variety and Pets 2281 Commerce Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION RE: Hennepin County Regional Trail PID# 14- 117 -24 -34 -0050 Mr. J. Michael Noonan Sr. Administrative Manager Real Estate Division 701 Fourth Ave South, Suite #400 Minneapolis, MN 55415 -1843 Phone: 612- 348 -8537 i.michael.noonan@co.hennepin.mn.us SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION INFORMATION -1314- • Hennepin a ---] Hennepin County Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340 -5421 Ms. Sarah Smith, Community Development Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Ms. Smith: 612- 596 -0300, Phone 763 - 478 -4000, FAX 763 - 478 -4030, TDD www.hennepin.us March 29, 2012 Re: Preliminary Plat Review — Conner Green Addition (Walgreens) Commercial redevelopment Lynwood Blvd. (CSAH -15) / Commerce Blvd. (CSAH -110 Hennepin County Plat Review No. 3239 Minnesota Statutes 505.02, 505.03, and 462.358, Plats and Surveys, allow up to 30 days for county review of preliminary plats abutting county roads. This redevelopment and proposed site plan has been reviewed with county staff a number of times since the summer of 2011 when the developer's representative and their traffic consultant met with our Plat Review Committee. This preliminary plat submission was received on March 27, 2012, and revises an earlier version you submitted in early March. Proposed Site Plan — Since meeting with the Plat Review Committee last August 2011, the developer has addressed county comments regarding the site plan layout, driveway access locations and westbound left turn lane on Lynwood Boulevard. With minor adjustments, it was determined that the redevelopment could be • accomplished within the existing roadway rights -of -way. We understand that the revised preliminary plat now excludes the Lynwood Boulevard apartments at 5701 Lynwood Boulevard which were originally anticipated to be purchased as part of the redevelopment. While this modification changes the plat boundaries, it does not appear to materially affect the Walgreens site plan. Monument Signage — One addition in this latest plan are new monument signs for the Walgreens and the proposed restaurant -bistro building. We ask that the city confirm with the developer that these signs will not obscure sight lines for drivers exiting the site. Typically, these sight lines are taken 15 feet back from the curb for the eye of the driver so they can see approaching roadway traffic and pedestrians on the sidewalk. The proposed parking lot stop bars makes sense in relation to the sidewalk, however the combination of vehicle location and monument placement may limit the visibility for the drivers. Permits — Please inform the developer that all proposed construction within county right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping / streetscaping. Permit questions can be directed to Carolyn Fackler at (612) 596 -0336 or carolyn.fackler uco.hennenin.mn.us . Please contact Bob Byers at (612) 596 -0354 or robert .byers(a)co.hennevin.mn.us for any further discussion of these items. Sincerely, J James N. Grube, P.E. •JNG /rqb Director of Transportation and County Engineer cc: Plat Review Committee — Benicke / Byers / Dauer / Drager / Ekola / Fackler / Holtz / Hooper / Lowry / Witt Mark Larson, Hennepin County Survey Office -1315 - An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper RECD MAR 1 2012 Wenck F11e #2271 -06 Prepared for: SEMPER DEVELOPMENT, LTD Prepared by: WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 -1316- Traffic Impact Study for Walgreens Store Mound, Minnesota March 1, 2012 Wenck r� • • 10 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .......................................................................... ............................... l 2.0 Purpose and Background ................................................................... ..............................3 3.0 Existing Conditions ........................................................................... ..............................6 4.0 Traffic Forecasts ................................................................................ ..............................8 5.0 Traffic Analyses ............................................................................... .............................12 6.0 Conclusions ...................................................................................... .............................18 FIGURES 1 Project Location .................................................................................. ..............................4 2 Proposed Site Plan .............................................................................. ..............................5 3 Existing Conditions ............................................................................. ..............................7 • 4 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....................................... .............................10 5 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ...................................... ............................... 11 6 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service ...................................... .............................16 7 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service ...................................... .............................17 0 -1317- turns should occur while entering the site. • Vehicle queues for the eastbound and northbound approaches at the Lynwood Boulevard /Commerce Boulevard are not expected to block the proposed access locations. • Applying parking rates data collected at other Walgreens stores to the proposed store results in peak parking demands of 23 stalls on a weekday and 21 stalls on a Saturday. Therefore, the proposed 54 parking stalls are adequate for the expected parking demand. • The parking stalls provided in excess of the demand figures will accommodate fluctuations in demand during the holiday season and other times throughout the year. The additional spaces will also accommodate any parking demand created by the small retail building located near the trail. • Based on parking survey data, the peak usage at the one remaining apartment building is estimated to be 10 vehicles. The 17 stalls provided for this building will accommodate the expected demand. • r� 2 • -1318- • 2.0 1 Purpose and Background The purpose of this report is to present the results of our traffic impact study for the proposed Walgreens development in the City of Mound, MN. The proposed development site is, located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard (CSAH 15) and Commerce Boulevard (CSAH 110). Figure 1 shows the project location. This traffic study examined the impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard Lynwood Boulevard and development access Commerce Boulevard and development access The proposed project will remove several existing buildings and construct a new 14,378 square foot Walgreens with a drive through. In addition, a separate 1,010 square foot retail building is proposed for an area near the regional trail. For purpose of this study, this building is assumed to contain a fast food/coffee stand. • Figure 2 shows the current site plan for the proposed development. Access for the proposed development will be provided on both Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. Both driveway locations will provide full access. r� The proposed development is expected to be completed by the end of 2012. 3 -1319- Dutch Lake o Al" 12. BAI APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 1600' Wenck Engineers • Scientists b H ay 1 'y 41 PROJECT LOCATION TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN -1320- FIGURE I PROJECT LOCATION 6QFd N t • • • • • -1321- CL Z LU I.- C4 ui LU 0 Z Z W Z 0 LL 0 z 9 LL • 3.0 Existing Conditions The subject site presently contains several buildings which will be removed as part of this project. The project is bounded by Lynwood Boulevard on the north, Commerce Boulevard on the east, adjacent residential uses to the west, and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail to the south. Lynwood Boulevard east of Commerce Boulevard consists of two through lanes in each direction with a raised median and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Lynwood Boulevard west of Commerce Boulevard consists of one through lane in each direction and a posted speed limit is 30 mph. Commerce Boulevard near the intersection with Lynwood Boulevard is a four lane roadway with a raised median north of Lynwood Boulevard and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Existing conditions are shown in Figure 3. Existing geometrics and traffic control at the subject intersection are described below: Lynwood Boulevard & Commerce Boulevard. This four - legged intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides one shared • through/right -turn lane and one exclusive left -turn lane. The westbound approach provides one through lane, one exclusive right -turn lane, and one exclusive left -turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches each provide a shared through/left- turn lane and a shared through/right -turn lane. Existing signal timing and phasing information for this intersection was obtained from Hennepin County. Weekday turning movement counts were performed on October 12, 2011 during the a.m. (7:00 -9:00 a.m.) and p.m. (4:00 -6:00 p.m.) peak periods. Transit Provisions Metro Transit provides limited transit service throughout the City of Mound. Metro Transit Routes 675 and 677 travel within ' /a mile of the site. A Park and Ride is also located within '/a mile of the site. On weekdays, Metro Transit Route 675 provides service between the hours of 8:10 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. with buses arriving approximately every 60 minutes. Metro Transit Route 677 provides peak hour transit service with stops every 30 minutes between 5:55 a.m. and 7:35 a.m. and 4:20 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. For the purpose of this study, no reduction in trip generation was made for transit use. R -1322- • • 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios As indicated earlier, the proposed development is expected to be complete by the end of 2012. Traffic forecasts and analyses were completed for the year after full completion of the proposed development, i.e. 2013. Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were developed for the subject intersections for 2011, 2013 No- Build, and 2013 Build scenarios. Each of these three scenarios is described below. • Existing (2011). Typical weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes for this scenario were established based on peak period traffic counts. • 2013 No- Build. To account for natural background traffic growth, existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 2.0 percent per year. This growth rate was based on historic traffic growth trends and review of the 2030 traffic forecasts completed by Hennepin County. • 2013 Build. To establish 2013 Build volumes, trips generated by the proposed • development were added to the 2013 No -Build volumes. Trip Generation The expected development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Eighth Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent gross total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The total trips generated by the proposed Walgreens are presented in Table 1. Table 1 TH Generation for the Pro osed al greens Land Use Size Gross Trips Weekday A.M. Peak Hour In' Out Pharmacy/Drugstore w/ Drive-Through 14,378 SF 22 16 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Pharmacy/Drugstore w/ Drive-Through 1 14,378 SF 75 74 In addition to the proposed Walgreens, a small retail building will also be constructed on the site. For purpose of this study, this building is assumed to contain a fast food/coffee stand. The building will be located adjacent to the Dakota Rail Regional Trail with the expectation of drawing most of its business from the trail. However, since it is difficult to quantify trip generation based on trail usage, ITE Trip Generation rates were used for the fast -food • 0 -1324- �J restaurant /coffee stand and will represent a worst -case scenario. Table 2 presents the total trips generated by the proposed fast -food restaurant /coffee stand. Table 2 Trin (Tneratinn fnr the Prnnnsed Fast- Food/Coffee Stand Land Use Size Gross Trips Weekday A.M. Peak Hour In Out Fast -Food Restaurant w/o Drive-Through 1,010 SF 26 18 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Fast -Food Restaurant w/o Drive-Through i 1,010 SF 13 13 The net total trips can be categorized in the following two trip types: • New Trips. Trips solely to and from the proposed development. • Pass -By Trips. Trips that are attracted from the traffic volume on roadways immediately adjacent to the site. Pass -by trips for this study include through trips on Lynwood Boulevard that will enter the site before continuing on Lynwood Boulevard and trips on Commerce Boulevard that will enter the site before continuing on Commerce Boulevard. The percentage of net trips assigned to each trip type described above was based on data • provided in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition. Based on this data and adjustments made to provide more conservative results, the percentages by type of trip for the development uses are as follows: • • Walgreens with Drive- Through Window: 60% new trips, 40% pass -by trips • Fast -Food without Drive - Through Window: 50% new trips, 50% pass -by trips The new development trips were distributed using the following percentages: • 30% to and from the east on Lynwood Boulevard • 15% to and from the west on Lynwood Boulevard • 30% to and from the north on Commerce Boulevard • 25% to and from the south on Commerce Boulevard The pass -by trips were assigned to both access driveways based on existing traffic volume patterns on both Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. The development volumes were added to the 2013 No -Build volumes to arrive at 2013 Build forecasts. The existing, 2013 No- Build, and 2013 Build forecasted traffic volumes are presented in Figures 4 and 5. -1325- N EXISTING 2011 2013 NO -BUILD 2013 BUILD )O(rxxm NOT TO SCALE Engineers - Scientists PROJECT LOCATION ACCESS Co M N M T 4N M T N E� '�- 224/233/233 E- 64/67/70 54/56161 atio Lc`5 aNC-� T Lo Li) c T \ ti Lo N 148 -' �1 T 4-17-1, T LO T 0 m Co � M W O 0 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES • U U La a T T Lo w E— 87/91/86 T "A/12 LYNWOOD BLVD. 3211334/327 `1 r' 91/95/99. -T M 208/216/220 -> 1 T 22/23/23 1 N EXISTING 2011 2013 NO -BUILD 2013 BUILD )O(rxxm NOT TO SCALE Engineers - Scientists PROJECT LOCATION ACCESS Co M N M T 4N M T N E� '�- 224/233/233 E- 64/67/70 54/56161 atio Lc`5 aNC-� T Lo Li) c T \ ti Lo N 148 -' �1 T 4-17-1, T LO T 0 m Co � M W O 0 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES • U U r� • C7 F- 350/364/353 LYNWOOD BLVD. IF— -1424 227/236/228--3,. I CD N N EXISTING 2011 2013 NO -BUILD I l 2013 BUILD xUXX/XX NOTTO SCALE Ada V V'enck Engineers - Scientists QT r N = N T T N N mCo r CV 'L— 386/402/402 <— 2621273/280 ,�— 110/114/123 69/72/81 1 T r 129/134/143 29130/30 � N �. N h T PROJECT LOCATION CIO c I 04 Lo � M T M ACCESS i 421 4421 - 04 > �-44 r [D Im M U � O M w O U TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN -1321- FIGURE S WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES • 5.0 Traffic Analyses Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the study intersections for the existing, 2013 No -Build and 2013 Build conditions during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro analysis software. Existing geometrics presented earlier were used for the initial analyses for the subject intersections. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high- density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. For most agencies in Minnesota, level of service D represents the minimal acceptable level of service for regular daily operations. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an 12 -1328- • unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop- and -go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. The forecasted traffic volumes for each scenario were analyzed using the existing geometry and the existing signal timings provided by the County. The LOS results for the study intersections are presented in Figures 6 and 7 and discussed below. Lynwood BoulevardlCommerce Boulevard. (traffic signal controlled). During the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS C or better under 2011, 2013 No- Build, and 2013 Build conditions. The overall intersection operates at LOS C under all scenarios during the a.m. peak hour. During the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at LOS C or better under 2011, 2013 No- Build, and 2013 Build conditions. The overall intersection operates at LOS B under all scenarios during the p.m. peak hour. isDuring both the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, trips added by the proposed development do not change the LOS of any movement at this intersection. No improvements are needed at this intersection to accommodate the proposed development. Lynwood BoulevardlDevelopment Access (minor street stop sign control). With development of this site, an access driveway will be located along Lynwood Boulevard approximately 230 feet west of Commerce Boulevard. As shown in Figure 3, the center area of Lynwood Boulevard at the access location is currently a cross hatched striped area approximately 14 feet in width. Vehicles entering the site from the east would likely enter the striped area to make left turns. The northbound approach will provide a shared left- turn/right -turn lane. The eastbound approach will provide a shared through/right -turn lane, and the westbound approach will provide one through lane and one exclusive left -turn lane. During the a.m. and p.m. peak hours of the 2013 Build scenario, all movements will operate at LOS B or better. We recommend that a short westbound left turn lane be striped on Lynwood Boulevard in the cross hatch striped area. This will help to clearly define where left turns should occur while entering the site. Commerce BoulevardlDevelopment Access (minor street stop sign control). With development of this site, an access driveway will be located along Commerce Boulevard approximately 150 feet south of Lynwood Boulevard. The eastbound approach will provide a shared left - turn/right -turn lane. The southbound approach will provide a through lane and 13 -1329- • one shared through/right -turn lane and the northbound approach will provide one through lane and one shared through/left -turn lane. During the a.m. and p.m. peak hours of the 2013 Build scenario, all movements will operate at LOS B or better. Intersection Queuing Analysis Queuing analyses were completed for the study intersections for the 2013 Build condition during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using SimTraffic simulation software. Existing geometrics presented earlier were used for the initial analyses for the subject intersections. Due to the location of the proposed access driveways, the queuing analysis focuses on the northbound and eastbound legs of the Lynwood Boulevard/Commerce Boulevard intersection. The purpose of the queuing analysis is to determine if queues from the Lynwood Boulevard /Commerce Boulevard intersection block the site access driveways. A total of five simulation runs were completed for each analysis scenario and peak hour. An average of the 95`h percentile queue lengths for each scenario was taken and is presented below. Based on the results of the queuing analysis, 95h percentile eastbound queues are expected to be less than 180 feet during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The proposed access driveway will be located approximately 230 feet west of the Lynwood Boulevard/Commerce Boulevard intersection. Therefore, no blockages are expected at the site access. 95`h P ercentile northbound queues are expected to be less than 125 feet during both the a.m. • and p.m. peak hours. The proposed access driveway will be located approximately 150 feet south of the Lynwood Boulevard/Commerce Boulevard intersection. Therefore, no blockages are expected at the site access. Parking Analysis On -Site Parking The number of proposed on -site parking spaces was reviewed to determine if the supply is adequate for the expected parking demand. As shown in the site plan, the proposed project includes 54 parking spaces. As part of a previous project, parking usage data was collected at four existing Walgreens locations in Minnesota during a typical weekday and a Saturday. This data was used to determine the expected peak parking demand at the proposed store. Based on the data collected, the peak weekday parking demand for Walgreens is 1.58 stalls per 1,000 square feet of building space. The:peak Saturday parking demand is 1.47 stalls per 1,000 square feet. Applying the parking rates to the proposed store results in peak parking demands of 23 stalls on a weekday and 21 stalls on a Saturday. Therefore, the proposed number of parking stalls is adequate for the expected parking demand. These parking demand results represent typical weekdays and Saturdays, which occur frequently throughout the year. The parking stalls provided in excess of these demand • 14 -1330- • • • figures will accommodate fluctuations in demand during the holiday season and other times throughout the year. The additional spaces will also accommodate any parking demand created by the small retail building located near the trail. Apartment Building Parking Construction of the proposed project includes the removal of an existing apartment building located immediately to the west. A second apartment building will remain. Currently the two apartment buildings share a 37 stall parking lot. After completion of the proposed project, the remaining apartment building will have 17 parking stalls. The parking usage for the two apartment buildings was surveyed to understand existing conditions. The parking usage was surveyed during multiple time periods on four different days in order to capture a variety of parking scenarios. Data was collected on Thursday through Sunday, February 23 -26, 2012. The results of the parking survey are shown in Table 3. Table 3 F.xictino Parking Usage for Both Apartment Buildings Time Period Total Vehicles Parked Thursday, 2/23/12 at 2:30 pm 5 Thursday, 2/23/12 at 8:15 pm 14 Friday, 2/24/12 at 8:30 pm. 16 Saturday, 2/25/12 at 1:00 prn 11 Sunday, 2/26/12 at 9:15 am 19 As shown, the peak parking usage occurred at 9:15 am on Sunday with 19 vehicles parked. Under future conditions, half of the parking demand will be eliminated through removal of the apartment building. Therefore, the peak usage with one building is estimated to be 10 vehicles. As described above, the building will have 17 parking stalls. Therefore, the number of stalls provided will be able to accommodate the expected demand. 15 -1331- LYNWOOD BLVD. A/A/A —� - / -/A E-- A/A/A ,�— - / -/A I mm U) PROJECT w LOCATION U U Q N EXISTING 2011 2013 NO -BUILD 2013 BUILD XX/XX/XX NOT TO SCALE Engineers • Scientists ACCESS UUU 000 t — A/A/A C /C /C B /B /B B /B /B C /C /C C /C /C �. Qa 'a �(jI T r mmm mmm m m m .7 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN -1332- FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK • HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE 'a m W U W O U TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN -1332- FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK • HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE • <— A/A/A LYNWOOD BLVD. ;7— -/-/A A/A/A <1 (� - / -/A 0n PROJECT w LOCATION U U Q 0 1 ACCESS N EXISTING 2011 2013 NO -BUILD 2013 BUILD XXJXiC/I X)C, NOT TO SCALE I* Wenck Engineers • Scientists UUU v v A/A/A <-- <— C /C /C B/BB B /B /B --t B /B /B —� BBB �. as -a m mmm -/-B I 4-113 Ci 'a J CC W U w W O U TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WALGREENS IN MOUND, MN FIGURE i WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE �J 6.0 Conclusions Based on the information and analyses presented in this report, the following conclusions have been made: • The proposed development will generate a gross total of 82 trips (48 entering and 34 exiting) during the weekday a.m. peak hour and 175 trips (88 entering and 87 exiting) during the weekday p.m. peak hour. • Traffic analyses for all scenarios show the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard/Commerce Boulevard has adequate capacity with existing geometrics and control to accommodate the proposed project. • The proposed development will provide access to Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. Under 2013 Build conditions, both access driveways will operate at acceptable levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • We recommend that a short westbound left turn lane be striped on Lynwood Boulevard in the cross hatch striped area. This will help to clearly define where left • turns should occur while entering the site. • Vehicle queues for the eastbound and northbound approaches at the Lynwood Boulevard /Commerce Boulevard are not expected to block the proposed access locations. • Applying parking rates data collected at other Walgreens stores to the proposed store results in peak parking demands of 23 stalls on a weekday and 21 stalls on a Saturday. Therefore, the proposed 54 parking stalls are adequate for the expected parking demand. • The parking stalls provided in excess of the demand figures will accommodate fluctuations in demand during the holiday season and other times throughout the year. The additional spaces will also accommodate any parking demand created by the small retail building located near the trail. • Based on parking survey data, the peak usage at the one remaining apartment building is estimated to be 10 vehicles. The 17 stalls provided for this building will accommodate the expected demand. 18 -1334- C7 • 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to present the results of our traffic impact study for the proposed Walgreens development in the City of Mound, MN. The proposed development site is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard (CSAH 15) and Commerce Boulevard (CSAH 110). This traffic study examined the impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard Lynwood Boulevard and development access Commerce Boulevard and development access The proposed project will remove several existing buildings and construct a new 14,378 square foot Walgreens with a drive through. In addition, a separate 1,010 square foot retail building is proposed for an area near the regional trail. For purpose of this study, this building is assumed to contain a fast food/coffee stand. • Access for the proposed development will be provided on both Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. Both driveway locations will provide full access. • The proposed development is expected to be completed by the end of 2012. Based on the information and analyses presented in this report, the following conclusions have been made: • The proposed development will generate a gross total of 82 trips (48 entering and 34 exiting) during the weekday a.m. peak hour and 175 trips (88 entering and 87 exiting) during the weekday p.m. peak hour. • Traffic analyses for all scenarios show the intersection of Lynwood Boulevard /Commerce Boulevard has adequate capacity with existing geometrics and control to accommodate the proposed project. • The proposed development will provide access to Lynwood Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard. Under 2013 Build conditions, both access driveways will operate at acceptable levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • We recommend that a short westbound left turn lane be striped on Lynwood Boulevard in the cross hatch striped area. This will help to clearly define where left -1335- Walgreen's Application - Comments for Planning Commision consideration; Walgreen's Application - Comments for Planning Commision consideration; Peter W. Johnson [peter] @peterwjohnson.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 1:05 PM To: Sarah Smith Cc: jkohler @semperdev.com Page 1 of 1 Sarah, I can't attend the Planning Commission meeting tomorrow night. I have reviewed the application materials. As the owner of the building immediately south of the development, I support moving the application forward for counsel review and approval. As the application proceeds, I'd like to see more detail on how phased construction will be accomplished. The current application materials suggest that the second building is for "future construction ". How will that area be finished in the interim? Once completed, the second building will provide screening for the loading dock and drive -thru. Will the interim. finishing of that area also provide screening? If not, then the South fagade of the main structure should be finished in a manner that is comparable to the east, west and north facades and the design should address screening of the drive -thru and loading dock (screening for both view and noise). Also, if the applicant has a proposed interim use for the area where the second building is planned, should the interim use be considered in the planning process? If there is no schedule for constructing the second building, the interim use could easily become a permanent feature of the site. Please share this email with the Planning Commission. Thank You. Peter W. Johnson 15600 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 104 Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 peteri @peterwiohnson.com Phone: 952 - 475 -1907 Fax: 952- 476 -0007 Cell: 612 - 741 -1907 ------------------------------------------------- The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) named in this message. This communication is intended to be and to remain confidential and may be subject to applicable attorney /client and /or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e -mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message and /or any attachments and if you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments. Handout - PC April 3, 2012 -1336- https : / /mail. cityofinound. com/owa/ ?ae= Item& t = IPM .Note &id =RgAAAABMggh4OuHdQo... 4/3/2012 r� LJ • r LJ RE: Request for Review and Comment Pagel of 2 RE: Request for Review and Comment Longfield, Lynn M [Lynn .M.Longfield @xcelenergy.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 12:58 PM To: Sarah Smith Cc: Steven.Storo @ftr.com; shennes @mediacomcc.com; alla .denlsova @CenterPointEnergy.com Attachments: 5701 SHORELINE DR- MOUND- WA -l.pdf (246 KB) ; CONNECTED LOAD SHEET REVIS —l.xis (55 KB) Good afternoon Sarah. I had a chance to run out and take a look at this area and Xcel does have some facilities that will be in the way of your construction, if it commences and according to the site plain you provided me. There would be charges for the removal of this equipment. I have attached a map of the area, showing Xcel facilities. There are 3 poles, an overhead 3 -phase transformer bank and a single phase padmounted transformer. I presume a temp service would be desired for the construction of the new building, so maybe something could be left, if not in the way, in order to feed a temp. I would need more information to determine how we would feed the new building permanently, such as the amps size & the total load of the new proposed building and any • future load plans. I have also attached a load calculation sheet, if and when you're ready to supply that info to me. Below is my contact info. Thank you Lynn Longfield .< Xcel Energy I Responsible By Nature Electric Distribution Designer For the Cities of lndependence, Long Lake, Maple Plain, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista/Shorewood (Enchanted island & Shady island only) Mound, Orono (including Big island & Navarre), Spring Park 5505 Manitou Road, Excelsior, MN, 55331 W: 952.470.3313; C: 6'12.669.4138, F: 952.470.3310 E: lynn.m.longfield cDxcelenergy.com XCELENERGY.COM Please consider the environment before printing this email ***This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain confidential or private material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.. -1337- Handout - PC April 3, 2012 Existing storm drainage along Commerce .Boulevard; Page 1 of 1 Existing storm drainage along Commerce Boulevard; • Peter W. Johnson [peterj @peterwjohnson.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 1:49 PM To: jkohler @semperdev.com Cc: Sarah Smith Attachments: Mound Building 1955.pdf (2 MB) Mr. Kohler, As I stated in a email message left earlier today, the existing storm drains on County Road 110, at the location where the trail crosses, are apparently not constructed properly. While they function well most of the time, they are.subject to freezing up or otherwise becoming blocked. When that happens, standing water floods the roadway. Cars don't anticipate the standing water and drive through at speed, sending a water spray which covers the front of my building with a briny mixture that damages the painted surfaces — causing peeling cracking fading of paint, etc. Apparently the drains freeze shut because the drain basin is very shallow, and doesn't extend below the frost. Most of the water from my site already surface drains to the west or to the northwest into the existing drainage ditch running along and south of the trail. I appreciate that Walgreen's drainage plan directs drainage from the site to the Southwest. That may reduce the accumulation of water on Commerce, but it won't fix the basic problem. As the property owner, Walgreen's will want a properly working storm sewer for drainage of Commerce Boulevard. I've complained for years to no effect. Years ago, I was told that the city viewed that particular drainage feature to be the responsibility of the county or the rail authority. It maybe that the responsibility for that drainage feature is not clearly delineated between the city, the county, and the rail • authority. I thought you should at least be aware of the issue. L I've attached a picture of my building in about 1955. Bridgeman's Ice cream is trying to leverage its long history in Minnesota in its effort to sell franchises & extend its brand as a high end premium ice cream: http:// www.bridgemans.com /history.htmI They could be a good prospect for the small trailside building. Peter W. Johnson 15600 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 104 Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 peterj@peterwlohnson.com Phone: 952 - 475 -1907 Fax: 952 - 476 -0007 Cell: 612 - 741 -1907 ------------------------------------------------- The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) named in this message. This communication is intended to be and to remain confidential and may be subject to applicable attorney /client and /or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e -mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message and /or any attachments and if you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments. -1339- Handout - PC April 3, 2012 https:/ /mail. cityofinound. com/owa/ ?ae= Item& t = IPM .Note &id= RgAAAABMggh4OuHdQo... 4/3/2012 Walgreens Proposal Walgreens Proposal Roberta Flatten [roberta.flatten @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 3:08 PM Ta: Sarah Smith Hi Sarah, I cannot attend the P.C. meeting this evening. Please pass on to the Planning Commission that I recommend no action on Walgreens land use applications until after the Met. Council has decided whether or not to approve the Comp. Plan amendment. Thank you. Tom Casey -1340- Page 1 of 1 C7 f 1 Handout - PC April 3, 2012 • https: / /mail.cityofmound.com/owa/ ?ae= Item& t = IPM .Note &id= RgAAAABMggh4OuHdQo... 4/3/2012 • CITY OF MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #12- A RESOLUTION BY THE MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINING CONFORMITY WITH AMENDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING VACATION AND CONVEYANCE WHEREAS, the City of Mound has adopted a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide certain areas to Pedestrian and Park (the "Amended Comprehensive Plan"); WHEREAS, the Amended Comprehensive Plan has been referred to the Metropolitan Council for its review and action; and WHEREAS, such review and action is still pending; and WHEREAS, policies contained in the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan contemplate the redevelopment of downtown Mound; and WHEREAS, the land use, subdivision and related applications associated with the Conner Green Addition major subdivision and redevelopment project includes the vacation of a "public alley" by the City of Mound which is referenced in Hennepin County Document No. 2839170 and Hennepin County No. 2790722; and • WHEREAS, the ro osed vacation and conveyance was reviewed by the Planning p p Commission at its April 3, 2012 meeting who voted in favor and opposed to recommend approval of the vacation and conveyance as such was found to be compliant with the policies contained in the Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota that, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 462.356 Subd. 2, the Planning Commission hereby finds the vacation and conveyance to be compliant with the City's Amended Comprehensive Plan. Adopted this 3rd day of April, 2012 Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander -1341- Chair Stephen Ward Handout - PC April 3, 2012 CITY OF ST. BONIFACIUS • 8535 Kennedy Memorial Drive St. Bonifacius, MN 55375 952/446 -1061 RESOLUTION 2012 -12 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING FURTHER RESEARCH OF THE CONCEPT OF A COOPERATIVE FIRE PROTECTION AREA THAT SERVICES 100% OF MOUND, MINNETRISTA, ST. BONIFACIUS AND ITS EXISTING CONTRACTED SERVICE AREAS WHEREAS, the City of St. Bonifacius values public safety as a core service of government; and WHEREAS, currently, the City of Minnetrista receives contracted fire protection services from St. Bonifacius Fire Department and Mound fire Department at an estimated 48/52 land coverage percentage via two separate city contracts and formula allocation; and WHEREAS, the City has received correspondence from the City of • Minnetrista requesting the cities of St. Bonifacius and Mound work together to present a single fire contract to service 100% of their city; and WHEREAS, the Fire Chiefs of St. Bonifacius and Mound were present at the St. Bonifacius 4/26/12 workshop at which time they presented three options to the city council. The option presented included SBFD protecting the areas of; A) 100% of Mound, Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius and their current contracted service areas. B) 100% of St. Bonifacius and minimal coverage areas in Minnetrista such as the developments of Hunters Crest and Turtle Creek. (2 sq. miles) C) 100% of St. Bonifacius (1 sq. mile); and WHEREAS, the fire chiefs strongly recommended Option A proposing to accomplish the fire protection service restructuring plan by utilizing all of the existing and available resources from MFD and SBFD; and U -1342- WHEREAS, the fire chiefs request the council's resolution of support prior to their continued work on the plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of St. Bonifacius supports option A supporting further work on the concept of a cooperative fire protection area that services 100% of Mound, Minnetrista, St. Bonifacius similar to the existing contracted service areas. Adopted by the St. Bonifacius City Council this 2nd day of May, 2012. AT ST: Brenda Fisk, lerk- Treasurer • -1343- Rick Weible, Mayor MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES • APRIL 11, 2012 The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, met in special session on Wednesday, April 11, 2012, at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Councilmembers Kelli Gillispie, Ray Salazar, Heidi Gesch and David Osmek. Others present: City Manager Kandis Hanson, Finance Director Catherine Pausche, Police Chief Dean Mooney, Blaza Fugina 1. Open meeting Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. Update on Fire Study Mayor Hanus gave a brief update on the Fire Study. The Mayor had met with the St. Bonifacius Mayor on Saturday, April 7, 2012, and the St. Boni Mayor seemed open to contracting with the City of Mound to provide coverage to Minnetrista, thereby achieving one fire contract for Minnetrista. 3. Update on Police Study The Mayor gave an update on the discussion for police services and stated that the workshop • was meant to feel out each council member as to where they stand in having a say on selection of a police chief and whether they want to proceed with the overall discussion of a contract for services. Both Minnetrista's current proposal and Mound's responses to date were shared with the attendees. Mayor Hanus closed a portion of the meeting per Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.03, to consider strategies related to labor negotiations under the Public Employment Labor Relations Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 179A. Mayor Hanus reconvened the meeting at 8:30pm and asked each council member to state their preferences. Mayor Hanus stated overall, he votes yes to proceed with discussions because he wants to take one more crack at it. Council Member Ray Salazar stated that he would like to be closer to the 10 -15% savings as stated a the October meeting, as well as he would like to see the advisory board have more influents, but based on the input from Chief Mooney, some of his reservations had been addressed, and he would vote "yes" to proceed with discussions. Council Member Gillispie said the same. Council Member Gesch stated the building situation is a huge issue for her and she would need to see more plausible alternatives, but that she was willing to continue negotiations. Council Member David Osmek was the last to vote, and stated even with some of the labor trade -offs, he was leaning against contracting. He stated the long -term use for the public safety building was his biggest concern. He stated he from the start of negotiations, he always thought • -1344- Mound City Council Minutes —April 11, 2012 • there would be some police presence in the facility with some activity level. He did not feel the savings were compelling enough, even if future costs would rise for the City, but he was willing to let discussions go forward. He wants to see some level of performance measurement/triggers or that the City of Mound could enact a probationary period where Minnetrista was given a year to rectify any concerns brought forward and then an out - clause could be exercised that allowed Mound also to recoup some of the contributed capital. Ray Salazar also reiterated his concerns about the savings being more compelling. The Mayor said the committee would meet with Minnetrista on Tuesday, April 17th to continue negotiations. 4. Adjourn The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Attest: Catherine Pausche • C7 -1345- Mayor Mark Hanus MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES • MAY 1, 2012 The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, met in special session on Tuesday, May 1, 2012, at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Councilmembers Kelli Gillispie, Heidi Gesch and David Osmek. Members absent: Councilmember Ray Salazar Others present: City Manager Kandis Hanson, Finance Director Catherine Pausche, Fire Chief Greg Pederson, Police Chief Dean Mooney, Blaza Fugina, Geoff Michael, Todd Truax, Len Harrell, John McKinley, Mary McKinley, Ken Beck, Mike Sussman, Shirley Hawks, Butch Hawks, Nancy Swanson, Jami Wittke, Dan Niccum, Brent Rassmussen, Brad Schoenherr. 1. Open meeting Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Update on Fire Study Fire Chief Greg Pederson gave an update on the Fire Study. The Fire Chief reported that he and City Manager Kandis Hanson attended a special meeting of the St. Bonifacius City Council • on Thursday, April 26, 2012, where they presented three alternatives for providing fire service to the City of Minnetrista. The Fire Chief reported that the St. Boni Council was in favor of the most desirable /economic alternative, which includes significant cooperation between the St. Boni Fire Department and the Mound Fire Department, including full consolidation at some point in the future. 3. Update on Police Study The Mayor gave some background on the Police Share Services Study and why up until now, much of the work has gone on behind the scenes. He said it was necessary for the analysis to reach a certain point before the public debate began. Catherine Pausche reviewed the information presented in the handouts, including a financial analysis of three scenarios including: (1) the police department is kept in house and two additional officers are hired, (2) contract with the City of Minnetrista for a flat $1.6M with annual capped increases which is the current offer on the table, and (3) contract with the City of Minnetrista for a flat $1.545M with annual capped increases which is what the Mound Committee would like to counter with. The second handout detailed the number of full -time positions that have been eliminated since 2008. The third handout highlighted the soft savings and increased capacity opportunities if a contract for police services was entered into, and finally there was a handout of highlights from the Emergency Services Consulting International (ESCI) Study stating the benefits of a combined department. The Mayor took questions and comments from the audience which included the subject of the • differences in "culture" between the two departments, the question of why we did not consider a -1346- Mound City Council Minutes — May 1, 2012 • JPA, among others. The Mayor tried to address those concerns as well as recommitting that if Minnetrista insists on putting our officers on probation, that is still a deal- breaker for us. The Mayor then surveyed the members of the City Council who were present as to whether they supported continuing the talks and what their issues or concerns were. Mayor Hanus stated that he is a "yes" because the savings are close to what the initial expectation was for the study. Council Member Gillispie stated that besides the numbers (financials) there are other factors like how well the departments would work together. She would need to see more details of how this would work and how we would ensure the departments would be blended, but she was a "yes" to continue negotiations. Council Member Gesch also stated it was not all numbers for her, and that she has concerns about the philosophies and culture. If she had to vote on the final contract today, she would vote "no ", but she is a "yes" to continue discussions. Council Member Osmek stated he would vote "no" if voting on the final contract, but may allow one more baby -step to negotiations. He stated this is not a performance issue for our police department and he always thought there would be a presence in Mound. He questions whether there are enough savings to make it worth the loss of control. Geoff Michael from the audience stated he agreed with Council Member Osmek and asked what other alternatives to savings could be considered, including looking at increasing revenues or reviewing management salaries. • 4. Adiourn The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 7:50pm. Attest: Catherine Pausche 0 Mayor Mark Hanus -1347- MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES • May 8, 2012 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, May 8, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Councilmembers Kelli Gillispie, Ray Salazar, David Osmek and Heidi Gesch Others present: City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Finance Director Catherine Pausche, Sherry Maas, Amy Maas, Leah Prudent, Casey Horgan, Blaze Fugina, Brian Pelowski 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 meetina Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Gesch to approve the agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. • 4. Consent agenda MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Salazar to approve the consent agenda. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $205,076.68 B. RESOLUTION NO. 1241: RESOLUTION OF SPONSORSHIP AS RELATED TO THE SOUTHWEST TRAILS SNOWMOBILE ASSOCIATION C. Approve Pay Request No. 4 from Minger Construction, Inc. in the amount of $9,322.54 for work completed on the 2011 Lift Station Improvement Project, PW -11 -03 D. Approve Pay Request No. 2 from MinnComm Utility Construction Co. in the amount of $21,306.13 for work completed on the Island View Drive - Windsor Road Watermain Loop Project, PW -12 -07 E. RESOLUTION NO. 12-42: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF HENNEPIN COUNTY RECYCLING GRANT AND EXECUTION OF GRANT AGREEMENT F. Approve permits for June 2, 2012 Fish Fry — Mound Fire Relief Assn (with fee waivers) 1) Temporary sign permit 2) Temporary on -sale liquor 3) Public Dance /Live Music 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. None were offered. Councilmember Osmek arrived at 7:05 p.m. • -1348- Mound City Council Minutes — May 8, 2012 • 6. Request for action on resolution providing for sle of $10,450,000 GO Bonds, Series 2012A Pausche stated that the request for sale of bonds that are to finance the following: $2,245,000 Street Improvement Project and Retaining Walls; $1,190,000 Watermain Capital Improvements; $545,000 Storm Water Capital Improvements; $880,000 Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvements; $4,345,000 Current Refunding of HRA Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2002; and $1,245,000 Current Refunding of GO Revenue Bonds, Series 2004B. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 12-43: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $10,450,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2012A 7. Presentation from University of Minnesota Students — Mound Sustainability Project Leah Prudent, Amy Maas and Casey Horgan presented the results of their University of Minnesota project regarding sustainability including concepts and applied practices. Their project included community visits as well as meetings and discussion with City Staff. The Mayor thanked them for choosing Mound for their project. 8. Mary LaRose Hennepin County Appraiser, presenting 2012 Assessment12011 Sales Report LaRose highlighted key statistics of the 2012 Assessment/2011 Sales Report for the City. • MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to receive the report as presented. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 9. Discussion /action on Planning Case 11 -11 (continued from 3/3112) — Variance for identification sign at Mound MarketPlace Sarah Smith reviewed the request by Mound MarketPlace, LLC, for modifications to the area identification sign at Mound MarketPlace. This request is to add 8 sq. ft. to the current 120 sq. ft. sign, and to also allow for color corporate signage rather than the current reverse cut copy. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Salazar to direct staff to draft a resolution to allow the modification of the variance to allow for color corporate signage. All voted in favor. Motion carried. MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Gillispie to direct staff to draft a resolution to allow the modification of the variance to allow for an additional 8 sq. ft., to the present 120 sq. ft. sign. The following voted in favor: Gillispie, Salazar and Hanus. The following voted against: Gesch and Osmek. Motion carried. 10. Planning Commission Recommendation — discussion /review of "home occupation" definition in City Code chapter 129 (zoning ordinance) as it relates to signage Smith explained that a resident made the request, and the Planning Commission reviewed the home occupation regulations related to signage. The Planning Commission is not recommending any change to the current regulations. • MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Hanus not to amend the City Code as it relates to signage for home occupations. All voted in favor. Motion carried. -1349- Mound City Council Minutes — May 8, 2012 11. Approve minutes • MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Gesch to approve the minutes of the April 24, 2012 meeting. The following voted in favor: Gillispie, Salazar, Hanus and Gesch. The following voted against: None. Osmek abstained from voting because he was absent from that meeting. Motion carried. 12. Executive Session for the purpose of the City Manager's performance evaluation At 8:30 p.m. Mayor Hanus announced that the Council would go into closed session for the purpose of performing the City Manager's performance evaluation. The meeting reconvened at 9:01 p.m. Mayor Hanus announced that the Council had completed the performance evaluation of the City Manager and commended her for her performance. 13. Information /Miscellaneous A. Comments /reports from Councilmembers /City Manager B. Reports: Bolton & Menk — Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed TMDL Study Mediacom — new channel notification Draft 2013 LMCD Budget C. Minutes: None D. Correspondence: Letter from Craig Dawson of MCWD Winsted Investment, LLC — 4/12/12 Memo from Chief Mooney — 4/26/12 14. Adiourn MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Gesch to adjourn at 9:02 p.m. All voted favor. Motion carried. • Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -1350- Mayor Mark Hanus • • MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 15, 2012 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in special session on Tuesday, May 15, 2012, at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members present: Mayor Mark Hanus; Councilmembers Kelli Gillispie, Ray Salazar, David Osmek and Heidi Gesch Others present: City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, Public Works Superintendent Jim Fackler, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Public Works Supervisor Ray Hanson, Liquor Store Manager John Colotti, Public Works Director Carlton Moore, Fire Chief Greg Pederson, Police Chief Dean Mooney, Finance Director Catherine Pausche 1. Open meeting Mayor Hanus called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. 2. Department Head Annual Reports Annual reports were presented by Department Heads, with discussion following. A. Liquor Store — Manager John Colotti B. Police Department — Police Chief Dean Mooney C. Fire Department — Fire Chief Greg Pederson D. City Clerk's Department — City Clerk Bonnie Ritter • E. Finance Department Finance Director Catherine Pausche F. Community Development Department — CD Director Sarah Smith G. Public Works Divisions 1. Public Works a. Public Works Director Carlton Moore b. Public works supervisor Ray Hanson 2. Parks and Docks a. Public works superintendent Jim Fackler 3. Adlourn MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Gillispie to adjourn at 8:47 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk • Mayor Mark Hanus -1351- DOCKS AND COMMONS COMMISSION MEETING Thursday, April 19, 2012 Present: Chair Jim Funk Commissioners Mark Drahos Susan Gardner, and Cliff • Schmidt. Excused: Rodney Beystrom and David Osmek Other Present: Public Works Superintendent Jim Fackler Public Present: Maria & LaMarr Barnes (4857 Island View Dr), Mike Hendrickson (10680 Hwy 7, Watertown) Chair Jim Funk called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Agenda MOTION by Drahos, second by Gardner, to approve agenda with one addition. MOTION carried unanimously. 2. Approval of March 15, 2012 Minutes MOTION by Schmidt, second by Drahos, to approve the minutes as written. MOTION approved unanimously • 3. Comments and Suggestions - no one present 4. Public Lands Permit for 4857 Island View Drive Fackler briefly reviewed the application for the Commission. The request includes new boulder walls, replacement of the existing stairs, and related restoration activities. Staff recommends approval with conditions, including the recording of an agreement regarding the utilities located in the affected area. MOTION by Funk, second by Schmidt, to approve the public lands request as submitted. MOTION carried unanimously. 5. Review of 2013 Dock and Slip Fee Options Gardner questioned whether the current fee schedule covered the cost of program administration. Fackler indicated that it did not. Originally, when the program began, the fees were designed to subsidize the cost of slips. It was requested to bring this issue back to May's meeting with 6. Discussion of LMCD Ruling on Dock Extension and Dredge Limits and Mound Ordinance • on Boat Lifts -1352- Fackler reported that the LMCD is allowing the City of Mound to administer our own • dock extension policy. A letter is being prepared for all dock holders regarding this new policy. Each request for extended dock length will be reviewed individually. Dredging is extremely cost prohibitive. Selected areas have been done because it's been cost effective to do so. Boat lifts are allowed where they will fit. Enforcement is complaint driven. If lifts start increasing we will likely see more storage complaints. 7. Review of the 2011 Dock Annual Report 8. Review of the 2012 Calendar Bring back the amended Annual Report for the May meeting. MOTION by Funk, second by Schmidt, to accept the calendar with changes. MOTION approved unanimously. 9. Reports Jim Fackler — Dock administration has been assigned to City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, the Field • Representative assignment has been given to the Community Service Officer, Mike Wocken, and Ron Stansfield continues to be the Dock Inspector. Mark Drahos — Updated the commission on the antique car and boat show in July. MOTION by funk, second by Schmidt, to adjourn. MOTION approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m. -1353- MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 2012 ROLL CALL Members present: Chair Stephen Ward; Commissioners Jeffrey Bergquist, Douglas Gawtry, George Linkert, Cindy Penner, Kelvin Retterath, and Councilmember Ray Salazar. Absent: Pete Wiechert and David Goode. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planning Commission Secretary Jill Norlander, Planning Consultant Rita Trapp from HKGi. Others present: David Deters; John Rozen; Mike Bain, 4684 Manchester Rd; Vernon Brandenburg, 4446 Wilshire Blvd; Blaze Fugina, Laker; John Kohler, 80 So 8th St #1275, Mpls; Alan Catchnall, 2277 W Hwy 36, Roseville; Johann & Mila Chemin, 6039 Beachwood Rd; Ross Langhans, 2561 Wexford La; Mitch Madson, 2561 Wexford La; Todd Mikkelson,1350 No Arm Drive, Minnetrista; John Tombers,1736 Baywood Shore Dr. APPROVE AGENDA WITH ANY AMENDMENTS Ward asked to add a discussion item regarding the May meeting date. MOTION by Ward, second by Linkert, to approve the agenda as amended. MOTION • carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MARCH 6, 2012 MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Linkert, seconded by Bergquist, to approve the March 6, 2012 minutes as presented. MOTION carried unanimously. BOARD OF APPEALS Public Hearing — Conner Green Addition (Walgreens) PC Case No. 12 -04 to 12 -09 and 12- 11Preliminary Plat; Rezoning; Subdivision Exemption, Variance, Conditional Use Permit, Vacation, Final Plat and a Specific Sign Program Location: SW corner of Commerce and Lynwood Boulevards Applicant: Semper Development Chair Ward opened the Public Hearing. Consultant Planner Trapp introduced the requests from Semper Development. She indicated that developments in this district follow the Planned Unit Development process. Trapp reviewed each aspect of the development in detail as outlined in the • Planning Report dated March 30, 2012. -1354- • Linkert asked if Met Council says "no" do we do this all again. Trapp wasn't sure how the applicant would proceed if the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is denied. Linkert wondered if the City was compensated for the alley vacation. Trapp indicated that it was not. Linkert confirmed that the variance for the parking lot on the apartment building was not needed and wanted to know if the commission would vote to deny or not address it at this point. Smith thought we would let the developer address this issue; he may withdraw it. Linkert wanted an explanation of the park dedication provision. Trapp related that the City Code requires 10% of the total land area or the cash equivalent. Land doesn't make sense in this case. Policy has been that it is based on tax value not sale amount. Ward asked what the purpose was for the subdivision exemption. Trapp said it was the only way to change a property boundary without re- platting the whole Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority property and doing all the title work and related actions. Ward asked why the commission is being asked to make a recommendation on the preliminary plat as well as the final plat on the same night. Trapp explained that the preliminary plat requires a public hearing at both the Planning Commission and City Council. Final plat is only addressed at the City Council level and needs to be the same as proposed in the preliminary plat. In this case, there is limited ability to change property lines or other details from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat so the applicant • is requesting that both be considered concurrently. Linkert wondered if it was a minor or major matter that the drive up window is under the "restaurant" section rather than "retail" section of the code. Trapp replied that Staff believes that the drive through window reference in the code applies to either and has informed the applicant of that determination. Linkert asked about the elevation change on the property. Trapp said it was about 5 feet. John Kohler (Semper Development) — Kohler reviewed their requests. He indicated that the parking variance for 5701 Lynwood Boulevard is not needed. It was interesting to note that the design of the smaller building is a takeoff of the railroad station theme. Salazar thought that windows needed to be added to the east and north elevations. Kohler said the design was an effort to break up the span of wall to minimize the massive building. Salazar suggested they also add windows to the trash area to improve look. Salazar thought the size of the signs overall were fine given the size of the building. He was concerned with the Walgreens monument sign and felt that in regard to the reader sign, public service information would be fine; but it should not be used as advertisement. The bistro monument sign was discussed. Kohler indicated that the • bistro building will be sold and that there is significant interest right now. Walgreens will maintain everything but the sidewalks. Salazar asked if they could add one more -1355- tree. Kohler said that wasn't a problem. Salazar asked about the storm water plan. Kohler thought everything was in place. The MCWD was at the initial developer • meeting. They are awaiting final comments from them. Linkert wants them to think about another entrance on the Commerce side of the building. He suggested switching the sidewalk and greenspace such that the sidewalk is closer to the building with greenspace adjacent to the street. Smith said the sidewalk and greenspace arrangement is based on the downtown design plan. Salazar said that there would be a security issue with another entrance /exit and it would cut into the stockroom area. Retterath felt that, since hardcover is limited to a maximum of 75% in the business districts this site should be limited to 75 %, not the 81.2% proposed. Kohler said they could probably meet the 75% at the expense of some of the seating /plaza areas. Retterath felt there was a significant amount of Spandau glass. He was also concerned about light pollution on the residential side with lit towers. It was not neighborhood friendly. He questioned the 5 foot setback along the bistro building. Trapp indicated there are no mandated setbacks in the Pedestrian District; whatever is agreed upon. Site elevations were also discussed in relation to pedestrian access from the Commerce side. Trapp reviewed the written communications received. Tom Casey requested no action • be taken until the Metropolitan Council decision is made on the comp plan amendment. Peter Johnson was supportive of moving the applications on to the Council for approval. He was concerned if the bistro construction was delayed that it would look bad from his property on the south. He also questioned whether the past storm drain issues on Commerce were adequately addressed. According to Trapp, Public Works Director Moore thought it had been taken care of a few years ago but would check on it. Public Comments Johann Chemin (6039 Beachwood Rd) 1) 54 parking spaces are too many; district should have a pedestrian focus but Walgreens is focused on cars. 2) Storm water treatment system not environmentally friendly. 3) Use of solar panels to offset electrical consumption should be encouraged as a good example for the community. 4) Parking lot equals heat; could use more trees; utilize existing trees. 5) Bistro building 6 foot monument is a safety concern; bikes won't see the traffic or be seen; city liability; put bistro building further west. 6) No integration of the pedestrian in the architectural design; all car oriented; visually see the butt instead of the front of the store. 7) Building is a cookie cutter; square; big box; steeple design will be dated in 10 years. Bistro building design is attractive. 8) There seems to be signage frenzy. 9) South view is not appealing to trail users; rather than fake 2 "d level try a real 2 "d level. • -1356- • Ward indicated that any written comments received will be entered into the record. Kohler: drive up window was redesigned with Hennepin County's input and with safety in mind; in his experience the tower design is unique to Mound; Ward asked Kohler about the bistro monument blocking traffic sight. Kohler said sight line is fairly significant. Salazar asked about saving trees. Kohler replied that the trees are primarily in the middle of the sight; none in perimeters that would work. Salazar asked about adding windows on the north and east sides of the Walgreens building; also the south side. Peter Goshgarian (100 Orono Orchard Rd, Wayzata) He's excited about the plan. His question was about the tower, screening, and lighting spill -out to the remaining apartment building. Kohler demonstrated the elevation and tree plan. The light can be shut off after hours or permanently, if there's a concern. Retterath added that the shoebox style parking lot lights shine down rather than out. Goshgarian asked if they could have flexibility if it becomes an issue for the apartment building. Kohler said it's easy to add shields. • John Royer, Jr. (2281 Commerce Blvd) He thinks the building design is gorgeous. In addressing Mr. Chemin's remaining questions, Kohler indicated that the pedestrian entry is a loss prevention issue with the front door. It needs to serve both parking lot and pedestrians from Lynwood. Salazar suggested more windows on and south side and southeast corner. Linkert asked about passive storm water systems. Kohler said that systems like rain gardens require elevations within the site that don't exist. MOTION by Salazar, second by Penner, to close the public hearing. MOTION carried unanimously. Ward would like to see the reader board on the Walgreens monuments lower, more trees, which Kohler stated was acceptable, and more design on the east and south side. Much discussion about the monument sign being too tall and too large; driving distraction with the reader board; monument sign is redundant with the signage on the building; suggest eliminating the reader and raise it slightly. A second look was given to the monument sign for the bistro building. It was recommended that the sign on the north side be removed and that the monument sign • for the bistro be limited to 12 square feet. Retterath urges the commission to recommend the minimum size allowed for both locations. -1357- Linkert thinks that Mound should insist on a second entrance off Commerce Boulevard. • Retterath agrees. Kohler indicated that there are windows there so, in some time in the future, a door could be cut in. MOTION by Linkert to table until the next meeting. MOTION died for lack of a second. MOTION by Bergquist, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the rezoning with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Comprehensive Plan hasn't been formally approved by the Metropolitan Council. MOTION by Ward, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the Subdivision Exemption with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Penner, second by Salazar, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Conditional Use Permit hasn't been approved yet. MOTION by Salazar, second by Ward, to recommend approval of the Resolution by the • Mound Planning Commission Determining Conformity with Amended Mound Comprehensive Plan Regarding Vacation and Conveyance as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Salazar, second by Penner, to recommend approval of the alley vacation with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Linkert, second by Retterath, to table action on remaining applications with Walgreens making improvements to their plan as suggested. MOTION defeated. Retterath and Linkert approved; Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar against. MOTION by Salazar, second by Bergquist, to recommend approval of the Final Plat with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar approved; Linkert and Retterath opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Metropolitan Council has not approved the Comp Plan Amendment and the Conditional Use Permit has not been approved. Reason for voting in opposition from Retterath: Final Plat is the last say of the Commission and he doesn't see why it can't be postponed briefly. Trapp added 2 conditions to the CUP staff recommendation as follows: -1358- 19. The City reserves the right to reevaluate lighting from signage and site lights should • it become a problem, particularly to the residential property to the west. This may include additional screening of lights or signage. • 20. Addition of windows on the north, east and south elevations as discussed. Retterath, again, thinks that the Commission should insist on a limit of 75% Hardcover. Salazar reiterated that the City requested the impervious pavers as well as the seating plaza areas. He said Walgreens indicated that they could remove some of that, but grass would get trampled. Trapp reminded the Commission that, in this district, the requirement says 75% or as approved. There is flexibility in this district. Linkert believes strongly in the second entrance. MOTION by Linkert to recommend requiring a 2 "d entrance on Commerce /Lynwood be created. MOTION withdrawn. MOTION by Gawtry, second by Salazar, to recommend Conditional Use Permit approval with conditions 1 through 20 as recommended by Staff and the addition of the words at least (one tree) to condition No. 8. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar approved; Retterath and Linkert opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Would like to see a second entrance; drive through was not addressed; it was rushed thru and we should have spent more time. MOTION by Ward, second by Penner, to recommend approval of the specific sign program subject to the conditions as recommended by staff and reduce the monument reader board portion of the sign. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, and Salazar; Linkert and Retterath opposed. Reason for voting in opposition from Linkert: Building and monuments could be smaller; safety hazard. Reason for voting in opposition from Retterath: Same as Linkert. Case No. 12 -10 Expansion Permit Location: 2561 Wexford Lane Applicant: Ross Langhans Smith introduced the request to allow a remodel /addition including construction of an upper level addition over the existing garage portion of the house. Existing structure is nonconforming requiring the expansion permit. Staff recommends approval subject to conditions outlined in the March 29, 2012 planning report. Staff also informed the Commission that the MCWD contacted Staff to inform the City that the project does not need a permit from the MCWD as it is under their permitting threshold. Staff explained the expansion permit requirements from the Code and a brief discussion ensued. -1359- MOTION by Ward, second by Gawtry, to recommend approval of the expansion permit with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried unanimously with findings • of fact as in Planning Report. Case No. 12 -02 Waiver of Platting Location: XXXX Manchester Road Applicant: Kurt Gullickson At the request of Ward, Smith provided a brief overview of platting. Due to the current time, Staff informed the Planning Commission of Work Rule provision that requires meetings to conclude by 11PM unless a majority of the Planning Commission agrees to an extension. MOTION by Linkert, second by Salazar, to recommend extending the meeting past 11:00 p.m., if needed. MOTION carried unanimously. The purpose of the waiver of platting request is to subdivide the property on Manchester Road along original /exterior lot lines. The code does not require Planning Commission review of waiver requests. The application was referred to the Planning Commission as Staff thought their review would be beneficial for the Council, especially due to the wetland. Retterath noted that not all the corners on the survey indicated irons set. He thought • that the survey markers should, at a minimum, be in place on all the corners. Fritz Gullickson (applicant) stated that corner markers were set on site. He's not sure why they weren't indicated as such on the survey. Mr. Gullickson inquired about $8,000 in utility fees, which was a condition in the Planning Report, and asked why they are being charged since it was platted previously. Smith commented that per City policy, vacant property is charged for sewer and water trunk fees ($4,000 for each lot) in addition to utility connection fees and MCES SAC charges. MOTION by Linkert, second by Gawtry, to approve the waiver of platting with conditions as recommended by staff. MOTION carried. Bergquist, Gawtry, Linkert, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Ward opposed. Findings of Fact: Ward wanted to add a requirement to the recommended conditions that the surveyor update survey to reflect the installation of corner markers. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Review /discussion — PC Work Rules MOTION by Ward, second by Salazar, to table consideration of the Work Rules to the next meeting. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and • Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. -1360- • May Meeting Date MOTION by Ward, second by Salazar, to set next meeting for May 15th. MOTION carried. Ward, Bergquist, Gawtry, Penner, Retterath, and Salazar approved; Linkert opposed. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Salazar, second by Penner, to adjourn at 11:15 pm. MOTION carried unanimously. Submitted by Jill Norlander • U -1361- PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Present: Absent: Others Present: Public Present: Thursday, May 10, 2012 Chair Mike Wilkus; Commissioners Derek Goddard, Todd Peterson, and Council Representative Heidi Gesch Sharon Holden, Robert Brose, and Josh Dunwoody Public Works Superintendent Jim Fackler None Chair Wilkus called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Goddard, to approve the agenda as presented. MOTION carried unanimously. 2. APPROVAL OF APRIL 12, 2012 MINUTES MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Peterson, to approve minutes as written. MOTION carried unanimously. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS — None 4. DISCUSS: ADOPT -A -GREEN SPACE APPLICATION & HISTORY Commission suggested "Adopt -a -Green Space" and the name of the adopter. MOTION by Gesch, seconded by Peterson, to direct staff to make a sample sign for Commission review, applied to those parks with the new park signs installed. MOTION carried unanimously. 5. DISCUSS: POSC 2013 BUDGET REQUESTS MOTION by Peterson, seconded by Goddard, to direct staff to include replacement of the Surfside Park play structure in the 2013 budget request, amount to be determined. MOTION carried unanimously. 6. DISCUSS: PARK DEDICATION FUND BALANCE - $4,600 No action. 7. DISCUSS: WORK RULES Issue discussed was the "unexcused absence" clause. No action. -1362- • • • • 8. DISCUSS: DOG PARK Several locations were discussed. Decision needs to be made as to what kind of park is desired (i.e. large, small, wild, etc.). Estimated dog population in Mound is 4,000. Commission would like to see this item revisited in the fall. 9. REVIEW: 2012 CALENDAR Add Dog Park to September. 10. REPORTS Gesch: Some developer interest shown for downtown; Minnetrista /Mound police and fire negotiations continue; Walgreens is waiting for Met Council action Fackler: Field personnel trying to keep up; prepping for fish fry; centennial items; seasonal help comes on board the first part of June MOTION to adjourn by Gesch, seconded by Peterson. MOTION approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Submitted by Jill Norlander • • -1363- ���h1NNFr0�� � y • LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRIC "Save the Lake" is a non - profit fund investing in the environmental quality and recreational enjoyment of Lake Minn eto \F'NATION 0\ SAVE THE LAKE April, 2012 Your efforts to fund projects that benefit Lake Minnetonka are paying off. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) has maintained a non - profit Save the Lake Fund since the 1970's. Tax deductible contributions received from this bi- annual solicitation drive, and other campaign initiatives, fund environmental and public safety, service, and educational projects that are not provided within the LMCD's approved Administrative and Aquatic Invasive Species budgets. Save the Lake solicits proposals to fund projects that meet specific funding criteria guidelines. Based on contributions received in 2011 ($50,000), the LMCD Board of Directors (via the Committee's recommendation) approved the funding of the following four projects: 1. $13,676 to the Hennepin County Sheriffs Foundation for partial assistance in funding a Remotely Operated Underwater Vehicle (ROV). The ROV will greatly improve the public safety efforts of the Hennepin County Sheriffs OfficeMater Patrol divers during search and rescue efforts; 2. Up to $30,000 to the Lake Minnetonka Association for the final treatment of the five -year Herbicide Treatment Pilot • Program on Carmans, Grays, and Phelps Bays; 3. $4,168 to Long Lake Fire Department to improve public safety on Lake Minnetonka for the purchase of ice water rescue suits; and 4. $2,470 to the Libbs Lake POA for funding of one herbicide treatment. Save the Lake receives both monetary and in -kind support from many of our commercial Lake Minnetonka stakeholders. In -kind support includes the Lake Minnetonka Charter Boat Association annually volunteering their time to install and remove the red and green solar lights (all of which were purchased through the Save the Lake Fund). Additionally, the marinas are initiating their own campaign drive to not only raise more funds for the ROV (noted above), but also to continue the funding of the Solar Light Program. Look for mailers from these stakeholders. Many of you have contributed to Save the Lake via the Aerial Photography Campaign. If you have not yet viewed this campaign on the LMCD's website, please take the time to do so. Aerial photographs of your favorite bay, or the whole Lake, are available for purchase. Your support is appreciated! Sincerely, Bill Olson, Chair • Annual Save the Lake Campaign -1364 - Wen Page Address: httr): / /vvw.w.imcd.org • E -mail Address: lmcd;lmcd.org 13505 SM17H T OWN ROAD, SUITE 120 • SHOREV.%OOD, M114NESOIA 55331 • TELEPHONE 952 /745 -0789 • FAX 952/745 -9085 X k� Public Health and Recommend AGAINST M, Alcohol Sales in Places that Currently. Have Government Control The Community Preventive Services Task Force (Task Force), an independent, nonfederal, unpaid group of public health and prevention experts, recom- mends against privatization of retail alcohol sales in places that currently have government control, based on evidence that privatization leads to increased consumption of alcoholic beverages, excessive drinking and related harms. The Task Force finding and The Guide to Community Preventive Services The Community Guide) evidence Wview appear in the April 2012 issue _ the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Privatization of retail alcohol sales is the repeal of state, county, city, or other types of governmental control over the retail sales of alcoholic beverages, which allows commercial retailing. The MMBA office hanni] a small combination faci I just wanted to catch yot year We just had a meeting wn of $21,300 for the 2011 F few years of losses. Our auditor noted the rec internal control measures cost of inventory counts have instructed us to continue to a the staff helped the audit go s MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE 10 The privatization of retail alcohol sales applies to off - premises alcohol outlets, or places where alcohol is sold for the buyer to drink elsewhere (e.g., liquor stores), and does not generally affect the retail sales of alcoholic beverages at on- premises alcohol outlets (e.g., bars or restaurants). The Community Guide systematic re- view included scientific evidence from 18 studies, of which 17 assessed the impact of privatization on the consumption of alcoholic beverages that were and were not privatized. Following privatization, consumption of privatized beverages within the jurisdiction that underwent privatization increased by a median of 44.4 %, and consumption of non - privatized beverages within the jurisdiction that underwent privatization experienced a small 2.2% decrease, resulting in Minnesota: ;Tess our facility has made this past for, & we had a operating income finite improvement over the previous 1tory, making timely deposits, tighter ctations have improved our operation. our inventory control program, the � better than in the past. The auditor :hecks to monitor the inventory and 1365 substantial net increases in alcohol use. Nearly all of the studies used alcohol sales or tax data to estimate excessive alcohol consumption, which is a well - established way to measure this. One study in Sweden found that re- monopolization was associated with a general reduction in alcohol - related harms. The Task Force recommendation against privatization of retail alco- hol sales is based solely on evidence related to public health consequences, which may be one of several factors to consider when making decisions on whether to privatize retail alcohol sales. For more information go to: http : / /www.thecommunityguide.org / alcohol/privatization.html • • 0