The URL can be used to link to this page

09-25-17 CC Reg Mtg AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2017 AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call B. Review Agenda 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Zerby Johnson Labadie Siakel Sundberg Attachments 2. CONSENT AGENDA — Motion to approve items on the Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of Sept. 11, 2017 Minutes B. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List C. Resolution 17 -XX Accepting 2017 Residential Recycling Grant Clerk Memo Resolution D. Resolution 17 -XX Updating Fee Schedule to Include Certification Fee Clerk Memo Resolution E. Proposal for Construction and Material Testing Services for the Badger Park, Phase 2 Improvements, City Project 17 -09 Engineer Memo 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council Action will be taken) 4. PUBLIC HEARING 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 6. PARKS A. Park Commission Meeting Report — Commissioner Molly Barr Minutes B. Accept donation of Memorial Park Bench Planning Staff Memo Resolution CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — September 25, 2017 Page 2 7. PLANNING A. C.U.P. for coffee shop with drive -thru service and outdoor seating Applicant: Dave Watson Location: 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 8. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. MN DOT Local Road Improvement Grant program 9. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS A. Re- roofing Southshore Center 10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Monthly Budget Report B. Mayor and City Council 11. ADJOURN Planning Staff Memo Resolution City Administrator memo City Administrator memo Finance Memo CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2017 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Acting Mayor Siakel; Councilmembers Johnso Administrator Lerud; Planning Director Darling; City Engineer Fauske Absent: Mayor Zerby and Councilmember Sundber B. Review Agenda Labadie moved, Johnson seconded, approving the agenda as p 2. CONSENT AGENDA Acting Mayor Siakel reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. 2A 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Attorney Keane; City is Works Brown; and, d. Motion passed 310. Johnson moved, Labadie'seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. City Council Work Session Minutes of August 28, 2017 B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of August 28, 2017 C. Approval of the Verified Claims List D. f Call Special Joint Meeting with Planning Commission for September 26, 2017, to Discuss the Comprehensive Plan E. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17 -076, "A Resolution Selecting the Truth -in- Taxation Hearing Date of December 4, 2017 with a Continuation Date of December 11, 2017." F. Cell Phone Usage Policy Update G. Approve a Professional Services Agreement for the Street Capital Improvement Program H. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17 -077, "A Resolution Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for the Riviera Lane, Shorewood Lane, Mann Lane and Maple Street Improvement Project, City Project 18- 001." CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 2 of 13 Motion passed 310. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Vacate Drainage and Utility Easements Applicant: Thomas and Judy Dahlberg Location: 25270 Smithtown Road and 5683 Acting Mayor Siakel opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M. Director Darling explained that Thomas and Judy Dahlberg owne Smithtown Road and Harding Lane. The Dahlbergs have recently under the 25270 Smithtown Road address at Hennepin ,County. addition onto their home and meet the required minimum setback There still are standard drainage and utility easements on both Dahlbergs have requested that those easements be vacated so the3 naturally. The applicants had submitted a search of the easements ti City which confirmed there are no utilities in those easements. Lane two parcels of land located between onsolidated the two °parcels into one 'he„ applicants want to construct an nd impervious surface requirements. ;ides of the old property line. The ,ould end up with one lot that flows ;mall utility companies as well as the Darling noted that if the property owners would resubdi ide the property in the future the City would require that they replace the easements in the same area. Acting Mayor Siakel opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M. Judy Dahlberg, one of the, owners of the 25270 Smithtown Road property, reiterated there never have been any utilities in the easements they would like to have vacated. She stated the easements need to be vacated in order for them to do anything (e.g.; rebuilding the garage) on their property. Acting .Mayor Siakel closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:06 P.M. Attorney Keane asked if the property owners have completed the joinder of the parcels as a unified tax parcel. Director Darling stated the applicants have submitted all of the necessary paper work to Hennepin County. The County, is in the process of completing the consolidation. It does take some time for the City to receive confirmation of the official consolidation and a new property identification number. Keane suggested that vacation of the easements be conditioned on the completion on the joinder of the parcels into a single tax parcel. Ms. Dahlberg noted that she had spoken with Hennepin County staff and learned that it could take up to one year before all of the paper work is complete. She was told the new property identification number would not come out until at least next spring. She stated they would prefer not to have to wait one year to do their project. Attorney Keane stated he assumes the applicants will have or do have verification that they submitted all of the necessary paper work. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 3 of 13 Acting Mayor Siakel asked Ms. Dahlberg when they would like to start their project. Ms. Dahlberg responded in the fall. Councilmember Labadie asked if it is legally viable to begin construction before the two parcels are officially joined into a single tax parcel. Attorney Keane stated yes and clarified as long as the filings have been submitted to the Hennepin County Recorder. Labadie moved, Johnson seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17 -081, "A Resolution Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements for 25270 Smithtown Road" conditioned on the joinder of a single tax parcel. Motion passed 310. Acting Mayor Siakel closed the Public Hearing at 7:09 P.M. 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 6. PARKS 7. PLANNING A. Amendment to Minnetonka Country Club Devdopment Agreement Director Darling explained that Mattamy Homes (developer for- the Minnetonka Country Club development) and City staff are proposing an amendment to the MCC Development Agreement. A questionable soil condition issue was identified not too long ago when the developer tried to construct the interior tails. After much discussion the City Engineer; the City's geotechnical engineer and the developer's geotechnical engineer decided that the best approach to getting the interior trails constructed is to prepare the trails this .fall and let them settle over the upcoming winter season. The trails would be paved during the spring of 2018. Paving next year should increase the life of the trails. The amendment would allow the developer an additional year to finish the trail construction. Acting Mayor Siakel asked if the, amendment specifies when that trail work needs to be completed by. Director Darling stated the amended Agreement specifies by July 1, 2018, and that she will correct the draft resolution to reflect that date. Councilmember Johnson asked if the amendment provides the developer the opportunity to not work on the other trails. Director Darling Mated most of the other trails are finished. She clarified the trails being discussed are the interior segment of trails. Councilmember Labadic asked Director Darling to expand on what makes the soils questionable. Director Darling clarified it is the soils beneath the proposed interior trails that are questionable. She explained the construction standards for the trails in order to provide more support for the pavement, the base needs to settle over a winter season. Director Brown explained those soils are very susceptible to freeze /thaw conditions. Typically if soils are allowed to go through a freeze /thaw cycle they will compact and settle. He cautioned against paving those trails this year only to have them fall apart after the soils settle. He noted that both the developer's soils consultant and the City's soils consultant both think that is the best approach as well as the most cost effective. Administrator Lerud noted that the two -year warranty period would start after the trails are paved. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 4 of 13 Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17 -078, "A Resolution Approving a Second Amendment to the Development Agreement for Minnetonka Country Club Planned Unit Development" subject to changing the completion date in the Resolution to July 1, 2018. Motion passed 310. B. Conditional Use Permit for Coffee Shop with Drive -thru Service and Outdoor Seating Applicant: Dave Watson Location: 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 Acting Mayor Siakel stated that during Council's August 28, 2017 consideration of a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for the Watson Vin the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 for a c( service and outdoor seating to this Council meeting. She explained I have been additional discussions between the Cities of Shorewooc The Cities want to make sure that whatever decisions arc:, made a Continuing this item to Council's September 25 meeting would options further. Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, continuing the consideratio drive thru service window for the Watson Vinehill, LLC, prt with drive -thru service and outdoor seating for the properth Highway 7 to the September 25, 2017, Council meeting. Motion 8. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS A. Johnso Acting Mayor Siake� Meeting at 7:15 P.M. in the tingTCouncil continued the LLC, proposal to redevelop (Starbucks) with drive -thru the August 28 meeting there netonka about the proposal. best interests of all parties. parties to of a conditional sal for a coffee located at 19245 to various use permit for a shop (Starbucks) and 19285 State Storm Sewer" System (MS4) Stormwater Report by Paul tal Compliance Specialist, WSB & Associates Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Public Information Siakel noted Paul Johnson, Environmental Compliance Specialist with WSB & Associates, is present to make a�presentation abouttne progress, the, City made during 2016 on its SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program) and to provide an overview of what will be done next with regard to stormwater management: The meeting should help educate Shorewood's residents. Public comment will be received. Mr. Johnson explained holding a Public Information Meeting about the City's SWPPP is a requirement for obtaining a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit. The Permit is for five years and is required by the Federal Clean Water Act. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) administers the MS4 permit. The stormwater program for MS4s is designed to reduce the amount of sediment and pollution that enters surface and ground water from storm sewer systems to the maximum extent practicable. Stormwater discharges associated with MS4s are regulated through the use of NPDES permits. The permits are legal documents. Through the permit the City is required to develop a SWPPP that incorporates best management practices (BMPs) applicable to its MS4. An MS4 is a conveyance or system of conveyances (e.g.; roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man -made channels, storm drains). An MS4 is owned or operated by CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 5 of 13 a public body (e.g.; state, city, town, borough, and county) created by or pursuant to State Law. It is designated or used for collecting or conveying stormwater which is not a combined sewer. It is not part of a publicly owned treatment works. Shorewood is designated MS4 because it is a city with a population greater than 5,000 and it discharges or has the potential to discharge to valuable or polluted waters. There are impaired waters in Shorewood. He reviewed the progress the City had made in 2016 to satisfy the MS4 Permit. • Public education/Outreach • City website — it contains a lot of information about s • City newsletter — a number of articles were p information. • Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) — there has,b media more to keep residents informed. • Resident guide — it contains information about what lawns and landscaping. • Recycling • Spring Garden Fair — that provides a great oppor native plants. • Construction site inspections. • Plan Reviews for construction sites, • Stormwater system inspections • Street sweeping — it is estimated that the City removes 57 He displayed a copy of the Shorewood MS4 r related activities. about stormwater related een an attempt to incorporate social residents can do with things such as tunity to encourage people to plant of phosphorus annually. He explained the City's SWPPP had six minimum control measures (MCMs) which are used to evaluate the City each year. He highlighted some things the City needs to undertake per its current MS4 General Permit. ➢ MCM 1— Pubic Education and Outreach Prioritize education activities, within the City of Shorewood — focus on areas without stormwater treatment, assess areas with curb and gutter where there is not treatment and assess areas discharging to water bodies (e.g.; Lake Virginia) that have degraded water ■ Educate the public and commercial businesses on illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) with handouts, surveys, newsletters, social media, etc. ■ Partnerships —have an education planning meeting. ■ Document sneeific MCM 1 information. ➢ MCM 2 — Public Participation and Involvement • Provide public notice of the annual public information meeting (this meeting) to provide the public an opportunity to comment on or present issues with the City's SWPPP. • Document specific MCM 2 information. ➢ MCM 3 — Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 6 of 13 • Assess the need to revise the ordinance with regard to IDDE. Ordinances are enforced administratively. • Complete training of all field staff in recognition of illicit discharge. That should be done in the early part of the summer when all seasonal staff members are present. • Detection — look for illicit discharges when doing inspections and when doing routine activities. • Document specific MCM 3 information. ➢ MCM 4 — Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control ■ Assess the need for ordinance revisions to comply with the new permit coverage. ■ Conduct plan reviews and inspections for all sites one acre in size or greater. ■ Document specific MCM 4 information. ➢ MCM 5 — Post - Construction Stormwater Manag • Assess the need for ordinance revisions to comply New development with no net increase ,vc (total phosphorous) from pre - project conditioi Redevelopment with net reduction of volume,` • Long -term maintenance — develop post const Shorewood to conduct inspections, perform m with the new permit coverage. lume, TSS (total suspended solids) and TP structural stormwater BMPs constructed 'after the permit ■ Document specific MCM 5 information. d TP from pre - project conditions. regulatory mechanisms to allow cc. and assess costs to maintain ➢ MCM 6 — Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping, for Municipal Operations • The Storm Water Asset Management Program (SWAMP) is a system designed to help prioritize pond inspections and management activities. WSB helps Shorewood with doing that. • Complete inspectiois for: strttetural stormwater BMPs (annually); outfalls (once per 5 year permit term); ponds (once per 5 year permit term); and, stockpiles and material handling Implement the annual stormwater management training program. Document specific MCM 6 information. He reviewed the MS4 checklist. ■ Site plan review for post construction when the proposed project results in 1 or more acres of new impervious, surface or fully reconstructs 1 or more acres of impervious surface • Construction site inspections ■ Initial inspection in accordance with the City ordinance ■ Project completion inspection ■ At any other time, at the issuing authority's discretion ■ City owned projects weekly and within 24 hours of �/z inch or more rain event • Annual structural stormwater BMP inspections for sumps, grit chambers, baffles, stormceptors, rain gardens, infiltration basins, and other pollution control devices • Stormwater catch basin inspections — do 20% annually • Stormwater pond inspections —100% are inspected once within a 5 year permit cycle • TSS and TP assessment of ponds — should be completed after the initial inspection is completed CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 7 of 13 • Outfall inspections of culverts, or pipes of 12" or greater, that outfall into public lakes, rivers, stream or wetlands. 100% are inspected once within a 5 year permit cycle • Annual training on the MS4 program, illicit discharge, erosion and sediment control BMPs. • Quarterly inspection of the City's facilities (e.g.; the Public Works facility, the material storage yard, streets and parks) • Public education via newsletter articles and the City's website. • Public involvement (i.e.; the annual SWPPP Public Information Meeting) • Annual reporting is due June 30 each calendar year. He highlighted some stormwater improvement opportunities. Grants through the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Res Street improvement projects. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District cost -share Rants — He then highlighted next steps. Continue to provide education for high Continue to conduct staff training. Continue to perform inspections for i sites. Complete stormwater system inspectio? Continue to document MS4 activities. MPCA audit. 50% of the and post - construction to a possible future MS4 Information Meeting at 7:33 asked Mr. Johnson if he has been involved with the :a Country Club (MCC) redevelopment project site. Mr. I why that was. Mr. Johnson explained he is a compliance ; he has not been involved with that project. Mr. Greenfield asked why it is more environmentally sound to direct 100s of 1,OOOs of gallons of highly polluted water directly into Lake` Minnewashta rather than into the regular system like the one on the MCC site. Councilmember Johnson explained that prior to the Wetland Conservation Act going into effect in 1990 there were no rules and regulations. Cities were able to discharge stormwater water into wetlands, lakes, rivers and streams without pretreating the water. The MPCA through the MS4 General Permitting process has regulations requiring stormwater to be pretreated before it enters into a wetland or a public water body. Mr. Greenfield asked if the water sitting in holding ponds is considered treatment. Mr. Johnson confirmed that and explained that settles sediment out. There are also infiltration basins that help infiltrate the water. There are stormwater structural BMPs. There are storm catch basins that have sumps in them that collect sediment. Rain gardens can also be used for treatment. Mr. Johnson stated because of new development practices used by cities there are more developments with swales, vegetative buffers and infiltration basins. Stormwater ponds are only functional for so many years and the length of time depends on the number of rain events there have been. As part of the MS4 CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 8 of 13 permit the stormwater ponds get inspected (once in the five year permit cycle) to ensure determine if they are functioning to their full capacity. Mr. Greenfield asked what happens to the sediment and chemicals that collect in a stormwater pond. Mr. Johnson explained when a pond is inspected samples are taken to determine the TSS and TP levels. The ponds with the higher levels are cleaned out first. If the sediment contains contaminants the sediment would go to landfills. Mr. Greenfield asked if there is any danger that the contaminants in the bottom of a pond could seep into the ground water supply. Mr. Johnson stated he is not aware of that happening. Mr. Greenfield stated Shorewood increased its storm water utility rate by more than 20 percent last year and that was 10 times more than the rate of inflation. That increase was published in the Shore Report. He explained in response to that increase he wrote to the City and asked for justification of that increase. He received a list of projects done over the last few years and the cost of them. One project on the list which was in his neighborhood was supposedly done for a cost of $100,000. He found out that project was never done. He thought there was one other project that he did not think .ever got done. He, encouraged the City to review that list. He did not think it was right to send out information that was not accurate. Acting Mayor Siakel explained the decision to increase the storm water rate was not made lightly. The City had hired a consultant to review fees /rates and expenditures ,to find out of the revenues were covering the associated expenditures and to determine what the future needs were. She thought the increase was $6 per quarter, but she was not sure. Mr. Greenfield Mated his quarterly fee increased from $20 to $27. Siakel stated that based on the needs and the regulations the City has to comply with Council thought it prudent to increase rates. Mr. Greenfield rioted he does not doubt that and stated he thought that should be made clear to residents. Administrator Lerud stated he Sent Mr. Greenfield a copy of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects for the last few years. He clarified he had told him that he was not sure that work had been done. Mr. Greenfield stated th�t,generally subscribes that everyone in Shorewood should contribute equally toward paying the cost of significant City projects. But; in the case of stormwater runoff some residents do not have any stormwater runoff. They have no sewers or curbs and gutters yet they are charged the same storm water rate as others in the City are charged. He clarified he is somewhat ambivalent about that. He thought it was somewhat unfair that, for example, the new MCC development has storm sewers every 15 feet. Yet, there has never been one on his street noting the drainage is not the greatest. He then stated he thought the project done by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) on the MCC site was an initial failure. There was standing water in his neighborhood for four months. He questioned if it was corrected properly. He asked Mr. Johnson if he had inspected that project. Mr. Johnson responded he had not. Acting Mayor Siakel stated sometime during a five -year period that will be inspected and that she assumed the ponds are inspected on a rotation schedule. She thanked Mr. Greenfield for his comments and questions. Mr. Johnson explained that WSB acts as a liaison to the City in managing its stormwater program. City staff is responsible for doing curb and gutter, catch basin, and stormwater BMP inspections. WSB does the stormwater pond inspections. The cleanout of the ponds are prioritized based on what WSB finds. Director Brown explained that almost 90 percent of the inspection items Mr. Johnson mentioned are done by Public Works personnel unless it involves surveying or chemical testing. One of the last stormwater pond projects was the inspection of Manor Pond. It was determined that it would cost more than $300,000 to dispose of the contaminated sediment that had accumulated in the Pond. That contamination was CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 9 of 13 caused by the use of coal tar -based sealants in the past. He anticipates that same type of contamination will be found in other stormwater ponds that that have been around for a long time. He noted that WSB is responsible for monitoring if the City complies with the EPA standards which require ponds be inspected and maintained. Mr. Greenfield asked Director Brown if it is likely that the stormwater ponds on the MCC site would end up like Manor Pond. Brown stated he does not think so because the Minnesota Legislature banned the sale and use of coal tar -based sealants a few years ago. Brown then stated the WSB inspections staff monitors things to ensure that the ponds and stormwater systems are constructed to the approved standards. He went on to state that before the City takes ownership of the ponds on the MCC site there will be a final inspection of the ponds. Councilmember Johnson asked what agency the Annual Report is submitted to and would it be publicly accessible. Mr. Johnson stated the Annual Report is due at the end of June. Itis a summary of the six MCM requirements and what the City had done throughout the previous year. Mr. Johnson stated he works with staff to prepare the Report. Director Brown noted the Report is also sent to Council and it is available on the City's website. Acting Mayor Siakel closed the Public Information Meeting at 7:48 B. Accept Bids and Award Contract for the '1017 Pavement Reclamation Project, Howard Point Road, Kathleen court, Oak Ridge., Circle, Summit Avenue, City Project 17 -13 Engineer Fauske explained the initial 2017 Pavement Reclamation Project included the reclamation of Howards Point Road, Kathleen Court, Oak Ridge Circle and Summit Avenue. There have been some additions to the Project. They inelde the replacement of a culvert between the wetlands and Eureka Road North and paving the raised gravel'area of the roadway. Also added are the construction of concrete curb and gutter and the installation of blinker stop signs at the Country Club Road and Lake Linden Drive intersections with Yellowstone Trail. The project was bid out with a 25 foot radius for the curb and gutter at both intersections. Should the project be approve the radius can be altered to 20 feet in the field if that is Council desires. The City received four bids for the project. They were opened on August 31 and WSB tabulated the bids. The birds came in a little higher than anticipated because of the increases in bituminous prices due to an oil price' hike due to refineries in Texas being shut down because of the hurricanes. The low.bidder'was C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc., for an amount of $810,924.60. She noted the total project cost includes a 5 percent construction contingency Councilmember Johnson asked if any consensus has been reached about whether or not the radius should be 25 feet for 20 feet. Director Brown stated Mayor Zerby had a strong interest in the size of the radius and noted there is time ,to make that decision. Director Brown stated that the Country Club Road and Lake Linden Drive intersections with Yellowstone Trail are 3- legged intersections. The blinker stop signs will be on the two busiest approaches and a regular stop sign will be on the minor leg due to the cost of the blinker signs. Siakel moved, Johnson seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17 -079, "A Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for the 2017 Pavement Reclamation Project, Howards Point Road, Kathleen Court, Oak Ridge Circle, Summit Avenue, City Project 17 -13, to C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. for $810,924.60." Motion passed 310. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 10 of 13 9. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS A. Adoption of the Preliminary 2018 General Fund Operating Budget and Tax Levy Administrator Lerud noted that by law the City has to approve a preliminary budget by September 30 of each year. He explained that Council discussed the preliminary 2018 General Fund Operating Budget during work sessions on August 14 and on August 28. During those discussions a 2.9 percent tax levy increase was proposed for 2018. The certified preliminary levy amount cannot be increased before it is adopted during the December 4, 2017 Truth -in- Taxation hearing. It can be decreased. The resolution Council is being asked to adopt reflects the 2.9 percent Levy increase. Acting Mayor Siakel recommended Council set the 2018 maximum tax levy amount to reflect a 4 percent increase when compared to the actual 2017 levy amount. Doing so would allow Council some flexibility during the remainder of the 2018 budget discussions. She reiterated the levy amount can be decreased before it is adopted on December 4. Siakel moved, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 17- 080 "A Resolution Adopting the Preliminary 2018 General Fund Operating Budget and Tax Levy Increase of 4 Percent" subject to changing the tax levy amount to reflect a 4 percent increase over the adopted amount for 2017. Councilmember Labadie asked Acting Mayor Siakel to exp tax levy increase to 4 percent. Acting Mayor Siakel stated doing so would give 1 process between now and the December 4 Truth- been on Council she thought Council has been ve the additional 1 percent increase' is, about $50,000. Councilmember Councilmember Labadie stated: and staff are further along in the Labadie econded. Motion. nassed 10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff for changing the maximum bit of flexibility during the 2018 budget 3,ring. She then stated that since she has `only levvinR what is needed. She noted tax levy increase of 4 percent. tax levy increase of 4 percent until Council 1. !City Administrator — Gravel Street Paving Administrator Lerud explained there are three streets in Shorewood that have a gravel surface. The City received a request from one resident asking what it would take to pave one of those roadways. The City does not have a written policy about how to pay for the cost to do that. Based on what he has been told in the past the City has said the resident(s) would have to pay one hundred percent of the cost for the initial paving. He asked if Council would like to discuss the need for a policy and if so what the policy should be during a work session. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 11 of 13 Councilmember Labadie asked if the City's Zoning Code requires a request from property owners living along a street to pave a roadway. Attorney Keane responded no. Labadie stated that means the City could initiate an improvement project. Keane confirmed that. Labadie stated she thought there are more than three gravel streets in the City. Director Brown noted there are only three and they are Maple Avenue, Enchanted Point, and Wiltsey Lane. He stated a few years ago the City did a pilot program called Otta seal where Enchanted Point was sealed much like a sealcoat. That has held up relatively well. Through part of the sealcoat process that was done again for the majority of that roadway. Acting Mayor Siakel stated she thought there would be value in Other Administrator Lerud stated a franchise agreement has been sent to CbnterPoint Energy,for comment. Director Brown stated Council had been informed that -Public Works, had made two watermain repairs. They were successfully completed without incident. Engineer Fauske stated the curb work on Chaska Road near the Oppidan project was completed the previous week. The plan was to backfill behn d,the curb the next day. That has to be done before a street can be paved. The manhole lids will be raised in the next day or two. Staff has been told the paving will start on or before September 15. She explained part of Mill Street is closed because of 'a utility project in Excelsior. Mill Street is an extension of Powers Boulevard I out of Chanhassen. City staff has been receiving phone calls from residents along Galpin Lake Road who are concerned about the increase in traffic because drivers are not taking the detour route (Highway 101):' She stated Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) will be doing some sanitary sewer work at night on Christmas Lake Road north. MCES has not confirmed the date yet. Fauske explained that the City has been notified by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), that effective September 12 MnIIOT is changing the posted speed limit on Highway 7 from 50 to 55 miles per hour (mph) for the portion of the Highway that starts 350 feet west of Church Road and goes east up to the intersection with Highway 41. It will take two to three days for MnDOT to install the new speed limit signs. Councilmember Labadic asked if that increase in speed is based on a traffic study. Engineer Fauske stated that typically MnDOT sets the speed at the 85"' percentile (the speed 85 percent of the vehicles travel at) unless there is an overwhelming geometric constraint on the roadway. Director Brown stated about 1.5 years ago MnDOT decided to increase the posted speed on Highway 7 to 55 mph from 50 mph starting at the intersection of Highway 7 and Highway 41 and going east. The speed data MnDOT had gathered showed the 85"' percentile was 57 or 58 mph. The speed limit west of that intersection was not changed to 55 mph. Labadie then asked if the City has received any indication that MnDOT might conduct counts at intersections west of the Highway 7 / Highway 41 intersection and possibly consider a stop light at one of those intersections. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 12 of 13 Director Brown explained Shorewood had petitioned for a traffic signal at the intersection of Eureka Road and Highway 7 and Chanhassen had petitioned for a signal at the Minnewashta Parkway / Highway 7 intersection. Councilmember Labadie stated if the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen joined forces to petition for a traffic signal at the Minnewashta Parkway / Highway 7 / Church Road intersection she asked if that would carry more weight with MnDOT. She then stated drivers are already traveling about 58 mph when the posted speed is 50 mph west of the Highway? / Highway 41 intersection. When the posted speed limit in increased to 55 mph drivers will be traveling at speeds over 60 mph. She thought it prudent to have a traffic signal at the Minnewashta Parkway / Highway 7 / Church Road intersection or the Eureka Road / Highway 7 intersection. Acting Mayor Siakel stated she thought that when the traffic signal at the intersection of Smithtown Road and Highway 7 was installed MnDOT stated it favored service roads feeding a traffic signal over installing more signals. She then stated she is not sure what the City can do about MnDOT increasing the posted speed west of Highway 41 other than voice opposition about it. Director Brown stated there may be some benefit in the two cities presenting a united front in an appeal to MnDOT. Acting Mayor Siakel suggested drafting a letter to MnDOT and including Minnetrista and other cities which border Highway 7. She also suggested Mayor Zerby contact the other mayors. Director Brown suggested staff contact other communities and if they share Shorewood's concerns then they should adopt resolutions of support and send them to MnDOT. Acting Mayor Siakel suggested drafting a sample resolution that 'could be sent to other cities for consideration. Councilmember Labadie supported that idea. Councilmember Labadie stated there are three times, of the day when the traffic issue at those intersections is more problematic — in the morning with the combined traffic going to the High School, in the mid - afternoon when the High School gets out, and during rush hour. At those times is it nearly impossible to come from the north side of Highway 7 and take a left turn to go east on Highway 7 without a driver fceling like they were putting their life in danger. Councilmember Johnson stated that when the Boulder Cove development was being built there had been discussion about this with Chanhassen and MnDOT. Since then things have changed making the situation worse. An example is the added traffic from the new Woodland Cove development. Director Darling explained that in July the received a petition from a group of residents expressing concern about the lack of landscaping for the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services' (MCES') Lift Station 18 replacement project near Christmas Lake Road and 3rd Avenue. Staff had been directed to work with MCES staff and the residents to come up with an improved landscaping plan. She thought the revised plan MCES prepared is acceptable to all those involved. The revised plans include adding a four - foot berm along 3rd Avenue and planting additional trees. Staff worked with MCES on the type of trees and where they should be planted. Staff believes the revised plan can accommodate drainage. She noted staff has given MCES the go ahead to move forward with the new plan. Councilmember Labadie asked if the revised plan will have any financial impact to Shorewood. Director Darling responded no. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2017 Page 13 of 13 B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Johnson stated he and his family attended the Movie in the Park event held in Freeman Park on Friday, September 8. The event was well attended and the movie basically started on time. He thought City staff did a great job planning and organizing the event. He stated that for future Movie in the Park events he suggested someone from Council and /or the Park Commission give some welcoming remarks and after the event staff should make an attempt to solicit feedback about the event. 11. ADJOURN Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of September 11, 2017, at 8:18 P.M. Motion passed 310. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Zerby, Mayor Sandie Thone, City Clerk ® #2B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood nib Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Verified Claims Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant Greg Lerud, City Administrator Attachments: Claims lists Policy Consideration: Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid? Background: Claims for council authorization. 63967 — 64005 & ACH 568,931.52 Total Claims $568,931.52 We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending September 17, 2017. Financial or Budget Considerations: These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents and funds are budgeted and available for these purposes. Options: The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may reject any expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented. Next Steps and Timelines: Checks will be distributed following approval. Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description FUND 101 General Fund 101 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 50,764.34 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 101 -11- 4103 -0000 1,716.64 0.00 PART -TIME 101 -11- 4122 -0000 131.31 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13- 4101 -0000 9,905.78 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -13- 4103 -0000 384.39 0.00 PART -TIME 101 -13- 4121 -0000 771.76 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13 -4122 -0000 785.13 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -13- 4131 -0000 1,602.92 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -13- 4151 -0000 88.92 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -15- 4101 -0000 1,824.50 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -15- 4121 -0000 136.85 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -15 -4122 -0000 137.06 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -15- 4131 -0000 156.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -15- 4151 -0000 10.83 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -18- 4101 -0000 5,481.62 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -18- 4121 -0000 411.12 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18 -4122 -0000 415.94 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -18- 4131 -0000 463.50 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -18- 4151 -0000 33.30 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -24- 4101 -0000 4,243.04 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -24- 4121 -0000 318.23 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -24 -4122 -0000 267.93 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -24- 4131 -0000 515.00 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -24- 4151 -0000 29.30 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -32 -4101 -0000 8,074.21 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -32 -4102 -0000 209.99 0.00 OVERTIME 101 -32 -4105 -0000 371.68 0.00 STREET PAGER PAY 101 -32 -4121 -0000 649.21 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -32 -4122 -0000 660.24 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -32 -4131 -0000 1,899.66 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -32 -4151 -0000 292.30 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -33- 4101 -0000 312.79 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -33- 4121 -0000 23.45 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -33 -4122 -0000 19.38 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE PR - G/L Distribution Report (09/18/2017 - 11:57 AM) Page 1 Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description 101 -33- 4151 -0000 9.34 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -52 -4101 -0000 5,215.21 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -52 -4121 -0000 391.14 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52 -4122 -0000 410.70 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -52 -4131 -0000 1,086.61 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -52 -4151 -0000 220.00 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION 101 -53- 4101 -0000 901.98 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 101 -53- 4121 -0000 67.65 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53 -4122 -0000 67.38 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 101 -53- 4131 -0000 22.28 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 101 -53- 4151 -0000 28.07 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 50,764.34 50,764.34 FUND 201 Southshore Center 6,132.70 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 201 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 1,669.80 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 201 -00- 4101 -0000 1,068.78 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 201 -00 -4102 -0000 76.44 0.00 OVERTIME 201 -00- 4103 -0000 305.00 0.00 PART -TIME 201 -00- 4121 -0000 80.17 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00 -4122 -0000 100.90 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 201 -00- 4151 -0000 38.51 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 1,669.80 1,669.80 FUND 601 Water Utility 601 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 9,111.61 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 601 -00- 4101 -0000 6,639.66 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 601 -00 -4102 -0000 298.40 0.00 OVERTIME 601 -00- 4105 -0000 333.19 0.00 WATER PAGER PAY 601 -00- 4121 -0000 545.33 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 601 -00 -4122 -0000 478.75 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 601 -00- 4131 -0000 588.79 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 601 -00- 4151 -0000 227.49 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 9,111.61 9,111.61 FUND 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 611 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 6,132.70 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 611 -00- 4101 -0000 4,331.72 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 611 -00 -4102 -0000 90.87 0.00 OVERTIME 611 -00- 4105 -0000 333.19 0.00 SEWER PAGER PAY 611 -00- 4121 -0000 356.65 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611 -00 -4122 -0000 327.76 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 611 -00- 4131 -0000 588.79 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY PR - G/L Distribution Report (09/18/2017 - 11:57 AM) Page 2 Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description 611 -00- 4151 -0000 103.72 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 6,132.70 6,132.70 FUND 621 Recycling Utility 621 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 670.04 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 621 -00- 4101 -0000 522.54 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 621 -00- 4121 -0000 39.21 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 621 -00 -4122 -0000 34.32 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 621 -00- 4131 -0000 71.93 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 621 -00- 4151 -0000 2.04 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 670.04 670.04 FUND 631 Storm Water Utility 631 -00- 1010 -0000 0.00 724.17 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 631 -00- 4101 -0000 585.04 0.00 FULL -TIME REGULAR 631 -00- 4121 -0000 43.88 0.00 PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 631 -00 -4122 -0000 43.19 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE 631 -00- 4131 -0000 48.02 0.00 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE - CITY 631 -00- 4151 -0000 4.04 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND Total: 724.17 724.17 FUND 700 Payroll Clearing Fund 700 -00- 1010 -0000 69,072.66 0.00 CASH AND INVESTMENTS 700 -00- 2170 -0000 0.00 34,836.24 GROSS PAYROLL CLEARING 700 -00- 2171 -0000 0.00 6,832.06 HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE 700 -00 -2172 -0000 0.00 4,929.99 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2173 -0000 0.00 2,126.40 STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2174 -0000 0.00 7,759.98 FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE 700 -00- 2175 -0000 0.00 7,158.02 PERA WITHHOLDING PAYABLE 700 -00- 2176 -0000 0.00 1,699.52 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 700 -00- 2177 -0000 0.00 1,087.86 WORKERS COMPENSATION 700 -00- 2181 -0000 0.00 1,098.62 DISABILITY INSURANCE 700 -00- 2183 -0000 0.00 735.77 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT 700 -00- 2184 -0000 0.00 502.20 DENTAL DELTA 700 -00- 2185 -0000 0.00 306.00 DENTAL - UNION FUND Total: 69,072.66 69,072.66 Report Total: 138,145.32 138,145.32 PR - G/L Distribution Report (09/18/2017 - 11:57 AM) Page 3 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Mnguyen Printed: 09/21/2017 - 9:45AM Batch: 00002.09.2017 - CC -09 -25 -2017 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 104 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: True 2588053 Building Inspection- Shorewood 71.33 09/25/2017 101 -19- 4400 -0000 2590992 Building Inspection- S outhshore 60.00 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 131.33 Vendor: 105 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: True INV 144375 Monthly Maint- Konica Minolta 104.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4221 -0000 Check Total: 104.00 Vendor: 4 AFSCME CO 5 MEMBER HEALTH FUND Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: True September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Union 306.00 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2185 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Union Check Total: 306.00 Vendor: 111 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: False 98110 Construction Testing Svc - Mtka Country Club -1 1,240.75 09/25/2017 450 -00- 4302 -0016 Check Total: 1,240.75 Vendor: 112 AMERICAN LEGAL PUBLISHING CORPOR Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: False 118168 Internet Renewal - 10/29/2017 - 10/29/2018 450.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 450.00 Vendor: 862 WARREN ANDERSON Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: False 25000YellowTrai Subdivision Application 25000 Yellowstone Trai 100.00 09/25/2017 101 -00- 3413 -0000 Check Total: 100.00 Vendor: 761 BLACKOWIAK ROLLOFF Check Sequence: 7 ACH Enabled: False 18715 RolloffTimbers 412.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4400 -0000 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 1 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Check Total: 412.00 Vendor: 131 BUDGET PRINTING AND AWARDS Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: False 5381 Signs 55.26 09/25/2017 101 -11- 4245 -0000 Check Total: 55.26 Vendor: 136 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Check Sequence: 9 ACH Enabled: False 08 -29 -2017 20405 Knighsbridge Rd 23.37 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4394 -0000 08 -29 -2017 28125 Boulder Bridge 21.00 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4396 -0000 08 -29 -2017 24200 Smithtown Rd 60.82 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4380 -0000 08 -29 -2017 5745 Ctry Club & 25200 Hwy 7 35.14 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4380 -0000 08 -29 -2017 5755 Country Club Rd 21.58 09/25/2017 101 -19- 4380 -0000 Check Total: 161.91 Vendor: 137 CENTURY LINK Check Sequence: 10 ACH Enabled: False 612E451785 -SE17 612 -E45- 1785 -Bldr Brdg 294.00 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4396 -0000 612E458019 -SE17 612 -E45- 8019 -SE Areas 220.50 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4398 -0000 Check Total: 514.50 Vendor: 147 CITY OF MOUND Check Sequence: 11 ACH Enabled: True 4th Qtr -2017 Quarterly Fire Payment 6,240.75 09/25/2017 101 -22- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 6,240.75 Vendor: 150 CLASSIC CLEANING COMPANY Check Sequence: 12 ACH Enabled: False 25632 City Hall Monthly Svc 495.00 09/25/2017 101 -19- 4400 -0000 25633 Public Works Monthly Svc 295.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 790.00 Vendor: 3 DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA Check Sequence: 13 ACH Enabled: True Sept- 2017 -COBRA September- COBRA -Jean Panchyshyn 44.55 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2184 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Non Uni Sept- 2017 -COBRA September- COBRA -Brad Nielsen 44.55 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2184 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Non Uni September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Non Union 502.20 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2184 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Dental - Non Uni Check Total: 591.30 Vendor: 865 DEM -CON COMPANIES Check Sequence: 14 ACH Enabled: False 13678 Demo Landfill 153.70 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4400 -0000 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 2 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 179 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT Check Sequence: 18 ACH Enabled: False 4th Qtr -2017 Check Total: 153.70 09/25/2017 101 -22- 4620 -0000 Vendor: 167 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 86,994.12 09/25/2017 Check Sequence: 15 ACH Enabled: True 529285 Ord. No. 545 70.50 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4351 -0000 529472 Ord. No. 545 46.26 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4351 -0000 ACH Enabled: False 254600 Check Total: 116.76 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4437 -0000 Vendor: 5 EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 864.70 09/25/2017 Check Sequence: 16 ACH Enabled: True PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Federal Income Tax 4,929.99 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2172 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Federal Income I PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 FICA Employee Portio 3,144.58 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2174 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 FICA Employee _ PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 FICA Employer Portioj 3,144.58 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2174 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 FICA Employer ] PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Medicare Employee Pc 735.41 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2174 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Medicare Emplo,. PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Medicare Employer Po 735.41 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2174 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Medicare Emplo,. WMart- F1tFarml7 Check Total: 12,689.97 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4331 -0000 Vendor: 219 ELLY PIEPER 65.44 Check Sequence: 17 ACH Enabled: False 09 -19 -2017 SSC- Tablecloths 64.00 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4400 -0000 ACH Enabled: False AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 3 Check Total: 64.00 Vendor: 179 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT Check Sequence: 18 ACH Enabled: False 4th Qtr -2017 Building 64,161.94 09/25/2017 101 -22- 4620 -0000 4th Qtr -2017 Operations 86,994.12 09/25/2017 101 -22- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 151,156.06 Vendor: 186 FERGUSON WATERWORKS No.2516 Check Sequence: 19 ACH Enabled: False 254600 Software Maint. N -Sign Upgrade 995.00 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4437 -0000 258531 Water Meters 864.70 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4265 -0000 261207 Water Meters 123.59 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4265 -0000 Check Total: 1,983.29 Vendor: 206 TWILA GROUT Check Sequence: 20 ACH Enabled: True Cub- 07 -19 -17 Cubs - Bakery 26.97 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4245 -0000 Cub- 09 -14 -17 Cubs - Bakery 11.97 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4245 -0000 WMart- F1tFarml7 Mileage to Walmart & Fleet Farm 26.50 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4331 -0000 Check Total: 65.44 Vendor: 417 ROBERT HANSON Check Sequence: 21 ACH Enabled: False 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement 360.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4321 -0000 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 3 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Check Total: 360.00 Vendor: 211 HAWKINS, INC. Check Sequence: 22 ACH Enabled: True 4139488 -RI Chlorine 250.00 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4245 -0000 Check Total: 250.00 Vendor: 6 HEALTH PARTNERS -GROUP Check Sequence: 23 ACH Enabled: False Sept- 2017 -COBRA Sept COBRA -Jean Panchyshynh 569.54 09/01/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Insurance Sept- 2017 -COBRA Sept COBRA -Bruce DeJong 1,595.75 09/01/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Insurance September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Health Ins - CoPay 2,201.64 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Health Ins - Cop; September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Health Insurance -HSA 4,630.42 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Health Insurance September -2017 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Ins - CoPay 2,201.64 09/01/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Ins - Cop; September -2017 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Insurance -HSA 4,630.42 09/01/2017 700 -00- 2171 -0000 PR Batch 00001.09.2017 Health Insurance Check Total: 15, 829.41 Vendor: 861 CHRISTOPHER HEITZ Check Sequence: 24 ACH Enabled: False 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement 240.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4321 -0000 Check Total: 240.00 Vendor: 215 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION TECH] Check Sequence: 25 ACH Enabled: True 1000098105 Radio Fleet & Time 264.36 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4321 -0000 Check Total: 264.36 Vendor: 646 DAVID HERYLA Check Sequence: 26 ACH Enabled: False 2017- Oktoberfes Oktoberfest Event 300.00 09/25/2017 101 -53- 4438 -0000 Check Total: 300.00 Vendor: 2 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -457 Check Sequence: 27 ACH Enabled: False PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Deferred Comp Flat Ai 1,550.00 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2176 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Deferred Comp I PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Deferred Comp Percen 149.52 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2176 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Deferred Comp I Check Total: 1,699.52 Vendor: 723 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Check Sequence: 28 ACH Enabled: False CP13413- May2017 FED ID -41- 60051452 - JUNE 30- 2017 -FORM 9 316.51 09/25/2017 700 -00- 2174 -0000 Check Total: 316.51 Vendor: 228 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, INC. Check Sequence: 29 ACH Enabled: False AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 4 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 1000807130 12 IPMC Soft 40.95 09/25/2017 101 -24- 4331 -0000 09/25/2017 101 -53- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 40.95 Vendor: 470 BRADLEY MASON Vendor: 235 J.P. COOKE RABIES & LICENSE TAGS 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement Check Sequence: 30 ACH Enabled: False 470302 2018 Dog Tags 83.50 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4245 -0000 METRO SALES INC Check Total: 83.50 Vendor: 686 KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPAN' Check Sequence: 31 ACH Enabled: True September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Long Term Disability 507.32 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2181 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Long Term Disat September -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Short Term Disability 591.30 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2181 -0000 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 Short Term Disat Check Total: 1,098.62 Vendor: 247 DREW KRIESEL Check Sequence: 32 ACH Enabled: False Hobart- 08282017 Replaced Parts- Heating Problem 220.19 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 220.19 Vendor: 531 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Check Sequence: 33 ACH Enabled: False 258678 LU501 Land Use - Marie Darling 30.00 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4331 -0000 258678 LU502 Creating the Ground Rules - Marie Darli 30.00 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4331 -0000 258678 LU502 Creating the Ground Rules - Sue Davis 30.00 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4331 -0000 258678 LU502 Creating the Ground Rules - Jennifer Lal 30.00 09/25/2017 101 -11- 4331 -0000 258678 LU502 Creating the Ground Rules - Debbie Sial 30.00 09/25/2017 101 -11- 4331 -0000 258695 CLP500 - Greg Lerud 15.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4331 -0000 258695 CLP500 - Sandie Thone 15.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4331 -0000 258695 CLP500 - Marie Darling 15.00 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4331 -0000 258695 CLP500 - Larry Brown 15.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4331 -0000 258695 CLP500 - Brett Baumann 15.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4331 -0000 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 5 Check Total: 225.00 Vendor: 259 CLARE T. LINK Check Sequence: 34 ACH Enabled: True 2017 -SHWD9 Park Commission Meeting - 09/12/17 165.00 09/25/2017 101 -53- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 165.00 Vendor: 470 BRADLEY MASON Check Sequence: 35 ACH Enabled: False 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement 360.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4321 -0000 Check Total: 360.00 Vendor: 283 METRO SALES INC Check Sequence: 36 ACH Enabled: False AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 5 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference INV880940 Ricoh/MP -C3002 Color Copier - Svc - 09/08/17 -1 453.00 09/25/2017 101 -19- 4221 -0000 Check Total: 453.00 Vendor: 279 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (WASTEWATE_ Check Sequence: 37 1072436 Monthly Waste Water Svc 57,558.27 09/25/2017 611 -00- 4385 -0000 Check Total: 57,558.27 Vendor: 11 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Check Sequence: 38 PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 State Income Tax 2,126.40 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2173 -0000 Check Total: 2,126.40 Vendor: 672 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS Check Sequence: 39 23158 2040 Comprehensive Plan - Tech 4,316.10 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 4,316.10 Vendor: 325 ON SITE SANITATION -TWIN CITIES Check Sequence: 40 480785 Badger Pk-5745 Country Club Rd 113.42 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 480786 Cathcart Park -26655 W- 62nd ST 56.71 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 480787 Freeman Park -6000 Eureka Rd 170.13 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 480788 Silverwood Pk -5755 Covington Rd 56.71 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 480789 SS Skate -5355 St Albans Bay Rd 56.71 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 480790 Christmas Lk Rd -5625 Merry Ln 235.40 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 486479 Badger Park - Credit -32.06 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4410 -0000 Check Total: 657.02 Vendor: 665 OPTUM BANK Check Sequence: 41 PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 HSA - OPTUM BANK 735.77 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2183 -0000 Check Total: 735.77 Vendor: 9 PERA Check Sequence: 42 PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 MN -PERA Deduction 3,323.37 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2175 -0000 PR -09 -18 -2017 PR Batch 00002.09.2017 MN PERA Benefit Em 3,834.65 09/18/2017 700 -00- 2175 -0000 Check Total: 7,158.02 Vendor: 334 CHRISTOPHER POUNDER Check Sequence: 43 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement 360.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4321 -0000 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Ricoh/MP -C3002 Color Copier ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00002.09.2017 State Income Tax ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00002.09.2017 HSA - OPTUM B ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00002.09.2017 MN -PERA Dedu PR Batch 00002.09.2017 MN PERA Benei ACH Enabled: False Page 6 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 7 Check Total: 360.00 Vendor: 685 BRENDA PRICCO Check Sequence: 44 ACH Enabled: True September -2017 Wellsness Expense 40.00 09/25/2017 101 -13- 4101 -0000 Check Total: 40.00 Vendor: 864 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS, INC. Check Sequence: 45 ACH Enabled: False 34084 Lift Station 20 -Pump Rebuild 3,160.00 09/25/2017 611 -00- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 3,160.00 Vendor: 863 R & D COMMUNICATIONS Check Sequence: 46 ACH Enabled: False 112 Radio Parts 295.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4245 -0000 Check Total: 295.00 Vendor: 108 REPUBLIC SERVICES No.894 Check Sequence: 47 ACH Enabled: False 0894 - 004439100 Monthly Recycling Service 9,854.80 09/25/2017 621 -00- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 9,854.80 Vendor: 727 S & S TREE AND HORTICULTURAL SPECIA Check Sequence: 48 ACH Enabled: False 911710100 Ash Tree Treat 9,490.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 9,490.00 Vendor: 354 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE Check Sequence: 49 ACH Enabled: False 762460 Gloves 11.99 09/25/2017 611 -00- 4245 -0000 763289 Hardware 1.80 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4245 -0000 Check Total: 13.79 Vendor: 360 SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE DEPA Check Sequence: 50 ACH Enabled: False 4th Qtr- 2017 -DS Quarterly -Lease Payment 53,451.75 09/25/2017 101 -21- 4620 -0000 October - 2017 -013 Monthly- Operating Budget Exp 98,125.00 09/25/2017 101 -21- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 151, 576.75 Vendor: 366 BRUCE STARK Check Sequence: 51 ACH Enabled: False 2017 -Cell 2017 Cell Phone Reimbursement 360.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4321 -0000 Check Total: 360.00 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 7 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 702 SW NEWS MEDIA Check Sequence: 52 ACH Enabled: False 201282 Wedding Ads 269.75 09/25/2017 201 -00- 4351 -0000 Check Total: 269.75 Vendor: 376 THE MULCH STORE Check Sequence: 53 ACH Enabled: False 22346 Brush Disposal Service 25.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4400 -0000 Check Total: 25.00 Vendor: 390 UPS Check Sequence: 54 ACH Enabled: False YF0671377 Street Signs Pick Up 59.92 09/25/2017 404 -00- 4225 -0000 Check Total: 59.92 Vendor: 421 VERIZON WIRELESS Check Sequence: 55 ACH Enabled: False 48677171100001 -Brae Brad's Cell- 612 - 865 -3582 130.12 09/25/2017 101 -18- 4321 -0000 Acct #486771711 -00001 9791977969 Sewer & Water - Acct8 420 1 73 86- Svc- 08/02/17-1 48.60 09/25/2017 601 -00- 4321 -0000 Acct #842017386 -00001 9791977969 Sewer & Water - Acct8 420 1 73 86- Svc- 08/02/17-1 48.60 09/25/2017 611 -00- 4321 -0000 Acct #842017386 -00001 9791977969 S & W Lines- Acct842017386- Svc - 08/02/17 -09 48.60 09/25/2017 631 -00- 4321 -0000 Acct #842017386-00001 Check Total: 275.92 Vendor: 415 WARNER CONNECT Check Sequence: 56 ACH Enabled: True 29934493 Monthly Network Maint Services 2,681.80 09/25/2017 101 -19- 4321 -0000 29934523 Domain Name Registration Renewal - Arctic Feve 14.23 09/25/2017 101 -53- 4433 -0000 Check Total: 2,696.03 Vendor: 408 WM MUELLER & SONS INC Check Sequence: 57 ACH Enabled: True 227404 Road Maint 1,368.00 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4250 -0000 227472 Road Maint 1,365.72 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4250 -0000 227594 Road Maint 455.43 09/25/2017 101 -32- 4250 -0000 Check Total: 3,189.15 Vendor: 411 XCEL ENERGY, INC. Check Sequence: 58 ACH Enabled: True 5102846200 - 090817 5655 Merry Lane 25.95 09/25/2017 101 -52- 4380 -0000 5655 Merry Lane Check Total: 25.95 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 8 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Total for Check Run: 453,476.72 Total of Number of Checks: 58 AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:45 AM) Page 9 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Mnguyen Printed: 09/21/2017 - 9:59AM Batch: 00003.09.2017 - CC- 09 -25- 2017 -PERA Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Vendor: 9 PERA 113315 Crisy Schmidt -PERA Deduction Period - 07/25/1 1,093.91 Check Total: 1,093.91 Total for Check Run: 1,093.91 Total of Number of Checks: 1 Check Sequence: 1 09/25/2017 700 -00- 2175 -0000 Reference ACH Enabled: False AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 9:59 AM) Page 1 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Mnguyen Printed: 09/21/2017 - 11:31AM Batch: 00004.09.2017 - CC- 09 -25- 2017 - Allied Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Vendor: 107 ALLIED BLACKTOP COMPANY PV #1- P02925 -29 P.V.# 1 - Project #02925-29 - 2017 Seal Coat 114,360.89 Check Total: 114,360.89 Total for Check Run: 114,360.89 Total of Number of Checks: 1 Check Sequence: 1 09/25/2017 404 -00- 4620 -0006 Reference ACH Enabled: False AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (09/21/2017 - 11:31 AM) Page 1 I M Q City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Accepting 2017 Residential Recycling Grant Meeting Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk Reviewed by: Julie Moore, Recycling and Communications Coordinator Attachments: Resolution #2C MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting Background: On September 1, 2017 the city received the 2017 Residential Recycling Grant in the amount of $23,235. The purpose of the county's residential recycling grant is to provide funding to increase recycling and help reach the 2030 recycling goal established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The amount is a decrease from previous years due to the fact that the county's new funding policy has shifted more grant money to organics. In 2017 the funding policy allocates 80 percent of the total grant money to recycling and 20 percent to organics. The additional basic requirements remain the same and are as follows: 1) Collecting a basic list of recyclable materials 2) Using county terminology and images 3) Making recycling information available on the city website 4) Mailing a recycling guide to residents annually 5) Supporting the county's messaging efforts by completing education and outreach activities Financial or Budget Considerations: Favorable to the recycling budget in the amount of $23,235 for the purposes described above. Recommendation /Action Requested: Motion: Staff respectfully requests the city council to accept the Resolution accepting the 2017 Residential Recycling Grant issued by Hennepin County in the amount of $23,235. Motion, Second, and Simple Majority required. Connection to Vision /Mission: Consistency in providing the community with quality public services, a healthy environment, a sustainable tax base and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 RESOLUTION 17- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING 2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING GRANT WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood supports the application and the purpose of the county's residential recycling grant to provide funding to cities to increase recycling and help reach the 2030 recycling goal established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood is committed to the recycling grant requirements which include the following: 1) Collecting a basic list of recyclable materials 2) Using county terminology and images 3) Making recycling information available on the city website 4) Mailing a recycling guide to residents annually 5) Supporting the county's messaging efforts by completing education and outreach activities; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood understands the change in the 2017 funding policy which allocates 80 percent to recycling and 20 percent to organics and therefore is committed to exploring additional organic opportunities for the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota hereby accepts the 2017 Residential Recycling Grant in the amount of $23,235 issued by the Hennepin County Environment & Energy Department. Passed and Adopted by the City Council on this 25th day of September 2017. CITY OF SHOREWOOD By: Scott Zerby Mayor ATTEST: By: Sandie Thone City Clerk I M Q City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Approving City Fee Schedule Update Meeting Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk Reviewed by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Attachments: Resolution #2D MEETING TYPE Regular Meeting Policy Consideration: Pursuant to MN State Law municipalities shall set forth fees to be reimbursed for administrative costs and expenses associated with issuing permits, licenses and providing other city services. Background: In preparation for the annual certification of special assessments, staff discovered while referencing Shorewood City Code 903.10 Subd. 3 (e), that although the code references that a certification fee shall be collected for all delinquent utility accounts assessed to the county tax rolls, no certification fee currently exists in the City Fee Schedule. The city is required to maintain a relevant schedule of fees and regularly audit their effectiveness and ensure that the cost to issue permits or provide services are covered but that costs do not exceed the cost to issue the permit or provide the service as municipalities are not to profit from the fees and charges. The fee proposed of $50 per delinquent account assessed to the county would cover the cost of staff time and any additional charges to certify the assessment and is in line with what other municipalities charge for certifying assessments. Financial or Budget Considerations: The certification fee would cover city costs associated with certifying the assessments to the county and may help in deterring future delinquencies. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff respectfully recommends the city council approve the attached resolution approving the city fee schedule update including the certification fee. Motion, second and simple majority vote required. Connection to Vision / Mission: Consistency in providing residents quality public service, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 17 -XX APPROVING UPDATED CITY FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood and its activities as a municipality requires setting forth fees and charges to reimburse the city for administrative and other expenses related to the issuing of permits, licenses and other services; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood must maintain a relevant schedule of fees and regularly audit their effectiveness; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has established fees for licensing, permits, programs, and services that include but are not limited to building, zoning, planning, business, animal, park and recreation, rentals, solicitors, fire prevention, utility, franchise, administrative citations, and other miscellaneous fees that further the health, safety and welfare of the community at large; and WHEREAS, all fees and charges shall be fixed and determined by the council and set forth in the master fee schedule which will be adopted by resolution and uniformly enforced; and WHEREAS, Shorewood City Code 903.10 Subd. 3(e) allows for a certification fee to be added to delinquent accounts assessed to the county tax rolls; and WHEREAS, a $50 assessment certification fee has been added to the City of Shorewood's Master Fee Schedule and has been updated according to this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, the updated Master Fee Schedule for the City of Shorewood is adopted. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 25th day of September 2017. ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk Scott Zerby, Mayor #2E MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Proposal for Construction and Material Testing Services for the Badger Park, Phase 2 Improvements, City Project 17 -09 Meeting Date: September 25, 2016 Prepared by: Alyson Fauske, PE, City Engineer Reviewed by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Attachments: Construction and Material Testing Proposal — American Engineering Testing, Inc. Policy Consideration: Should the City Council enter into a contract with American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) to perform testing services for the Badger Park, Phase 2 Improvements? Background: At the August 28, 2017 city council meeting the construction contract for Badger Park, Phase 2 improvements was awarded. Due to the nature of the improvements soil testing, concrete testing, and bituminous pavement sampling and testing is required. The City has used AET for testing services for many years due to their professionalism, responsiveness and competitive pricing. Total Estimated Engineering Fee: The cost to provide the scope of services outlined in this proposal is estimated to be $8,759.50. The actual cost will likely vary- either increasing or decreasing- based on the actual number of tests performed. Time Schedule: Testing will be performed as needed as the contractor progresses through the project. Financial Considerations: Fees for construction and material testing services have been included in the budgeted amount of the 2017 CIP. Options: 1. Accept the proposal, as presented. 2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction. Recommendation: Staff is recommends approval of the proposal for construction and material testing services for the Badger Park Phase 2 Improvements. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. September 6, 2017 City of Shorewood 5755 County Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 CC: WSB & Associates — Attn: Ms. Alyson Fauske RE: Proposal for Construction and Materials Testing Badger Park Phase 2 Improvements Country Club Road and County Road 19 Shorewood, Minnesota AET Proposal No. 20 -16056 Dear Ms. Fauske: CONSULTANTS ® ENVIRONMENTAL e GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS e FORENSICS Thank you for the opportunity to provide a proposal to perform testing services on the referenced project. American Engineering Testing, Inc., (AET) is pleased to provide this proposal which presents our anticipated scope of services, our unit rates, and an estimated total cost to perform these services. Project Information We understand the City of Shorewood will be reconstructing Badger Park. WSB & Associates (WSB) will be performing the field engineering, construction staking and civil services for the project. We have reviewed the plans and specifications for the project. We understand the project will include the following: • , Installation of storm sewer pipes and structures. • Reconstruction of a parking lot. • Construction of new concrete curb & gutter, and sidewalks. • Reconstructing a drainage pond and increasing the height of the pond berm. Project Approach During the construction, AET will provide experienced Engineering Technicians to perform sampling and material testing services. For this project, Mr. John Haupt P.E. will be AET's Project Manager. Mr. Haupt can be reached at (651) 603 -6638 (office). Scope of Services Based on our review of the available plans and our experience with WSB on similar projects, our anticipated scope of services is outlined below. These services will be provided on a part-time, will -call basis coordinated through authorized WSB field personnel. 550 Cleveland Avenue North I Saint Paul, MN 55114 Phone (651) 659 -9001 [ (800) 972-63641 Fax (651) 659 -1379 9 www.amengtest.com i AA/EEO This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc. City of Shorewood c/o WSB & Associates — Badger Park Phase 2 Improvements September 6, 2017 AET Proposal No. 20 -16056 Page 2 of 4 Soil Testing During placement of fill in the pavement excavations, utility trench excavations and berm addition, an Engineering Technician will visit the site on a will -call basis when requested by WSB personnel to test the compaction of the fill. The technician will perform the following services: In -place field density tests to evaluate the compaction of the fill soils using the nuclear density gauge or sand cone method. Standard Proctor tests for each different type of fill encountered at the test locations. Obtain samples of sand fill and/or aggregate base materials for sieve analysis tests. Concrete Testing Personnel from AET will perform testing of concrete on a will -call basis when requested by WSB Personnel. These services will be performed by experienced, ACI certified Engineering Technicians at the frequencies required by the project specifications. Our services will include the following: • Document that the correct mix is delivered to the site by checking the delivery slips. • Test the slump of the plastic concrete delivered to the site. • Test the air content of the plastic concrete delivered to the site. • Measure the temperature of the plastic concrete delivered to the site. • Comparing the test results to the requirements of the project specifications. Any discrepancies from the project specifications will be brought to the attention of the contractor and/or their subcontractor. Daily field reports of our observations and testing will be available to the contractor and other authorized personnel at the site. During placement of the concrete, our Engineering Technicians will also cast test cylinders for compressive strength testing. We have assumed that one set of cylinders be cast for every 100 cubic yards (or fraction thereof) of each type of concrete placed each day. Each set will consist of four cylinders; one which will be tested after 7 days and two which will be tested after 28 days. The forth cylinder will be held in reserve for future testing, if required. AET will also pick up the cylinders from the site and return them to our laboratory for moist curing and testing. The results of our compressive strength tests will be presented periodically, as -they become available. Bituminous Pavement Sampling and Testing As bituminous paving is being placed, an Engineering Technician will obtain companion samples, provided by the contractor, during each day of paving. Samples will be tested in our laboratory for the following: • Gyratory density, Rice specific gravity and VMA. • Asphalt extraction and aggregate gradation. After the completion of the paving, cores will be removed by others from the finished surface City of Shorewood c/o WSB & Associates — Badger Park Phase 2 Improvements September 6, 2017 AET Proposal No. 20 -16056 Page 3 of 4 when all layers are completed: After the cores are removed, the companion cores will be returned to our laboratory for testing. This testing will include the following: • Measure the thickness of each layer of the core sample. • Determine the density of each layer of the core sample. • Determine the percentage of the maximum Gmm of each layer of the core sample. Estimated Fees All services will be invoiced on a unit cost basis according to the attached Fee Schedule. Our estimated total cost is $8,759.50. Our invoices will be determined by multiplying the number of tests, hours, or other units accumulated each billing period by their respective unit rates. We caution that this proposal presents an estimated cost. Often, variations in the overall cost of the services occur due to reasons beyond our control, such as construction change orders, weather delays, changes in the contractor's schedule, unforeseen conditions or retesting of services. These variations will affect the actual invoice totals, either increasing or decreasing our total costs for the project from those estimated in this proposal. If more time or tests are required, additional fees may be needed to complete the project testing services. If less time or tests are needed, a cost savings will be realized. We will not, however, exceed the estimated total cost for the project without first obtaining your authorization. Terms and Conditions All AET Services are provided subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth in the enclosed Construction Service Agreement—Terms and Conditions, which, upon acceptance of this proposal, are binding upon you as the Client requesting Services, and your successors, assignees, joint venturers and third -party beneficiaries. Please be advised that additional insured status is granted upon acceptance of the proposal. Acceptance AET requests written acceptance of this proposal in the Proposal Acceptance box below, but the following actions shall constitute your acceptance of this proposal together with the Terms and Conditions and Amendments: 1) issuing an authorizing purchase order for any of the Services described above, 2) authorizing AEI's presence on site or 3) written or electronic notification for AET to proceed with any of the Services described in this proposal. Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by signing below and returning a copy to us. When you accept this proposal, you represent that you are authorized to accept on behalf, of the Client. Remarks Thank you for this opportunity to submit our proposal. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call me at (651) 603 -6638 or email me at jhauptgamen est.com. City of Shorewood c/o WSB & Associates — Badger Park Phase 2 Improvements September 6, 2017 AET Proposal No. 20 -16056 Page 4 of 4 SIGNATURES CLIENT ACCEPTANCE: Date Date Rob c ' r Senior EnP�' er) XO -f 7 Date Attachments: Fee Schedule Tabulation Construction Service Agreement — Terms and Conditions FEE SCHEDULE . PROJECT TESTING SERVICES BADGER PARK PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS COUNTRY CLUB ROAD & COUNTY ROAD 19 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AET PROPOSAL No. 20 -16056 Page 1 of 1 TOTAL AMOUNTS PROJECT BUDGET INVOICED THROUGH Invoice Amount 10/15/2017 Through 10/15/17 SERVICE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED UNIT BUDGET UNITS RATE AMOUNT # Units Amount # Units Amount Excavation Observations and Compaction Testing 1. Staff Engineer I for observations of excavations and subgrade test rolls, consultation and reporting (services provided on a will -call basis). 0 hours $127.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 2. Engineering Technician II travel and site time for soil compaction testing (services provided on a will -call basis - assumes 8 trips to the Jobsite). 18 hours $87.00 $1,566.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 3. Personal or Company vehicle mileage. 400 miles $0.75 $300.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 4. Soil compaction tests (nuclear density gauge). 24 tests $30.00 $720.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 5. Standard Proctor tests (Methods A or B). 3 tests $130.00 $390.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 6. Sieve tests of granular fill and Class 5 aggregate base. 2 tests $105.00 $210.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 Concrete Testing 1. Engineering Technician I for testing of concrete only- NO OBSERVATIONS OF REINFORCING STEEL (services provided on a will -call basis - assumes 7 trips to the jobsite). 21 hours $79.00 $1,659.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 2. Personal or Company vehicle mileage. 350 miles $0.75 $262.50 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 3. Curing, handling and compressive strength testing of 4" x 8" or 6" x 12" concrete test cylinders (includes handling of non - tested cylinders). 28 cyls. $28.00 $784.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 4. Concrete cylinder pick -up service from jobsite. 3 trips $75.00 $225.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 Bituminous Testing 1. Engineering Technician II for observations of bituminous placement, establishing roll pattern, thickness and density testing, and obtaining samples for laboratory testing (services provided on a will -call basis - assumes 2 trips to the jobsite). 7 hours $87.00 $609.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 2. Personal or Company vehicle mileage. 100 miles $0.75 $75.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 3. Removal of cores from finished bituminous surface (includes all personnel, equipment rental and patching materials). 0 hours $1 B5.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 4. Thickness and density tests of bituminous core samples. 0 tests $42.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 5. MnDOT Gyratory properties of bituminous; including Asphalt Extraction and Aggregate Gradation tests, Rice Specific Gravity test, and Gyratory Density test. 2 tests $500.00 $1,000.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 Project Management & Coordination 1. Staff Engineer II /Project Manager for coordination of AET personnel and activities, attending meetings (if requested), consultation and report preparation. 7 hours $137.00 $959.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 2. Principal Engineer for special consultation and report review. 0 hours $183.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 3. Personal or Company vehicle mileage. 0 miles $0.75 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 0.0 $0.00 TOTAL MONTHLY ESTIMATED BUDGET $8,759.50 INVOICED $0.00 INVOICE $0.00 THROUGH TOTAL 10/15/2017 Page 1 of 1 CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 1 of 4 SECTION 1- RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 — This Service Agreement — Terms and Conditions ( "terms and conditions ") is applicable to all Services provided by American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET). As used herein "Services" refer to the scope of Services described in the proposal submitted by AET to Client. The proposal, these terms and conditions and any appendices attached hereto shall comprise the Agreement between AET and Client for Services described in the proposal and are binding upon the Client, its successors, assignees, joint ventures and third -party beneficiaries. AET requests written acceptance of the Agreement, but the following actions shall also constitute Client's acceptance of the Agreement: 1) issuing an authorizing purchase order for any of the Services, 2) authorizing AET's presence on site, or 3) written or electronic notification for AET to proceed with any of the Services. Issuance of a purchase order by Client which contains separate terms and conditions will not take precedence or modify the terms and conditions contained in this Service Agreement. 1.2 - Prior to AET performing Services, Client will provide AET with all information that may affect the cost, progress, safety and performance of the Services. This includes, but is not limited to, information on proposed and existing construction, all pertinent sections of contracts between Client and property owner, site safety plans or other documents which may control or affect AEI's Services. If new information becomes available or changes are made during AET's Services, Client will provide such information to AET in a timely manner. Earthwork and construction activities are done to support a particular structure (type, size, and shape) or facility at a specific location and elevation. If the type of structure or facility (structural type, size, shape, location, elevation, etc.) changes, the earthwork or construction activities completed may no longer provide suitable structural support or be capable of supporting the intended construction. Additional earthwork or redesign of all or a part of the structure or facility may be needed. Failure of Client to timely notify AET of changes to the project including, but not limited to, location, elevation, loading, or configuration of the structure or improvement will constitute a release of any liability of AET. Client will provide a representative for timely answers to project- related questions by AET. 1_3 - AET observes and tests earthwork and other construction operations and materials, and may provide opinions, conclusions and recommendations regarding the same. However, AET's Services do not relieve the contractors of their contractual responsibility to perform their work in accordance with approved plans, specifications and building code requirements. 1.4 - AET personnel do not have authority to accept, reject, direct or otherwise approve the work of the contractor. AET cannot stop work or waive or alter the requirements of the project documents. Any authority given to AET by Client must be in writing prior to the start of Services. 1.5 - AET does not perform construction management, general contracting or surveying services and our involvement with the project does not constitute any assumption of those responsibilities. 1.6 - Services performed by AET often include sampling at specific locations. Client acknowledges the limitations inherent in sampling. Variations in conditions occur between and beyond sampled /tested locations. The passage of time, natural occurrences and direct or indirect human activities at the site or distant from it may alter the actual conditions. Client assumes all risks associated with such variations. 1.7 - AET is not responsible for interpretations or modifications of AEi's recommendations by other persons. 1.8 - Should change in conditions be alleged, Client agrees to notify AET before evidence of alleged change is no longer accessible for evaluation. 1.9 - Test-borings and /or cone penetration test soundings to a proper depth below foundation grade and the base of suitable bearing soils are recommended for projects where supporting soils will be subjected to increased loads to explore the deeper unseen soil and ground water conditions. Judgments made by AET personnel regarding the suitability of materials and ground water conditions below the bottom of an excavation are limited if sufficiently deep test borings /soundings are not provided by the Client priorto our observations and judgments. AET's opinions, conclusions and recommendations are qualified to that extent. 1.10 — Pricing in the proposal assumes use of these terms and conditions. AET reserves the right to amend pricing if Client requests. modifications to the Agreement or use of Client's alternate contract format. Any contract amendments made after Client has authorized the Services shall be applicable only to Services performed after the effective date of such amendment. The proposal and these terms and conditions, including terms of payment, shall apply to all Services performed prior to the effective date of such amendment. 1.11 —The AET proposal accompanying these terms and conditions is valid for sixty (60) days after the proposal issuance date to the Client. Any attempt to authorize Services after the expiration date is subject to AET's right to revise the proposal as necessary. SECTION 2 - WILL CALL SERVICES 2.1 - If AET's Services are performed on a will -call basis at the direction of the Client or its authorized representatives, Client acknowledges the inherent limitations associated with performing engineering judgments and testing Services on a will -call basis, including without limitation, the Inability to completely evaluate, document or judge work and conditions not directly observed or tested by AET. AET's opinions, conclusions, and recommendations are qualified to the extent of those limitations. 2_2 - Density tests of fill soils represent conditions only at the locations and elevations tested and do not necessarily represent conditions laterally or below. AET can only provide judgments regarding the engineered fill system to adequately support the design construction loadings by monitoring the filling process on a continuous basis for consistency of soil type, moisture content, lift thickness, and compaction effort. 2:3 —AET requires a minimum of 24 hours notice of the need for Services. AET will not be liable for claims, damages, or delays related to failure of Client to provide adequate advance notice to AET. SECTION 3 - SITE ACCESS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION STAKING 3.1- Client will furnish AET safe and legal site access. 3.2 - AET is not responsible for locating underground facilities on construction sites. Client shall ensure that underground facilities have been previously located and cleared. AET will not be responsible for any damages to underground facilities not located or incorrectly identified. An underground facility is an underground line, fixture, system, and its appurtenances used to produce, store, convey, transmit, or distribute communications, data, power, heat, gas, oil, petroleum products, water including storm water, steam, sewage, and similar substances. ACS 403C (02/17) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 2 of 4 3.3 - The location and elevation of a proposed structure or facility is staked (with offsets) and controlled by surveying or GPS equipment by others. AET's measurements are made in relation to that information. The reliability of any opinions, conclusions, and recommendations based on those measurements is strictly dependent on the accuracy of the staking or GPS information provided by others. 3.4 - During construction, observations and testing Services are based on the positioning of the formwork by the contractor or its subcontractor. AET will not be responsible for any errors or damages resulting from improper location or positioning of the formwork. SECTION 4 - SAFETY 4.1 - Client shall inform AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials or unsafe conditions at the site. Client or its authorized representative(s) is responsible for the safety of the jobsite. if, during the course of AET's Services, such materials or conditions are discovered, . AET reserves the right to take measures to protect AET personnel and equipment or to immediately terminate Services. Client shall be responsible for payment of such additional protection costs. 4.2 - AET shall only be responsible for safety of AET employees at the site; the safety of all others shall be Client's or other persons' responsibility. SECTION 5 -SAMPLES 5.1- Client shall inform AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials prior to submittal to AET. All samples obtained by or submitted to AET remain the property of the Client during and after the Services. Any known or suspected hazardous material samples will be returned to the Client at AET's discretion. 5.2 - Non - hazardous samples will be held for thirty (30) days and then discarded unless, within thirty (30) days of the report date, the Client requests in writing that AET store or ship the samples. Storage and shipping costs shall be borne solely by Client. SECTION 6 - PROJECT RECORDS The original project records prepared by AET will remain the property of AET. AET shall retain these original records for a minimum of three years following submission of the report, during which period the project records can be made available to Client at AEI's office at reasonable times. SECTION 7 - STANDARD OF CARE AET performs its Services consistent with the level of care and skill normally performed by other firms in the profession at the time of this service and in this geographic area, under similar budgetary constraints. SECTION 8 - INSURANCE AET maintains insurance with coverage and limits shown below. AET will furnish certificates of insurance to Client upon request. 8.1 —AET maintains the following insurance coverage and limits of liability: Workers' Compensation Employer's Liability Commercial Genera 111a bility Automobile Liability Professional Liability Insurance Statutory Limits $100,000 each accident $500,000 disease policy limit $100,000 disease each employee $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate $1,000,000 each accident $1,000,000 per claim $1,000,000 aggregate 8.2 - Commercial General Liability insurance will include coverage for Products /Completed Operations extending one (1) year after final acceptance of the Project by Owner, Property Damage including Completed Operations, Personal Injury, and Contractual Liability insurance applicable to AET's indemnity obligations under this Agreement. 8.3 - Automobile Liability insurance shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. 8.4 - Professional Liability Insurance is written on a claims -made basis and coverage will be maintained for one (1) year after final acceptance of the Project by Owner. Renewal policies during this period shall maintain the same retroactive date. 8.5 - To the extent permitted by applicable state law, and only upon Client's signing of the proposal and return of the same to AET, Client and Owner shall be named an "additional insured" on AET's Commercial General Liability Policy (Form CG D4 14 04 08, which includes blanket coverage for Products /Completed Operations and on a Primary and Non - Contributory basis) and Automobile Liability Policy. Client and Owner shall be extended "waiver of subrogation" status for applicable coverages. Any other endorsement, coverage or policy requirement shall result in additional charges. 8.6 - AET will maintain in effect all insurance coverage required by this Agreement at its sole expense, provided such insurance is reasonably available, with insurance carriers licensed to do business in the state in which the project is located and having a current A.M. Best rating of no ACS 403C (02/17) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 3 of 4 less than A minus (A -). Such insurance shall provide for thirty (30) days prior written notice to Client for notice of cancellation or material limitations for the policy or ten (10) days' notice for non - payment of premium. 8.77 - AET reserves the right to charge Client for AEI's costs for additional coverage requirements unknown on the date of the proposal, e.g., coverage limits or policy modification including waiver of subrogation, additional insured endorsements and other project specific requirements. SECTION 9 - DELAYS If delays to AEI's Services are caused by Client or Owner, work of others, strikes, natural causes, weather, or other items beyond AEI's control, a reasonable time extension for performance of Services shall be granted, and AET shall receive an equitable fee adjustment. SECTION 10 - PAYMENT. INTEREST AND BREACH 10.1- Invoices are due net thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of an undisputed invoice, but not greater than 45 days from the date of the Invoice. Client will inform AET of invoice questions or disagreements within fifteen (15) days of invoice date; unless so informed, Invoices are deemed correct. 10.2 — Invoices remaining unpaid for sixty (60) days shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement, permitting AET, in its sole discretion and without limiting any other legal or equitable remedies for such breach, to terminate performance of this Agreement and be relieved of any associated duties to the Client or other persons. Further, AET may withhold from Client data and reports in AEI's possession. If Client fails to cure such breach, all reports associated with the unpaid invoices shall immediately upon demand be returned to AET and Client may neither use nor rely upon such reports or the Services. 10.3 — AET reserves the right to secure any unpaid invoice utilizing available remedies at law. AET explicitly reserves its' Mechanic Lien or Bond Claim rights for nonpayment of an undisputed invoice. Client is responsible for paying AET expenses and attorney fees related to collection of past due invoices. SECTION 11- MEDIATION 11.1 - Except for enforcement of AEi's rights to payment for Services rendered or to assert and /or enforce its lien rights, including without limitation assertion and enforcement of mechanic's lien rights and foreclosure of the same, Client and*AET agree that any claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration or the Institution of legal or equitable proceedings by either party; provided however that if either party fails to respond to a request for mediation within sixty (60) days, the party requesting mediation may without further notice, proceed to arbitration or the institution of legal or equitable proceedings. 11.2 - Mediation shall be in accordance with the Construction Industry Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Request for mediation shall be in writing and the parties shall share the mediator's fee and any filing fees equally. The mediator shall be acceptable to both parties and shall have experience in commercial construction matters. SECTION 12 - LITIGATION REIMBURSEMENT Except for matters relating to non - payment of fees, which is governed by Section 10 hereof, payment of attorney's fees and costs associated with lawsuits or arbitration of disputes between AET' and Client, which are dismissed or are judged substantially in either party's favor, shall be paid by the non - prevailing party. Applicable costs include, but are not limited to, attorney and expert witness fees, court costs, and AEi' costs. SECTION 13 - MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION 13.1 - Subject to the limitations contained in Sections 14 and 15, AET agrees to indemnify Client from and against damages and costs to the extent caused by AET's intentional acts or negligent performance of the Services. 13.2 - Client agrees to indemnify AEf from and against damages and costs to the extent caused by the intentional acts or negligence of the Client, Owner, Client's contractors and subcontractors or other third parties. 13.3 - If Client has an indemnity agreement with other persons or entities relating to the project for which AEI's Services are performed, the Client shall include AET as a beneficiary. 13.4 - AEI's indemnification to the Client, including any indemnity required or implied by law, is limited solely to losses or damages caused by Its failure to meet the standard of care and only to the extent of its negligence or intentional acts. SECTION 14- WAIVER OF CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT, NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES INCURRED EVEN IF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES WAS FORESEEABLE. CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF USE AND LOSS OF INCOME OR PROFIT. SECTION 15 - LIMITATION OF LIABILITY Client agrees to limit AET's liability to Client resulting from AET's negligent acts, errors or omissions, such that the total liability of AET shall not exceed $20,000. SECTION 16 —UNIONIZATION AET reserves the right to negotiate an appropriate fee increase or to terminate its contract on three (3) days written notice to Client without incurring penalties or costs from Client, Owner and their successors, assignees, joint- venturers, contractors and subcontractors, or any other ACS 403C (02/17) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 4 of 4 parties involved with the project for claims, liabilities, damages or consequential damages, directly or indirectly related to AET being required to provide unionized personnel on the project. Reservation of this right on the part of AET represents neither approval nor disapproval of unions in general or the use of collective bargaining agreements. SECTION 17 - POSTING OF NOTICES ON EMPLOYEE RIGHTS Effective June 21, 2010, prime contracts with a value of $100,000 or more and signed by federal contractors on projects with any agency of the United States government must comply with 29 CFR Part 471, which requires physical posting of a notice to employees of their rights under Federal labor laws. The required notice may be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations Part 471, Appendix A to Subpart A. The regulation also has a "flow- down" requirement for subcontractors under the prime agreement for subcontracts with a value of $10,000 or more. AET requires strict compliance of its subcontractors working on federal contracts subject to this regulation. The regulation has specific requirements for location of posting and language(s) for the poster. SECTION 18 - TERMINATION After 7 days' written notice, either party may elect to terminate work for justifiable reasons. In this event, the Client shall pay AET for all Services performed, including demobilization and reporting costs to complete the file. SECTION 19 - SEVERABILITY Any provisions of this Agreement later held to violate a law or regulation shall be deemed void, and all remaining provisions shall continue in force. However, Client and AET will in good faith attempt to replace an invalid or unenforceable provision with one that is valid and enforceable, and which comes as close as possible to expressing the intent of the original provision. SECTION 20 - GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the Laws of the State of Minnesota without regard to its conflicts of law provisions. SECTION 21- ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement, including these terms and conditions and attached proposal and appendices, is the entire agreement between AET and Client. Regardless of method of acceptance of this Agreement by the Client, this Agreement supersedes any previous written or oral agreements, including purchase /work orders or other Client agreements submitted to AET after the start of our Services. Any modifications to this Agreement must be mutually acceptable to both parties and accepted in writing. No considerations will be given to revisions to AET's terms and conditions or alternate contract format submitted by the Client as a condition for payment of AEI's accrued Services. SECTION 22 - CHANGE ORDERS ' AET's proposal associated with this project provides an estimated cost for the work. If the proposal amount is a time and material estimate, or if changes occur affecting the project scope, estimated quantities, project schedule or other unforeseen conditions, AET will communicate with Client if AEI's fees are approaching the proposal amount and request a change order. However, nothing in this agreement shall be construed in any way as a waiver of payment by Client to AET for services ordered under this agreement. Approval of a change order may be in writing or by electronic communication. ACS 403C (02/17) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2017 MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Mangold convened the meeting at 7:10 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Absent: B. Review Agenda Chair Mangold, Commissioners V Planner Darling Rock, Council Liaison Vassar moved to approve the agenda as amended: seconded the motion. Motion carried 4.0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minut Vassar moved to approve the minutes of the A not present. Gorham seconded the, motion. N 3. MATTERS There were 4. Continue Review of 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD SHOREWOOD CITY HALL 7:00 P.M. , Kobs, Barr, and Gorham; City Freeman Ice Update. Gorham 8, 2017 8, 2017 meeting as amended: Siakel was Commissioners,reviewed CIP projects and status. Mangold asked how the number for Badger Park of $375,000 was calculated. Darling explained what the amount included such as the playground, buildings, and miscellaneous work. Mangold noted 2019 would include the tennis court. He stated the center space would be completed the following year. Barr asked how estimates changed for these items. Darling stated the tennis court cost increased. She stated there had been assumptions that we could obtain grants for the construction. Mangold asked how the $375,000 compared to original estimates. Darling replied it was substantially less than the original $700,000 estimate. She noted the Council was very comfortable with how the Park Commission determined priorities. She also stated a $200,000 payment has been received. Barr asked if grants could still be sought. Darling stated they could. Darling stated she would provide engineering estimates for the construction by the next meeting. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2017 PAGE 2 OF 3 Commissioners reviewed 2020 CIP projects beginning with the Freeman Park trail overlay. Darling stated the figure shown is generic based on today's costs. She stated an overlay would involve a new bituminous layer over the trail. Mangold was concerned about budgeting for a grant we are not sure we will receive. He asked for staff information explaining why the grants are included in the budget. He believed the Commission has a good direction in the CIP for the next two years. The goal would be to determine what comes after Badger is completed. He asked if we need to make a recommendation to Council. Darling stated a formal motion could be made if the Commission is comfortable. Barr asked if 100,000 is still a good benchmark for a playground. Vassar indicated it is. Mangold moved, Gorham seconded to recommend grants from the budget. Motion carried 4 -0. to remove B. Badger Park Improvements 1) Parking Darling stated the bid was awarded for the parking lot, and work,will begin the week of September 18 with completion in November with the exception of trees. In response to 'a question from Mangold, Darling stated it includes repaving the City Hall parking lot. Mangold noted the funding is a little over budget, and financing will come from other fund sources. Darling stated we were lucky to get the prices when we did because the cost of oil and bituminous are rising after the hurricane in Texas. C. Freeman Park Ice Update Vassar asked what the statuswas of the rink in Freeman Park. Darling stated grading will be done in the fall. She stated lighting is also moving forward. The rink completion is moving forward for this year. Mangold asked hour the partition inside the shelter is 'progressing. Darling stated it is being constructed. He asked for a clear time line from Public. Works relating to the rink's construction schedule prior to the next meetinp,. Vassar moved, Barr seconded to obtain a bid for grading for the Freeman Park ice rink area. Motion carried 4 -4., 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Donation for Memorial Benches Darling reviewed two donations for memorial benches in Freeman Park and another in Badger Park. Vassar asked how the bench in Badger can be installed without a plan for the area. Darling indicated it would not be installed until that is known. Mangold was concerned about the proposed bench for Freeman will not match the existing one. Darling stated she would check with Twila regarding bench design. Darling noted Council has accepted the bench donation for the Badger Park bench. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2017 PAGE 3 OF 3 Vassar suggested other items for donation be considered. Barr suggested it be discussed with the Parks Foundation. 6. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS /UPDATES A. City Council No City Council liaison present to give a report. B. Staff 7. ADJOURN Barr moved, Vassar seconded, to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of September 12, 2017 at 7:55 p.m. Motion carried 4 -0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Clai Rea #6B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Memorial Bench Donation for Badger Park Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Twila Grout Reviewed by: Marie Darling Policy Consideration: Should the City accept a donation for a memorial park bench for Badger Park? Background: Jason Landstrom on behalf of Minnetonka Lacrosse Association, proposed a donation of $1,000 for the installation of a park bench adjacent to the Lacrosse field. Financial or Budget Considerations: None. The donation covers the cost of purchase and installation. Options: Accept or reject the donation. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends accepting the donation and sending a thank you note. Staff would then move forward with installation. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A DONATION FOR INSTALLATION OF A MEMORIAL BENCH FOR BADGER PARK WHEREAS, Jason Landstrom, on behalf of the Minnetonka Lacrosse Association submitted a donation of $1,000 for the installation of a memorial bench at Badger Park in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin; and WHEREAS, the donor has specified that the bench be placed adjacent to the Lacrosse field at Badger Park. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby accepts the donation of the money towards a memorial park bench. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 25h day of September 2017. Scott Zerby, Mayor ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk #7A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Starbucks — Conditional Use Permit —Drive Thru Service Window Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director Review Deadline: Waived by Applicant Attachments Included in Paper Packet: Exhibit of staff's recommendations for area improvements Correspondence received after August 28, 2017 Council action form dated August 28, 2017 City engineer's memo dated August 23, 2017 Applicant's memos dated August 28, 2017 and August 24, 2017 Resolution Denying Request Resolution Approving Request Additional Attachments Available in Electronic Packet on City's website: Staff Memos to Planning Commission dated March 1, 2017, and April 4, 2017 Minutes from the March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2017 Meetings City Engineer's Memo dated April 19, 2017 Spack Technical Memorandums dated April 27, 2017 and August 22, 2017 Traffic Impact Study ( Spack) pp. i -14 (full report available on City of Shorewood website) Correspondence and Petition Received Applicant's Site and Building Plans Policy Consideration: Should the City grant approval for Watson Vinehill, LLC. to redevelop 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 to allow a the construction of a Starbucks coffee shop with a conditional use permit for a drive -thru service window? Background: See attached staff memorandums. At the last Council meeting, the City Council voted to continue this item to September 25, 2017, to allow staff and the applicant time to: 1) discuss the application with Minnetonka staff; 2) research parking permit and carpool information with the Minnetonka School District; and 3) review the applicant's proposed amendments to staff's recommended conditions of approval. Discussions with Minnetonka Staff: Staff met with the City of Minnetonka to discuss whether or not their city would allow the applicant to add a right turn lane on Minnetonka's side of the Vine Hill Road right -of -way. Minnetonka staff indicated that work in the right -of -way would need a right -of -way permit and an agreement with the applicant which would need to be reviewed /authorized by their City Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. S: \Planning \Planning Files \Applications \2017 CURRENT CASES \Starbucks CUP \CAF for 09 25 17.docx Page 2 Council. Staff were not opposed to the expansion as long as space is preserved to incorporate a future trail (letter attached). Parking permits and Carpool Info from the School District: The superintendent of Minnetonka Schools indicated that about 625 parking permits have been issued to students for school years 2015, 2016 and 2017. They also have another 65 additional spaces in the dome for daily student passes. Most of the parking permits issued are for 2, 3, and 4 person carpools, but some junior and senior students are able to get permits to drive alone under special circumstances. The Superintendent of Minnetonka Schools submitted an email supporting the request. Applicant's proposal for Amending the Staff Recommendation: At the August 28, 2017 meeting and in the staff report, staff recommended approval of the proposal subject to three improvements to the adjacent right -of -way. The applicant had countered staff's three recommendations as identified in his attached correspondence. Similar to the recommendation given on August 28, 2017, staff recommends approval of the application with the addition of three improvements (conceptually shown in the attached graphic): • A right turn lane into the site from Delton Avenue • A right turn lane at the Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue Intersection • A by -pass lane on Delton Avenue near the site entrance However, the City's Transportation Engineer (Chuck Rickart, WSB) has reduced the design standards on which he initially based his analysis. Originally, he modeled his analysis on a standard design for the amount of traffic in the vicinity, including 200foot turn lanes in both locations and a 200 -foot by -pass lane with standard tapers. Since the meeting, Mr. Rickart worked with the City Engineer to refine his recommended improvements based on the parameters of this challenging site. In this situation, Engineer Rickart finds that providing shorter than typical turn lanes and by -pass lane (with tapers) would provide some mitigation to the development's impact on the area. The turn -lanes /bypass lanes could be as short as 100 feet (which would accommodate four cars) and still provide benefit. However, shorter lanes would have less benefit. The applicant initially proposed signage instead of a bypass lane. Staff considered the request but recommends against the signage option as it would create an on -going enforcement challenge. Prohibiting left turn lanes during morning rush when customers are most likely to want to stop at the business would require police enforcement. Pulling over and ticketing vehicles in this area during the morning peak would cause additional back -ups to an already challenging area. The applicant also proposed restriping the Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue intersection to provide the turn lanes instead of widening the roadway. Staff initially considered this option. However, the area was restriped not long ago to create defined lanes and the striping was abandoned after numerous complaints from bus drivers about not being able to make the turn onto Vine Hill Road were filed with both Shorewood and Minnetonka. Financial or Budget Considerations: The application fees cover the cost of processing the application. Options: Deny the request, approve the request subject to the recommended conditions; or modify either resolution. Page 3 Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff concludes that the recommended improvements to Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road are adequate to mitigate the impact of the additional traffic on the adjacent roadways caused by the proposed drive - through service window. Consequently, staff recommend adoption of the attached resolution for approval of the request. Next Steps and Timelines: If the City Council denies the application, the City Council is not obligated to consider a similar application for six months. If the City Council approves the application, the applicant may submit their request for a building permit as soon as the conditions of approval are met. pw � do +� — do do • r J 1' d top .PEN _ reoLAME.99 , °reM ,T&ti E 7 IAN Mre978- INV ' (NW)INV 9)5.08 � ° /MH x� ;,y 01® 9.5 - Ell �l I �a A t® 0 ED ssC 9 STM 0 � M' . � r Jt� � � • ♦� , w r FEre"w rs .nP sa s of u ' ' nPae- Pv RO o ore VEO ea ,O °pay \ / F ° _ ��1 PIPE �► DO, PER • •• IL J Wa.EN ;- . PER(j) P ®N�'o0. k4•.' .(2' 6^ 15' DIPM BENDS L — — W Ill c Es o °re AND y 9rzs L P�F I x" S AJ t �• .0 WSB WSB PROJECT NO 9999 N o ao 80 H: FEM SCALE IN FEET a 1. rt 777 L_ Lill IT IF- ( I •' r w • c s ~f 1� i • r , It R 49 I 1 ••. r fit• ` f - — up , w .0 WSB WSB PROJECT NO 9999 N o ao 80 H: FEM SCALE IN FEET a From: Julie Wolleat [mailto:jwolleat @starbucks.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 6:12 PM To: Dave Watson <dwatson @wci2.com> Subject: RE: City Council Meeting DT Times Hi Dave —so here is what I was able to determine... I looked at six locations that had high schools that were within an average of .41 miles from a drive -thru Starbucks. I gauged Minnetonka High School at about .5 miles from our intersection. In our sample set the closest store was .13 miles from the high school, the furthest was .78 miles. All were from our Mid - America region but not necessarily from Minnesota as we only had one site in Minnesota that was close enough to a high school to be comparable. The average DT time of the sample group was 50.34,seconds —with several stores in the sample group averaging drive -thru times below our market average. Three of the six were below the 50 Seconds, two were above (one 52.6 and the highest was 55 seconds and one was right at the 50 second mark. Interestingly enough the lowest volume store actually had the longest DT time). While we don't track # of visitors per car or number of orders per car, the District Managers I spoke to did indicate that it was not uncommon to have multiple passengers in the cars when stores were near high schools. The difference between the 50 second average that we strive for at each store and the drive -thru times at the stores near high schools was just .34 seconds on average. Let me know what else you may need. 0 Marie Darling From: Greg Lerud Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 8:22 AM To: Marie Darling Subject: FW: Proposal for a Starbucks From: Peterson, Dennis [mailto:DENNIS. PETERSON @minnetonkaschools.org] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 8:11 AM To: Greg Lerud Cc: Dave Watson Subject: Proposal for a Starbucks Greg: Thanks for giving us the opportunity to comment on the proposed Starbucks for the Delton /Vine Hill area. As you know, I had some initial concerns that the placement of that store would create problems for traffic to the High School in the mornings. However, I was able to meet with Dave Watson and review the overall proposal and the expected traffic flow, and I am much more comfortable with the plan. The number of parking spaces being planned, the large number of spaces for cars in line to order /pick -up, and the exit onto Vine Hill are all reassuring that we should experience no problems with traffic going to the High School. In fact, it could become a great opportunity for parents and students to access another place for morning, noon or after - school refreshments. Therefore, I am withdrawing my objections to the project and am supporting this addition to the community. Dennis , Cl I r t Y „0 S i 01-RI vj( 0tJ 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55345 952- 939 -8200 Fax 952 - 939 -8244 September 8, 2017 Mr. Greg Lerud City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 RE: Northbound Right Turn Lane at Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue Dear Mr. Lerud: Our engineering and planning staff recently met with your staff to review the findings of a traffic study conducted by WSB and Associates (dated August 23, 2017) for the city of Shorewood. The study recommended three improvements be made to Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road to mitigate increased traffic and changes to traffic patterns in this area as a result of property changes at 19245 and 19285 Delton Avenue in the city of Shorewood. Of particular note for the city of Minnetonka is the recommended construction of a right turn lane on the Minnetonka side of Vine Hill Road, south of Delton Avenue. Based on the results of the traffic study, we would request the city of Shorewood require improvements to mitigate increases in traffic in this area to the existing condition or better. The city has received concerns from our residents regarding traffic increases as a result of the proposed changes in Shorewood. It is very important for Minnetonka to take in to account how these proposed changes would impact residents living in Minnetonka, specifically near the intersection. It is also very important that Minnetonka considers how these proposed improvements would impact costs the city would incur with future planned trail construction utilizing right -of- way in this area. Our engineering department has provided minimum city design standards to the city of Shorewood, if proposed improvements on Vine Hill Road in Minnetonka are requested to be considered. At such time an application is requested of Minnetonka, our city attorney would work with the constructing agency on the necessary process and agreements which would need to be in place prior to considering an application with 'no proposed costs to the city of Minnetonka. The application will likely require city council approval and authorization. We would further anticipate these improvements may have impacts on Minnetonka High School operations, and we would encourage your staff to engage with the district prior Minnetonka... where quality is our nature to finalizing recommended public improvements, as we understand they have not yet been contacted at the time of this letter. We thank you for the opportunity to include these comments in your process. We again request the city of Shorewood require improvements to mitigate increases in traffic to this already busy area, while limiting impacts and future costs to Minnetonka. Our staff continues to be available to work with your staff on this issue. Please don't hesitate to contact me directly if you would like to discuss further. Sincerely, Will Manchester, PE Director of Engineering cc: Geralyn Barone, Minnetonka City Manager Julie Wischnack,- Minnetonka Community Development Director Marie Darling, Shorewood Planning Director Paul Hornby, Shorewood City Engineer Alyson Fauske, Shorewood Senior Project Manager Marie Darling Mr Mayor & Council Members, I have attached a document of questions /statements that I originally sent to WSB (which forwarded it on to Shorewood). The questions regard some of the assumptions made by Spack Consulting and I was hoping that WSB could verify if the assertions are correct and what impact these would have on the results of the study. I send these to you so that they don't 'get lost in the shuffle'. Hopefully they will get answered before the next meeting on the 25th. I also attached an article from the On -line Pioneer Press (9/5/17) discussing what type of traffic impacts can occur from adding a Starbucks to the mix. I wonder, did Spack do that Impact Study as well? The last attachment is a photo I snapped on Tuesday the 12th. It shows 3 cars pulled over due to a 3 car accident. It was at Shady Hills Road & Vine Hill, a couple of blocks from Delton & Vine Hill. Food for thought... I don't mean to be a pain, but I want everyone to have as many facts available to make an informed decision on a project that will impact the area literally for decades to come. I thank you for your time and consideration and look forward to seeing you all on the 25th. Sincerely, Paul Stelmachers RDS of MN 952.934.4001 - Office 952.392.2693 - Direct 952.221.3321 - Cell i Mr. Paul Stelmachers 5210 Shady Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 Mr. Lee Gustafson, Senior Project Manager WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 RE: Proposed Starbucks C.U.P. in Shorewood Hello Mr. Gustafson, 9/6/2017 i G i .i 0 f 20E7 CITY `-F SHORF 00, I write you asking for you to verify if the following statements are true and could have an impact on the findings of the Spack Traffic Impact Study. 1. Spack used the designation of "Pass -By" trips as opposed to "Diverted or New Trips" which would have shown higher counts coming to the area. 2. Spack used ITE 91h edition © 2012, which relies on data acquired since the ITE Stn edition, published 5 years earlier in 2007. So the data they are using is 10 years old at worst and 5 years old at best. 3. Spack used traffic counts only from Delton Avenue, but the Starbucks Representative stated that they used counts of T.H. # 7 (20K /day) in their calculus to decide if the site met their minimum criteria for counts. It appears that they want it both ways: Starbucks is counting on New & Diverted Trips to drive business, yet Spack is not, thereby underestimating the true impact of the development. 4. (ITE) Trip Generation Manual suggests that "the user may wish to modify trip generation rates presented in this document to reflect ... special characteristics of the site or surrounding area." (emphasis mine). I am wondering if Spack made any allowances for the VERY'special characteristics of this site or surrounding areas.' Can this be verified? I spoke at the last Council Meeting but I believe the above topics were not adequately explained to the Council and I am hoping you can either confirm or deny my assertions. The next Council Meeting with this on the agenda in Monday, September 11' and I will be in attendance. Mr. Gustafson, I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Sincerely, Paul Stelmachers 952 - 221 -3321 NEWS Starbucks drive -thru causing venti backups, at times snarling Snelling l "raffic backs up at (ho Starbucks drive -thru on Marshall Avonue oart of Snelling in St. Paul, on Monday, SepL 4, 2017. (Frederick Melo / Pioneer Ness) By FREDERICK MELD I finelo @pioneerpress.com I Pioneer Press PUBLISHED: September 5, 2017 at 2:36 pm I UPDATED: September 6, 2017 at 8:07 pm Welcome to "Snarshall,' where the coffee's hot, but the access is not. In St. Paul, drivers turning east off Snelling Avenue into the Marshall Avenue drive -thru of a new Starbucks coffee shop are backing up traffic Into the intersection. And that's notjust any intersection. SnellingAvenue —which is also Minnesota highway 51— carries drivers through the city from Highland Park to Roseville, meeting Interstate 94 at exits a few blocks from the intersection, Meanwhile, customers who have attempted to navigate the narrow drive -thru report tight turns and scraped fenders, as well as near - misses with drivers backing out of parking stalls. Bryan Kennedy, a web developer, tried the drive -thru "in a moment of weakness' and could barely squeeze through in his subcompact car. "It's a mess," Kennedy said. A store manager on Tuesday referred calls to a media line at Starbucks headquarters. BUSY INTERSECTION Under the heading "exceptional traffic counts," the Stan Johnson Co. real estate brokerage —which helped market the site —describes the combined vehicular traffic at Snelling and Marshall as exceeding 67,000 cars per day. And by all appearances, those numbers are about to climb. St. Paul is growing, and the Midway— which is already home to multiple colleges and shopping centers —may soon absorb a fair share of traffic. FreclMelo, Reporter @FrederickMelo 4 Sep Ok. I've now experienced the Snelling coffee shop drive -in back - up for myself. This is not good... # Snelby #Blocking pic.twitter.com/uVQPnObnPD bryan kennedy Follow @xbryanx That drive through is ridiculous. I only ever did it once, but could barely negotiate the turns in Honda Fit! 4:58 PM - Sep 4, 2017 St Paul, MN 1 2 Construction crews recently broke ground on a Major League Soccer stadium with more than 19,000 seats just up the street, off Snelling and University avenues. In 2016, a Whole Foods grocery opened along Snelling next to the Vintage on Selby, a housing development featuring dozens of upscale apartments. Jeff Zaayer Follow @shovelfoot It's actually #Snarshall not #snelby twitter.com /FrederickMelo /... 9:52 PM - Sep 4, 2017 1 14 There's yet anotherwrinkle at the Snelling - Marshall intersection that some social media usersjokingly refer to as "Snarshall." in 2014, the city of St. Paul and Ramsey County removed center turn lanes along Marshall and installed a bike lane along the street's south side from Snelling to Lexington Parkway. BOLLARDSI At the urging of neighborhood advocates with the Union Park District Council, the city recently installed bollards— flexible safety tubes to delineate lanes — along the bike lane, but they keep getting struck down by vehicles navigating the tight turn. On Monday, at least one bollard appeared flattened and another had been knocked into the center of the bike lane, effectively blocking cyclists. Meanwhile, drivers who turn into the Starbucks report tight turns inside the lot, as well, with drive•thru customers struggling to avoid cars backing out of parking stalls. "That drive -thru is ridiculous," said Kennedy, the web developer, "I only ever did it once, but could barely negotiate the turns in Honda Fill" , Eric Osekowsky Follow l' @EricOsekowsky It is terribly tight for my midsize, at that entrance and the drive thru itself. my gf scraped my fender there when borrowing my car twitter.com /FrederickMelo /... 11:26 AM - Sep 5, 2017 1 Union Park District Council staff met with representatives from Starbucks and the city in June to discuss possible ways to improve the situation, such as adding the bollards and additional street parking on Marshall or prohibiting left -hand turns out of the Starbucks lot onto Marshall. To open the drive -thru, Starbucks obtained a conditional use permit from the city, as well as a zoning variance allowing a smaller store than usual. During planning in September 2015, the Union Park District Council had deadlocked, with a 7 -7 vote, on whether to support the permit and variance. Julie Reiter, executive director of the Union Park District Council, said in March that she met a city planner for coffee at Starbucks in order to show him the traffic back -ups firsthand, "We saw cars backing up ... across Snelling," she said. In mid -June, she met with four representatives from Starbucks, as well as officials from St. Paul planning, the St. Paul Department of Safety and Inspections and the St. Paul Department of Public Works. "We talked about everything from modifying the site plan internally... to shutting down the drive- thru," Reitersaid. The district council's land -use committee sent a resolution to the city this summer supporting the closure of the Starbucks drive -thru and revocation of its conditional use permit "unless and untit the obstructions of the adjacent right -of -way are removed." In response, city officials promised to install the bollards and require Starbucks to provide traffic control from 7 to 9 a.m. to ensure that the traffic and bike lanes and sidewalk are not blocked. Tags: St. Paul Frederick Melo Frederick Melo was once sued by a reader for S2 million but kept on writing. He came to the Pioneer Press in 2005 and brings a testy East Coast attitude to St. Paul beat reporting. He spent nearly six years covering crime in the Dakota County courts before switching focus to the St. Paul mayor's office, city council, and all things neighborhood - related, from the city's churches to its parks and light rail. A resident of Hamline- Midway he is married to a Frogtown woman. He Tweets with manic intensity at pa Frederickh9elo. Follow Frederick Melo @FrederickMelo SMORfOCONlf.Nf You Won't Believe What This Man Will Do to Ensure His Guests Are Happy President of Ovation Vacations, a luxury travel agency, Jack Ezon has a passion for creating out -of- this - world... By Hilton As you comment, please be respectful of other commenters and other viewpoints. Our goal with article comments is to provide a space for civil, informative and constructive conversations. We reserve the right to remove any comment we deem to be defamatory, rude, insulting to others, hateful, off -topic or reckless to the community. See our full terms of use here- Marie Darling From: Greg Lerud Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 7:07 AM To: Marie Darling Subject: FW: traffic questions FYI From: Peterson, Dennis [mailto:DENNIS. PETERSON @minnetonkaschools.org] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 4:37 PM To: Greg Lerud Subject: traffic questions Greg: We have the information you requested. The student parking permits issued for those 3 years are roughly 625. The numbers vary, as we add throughout the year. We still do have a carpool requirement, but some seniors and juniors may get individual permits based on special circumstances (medical needs, PSEO, etc). At this point, we have 615 parking spots for students, with an additional 65 in the dome lot for daily student passes. It needs to be considered as well that there is a great deal of parent traffic before school and at the end of the school day. Much of it comes through the Vine Hill /Delton intersection. We are very concerned about the impact on traffic with a Starbucks that would tend to back up traffic into the restaurant. I would think customers would be very tied up in traffic at the prime times of the day. We would really be concerned about having their traffic block access to the school. It could be a real nightmare. Please let me Know when this matter will be heard by the City. Thank you. Dennis From: Greg Lerud [ mailto :GLerud @ci.shorewood.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 2:55 PM To: Peterson, Dennis <DENNIS .PETERSON @minnetonl<aschools.o Subject: traffic questions Dr. Peterson, You are not the correct person that I should be corresponding with, but I would appreciate if you could forward this email to the appropriate person. We had a lengthy discussion at last night's Shorewood City Council's meeting about a potential Starbucks at the intersection of Vine Hill and Denton Road (frontage road.) The council requested that staff contact the school to determine the answers to a few questions: 1. How many MHS parking permits are issued? Would it be possible to get that information for the 2015, 2016, and 2017 YTD school years? 2. Does the school still have the two people minimum per car requirement, or has that changed? 3. How many parking spaces are there in the school lots for students? Has the number increased in recent years? Any plans to add additional student parking spaces? Thank you for your help, and please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Greg Lerud, City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 p: 952 - 960 -7905 <image002.jpg> #7B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Starbucks — Conditional Use Permit —Drive Thru Window Meeting Date: August 28, 2017 Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen, Assistant Planner Review Deadline: Waived by Applicant Attachments: Staff Memos dated March 1, 2017, and April 4, 2017 Minutes from the March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2017 Meetings City Engineer's Memos dated April 19, 2017 and August 23, 2017 Applicant's memo dated August 24, 2017 Spack Technical Memorandums dated April 27, 2017 and August 22, 2017 Traffic Impact Study ( Spack) pp. i -14 (full report available on City of Shorewood website) Correspondence and Petition Received Resolution Denying Request Resolution Approving Request Policy Consideration: Should the City grant approval for Watson Vinehill, LLC. to redevelop 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 to allow a Starbucks coffee shop with a conditional use permit for a drive -thru window? Background: See attached staff memorandums. Site Context: The site is a combination of two parcels. These two parcels and the surrounding land uses were developed prior to the existence of the current configuration of the frontage road. It was retro- fitted to accommodate increasing traffic on State Highway 7 and on the adjacent side streets and includes problematic curves, narrow rights -of -way on the north side, and challenging intersection geometrics. To help the traffic situation at the intersection of State Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road, MnDOT has begun constructing a right turn lane from northbound Vine Hill Road to eastbound State Highway 7. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 1, April 4 and May 2, 2017 to consider this application. At their May 2, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the request. The Commissioners indicated concerns with approving a use that would: 1) increase trips in the morning peak further deteriorating the existing failing traffic situation; 2) increase nuisance trash blowing from the business; and 3) produce noise from the drive -thru speaker that would impact the adjacent residents. At each meeting, individuals raised traffic concerns, and one person testified to concerns regarding increased litter and noise from the development. The applicant's traffic engineer responded to the Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. S: \Planning \Planning Files \Applications \2017 CURRENT CASES \Starbucks CUP \CAF for 08 28 17.doc Page 2 traffic concerns by stating that the proposed drive -thru would have a negligible impact on the adjacent traffic. Correspondence and a petition received during the review of the application are attached to the staff report. After the last Planning Commission meeting, the City's traffic engineer (Chuck Rickart, PE PTOE, with WSB) and the applicant's traffic engineer have continued discussions on the traffic impacts related to the proposed development. The City's traffic engineer has determined that the impact of the use as proposed could be mitigated if the developer makes alterations to the frontage road at the site entrance and at the Vine Hill Road /Delton Lane Intersection. The recommended improvements are: Adding a right -turn lane into the site driveway from the eastbound frontage road. This addition allows the traffic entering the site to leave the east -bound queued traffic that is waiting to pass through the intersection at Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road. Adding a bypass lane on the westbound frontage at the site driveway. This addition allows westbound traffic to pass by car(s) queued to turn left to enter the site. Modifying the northbound segment of the intersection of the Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road to include a dedicated right turn lane instead of the current wide single lane for all northbound traffic. This modification would accommodate the additional traffic that is expected to exit the subject property on Vine Hill Road before continuing back to Delton Avenue to complete their journey. Staff stresses that these improvements will not correct the existing traffic problem on the frontage road and at the intersection. They are intended to mitigate the impact from the proposed additional traffic associated with the coffee shop /drive -thru service window. Staff also included the following additional conditions in the attached resolution in addition to standard conditions of development. The applicant shall complete the following prior to issuance of a building permit: 1. Revise their plans to include the above changes subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. Consolidate the properties into a single tax parcel. 3. Acquire any temporary construction easements necessary for either demolition of existing improvements or construction of retaining walls. 4. Pick up stray trash on a daily basis from the site and nearby the site to avoid becoming a nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood. 5. Submit a sound study (or specifications from a speaker vendor) indicating that the sound from the ordering station shall not exceed 50 decibels at the east property line. 6. Limit the hours of operation to 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. and further limit trash service and deliveries to the hours between 9:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Financial or Budget Considerations: The application fees cover the cost of processing the application. Options: Deny the request, approve the request subject to the recommended conditions; or modify either resolution. The Council may also choose to remand the request back to the Planning Commission as the final information from the traffic engineers wasn't available for the last Planning Commission meeting on this subject. Page 3 Recommendation / Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution for approval of the request. Next Steps and Timelines: If the City Council denies the application, the City Council is not obligated to consider a similar application for six months. If the City Council approves the application, the applicant may submit their request for a building permit as soon as the conditions of approval are met. Connection to Vision / Mission: Sustainable tax base. WS Asonown et Associates, Inc. Infrastructure ® Engineering u Planning ■ Construction Memorandum To: Marie Darling, Planning Director Paul Hornby, P.E., City Engineer City of Shorewood From: Chuck Rickart, P.E., P. T. O.E., Transportation Engineer WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: August 23, 2017 Re: Traffic Review Starbucks Traffic Impact Study City of Shorewood, MN WSB Project No.: 2925 -035 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Spack Consulting prepared a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) dated March 27th 2017. WSB and City Staff has been working with the developer and his Traffic Engineer to review and address concerns from the study. Most recently the developer submitted a Technical Memorandum summarizing the Traffic Study results. The purpose of this memo is to provide a review of the final traffic analysis and provide recommendations of potential mitigation. The developer's analysis reviewed site traffic based on both a "worst- case" scenario and "likely" scenario for traffic distribution to and from the site. The "worst- case" scenario assumed that the majority of traffic exiting the site would use the access on Delton Avenue. The "likely" scenario assumes the majority of the traffic exiting the site would use the Vine Hill Road access. The developers engineer prepared a Synchro /SimTraffic analysis documenting the Level of Service (LOS) and delays at the intersections adjacent to the site. The analysis documents that the AM peak hour is the critical time with the most impacts. Table 1 below shows a summary of the results for the AM peak hour. Table 1 Analvsis Results Summary (AMPeak Hour) Forst -Case Scenario Likely Scenario Intersection LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay sec Delton Ave at F 50.6 B 14.6 Site Entrance (Access 426.9) (Access 25.4) Delton Ave at F 56.27 F 53.03 Vine Hill Rd (Vine Hill Rd 13.77) (Vine Hill Rd 15.55) Vine Hill Rd at A 0.62 A 4.02 Site Entrance (Access 11.60) (Access 14.0) Traffic Review — Starbucks TIS City of Shorewood, MN August 23, 2017 Page 2 Based on the results of the developer's analysis, concerns continue to exist with the possible impacts, specifically at Delton Avenue and the Site Entrance and the Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road intersections. In order to evaluate the potential operational concerns to the intersections or site access points, mitigation improvements were considered. These improvements included: Addition of a right turn lane eastbound on Delton Avenue at the site entrance Addition of a by -pass lane westbound on Delton Avenue at the site entrance. Addition of a right turn lane northbound on Vine Hill Road at Delton Avenue. WSB evaluated these impacts using Synchro /SimTraffic modeling. Table 2 below shows a summary of the results assuming the potential mitigation. Table 2 Mitigation Analysis Results Summary (AM Peak Hour) Based on the results it can be concluded that while the improvements would not solve the current operational issues they would improve the operations. Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed improvements be considered with the proposed Starbucks project. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this memo, please do not hesitate to contact me at 763 - 287 -7183 Forst -Case Scenario Likely Scenario Intersection LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) Delton Ave at E 47.41 A 7.22 Site Entrance (Access 421.35) (Access 17.94) Delton Ave at F 53.11 E 48.63 Vine Hill Rd (Vine Hill Rd 12.26) (Vine Hill Rd 14.22) Vine Hill Rd at A 0.62 A 4.02 Site Entrance (Access 11.60) (Access 14.0) Based on the results it can be concluded that while the improvements would not solve the current operational issues they would improve the operations. Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed improvements be considered with the proposed Starbucks project. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this memo, please do not hesitate to contact me at 763 - 287 -7183 µ IW Al 0 NIT 10 RECEIVED 5 ,f AUGf 6 1 T c t! S 100 wi 'Jt'�� To: Mayor, and City Council City of Shorewood cc: Greg Lerud, City Administrator; Marie Darling, City Planning Director; Chuck Rickart, City Transportation Engineer; Tim Keane, City Attorney From: David Watson Re: City Staff Report Date: August 28, 2017 A. Introduction. thought it would be beneficial and save time at tonight's council meeting if I set forth my preliminary response to the City Staff report, etc, I did not receive the City Staff report until 4 p.m, last Friday. _I reviewed concerns we had with our consultants over the weekend and discussed. a few items with Marie Darling and Chuck Rickart this morning. B, Results of Traffic Study. A traffic study was done to show the impact of the proposed Starbucks Development. The results of the traffic study, including the likely distribution of traffic, have been reviewed and agreed to by the City's traffic engineer (Chuck Rickart WSB), MnDOT, and an independent engineering firm, HDR. The result of the traffic study shows that during the AM Peak Hour (7 -8am on weekdays during the school year) the Starbucks Development does not have a noticeable impact on the existing traffic condition. • Delton Avenue access /exit point level of service is a B and remains a B with the development in place. » Vine Hill Road access /exit point level of service is an A and remains an A with the development in place. • Intersection of Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road — level of service is an F and remains an, F with the development in place. The actual delay time is reduced with the development in place (54,73 seconds to 53.03 seconds) because customers entering the site off of Delton Avenue exit the site on Vine Hill Road, therefore distributing some of the traffic from Delton Avenue eastbound onto Vine Hill Road northbound. The Traffic study also projects only 13 new cars will be added to the existing traffic condition of nearly 900 cars during the AM Peak Hour. 1 `W AT SON C. Reaction to City Staff report as to Traffic In the City Staff Report that I received last Friday there is a memo from WSB dated August 23, 2017'. In this memo WSB lists three improvements that WSB says would improve the existing traffic condition with the Starbucks Development in place. The memo states: "Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed improvements be considered with the proposed Starbucks project." There is no statement that they are proven to be needed in order to comply with the conditional use permit standards for approval. First Improvement, add a right turn lane into the site driveway off of eastbound Delton Avenue Watson Response: Although it is not needed, it will improve the intersection of Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road. I am told the cost of this work will be approximately $9,000 and I am willing to contribute this amount for the work as a condition of the approval. Second Improvement, at the intersection of Delton Ave / Vine Hill Road modify. northbound Vine Hill Road to add a dedicated right turn lane going east on Delton Avenue, Watson Response: This portion of the intersection is in Minnetonka. Since customers will be utilizing northbound Vine Hill when exiting the site, if it is possible to create this turn -lane with stripping, although it, is not needed, l am willing to pay for that work as well as a condition of approval if the City of Minnetonka agrees that work should be done; Third, add a bypass lane on westbound Delton Avenue to allow westbound cars to pass by cars queued; to turn left into the site. Watson Response: My group did a very quick, review of the possible bypass lane and we have engineering concerns given the limited amount of space, Highway 7 Immediately to the north, and the Delton /Vine Hill intersection being only 150 feet away. Per the MnDOT Road Design Manual - Chapter 5, a standard bypass lane for a 30 mph road will include 250 feet of by -pass lane plus a 360 foot taper (entering /exiting the bypass lane). This results in a total of 610 feet which will require the by -pass lane to begin near the Delton Avenue / Valley View Road intersection and go directly through the Delton Avenue/ Vine Hill Rd intersection. This will have a negative impact on driver expectation on how the Delton Avenue / Vine Hill Road intersection operates and may also require a taking of land south of Delton Avenue. My traffic expert and I do not believe this scope of work is needed given that the traffic distribution showsjust 4 cars entering the site during the AM Peak Hour from westbound Delton Avenue. Finally, a very expensive and impossible to realistically build bypass, if built; would only affect 4 cars waiting to make the left turni into the site during that hour, To alleviate any concerns, as a condition of approval, I propose adding a sign that prohibits a left turn into the site off of westbound Delton Avenue during the AM Peak Hour. D. Reaction to Balance Staff report and conditions of Resolution of_Approval. I have read the Resolution of Approval. Although I believe some of the conditions are not needed, I agree to be bound by all of them as stated but as to roadway changes, the conditions should read as set forth above. Thus paragraph Al) under Conclusions of the Resolution of Approval would read as follows (redline shows the changes): "A. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit subject to approval of the building permit by the Excelsior Fire District and subject to the following conditions and conformance with city code, zoning regulations and engineering guildelines. Prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall: 1) Revise the plans or submit the information as directed in the Engineer's memorandums dated April 19, 2017 and August 23, 2017, subject to the approval by the City Engineer, except that the applicant shall: a. Pay up to9.00p for a right turn lane into the site; b. Payto stripe a turn lane onto the northbound_ Vine Hill road if the City of Minnetonka agrees to allow such striping; c, Pay to install and maintain a sign on westbound Delton Avenue that sa s "No Left Turn Into Starbucks from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a m, weekda s," E. Introduction; of Vern Swing and Bruce Malkerson. My traffic expert, Vern Swing, is present this evening. I ask that he be allowed! a few minutes to present his findings as outlined in detail in his report that you have available; to address any questions you or staff may have. Bruce Malkerson is my legal counsel and he is available to address any legal questions you may have. in order to limit the time we need to present our position, he has submitted a letter to you which summarizes our legal position. F. Process. I ask that after you deliberate concerning this,appl!cation that I be allowed a minute to address any questions or issues that you think have not adequately been addressed. Finally, I ask that if you find that there is not a majority vote in favor of the resolution with the additional conditions I discussed, I ask that you add whatever other conditions you believe must be added in order to obtain approval, It may also be that If I have not adequately addressed all of your concerns, I ask you to table the vote until the next meeting so that i have a chance to address those issues. Thank you. 3 T' SO — R �s Luc D. Reaction to Balance Staff report and conditions of Resolution of_Approval. I have read the Resolution of Approval. Although I believe some of the conditions are not needed, I agree to be bound by all of them as stated but as to roadway changes, the conditions should read as set forth above. Thus paragraph Al) under Conclusions of the Resolution of Approval would read as follows (redline shows the changes): "A. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit subject to approval of the building permit by the Excelsior Fire District and subject to the following conditions and conformance with city code, zoning regulations and engineering guildelines. Prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall: 1) Revise the plans or submit the information as directed in the Engineer's memorandums dated April 19, 2017 and August 23, 2017, subject to the approval by the City Engineer, except that the applicant shall: a. Pay up to9.00p for a right turn lane into the site; b. Payto stripe a turn lane onto the northbound_ Vine Hill road if the City of Minnetonka agrees to allow such striping; c, Pay to install and maintain a sign on westbound Delton Avenue that sa s "No Left Turn Into Starbucks from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a m, weekda s," E. Introduction; of Vern Swing and Bruce Malkerson. My traffic expert, Vern Swing, is present this evening. I ask that he be allowed! a few minutes to present his findings as outlined in detail in his report that you have available; to address any questions you or staff may have. Bruce Malkerson is my legal counsel and he is available to address any legal questions you may have. in order to limit the time we need to present our position, he has submitted a letter to you which summarizes our legal position. F. Process. I ask that after you deliberate concerning this,appl!cation that I be allowed a minute to address any questions or issues that you think have not adequately been addressed. Finally, I ask that if you find that there is not a majority vote in favor of the resolution with the additional conditions I discussed, I ask that you add whatever other conditions you believe must be added in order to obtain approval, It may also be that If I have not adequately addressed all of your concerns, I ask you to table the vote until the next meeting so that i have a chance to address those issues. Thank you. 3 To: David Watson From: Vernon Swing Date: August 28, 2017 Re: Proposed Shorewood Starbucks Development - Traffic Response to items 8 -10 and b -f of the City Draft Resolution Denying Conditional Use Permit Per your request, I have reviewed the Draft Resolution referenced above and have the following responses: Finding of Facts #8, "The applicants traffic consultant found...." Response: The traffic study of the likely distribution shows there are only 13 additional vehicles added to the area, and the intersection of Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road which is between the adjacent intersections providing site access will have reduced delay with the addition of the proposed Starbucks development. Finding of Facts #9, "The applicant's traffic consultants indicate..." Response: The statement referenced in number 9 was referring to a worst case condition and referred to TH7 and Vine Hill Road. However, with the analysis of the likely distribution of site traffic this comment is no longer applicable. Finding of Fact #10, "Additionally, the City Traffic Engineer..." Response: The City Traffic Engineer at the May 5, 2017 Planning Commission meeting stated that in his opinion the inbound traffic was not the issue. Conclusion B, "The request for Conditional use Permit..." Response: The development of the Starbucks with a drive -thru window that necessitates the request for Conditional Use Permit results in less traffic than would occur per allowable use, based on the City Zoning Ordinance. As discussed in the traffic study and in updated information the "Alternative Development Scenario" analysis requested by the City Planner at the March 1, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, indicates that the use not requiring a Conditional Use Permit will generate more traffic than the proposed development. This conclusion has been verified by the City's Traffic Consultant, MnDOT, and HDR (an independent reviewer). Conclusion C, "The City of Shorewood finds..." Response; The analysis of the likely distribution of site generated traffic indicates this development does not create traffic conditions that are incompatible with existing and future land use in the area. Further, this land has been zoned for coffee shop use. Conclusion D, "The proposed use would tend to..." Response: The traffic analysis of the existing conditions and likely distribution indicates that the Delton Avenue site access intersection currently operates at acceptable level of service B, and will continue to 3:��. `•� '4'd�•a`�� ✓+�SF�.��Tfi� "'3+' f �33��`F�A � ��- �S 3z�� ca`s?.�� Y�y �4� �;�g ��' �'+ ��i Shorewood, MN 2 of 2 Spack Consulting Propose Starbucks Development Resolution Traffic Summary operate at acceptable level of service B with the Starbucks development. The intersection of Vine Hill Road and the site access operates at level of service A under existing conditions and will continue to operate at level of service A with the Starbucks development. The intersection of Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road, a non - adjoining intersection, currently operates at level of service F during the AM peak hour with 54 secs of delay and will continue to operate at level of service F during the AM peak hour; however, with traffic entering the site from Delton Avenue and exiting onto Vine Hill Road, the resulting redistribution of existing traffic results in only 53 seconds of delay. Conclusion E. - See response D. Conclusion F. - See response C. MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 1 900 U.S. BANK PLAZA SOUTH TOWER 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612 -344- 1 1 1 1 FACSIMILE 612 -344- 1 41 4 4J Bruce D. Malkerson, Esq. Direct Dial No. 612.344,1699 G T Y Oi S HORE' 10 "OD Udm n mgmllp.com August 28, 2017 Mayor Scott Zerby and Members of the Shorewood City Council City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 -8926 RE: Application for Conditional Use Permit; Watson Vinehill, LLC; Starbucks Drive Through — to be considered at the Council Meeting on August 28, 2017 Dear Mayor Zerby and Members of the City Council: I. INTRODUCTION. This office represents Watson Vinehill, LLC ( "Watson "), which has an interest in property located at 19245 and 19285 Highway 7 ( "Property ") in the City of Shorewood ( "City "). Watson has submitted an application to develop a Starbucks coffee shop with a drive -up window (the "Project "). The proposed drive - through requires a conditional use permit ( "CUP ") under the City's zoning ordinance. The City Staff has recommended approval. The City Council will consider it at its regular meeting this evening. Watson has submitted a voluminous application packet to the City. This application packet includes materials that describes the proposed project in great detail. We submit this letter as a supplement to the materials submitted in that application packet. For the reasons set forth below, the project proposed by Watson satisfies all applicable criteria for a CUP established by the City's zoning ordinance. We therefore respectfully ask that the City Council vote to approve the application. We apologize for submitting this letter so soon before the Council Meeting. However, we and our clients' consultants received the staff report on Friday afternoon at 4 :00 p.m. and we, our client, and our clients' consultants needed to review it over the weekend. 227577.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Shorewood August 28, 2017 Page 2 11. WATSON SATISFIES ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE AND Is THEREFORE ENTITLED TO THE REQUESTED CUP AS A MATTER OF RIGHT. The law in Minnesota is that a local governinent body must approve a conditional or interim use permit application if the applicant satisfies all conditions set forth in the applicable ordinance. Trisko v. Cite of Waite Park, 566 N.W.2d 349, 354 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Minnesota appellate courts have held that the denial of a conditional or interim use permit is arbitrary and unlawful when the proposed use meets the requirements specified by the relevant zoning ordinance and when the reasons for denial have no factual basis in the record. Yang v. County of Carver, 660 N.W.2d, 828 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). Minnesota appellate courts have also held that when an applicant meets the requirements for granting a conditional or interim use permit, approval of a permitted conditional or interim use must follow as a matter of right. Citizens for a Balanced City v. Plymouth Congregational Church, 672 N.W.2d 13 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). Here, project proposed by Watson complies with all applicable requirements set forth in the City's ordinances. As noted above, the only substantive objection to the application concerns traffic.' For this reason, this letter will focus solely on the requirements for CUP approval set forth in the City's zoning ordinance relating to traffic. The City's zoning ordinance provisions relating to CUP approval contains a "catch all" provision which reads in relevant part as follows: Propose. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the City of Shorewood with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety. In making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the city may consider the nature of the adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other lands innnediately close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads and all other or future factors as the city shall deem a prerequisite of consideration in determining the effect of the use on the general welfare, public health and safety. City Code, § 1201.04, subd. 3(a). ' There have been lengthy public proceedings concerning this matter, and no one has questioned that Watson's application fully complies with all applicable requirements of the City's zoning ordinance with the exception of those relating to traffic impacts. Likewise, no one has raised any substantive objection to the Project with the exception of the objections relating to traffic impacts. For this reason, this letter will focus solely on the Project's compliance with the City zoning ordinance requirements relating to traffic impacts and will not discuss other requirements for CUP approval set forth in the zoning ordinance. 227577.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Shorewood August 28, 2017 Page 3 This provision allows the City to consider "the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads" when determining whether to grant or deny an application for a CUP. (Id..), Here, the evidence presented by the applicant demonstrates that the Project will have no adverse "effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads" for the reasons set forth in detail in memos by Vern Swing to David Watson, dated August 22, 2017 ( "Swing Memo ") which is in your Council packet. "Adjoining roads" or "adjoining" are not defined terms in the City's zoning ordinance. Therefore, one needs to read and apply these terms as defined in court case law or accepted dictionary. There are no Minnesota court cases which define these terms. The American Heritage Dictionary defines "adjoining" as follows: "To be next to; to be contiguous to." Therefore this adjoining roads are portions of Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road where they are "next to" or "contiguous to" the site on which the development is proposed. As the project proposed by Watson satisfies all criteria established by the City's zoning ordinance for the approval of CUPs, Watson is entitled to the requested CUP as a matter of right. Watson therefore respectfully asks that the City Council approve its application. 111. COMMUNITY OPPOSITION IS NOT A LEGALLY SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR DENYING A CUP APPLICATION. Comments made by members of the public at the public hearings relating to the application have generally been very positive and complementary of the proposed project. Notwithstanding this, some members of the public have voiced concerns about the proposed project. Many of these concerns relate to general concerns concerning traffic. Watson and its consultants have worked diligently with the City's staff members and planning consultants to address these concerns. Nevertheless, we briefly address the subject of possible community opposition to the proposed project. Quite simply, generalized community opposition is not a legally sufficient basis for denying an CUP application. The law in Minnesota is that community opposition to a landowner's desire to use his property for a particular purpose is not a legally sufficient reason for denying a conditional or interim use permit. Scott County Lumber Co. Inc. v. City of Shakopee, 417 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988) and Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn, Ct. App, 1986). Indeed, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that a local government entity must base the denial of a conditional or interim use permit on "something more concrete than neighborhood opposition and expression of concern for public safety and welfare." Chanhassen Estates Resiclence Assoc. v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335, 340 (1984); see also Scott County Lumber Co. Inc. v. City of Shakopee, 417 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988) and Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. Ct. App, 1986). 227577.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Shorewood August 28, 2017 Page 4 Here, Watson has presented evidence from multiple traffic experts that conclusively demonstrates that the Project will have no adverse "effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads." The conclusions of Watson's traffic experts have been reviewed and verified by other traffic experts, as discussed in the Swing memo. On the other hand, opponents of the Project have presented no expert testimony or traffic studies. To the contrary, opponents of the Project have presented only their own generalized concerns based on nothing more than speculation of how the Project will affect traffic. Such generalized concerns are not evidenced - based, and we therefore ask that the City Council disregard them as it is required to do under Minnesota law. IV. CONCLUSION. In summary, the Project proposed by Watson complies with all criteria established by the City's zoning ordinances, and Watson therefore respectfirlly requests that the City Council approve its CUP application. Representatives of Watson will be present at City Council meeting tonight to answer any questions that members of the City Council may have concerning Watson or its proposal. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this letter and of the other materials submitted in support of Watson's application. Very truly yours, �25AULQ, V Bruce D. Malkerson Patrick B. Steinhoff cc: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Chuck Rickart, City Transportation Engineer Marie Darling, City Planner Timothy Keane, City Attorney David Watson Vern Swing 227577.DOC L .ice f'_: <. r IRECED PROPOSED STARBUCKS DEVELOPMENT— SHOREWOOD, MN VIDEOS OF ADJOINING ROADS AND DELTON AVENUE / VINE HILL ROAD INTERSECTION Adioining Road - Delton Avenue As shown in the pictures below, the traffic along eastbound Delton Avenue in -front of the Proposed Starbucks Development starts to form around 7:30am on weekdays during the school year. 7:20AM — March 9th- No Traffic jYl 7:30AM — March 9th —Traffic starting to form Below are five videos that show the traffic along Delton Avenue during the time period of 7:40AM - 7:55AM on a weekday during the school year. The first video is of the traffic at 7:40AM on April 24th. There is a steady stream of traffic continuously moving slowly towards the intersection of Delton Avenue / Vine Hill Road. You Tube Link: https• / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= isEiNE07izo 2. The second video is of the traffic at 7:50AM on April 24th. The amount of traffic and the movement of the cars is very similar to that of the traffic at 7:40AM. You Tube Link: https• / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= b04CwmwCOcw The third video is of the traffic at 7:55AM on April 24th. The traffic has cleared at this point and during this 23 second video there is one eastbound car and 4 westbound cars. You Tube Link: https: /Zwww.youtube.com /watch ?v= AAlu7dYgkS8 `_M e'er .~ 4. The fourth video is of a vehicle exiting the Proposed Starbucks Development using the Delton Avenue exit during peak AM traffic (7:45am on March 9th). The eastbound traffic stopped to allow the exiting vehicle to turn left out of the site onto westbound Delton Avenue. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= fT4FKMc1 y8 The fifth video is a vehicle heading westbound on Delton Avenue away from Minnetonka High School at 7:55AM on March 9th. The video shows that there is very limited traffic on westbound and eastbound Delton Avenue at this time. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= XBiFy5kf6Ek Adioining Road — Vine Hill Road Below are three videos that show a vehicle exiting the Proposed Starbucks Development using the Vine Hill Road exit, turning left and heading north on Vine Hill Road towards the Delton Avenue / Vine Hill Road intersection. 1. The first video was taken at 7:30AM on May 18th. The wait time to exit onto Vine Hill Road is 5 seconds, waited for one car heading north on Vine Hill Road to pass. You Tube Link: https: / /www.Voutube.com /watch ?v= Ki8M6iliXrs 2. The second video was taken at 7:40AM on May 181h. The wait time to exit onto Vine Hill Road is 12 seconds, waited for two cars heading north on Vine Hill Road to pass. You Tube Link: httos: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= x3xuAO2G5JQ 3. The third video was taken at 7:50AM on May 18th. There was no wait time to exit onto Vine Hill Road. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= ZRJnh4Jaegs Non- adioining intersection - Delton Avenue / Vine Hill Road The below three videos were taken from the Tino's parking lot viewing the traffic flow at the Delton Avenue/ Vine Hill Road intersection. 1. The first video was taken at 7:15AM on April 20th. There are very few cars at this intersection, in fact a total of four cars approach the intersection during the 15 second video. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v =fmWA kp-ek '3 f � � The second video was taken at 7:45AM on April 20th. There is a steady stream of cars entering the intersection from eastbound Delton Avenue going towards Minnetonka High School but there are ample breaks in the traffic heading northbound on Vine Hill Road. No new cars appear on northbound Vine Hill Road during the last 10 seconds of the 30 second video. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v= bSbhlZ nHoY The third video was taken at 7:55AM on April 20th. All of the cars, except two, entering this intersection during the 37 second video are on westbound Delton Avenue heading away from Minnetonka High School. You Tube Link: https: / /www.youtube.com /watch ?v =Lb5H n1Ay0 3 Fl L 111, 11 11 5755 Country Club Road e Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 ® 952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewoobnn.us. cityhal] @dshorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 4 April 2017 RE: Starbucks Coffee — CUP for Drive -up Window FILE NO.: 405 (17.06) An application for a conditional use permit for a drive -up window for a Starbucks Coffee shop was considered at the March Planning Commission meeting. The matter was continued to the April meeting pending submission of certain items requested by staff and the Commission. Most significantly, the Commission asked for a traffic study, addressing concerns raised by local residents at the public hearing. Following is the current status of information requested and provided: 1. Traffic Study. Staff expressed some concern that a traffic study could be completed in time for our consulting engineer's to review and comment on this item. While the applicant's engineers submitted a traffic study, it came in later than was necessary for staff review and comment. Due to its length, the study is forwarded to the Commission under separate cover. 2. A landscape plan, attached, has been submitted. In general, it is considered acceptable, but it fails to provide parking lot screening at the easterly entrance to the site. Site lighting still has not been addressed. 4. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan, attached, has been submitted. It includes a small infiltration pond at the easterly entrance to the site, which is undoubtedly why no landscaping has been provided there. The City Engineer points out that no drainage calculations have been provided. If the applicant's engineers can demonstrate that impervious surface after the redevelopment is the same or less than prior to redevelopment, the calculations may not be necessary. These plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. As a follow -up to continuing the application, the applicant was sent a letter advising him that the application would take more than 60 days and up to 120 days to process. Since important information remains to be analyzed, staff recommends that this matter be continued once more, to the May Planning Commission meeting. Cc: Greg Lerud Tim Keane Paul Hornby Dave Watson MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO.: BACKGROUND C�il� 5755 Country Club Road e Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 •952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.d.shorewood.mmus • cityha11 @dshorewood.mn.us Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Brad Nielsen 1 March 2017 Starbucks Coffee — Conditional Use for Drive -Up Window 405 (17.06) Mr. Dave Watson, representing Watson Vinehill, LLC, has an interest in the properties at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 (see Site Location map — Exhibit A, attached). He proposes to redevelop the site as a Starbucks coffee shop with a drive -up window as shown on Exhibit B. The subject properties are currently zoned C -1, General Commercial and contain a total of 36,535 square feet of area (.84 ac.). The proposed drive -up feature necessitates a conditional use permit in the C -1 District. The properties in question are currently occupied by two office buildings (see Exhibit C). Land use and zoning surrounding the site are as follows: West: Vine Hill Road/Highway 7 intersection South: Self- storage facility; zoned C -1, General Commercial East: Restaurant and single - family residential (in Minnetonka); zoned C -1 and residential, respectively North: State Highway 7, then commercial in Deephaven As shown on Exhibit B, the proposed building will be located on the west end of the site, with parking to the east of the building. The existing three access drives on the service road have been consolidated into one at the east end of the property. A secondary access drive will remain on Vine Hill Road. The proposed building measures 35' X 64' and contains 2325 square feet of floor area. It is 18 feet high (single story) with a three -foot parapet at the drive -up window. As can be seen in Exhibits E -H, proposed building materials are brick and decorative block. In addition to inside seating, a patio at the northeast corner of the building provides additional outdoor seating. Memorandum Re: Starbucks CUP 1 March 2017 ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION It should be noted that the plans submitted to date are very preliminary. In fact, the site plan on Exhibit B is labeled "Conceptual Site Plan ". As such, this report is intended to address the concept proposed, with review of more detailed plans to follow. A. Land Use. Coffee houses are listed as permitted uses in the C -1 zoning district. Drive -in facilities are listed as conditional in that district. Conditions for this use are found in Section 1201.22 Subd. 4.b. of the Zoning Code: The appearance of the proposed building (see Exhibits E -H) may be considered to be an improvement over the existing, somewhat dated, buildings it will replace. Stacking space for the drive -in window is considered ample. Site circulation is also improved, particularly with the consolidation of driveways along the frontage road. The access has been moved as far to the east, away from the curve in the road, as possible. 2. The small frontage on Vine Hill Road is across the street from single- family homes. The green space created by required setbacks should be landscaped so as to buffer the homes across the street, keeping in mind required sight triangles for the driveway. 3. The plans do not address site lighting. 4. Parking lot screening from residential — see 2., above. 5. Although as very small scale, the site plan appears to show perimeter curbing around the circulation and parking areas. Curbing is required to be concrete. 6. As mentioned, the consolidation of driveways and keeping the primary access as far from the curve in the service road is considered to be an improvement to the existing site conditions. 7. Again, no information on site lighting. There is no information provided relative to drainage. 9. Presumably, areas not covered by building or pavement will be surfaced with grass and landscaping. No landscape plan has been submitted. 10. The site plan shows the location of a freestanding sign in the northeasterly corner of the property. Aside from that, no details have been provided for signage. B. Building Setbacks. The existing building complies with the requirements of the C -1 District. The Zoning Code requires a 30 -foot front setback, a 30 -foot rear setback, a 30 -foot setback on the side yard abutting the street, and 15 feet on the sides. The existing building is 32 feet back from the -2- Memorandum Re: Starbucks CUP 1 March 2017 property lines that abut the service road, 23 feet from the south property line, and 192 feet from the Vine Hill Road right -of -way. C. Building Height. The C -1 District allows buildings to be three stories or 40 feet in height. As shown on Exhibit D, the proposed building is one story, and 18 feet in height. D. Parking. (Analysis of the proposed parking will be provided under separate cover.) E. Building Construction. The proposed building is consistent with the standards set forth in Section 1201.03 Subd. 7.c. of the Zoning Code. F. Landscaping. The site plan shows faint indications of landscaping along the service road and on the west side of the building. No detailed landscape plan has been provided. G. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control. Presumably, there will be significant grading, especially on the west end of the site, to accommodate the layout. No grading plan has been provided as of this writing. The applicant should provide a detailed grading plan, along with drainage calculations for the existing and proposed conditions. H. Signage. The applicant has not provided any plans for signage. The property is allowed three signs, one of which may be a freestanding pylon sign. Presumably the allowable area of signage will be spread somewhat equally between the three signs. Signs are subject to a separate permit. In light of the absence of certain plans, staff is reluctant to suggest anything more than a "concept" approval. It is therefore recommended that the application be continued to the April Planning Commission. Prior to that meeting, the applicant should provide the plans referenced herein. Cc: Greg Lerud Paul Hornby Lary Brown Dave Watson -3- O W O LL- z ° 0 O O M L O c� P:a-9 ON .gal NJ IM auln VMNOIRINNIH .y � L SII! to Q. ; C EmrUm L' ui L c� c U C m vl- N r T .y L U OI , , , Exhibit A SITE LOCAT Starbucks CUP -A w z r, s IN" ) LNnOO NId3NN3H t o 7 k - k. t0495NW'000M3210HS g g 'o Nz �gS�3 °- 'a fF Ltw � - ° Y o� c S3,��°�TgGWt � f�3 3 o d rc , s` y �- Uz��6 �6 j'�kffi,,o 0 � o �_= �. I LAVMHOIH98Z66 �� d$� a $ w QzZ jr, 15 n s7�= § -do gY� g a ss3aaavio3road sua a U o U�Q�M 3 �g �E=�'° m g 6 K 0�3 s r L eggs €¢S �, ° U-1 5 Y IIIH3NIA 19 L WH a z' DHOlS 333300 Lu Lu w w �s a< a w S>iOf1mvis M3N g a W 4�� c=i 5 3 3h'MN 1D3road a � i` i< � �' S vl F -3sn NOI.LDn211SNOO 2103 ®3®N31N1 ION - LINO NJIS3® Olivw3HOS wg a a� zs ° u w H �w `a 3o3e�b M § §$g58m�8 w ° _..�a �e ___ ❑ o= 0 �l� 11 " , ✓ o �� 20a< t;LL LL o o \o a y LL LL cI a 3nYY ua3aoad - Exhib: SITE MJ IIIH3NIA a a w IIdHSJ WHH�s P� +'aloy5-d4'uurBLn +H-M'a\+leP°4Y dV+ A- VOLLYIBN! Ia0- OOSlelo4S- Gi4��8L hvN' sX- n9^'IS-BLCtr9lH�IN197�91�5Uueme� -t B PL. im I w MJ IIIH3NIA a a w IIdHSJ WHH�s P� +'aloy5-d4'uurBLn +H-M'a\+leP°4Y dV+ A- VOLLYIBN! Ia0- OOSlelo4S- Gi4��8L hvN' sX- n9^'IS-BLCtr9lH�IN197�91�5Uueme� -t B PL. im 12020175:59: 56 PM P:V2esbuanhSb�mksWICH160 378- Sbrbmks- HVry7SVuhit.6h, 150 , MBI /.M1- lViP_I /edelsV.IN- HAy78V M- SWw— d_SCHEMATICSHELLM q7 i 9 v N 0 v SCHEMATIC DESIGN ONLY - NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE (nom m z o'� o�$ N � -1 PROJECT ME: ,= %, = v 6 �m NEW STARBUCKS D" a Yo g COFFEE STORE s9 C _ m �Z Exhibit D t g P HWY 7 & V I N E H I L L 0 -0 g PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN $?s o PROJECTADDRESS: T p p gg9 G N 19285 HIGHWAY 7 [ m '•I< g 8 _ o S H SHOREWOOD, MN 55401 x HENNEPIN COUNTY a S LU LL �m o ,� °�FLL $ k e l.1Nf100NMAilOHS O} o� 4� &Sc "� J ,.o! "t F = it I _: s` 10455 NW 'O00 °S� g ° '" a }? L kVMHJIH99M6 :ssaaaavLOaroaa mm�a o w €gwl'y�ab o >_ O m °�w� §pig`s ° °j =3 w, /= �`" �IIHANIA 8 L AMH 5 w g u a s��rcG a z 6 32101S AAAAOO W W E€ m a ego S>iOfl9 wis MAN a a s s 3 s n NouonNISNOO MOO 03ON31NI ION - AINO NOIS30 31IVIN3HOS WIIaHS NiVMHOSP -04S-R AVL RV11 -NW q0M &AN- LOV41' ; Exhibit G BUILDING PERSPECTIVES NW AND NE B it \ [ §< 7;; ! u mom «mw ): . ®,E �`;t% «, G,»y2 «\ m«m� _ams ! 0 »2.- � (� 4/r ! \x ! !9 | l.16 ; !) /! f za_� _r §! \d /!! ( °Z®� A2 § )!. 2® - M \ °r « / — — §� ®& #A �: 2 2 2�� N>�zH ! ] ! ° !_20 8§ URN ~ dm4 . § /; 77U,/§ )y�l�§ DW Sg��O `! ID z » g ® ) ( /) w «1 s i o i wir@ § /#E #4� ` % / §)L- s n NoiIonNISN03 ao! QeQN31N, ION -AINO NeiS2Q o3 ¥n3HOS ` Exhibit H BUILDING PERSPECTIVES SE AND SW CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 2017 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. PUBLIC HEARING FOR CUP FOR COFFEE SHOP WITH DRIVE -THRU SERVICE AND OUTDOOR SEATING Applicant: Dave Watson Location: 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 p.m. Nielsen noted the location of the proposed site slated for redevelopment which will replace two existing office buildings. The properties are currently zoned C -1, General Commercial. The CUP is required because of the drive -thru window. He reviewed an aerial photograph showing the existing conditions. He discussed surrounding uses. He reviewed the proposed building and stated three existing driveways will be consolidated into one. The building is single story with a 3' parapet at the drive -thru window. He reviewed the floor plan and building elevations. Nielsen stated the plans are preliminary at this point. He discussed problems associated with the request. He discussed the conditions for approval of a drive -thru. The building is an improvement over what currently exists on the site. There is sufficient stacking room for vehicles. Site circulation is also improved. The small frontage road is across the street from single family homes. The plans do not address site lighting. The drawings are small scale but show perimeter curbing. There isn't any information provided relative to drainage. A landscape plan has not been provided. The site plan shows a sign, but a signage plan has not been provided. The setbacks comply with C -1 zoning requirements. The building height has been met. A parking analysis has not been completed. The building is consistent with design standards required in a C -1 district. Nielsen stated the City Engineer is well aware the intersection has a low rating. He suggests a traffic study be provided by the applicant showing the use will not make traffic worse in the area. It should include trip generation and timing. Staff is recommending this item be continued to the April 4 meeting pending submittal of all missing information. Davis stated they do not need a CUP for a coffee shop but for a drive -thru. The applicant stated all missing information will be provided as well as the requested traffic study. Chair Maddy opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:16 p.m. Kris Thayer, 5345 Shady Hills Circle, Shorewood stated she has canvassed the neighborhood and has collected 88 signatures from households in the area opposing the request. She discussed traffic circulation in other coffee shops in the area. Her major concern was the traffic and showed photographs of traffic situations in the area of the proposed use. She urged the Planning Commission to consider this request seriously. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, March 7, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Hany Millen, 5117 Vine Hill Road, Minnetonka stated he stands to be the most affected resident by this use. He was concerned about the increased traffic drawn to this use. He discussed traffic congestion in the morning and evening rush hours. He was also concerned about vehicle collisions, nuisances, drive - thru wait times, and snow removal from the Starbucks lot onto his property. Matt Larson, 5125 Vine Hill Road, Minnetonka discussed surrounding uses and headlight intrusion from current uses. Niko Sari, address not 'given stated he was concerned about the traffic. Rose DeSanto, 5111 Valley View Road, Minnetonka discussed her concerns about the traffic in the area. She stated problems associated with the new development will just become worse. She discouraged the Planning Commission from considering this. Mary Macanek, 5108 Valley View Road, Minnetonka stated traffic from the high school is very heavy, the road is curved, and it is difficult to see around the corner. She believes MnDOT should have a say on what could be done with Highway 7. She was concerned about the increased traffic that will be short in nature. David Sime 5363 Ashcroft Road Minnetonka was concerned about access to roads already. He discussed the length of the traffic cycle on Vine Hill Road at Highway 7. He stated the traffic impact resulting from a Starbucks would take two hours to clear the new traffic. He was also concerned about safety and enviromnental impacts. John Massart, 5220 Vine Hill Road, Shorewood stated he will be impacted by the proposed use. He preferred the use be kept away from residential uses. He stated he avoids the intersection during rush hours. Cindy Heimer, 5121 Shady Lane, Shorewood was concerned about traffic and accidents. Chair Maddy closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:44 p.m. Davis stated there are many drive- throughs in many locations in the area. Bean asked the Starbucks' representative for information on customer numbers. Julie Waite, Starbucks, stated it was normal to have 500 in a day at an average store in the Twin Cities. On average 62% of the business is through the drive -thru. Davis asked if she was aware there was a traffic problem in this area. Waite stated she was not aware, but it will be addressed Riedel stated the circumstances of the intersection are already bad. The traffic study should consider the increase of traffic to the intersection. Maddy asked if the City would commission the traffic study. Nielsen stated the applicant would commission the study, which staff would review. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, March 7, 2017 Page 3 of 3 Maddy suggested the traffic study look at the congestion already in the area. Bean believed a cut - through problem would be created. Riedel stated this appears to be a long -term problem and asked the residents for their long -term solutions. Bean stated the solution would be to completely realign the Vine Hill Road intersection. Riedel stated the increase in students at the high school will only create additional traffic problems. hl response to a question from Bean, Nielsen explained what the traffic study should include. A comparison of a coffee shop with/without a drive -thru should be discussed in the study. Riedel stated there are other issues besides the traffic. Nielsen stated we still need to see plans for lighting, grading, landscaping and signage. Bean asked how much time the applicant will need for the traffic study. Nielsen stated he did not know how long it would take. He stated the item could be continued again if needed. Davis suggested a dedicated right -turn be constructed at Delton Avenue. Riedel moved, Davis seconded to continue the request to the April 4 Planning Commission meeting to allow time for the applicant to provide lighting, grading, landscape and signage plans and a traffic study. Motion carried 5/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 2017 MINUTES COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. 1. PUBLIC HEARING — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR COFFEE SHOP WITH DRIVE -THRU SERVICE AND OUTDOOR SEATING (continued from March 7, 2017) Applicant: Dave Watson Location: 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:01 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. He also noted the Hearing was continued from March 7, 2017. He explained the Planning Commission is comprised of residents of the City of Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. The Commissioners are appointed by the City Council. The Commission's role is to help the City Council in determining zoning and planning issues. One of the Commission's responsibilities is to hold public hearings and to help develop the factual record for an application and to make a non - binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisory only. He stated this evening the Planning Commission is going to consider a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for a coffee shop with drive - thru service and outdoor seating for the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7; also, known as the Starbucks proposal. Director Nielsen apologized for sending out the report for this item late. The applicant submitted the material later than staff would have liked. The staff report was sent out earlier that morning. He explained the staff report talked about a number of things discussed during the March 7, 2017, public hearing. He reviewed the items discussed in the report. During the March 7 Public Hearing the Planning Commission asked the applicant to have a traffic study done. It was to take into account the intersection, the site, and what affect the proposed use would have on the traffic issues in the area. The applicant submitted the results of the study to the City the previous week, but not in time for the City's consultant to review it and comment on it. Primarily because of that staff is recommending the Public Hearing again be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting which is scheduled for May 2, 2017. The report is about 100 pages long and he did send it to the Commissioners under separate cover. The report contains an executive summary which summarizes most of the highly technical report. The City will have its Engineer review and comment on the report. 2. A more detailed landscape plan was submitted. Most of what is proposed is decorative landscaping. There is no need to screen the site from Highway 7 or the intersection. The original staff report recommended putting in some landscaping on the easterly entrance to / exit from the site to provide screening of the parking lot from residents on that side of the street. That is not shown on the new plan. Staff continues to believe that something should be done to create a screen between the parking and those residents. A row of maple trees is proposed along the front of the site. There is a backdrop of Black Hills Spruce and various decorative landscaping around the building. 3. Site lighting still has not been addressed. It was mentioned during the March 7 Hearing. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 5 4. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted. It includes a small infiltration pond at the easterly entrance to the site, which may be why no landscaping has been provided there. The City Engineer has noted that no drainage calculations have been provided. Whether or not additional ponding would be needed on the site would be dependent on whether or not the applicant intends to add additional hardcover to what already exists. The applicant had told him that his engineers have done those calculations and that the amount of hardcover would be less than what is currently there. Therefore, no additional ponding would be needed. Staff needs to review those calculations. The plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. He reiterated that staff recommends this be continued to the May 2 Planning Commission meeting. He noted that as follow -up to continuing the application, the applicant was sent a letter advising him that the application would take more than 60 days and up to 120 days to process. If the City does not take action within 120 days it would automatically be approved if the applicant was not notified of the 120 days. Chair Maddy asked if the infiltration pond site is part of the drainage expansion that could possibly be needed. If the amount of hardcover is not increased could that be replaced with landscaping? Director Nielsen clarified he did not know the answer to that question. Director Nielsen explained that in the past the City has always asked for landscape berms for screening. Because of the desire to keep stormwater on the site to control drainage developers have gone to creating depressions which the water would flow into and then into the ground where soils allow that. He does not know if that is necessary for what is being proposed. It is possible things could be modified so a little of both infiltration and landscaping could be done. The worst case there could end up being a section of fence along there to screen the cars. Commissioner Davis stated that area is not very deep and that she thought it could be nicely landscaped easily. Chair Maddy asked if a copy of the traffic study can be found on the City's website. Director Nielsen stated the ability to link to the study remotely is down at this time; it has been that way since March 31. The technology consultants are tying to resolve the problem. Director Nielsen stated if anyone wants a copy of the traffic study or any other part of the staff report he asked them to provide the City with their email address on the sign in sheet. Commissioner Riedel stated the study makes the assumption that there would not be an increase in traffic and he questioned that. He did not find there to be any justification for that assumption. Commissioner Davis stated it was also refuted by Starbucks during the March 7 Hearing. Riedel stated the statement that caught his attention was "The overall aiuount of traffic and the congestion that occurs because of the school is not likely to increase over tinie." He thought that statement is questionable. Director Nielsen stated he thought the applicant may believe that they would be drawing from traffic already in the area; that would be somewhat logical. He then stated from his perspective if a driver traveling on Highway 7 decided they would stop at the coffee shop the next morning he does not think they would ever do that again because of the volume of traffic. Commissioner Sylvester asked if the data included in the Study report was aligned with data from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Director Nielsen stated one of the recommendations included in the executive summary was to create another northbound lane at the intersection. Currently there are north, left and right turn lanes. MnDOT has considered doing that before this proposed project came before the City. Commissioner Bean clarified that currently at that intersection there is a dedicated left turn lane and there is a center -right lane; a driver could go northbound on Vine Hill Road or they could turn right and go eastbound on Highway 7. Bean stated there is only about a three -car queue space in the right turning space. Traffic is already backed up along the curve and past the Public Storage facility long before there is a chance to turn right. Bean noted that he has a number of questions about the study. He asked if there was anyone who could answer his technical questions. Director Nielsen encouraged Bean to ask his questions so the traffic engineer could address them. Bean stated the City has no control over the right -turn lane. Nielsen confirmed that and noted the City cooperates and coordinates with MnDOT. He clarified it is MnDOT's right -of -way (ROW). He commented he was not sure why the City would object to what MnDOT is proposing. Chair Maddy asked Commissioner Bean if he was asking if approval of this application could be contingent on MnDOT adding a lane. Bean stated possibly contingent on reconfiguring the curve. Director Nielsen stated the City is aware that MnDOT wants to do something and commented that usually it carves down to MnDOT being willing to do what a city wants provided that the city pays for it. Commissioner Bean stated the study report indicates that area of Highway 7 has a posted speed of 50 miles- per -hour (mph). That posted speed has been increased to 55 mph. Bean then stated the report indicates there are 24 -hour videos of the intersection. He asked how many cycles there are of them and how many of them were actually viewed. Commissioner Davis asked what days the recordings were done on. Director Nielsen stated staff will get that information. Someone from the audience stated the intersection was video recorded on a Monday and a Tuesday and not during spring break. Bean went on to state the report refers to Vine Hill Road E and Vine Hill Road W yet Vine Hill Road does not run east and west. Someone in the audience clarified that is the Vine Hill intersection and encouraged people to think of them as west of the site and east of the site. Bean noted that he will send his questions to staff and copy the other members of the Commission. Director Nielsen asked that they be sent to him and he will forward them on to the rest of the Commission. Commissioner Riedel stated there is a brief section in the report on non -site traffic forecasting. It pertains to any increase in traffic not related to the Starbucks facility; the assumption was there would not be any. He questioned that assumption. He would like an explanation for that analysis. He has read that traffic at the Minnetonka High School is increasing. Director Nielsen stated it could be based on the size of the School parking lot. However, there are a lot of parents of open enrollment students who drive the students to school. That volume could potentially increase. Commissioner Sylvester stated the Study report states the land -use is expected to produce approximately one -half the morning trips when compared to the alternative development which would be a coffee shop CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 5 and fast food combination. She asked if that means that if the drive -thru is not approved there is an alternate plan. Dave Watson, the applicant with Watson Vinehill, LLC, stated the probable alternative would be to develop a non - drive -thru coffee shop along with some form of drive -thru fast food or a fast casual restaurant. In response to a comment from Commissioner Sylvester, Mr. Watson stated if the drive -thru portion of the proposal was not approved he would not just have a small coffee shop built. Chair Maddy stated if the applicant did not have a drive -up window he asked if a C.U.P. would not be required. Director Nielsen explained that for this application the drive -up window is what required the Public Hearing. If it was just a permitted use in that C -1, General Commercial district it would still have to go through a site plan review. Chair Maddy re- opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:24 P.M. Rose DeSanto, 5111 Valley View Road, Minnetonka, stated it would take 20 years before newly planted maple and spruce trees look half way decent. They are slow growing trees, particularly spruce. There will also be a great deal of salt spread along the roadways in the winter and she does not think the spruce trees will tolerate the salt. Director Nielsen explained the spruce trees are a backdrop to the building; they are not in front by the road. If spruce trees are taken care of correctly they can grow about one foot a year. The minimum size the applicant is supposed to plant is about six feet. He reiterated that for the most part it is decorative landscaping and not required screening. Near Vine Hill Road those trees should be an effective screen. Six -foot trees start to block out cars effectively. Ms. DeSanto stated six foot spruce trees would block very much. She then stated maple trees won't have leaves very long. Director Nielsen stated maple trees do not screen anything, noting that is not the intent of the maple trees. Paul Stehnacher, 5210 Shady Lane, Shorewood, stated that MnDOT has already graded that intersection as "F ". He questioned the value of entertaining another traffic study done by a consultant who could be somewhat biased in favor of the firm that hired him. He also questioned why something would be added that would exacerbate the current situation and not make it safer. Until that intersection is improved he cautioned against doing anything that would make the traffic at the intersection worse. Susan Hambor, 5146 Valley View Road, Minnetonka, noted her property is located right across Vine Hill Road south. They also own the property located at 5147 Valley View Road and the log house at the corner of Delton Avenue and Valley View Road. She thought it was senseless that people were considering having a coffee shop there with a drive -tbru. She noted there are two times during the day when they cannot get off of Valley View Road. They are at a dead stop at those times. She had to always leave for work one hour early so she could get out of her neighborhood. She anticipates that same thing would happen for the proposed drive -thru. She stated they have a hard time renting their rental units to anyone who has children because of existing traffic to and from the High School. She noted the traffic at the High School did increase because the size of the parking lot was increased last summer and more permits were given outs. People coming from the School "scream" through her neighborhood especially during the afternoon on a beautiful day. The residents in her neighborhood have wanted their road blocked off. She anticipates that if the proposed project moves forward drivers will be stuck in the CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 5 parking lot of the site. She agreed that people would not go to the drive -thru more than once because of traffic. Thomas Millen, 5117 Vine Hill Road, Minnetonka, stated his property is located directly across from the proposed project site and therefore would be greatly impacted. He asked why the application is being considered further because it has already been recognized that traffic in that area is a significant problem. He also questioned the need for a traffic study because it has already proved to be an issue. He suggested locating the proposed drive -thru coffee shop a quarter of a mile to the east where there is an existing shopping center. He thought it was counter intuitive to put it in the proposed location. His children are not allowed to play in their front yard for safety reasons. He noted that drivers frequently use his driveway as a turnaround. He stated that there would still be a traffic issue even if there was not a drive -thru coffee shop. Chair Maddy stated the reason for having another traffic study done is primarily because of the Fourteenth Amendment which requires that all property owners have to be treated the same. The Planning Commission cannot prejudge the application until it goes through the public hearing process even though there is a busy intersection in the area. Chair Maddy closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. Riedel moved, Bean seconded, continuing the Public Hearing for a conditional use permit for a coffee shop with drive -thru service and outdoor seating for the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 to the Planning Commission's May 2, 2017, Planning Commission meeting. Motion passed 5/0. Chair Maddy continued the Public Hearing at 7:33 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2017 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. PUBLIC HEARING — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR COFFEE SHOP WITH DRIVE -THRU SERVICE AND OUTDOOR SEATING (continued from April 4, 2017) Applicant: Dave Watson Location: 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. He also noted the Hearing was continued from April 4, 2017. He stated this evening the Planning Commission is going to consider a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for a coffee shop with drive -thru service and outdoor seating for the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7; also, known as the Starbucks proposal. Director Nielsen explained the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing was closed when this item was discussed on April 4. New information has been made available since then. If the Commission wants to reopen the Public Testimony he suggested the comments be limited to comments about the new information. Chair Maddy stated he plans on reopening the Public Testimony. Director Nielsen explained that during the Planning Commission's March 7 and April 4 the Planning Commission meetings the Commission held a Public Hearing on a conditional use pei7nit (C.U.P.) for a coffee shop with drive -thru service and outdoor seating for the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7. During the first Hearing the Commission heard public testimony from people. The majority of the comments were about the existing traffic situation and the affect the proposed coffee shop would have on traffic. Issues were raised about the site plan by staff. The applicant has submitted revised plans that address the majority of the issues raised by staff. For example, staff had suggested adding additional landscaping. The revised plans reflect that. The applicant worked through drainage issues with the City Engineer and adjusted the site plan accordingly. What remains is the traffic issue which was the most significant issue raised. The Commission had asked the applicant to do a traffic study. The applicant hired Spack Consulting to conduct the study. The City's Traffic Engineer, Chuck Rickart with WSB & Associates, reviewed and commented on that study. Spack consultants submitted a technical memorandum which responded to Mr. Rickart's comments. Nielsen asked the Spack consultants to review their responses. Vern Swing, the Traffic Engineering Manager with Spack Consulting, reviewed their responses to each of Mr. Rickart's comments. Following is a summary of the questions and responses. 1. The proposed site traffic assumes 89% pass -by trips. What assumptions were used about the direction of the traffic flow for the analysis? CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 2 of 10 Mr. Swing stated Spack took a conservative approach. It assumed traffic passing the area on Trunk Highway 7 would divert to Starbucks and then return back on its path on Highway 7. The proposed Starbucks will be successful if it can draw from those people on the fi-ontage road on their way to the Minnetonka High School in the morning. Or, come back to Starbucks after having dropped their children off at School. 2. There was a question as to whether or not a 10 -yeat forecast should be considered. Mr. Swing stated Spack look at the traffic volumes on Highway 7 and the frontage road and the land in the area that is yet to be developed or to be redeveloped. On Highway 7 they assessed the traffic volumes over the last 12 years. There has been no growth. In fact is has been coming down slightly according to the Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnDOT's) counts. It is possible the traffic volume could go up but likely not enough to impact how the proposed site would function. Commissioner Riedel asked Mr. Swing if Spack studied the growth patterns in traffic for the High School. He stated anecdotally it seems there has been an increase in the traffic to the School perhaps due to open enrollment or to more students driving themselves to school. That increase in traffic specifically could be problematic. Mr. Swing explained they did look at that. They also looked at enrollment numbers and class sizes. That ebbs and flows to some extent. The ability to open enroll also ebbs and flows to some extent. He noted the numbers were higher in 2007/2008. Over a span of time the numbers were fairly stagnant. The School has limitations on the number of students there can be in each classroom and caps enrollment off to some extent. As the economy improves and there is more affluence students may have more cars. He does not think a gross change would be very much. The land use is quite set. Commissioner Riedel asked if historical data was looked at. He asked how long there have been problems at the intersection. Mr. Swing stated the Highway 7 and Vine Hill road intersection is problematic and it is due to the two traffic peaks associated with the School. MnDOT does have a project scheduled to be let this fall that would allow for a right turn lane coming up to Highway 7. That will help with traffic there. It would be helpful if the signal timing could be changed for that short peals when traffic is destined to the School or from the School. Unfortunately, it is MnDOT's route and it prefers mobility. Commissioner Bean asked Mr. Swing if Spack asked the School about its parking situation. Mr. Swing stated they just looked at student numbers. Bean noted the School has regularly been expanding parking for years. There was an expansion this past year. More students are driving to school. Dave Watson, with Watson Development, stated according to the 2016 annual report for the Minnetonka Schools they are at capacity now at 10,460 students. Once the Schools are at capacity open enrollment closes down. If enrollment goes below capacity then open enrollment opens back up. Mr. Swing went on to Mr. Rickart's next comment. 3. Level of Service (LOS), delays and queue's should be reported for all intersections. Mr. Swing stated Spack has followed up and provided that information in its response memo. It has been included in the original information in the appendix but it may have been more difficult to sort through. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 3 of 10 Commissioner Riedel stated he found the following letter in the response troubling. "When roadways are over capacity traffic engineering models break down and do not achieve an accurate representation of nnhat is happening in the field" To him that suggests with all of the specialty in engineering calculations the recommendation may not reflect what reality would be. Mr. Swing stated the models are quite good up to the point when capacity has been exceeded by 10 percent. At that point the models have difficulty in accurately portraying what is going on. At Spack the consultants film everything that they look at. When they look at the existing condition they see the queue that builds up and the parking that occurs on Delton Avenue. They looked specifically at the peak times and do their analysis based on the peak times. If there is a situation that looks as if it is not being portrayed as the way it was observed the consultants will, if necessary, calibrate the model so it reflects what was observed. If they know it is breaking down but only for a short period of time often times there is nothing that can be done about that; at least something that is cost effective. Chair Maddy stated when a road gets to that point he asked if that is synonymous with giving it an "F" LOS. Mr. Swing stated a LOS "F" means the amount of capacity was exceeded that was theoretically available on the road. For intersections it is based on amount of delay the driver has to experience. One the delay has reached 60 — 80 seconds it is in the LOS "F" and if a driver had another way to go they would do that rather than be stuck in traffic. LOS "F" is severe congestion. Mr. Swing went on to Mr. Rickart's next comment. 4. There was a question about the validity of 104 outbound left turns in the morning creating only a four vehicle queue. Mr. Swing stated that goes back to comment 1 and Spack's conservative approach of using the worst possible case where everyone would be turning left rather than coming out and taking a right and going on to School, for example. For the analysis the vehicles were all sent up to the frontage road, Delton Avenue rather than Vine Hill Road. In reality, if a driver could not get out on Delton Avenue they would go over to Vine Hill Road and go up that way where there is an all - way stop. He noted that 104 vehicles in one hour is not a lot of traffic. That would amount to slightly more than 8 vehicles per minute. 5. Mr. Richart asked if a right turn lane or a left turn lane on to Broms Boulevard (a frontage road) would be beneficial. Mr. Swing stated that often times for large retail sites that would be quite beneficial. In this situation because the queue extends back and around the corner turn lanes may not be of benefit. He noted Spack shares its information with the national organization the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). There is also a website where it shares all of the information it gathers. He explained that Spack is finding that the queues that typically occur at coffee shops during peak times are on average 11 vehicles in length. The 85«' percentile that the proposed coffee shop would be designed for is 13 vehicles in length. If the assumption was that vehicles were going to stack out into the right turn lane to get onto the site the vehicles that want to pull on to the site and into a parking space would be prevented from doing that because they would be entering from the right turn lane. After pondering that for quite some time it seemed to them that a right turn lane would not be an appropriate use in this case. He thought the left turn volume if it was coming to the site would likely turn at the all -way stop and come in through one of the other CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 4 of 10 driveways. He does not think the drivers would take the turn off of Delton Avenue to come onto the site. Commissioner Bean stated he understood Mr. Swing to be saying that if a driver was traveling east on Delton Avenue, and in lieu of the right turn lane, and if the driver saw that it was congested the driver would go up to the all -way stop and enter the site off of Vine Hill Road. Mr. Swing clarified if a driver was driving eastbound on Delton Avenue he thought they would pull on to the site from Delton Avenue if possible. If a right turn lane was cut in and if it was plugged up with vehicles heading to the drive -thru lane drivers would not be able to get into the parking lot. Commissioner Riedel stated he understands the Spack analysis to be conveying that the expected queue length would be within the capacity of the drive -thru and that waiting time onsite would not be the issue. He then stated his concern, which may be shared by some of the residents, is how traffic on the site would be impacted not people trying to get to Starbucks. Mr. Swing explained on the site itself if the queue exceeds the 85% capacity it may be possible that another car could stack onsite and potentially block another vehicle from getting in if someone was exiting at the same time. If someone was not exiting at the same time it would be possible to get around the vehicle. In their estimation there is sufficient room to choose to get into the queue to get to the drive - up window or to drive up and park and go inside. There is enough room and enough time, at very slow driving speeds, to make that decision and do it in a way that would not be detrimental to pedestrians that are walking out and to other vehicles that are traversing the site. Going out from there once a driver gets on to Delton Avenue the vehicles that are being added (that were included in the report) are vehicles that are currently on Highway 7. That is a very conservative way to consider it. If a person was driving east in the morning and if they wanted to get coffee it would be unlikely they would stop at the proposed Starbucks because of how long it would take to do that. There are a number of other places along Highway 7 to stop and get coffee. The Starbucks would most likely be drawing from the traffic already making that trip. Spack added approximately 62 of the 104 trips taking them out of the through traffic on Highway 7. They made them right turns coming down on to Delton Avenue and then onto the site. They added another 20 vehicles that were headed westbound on Highway 7 and had them come left and do that. They sent all of them back out on that path. Using that assumption in the review of what was going on they projected the overall change in operations and the overall change in queuing that took place would be minimal at best. It was difficult to tell the difference between one and the other. Commissioner Riedel stated there is already congestion during peak hours. He asked if the impact of adding the dynamic of drivers pulling in and out of the proposed site would be negligible. Mr. Swing explained that would make a negligible change because there is the all -way stop there. Drivers are already stopping in that particular spot. The drivers taking a right turn coming onto the site would be traveling at 5 —10 miles per hour (mph) at most. Riedel stated every vehicle that pulls in and out of the site introduces an additional gap albeit small. It would very slightly exacerbate an already bad situation. Mr. Swing reiterated the impact would be negligible. Commissioner Bean stated if he was trying to leave the proposed site on to Delton Avenue it would necessitate there being a gap for him to get in so he can drive to the stop sign and stop again. Mr. Swing confirmed that. Bean stated Spack must have assumed that he would not have to wait for a few minutes for another driver to be nice. Mr. Swing stated when traffic is congested drivers have a lot more patience for allowing that to occur. Bean indicated he was not sure students would do that. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 5 of 10 Mr. Swing went on to the Mr. Rickart's next comment. 6. Mr. Richart asked Spack to comment on the possible addition of a northbound lane at the Highway 7 signal. Mr. Swing explained that MnDOT has a project that will be adding that. That will be beneficial all day long. Commissioner Bean asked if Mr. Swing has details of what that would be like. He stated that essentially there is a right turn lane there now. He then asked if MnDOT is going to materially change the right turn lane and make it longer and take some of the curve into consideration. Engineer Horriby explained that MnDOT is only going to widen the existing pavement so they can get an official lane in there to make that right turn. It will not be longer but it will be a wider dedicated east bound lane. He said he does not understand how that would change northbound Vine Hill Road at all. Mr. Swing stated it would add capacity. From the existing condition vehicles probably do queue up two abreast. He thought there would be an acceleration area with the new lane so vehicles could start to make that turn when the opportunity is there and get moving a little quicker a little faster. Engineer Hornby noted he has the plan back in his office. Nh-. Swing stated it would be a small zone and maybe it would address one more vehicle. 7. Mr. Richart commented that the potential for traffic queues of the drive -thru may require the addition of an eastbound right turn lane on to the site. Mr. Richart thought a condition of the C.U.P. should be that a turn lane be added if the condition occurs. Mr. Swing stated this is comment similar to the discussion there has just been about the queuing on site and the benefits or not of having a right turn lane out on the street. Chair Maddy stated he thought Spack's conclusion was it as unlikely a lot of people would add to a line of 13 vehicles if it exists. Mr. Swing confirmed that and stated if they did and if they blocked the right turn lane they would block people from going on to the site as a parking customer. Chair Maddy asked if the length of the queue would be visible as they were coming on to the site. Mr. Swing stated that would depend on how robust the landscaping is. Commissioner Bean stated the sample data for comment 7 came from Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Roseville, St Louis Park, Minnesota as well as Kansas City, Kansas. Mr. Swing explained that Starbucks asked Spack consultants to go to Kansas City to look at 12 sites they had down there. There was queue statistic for Minnesota and then for Minnesota and Kansas combined. Mr. Swing noted he was not around when the Kansas City sites were evaluated. Commissioner Riedel stated he buys the argument that during the periods when the intersection is severely congested cars puling in and out from the site may not change the situation very much. He asked what about during the shoulder periods when it is transitioning from being severely congested to less severely congested. Then cars pulling in and out can slow traffic down. Mr. Swing stated that can happen and reiterated it would be slightly over one car per minute. That is a very small number when compared to CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 6 of 10 a very large number of high school students arriving. Because drivers are already planning on stopping at the all -way stop there is the advantage of safety when pulling around the corner and going on to the site. Commissioner Bean stated Mr. Swing refers to the all -way stop at Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road as being some type of mitigator when in fact during the peak timeframe the traffic is queued all of the way back through the intersection and back on the eastbound Highway 7 shoulder. Mr. Swing clarified that Commissioner Riedel was asking about when the peak tunes were lessening when the queue was no longer on Highway 7 but on Delton Avenue. The queue is not quite as long on Delton Avenue. Adding a vehicle into that or taking a vehicle out of that would have a fairly negligible impact on the overall flow of traffic because it is all stopped already. Commissioner Bean stated he understands Mr. Swing to be saying it is already a mess and adding 10 more vehicles does not make it any more of a mess. Mr. Swing confirmed it is a mess during the half hour period when everyone is arriving. It is slow and congested. Bean asked if Spack's measurement was of 30 minutes. Mr. Swing confirmed that. Bean stated his measurement is from 7:30 A.M. to 8:15 A.M. Mr. Swing stated based on their recordings and Mr. Watson's recordings it is just under one half hour. Chair Maddy asked if the traffic study numbers were averages for a five day school week. Mr. Swing stated they were basically averages for the peak period for that period of time. He noted the cameras were put out on Monday and taken down on Friday. Commissioner Bean stated that is not his experience and he goes through there twice a week early morning. At that time he is heading south on Vine Hill Road to try and get to County Road 62. It is a lot more than 30 minutes based on what he observes. He then stated he can go to the 80t" percentile of peak and there is still a mess. Mr. Swing stated the numbers did drop off fairly quickly after school starts. Chair Maddy asked if the data could be interpreted as the peak time is when traffic is backing up all the way back to Highway 7. Mr. Swing stated the peak time includes that time. Peak starts slightly before traffic backs up to Highway 7, then it backs out of Highway 7 and within that peak hour it dissipates from that and the traffic is on Vine Hill Road. Maddy stated he interprets that to mean one half hour of really bad congestion and after that it is just pretty bad. Commissioner Bean concurred. Mr. Richart stated he did review the Spack traffic study report and developed the list of comments /questions that were just reviewed. He noted that he agrees that the area is congested; it is an issue today. He commented that he does not know how much a left turn lane would benefit the site. He thought the right turn lean could possibly be a benefit to the site. He noted whether or not the right turn lane could fit in there is a separate issue. He stated there are some options that could be looked into that may make the circulation work better should there be an issue with drivers baking up on the site. In response to a comment from Chair Maddy, Engineer Hornby stated he does not think there would be enough room to get around vehicles if they were stacking up on Delton Avenue. One of the reasons for the recommendation for a right turn lane as a condition for this C.U.P. was it would also be there for a future use of the site. Commissioner Riedel stated if there is any stacking up of traffic and if traffic is moving faster than a stand still there is a possibility that could be a hazard for drivers coming around the turn. Engineer Hornby stated the point was the City does not want vehicles stacking out. If the right turn lane was a condition of approval it might be able to mitigate that during peak times. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 7 of 10 Commissioner Riedel asked Mr. Richart if he agrees with the assessment that stacking should not be a problem according to the business model. He staffed if stacking is not an issue he asked if Mr. Richart agrees with the assessment (which he finds somewhat surprising) that traffic in and out of the drive -thru would not exacerbate the existing traffic problems significantly. Mr. Richart stated drivers would be able to get into the site. Getting out may be different. He explained the way the plans are laid out vehicles would not block the drive -thru; parking spaces may get blocked. Chair Maddy re- opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:52 P.M. Paul Stelmachers, 5210 Shady Lane, noted he has lived in Shorewood for about 10 years. He stated Commissioner Riedel asked if the coffee shop would make the traffic situation worse. The traffic study indicates it would be adding trips to the area. If new trips are going to be added to the area it is going to .be worse; how much worse is the not known. He then stated he called Minnetonka High School to ask about school enrollment. When Mr. Watson said the enrollment was 10,460 he thought he meant for the School District. The current enrollment at the High School is about 3,120 and its capacity is 3,400. The School is actively seeking enrollment because it receives federal dollars. School representatives basically told him they want to reach 3,400 students. The High School has 1,060 parking spaces currently. The School has bought 20 properties in order to add spaces. The School is continuously adding to that. Commissioner Bean stated approximately 30 percent of the student population currently parks at the School. And, 30 percent of the potential 280 more students equates to 84 additional drivers. Mr. Stelmachers stated the properties the School is buying are along Delton Avenue. He noted of the 1,060 parking spots he counted on Google Maps some of them may be used by staff and not students. Mr. Swing noted the High School has a coffee shop in it. Mr. Stelmachers stated the LOS grade "F" for the intersection is the poorest the grade can be. There is no lower grade yet the traffic gets worse. He then stated Mr. Swing stated their estimates may be conservative so the traffic will get worse. Chair Maddy clarified the conservative estimates were on the pessimistic side. He asked if the City has the ability to adjust the timing of the signal light on Highway 7. Engineer Hornby clarified that is a MnDOT function. He stated MnDOT will look at situational opportunities to make adjustments that will help its facility. Mr. Stelmachers noted that he was opposed to what is being proposed. He also noted he spoke with someone who told him the cameras were only there for one day. He stated he thought the Executive Summary showed the data was for a 24 hour period and not a 7 day period. He asked if the complete traffic report from Spack was on the City's website. Someone from the audience stated the cameras went up on a Monday and they were taken down on a Friday. Wednesday was not counted in the data because it was only a half day of school. David Sime, 5363 Ashcroft Road, Minnetonka, commented he came to the Public Hearing with a list of questions because when he looked at the draft of the initial report he questioned if the report addressed peoples concerns. He was a little unsatisfied. He noted that he is a physicist and he understands the value of formulating the use of standard tables. He is also a neighbor and a human being so he understands the limitations to heavily relying on formalisms to represent what is actually happening. He expressed concern some of the report seems to disappear into that and he thought it left those living in the neighborhood high and dry. During the LOS discussions there was also discussion about delay times and delays of less than 55 seconds being considered okay. He thought what was particularly important about CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 8 of 10 the intersection is that any times greater than 12 seconds are irrelevant ultimately because every operation for people coming south of Highway 7 is quantized into 8 to 12 and sometimes 15 second chunks which occur every 4 minutes. If he faces a 36 second delay that is three sets of 12 second traffic light operations. The traffic light period is approximately 4 minutes. That means a 12 minute delay. Conversations about delays being less than 55 seconds lose their meaning, albeit they are formally correct, for people on the ground unless the quantization introduced by the traffic light is considered. Commissioner Riedel stated if a person is delayed by 55 seconds they will only wait at the light once and not three tunes. Chair Maddy stated they would have 2 minutes to clear the intersection before the next green light. Mr. Sime stated if he does not get in the fast 8 seconds he has to wait another 4 minutes. If he is not in the second 8 seconds he has to wait another 4 minutes. Commissioner Bean stated if a driver is going northbound or southbound on Vine Hill Road and the light turns green it is green for Vine Hill Road for about 15 seconds. Then there is another 4 minute cycle before it turns green again. He explained that at 5:30 P.M. this evening he was going northbound on Vine Hill Road. When he took a left on Delton Avenue the traffic was already queued through the curve past public storage to where the Starbucks would be and it took him three lights (about 12 minutes) to get across Highway 7. Mr. Sime stated there is already a traffic mess at the intersection and it should not be made worse. He expressed concern about the assumptions used in the report. He thought it difficult to believe that traffic is static when there are large developments in the City of Minnetrista taking place. That traffic was not traveling on Highway 7 10 years ago. He then stated in the short term he is less concerned about enrollment in the High School than he is about the change and use of the facility. It has gone from being a high school to being an entertainment complex. There is a dome, a theater, 8 baseball parks, and there is an ice area corning. Those things may all be good for the school community but they compromise the conventional model of an 8 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. school day for the basis of traffic evaluation. He went on to state there is continued discussion about MnDOT ignoring the community through negligence or inaction. He asked what the community can do to get MtrDOT's attention about the intersection. If the City takes the lead he thought the community would follow. Mr. Sime thanked people for their time. Stacy Kline, 185 West 62 1id Street, Chanhassen, stated she did not know this item was going to be on the agenda this evening so she has only heard what has been presented earlier in the meeting. She noted she has been underwhelmed with the graphic because it does not help her visualize a lot of the discussion there has been. The graphic is cut off on the right side where the problematic intersection is. Commissioner Bean apologized for that and noted this is the third time this application has been discussed. Ms. Kline stated because she is a parent she can resonate with the High School having more than a start of school and end of school traffic pattern. She noted she has a daughter that is in Junior High School now and she does not drive. She drives her daughter to activities at the High School. She explained that she avoids the intersection when she drives to the School. She purposely goes past the High School to County Road 101 and comes in the back to the School. She experiences teenage drivers coming to and from the facility. She cautioned against assuming a best case mature mindset at that intersection. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 9 of 10 Rose DeSanto, 5111 Valley View Road, Minnetonka, stated no one has addressed people living in the area being discussed. There will be increased noise and litter from all of the coffee cups. She noted she picks up litter in the neighborhood now. She thought the people who live in the area have been totally neglected with regard to the inconvenience to their lives. Chair Maddy closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:09 P.M. Commissioner Riedel stated to him this issue is about more then granting a C.U.P. for drive -up window for a Starbucks coffee shop. The issue is much larger than that. There needs to be a much larger discussion about what can be done about the intersection. Commissioner Bean concurred with Commissioner Riedel. He stated other jurisdictions need to be involved in the discussion; the City of Deephaven to the north, Hennepin County, and MnDOT. He explained during the initial Public Hearing on this application there was discussion about completely realigning the Vine Hill Road intersection to create queuing space. But, that would require the purchase of properties, both commercial and residential, to be able to have a straight cross intersection. The lack of land is the reason there is the convoluted, curved, back queuing situation. He asked if MnDOT should be engaged first in the discussion. Director Nielsen explained MnDOT is aware of the issues with the intersection. MnDOT has a minor improvement scheduled with the right turn lane; that will result in there being three distinct lanes at the intersection on that side. He and Engineer Hornby discussed that at one time there had been a right off on Highway 7; that was eventually closed off. It would be nice to have that back albeit it is very unlikely. MnDOT spent a lot of time and effort closing off little accesses like that. He thought the issue with the intersection is as much of a local issue as anything. It is not MnDOT's fault that the High School is where it is. Commissioner Bean stated MnDOT would have to take the lead on making material changes to the intersection. Director Nielsen concurred. Commissioner Riedel asked if there could be a discussion with the School to change the flow of traffic to the School by directing all of the traffic to County Road 101. Director Nielsen stated he thought that would be a good starting point. He explained the School has made changes over the years. He thought the number of buses going through the intersection has been reduced. He thought they come around the back way now. He suggested asking the School District why it lets so many students drive to School. In response to a question from Commissioner Riedel, Nielsen stated staff can talk to both MnDOT and the School District. Chair Maddy asked that the conversation return to the proposal at hand. Commissioner Sylvester asked how what is being proposed is good for the City. There is already a traffic problem in at that intersection. She agreed with Mr. Stelmacher that any increase in traffic will only exacerbate the problem regardless of what a traffic study determines. She questioned the appropriateness of making the problem worse. She then asked how it aligns with the City's Comprehensive (Comp) Plan. She stated per the Plan Shorewood is intended to be a bedroom community, a neighborhood and a happy place to live. A fair number of residents have expressed valid concerns about increased traffic, trash, and noise. No one has mentioned the speaker at drive -thru that residents who live nearby are going to hear. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2017 Page 10 of 10 She would not want to hear that all the time. She then stated with those two questions in her mind she is not convinced that what is being proposed makes sense. Commissioner Riedel noted he agreed with everything Commissioner Sylvester just said and what the residents have said. But, the property is zoned commercial and the owner of the property is entitled to make use of it. The only reason for this Public Hearing is the C.U.P. application for the drive -thru window. Yet if the impact on traffic would be negligibly small then he thought the owner would have the right to snake use of that commercial property. Commissioner Sylvester stated the Comp Plan has the subject properties zoned commercial. But, the added burden of a drive -thru window is not in the Comp Plan and that is why there is a Public Hearing on this. She clarified that she would have no problem with there being a use there that does not add the same degree of burden. She thought a drive -thru would add a different burden then another business would. Commissioner Davis noted the developer has stated that without the drive -thru window the coffee shop itself would not be financially feasible. Commissioner Sylvester stated the last time this was discussed the developer indicated a fast food casual sit down establishment could work. Commissioner Davis noted she would be against anything that would torment the neighborhood further. Commissioner Riedel stated if the drive -thru versus no drive -thru makes the difference that suggests there would additional traffic. Bean moved, Sylvester seconded, recommending denial of a conditional use permit for a coffee shop with drive -thru service and outdoor seating for the properties located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7. Motion passed 5/0. Chair Maddy closed the Public Hearing at 8:19 P.M. April 19, 2017 Mr. Brad Nielsen Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN, 55331 Re: City Project No. 17 -08 WSB Project No. 02925 -350 Dear Mr. Nielsen: 477 Temperance Street i St. Paul, MN 55101 i (651) 286 -8450 We have reviewed the plans and traffic study submitted for the proposed Starbucks Coffee Store, located near the Brom's Boulevard and Vine Hill Road Intersection. Plans have been prepared by Hakanson Anderson and we have the following comments and recommendations. General 1. Prior to the start of any construction, the following permits are required (or agency letter indicatin a permit is not required): a. MnDOT — Brom's Boulevard (TH 7 Service Road) is within MnDOT right of way b. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) — Stormwater management and erosion control 2. All work performed within the public right of way is to be in accordance with the City 2016 Standard Specifications and detail plates, and amendments thereto. A copy will be provided to the development Engineer. Removals and Existing Conditions Plan 1. The removals show a saw cut 3 feet into the bituminous of Brom's Boulevard and Vine Hill Road for curb removal and replacement for curb construction. This proposed removal results in an undesirable seam along the wheel line of traffic and a continual maintenance issue for Public Works, post development. Plans are to show the saw cut at the face of the existing concrete curb gutter and the new curb is to use the bituminous edge as the roadside form. Grading Drainage and Erosion Control 1. The proposed grading plan provides highpoints and low points in a similar manner to the existing conditions. 2. The proposed site layout eliminates the existing driveways west of the proposed driveway. The runoff from the site will be concentrated at the proposed driveway which results in additional flow to the downstream inlet on Brom's Boulevard. We recommend the development add two catch basins and storm sewer to collect runoff from the site in the driveway curb line outside of the right of way, and discharge by piped connection to the downstream catch basin. 3. Add a spillway (or move the proposed spillway) to the rain garden in the north access curb line near Vine Hill Road. Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com Starbucks Coffee Store Submittal 1 KA 02925- 3501Admin\Do \LTR- PTH_BNielsen- 041917- Starbucks site plan review t.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen April 19, 2017 Page 2 4. Provide additional grade information for the proposed outlet of the rain garden. Where is the water overflowing to? 5. The rain garden detail does not include draintile. Area project work in this area is predominately clay soils that will not infiltrate runoff. Filtration basins are typical proposed unless soil boring information identifies sand in this area is sufficient for infiltration. 6. The driveway access proposed to Brom's Boulevard is approaching 10% grade. The approach needs to be reduced to 5% or less to reduce seasonal issues entering and exiting the site. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain 1. The proposed connection of the water service to the watermain is to be located further east to avoid excavation in the roadway. A trench box or shoring may be required during excavation. 2. The water service connection to the watermain is to be by wet -tap connection. 3. DIP watermain is to be poly- wrapped. 4. We recommend the sewer connection utilize the existing site service, but if televised and not usable, this service will need to be abandoned in place at the right of way line. A new sanitary sewer service connection is to be a strapped wye connection, not a cut -in wye. Site Lighting 1. The site photometric plan submitted indicates the site lighting is less than 0.4 foot - candles at the adjacent property lines. 2. The site photometric plan indicates the site lighting adjacent to Vine Hill Road is less than 1.0 foot - candles. Traffic 1. The proposed site traffic assumes 89% pass -by trips. It appears that traffic was redirected from Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road). Please provide additional documentation on how this traffic was redirected from TH 7 through the Vine Hill Road intersection. 2. Future traffic conditions, 10 or 20 year forecast, should be considered. Not just 2017. 3. LOS, Delay and Queue's should be reported for all intersections and driveways. Movement LOS and Delay's should also be discussed. 4. It does not seem reasonable that 104 outbound lefts in the AM peak hour would only have a 4 vehicle queue, especially with traffic backing up from Vine Hill Road? This should be confirmed. In the AM peak hour does the right turn volume into the site get delayed? 5. Would development of a right turn lane and /or a left turn lane on Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road) be beneficial to the overall operation of the roadway? 6. Provide discussion on the addition of a northbound lane at the TH 7 signal. 7. Staff has discussed that the potential for traffic queues of the drive through may require the addition of a eastbound right turn lane into the site. Additional requirements of this potential condition is recommended to be a requirement of the C.U.P. that the turn lane is to be added if this condition occurs. Starbucks Coffee Store Submittal 1 K902925- 3501Adm1n)Docs1LTR- PTH_Welsen- 041917- Starbucks site plan review 1.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen April 19, 2017 Page 3 We recommend the plans be revised to meet the requirements and recommendations provided herein prior to construction. We also recommend a Development Agreement is executed, and the financial securities are posted with the City. The developer can schedule a pre- construction meeting, including City, construction, developer and private utility representatives upon site plan approval. Please contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information from engineering staff. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, P.E. City Engineer (651) 286 -8453 phornbyP,wsben.q com Copy: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works Chuck Rickart, WSB Starbucks Coffee Store Submittal 1 K\02925- 350\Admin\ Dots\ LTR- ITH_131,lielsen- 041917Starbucks site plan review 1.docx CONSULTING ENGINEERING TRAFFIC FORWARD Technical Memorandum To: David Watson From: Vernon Swing Date: August 22, 2017 Re: Proposed Shorewood Starbucks Development - Traffic Summary A. Overview kECEIVED Watson Development, LLC ( "Watson ") has proposed to redevelop the office buildings located at 19245 and 19285 Delton Avenue, Shorewood, Minnesota ( "Property ") as a Starbucks coffee shop with a drive -thru window ( "Starbucks Development "). The land use as a coffee shop without a drive -thru window is a permitted use with the existing property zoning of C -1, and the City's Zoning Ordinance does not require a traffic study for a permitted use. However, Watson is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for a drive -thru window as part of the Starbucks Development. This request allowed the City to require a traffic study to determine if the adjoining roads can adequately accommodate additional traffic, if any, due to the proposed drive -thru window. It is important to differentiate between adjoining and non - adjoining roads because the City's Zoning Ordinance for Conditional Use Permits states "In making the determination ... whether a conditional use permit is allowed ... the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads" needs to be reviewed for traffic impacts. In other words, will the addition of a drive -thru window significantly impact traffic operations relative to those same operations without a drive -thru window? The word "adjoining" does not have a definition in the traffic engineering lexicon, nor is it defined in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the definition as written in the American Heritage Dictionary, "To be next to; be contiguous to" is used to identify the adjoining roads. Adjoining roads provide direct access to the site. The Property's adjoining roads are Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road ( "Development's Adjoining Roads ") as shown in Figure 1 (attached). Watson hired Spack Consulting to perform the traffic study, which was conducted the week of March 13tH The study showed that the project with a drive -thru window would not have a significant or noticeable effect on the traffic operations on the Development's Adjoining Roads, as discussed below. The City's traffic engineer (WSB), MnDOT's traffic engineer (email is attached), and a traffic engineer from an independent engineering firm HDR (memo is attached), all reviewed the study and agreed with the conclusion of no significant or noticeable impact on traffic conditions during the time period of 7:OOAM — B:OOAM on weekdays during the school year ( "AM Peak Hour "). B. Traffic Study The traffic study conducted by Spack Consulting was purposefully conducted to review a worst -case scenario. If the Development's Adjoining Roads and non - adjoining roads could handle traffic from the Starbucks Development in the unlikely scenario associated with the worst -case, then all lessor scenarios Watson Development, LLC ( "Watson ") has proposed to redevelop the office buildings located at 19245 and 19285 Delton Avenue, Shorewood, Minnesota ( "Property ") as a Starbucks coffee shop with a drive -thru window ( "Starbucks Development "). The land use as a coffee shop without a drive -thru window is a permitted use with the existing property zoning of C -1, and the City's Zoning Ordinance does not require a traffic study for a permitted use. However, Watson is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for a drive -thru window as part of the Starbucks Development. This request allowed the City to require a traffic study to determine if the adjoining roads can adequately accommodate additional traffic, if any, due to the proposed drive -thru window. It is important to differentiate between adjoining and non - adjoining roads because the City's Zoning Ordinance for Conditional Use Permits states "In making the determination ... whether a conditional use permit is allowed ... the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads" needs to be reviewed for traffic impacts. In other words, will the addition of a drive -thru window significantly impact traffic operations relative to those same operations without a drive -thru window? The word "adjoining" does not have a definition in the traffic engineering lexicon, nor is it defined in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the definition as written in the American Heritage Dictionary, "To be next to; be contiguous to" is used to identify the adjoining roads. Adjoining roads provide direct access to the site. The Property's adjoining roads are Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road ( "Development's Adjoining Roads ") as shown in Figure 1 (attached). Watson hired Spack Consulting to perform the traffic study, which was conducted the week of March 13tH The study showed that the project with a drive -thru window would not have a significant or noticeable effect on the traffic operations on the Development's Adjoining Roads, as discussed below. The City's traffic engineer (WSB), MnDOT's traffic engineer (email is attached), and a traffic engineer from an independent engineering firm HDR (memo is attached), all reviewed the study and agreed with the conclusion of no significant or noticeable impact on traffic conditions during the time period of 7:OOAM — B:OOAM on weekdays during the school year ( "AM Peak Hour "). B. Traffic Study The traffic study conducted by Spack Consulting was purposefully conducted to review a worst -case scenario. If the Development's Adjoining Roads and non - adjoining roads could handle traffic from the Starbucks Development in the unlikely scenario associated with the worst -case, then all lessor scenarios Shorewood, MN 2 of 4 Spack Consulting Proposed Starbucks Development Traffic Summary could also be handled. The worst -case designation and the conclusions were reviewed and agreed upon by WSB, MnDOT, and HDR. Additionally the expected likely distribution of the AM Peak Hour traffic on the Development's Adjoining Roads was analyzed and has been reviewed by WSB, MnDOT, and HDR and they concur that it is an appropriate expectation. Most drivers when entering and exiting a site will choose the path that takes less time and that is more easily traversable. For cars exiting the Starbucks Development, the site layout of the Starbucks Development ( "Site ") allows vehicles to exit onto Vine Hill Road (eastside of the site) and then travel north to the all -way stop condition at the T -type intersection of Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road. As is the case with all such intersections, the all -way stop assigns the right of way to the first vehicle to arrive and further establishes the order of travel through the intersection. This makes the vehicle merge onto Delton Avenue, heading east or west, easier than the vehicular use of the Site's Delton Avenue exit that requires a break in the queue of the existing eastbound traffic. For cars entering the Starbucks Development, the traffic on Delton Avenue heading eastbound towards Minnetonka High School will simply turn right at the Site's Delton Avenue entrance; and traffic on Delton Avenue heading westbound away from Minnetonka High School will likely turn left at the all -way stop at Vine Hill Road and head south to the Site's Vine Hill Road entrance and turn right into the Site. In other words, customers entering and exiting the Site will have the option to utilize Vine Hill Road rather than choosing to wait for a break in the queue of the eastbound traffic on Delton Avenue during the AM Peak Hour. Attached is the Site's layout. C. Starbucks Development's Impact on Traffic Additional Traffic Generated by Starbucks Development Starbucks is not a destination business; they are a convenience driven business. They position their stores to draw from existing traffic and existing traffic generators. Due to nearby Minnetonka High School, Delton Avenue eastbound and Vine Hill Road northbound already have a combined traffic count of nearly 900 cars ( Delton Avenue eastbound — 587 cars / Vine Hill Road northbound — 305 cars) during the AM Peak Hour. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation information gathered at coffee shops with a drive -thru window indicates that 89 percent of the cars going to coffee shops with a drive -thru window are already on the adjoining roadways passing by the coffee shops, thus they are referred to as "Pass -By." Eleven percent of the cars going to coffee shops with a drive -thru window are new to the adjoining roadways because of the coffee shops, thus they are referred to as "New Trips ". Table 1 summarizes the ITE information. Table 1 —Trip Generation for Coffee Shop; with Drive -Thru As shown in the Table 1 above, during the AM Peak Hour the Starbucks Development is projected to have 26 New Trips and 208 Pass -By for a total of 234 trips. Each car will make two trips, one entering and one exiting, so it is expected that the Starbucks Development will have 117 cars (234 divided by 2) to the Site Shorewood, MN 3 of 4 Spack Consulting Proposed Starbucks Development Traffic Summary during the AM Peak Hour of which 13 (26 divided by 2) of them will be new to the Development's Adjoining Roads. Conclusion: During the AM Peak Hour, the Starbucks Development will generate only 13 new cars to an existing condition that has nearly 900 cars and therefore the Starbucks Development will not have a noticeable impact on traffic. Starbucks Development's Effect on Traffic The traffic operations during AM Pear Hour have been analyzed in terms of Level of Service (LOS) and driver delay. Figure 2 (attached) summarizes the results of the analysis. It is noted the delay associated with an intersection's level of service ( "LOS ") represents the total intersection delay calculated by averaging the delay experienced by the drivers on each roadway approach to the intersection. The LOS for intersection A (Vine Hill Road access /exit point) is an A and remains an A with the Starbucks Development in place. For intersection C (Delton Avenue access /exit point) the LOS is a B and remains a B with the Starbucks Development in place. Intersection B (the 3 -way stop sign at Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue), which is not a Development's Adjoining Road, currently has a LOS F and remains a LOS F with the Starbucks Development. The overall delay time for intersection B actually decreases from 54.73 seconds to 53.03 seconds with the Starbucks Development because some of the eastbound traffic on Delton Avenue that enters the Site will exit onto Vine Hill Road rather than exiting back onto Delton Avenue. For intersection B, "VHR" is the delay time for Vine Hill Road northbound traffic at this intersection. The VHR is currently 13.66 seconds and with the Starbucks Development in place it is 15.55 seconds. This 2 second increase is an amount that is not noticeable to a driver. Conclusion: The proposed Starbucks Development will not have an overall noticeable effect upon traffic into and from the Site or on the Development's Adjoining Roads. Also, the Starbucks Development impact on the non - adjoining intersection of Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue will not be noticeable to a driver. D. Impact of Starbucks Development Compared to Alternative Development Alternative Development The Starbucks Development will be nearly 2,400 square feet in size. Watson's alternative redevelopment plan for this site is a 4,000 square foot multi- tenant retail development that will include a 2,000 square foot coffee shop that does not have a drive -thru window and a complimentary 2,000 square foot restaurant use ( "Alternative Development "). The Alternative Development meets all of the City's setback requirements and the use is a permitted use and does not require a conditional use permit. Additional Traffic Generated by Alternative Development Table 2 summarizes and compares the trip generation potential of the Starbucks Development versus the Alternative Development use which is a permitted use under the City's Zoning Ordinance. Shorewood, MN 4 of 4 Spack Consulting Proposed Starbucks Development Traffic Summary Table 2 — Comparison of Starbucks Development and Alternative Development As shown in Table 2, during the AM Peak Hour the Alternative Development will generate 33 more trips (18 New Trips and 15 Pass -By), which equals 16.5 more cars (33 divided by 2), than the Starbucks Development. As it relates to New Trips to the Development's Adjoining Roads during the AM Peak Hour, the Alterative Development adds 44 New Trips which equals 22 new cars (44 divided by 2) and the Starbucks Development adds 26 New Trips which equals 13 new cars. In other words, during the AM Peak Hour the Alternative Development will result in 9 more new cars (22 compared to 13) when compared to the Starbucks Development. Alternative Development — Effects on Traffic Figure 3 (attached) shows a comparison of the LOS and delay during the AM Peak Hour for both development options. The Alternative Development will also have a negligible impact on the Development's Adjoining Roads, although there will be slightly longer delays at all intersections when compared to the Starbucks Development. For example, intersection B's (Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue) delay time with the Starbucks Development is 53.03 seconds and with the Alternative Development it is 55.50 seconds. Conclusion: As shown in Table 2 and Figure 3, the smaller scale Starbucks Development that requires a conditional use permit because of the drive -thru window will result in less traffic and shorter delays, on the Development's Adjoining Roads and the non - adjoining intersection of Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue, than the larger scale Alternative Development that is a permitted use and does not require a conditional use permit. ' ! l LOS A - 0000 ACCESS - NIA LOS B - 14.6 AC= - 254 LOS F - 54.73 VBR - 13.66 LOS F - 5203 VITZ - 15.55 LOS A - aoo ACCESS - NIA LOS A -3.02 ACCESS - 14.00 OA VINE RML ROAD ACCESS OB VINE RML ROAD 0 & DELTON AVENUE NOM- VRR - VINE RML ROAD DELAY DELTON AVENUE ACCESS ACCESS - DEVELOPMENT ACCESS DELAYS S 'ac'k,, • :PA 1001 0 SCENARIO LEVEL OF SERVICE - DELAY NEC/MV I YD ON (24 Mn: LOS X- )= ir I 1 11 lial roMMYN—COWN." um 11 9 119 LOS A - 0000 ACCESS - NIA LOS B - 14.6 AC= - 254 LOS B - 14,9 ACCESS _.277.3 LOS F - 54.73 VBR - 1366 LOS F - 53.03 = - 15.55 LOS F - 5550 vim - 1599 LOS A- aoo ACCESS - NIA LOS A -3.02 ACCESS - 14.00 LOS A -3.36 ACCM - 14.52 OA VINE I-VLL ROAD ACCESS OB OC VINE BILL ROAD 0 & BELTON AVENUE N! =,RZLL ROAD DELAY nn:O��DCC ACCESS DHTON AVENUE ACCESS ACCESS DELAYS 71 ack 11001 0 SCENARIO LEVEL, OF SERVICE - DELAY (BEGIN FD PRO TOSM CUP (24 KS19: LOS X - X= FIGURE 3 " PEAK BVFFM=ON OPERATION COMPARISON CCONSORTIUTMURAL 901 NOMT'Ws al.5ul10 220 61249 -0 Mlnnoopolla,MN 66e01 Fw 8126029960 ]D9 O d•O'R63�l�� //� \ \ \ \\ R' /39 I a \� Y•�� F I� y O 30' BLDG ! O • (f SETBACK ,Qa r�� ,✓ ao�e P , rS /j' {�� /+� •�• O Mark RovWonllssuo Dafo Y m� e1 T L• J1 h I q TRASH I a / f ENCLOSURE PATIO � w _ � •r NBq JO %O%Y /4954 /se'� � �•� _ IS• "' RETAINING •i - -- WALL ---- -_• i° DEVELOPMENT HWY 7 & VINEHILL p — SITE 0.83 ACRES t e RETAIL 2,325 SF t I I SHOREWOOD, MN PARKING 27 SPACES 195.95 N 9o%o1V SITE PLAN SCALE: AS NOTED 51TE PLAN 1• _ 19' -0• MgRN Al -H Architectural Consortium. L.L.C. 2016 From: Otto, Patricia (DOT) [mailto:pat.otto @state.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:38 PM To: Lutaya, Andrew (DOT) <andrew.lutaya @state.mn.us >; Schwartz, Kevin (DOT) <kevin.schwartz @state.mn.us >; Erickson, Chad (DOT) <chad.erickson @state.mn.us> Subject: RE: Hwy 7 & Vinehill Andrew Hi, I spoke with Spack Consulting project engineers regarding the situation being worse at TH 7 and Vine Hill with the proposed Star Buck. They explained how they used diverted trips instead of pass -by trips for their modeling, to be more conservative. They wanted to add pressure to the TH 7 and Vine Hill intersection to see how bad it would get. Realistically they felt the traffic pattern would include more pass -by trips than diverted trips, with Minnetonka H.S. upperclassman stopping at Star Bucks on the way to school and the underclassman's parents stopping after they drop their kids off. This traffic pattern makes sense to us at MnDot. With this more realistic traffic pattern, we are back to the added 13 AM peak hour trips which should not have` noticeable impact on the existing roadway congestion.` The new NB right turn lane at TH 7 and Vine Hill, should add some minor relief to the intersection by providing added storage. This will allow the NB traffic to sort out and be prepared to make the best use of their given green time. As stated in past correspondence the cross street green time has been fine - tuned and will stay the same. There is no extra time to give to the cross street. The 3 -way stop at Delton and Vine Hill (west) continues to cause backups through the TH 7 Vine Hill Road signal during the AM peak. Spack Consulting provided video which shows the queue impacting Vine Hill at TH 7 for about 40 minutes during the morning school peak (7:20 -8:00 AM). Kevin Schwartz ran into Will Manchester of Minnetonka recently and found out that he was not aware of the proposed Star Bucks since it is a Shorewood project. Mark said that the 3 -way stop was installed about 10 years ago by the city of Minnetonka to help the north bound traffic. There may be possible mitigations that can be done to this intersection, police assisted traffic control during AM peak, added EB through lane to name a few. Perhaps Star Bucks and it's patrons could become a catalyst working with the city and Minnetonka High School to help solve the backup problem during the morning rush. I hope this helps answer your questions. Pat Otto MnDot Metro Traffic Engineering 1500 West County kodd B2 Roseville, Mr). 55113 651.234.7837 Pat.otto@state.mn.us DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MEREM AUG 2 2 20117 'CITY OF �: >HCURE'JVoo L) FN Watsonson Vinehill, LLC I Shorewood Starbucks TIS Review Peer Review Memo Memo Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 Project: Shorewood Starbucks TIS Review To: David Watson, Watson Vinehill, LLC From: Katherine Schmidt, P.E. — Traffic Engineer Subject: Peer Review of Shorewood Starbucks Traffic Impact Study The purpose of this memo is to provide a third party review of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the proposed Starbucks development, dated March, 27th, 2017 and prepared by Spack Consulting (termed "Starbucks TIS" for this memo). In addition to the Starbucks TIS, the City's comments and Spack Consulting's responses from April 27th, 2017 were reviewed. HDR offers the following assessment of the Starbucks TIS analysis: • The analysis followed industry current traffic impact study procedures. • The eastbound queuing issues along Delton Ave during the AM school peak period were highlighted and it was noted that this only occurs for about a 30- minute period. These back -ups occur during existing conditions and are not related to the proposed Starbucks development. • The trip generation values for the drive -thru coffee shop are from a well document land use with over 40 surveyed sites across the country. • The estimated trip generation values (number of vehicles entering /exiting the site) used in the analysis could be conservative (higher than what might actually occur) as many vehicles visiting the site could contain more than one customer traveling together (considering the nearby location of Minnetonka High School and student and parent travel). The analysis provides a worst case scenario. • The distribution of pass -by and diverted traffic is conservative as trips used the same route to access the site both in and out. In reality these trips will use a combination of TH 7, Delton Ave, TH 101 and the high school. For example all the estimate 105 AM trips use the Delton Ave Access to enter and exit the site, providing a worst case analysis at this access point. Delton Ave has higher existing traffic volumes than Vine Hill Rd, so analyzing the new trips added to the Delton Ave access provides the worst case analysis. • The explanation of declining traffic volumes on TH 7 and the full residential development of the area justifies the reasoning for not looking at future design years. hdrinc.com 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55416 -3636 (763) 591 -5400 FN Watsonson Vinehill, LLC I Shorewood Starbucks TIS Review Peer Review Memo Overall the TIS provides a conservative worst case analysis for the proposed development and the analysis accurately indicates that the addition of site - generated traffic does not deteriorate any existing conditions. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a peer review of the Starbucks TIS. Feel free to contact me with any comments or questions. Sincerely, xtm& A. szh Katherine A. Schmidt hdrinc.com 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55416 -3636 (763) 591 -5400 From: Otto, Patricia (DOT) [mailto:pat.otto @state.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:38 PM To: Lutaya, Andrew (DOT) <andrew.lutaya @state.mn.us >; Schwartz, Kevin (DOT) <kevin.schwartz @state.mn.us >; Erickson, Chad (DOT) <chad.erickson @state.mn.us> Subject: RE: Hwy 7 & Vinehill Andrew Hi, I spoke with Spack Consulting project engineers regarding the situation being worse at TH 7 and Vine Hill with the proposed Star Buck. They explained how they used diverted trips instead of pass -by trips for their modeling, to be more conservative. They wanted to add pressure to the TH 7 and Vine Hill intersection to see how bad it would get. Realistically they felt the traffic pattern would include more pass -by trips than diverted trips, with Minnetonka H.S. upperclassman stopping at Star Bucks on the way to school and the underclassman's parents stopping after they drop their kids off. This traffic pattern makes sense to us at MnDot. With this more realistic traffic pattern, we are back to the added 13 AM peak hour trips which should not have noticeable impact on the existing roadway congestion.! The new NB right turn lane at TH 7 and Vine Hill, should add some minor relief to the intersection by providing added storage. This will allow the NB traffic to sort out and be prepared to make the best use of their given green time. As stated in past correspondence the cross street green time has been fine - tuned and will stay the same. There is no extra time to give to the cross street. The 3 -way stop at Delton and Vine Hill (west) continues to cause backups through the TH 7 Vine Hill Road signal during the AM peak. Spack Consulting provided video which shows the queue impacting Vine Hill at TH 7 for about 40 minutes during the morning school peak (7:20 -8:00 AM). Kevin Schwartz ran into Will Manchester of Minnetonka recently and found out that he was not aware of the proposed Star Bucks since it is a Shorewood project. Mark said that the 3 -way stop was installed about 10 years ago by the city of Minnetonka to help the north bound traffic. There may be possible mitigations that can be done to this intersection, police assisted traffic control during AM peak, added EB through lane to name a few. Perhaps Star Bucks and it's patrons could become a catalyst working with the city and Minnetonka High School to help solve the backup problem during the morning rush. I hope this helps answer your questions. Pat Otto MnDot Metro Traffic Engineering 1500 West County Road B2 R05eVi11e, Mn. 55113 651.234.7837 Pat.otto @state.mn.us DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION Spck TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY To: David Watson From: Vern Swing, P.E. Date: August 8, 2017 Re: Shorewood Starbucks TIS Per your request, Spack Consulting has reviewed the second group of comments dated July 11, 2017 in response to Spack Consulting's answers to the comments dated April 22, 2017 and suggestions from the City of Shorewood regarding the information contained in the traffic impact study conducted for the proposed Starbucks drive -thru coffee shop in Shoreview, MN. The City's recent comments are listed below in red and our responses follow in blue. 1. The proposed site traffic assumes 89% pass -by trips. It appears that traffic was redirected from Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road). Please provide additional documentation on how this traffic was redirected from TH 7 through the Vine Hill Road intersection. As discussed with Mr. Rickert, Speck Consulting took a very conservative approach when analyzing the site to ensure the site will be able to handle the worst case by assuming traffic passing the area on TH 7 will divert to Starbucks then return to their path on TH 7. This resulted in a large number of left turns from the site to the frontage road. The analysis contained in the study verified the site will operate well even with this unlikely distribution of traffic. The attached figure represents the traffic routing contained in the report. (Note: In reality the vast majority of traffic coming to Starbucks will be destined to Minnetonka High School and will stop on the way, resulting right turns toward the school and short queues on site.) Comment: It is agreed that the High School Traffic would be a primary source for the development. How will this impact the delay's and queues, with more traffic in the AM peak trying to turn right from the site into a queue already past the site driveway? As discussed we have redistributed the site generated traffic to reflect the more realistic distribution of traffic (See Figure 1) rather than the worst case condition previously report (See Figure 2). The traffic operational analysis with the realistic distribution indicate there is virtually no change in delay and Level of Service at the studied intersections. (See Figure 3 for the realistic distribution results and Figure 4 for the previous results.) As further discussed, the site driveways under the realistic scenario will operate better as the site traffic returns to the path toward its destination (Minnetonka High School) favoring Vine Hill Road versus Delton. Spack Consulting 2 of 4 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis 2. Future traffic conditions, 10 or 20 year forecast, should be considered. Not just 2017. Spack Consulting considered the necessity to study future conditions by examining the traffic growth over the last 20 years and considering the development opportunities in the area surrounding the site. There is currently a negative growth rate along TH 7 according to MnDOT traffic counts. With this in mind the 10 and 20 year forecast should be stable or lower than the existing volumes. Also, the properties along the frontage road are essentially developed with the big traffic generator, Minnetonka High School, static in terms of growth opportunities. For this reason, the 10 and 20 year forecast are not needed. Comments There will anticipated growth west on TH 7 at CR 11 /rings Point Road with a 1200 unit subdivision. This assumption should be reconsidered using the Hennepin County State Aid growth rate. Acknowledged. However, the 26 additional trips to and from the TH 7 Intersection is negligible and unquantifiable in terms of effect on existing and future conditions when compared to the existing approximately 4,000 trips or the addition of nearly 1,000 new trips (5,000 total) from the new subdivision. 3. LOS, Delay and Queue's should be reported for all intersections and driveways. Movement LOS and Delay's should also be discussed. Duly noted, the attached table contains the requested information. Due to the inflated volumes during the school peak the LOS, delays, and queues are excessive for 15 -30 minutes of the day. When roadways are over capacity traffic engineering models break down and do not achieve an accurate representation of what is happening in the field. The qualitative summary was able to put the existing conditions and proposed build conditions in perspective and show the impact of the proposed Starbucks in the development area. Comment: How was it determined that the queues would be "excessive 15-30 minutes per day"? The delay's turning into and out of the site should be further discussed. The queues along Delton have been filmed on several occasions over the spring. In the realistic scenario discussed in number 1, the delay of vehicles turning into the site in an eastbound direction will be governed by the queue that develops at the adjacent intersection of Delton and Vine Hill Road. Most of these vehicles will already be waiting in the queue. As cars stack to get through the all way stop, traffic destined to Starbucks may need to wait in line prior to the driveway. However, as these vehicles are existing, the fact that they are turning off to go to Starbucks will lessen some of the existing eastbound demand. Westbound Delton traffic that is destined to Starbucks during the AM school peak hour will naturally turn onto Vine Hill Road and utilize the Vine Hill Driveway. Signs could be installed to suggest westbound Delton Avenue Starbucks' traffic use the Vine Hill Road access. Traffic coming out of the site in the realistic scenario will vastly favor exiting onto Vine Hill Road rather than Delton. Review of the traffic operations indicates that the site approach to the Vine Hill Access will operate at LOS B, with 14.0 seconds of delay. Spack Consulting 3 of 4 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis 4. It does not seem reasonable that 104 outbound lefts in the AM peak hour would only have a 4 vehicle queue, especially with traffic backing up from Vine Hill Road? This should be confirmed. In the AM peak hour does the right turn volume into the site get delayed? The slow moving traffic along Delton Ave, as well as the all way stop at Delton/Vine Hill Road provides gaps in traffic for cars to pull out. Also, with two proposed access the 104 vehicles can be spread out allowing vehicles to exit onto Delton Ave or Vine Hill Ave helping to reduce queueing. Comment: How would vehicles be directed to the second access? How will this impact the queues on Vine Hill? What is the impact if vehicles do not let drivers enter the roadway? The site plan is currently laid out to encourage traffic to head east to Vine Hill Road. Directional exit signs could be added to encourage drivers that use the drive -thru to exit to the east. The realistic distribution of traffic has been assessed at Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue and shows approximately a one car addition to the queue on Vine Hill and a two second increase in delay from 13.66 seconds to 15.55 seconds. 5. Would development of a right turn lane and /or a left turn lane on Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road) be beneficial to the overall operation of the roadway? A right and left turn lane are not needed and would not result in a perceptible improvement to the existing operations due to the low speed of vehicles passing the proposed site accesses. The presence of the all way stop at Delton and Vine Hill further reduces speed in the area. Comment: If more traffic is coming from the High School, would a westbound by -pass lane or turn lane be beneficial in limiting the queues back to Vine Hill Road? As mentioned in number 3, westbound Delton Avenue High School traffic that is destined to Starbucks will likely turn left onto Vine Hill Road and utilize the Vine Hill site access to avoid creating congestion on Delton. Directional signage could be provided to encourage this maneuver. 6. Provide discussion on the addition of a northbound lane at the TH 7 signal. MnDOT currently has plans to let an intersection improvement project in the fall of 2017 for the TH 7 intersection. Separating the right turn traffic into a dedicated right turn lane will help reduce queueing. No new comments 7. Staff has discussed that the potential for traffic queues of the drive through may require the addition of an eastbound right turn lane into the site. Additional requirements of this potential condition are recommended to be a requirement of the C.U.P. that the turn lane is to be added if this condition occurs. Spack Consulting 4 of 4 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis While including dedicated right turn lanes for site access can be beneficial in certain situations it will not provide the desired outcome in this case. The discussed queuing condition from the drive -thru is very unlikely based on studies conducted from locally collected data, which suggests the average queue for a coffee shop drive -thru lane during peak times is 11 cars and the 85t" percentile design queue is 13 cars, see table below. The site plan includes queuing capacity for 13 vehicles in the dedicated drive - thru lane and there is additional space on site for one or two extra cars to stack. Further, in the very unlikely event that conditions do back up, traffic destined to the site in the suggested right turn lane would serve to limit the ability of those customers that are parking on site and using walk in service, rather than using the drive -thru to gain access. Lastly, there is insufficient space on site to provide adequate turning radii for vehicles to enter the site and turn directly into the drive -thru lane. Coffee Shops Data collection was done at six coffee shops with drive - through services in November 2010, August 2011 and February 2012. Fourteen days of data were collected. The coffee shops were located in the cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Roseville and St. Louis Park, MN. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Twelve days of data from the Kansas City, Kansas area is also included. Table 3.3 — Drive - Through Coffee Shop Maximum Queue Statistics With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 13 vehicles, the data suggests that coffee shops with drive - through lanes should be able to accommodate at least 260 feet of vehicle stacking during morning hours. Comment: How is the queuing calculated, from the window or menu board? Is the proposed Shorewood site comparable the other sites surveyed? The surveys are not 5 to 7 years old. Coffee shop patronage has been going up in that time. How accurate do You think these estimates are? I know of a Starbucks in Chanhassen that has had significantly more queuing. Queuing is calculated from the window. The Shorewood site is similar to most suburban neighborhood style stores with queuing capacity for 13 vehicles. It is true coffee consumption has been going up in the last 5 -7 years, but it is also true there have been more coffee stores built in that time to address the increase in demand. The Chanhassen store has less on -site queuing storage, enough for only 10 vehicles right to the street. Similarly, Eden Prairie, Edina, St. Louis Park and Roseville provide slightly less queuing capacity than the averages calculated in older studies. Figures 1 -4 attached Minnesota Data Minnesota + Kansas Data Number of Data Points 14 26 Average Maximum Queue (Vehicles) 11.00 10.23 Standard Deviation (Vehicles) 2.25 2.76 Coefficient of Variation 20% 27% Range (Vehicles) 7 to 16 3 to 16 85th Percentile (Vehicles) 13.50 13.00 33rd Percentile (Vehicles) 10.00 9.91 With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 13 vehicles, the data suggests that coffee shops with drive - through lanes should be able to accommodate at least 260 feet of vehicle stacking during morning hours. Comment: How is the queuing calculated, from the window or menu board? Is the proposed Shorewood site comparable the other sites surveyed? The surveys are not 5 to 7 years old. Coffee shop patronage has been going up in that time. How accurate do You think these estimates are? I know of a Starbucks in Chanhassen that has had significantly more queuing. Queuing is calculated from the window. The Shorewood site is similar to most suburban neighborhood style stores with queuing capacity for 13 vehicles. It is true coffee consumption has been going up in the last 5 -7 years, but it is also true there have been more coffee stores built in that time to address the increase in demand. The Chanhassen store has less on -site queuing storage, enough for only 10 vehicles right to the street. Similarly, Eden Prairie, Edina, St. Louis Park and Roseville provide slightly less queuing capacity than the averages calculated in older studies. Figures 1 -4 attached V�l- & 0) 9 X21 �a `Spack • ., j IN AO) 96 (37) —� 1 (0) —� LEGEND ' 11 I ' 1: • r � 2 �Z� ack,• � 1 (o) 1 �o� �o� 1 (oi 14 � N c 1 N N 11 (4) 1 (0) —� o. LEGEND S i rid •� .W LOS D - 4110 ra N OA VINE HILL ROAD ACCESS OB VINE HILL ROAD (8) & DELTON AVENUE OC DELTON AVENUE ACCESS OD DELTION AVENUE & VINE HILL ROAD M OE TRUNK HIGHWAY 7 & VINE HILL ROAD a • 00.00 ACCESS /A ACCESS - 14.95 LOS F -54.73 VHR - 13.66 LOS F - 53.03 - 15.55 �s IZ 1 I I ACCESS - NIA LOS A f 14.00 4 RIO �p k 1i A 4,', NOTES VHR - VINE HILL ROAD DELAY ACCESS - DEVELOPMENT ACCESS DELAYS I" `I m SCENARIO LEVEL OF SERVICE - DELAY (SEC/VEM �►,ItiYMI �1�1�4_t • Ins .�. A. Y Db=UFION (24 X- LOS D - 410 qsm�,: FA VffilE HILL ROAD ACCESS OB VINE HILL ROAD (R) & DELJON AVENUE OC BELTON AVENUE ACCESS OD DHTON AVENUE & VINE BILL ROAD M OE TRUNK HIGHWAY 7 & VINE HILL ROAD St) a c k,a • LOS A - 0000 ACCESS - NIA LOS A - 419 ACCESS - 4280 LOS A -5224 ACCM - 50.07 LOS E - ff.04 maim 093manim- up] LOS F - 54.73 VBR - 1366 LOS F -56.27 VHR - 13.77 LOS F - 57A VBR - B.81 A LOS A- aoo ACCESS - NIA LOS A - a45 ACCESS - IL44 LOS A - 062 ACCESS - B.60 NOTES- VRR V7NE HZLL ROAD DELAY A*4ESS DiYl�l FOOJ SCENARIO LEVEL OF SERVICE - DELAY W/VM ALTERMM S (40 K50 LOS X - )= 11,0101110:4111, if , a I Mi. ma, Ck 7FiE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Technical Memorandum To: David Watson From: Vern Swing, P.E. Jonah Finkelstein, E.I.T. Date: April 27, 2017 Re: Shorewood Starbucks TIS Per your request, Spack Consulting has reviewed the.comments and suggestions from the City of Shorewood regarding the information contained in the traffic impact study conducted for the proposed Starbucks drive -thru coffee shop in Shoreview, MN. The City's comment are listed below in bold and our responses follow in italics. 1. The proposed site traffic assumes 89% pass -by trips. It appears that traffic was redirected from Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road). Please provide additional documentation on how this traffic was redirected from TH 7 through the Vine Hill Road intersection. As discussed with Mr. Rickart, Spack Consulting took a very conservative approach when analyzing the site to ensure the site will be able to handle the worst case by assuming traffic passing the area on TH 7 will divert to Starbucks then return to their path on TH 7. This resulted in a large number of left turns from the site to the frontage road. The analysis contained in the study verified the site will operate well even with this unlikely distribution of traffic. The attached figure represents the traffic routing contained in the report. (Note: In reality the vast majority of traffic coming to Starbucks will be destined to Minnetonka High School and will stop on the way, resulting right turns toward the school and short queues on site.) 2. Future traffic conditions, 10 or 20 year forecast, should be considered. Not just 2017. Spack Consulting considered the necessity to study future conditions by examining the traffic growth over the last 20 years and considering the development opportunities in the area surrounding the site. There is currently a negative growth rate along TH 7 according to MnDOT traffic counts. With this in mind the 10 and 20 year forecast should be stable or lower than the existing volumes. Also, the properties along the frontage road are essentially developed with the big traffic generator, Minnetonka High School, static in terms of growth opportunities. For this reason, the 10 and 20 year forecast are not needed. 3. LOS, Delay and Queue's should be reported for all intersections and driveways. Movement LOS and Delay's should also be discussed. Duly noted, the attached table contains the-requested information. Due to the inflated volumes during the school peak the LOS, delays, and queues are excessive for 15 -30 Spack Consulting 2 of 3 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis minutes of the day. When roadways are over capacity traffic engineering models break down and do not achieve an accurate representation of what is happening in the field. The qualitative summary was able to put the existing conditions and proposed build conditions in perspective and show the impact of the proposed Starbucks in the development area. 4. It does not seem reasonable that 104 outbound lefts in the AM peak hour would only have a 4 vehicle queue, especially with traffic backing up from Vine Hill Road? This should be confirmed. In the AM peak hour does the right turn volume into the site get delayed? The slow moving traffic along Delton Ave, as well as the all way stop at Delton/Vine Hill Road provides gaps in traffic for cars to pull out. Also, with two proposed access the 104 vehicles can be spread out allowing vehicles to exit onto Delton Ave or Vine Hill Ave helping to reduce queueing. 5. Would development of a right turn lane and /or a left turn lane on Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road) be beneficial to the overall operation of the roadway? A right and left turn lane are not needed and would not result in a perceptible improvement to the existing operations due to the low speed of vehicles passing the proposed site accesses. The presence of the all way stop at Delton and Vine Hill further reduces speed in the area. 6. Provide discussion on the addition of a northbound lane at the TH 7 signal. MnDOT currently has plans to let an intersection improvement project in the fall of 2017 for the TH 7 intersection. Separating the right turn traffic into a dedicated right turn lane will help reduce queueing. 7. Staff has discussed that the potential for traffic queues of the drive through may require the addition of an eastbound right turn lane into the site. Additional requirements of this potential condition are recommended to be a requirement of the C.U.P. that the turn lane is to be added if this condition occurs. While including dedicated right turn lanes for site access can be beneficial in certain situations it will not provide the desired outcome in this case. The discussed queuing condition from the drive -thru is very unlikely based on studies conducted from locally collected data, which suggests the average queue for a coffee shop drive -thru lane during peak times is 11 cars and the 85th percentile design queue is 13 cars, see table below. The site plan includes queuing capacity for 13 vehicles in the dedicated drive - thru lane and there is additional space on site for one or two extra cars to stack. Further, in the very unlikely event that conditions do back up, traffic destined to the site in the suggested right turn lane would serve to limit the ability of those customers that are parking on site and using walk in service, rather than using the drive -thru to gain access. Lastly, there is insufficient space on site to,provide adequate turning radii for vehicles to enter the site and turn directly into the drive -thru lane. Coffee Shops Data collection was done at six coffee shops with drive - through services in November 2010, August 2011 and February 2012. Fourteen days of data were collected. The coffee shops were located in the cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Spack Consulting 3 of 3 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis Roseville and St. Louis Park, MN. Vehicles being served were counted as being in the queue. Twelve days of data from the Kansas City, Kansas area is also included. Table 3.3 — Drive- Through Coffee Shop Maximum Queue Statistics With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 13 vehicles, the data suggests that coffee shops with drive - through lanes should be able to accommodate at least 260 feet of vehicle stacking during morning hours. Attachements 1. AM Pass -by Distribution 2. PM Pass -by Distribution 3. LOS, Delay, and Queuing Tables Minnesota Data Minnesota + Kansas Data Number of Data Points 14 26 Average Maximum Queue (Vehicles) 11.00 10.23 Standard Deviation (Vehicles) 2.25 2.76 Coefficient of Variation 20% 27! Range (Vehicles) 7 to 16 3 to 16 85th Percentile (Vehicles) 13.50 13.00 33rd Percentile (Vehicles) 10.00 9.91 With an 85th percentile maximum queue of 13 vehicles, the data suggests that coffee shops with drive - through lanes should be able to accommodate at least 260 feet of vehicle stacking during morning hours. Attachements 1. AM Pass -by Distribution 2. PM Pass -by Distribution 3. LOS, Delay, and Queuing Tables Generated with " Version 5.00 -00 CONSULTING Traffic Volume - AM Pass -By o Jim 10 62 -� v 6`Z 4� 5 Nr Cn r� f A- t 0 5 Generated with moo= am Version 5.00 -00 CONSULTING Traffic Volume - PM Pass -By 2 W Table 2 — 2018 Build Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS)' The number is the intersection delay. The first letter is the Level of Service for the intersection. The second letter (in parentheses) is the Level of Service for the worst operating movement. Table 3 —Peak Hour 95th Percentile Queues L T R L T R L T R L T R TH 7 & Vine Hill Road NB SIB 12 15 NA 13 17 NA 14 31 NA 16 20 NA 18 11 7 10 9 9 17 12 7 10 10 9 EB 12 17 1 14 2 1 12 14 1 14 2 1 WB 4 3 1 4 3 1 5 3 1 11 7 1 Vine Hill Road & Delton Avenue (W) - SIB NA 2 NA NA 1 NA NA 2 NA NA 1 NA - EB 2 10 NA 1 1 NA 4 15 NA 2 1 NA - WB NA 1 2 NA 1 1 NA 2 2 NA 2 2 Vine Hill Road & Delton Avenue(E) - NB 1 NA 3 1 NA 1 1 NA 3 1 NA 1 - EB NA 22 NA NA 2 NA NA 22 NA NA 2 NA - WB NA 3 NA NA 2 NA NA 3 NA NA 2 NA Delton Avenue & Site Access - NB NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 NA 4 1 NA 1 - EB NA 0 NA NA 0 NA - WB NA 3 NA NA 2 NA Vine Hill Road & Site Access - NB NA 1 NA NA 1 NA - SIB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0 NA NA 0 NA - EB NA 1 NA NA 1 NA The queue number is the queue length in number of vehicles. Executive Summary Background: A 2,325 square foot Starbucks Coffee with a drive through is proposed for development on the existing lot south of Delton Road, west of the southern leg of Vine Hill Road next to Tino's Cafe in Shorewood, Minnesota. The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development on the study intersections. Results: The principal findings of this traffic study are: • The proposed expansion is expected to generate approximately 210 new trips during an average weekday (105 entering and 105 exiting), approximately 26 new trips during the a.m. peak hour (13 entering and 13 exiting) and approximately 10 new trips during the p.m. peak hour (5 entering and 5 exiting). • The proposed Coffee shop land use is expected to produce roughly half the AM trips and one -fifth of the PM trips when compared to the alternative development of the coffee shop and fast food combination. • The existing study intersections operate with acceptable averaged delays at TH 7 /Vine Hill Road, however, during the AM School Peak period queues at all three study intersection begin to spill out of their dedicated storage lanes, and during the PM School peak period excessive queueing, to a lesser degree than the AM School peak, is also experienced. These conditions last roughly 30 minutes during the AM peak and 20 minutes during the PM peak. The study intersections are forecast to operate with acceptable delays and queuing during all other times of the day. • The study intersections are expected to operate with similar queuing and delays with the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop with only 26 new AM trips and 10 new PM trips generated • Queueing at both site accesses remains below five vehicles during both peak periods. • With an Average Maximum Drive -thru Queue of eleven vehicles and an 85th percentile queue of thirteen and a half vehicles. The proposed site plan's drive through lane storage is sufficient based on locally collected drive -thru lane data. Recommendations: The following items are suggested based on the analyses contained in this study: • The addition of a northbound right turn lane at TH 7/Vine Hill Road is suggested to help reduce the existing queueing that occurs during the 30 minute AM School peak. This lane would help decrease the overall queue length and increase the capacity of the approach. • Review and update signal timing at the TH 7/Vine Hill road intersection, and any other intersection that is operating in coordination with the signal, to ensure the signal timing is appropriate for the current traffic flow patterns. This study is based upon a concept plan from January 20, 2017. Assuming the general characteristics of the proposed development remain approximately the same as documented, minor changes in the final design are not expected to alter the results or recommendations of this study. Traffic Impact Study i o ` CONSULTING Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota I. Introduction ............................................................ ..............................1 2. Existing Conditions ............................................:... .............................:2 3. Forecasted Traffic .................................................. ..............................3 4. Analyses ................................................................. ..............................6 5. Conclusions and Recommendations ................... .............................13 6. Appendix ................................................................ .............................14 LIST OF TABLES & CHARTS Table 1 — Study Corridor Characteristics .................. ............................... 2 Table 2 — New Trip Generation ............................ ........... 3 ........................... Table 3 — Alternative New Trip Generation ................ ............................... 4 Chart 1 — A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal- Controlled Intersections........ 7 Chart 2 — P.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal- Controlled Intersections........ 7 Chart 3 — A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side - Street Stop Controlled Intersections........................................................... ............................... 9 Chart 4 — P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side - Street Stop Controlled Intersections........................................................... ............................... 9 Traffic Impact Study Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota ° ` CONSULTING 1. Introduction a. ' Proposed Development A Starbucks Coffee Shop is proposed for development on the lot located south of Delton Road, west of the southern leg of Vine Hill Road and directly west of Tino's Cafe in Shorewood, Minnesota. The development will include a 2,325 Square Foot coffee shop with drive -thru window and a total of 27 parking stalls. The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development on the study intersections. For the purposes of this study, the development is expected to be fully built and occupied by the 2017 forecast year. b. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to: i. Examine the existing operations of the surrounding study intersections. ii. Forecast the amount of traffic expected to be generated by the proposed development. iii. Determine the traffic impacts associated with the build out of the proposed development. The traffic impacts are studied on the roads and intersections where significant impact is anticipated and improvements are recommended where mitigation is needed. For those not familiar with the general concepts and terms associated with traffic engineering, The Language of Traffic Engineering guide is included in the Appendix. c. Study Objectives The objectives of this study are: i. Document how the study intersections and roadways currently operate. ii. Forecast the amount of traffic expected to be generated by the proposed development. iii. Determine how the study intersections and roadways will operate in the future AM and PM peak hours with the proposed development. iv. Recommend appropriate mitigation and operation measures to improve operations if deficiencies are identified within the development or on the study intersections. The study intersections closest to the proposed development were chosen for review as these will experience the greatest impact from traffic associated with the development. The study intersections include: i. Trunk Highway 7 (TH 7) /Vine Hill Road ii. Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue iii. Vine Hill Road /D.elton Avenue (E) Traffic Impact Study 1 e CONSULTING Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota 2. Existing Conditions a. Corridor Characteristics As mentioned, the proposed site is located south of Delton Road, west of the southern leg of Vine Hill Road and directly west of Tino's Cafe in Shorewood, Minnesota. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the key roadway corridors around this site and within the study area. Table 1 — Study Corridor Characteristics 1 Number of routes along the road followed by the frequency of transit service during the peak periods. b. Traffic Volumes 24 -hour intersection videos were collected at the existing study intersections under normal weekday conditions in March 2017. Using these videos, 24 -hour turning movement counts were created. Based on these counts, the AM and PM peaks were determined to be 7:00 AM to 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The turning movement counts from these two peak hours were used at the study intersections for analysis. Additionally, using the collected videos, the School peak times were noted. The AM School peak is from roughly 7:20 AM to 8:00 AM, while the PM School peak is shorter and occurs at 2:40 PM to 3 :00 PM. The turning movement count data from the counts are contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. Based on the Weekday turning movement volumes, traffic volumes on each study corridor are: i. 38,200 vehicles per day on TH 7. ii. 6,200 vehicles per day on Delton Avenue. iii. 3,300 vehicles per day on Vine Hill Road (E). iv. 7,900 vehicles per day on Vine Hill Road (W). Traffic Impact Study Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota the current maximum daily +� • CONSULTING Peds/ Name Designation Seed Limit Lanes Transit' Bicycles Trunk Principal Highway 7 Arterial 50 mph 4 divided None None Vine Hill Road Minor W Collector 35 mph 2 undivided None None Vine Hill Road Minor E Collector 30 mph 2 undivided None None Delton 1 Route/ Avenue Local Street 30 mph 2 undivided 3 per None hour 1 Number of routes along the road followed by the frequency of transit service during the peak periods. b. Traffic Volumes 24 -hour intersection videos were collected at the existing study intersections under normal weekday conditions in March 2017. Using these videos, 24 -hour turning movement counts were created. Based on these counts, the AM and PM peaks were determined to be 7:00 AM to 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The turning movement counts from these two peak hours were used at the study intersections for analysis. Additionally, using the collected videos, the School peak times were noted. The AM School peak is from roughly 7:20 AM to 8:00 AM, while the PM School peak is shorter and occurs at 2:40 PM to 3 :00 PM. The turning movement count data from the counts are contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. Based on the Weekday turning movement volumes, traffic volumes on each study corridor are: i. 38,200 vehicles per day on TH 7. ii. 6,200 vehicles per day on Delton Avenue. iii. 3,300 vehicles per day on Vine Hill Road (E). iv. 7,900 vehicles per day on Vine Hill Road (W). Traffic Impact Study Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota the current maximum daily +� • CONSULTING 3. Forecasted Traffic a, Site Traffic Forecasting The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provides the Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, the standard document for determining expected traffic for proposed land uses. Using this ITE information, trip generation forecasts can be made for the development site. The ITE manual compiles empirical date from studies conducted across the country to provide a forecast technique for estimated traffic for various land uses. For the proposed Starbucks Coffee Shop, the designation of Coffee /Donut Shop with Drive - Through Window was used. Based on information supplied in the site plan, the development is currently proposed as 2,325 total square feet. With this information, the expected trip generation was completed based on the full build out of the development. Most trips that access the proposed coffee shop will be categorized as Pass -by and Diverted trips. Pass -by and Diverted trips are trips that will use the driveways to the site, but are not new trips to the study area. They are already on the roadway and divert from their path to access the development and then continue back on their normal path to their final destination. Using the ITE manual, a Pass -by rate of 89% was used based on the data collected for Coffee /Donut Shop with Drive - Through Window. The resulting trips generated by the proposed development are summarized in Table 2, below. A detailed breakdown of the trip generation showing the exact calculations of Pass -by and Diverted trips, and resultant new trips is provided in the Appendix. Table 2 — New Trip Generation *Adjusted for Pass -by /Diverted trips An additional site development scenario was considered including an approximately 4,000 square foot building comprised of a coffee shop without a drive -up window and a complimentary fast food restaurant. It should be noted that adjustments for shared trips between the uses were taken into consideration for this scenario. Internal trips take into account drivers who will visit both developments from one trip. Using the ITE manual as a base, internal Traffic Impact Study 3 e . CONSULTING Shorewood, Minnesota percentages of 28% in the AM peak hour and 14% in the PM peak hour were used for this analysis. The resulting new trip generation results are listed in Table 3 with the detailed Pass -by and Diverted trips, Internal trips, and resulting new trips being shown in the Appendix. Table 3 — Alternative New Trip Generation *Adjusted for Pass -by /Diverted trips and Internal trips AS Table 2 and Table 3 show, the preferred coffee shop land use is projected to generate roughly twoAhirds the AM new trips and one -third of the PM new trips when compared to the alternative development of the coffee shop and fast food combination. A trip distribution pattern was developed for the site generated traffic going to and from the proposed development. This pattern is based on the existing traffic volumes, access locations, location of major roadways leading to and from the site, and prior studies within the project area. The general trip distribution pattern for this study is: i. 9 percent of the site generated traffic to /from the north on Vine Hill Road. ii. 4 percent of the site generated traffic to /from the south on Vine Hill Road iii. 42 percent of the site generated traffic to /from the west on TH 7 and Delton Avenue. iv. 45 percent of the site generated traffic to /from the east on TH 7 and Delton Avenue. Traffic generated by the development of the site was assigned to the area roadways per this distribution pattern. b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting Due to the high density of existing household and developments within the study area and surrounding roadway networks, and the anticipated build year of 2017, no additional growth rate was applied to the background traffic. This assumption Traffic Impact Study 4 em CONSULTING Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota was also supported by MnDOT's collected ADT information which shows a steady, and sometimes decreasing ADT within the study area since 2008. c. Total Traffic Traffic forecasts were developed for the Build scenario by adding the traffic generated by the proposed development to the non -site forecast volumes. Peak hour forecasts are shown in the Appendix. Traffic Impact Study 5 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota - CONSULTING 4. Anuses a, intersection Vehicular Delay /analysis This study focused on the AM and PM peak hours of the adjacent roadways as the volume of traffic at these times will be most impacted by the proposed development. The School peaks were also considered, however, in the PM School time there is less traffic in the study area thus the impacts of the development of the site are less severe. The scenarios analyzed in this study for both the AM and PM peak hours were the existing, No- Build, and Build scenarios. Because the development is expected to be in full operation in 2017, and there is no expected background growth rate within the area, the existing and no -build scenarios are the same. Capacity analyses are performed for the study intersections to determine if improvements such as turn lanes or an upgrade in traffic control are needed. It should be noted that the existing. signal timing at TH 7/Vine Hill Road was calculated from the collected turning movement videos. The existing and forecasted turning movement volumes along with the existing intersection configurations and traffic control were used to develop the average delay per intersection in each study scenario. The delay calculations were done in accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition using the Vistro software package. The full calculations for each study scenario, including Level of Service (LOS) grades and queue lengths, are included in the Appendix. Also, included in the Appendix is a guide explaining the Level of Service grade concept. Chart 1 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 2 (p.m. peak hour) show the average peak hour delay per traffic signal controlled intersection for each study scenario. The LOS D/E boundary of 55 seconds of delay per vehicle is considered the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable traffic signal operation in Minnesota. Traffic Impact Study 6 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota • - CONSULTING Chart 1 — A.M. Peak Hour Delays: Signal- Controlled Intersections 60 -- - ..__...._ _ - - -- - -___- -- - -- - - - - - - -- -- ._.... _.__....— --- ._.....__..__._._....... - - - Congested at LOS D /EC Boundary (55 seconds) 317 40 0 V N A W 30 a� Q v an L 20 Q 10 IN L 0 W 0 30 D a) 20 gg z z 10 0 TH 7 & Vine Hill Road M Existing 19 2017 No -Build Lj 2017 Build Traffic Impact Study 7 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota em CONSULTING As Chart 1 and Chart 2 show the average peak hour delay, during the existing, No- build, and Build scenarios, at the TH 7/Vine Hill Road intersection remains below the 55 second threshold and operates at a Level of Service (LOS) D in the AM peak hour and. LOS C in the PM peak hour. These delays stay relatively similar in the Build scenario which shows that the proposed Starbucks Coffee Shop does not cause any significant impacts, in terms of overall delay, when compared to the existing scenarios. It is worth examining the worst movement delays at this intersection as well. Due to TH 7's classification as a Principal Arterial Roadway, a majority of the roughly 240 second cycle length is devoted to the TH 7 mainline. This results in Vine Hill Road, as well as the left turning movements for TH 7, experiencing long delays before receiving green signal indications during the AM and PM peak hours. In order to keep sufficient progression along TH 7 this extended cycle length is required, however when this is the case the cross streets and left turning movements will often operate with a LOS F. Again, the addition of the proposed Starbucks Coffee shop does not significantly increase these delays. Chart 3 (a.m. peak hour) and Chart 4 (p.m. peak hour) show the 95th percentile queue lengths on the access approaches at Vine Hill Road (E) and Delton Avenue. Average delays are not calculated for intersections with side street stop sign control because the vast majority of vehicles going through the intersection are on the main roadway and have zero delay, which leads to low overall average delays. At side street stop sign controlled approaches to busy roadways, the average delay for all the vehicles on the approach often exceeds 60 seconds. This can be the case for a few vehicles waiting at the stop sign where improvements would not be justified for the low traffic volume. In general, vehicle queuing of five cars or more is considered unreasonable and could warrant mitigation. Traffic Impact Study 8 CONSULTING Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota • Chart 3 — A.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side-Street Stop Controlled Intersections MFxisliq, a2017No-Bwi1d M,2017Build Chart 4 — P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side-Street Stop Controlled Intersections ei 4 . ... .... et �3 , . ...... . ............... 0 i.14i "'R `!3 Delton Avenue /Site Vine Hill Aoad/Silo, Access Dcltonkvonup/�itp A xe,!;s Vinle, Hill Road/Sife Accp,s MFxisliq, a2017No-Bwi1d M,2017Build Chart 4 — P.M. Peak Hour Queues: Side-Street Stop Controlled Intersections nExkfir,), o2017W-Build �201ZBWW Traffic Impact Study 9 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota em CONSULTING ei 4 . ... .... et �3 , . ...... . ............... 0 i.14i "'R `!3 Delton Avenue /Site Vine Hill Aoad/Silo, Access nExkfir,), o2017W-Build �201ZBWW Traffic Impact Study 9 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota em CONSULTING As Chart 3 and Chart 4 show, the proposed site accesses are expected to operate with acceptable queueing during the AM and PM peak hours with all queues remaining below 5 vehicles. It is worth noting that if queueing does begin to increase above 5 vehicles at the Delton Avenue /Site Access intersection that vehicles, will be able to change their access point and use the Vine Hill Road /Site Access intersection instead to exit the facility which experiences lower mainline traffic than the Delton Avenue Access during peak periods of traffic. Due to the inflated volumes, which progress through our study area during the AM School peak and less so during the PM peak hour excessive queueing within the existing conditions occurs. Due to the magnitude of queueing present at Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W) and Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (E) under existing conditions an additional queueing review was completed to fully discuss the existing scenarios and impact of the proposed coffee shop on these already failing traffic conditions. b. Intersection Queuing Analysis The queueing at the study intersections were also reviewed to ensure that movements fit within the supplied storage bays and do not impede the through traffic flow during the AM and PM peak hours. The existing, No- build, and Build scenarios fit all movements along TH 7 within their storage bays with no overflow of left turning vehicles into adjacent through lanes occurring. This shows that the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop contributes very little additional queuing to these movements. Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue do experience some excessive queueing during these periods due to traffic destined to and from Minnetonka High School, which is expected to continue. Due to the proposed developments proximity to the Minnetonka High School grounds, and TH 7Nine Hill Road being a main access point for vehicles from the west to reach the school, an additional peak in traffic occurs during the morning drop off period and afternoon pick up period of the high school (referred to as School peak). During these times, excessive eastbound queuing occurs at all the study area intersection. During the existing AM peak hour, this queuing begins around 7:30AM and last until roughly 8:OOAM. During this time, there is a slow moving eastbound queue which stretches from Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (E) intersection all the way through the Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W) intersection and the TH 7Nine Hill Road intersection. During this period the slow- moving queue allows vehicles to progress through the intersections as all way stops alternating between the mainline and cross street approaches at Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W). The slow moving queue impacts the right turning vehicles from eastbound TH 7 and slows their entrance onto Vine Hill Road. It also prevents the southbound through vehicles and westbound left vehicles at TH 7Nine Hill Road from progressing completely through the intersection during their corresponding green time due to Traffic Impact Study 10 CONSULTING Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota stacking in the southbound lane at Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W). This queueing clears within the half hour School peak period and is- expected to remain if no improvements are made to help improve overall congestion within the area. The PM peak hour does not experience as excessive queuing as the AM peak hour because the PM peak does not occur during the same period as the PM school peak. This results in smaller queues than experienced in the AM period. It is worth noting that during the PM school peak the largest queue does occur at the northbound through /right turn lane at TH 7/Vine Hill Road. During this time the queue stretches past its storage bay and spills through the Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W) intersection. This queue prevents the westbound right turning vehicles from proceeding onto Vine Hill Road until a green phase occurs allowing the vehicles to proceed through the intersection. Due to the existing excessive queuing conditions present during the AM peak hour, and minor addition of new vehicles expected to be generated by the proposed coffee shop development when compared to the existing volumes at the study intersections; no significant queueing impact is expected due to the construction of the proposed coffee shop at the three study intersections. c. Infernal Vehicle Circulation Analysis The concept site plan contained in the Appendix was reviewed to determine what changes are recommended, if any, to the proposed Starbucks Coffee shop development: i. Car Circulation: The proposed site plan provides sufficient vehicle circulation with two accesses on separate external roads. These accesses allow vehicles an option for entering and exiting the development which will help spread traffic more evenly throughout the site ii. Drive -Thru Lane Capacity: Spack Consulting has collected local drive - thru queue information to help assess the required capacity for these lanes. Based on data collected in 2010, 2011, and 2012 the Average Maximum Queue for a coffee shop with drive -thru is eleven vehicles with an 851h percentile queue of thirteen and a half vehicles. The existing site plan has space for twelve vehicles in queue with no blockages of any internal vehicle movements. There is additional space behind this twelve - vehicle queue to stack two more vehicles (fourteen total vehicles) without the final vehicle queue spilling into the street. This queue would prevent vehicles from Delton Avenue from turning into the development, however, as mentioned above, with a secondary access on Vine Hill Road, vehicles will still have access to the parking lot on this rare queue occasion. Based on this analysis the proposed site plan provides sufficient storage 'for drive -thru vehicles. Traffic Impact Study 11 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota ° ` CONSULTING d. Vehicular Mitigation Analysis The above analyses indicate during the AM and PM peak hours, and more specifically during the AM and PM School peak period the existing study intersections begin to break down and operate with excessive queuing and long delays. These conditions specifically impact the movement at Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (W) and Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue (E) with some impact to the eastbound right movement on TH 7 and northbound movements at TH 7/Vine Hill Road. As Charts 1 and Chart 2 show, the existing, no- build, and build delays stay consistent and well below the standard Average LOS thresholds. Also, Chart 3 and Chart 4 show that all 95th percentile queues remain at or below four vehicles per approach at all access intersections. These results suggest that the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop development will have negligible impact within the. study area. Furthermore, after analysis of the existing conditions, and review of the already failing traffic operation during the AM School and PM School peak periods, there is minimal expected impact from the proposed coffee shop due to the relatively minor amount of new traffic brought to the study area. It. is worth noting that there are some improvement options that could be implemented within the study area, however, these improvements are already required under the existing circumstances and not caused by the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop. The main improvement which would help improve the overall existing congestion within the study area is the addition of a separate northbound right turn lane at TH 7/Vine Hill Road. This lane would help reduce overall queuing on this approach by allowing right turning vehicles to turn on a red indication and prevent the occurrence of through vehicles blocking right turning vehicles from progressing through the intersection on their corresponding red phase. The additional lane would also increase the storage capacity of the segment allowing for additional Vehicle storage before spill over occurs. Again, it is important to note that these queueing issues already exist on the roadway and the addition of the coffee shop is not the triggering element for this improvement. Reviewing and updating the signal timing at the TH 7/Vine Hill Road intersection, and any other signals that are running in coordination with this signal, is also recommended and should be completed every three to five years, as required by Minnesota State law, to help ensure that the signal timing is appropriate for the present traffic patterns. Traffic Impact Study 12 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota a - CONSULTING The traffic impacts and operation of the proposed Starbucks Coffee shop development were thoroughly studied and the principal findings are: • The proposed expansion is expected to generate approximately 210 new trips during an average weekday (105 entering and 105 exiting), approximately 26 new trips during the a.m. peak hour (13 entering and 13 exiting) and approximately 10 new trips during the p.m. peak hour (5 entering and 5 exiting). • The proposed Coffee shop with drive -thru land use is expected to produce roughly half the AM trips and one -fifth of the PM trips when compared to the alternative development of the coffee shop and fast food combination. • The existing study intersections operate with acceptable averaged delays at TH 7Nine Hill Road, however, during the AM School Peak period queues at all three study intersection begin to spill out of their dedicated storage lanes, and during the PM School peak period excessive queueing, to a lesser degree than the AM School peak, is also experienced. These conditions last roughly 30 minutes during the AM peak and 20 minutes during the PM peak. The study intersections are forecast to operate with acceptable delays and queuing during all other times of the day. • The study intersections are expected to operate with similar queuing and delays with the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop with only 26 new AM trips and 10 new PM trips generated Queueing at both site accesses remains below five vehicles during both peak periods. With an Average Maximum Drive -thru Queue of eleven vehicles.and an 851h percentile queue of thirteen and a half vehicles. The proposed site plan's drive through lane storage is sufficient based on locally collected drive -thru lane data. The following recommendations are made based on the above findings. It is important to note that no additional intersection mitigation is required to help improve capacity due to the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop. However, there are improvements which can help reduce the existing congestion experienced within the study area. These improvements include: The addition of a northbound right turn lane at TH 7Nine Hill Road is suggested to help reduce the existing queueing that occurs during the 30 minute AM School peak. This lane would help decrease the overall queue length and increase the capacity of the approach. Review and update signal timing at the TH 7Nine Hill road intersection, and any other intersection that is operating• in coordination with the signal, to ensure the signal timing is appropriate for the current traffic flow patterns. Traffic Impact Study 13 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota • - CONSULTING 6. Appendix A. Site Plan B. The Language of Traffic Engineering C. Traffic Counts D. Trip Generation Tables E. Peak Hour Volumes F. Level of Service (LOS) G. Capacity Analysis Backups • AM Existing • PM Existing • 2017 AM No -Build • 2017 PM No -Build • 2017 AM Build • 2017 PM Build Traffic Impact Study 14 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota • - CONSULTING ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C. / fp •� /// • \\ I I 001 NOM ThIrd SU 4sull°220 812<p8-0060 Minnavpolb, MN 554p1 F. 612bB2 -8380 3a' BLDG SETBACK .4A � •¢ ao� c' 9�L� y✓•�5� QI MM Revision /Issue Data / � m ` � 1 1 41, r TRASH a f ENCLOSURE • �f ✓ ' "��e:' $ da s999aroF ls9.co ° PATIO Hsr DD Q^ / sr 8 � 1 dd 1 a 1 4 _ �� i v� "w° i°�°- •°wiy%�w'•'.e F�i.u: ,�5: � °�° � R RETAINING WALL p SITE D.83 ACRES HWY 7 & VINEHILL 3 " _ RETAIL 2,325 SFt SHOREWOOD, MN PARKING 27 SPACES /4.60 SITE PLAN SCALE: AS NOTED L _ r�EA ��51TE PLAN 1• - xp-o- xonm Al -H Architectural Consortium. L.L.C. 2016 • As a 25 -year resident of 5345 Shady Hills Circle, I have seen and RECEIVED experienced the daily mayhem at "Tino's" corner. • The congestion includes all surrounding streets. The backup on the shoulder of Hwy 7 is particularly dangerous. • We have altered, our driving patterns for years to avoid the entire area during the peak hours of 7 :15 -8:30 (which preseumably is the height of business hours for a coffee shop). • Starbucks customers are likely to be eastbound commuters, during the X hours of lam to 9am. This only adds to the congestion already present. s Ln Ln • The intersection of Delton and Vine Hill is already graded poorly by rt MNDot, please don't make it any worse. • LM The recent upgrade to the Vine Hill / Hwy 7 interesection is very welcome (thank you!), but does nothing to fix the inbound morning congestion. D LA • I respectfully ask that the Shorewood city council look very careful lat N N this proposal, and deny any application that includes -a drive - through. o • Kris Thayer 5345 Shady Hills Circle kristhayer @rocketmail.com Congestion on frontage road, Vine Hill Rd, and Hwy 7 • Minnetonka High School: Buses, drop -offs, and commuters, heaviest 7:15- 8:15am • Traffic backs up on frontage road, Vine Hill, and Hwy 7 • 3120 enrolled at MHS • Nearly 30% open enrolled — potentially 1000 extra drop -offs in addition to the buses, students, and staff parking at MHS, 1162 spaces Ashcroft Place, Stratford Woods, e • Petition: 80 against, 2 for The loop 1 1 - e loop approx. 10 ft loom for ' s 1 -12 cars in he chute (up the window) Example #2: Drive - through Dunn Brothers Hwy 7, Minnetonka tmagery @2017 Googte, Map data 32017 Google 20 ft Example #3: Drive - through Starbucks Hwy 5, Chanhassen PROPOSED drive - through Starbucks Vine Hill & Delton typical morning backup during school year. X25 -year resident of Shady eignporn000 j. u PROPOSED drive - through Starbucks Vine Hill & Delton Intersection of Hwy # 7 & Vine Hill looking South Congestion is getting UNSAFE. This entrance is a single lane, yet you can clearly see two cars that turned left and went wide JUST to make the light! _ They are now two abreast in single lane creating a safety hazard. RECEIVE You can also see cars stacked up both East & West waiting to get to the School East Bound Hwy # 7 The congestion is now spilling onto the Right Turn lane from East bound 7. There are NINE cars waiting to turn onto Vine Hill, but are unable to because of the congestion displayed on the previous photo. Also, these cars are stopped on the shoulder, beyond the designated turn lane creating a very unsafe condition. EAST BOUND DELTON You can see all the tail lights (circled) waiting to get to the school. From Vine Hill & Hwy 7, it is approx .7 miles (nearly 3/4 of a mile) with cars barely creep- ing along, waiting to get to the School entrance creating all the congestion. This is blocking residents on Delton to have access to & from their homes. Shorewood, MN 2 of 4 Spack Consulting Proposed Starbucks Development Traffic Summary could also be handled. The worst -case designation and the conclusions were reviewed and agreed upon by WSB, MnDOT, and HDR. Additionally the expected likely distribution of the AM Peak Hour traffic on the Development's Adjoining Roads was analyzed and has been reviewed by WSB, MnDOT, and HDR and they concur that it is an appropriate expectation. Most drivers when entering and exiting a site will choose the path that takes less time and that is more easily traversable. For cars exiting the Starbucks Development, the site layout of the Starbucks Development ( "Site ") allows vehicles to exit onto Vine Hill Road (eastside of the site) and then travel north to the all -way stop condition at the T -type intersection of Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road. As is the case with all such intersections, the all -way stop assigns the right of way to the first vehicle to arrive and further establishes the order of travel through the intersection. This makes the vehicle merge onto Delton Avenue, heading east or west, easier than the vehicular use of the Site's Delton Avenue exit that requires a break in the queue of the existing eastbound traffic. For cars entering the Starbucks Development, the traffic on Delton Avenue heading eastbound towards Minnetonka High School will simply turn right at the Site's Delton Avenue entrance; and traffic on Delton Avenue heading westbound away from Minnetonka High School will likely turn left at the all -way stop at Vine Hill Road and head south to the Site's Vine Hill Road entrance and turn right into the Site. In other words, customers entering and exiting the Site will have the option to utilize Vine Hill Road rather than choosing to wait for a break in the queue of the eastbound traffic on Delton Avenue during the AM Peak Hour. Attached is the Site's layout. ��EiC3A PRICE i PAGE # 1 �i C. Starbucks Development's Impact on Traff ic Additional Traffic Generated by Starbucks Development Starbucks is not a destination business: thev are a convenience dr Due to nearby Minnetonka High School, Delton ( Delton Avenue eastbound — 587 cars / Vine Hill Road northbound — 305 cars) during the AM Peak Hour. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation information gathered at coffee shops with a drive -thru window indicates that 89 percent of the cars going to coffee shops with a drive -thru window are already on the adjoining roadways passing by the coffee shops, thus they are referred to as "Pass -By." Eleven percent of the cars going to coffee shops with a drive -thru window are new to the adjoining roadways because of the coffee shops, thus they are referred to as "New Trips ". Table 1 summarizes the ITE information. Table 1— Trip Generation for Coffee Shop; with Drive -Thru As shown in the Table 1 above, during the AM Peak Hour the Starbucks Development is projected to have 26 New Trips and 208 Pass -By for a total of 234 trips. Each car will make two trips, one entering and one exiting, so it is expected that the Starbucks Development will have 117 cars (234 divided by 2) to the Site Inside Starbucks' ambitious plan to combat the 'seismic shift' that could kill its business KATE TAYLOR DEC. 7,2016,5:49 PM The slow and steady decline of retail that's shuttering department stores and putting malls out of business is also taking a toll on Starbucks. "We can't hide behind the fact that there is a seismic change that we're experiencing as a brick -and mortar retailer," Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said at the company's Investor Day on Wednesday. As customers increasingly shop online instead of in person, Starbucks can no longer rely on foot traffic as a way to get people in the door, Schultz said. The US currently has too many stores and not enough people willing to shop in them, which Schultz predicts will result in lots of companies closing stores. Despite the challenging retail climate, however, Starbucks plans to open 12,Ooo new stores around the world in the next five years, with projections of 1o% revenue growth. Schultz said that, in order to make this izrowth a realitv, the comt)anv is banking on two "We believe we not only have the antidote to the seismic change in consumer behavior, but we have an opportunity to really transform not only the core business to create a new source of growth and revenue," Schultz said. Schultz is stepping down as Starbucks' CEO and will focus on the first goal: ensuring that Starbucks is a "destination." A large part of Schu tz s new job as executive c airman w1 e ocusing on t e company s Roastery and Reserve brands. -W,% _w YSINES bu 'J INSIDE , The future of Starbucks depends on fixing its 'basic'image problem KATE TAYLOR DEC. 11, 2016, 10:09 AM Starbucks will go down in history books as the brand that made it OIZ to charge more than $2 for a cup of coffee. But its reputation as a higher -end coffee shop has faded and the company is now focusing its efforts on winning it back. Howard Schultz announced last week that he would step down as CEO in April to focus on building the company's ultra - premium Roastery and Reserve brand. Since he joined Starbucks in the 198os, Schultz has modeled locations after Italian espresso bars. Starbucks sought to become the "third place" in your life where you would go to simply hang out and socialize. "Starbucks is a destination. Starbucks is a sense of community," Schultz said at the tom an 's Investor Da on Wednesda . "We have become the third p ace between home and work, all over the world." -But since it openect its first shop in 5eattte in 1971, Ntaroucks nas become ubiquitous, wrtn more tnan 24,000 stores around the world. And that ubiquity has started to threaten its upscale brand. In a sense, Starbucks has gotten too basic. "Basic," according to Urban Dictionary is "an adjective used to describe any person, place, activity involving obscenely obvious behavior, dress, action. Unsophisticated. Transparent motives." Describing someone as basic "has come to mean lilting the things everyone else lilces," Fashionista writes. And that's not necessarily a good thing. Fashionista describes Starbucks as a core basic brand that joins the likes of the North Face, Lululemon, and Michael Kors. Sweet Starbucks beverages, like its signature Pumpkin Spice Latte, are most closely associated with the pejorative term. This is just one of countless Starbucks posts on social media sporting the hashtag "basic ": CHAPTER 14 A Walk. Through the Locationing Process 257 know the), have. Most retailers, however; are convenience-oriented lo- cations. People will drive ten miles to go to The Home Depot, but they will drive only one mile to go to a dry cicaner. People won't drive: out of the way to buy milk or gets or most other Commodities. If you sell specialty items and you i -e off the beaten path, hoer will customers even A few retail categories may fell in between convenience and destina- tion. Starbucks began as a convenience location —it had to be aeon the. way " -bUt as the company became ingrained in American CUlture many StarbUcks stores turned into local destinations, places that people seek out in their neighborhood for a break in the (lay. ltadio Shack is a convenience chop -ins who want to check out the: latest electronic toys and other gifts, whereas other traffic consists of destination custOlIM's who coarse with a specific mission —to get a connector or battery or similar part. vtIn vino ovt)"tly 1u1 -In u111i• to tind it 6rz itirn FROM: "BUILT FOR GROWTH" BY ARTHUR RUBENFELD, © 2005 FORMER PRESIDENT OF STARBUCKS. HE ABOVE WAS PUBLISHED IN 2005 I Fully twelve years ago. HIS LEAVES NO DOUBT THAT STARBUCKS IS A DESTINATION LOCATION. Spack Consulting 2 of 3 Louisiana Avenue /28th Street Left Turn Lane Analysis minutes of the day. When roadways are over capacity traffic engineering models break down and do not achieve an accurate representation of what is happening in the field. The qualitative summary was able to put the existing conditions and proposed build conditions in perspective and show the impact of the proposed Starbucks in the development area. 4. It does not seem reasonable that 104 outbound lefts in the AM peak hour would only have a 4 vehicle queue, especially with traffic backing up from Vine Hill Road? This should be confirmed. In the AM peak hour does the right turn volume into the site get delayed? The slow moving traffic along Delton Ave, as well as the all way stop at Delton/Vine Hill Road provides gaps in traffic for cars to pull out. Also, with two proposed access the 104 vehicles can be spread out allowing vehicles to exit onto Delton Ave or Vine Hill Ave helping to reduce queueing. 5. Would development of a right turn lane and /or a left turn lane on Brom's Boulevard (Frontage Road) be beneficial to the overall operation of the roadway? A right and left turn lane are not needed and would not result in a perceptible improvement to the existing operations due to the low speed of vehicles passing the proposed site accesses. The presence of the all way stop at Delton and Vine Hill further reduces speed in the area. 6. Provide discussion on the addition of a northbound lane at the TH 7 signal. MnDOT currently has plans to let an intersection improvement project in the fall of 2017 for the TH 7 intersection. Separating the right turn traffic into a dedicated right turn lane will help reduce queueing. 7. Staff has discussed that the potential for traffic queues of the drive through may require the addition of an eastbound right turn lane into the site. Additional requirements of this potential condition are recommended to be a requirement of the C.U.P. that the turn lane is to be added if this condition occurs. While including dedicated right turn lanes for site access can be beneficial in certain situations it will not provide the desired outcome in this case. The discussed queuing condition from the drive -thru is very unlikely based on studies conducted from locally collected data, which suggests the average queue for a coffee shop drive -thru lane during peak times is 11 cars and the 85'" percentile design queue is 13 cars, see table below. The site plan includes queuing capacity for 13 vehicles in the dedicated drive - thru lane and there is additional space on site for one or two extra cars to stack. Further, in the very unlikely event that conditions do back up, traffic destined to the site,in the suggested right turn lane would serve to limit the ability of those customers that are parking on site and using walk in service, rather than using the drive -thru to gain access. Lastly, there is insufficient space on site to'provide adequate turning radii for vehicles to Data collection was done at six coffee shops with drive - through services in �0, Auqust 2011 and February 20 2. ou een ays o a a were were "AGENDA PACKET PAGE # 140 August 2016 ( https : / /www.gsrmagazine.com /byissue /August -2016) I By TT ow Starbucks Reinvented the Customer Experience in the Drive Thru The coffee giant's drive thru used to be nothing special. But by following these steps, Starbucks created a world -class drive thru operation. customer needs and behaviors. Starbucks sales continue to outpace the quick - service industry; in its fiscal third quarter, the coffee giant saw global comparable sales increase by 4 percent, even as overall restaurant sales growth softened. But the company's growth would scarcely be possible had the companv not madeiantic strides at the drive thru in recent years. Early on, Starbucks' customers told the company they wanted a drive -thru option. But several years ago, Starbucks' drive thrus had "hit a wall." They lacked differentiation; communications were limited to menuboards. The brand was nowhere near best in class. The vision was to find ways to think differently about the drive thru. What could be done to speed throughput, increase transactions, provide better service, and grow ticket? What could be done to make the Starbucks' drive -thru experience dazzle its customers? Where to start? Page 2 At each meeting, individuals raised traffic concerns, and one person testified to concerns regarding increased litter and noise from the development. The applicant's traffic engineer responded to the traffic concerns by stating that the proposed drive -thru would have a negligible impact on the adjacent traffic. Correspondence and a petition received during the review of the application are attached to the staff report. After the last Planning Commission meeting, the City's traffic engineer (Chuck Rickart, PE PTOE, with WSB) and the applicant's traffic engineer have continued discussions on the traffic impacts related to the proposed development. The City's traffic engineer has determined that the impact of the use as proposed could be mitigated if the developer makes alterations to the frontage road at the site entrance and at the Vine Hill Road /Delton Lane Intersection. The recommended improvements are: 1. Adding a right -turn lane into the site driveway from the eastbound frontage road. This additior allows the traffic entering the site to leave the east -bound queued traffic that is waiting to pass through the intersection at Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road. 2. Adding a bypass lane on the westbound frontage at the site driveway. This addition allows westbound traffic to pass by car(s) queued to turn left to enter the site. 3. Modifying the northbound segment of the intersection of the Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road to include a dedicated right turn lane instead of the current wide single lane for all northbound traffic. This modification would accommodate the additional traffic that is expected to exit the subject property on Vine Hill Road before continuing back to Delton Avenue to complete their journey. Staff stresses that these improvements will not correct the existing traffic problem on the frontage road and at the intersection. They are intended to mitigate the impact from the proposed additional traffic associated with the coffee shop /drive -thru service window. Staff also included the following additional conditions in the attached resolution in addition to standard conditions of development, The applicant shall complete the following prior to issuance of a building permit: 1. Revise their plans to include the above changes subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. Consolidate the properties into a single tax parcel. 3. Acquire any temporary construction easements necessary for either demolition of existing improvements or construction of retaining walls. 4. Pick up stray trash on a daily basis from the site and nearby the site to avoid becoming a nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood. 5. Submit a sound study (or specifications from a speaker vendor) indicating that the sound from the ordering station shall not exceed 50 decibels at the east property line, 6. Limit the hours of operation to 6:00 A.M. to 10 :00 P.M. and further limit trash service and deliveries to the hours between 9:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Financial or Budget Considerations: The application fees cover the cost of processing the application. Options: Deny the request, approve the request subject to the recommended conditions; or modify either resolution. The Council may also choose to remand the request back to the Planning Commission AGENDA PACKET PAGE # 1 56 From: Otto, Patricia (DOT) [maiito :pat.otto @state.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:38 PM To: Lutaya, Andrew (DOT) <a ndrew. lutaya @state. m n.us>; Schwartz, Kevin (DOT) <kevin.schwartz @state.mn.us >; Erickson, Chad (DOT) <chad.erickson @state.mn.us> Subject: RE: Hwy 7 & Vinehill Andrew Hi, The 3 -way stop at Delton and Vine Hill (west) continues to cause backups through the TH 7 Vine Hill Road signal during the AM peak. Spack Consulting provided video which shows the queue impacting Vine Hill at TH 7 for about 40 minutes during the morning school peak (7:20 -8;00 AM). Kevin Schwartz ran into Will Manchester of Minnetonka recently and found out that he was not aware of the proposed Star Bucks since it is a Shorewood project. Mark said that the 3 -way stop was installed about 10 years ago by the city of Minnetonka to help the north bound traffic. There may be possible mitigations that can be done to this intersection, police assisted traffic control during AM peak, added EB through lane to name a few. Perhaps Star Buds a d it's atrons could become a catalyst workins with the city and Minneto_t�ka High School to help solve the backup problem during the morning rush. I hope this helps answer your questions. Pat Otto MoPot Metro Traffic Engineering 1500 West County Roar} B2 Roseville, Mn. 55113 651.234.7837 Pat.otto @state.mn.us DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION This is incorrect. It will be 1 3 Czars & 26 Trips. Refer to Page #1 72 in your Agenda Packet AGENDA PACKET PAGE # 172 5. Conclusions and Recommendations The traffic impacts and operation of the proposed Starbucks Coffee shop development were thoroughly studied and the principal findings are: • The proposed expansion is expected to generate approximately 210 new trips during an average weekday (105 entering and 105 exiting), approximately 26 new trips during the a.m. peak hour (13 entering and 13 exiting) and approximately 10 new trips during the p.m. peak hour (5 entering and 5 exiting). • The proposed Coffee shop with drive -thru land use is expected to produce roughly half the AM trips and one -fifth of the PM trips when compared to the alternative development of the coffee shop and fast food combination. • The existing study intersections operate with acceptable averaged delays at TH 7Nine Hill Road, however, during the AM School Peak period queues at all three study intersection begin to spill out of their dedicated storage lanes, and during .the PM School peak period excessive queueing, to a lesser degree than the AM School peak, is also experienced. These conditions last roughly 30 minutes during the AM peak and 20 minutes during the PM peak. The study intersections are forecast to operate with acceptable delays and queuing during all other times of the day. • The study intersections are expected to operate with similar queuing and delays with the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop with only 26 new AM trips and 10 new PM trips generated • Queueing at both site accesses remains below five vehicles during both peak periods. • With an Average Maximum Drive -thru Queue of eleven vehicles.and an 85th. percentile queue of thirteen and a half vehicles. The proposed site plan's drive through lane storage is sufficient based on locally collected drive -thru lane data. The following recommendations are made based on the above findings. It is important to note that no additional intersection mitigation is required to help improve capacity due to the addition of the Starbucks Coffee shop. However, there are improvements which can help reduce the existing congestion experienced within the study area. These improvements include: • The addition of a northbound right turn lane at TH 7Nine Hill Road is suggested to help reduce the existing queueing that occurs during the 30 minute AM School peak. This lane would help decrease the overall queue length and increase the capacity of the approach. • Review and update signal timing at the TH 7Nine Hill road intersection, and any other intersection that is operating. in coordination with the signal, to ensure the signal timing is appropriate for the current traffic flow patterns. Traffic Impact Study 13 Starbucks Shorewood, Minnesota CONSULTING E EN1 :A PACKET PAGE # 1 75 �IUN r 1 /0'1/ Where quality is our nature CAF S rIURFwca� 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. • Minnetonka, MN 55345 (952) 939 -8200 • Fax (952) 939 -8244 eminnetonka.com June 21, 2017 Mr. Paul Hornby C jV City Engineer JUN � City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road C {7Y C7F SHOREWD Q€J Shorewood, MN 55331 _-O a Subject: Proposed Starbuck's Coffee at Vine Hill Road and Highway 7 Dear Mr. •Hornby: Minnetonka city staff understand that the city of Shorewood has received a redevelopment proposal for the construction of a new drive -thru Starbuck's Coffee restaurant southwest of the intersection of Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue (directly south of Highway 7). This redevelopment site is located directly west of the municipal boundary with the city of Minnetonka and we believe has the potential to negatively affect traffic in this area. As you are aware, Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue serves as an access route for the Minnetonka High School campus, and as such, A.M. and P.M. peak traffic volumes during the school year can be significant on these roadways. The city has received complaints related to traffic in this area and observed traffic backed up through the three -way stop in the past. The city of Minnetonka was not notified of this proposal prior to the planning commission meeting, thus we have not reviewed the details of the traffic study provided by the developer, but our general understanding is that the redevelopment is expected to increase traffic in this area. Minnetonka staf traffic co Minnetonka is supportive of working collaboratively with the city of Shorewood and MnDOT to address traffic delays in this area, and appreciate the opportunity to review and understand traffic impacts of this site, as well as future development potentially impacting the city of Minnetonka, so we can help find ways to minimize impacts. Thank you in advance for your consideration and if you have any questions or concerns with respect to this letter please contact me directly at (952) 939 -8241. Sincerely, Engineering Project Manager CC: Will Manchester, Director of Engineering Julie Wischnack, Community Development Director Greg Lerud, City Administrator, City of Shorewood Marie Darling, Planning Director, City of Shorewood Minnetonka... where quality is our nature Page 3 AGENDA PACKET PAGE # 98 as the final information from the traffic engineers wasn't available for the last Planning Commission meeting on this subject. Recommendation / Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution for approval of the request. Next Steps and Timelines: If the City Council denies the application, the City Council is not obligated to consider a similar application for six months. If the City Council approves the application, the applicant may submit their request for a building permit as soon as the conditions of approval are met. Connection to Vision / Mission: Sustainable tax base. Moot Point ' ' E VV PETITION TO the City Council &P|anning Commission of the City ofShorewood Minnesota I-'[-Y � AP100- VVHEREASApproya| vVnu|d odd unbo|d traffic to on area a|readyauffering from extreme congestion; school enrollment projecdonsshowing increases; many rnuidp|eevmnts scheduled 7 clays week atall hours at the School Campus on a road systern not designed to handle that level of traffic. WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: To deny the Conditional Use PernniL subrnitted by Mr. Dave Watson of Watson \/inehiU LLC for a 6tarbucksCoffee @ 19245 &19Z85 State Highway (service road\, Name (printed) Address (printed) Signature P lFro, NA 01000,44 AN lKlAffAill �� 91 Is X AN TRIP La = C Wall t TO the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota WHEREAS Approval would add untold traffic to an area already suffering from extreme congestion; school enrollment projections showing increases; many multiple events scheduled 7 days a week at all hours at the School Campus on a road system not designed to handle that level of traffic. WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: To deny the Conditional Use Permit submitted by Mr. Dave Watson of Watson Vinehill LLC for a Starbucks Coffee @ 19245 & 19285 State Highway 7 (service road). M ■iY , IM � Cif � '. � . ! / � �_�_� / ' � ��►. ��i i ' wo IIAI NVAN 5 M,AN--- / : &_ i e . fflft AVAVAL �. I , • I _ate h max, M Marie Darling From: Debbie <debbowles @charter.net> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 4:38 PM To: Planning Subject: STARBUCKS My name is Deborah Smith, and I am an Ashcroft Resident. I use Vine Hill:Highway 7 on a daily basis.. I am very happy to have Starbucks as a new neighbor! If a Drive -thru would be beneficial to their Business, I am in Favor! Whatever will be most lucrative for them..... It's what we need!!! Deborah Smith Sent from my iPhone Where quality is our nature it ti+i;d June 21, 2017 Mr. Paul Hornby City Engineer City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Subject: Proposed Starbuck's Coffee at Vine Hill Road and Highway 7 Dear Mr. Hornby: ii ,. tq 1 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. • Minnetonka, MN 55345 (952) 939 -8200 • Fax (952) 939 -8244 eminnetonka.com 'UN 2 1 2017 CiN.,.i i ors � Vii: ' Minnetonka city staff understand that the city of Shorewood has received a redevelopment proposal for the construction of a new drive -thru Starbuck's Coffee restaurant southwest of the intersection of Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue (directly south of Highway 7). This redevelopment site is located directly west of the municipal boundary with the city of Minnetonka and we believe has the potential to negatively affect traffic in this area. As you are aware, Vine Hill Road / Delton Avenue serves as an access route for the Minnetonka High School campus, and as such, A.M. and P.M. peak traffic volumes during the school year can be significant on these roadways. The city has received complaints related to traffic in this area and observed traffic backed up through the three -way stop in the past. The city of Minnetonka was not notified of this proposal prior to the planning commission meeting, thus we have not reviewed the details of the traffic study provided by the developer, but our general understanding is that the redevelopment is expected to increase traffic in this area. Minnetonka staff believes that if the city of Shorewood allows this site to redevelop in a manner that will increase traffic volumes during the existing peak hours, the existing traffic concerns will likely be compounded further. Minnetonka is supportive of working collaboratively with the city of Shorewood and MnDOT to address traffic delays in this area, and appreciate the opportunity to review and understand traffic impacts of this site, as well as future development potentially impacting the city of Minnetonka, so we can help find ways to minimize impacts. Thank you in advance for your consideration and if you have any questions or concerns with respect to this letter please contact me directly at (952) 939 -8241. Sincerely, Engineering Project Manager CC: Will Manchester, Director of Engineering Julie Wischnack, Community Development Director Greg Lerud, City Administrator, City of Shorewood Marie Darling, Planning Director, City of Shorewood Minnetonka... where quality is our nature From: Lulloff THomas [tjlulloff @yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 9:33 AM To: Brad Nielsen Subject: Hwy 7 & Vine Hill Starbucks Greetings, I hope this email finds you well. I tried to speak at the the "Hwy 7 & Vine Hill Starbucks" Planning Meeting at 7 PM on 3/7/17 but the attendance had overflowed into the hallway. So I thought an email may be easier for all of us. My family and I have lived at 19000 Kingswood Ter. since 1996 which is about 3/4 of a mile south of Hwy 7 just off Vine Hill. We use the Vine Hill & 7 intersection frequently. That short strip of frontage road between where the cars come south from Hwy 7, then head east on Delton Ave is the worst example of \ frequent gridlock on a city street I have ever seen. Now we just try and avoid using it, if possible. I'm sure you heard all the reasons for constant gridlock at the Tue. meeting so I'm just going to ask that you please consider any business that would have less in and out traffic in this location. A much better spot for Starbucks would be a little bit west on Delton Road in the strip mall next to the Holiday gas station. The Starbucks customers could use the Old Market Road on and off Hwy. 7 exit, no High School or Deephaven School traffic there. Hwy 7 & Hwy 101 would also be much better location for a Starbucks location. Anywhere but that short bottle neck currently under consideration. With all the High School drivers(less experienced) and Coffee Drinkers (late for work), I'm sure your Police Dept. will be spending a lot of time at that site trying to sort out car accidents, if approval is granted. I like Starbucks as much as the next guy, but no one will win if you allow a coffee shop at that bottle neck; not even Starbucks. Youe Time Is Most Appreciated, Thomas J. Lulloff C) 5 75-t5 c) u (7 .0 ct, —7 - c l 1 E C Ell V D � +k 047, -T-Hno e t ek— '-firria, -d-, C', -c ort I I 1 ill y C - � j � l sic c)r 7 ' J�> = �''�� &iAJ ;i4 Y;"i�" � �-� .' � J ,� � �" t,'m? �` �l � ��-?�, <��`� �� ,9i l �j �J,�tf�� f 1 � ��`„%`.�VP�`�'_ l�,�ic:%) to r) ff r,7 r 7 6C1 —A- c 1: 1 J r7 ci r-ld V11-10-J I, 4:)aCl - 4)e- iTone_l ,e 71'C woi-J � � +k 047, -T-Hno e t ek— '-firria, -d-, C', -c ort I I 1 ill y C - � j Resident objection to Proposed Starbucks at 5062 Vine Hill Road Harry Millen 5117 Vine Hill Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 Congestion Concerns: Northbound traffic on Vine Hill Rd, to Delton Ave 3 way stop, shows nearly continual traffic until approx 9pm. • At 7:45am weekdays DAILY occurrence: Southbound traffic on Vine Hill Rd, backs up at Delton Ave 3 way stop, PAST the driveway to proposed Starbucks. Holding time: 5 min •. Driveway exit and entry to residences 5117 and 5110 at approx 7:45am depends on good will of backed up motorists who are stopped in northbound Vine Hill Rd traffic. • At 5:30pm, weekdays DAILY occurrence: Westbound traffic on Delton Ave, backs up PAST the Delton Ave driveway to proposed Starbucks. This allows no outlet to vehicles seeking frontage road thoroughfare to Hwy 7. Result is jumble of cars stopped, trying to find their lane. Holding time: 10 min. Vehicle Collision Concerns: • Traffic gunning southbound on Vine Hill, coming from Delton Ave 3 -way stop; gunning drivers seem to reach approx 40 mph by the time they pass proposed Starbucks lot entry. • Traffic southbound, having RUN Delton Ave 3 -way stop sign (collision likely with cars exiting the proposed Starbucks parking lot) • Northbound traffic on HWY 7 in icy road conditions: frequent trouble spot for cars sliding down hill and through Delton Ave 3 -way stop. • Northbound (Vine Hill) gunning drivers illegally passing stopped, turning Starbucks vehicles. • Southbound (Vine Hill) gunning driver hard braking for slow, turning Starbucks vehicles. • Resident estimate is that 80% of traffic grossly violates stop sign at Delton Ave 3 -way stop, making it difficult to back out of resident driveways. Nuisance Concerns: • Starbucks traffic will use 5117 and 5110 Vine Hill Rd driveway as turn - around spot on continual basis. • Mud /ruts in resident lawns (5117 and 5110 Vine Hill) at Starbucks lot entry (due to vehicle turns stops, etc). • Car audio volume will daily violate noise ordinance, with offending vehicles stopped opposite residents at 5117 and 5110. • High Concentration of teen drivers • Extensive drive -thru wait times for vehicles, continually including very bright headlights through resident windows, high volume audio, directly at 5117 and 5110 Vine Hill Rd residences. • Snow removal from Starbucks lot cannot include pushing excess snow onto 5117 property. • During peak seasons, drivers occasionally park on Vine Hill Road (partly on the shoulder), causing traffic to stop behind the parked vehicle while waiting to pass. From: David Sime <d.sime @att.net> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 6:58 AM To: Planning Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit to allow a coffee shop with drive thru plus open and outdoor sales at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7. March 6, 2017 Dear Commissioners, Re: Conditional Use Permit to allow a coffee shop with drive thru plus open and outdoor sales at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7. am writing with concerns for your consideration at the hearing on March 7, 12017 and subsequently in the consideration of the permit. I believe there will be significant direct opposition to the plan expressed, so my goal with this communication is to help avoid the unintended consequences which may fall out from a poor decision in this matter. These consequences are important to understand because the community surrounding this planned development has been sorely treated disadvantaged, I believe, as a result of major unintended consequences arising from other government decisions and actions made without proper consideration of concerns from the local residents. As a result, they are aggrieved, suspicious, and may be more forceful in their response to the fear of yet another violation of their peace. The first unintended consequence by which we are offended is the untrammeled growth of the traffic to and from the Minnetonka High School, with no attendant adjustment or compensation in the traffic flow which results. Most of the residents in this area were happy to move into the area knowing that they would be living as neighbors to the school community. However, the relentless march of the high school from being a place of education towards functioning as an entertainment complex has led to an untenable situation with traffic. The volume is exceedingly high and growing, and at some times of day, it becomes a very long trip to get from Vine Hill on to Hwy 7. In addition, the absence of traffic mitigation measures and the uncontrolled growth of traffic from communities to our West have brought things to an unacceptable situation at the junction of Vine Hill and Highway 7. May I request specifically that we be provided with traffic impact statements for the new planned development at the hearing? We look forward also to learning about the planned and funded mitigation measures to be taken. The second unintended consequence is the de facto conversion of Vine Hill road into a major thoroughfare rather than the neighborhood feeder route for which it was designed. This has resulted from the closure of Highway 101 and its remains closed for over a year. The result has been to encourage the habit of using Vine Hill as a short cut and alternate route. Now that people have been forced to use it for so long as a 101 by -pass, it has become their normal route. Vine Hill road is neither designed nor constructed nor maintained to serve this new role thrust upon it. Traffic density is now frustrating and dangerous. We cannot allow further traffic management upsets to reduce the safety and quality of life in our community Let us NOT develop further unintended consequences in the form of disrupted traffic with this planned coffee shop. A typical Starbucks serves 500 customers per day (growing to 750 in 2020). How will this traffic be handled with minimum impact on the community? How do you get an additional 400+ cars off 7 onto the frontage road and back again? How do you accommodate 400 cars in line between a slow- throughput drive — through line ( Starbucks service is notoriously and deliberately slow) and the High School? Please provide us now, or at assured date in the future before decisions are made finally, with the traffic impact estimates of the planned development and an opportunity to provide respond with feedback to that. We have our own estimates for the impact based on timing of lights and counting of cars; the numbers are not encouraging. Finally, the community looks to you for information on the bigger picture and whether this is a seed development for the ultimate goal of turning the Vine Hill / Highway 7 interaction into an expanded shopping / retail / professional building development. Please make that clear at tonight's hearing. Whether or not the permit is approved, let us not open ourselves to unintended consequences; let us be clear, explicit, both in qualitative and quantitative terms about what we face. Only then can we make informed choices. I remain, Yours faithfully, David G. Sime 5363 Ashcroft Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 952 470 9862 David G. Sime 5363 Ashcroft Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 +1 612 518 7692 (mobile) +1 952 470 9862 (home) R 07 2017 CIi-Y Of: SHOREWOOD To the Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood. My Name is Paul Stelmachers and have had the privilege of living at 5210 Shady Lane in Shorewood for that last 10 years. I have also had the honor of serving on the Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission and the Shorewood Parks Commission. I write to speak out against the proposed Starbucks to be located at 19245 & 19285 Highway 7. Although I thoroughly enjoy their coffee and products, this simply is NOT the location for it. Here's why: In my opinion, the addition of the Starbucks with Drive -Thru will add untold traffic congestion to an area already suffering from traffic that was not designed to handle such loads. During peak hours residents along Vine Hill & Delton are often unable to simply exit their driveways. We have learned that if we need to leave during these times, we must take alternate routes that can add miles and extra time to simply leave our neighborhoods or go to work. The High school has 3120 students enrolled, of which nearly 30% are open enrollees, with many of them being dropped off by their parents. That's over a 1000 extra vehicles in addition to the school buses, teachers, staff and students that already drive and park at the schools 1,162 parking spaces. In fact, Minnetonka School district bought a home adjacent to it and simply razed it for an additional 18 parking spaces. That is how acute the parking and traffic situation is surrounding the school. This area is congested and dangerous. (Photos illustrating how are attached as a pdf document) School enrollment is projected to increase in the coming years adding to the more traffic. In addition, the school's athletic fields, performing arts and other amenities are in use 7 days a week from 6AM to 10PM or later. Often the athletic fields are rented to 3`d party, non - school affiliated organizations, bringing in even MORE traffic from outside the area. I took the liberty of printing out the entire years schedule for all activities occurring at the school. It is 187 pages. One hundred, eighty seven pages at a really small font! (presented by Kristine Thayer) The school is a great asset and they do a wonderful job of preparing our children for the world and their lives; but with all the use, and increased enrollments, we have a traffic problem that is going to get worse on its own. Adding a Star Bucks will not improve the situation For a few hours I had the privilege of meeting many of the residents in the area when I went door to door informing them of the Starbucks plan. Many of them expressed concern and exasperation at the current traffic situation and the additional load the Starbucks would bring. After chatting with them, the traffic burden is not limited to Vine Hill (both North & South of Hwy 7) and Delton. The spillover already affects the Shady Hills Neighborhood, Waterford Place, Ashcroft Place, Stratford Woods and beyond. In fact, nearly everyone I spoke with was against this proposal and has signed a petition to that effect. (also presented by Kristine Thayer) It's nearly 80 residents that live in the immediate area of the 'Fallout Zone'. I'm confident that I would have got many more, but a high number were not home when I visited and the short notice hampered my efforts to reach everyone affected. To be fair, there was support for the Starbucks. It was 2 people. In closing, I am not against Starbucks per se, but I am against the Starbucks at this particular location. Thank -you Sincerely, Paul Stelmachers 5210 Shady Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 Intersection of Hwy # 7 & Vine Hill looking South Congestion is getting really bad... Congestion is getting UNSAFE. This entrance is a single lane, yet you can clearly see two cars that turned left and went wide JUST to make the light! They are now two abreast in single lane creating a safety hazard. You can also see cars stacked up both East & West waiting to get to the School. East Bound Hwy # 7 The congestion is now spilling onto the Right Turn lane from East bound 7. There are NINE cars waiting to turn onto Vine Hill, but are unable to because of the congestion displayed on the previous photo. Also, these cars are stopped on the shoulder, beyond the designated turn lane creating a very unsafe condition. EAST BOUND DELTON You can see all the tail lights (circled) waiting to get to the school. From Vine Hill & Hwy 7, it is approx .7 miles (nearly 3/4 of a mile) with cars barely creep- ing along, waiting to get to the School entrance creating all the congestion. This is blocking residents on Delton to have access to & from their homes. SOUTH BOUND VINE HILL You can clearly see cars backed up and over the hill. It can extend all the way to Shady Hills /Stratford Road blocking residents access to & from their homes. � � • • • � 1 1 �� 1 ` °�� „ �, i •! is approx. 9100 Drive-through Dunn Brothers Hwy 7, Minnetonka Imagery ©2017 Google, Map data 42017 Google 20 ft i l - 0 A �J` PROPOSED drive-through Starbucks Vine Hill • • Intersection of Hwy # 7 & Vine Hill looking South Congestion is getting really bad... 7j t Intersection of Hwy # i &Vine Hill looking South Congestion is getting UNSAFE. This entrance is a single lane, yet you can clearly see two cars that turned left and went wide JUST to make the light! They are now two abreast in single lane creating a safety hazard. You can also see cars stacked up both East & West waiting to get to the School. East Bound Hwy # 7 The congestion is now spilling onto the Right Turn lane from East bound 7. There are NINE cars waiting to turn onto Vine Hill, but are unable to because of the congestion displayed on the previous photo. Also, these cars are stopped on the shoulder, beyond the designated turn lane creating a very unsafe condition. EAST BOUND DELTON You can see all the tail lights (circled) waiting to get to the school. From Vine Hill & Hwy 7, it is approx .7 miles (nearly 3/4 of a mile) with cars barely creep- ing along, waiting to get to the School entrance creating all the congestion. This is blocking residents on Delton to have access to & from their homes. SOUTH BOUND VINE HILL You can clearly see cars backed up and over the hill. It can extend all the way to Shady Hills /Stratford Road blocking residents access to & from their homes. From: Leroy Krueger <krueger.leroy @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 9:21 AM To: Planning Cc: Amber Krueger; JOYCE BLUME Subject: Coffee Shop at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 To whom it may concern, My name is Leroy Krueger, and I live at 5250 Vine Hill Road, roughly a block away from the proposed location for a new Starbucks. It has come to my attention that at the meeting this week the topic of building a Starbucks nearby will be discussed. Unfortunately I will be unable attend the meeting be able to attend the meeting because I will be home caring for my child, however I know that quite a few of my neighbors, along with my wife will be attending a meeting to voice their displeasure for this venture. To be clear, if the plans called for any generic coffee shop, I would grab my pitchfork (figuratively only, there will be no pitchforlcs present) and join in with them in protest as their concerns are quite valid. There is already a serious traffic flow issue in that area that negatively affects the neighborhood. Specifically the amount of cars going into / out of the Minnetonka high school causes quite a backup between that three -way stop, the weird little intersection between Vine Hill Road and Highway 7, and at the stoplight to get onto highway 7. The thought is that adding coffee shop traffic to the mix will exacerbate the situation as the times that traffic will be worst with the coffee shop will also be the time that traffic will already be bad because everyone is going to the school. That being said, we are not talking about "Any generic coffee shop" We are talking about a Starbucks, and it has always been a dream of mine to live within close walking distance to a Starbucks (I do understand that as far as dreams go, this is probably a pretty lackluster one, but whatever). Given the size of the location they are looking to build on, it seems like they will most likely have ample parking, along with a good long lane for the drive -thru so that people going to get coffee will not cause a line of cars to back out onto the street. I personally think that the added traffic this will add will be unnoticeable compared to the traffic that already exists. So in short, you will most likely here quite a lot of very justified opposition to this plan tomorrow evening, but I just want to let you know that there is at least one person (most likely only one, which would be me) in the neighborhood who is on board with a nearby coffee shop. Thanks! Leroy Krueger P.S. If you questions, you can reach me at this email address, or at 507- 254 -4188. From: Lori Strommen <llstrommen @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 12:08 PM To: Planning Subject: Opposition To Starbucks - Watson Vinehill LLC Dear Mr. Nielsen, I am writing to voice my opposition to the construction of a Starbucks at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 (service road_. I drive along this service road a minimum of twice a day for the past 15+ years since I live south of Highway 7 off of Vine Hill Road. There is already so much morning and afternoon traffic congestion along the service road with the students and parents going to and from Minnetonka High School -- adding a Starbucks with a drive through would make it even worse! Any time there is an after school program or an evening of parent teacher conferences or games at the fields the traffic is already backed up for the people who live off of Vine Hill going South from Highway 7. People who simply want to go to work or get home from work. The traffic is already bad enough! A coffee shop (Camp Coffee) used to be located at 19215 State Highway 7 (right next door to the proposed Starbuck site) and it is permanently closed because they had no customers. There is a Starbucks located in the Target Store at 4802 County Rd 101, Minnetonka, MN 55345. No need for another one so close by. My home address is: 19001 Kingswood Terrace, Minnetonka, MN 55345. The west end of my street is the City of Shorewood. I use Highway 7 to get to and from work, the grocery store, shops in Excelsior, shops in Wayzata, Target, Ridgedale, any number of businesses I frequent as a resident of the area. Having a Starbucks in this location would impeded my ability (and my neighbors ability) to get to these places more than the high school traffic already does. I have a previous appointment on March 7th, otherwise I would be attending the meeting to voice my opposition. Please put my name on the email list for future Planning Commission Meetings addressing this issue if there are any. Thank you Lori Strommen 19001 Kingswood Terrace Minnetonka, MN 55345 612/979 -7659 From: Bryan Long <blong06 @yahoo.corn> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 9:53 PM To: Planning Subject: Starbucks To Whom it may concern, I just wanted to throw out my support for the new Starbucks project that is being proposed and discussed on March 7. Ironically, the project wasn't even on my radar until someone knocked on my door asking me to sign a petition against it, but I had to politely decline because I think the project would be great for our neighborhood. The current building is a total eye soar, and I think. this project would be a massive upgrade. I understand that there are logistical and traffic issues that need to be addressed, but I fail to see how a Starbucks creates MORE traffic issues for us during hours that will always have congestion due to the High School's location. I encourage you to give the green light for this project ... my wife and I would be thrilled to see it succeed. All the best, Bryan Long Sent from Yahoo Mail for Whone / PETITION TO the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota WHEREAS Approval would add Untoid traffic to an area already suffe.r|Ng from extreme congestion; school �nroU[neD1 projections showing increases; many nnu|t)p|e events scheduled 7 days week atall hours at the School Campus on a rood sysLern not designed to handle that level of traffic, WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: To deny the Conditional Use Pen-nit oubrnitied by Mr. Dove Watson of Watson V/nehiU LUC for o StorbuckaCnflee@ 19245 &19205 State, Highway (service road). N (printed) Address (printed) Signature ^ low TO the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota WHEREAS Approval vVou|d mdd untold traffic boon area a|neodysuffering from extnsnne congestion; Schoo| enrollment projecLionsshowing increases; many rnu|Lip|eeveDts scheduled 7 days Week otall hours at the School Campus on a rood systorn not designed to handle that level of traffic, WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: To deny the Conditional Use Permit submitted by Mr. Dove Watson ofVVaLson ViDehii| LLC for o StarbUcksCoffee (do 19245 D, 19285 State Highway (service road), Name (printed) Address (printed) Signature 676y'llt lbe 4VL / �A4 14JItl S�J, | /c�/�� / /\ / / _ 8 | � I t / cool / ��/f7�� y+�/f /V��~�� Id FARM 1� _-_- * ^ ' ° " * ' ° w ^ � TO the City Council &P|anning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota WHEREAS Approval mxzU|d add uMbo|d traffic to@O area ^ suffering frorn extnonne congestion; enrollment achon| enrollment projections showing increases; many uKip|e events scheduled 7 days week atall hours at the School Campus on m road sysbenn not designed 10 handle that level of traffic. WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: \ To deny the Conditional Use Permit submitted by Mr. Dave Watson of Watson VinehiU LLC for Starbucks Coffee @ 19245 & 19285 State Highvvay 7 (service road), INQIIII TO the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota WHEREAS Approval vvou|d odd untold traffic to on area o|remdysuffehnB from extreme congestion; school enro||nleDt projections showing increases; rnmny multiple events scheduled 7 days week otall hours at the School Campus on o road sys&ann not designed to handle that level of traffic. WE the undersigned petition the City Council & Planning Commission of the City of Shorewood Minnesota as follows: To deny the Conditional Use Permit subOnitted by Mr. Dave Watson of Watson V|OehiU LLC for m SLmrbUcks Coffee @ 19245Ek1928GState Highway7 (service road`, 7 / t s c s c C C Sir,- D E?cry _ LI y y y y y y y y y r r may YO S LL f u r JN r--O% 300 600 m 1 Sprin Cir 1 2 St AI ans Ba i r LNl� rl ��lII y y 1'.200 Feet Subject r6&tiq t logo y y y y y y y y y y y IL y y I> LL3 z iM TEST FIT SITE PLAN NOTES iuxosuPE artren Pnnowauxc > cox ie�no I PROPO6E➢TRMNENCIOFURE i P' �TROao�e °oio�caTwxcoaaoxunuxianxio ee a wxou:.00 oE�xaot'nObuneAt'r°owowwcpx 000R o. PEOEammu1 pwuwe. anRrtJeavneccssro Twm Exwoame to. alo•ReCK PROPOS[ODIDEWN.K t1 % vOPOEE0TPU19 i0R1AIRYM.lACn110xipK coxnlRHEnwrtx cmE ❑lMIOED,PINO ❑ �rw* or ci EroxEtaEre apIGTLb MJUD1AIWJATpLL CML ORnWINOD v UNE 2 PROPER W y � z cr fUAL SITE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY o e a r �z W STARBUCKS COFFEE Z COMPANY 2401 UTAH AVENUE SOUTH 0 SEATTLE.WASHINGTON 98134 u- I I o ENGINEER OF RECORD Z En9lnnmin9 Catwibnl W Z � 0 z r J V W = 0 IXcoz ado w> 3 y W�Wo3 a�Oz W to LL~ ?= w w LL -Wz aw0m$W v azUS N= STORE t. 49955 a PROJECT M 743254101 IEEUEOaTE' ]¢]a) C PROORM1tMNA0CR KNE]NDL IG pFDImIEx T� W tl1't ®M. RTURxFAuuIX mow—oE9DNFR' E.INU g16CIhD8V: P. bENV6NUiD V U) a D� o..aPmP SITE PLAN I SD-0 � 41 z nNORTH WEST PERSPECTIVE W 0 U) STARBUCKS COFFEE z COMPANY 2401 UTAH AVENUE SOUTH O SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 88134 (206 31 &1575 I"� TIESEOMw�NDSAND SPECIFlUiIONSM (,� PPOP°FA�ivAaF 9ThaoVdts c�oA'RPO UCTION WHicNiK TMarNEA OET�E CaPriuGHr: IN aPR NPART.s RE➢a otTM+TM� WELTS oR L -11—To TMs CROIE RWNITTEN CONKMo DR WM �ANOcIGIGT IXi6N+E MtENOFD To z �OC4T oIC MOEAuCN5AM'il ) IN O FPFlARtt[JIALL MAVEM'Y Oel1oATION NOR seamroTHEaTNEa r«csvr srnrED U Marc o re oaTHrR�A E IsEu O z J O Uwe z mOz LU z yg� C7 of c) 6i 3d0 N "Fw.6 °j xOz Wc) W L L axww U �LL wLnKz awo m=W U azU2 a uJx FSTORE #: 40855 PROJECT #: 74325 01 Q I.—o- c o no[0. oL W LEER ®M. oDUCTION DEhI°NER 0.TUM'ERUUU( cNECFC ➢BY: C U R U) o awe SD -1 V1 d t"f EAST PERSPECTIVE _ ...... _.__ .... ....... _. nSOUTH WEST PERSPECTIVE STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY U a } I J O U W = E U) W 3 >U) LU I- a= W w w>W w1+"+=Z 3 w 0 'o N=w U dZC) E ,-, co z: FSiORE#: 49955 Q PROJECT p: 74325901 ieouoc ow M- WL IF.E�nP 0.NPNERiAUd( aoucnaH oeelaN[x P v. eEMrt -]auto U) A... „awe sHCCnmE PERSPECTIVES SD -2 CIVIL SITE PLANS FOR STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE Shorewood, Minnesota I Hakanson Anderson Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 3601 Thurston Ave.. 0 Anoka, Minnesota 55303 7fi3 -4w hake 0 FAX demon.? -0520 ..w neon —a ndereon.c am THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI /ASCE 38 -2, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." HENNEPINJ COUNTY, V MINNESOTA GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS THE 2016 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" AND THE 2013 EDITION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS" SHALL GOVERN. ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCES SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SIGNING SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, INCLUDING THE LATEST FIELD MANUAL FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS. SHEETINDEX SHEET THIS PLAN CONTAINS 10 SHEETS NO DESCRIPTION 1 TITLE SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN 3 GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN 4 UTILITY PLAN 5 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES, LEGEND, AND EROSION CONTROL DETAILS 6 -7 DETAILS 8 PAVING AND STRIPING PUN L7 LANDSCAPE AND RESTORATION PUN Et SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN PROJECT STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE OWNER WATSON DEVELOPEMENT 3100 WEST LAKE STREET SUITE 215 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 SITE ADDRESS 19285 HIGHWAY 7 SHOREWOOD, MN 55401 I hereby certify that this plan, specification. or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. 23461 DATE 3/24/17 CRAId J. JOC UM, P.E. LIC. NO. INAKANSON ANDERSON DESIGN ENGINEER DATE I REVISION 7 -Hi svypuJq Wool —r Or - q�, 5 a7 Iierrnlr sr' Reich AQrk ROjedale AW dcTad itrAsior Blvd Ave CD EYC015� ).uw \VU PROJECT AREf alif•51Oy Hy1Frni� �I d ICJ Dillon+ z a iSIN Srad1V4'I RL $at9 ¢ M a 4 5 — pE ' -C*hia Er ui*Frm a' r Co 550h 55 _ I[iylgswoad Ter. I Hakanson Anderson Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 3601 Thurston Ave.. 0 Anoka, Minnesota 55303 7fi3 -4w hake 0 FAX demon.? -0520 ..w neon —a ndereon.c am THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI /ASCE 38 -2, ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." HENNEPINJ COUNTY, V MINNESOTA GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS THE 2016 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" AND THE 2013 EDITION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS" SHALL GOVERN. ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCES SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SIGNING SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, INCLUDING THE LATEST FIELD MANUAL FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS. SHEETINDEX SHEET THIS PLAN CONTAINS 10 SHEETS NO DESCRIPTION 1 TITLE SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN 3 GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN 4 UTILITY PLAN 5 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES, LEGEND, AND EROSION CONTROL DETAILS 6 -7 DETAILS 8 PAVING AND STRIPING PUN L7 LANDSCAPE AND RESTORATION PUN Et SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN PROJECT STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE OWNER WATSON DEVELOPEMENT 3100 WEST LAKE STREET SUITE 215 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 SITE ADDRESS 19285 HIGHWAY 7 SHOREWOOD, MN 55401 I hereby certify that this plan, specification. or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the lows of the State of Minnesota. 23461 DATE 3/24/17 CRAId J. JOC UM, P.E. LIC. NO. INAKANSON ANDERSON DESIGN ENGINEER DATE I REVISION / � L LEGEND o I -- REMOVE J / / o m 11 L I BITUMINOUS Im PAVEMENT / REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB '/ _ l l PROPERTY LINE • PROPERTY MONUMENT FOUND / L �.'/: a //� \ 1 II PROPERTY L j s LINE e ' / � _ 1 BUILDING p I s I L1 I1, II 1 I CONCRETE SURFACE �I7 l� 20 D 20 w SCALE IN FEET — DATE 42617 REVISION CITY COMMENTS nep sio� a�a ma er aer , „e ,aw, oan. t Hakanson Anderson Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 36D7 Thurcbn Ave., Anoka, Minnesota 55303 763 - 427 -5860 FAX 763 - 427 -0520 ww.hak.naon- andercan..— STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA EXISTING CONTOUR SAWCUT WATER SERVICE REMOVAL (1) Dote 3/24/1 Lic. No. 23461 o,a�mC.t.t AND CAP AT PROPERTY LINE. REMOVE REMAINING END CURB .5 �� I^ '' PIPE. O - REMOVAL AP GENERAL NOTES: /SAWCUT ''w' °e,F. 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ANY EXISTING SEWER AND WATER WATER SERVICE AND CAP AT PROPERTY "'.� / _ e `� SAWCUT SEWER SERVICE �1d AND CAP AT PROPERTY _ SERVICES AND ABANDON THE SERVICES AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, / LINE. REMOVE REMAINING PIPE. © SALVAGE EXISTING CATCH z _ LINE. REMOVE REMAINING _ PIPE' 02 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TYPE 1 BARRICADES 30 FEET THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BITUMINOUS -� BASIN CASTING v� - APART ALONG SAWCUT BITUMINOUS i REMOVAL. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO FILL IN THE REMOVED BITUMINOUS WITH CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE TO ELIMINATE A PAVEMENT ALONG P�,x. DROP OFF UNTIL THE NEW PAVEMENT IS INSTALLED. / FACE OF CURB J wo _ 3. WHEN THE CONTRACTOR NEEDS TO CLOSE A LANE ON DELTON AVENUE FOR BITUMINOUS AND CURB REMOVAL AND SAWCUT SEWER SERVICE L _ m 111 aov r CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLOSE THE LANE PER TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUT NO. 13 FROM THE / AND CAP AT PROPERTY MMUTCD. LINE. REMOVE REMAINING K i, p 111 REFERENCE NOTES: PIPE. Q® _ 1 1(' CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, BITUMINOUS a z o 1 ,�� CONCRETE AND BITUMINOUS SURFACES, SIGNS, TREES, UTILITIES, e PAVEMENT _ _ � 1 1 1 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING FOUNDATIONS, RETAINING WALLS, LIGHT POLES, LANDSCAPING, AND OTHER EXISTING SURFACE AND BEGIN CURB T - � �m s c o - �� 1 A 7 � I 1 -- co��,ele c�,o a e � - UNDERGROUND IMPROVEMENTS. REMOVAL _ ' 1 _ -'- _ - - - -- >, © SERVICE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD /? LOCATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL TELEVISE EXISTING SEWER SERVICE. IF I I I Agin = R0 SERVICE IS IN GOOD CONDITION SERVICE SHALL BE USED FOR ti p I NEW BUILDING. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT ° 4 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS IF II PAVEMENT ALONG FUTURE TOE OF CURB / � L o I -- REMOVE J / / o m 11 L I BITUMINOUS Im PAVEMENT / REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB jy _ l l RETAINING SAVE /PROTECT WALL - 5 EXISTING TREES 1 II PROPERTY L j s LINE _ p I s I L1 I1, II 1 I �I7 l� 20 D 20 w SCALE IN FEET — DATE 42617 REVISION CITY COMMENTS nep sio� a�a ma er aer , „e ,aw, oan. t Hakanson Anderson Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 36D7 Thurcbn Ave., Anoka, Minnesota 55303 763 - 427 -5860 FAX 763 - 427 -0520 ww.hak.naon- andercan..— STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA NE s2ET F B Dote 3/24/1 Lic. No. 23461 o,a�mC.t.t / CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1 GENERAL NOTES: 1. SEE SHEET 4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. / / 01 REFERENCE NOTES: a Q, FINAL DESIGN OF THE MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL / SD j/ SHALL BE BY A MINNESOTA LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. 04 9 p 5 e/ ROCK ENTRANCE �gl PER e �� c LBW 980.0 TWO 983.4 SILT FENCE / PER 5 INFILTRATION _ /' ee, TRENCH PER T - I, MODUTAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL Q, 981. I L 9 �FB � v I BW 982.2 Y 900 � 9B3oo II III —Ra- SILT CE a \� BW 983.7 PER 2 _ - - - -- � /e•� G �o II 83.14 G L x G 5a _ d 12 -'Z0'_- III \�L 0 O� II�Im 4-1 � I � 16G� �y&5�p0 9g� �0 I 001 F �ffi .7 BW 9$ .7 � B X987.7 TW7 89.1, L�� TW 99�U .d TW 993.0 o-� / B LOCK - RETAINING WALL Q1 BW 986.0 B TW 986.0 W 987.0 BW 986.0 BW 981.7 3 7.�.q� TW 987.0 TW 987.0 II RETAINING WALL Q 1 I I - LEGEND 0 INLET PROTECTION PER 3 AND 4 l� 20 D 20 w SCALE IN FEET — DATE 7 :e REVISION REVISED INFILTRATION POND FOR SCREENING °° ' "e ' oan. a NC t Hakanson Anderson STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE GRADING, DRAINAGE AND NE aE ,7 CITY COMMENTS °; ,„ s,vl 9 ^eB ° ^ °w° � CINII Engineers Dnd Lnnd SNF�eYDFe EROSION CONTROL PLAN DMS 36D7 63-427 Ave.. 0 Anoka, -427 -05 55303 763 - 427 -5860 An 763- 427 -0520 F B Dote 3/24/1 Lic. No. 23461 o,a�mu.t ww.hakaneon- andenon.com CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA CONNECT TO ST) EXISTING STORM MANHOLE (R -1 3 72^ DIA. ( INV= 972.50 =978.9) RI =978.90 (NW)INV= 975.08 - (SW) 975.06 16LF SUMP= SUM P= 974.50 15" CPP / \ / 60" DIA. (R -3067) / \ / FL= 979.00 ISLF / 25LF 15" CPP 48" DIA. (S)INV= 974.50 15" Cpp (NE)INV= 975.16 O 0.50% �` / a„a O 0.50% — 977.30 / SUMP= 971.50 STM /MH #1 Q3 46" DIA. (R -1733) RIM = 978.80 — 976.00 / INSTALL SALVAGED (NW)INV= 972.63 24LF (SW)INV= 974.88 CASTING WITH CONCRETE RINGS AND GROUT Cp 24" CPP O D.50% / FERNCO - / /! CB /MH N2 0" DIA. DRIFICE ADDLE 6` WYE TAP SADDLE APPROVED EQUAL 1Q �J� p� JE /` 72" DIA. (R -3067) FL= 978.79 - SECTION A -A /OR �'Y° tGN -0 / (5)INV= 974.50 (SW)INV= 975.00 / GOLF fi" PVC SEWER PIPE j (NE)INV= 975.00 SUMP= 971.50 R"I R -1733 (SDR 26) CASTING O 1.0D% �1J 52LF - WET TAP 6" DIP S�G , �GF'O CPP WATER SERVICE e Ey'v,tl SS p�� O D%F O.D - _ r2-7— 6" GATE VALVE AND +4 ,, 38LF 30" PERF CPP 451-r 30" PERT CPP A OX PERq) 6 O 0.00% / O 0.00% - THREE 977.30 1D" DIA. (2) 6 " -45' DIP BENDS � - 24" CPP ORIFICES — 976.00 AND GOLF 6" DIP s= 6" WEIR WATERMAIN ® a — 974.88 WALL 15" CPP a a a 972.63 - / / b F _ A / z f NCH � TRENCH PER 5 e p PROFILE � STM/MH #1 N2UT 4 PEI - m /�2 d III 1 7I m`I s� GENERAL NOTES: I I \ 1. SEE 6 FOR SERVICE PIPE BEDDING. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE TRENCH BOXES OR SHORING AS NEEDED TO ING CLOSURE RBE DELTRONTAVENUE WILL ALLOWED. REFEREPAVEMENT NON 1Q CONTRACTOR SHALL USE EXISTING SERVICE IF APPLICABLE. SEE REFERENCE NOTE 3 ON SHEET 2. Q ALL DUCTILE IRON PIPE SHALL BE POLYWRAPPED. Q CONSTRUCT MANHOLE PERT. 2D 0 2D 40 7 SCALE IN FEET DATE 4 26 17 REVISION CIIN COMMENTS is an. a Hakanson Andersan STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE UTILITY PLAN uE or 1n" sal�Llor "wriajyaso�a.__ , °� ]:ms:1 En.i d ivil Engineers and Lond Surveyors 4ET 36D7 Thl Ave., Anoka, Minnesota 55303 F Dote 3/ � � Lia. No. 23461 ��DU� 763 - 427 -5860 FAX 763 - 427 -0520 ww.hak.nson- andenon.— CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA B r 4 / CONCRETE VALLEY / \ GUTTER PERe 7 / \ / 1611 11616 CONCRETE / rl CURB AND GUTTER PER / MN/DOT LATEN71 D DDD WHITE PAVEMENT 3' MESSAGE PER 2 e4 _0. / (TYP.) 1 / P PAVEMENT MESSAGE PER Jj (TYP.) e %11 GRAPHIC ARROW -EXIT pE 4 GREEN tpN PAVEMENT MESSAGE / PER 4 THICKENED EDGE B612 CONCRETE CURB AND / SIDEWALK PER(4) GUTTER PER MN /DOT STANDARD 7 PLATE 7100 (TYP.) BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT PER 2 TAPER LAST 4' OF 1QQ 14" e CURB '- TO MATCH HANDICAP EXISTING PAVEMENT SYMBOL WHITE 4" CONCRETE CONCRETE WALK PAVEMENT 1' -4" 4" SOLID LINE, WHITE , ; ^ ° ° GRAPHIC ARROW- DOUBLE ,CD' 18' TYP 9' TYP. WRKONCRETE CROSSWALK BITUMINOUS <4 4" SOLID PAVEMENT LINE WHITE / !!` J�y�o WHITENG PER ` (TYP.) t•_a- / 10 / CONCRETE VALLEY / GUTTER SEE(f) GRAPHIC ARROW- SINGLE MATCH EXISTING 4 WHITE PAVEMENT BITUMINOUS CURB MESSAGE PER 4 THICKENED GENERAL NOTES: EDGE SIDEWALK 1. SEETFOR ADDITIONAL PAVING DETAILS. PER(j) 7 REFERENCE NOTES: (1) COLOR: PANTONE 369 -C (GREEN) BY SHERWIN WILLIAMS. - ® COLOR: TM2151 (WHITE) BY SHERWIN WILLIAMS. SEE DETAIL . 1� 20 0 2D 40 SCALE IN FEET — DATE REVISION is oan. uE . 26 ,7 CITY COMMENTS ,„ I NC.1.1 Hakanson Andersan STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE PAVING AND STRIPING PLAN om1„" s�Y��LIOr "Mi ajy PSO�a� __ °� ¢Y. Civi. -ton A- a no aond Minn eo1a rs s BcT 1 161 �n DMS 36D7 Th b Ave, A k d 1 55303 763 - 427 -5860 FAX 763 - 427 -D520 F B Dole 3/�� Lic. No. 23461 �6X2C" ww.hak.n,Ion- a.denon..onn CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AIA. 91 PLANT LIST: Site Plantings OTY. KEY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE /RDDT TREES 7 ABM ree Ace, x fm—ii Autumn Blaze' Autumn Blaze Maple 2,-1/2" B &B 5 BHS Piceo glouco d.BS.td Black Hills Spruce 6 ht. B &B / 5 LEA� e 2 PFC M,I", ' Prairiefire' Prairiefire Crobapple 1 -1/2' B &B SHRUBS 'EST, �/e JJ 9 GMS Spiraea joponicd 'Goltlmound Goltlmound Spired 2 G.I. Pot �- 6 NFS Spiraea joponica 'Neon Flash' Neon Flash Spired 2 Gal. Pot 11 EGA Thujo occidentolis Emerald Green Arborvites 2 G.I. Pat e� PERENNIALS & ORNAMENTAL GRASSES F' 26 KFG Cola magrostis acutiilora Karl Forester Feather Reed Gross 3 Gal. Pot BM 7 5 JBD Hemerocallis, sp w . Janice Brown Dayfily 1 Gal. Pot e' �! PLANTING NOTES: Contractor shop p—ide one year guorontee of all plant moteriols. The guorontee begins on the date of the Landscape Achit —G written occeplonce of the initial plonling. Replocemenl plant moteriols shall NFS _ also hove o one year guorontee commencing upon plonling. ;t 6 All plants to be northBrn -grown and hordy. Plants to be installed as per standard AAN plonling practices. OQ 0 use minimum 12" loom planting soil on trees and 6" on shrubs. K20 FG 2 G �b - Contractor shall verify locations with oll utililiss prior to instollotion of plants. JBD 9- All landscaping, inclutling seetletl and .added areas to be manually xaleretl until established. 5 _ Stoking of trees optionol; reposition it not plumb after one year. „e Wrop all smooth- borketl trees - fasten lop and bottom. Remove Dy April 1. 6 j, �� , Open lop of burlap on B &B moteriols; remo a pot on patted plants; split and break apart peat pots. d s neces P ag `d Prune plants a nary - per standard n sexy practice. Owner shall be responsible for maintenance after acceptance of the work by the Owner. / b EGA � Plonk 1M1011 be immediately planted upon arrival of Site. Properly heel -in moteriols if necessary. w ses s All tlislurDetl areas to be seetletl unless otherwise noted Sao sM1OII be northern grown and portly. DD _ Planting bed, for shrubs shall hove (a oz in.) weetl barrier fobs 3" - a" of 1 -1/2" ° GMS mohed R'i— Rock 1.11h antlon4" verticolom(cou',grco grotle) block steel edging. The edging shall Ip 7 be placed and slaked rith smooth lines o s shorn on the plan. Weed barrier shall not y� arountl or Gap to perennials o ore rental grosses. Weed barrier may be omitted if weetl. can be e. nagsd by using Preen o equivalent weetl pre - emergent and prevenlotive. Double sh,etltletl tleo,k brown ha,tlwootl mulch 9 deep shall be provitletl arountl all new trees. i $ ®1B °r_BH5 HB aa�� r till I I Retaining walls o not the rcsponsiDilily of the Landscape Architect. Contact the Project Engineer �r for tletails, locations, moteriols, and spscifi,oti— tar o1I retaining rolls. m GMS }� y� 2 BHS a / `11S„ Save all existing trees shown on the plan. Protection fencing shall be usetl if necessary. 1 - BHS '_ p9 BHS Soil testing shall be completed by the Landscape Contractor to en -re that soils are suitable to be ¢� - usetl in plonling a as. Where proposetl green a ore replacing previous pavement or compacted area "I `I subsurface base shall be re ovso to o depth of r9 feet minimum and replaced with soils that will sustain proper growing conditions. ROBILDIE OR PDL /E,j".LE . DP"Tw.) e- N°`I7,D/ ,E OR PALYZ.LEIE SIR i .P, RE- GA. WIRE-3 a,RD I—) „ B siEE[ R,Rr cAB BE Is xS`H3DQUiR[D`A "O TuxEBURaPETwTH FIRST DQUBLENSTRAID MuL[ iusnu[[x LxT[x�oD sT SinxL PER Ax 0 EQUAL AO, CAUCE wIRE -3 PER TREE ORIGINAL GRADE P T T C SiE[E R 9" -6` LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH INYSAUCER- EXTEND PAST STAKE ,INAL".A. 01 PLANT TO PA MIx. ri(l)l NuLCx IN SnuCER- ExiExD i STAKE L of A EQUAL ORIGINAL GRADE l� Yzf'e]II' SinxES SET t]0'PAS EQUAL ORIGINAL GRADE Ta BALKFILL MTH PLANTING SOIL AT APART UNDISE L BnNCKFILWwfTHEPLAxTINGL.dL Z9• uxp rl(� AINSTUIR EB DDESOILL OF MIN. Y.]'.]0' STAKES SET t]0' ,C MIN. LL AT 2D D 20 90 B [S: N ANDLE -3 PER 1REE B 1.OTW0 ALTERNATE METHODS OF TREE STAKING ARE SHOWN. UMGSTURBED SOIL BACKFILL MIIH PLANTING SOIL N RED TREES' Haw D ER SCALE IN FEET ES IN A PLUMB DIMENSION FROM EDGE IQU 2. 1 POSITIDN THROUGHOUT THE GJARAKFEE THQUaE SDBIRON TO Sly EGTREE& H DSEN ROO . m CONTAINERRED PLUIB POSITION REODED HARDYpCO NULCx uNLE.S Ix A NAIERM� (TIP.) T -DIED S Io MULCH TO BE IN COITACT RITH TRUIK. O. sCA Y Au n PuxTING ]. To PLANTING, 3NG. AID SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL M`DECIDUOUS DTREEL PLANTING DETAIL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL ff DATE REVISION NEE T : ,] ADDED SCREENING AT EAST ENTRANCE Hakanson ArjdersoTj STARBUCKS COFFEE STORE LANDSCAPE AND RESTORATION PLAN Lt °g ♦ 38 1] REVISED SHEET NUMBER Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 36131 63-4 7 Ave.. D Anoka, -427 -05 55303 763 - 427 -5660 FAX 763 - 427 -0520 F Li ww.hGk.nGOn- and...n..om CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 616. n, TYPE AA & AA1 CIMARRON LED RF � P ion yaw <. 3, M �rrr m .Iae�N�'e W o, 9pif0 &l NEW 9p1 ®Eo ■ O- r., Lam, INI-NG NFONWA .1.. wE ��•`�� enewowuurw. ro• x. r. r... ....e�.a...w....wouwie +.i.mm.w. a� ®•�� 0.2 O . 5�0 o 0.0 Calc ]anew c nera b.] 2.0 2.0 ', o.a e � 1.3 3.0 acel ne IXb U � Fe alt Zo 0.2 0.6 / rezone o / 1.5 �DO / 0 2 �O fi it Oalt 0.6 0.] O do zone us 0.� 0.0 .3 .o cnlo zone IXS 'o.o - to - o.o - 'o.o - o.o - o.o Care fief 2 SITE I PHOTOMETRIC PLAN ❑ AA ❑ AA, n�ne �� neenar .... /w)z of E�OnTF pill i .I 7k� ca U z Q � BMeI IL11b- E1.0 AA1 elc zone 4 2.2 3.4 \ O A 0.3 0. 1 2.6 3.5 2 d.0 0 2.8 .6 0 .4 12.9 2.4 1.3 0.2 c ZO e 1.1 1.1 2.0 1.7 '1 5 6 9 .On Ic zone# \ 0.9 2.5 2.1 'i.3d41.1 3.9 '1.1 '1.4 '1.1 0 0.2 talc Z.-<s ¢„ -Al ... #, If 2.5 '1.8 \'1.2 1.0 M N cal- mnc #5 �'3.2 2.9 '1.� 41. 53,'l s 1.4 1.2 1.2 '1. 0. '1 1 1.8 ' .3 2.4 2.2 1 I.A d r 2.82.8 '1 .5 1.9 2.1 2.1 2. 2 2.p 2.0 1. 1.1 '1 4 .4 .1 3.3 2.9 Z celo Zone 2.5,' '1.8 2.8 3.5 2.4 2.6 3.6 2.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 2.2 .3 2.9 2.1 1.4 0.9 0.'. Celt Zone #1 2.8 '21.1 11.9 2.6 2.9 . 2.4 2.5 '1.8 1.1 0.9 ta10.7 c ie IXi 3.8 3.8 1.3'1.8 '1.4 '0 3.6 p ! .3 .o cnlo zone IXS 'o.o - to - o.o - 'o.o - o.o - o.o Care fief 2 SITE I PHOTOMETRIC PLAN ❑ AA ❑ AA, n�ne �� neenar .... /w)z of E�OnTF pill i .I 7k� ca U z Q � BMeI IL11b- E1.0 RECEIVED Vvg CITY QF ,$.HO,R WOOD To: Greg Lerud, City Administrator; Marie Darling, City Planning Director; Tim Keane, City Attorney From: David Watson Re: Paul Stelmachers' presentation at the City Council Meeting on August 28th, 2017 Date: September 21, 2017 Below are the developer's (Watson) responses to Paul Stelmachers' presentation given at the City Council Meeting on August 28th. In reviewing the transcript of Paul's presentation at the City Council on August 28th, except for two items Paul discussed, it makes sense for me to reply to Paul's handouts rather than the transcript since his presentation is based off of his handouts. Transcript Items First: Paul states "You may not be aware, a lot of things go on at the high school. This is a yearly calendar. It is 187 pages — about a negative 6 font. Their enrollment is currently at 3120 and they want to get to 3400. Watson response: I met with Superintendent Peterson on September 12th and he supports the project. He sent an email to Greg Lerud on September 13th stating his position. Second: Paul states, "However, growth at the school is not just limited to enrollment. Growth consists is adding and upgrading of sports facilities, performing arts facilities and surrounding parking lots. The sprawling campus has an art center, 4 gymnasiums, a football arena, an ice arena, veterans baseball field and 4 softball fields and additional practice fields. When they upgrade or add to these amenities they are not only used by staff and students they open it up to the surrounding community, which means more traffic, more people coming into the area." Watson response: This is an existing condition and not a result of the drive -thru function of the Starbucks. This Starbucks is a convenience location, not a destination location. Most of the functions listed above occur during non - school hours. Handouts The first three pages have a picture of traffic on each page and notes below. The first two pages show and comment on the traffic at the intersection of Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road. The third page shows and comments on the traffic on eastbound Delton Avenue. Watson response: The intersection of Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road is not an adjoining road to the premises. The traffic study done by Spack Consulting, which has been reviewed and agreed to by WSB (City's Traffic Engineer), shows that the level of service at the Delton Avenue entry /exit is currently a B and remains a B with the development in place. The level of service of the Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road intersection (non- ' SON VV ,. TI C adjoining to the premises) is currently an F and remains an F with the development in place. The delay time for this intersection is actually reduced with the development in place because some cars that enter the site off of Delton Avenue will utilize the Vine Hill Road exit thus distributing traffic from Delton Avenue onto Vine Hill Road. The fourth page of the handout is page 2 of Spack Consulting Technical Memorandum dated August 22, 2017. The following section is underlined "Starbucks is not a destination business; they are a convenience driven business. They position their stores to draw from existing traffic and existing traffic generators ". Watson response: The above is confirmed by the above mentioned traffic study and its underlying data, which has been reviewed and agreed to by WSB, that projects only 13 new cars will be added to the existing condition of 900 cars during the time period of 7am -8am on weekdays. - Pages 5 -7 of the handout are copies of news articles (one page from three separate articles) and sections of these articles that mention Starbucks as a "destination" are underlined. Watson response: Below is from Julie Wolleat, senior store development manager with Starbucks Without putting words into the mouth of our founder, while we strive to be a destination for the neighborhoods we serve, a third place in their day, we are still very much a convenience driven business in a suburban, standalone location such as this. That hasn't changed. We selected this location because of the traffic generators that are there today. I would not have moved forward with this site if I had to make the assumption that we that would be driving traffic from outside of the existing trade area to the store. While it is an important part of our mission statement to be a part of the communities and neighborhoods we serve, this location is very much a convenience driven location and the decision logic to move forward was based on the existing conditions of the trade area, not on pulling traffic from outside of the immediate trade area. Page 8 of the handout is page 2 of Spack Consulting's Technical Memorandum dated April 27, 2017. The section "Coffee Shops Data collection was done at six coffee shops with drive - through services in November 2010, August 2011 and February 2012. Fourteen days of data were collected. The coffee shops were located in the cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis," is underlined. Paul's point on this was drive -thru technology has evolved since this data was collected. Watson response: Starbucks' knowledge of site design /circulation /stacking and their improved drive -thru technology is a positive. - Page 9 of the handout is a copy of an article titled How Starbucks Reinvented the Customer Experience in the Drive Thru. VVtea..': Watson response: Starbucks' knowledge of site design /circulation /stacking and their improved drive -thru technology is a positive. - Page 10 of the handout is page 2 of the City Staff Report dated August 28, 2017. The section "The City's traffic engineer has determined that the impact of the use as proposed could be mitigated if the developer makes alterations to the frontage road at the site entrance and at the Vine Hill Road /Delton Lane Intersection" is underlined. Watson response: Watson's position on the alternations (recommended improvements) is stated in Watson's memo re: City Staff Report dated August 28th, 2017. Page 11 of the handout is a copy of the email from Patricia Otto at MnDOT dated June 21, 2017 that was included in the agenda package. The section of the email that states "13 AM peak hour trips which should not have noticeable impact on the existing congestion" is underlined and Paul comments that "This is incorrect. It will be 13 cars & 26 Trips ". Watson response: Paul is correct that it is 13 cars, not trips. In all material that Watson and Spack have provided we state that it is 13 cars. - Page 12 of the handout is page 13 of the Spack Traffic Study dated March 27, 2017. Watson response: There are no markings to this page and therefore I do not have a response. Page 13 of the handout is a copy of a letter from the City of Minnetonka to Paul Hornby (Shorewood's City Engineer) dated June 21, 2017. Sections of the letter that mention the development's impact on traffic are underlined. Watson response: Watson met with Julie Wischnack (Minnetonka Development Director) on September 12th and Minnetonka's position is they will defer to Shorewood with regards to this development. - Page 14 of the handout is page 3 of the City Staff Report dated August 28, 2017. The section titled 'Connection to Vision / Mission: Sustainable tax base" is highlighted with the comment "Moot Point" pointed towards the highlighted section. Watson response: None Paul also handed out a 2 page Petition. Watson response: None RECEIVED 4 A <E ,'x-_'11 V � CITY OF SHOREWOOD To: Greg Lerud, City Administrator; Marie Darling, City Planning Director; Keane, City Attorney From: David Watson Re: Kris Thayer's presentation at the City Council Meeting on August 28th, 2017 Date: September 21, 2017 Below are the developer's (Watson) responses to Kris Thayer's presentation /handout given at the City Council Meeting on August 281h. In reviewing the transcript of Kris' presentation at the City Council on August 28th, he spoke about signage and provided a handout. Below are my comments on both.. Transcript Item Kris states "The suggestion was made that there would just be a sign saying No Left Turn between the hours of 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. Well we already have one of those signs on Delton Avenue on the other side of Vine Hill, and I know that there are other Shady Hill neighbors who see that that sign really doesn't work. Those signs just don't work." Watson response: The agreed distribution of traffic shows only 4 cars making a left turn into the site off of Delton during the one hour period of 7am -8am. On September 6th I conducted a study and made 8 left turns into the site off of Delton from 7:20am -8am and my longest wait time to turn was 6 seconds. This study along with the You Tube videos have been provided to the city staff. Most signage is not 100% effective but that does not mean that they do not work. For the drivers who do not follow the signage, the eastbound traffic is moving at a slow enough pace that the traffic does stop to allow the turn. This was proven out in the above mentioned study. Handouts - In the second bullet point it is stated "The congestion includes all surrounding streets. The backup on the shoulder of Hwy 7 is particularly dangerous ". Watson response: The intersection of Highway 7 and Vine Hill Road is not an adjoining road to the premises. In addition, the traffic study done by Spack Consulting, which has been reviewed and agreed to by WSB (City's Traffic Engineer), shows that this development will not have an impact on the level of service of the adjoining roads (Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road) and the non - adjoining intersection of Delton Avenue /Vine Hill Road. In the fourth bullet point it is stated "Starbucks customers are likely to be eastbound commuters, during the hours of lam to 9am. This only adds to the congestion already present." _,AINOV N DF� NT,E UCXPM31�`, Watson response: The before mentioned traffic study projects only 13 additional cars during the period of lam — 8am will be added to an existing condition of 900 cars. The level of service for eastbound Delton Avenue does not change with the development in place. - In the fifth bullet point it is stated "The intersection of Delton and Vine Hill is already graded poorly by MnDCT, please don't make it any worse ". Watson response: The traffic study shows that the level of service of this intersection is currently an F and remains an F with the development in place. The delay time for this intersection is actually reduced with the development in place because some cars that enter the site off of Delton Avenue will utilize the Vine Hill Road exit thus distributing traffic from Delton Avenue onto Vine Hill Road. - The handout includes an aerial of the proposed development, titled "Proposed drive - through Starbucks ", and has the following question: Question 1, 2 & 4 — (1) How long is the chute? (2) How many cars will stack up? (4) Will they back up into the street? Watson response: The stacking lane can accommodate 13 cars without spilling into Delton Avenue. Chuck Rickart at WSB has confirmed that the impound movement of traffic will not be an issue. The proposed improvement of adding an eastbound turn - lane into the site further alleviates any concerns with regards to the stacking. Question 3 — How will the get out? Watson response: During the AM Peak Hour (7am -8am on weekdays during the school year) most customers will utilize the Vine Hill Road exit and head north to the intersection. The level of service for the Vine Hill Road entry /exit is currently an A and remains an A with the development in place. This distribution of traffic has been agreed to by WSB (City's Traffic Engineer). 1V AT SON DE t'L LOP1��iENT', LL To: Mayor and City Council - City of Shorewood RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2017 CITY OF SHOREWOOD cc: Greg Lerud, City Administrator; Marie Darling, City Planning Director; Chuck Rickart, City Transportation Engineer; Tim Keane, City Attorney From: David Watson Re: City Staff Report Date: September 23, 2017 A. Introduction I would like to provide the Council with an update on the results of my meetings with the City of Minnetonka, the Superintendent of Minnetonka Schools, the results of Starbucks study regarding locations near high schools, and my response to the most recent City Staff Report. City of Minnetonka The City of Minnetonka sent a letter dated September 8th to the City of Shorewood that discusses their opinions of a northbound turn lane at Vine Hill Rd after a meeting they had with WSB and the City of Shorewood. In the letter, the City of Minnetonka states, "Based on the results of the traffic study, we would request the City of Shorewood require improvements to mitigate increases in traffic in the area to the existing condition or better." Vern Swing and I met with the City of Minnetonka (Development Director and Director of Engineering) on September 12th to discuss the above mentioned letter. Vern and I walked them through the results of the traffic study that shows that this proposed development does not have a negative impact on the existing conditions. They informed us that their position stated in the letter is based solely upon the information they received from WSB at their meeting and not on their own review of the traffic study. They stated that going forward their position is that they will defer to the City of Shorewood with regards to the required improvements for this development. The existing condition of Vine Hill Rd northbound from 7:30am — 8:00am on weekdays during the school year was discussed and they have been aware of this condition for many years. I asked if they have any improvements scheduled for this section of Vine Hill in their 5 year Capital Improvement Plan and they informed me that they do not. The only improvement planned for this stretch of road is a pedestrian trail. Also on September 12th I met with the Superintendent of Minnetonka Schools (Dennis Peterson) and after discussing the project with Mr. Peterson he supports the development, does not have concerns with regards to the proposed Starbucks development causing additional back -ups to the High School, and thinks it is a great opportunity for parents and students to meet. Superintendent Peterson sent the City Staff an email on Sept 13 th stating his position. DE VE L©PNIENT, WI' L C C. Starbucks Drive -Thru Study At the Council meeting on August 28th the Council requested that Starbucks look into the drive -thru delivery times for Starbucks located near high schools. Julie Wolleat with Starbucks looked into six locations that are near high schools and the average drive -thru delivery time of this sample group is 50.34 seconds. Starbucks strives to have a delivery time of 50 seconds, so this is a .34 second increase. Starbucks does not track the number of customers per car but the district managers that Julie spoke with did state that it was not uncommon to have multiple passengers in the cars when a store is near a high school. D. Staff's Recommended Improvements As I stated at the Council Meeting on August 28th, the result of the traffic study shows that during the AM Peak Hour (7am -8am on weekdays during the school year) the Starbucks Development does not have a noticeable impact on the existing traffic condition. In the memo from WSB dated August 23`d it lists three improvements that WSB says would improve the existing traffic condition with the Starbucks development in place. The criteria for a conditional use permit allows the City to consider "the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads ". The traffic study that was done for this proposed development, at the request of City Staff, shows that this development does not have an adverse effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads. Below are the results of the traffic study that shows the existing condition, the impact of the proposed Starbucks development, and the impact of WSB's three recommended improvements. Existine Condition Delton Ave Entrance Level of Service B Vine Hill Rd Entrance Level of Service A Delton and Vine Hill Level of Service F Proposed Development Level of Service B Level of Service A Level of Service F (delay time of 54.73) (delay time of 53.03) WSB Improvements Level of Service A Level of Service A Level of Service E (delay time of 48.63) As the above shows, the proposed Starbucks development does not have an adverse effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads. WSB's three recommended improvements result in an improvement to the existing condition, they are not required to mitigate the impact of the proposed Starbucks development. As stated in my attorney's letter dated August 28, 2017 to Mayor Zerby and the City Council, the proposed project satisfies all applicable criteria for a CUP established by the City's zoning ordinance. The law in Minnesota is that a local government body must approve a conditional or interim use permit application if the applicant satisfies all conditions set forth in the applicable ordinance. Minnesota appellate courts have held that the denial of a conditional or interim use permit is arbitrary and unlawful W ' T' DE VE LOP1%1 ENT, LL C when the proposed use meets the requirements specified by the relevant zoning ordinance and when the reasons for denial have no factual basis in the record. As it relates to traffic, the city is allowed to consider "the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads" when determining whether to grant or deny an application for CUP. The traffic study, as discussed above, shows that the proposed Starbucks development will not have an adverse effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads. The improvements that WSB is recommending are not required forthis proposed development to meet the criteria for a CUP established by the City's zoning ordinance. Below is my position as it relates to the three recommended improvements: First Improvement, add a right turn lane into the site driveway off of eastbound Delton Ave Watson Response: Although it is not needed, as a condition of approval, I am willing to install the right turn lane into the site driveway off of eastbound Delton Ave as shown on WSB's rendering attached to the September 25th City Staff Report. Second Improvement, at the intersection of Delton Ave / Vine Hill Rd modify northbound Vine Hill Rd to add a dedicated right turn lane going east on Delton Ave. Watson Response: WSB's proposed right turn lane on Vine Hill involves utilizing Minnetonka's right of way land and actually moving Vine Hill Rd closer to the residents on Vine Hill Rd. This will also result in less room for Minnetonka's future trail. As I previously stated, the City of Minnetonka is aware of the existing condition on northbound Vine Hill Rd and they do not have an improvement budgeted in their 5 year Capital Improvement Plan to remedy this existing condition. My proposed development does not have a noticeable impact on the existing condition and therefore I am not in agreement with installing a right turn lane on Minnetonka's right of way land. Although it is not needed, as a condition of approval, I am willing to work with the City of Shorewood and install a right turn lane that utilizes Shorewood's right of way land that is located on the southwest corner of Vine Hill Rd and Delton Ave. This incorporates WSB's desired 100 foot turn lane and has enough space for a school bus to make the appropriate turn from westbound Delton Ave to southbound Vine Hill Rd. Third, add a bypass lane on westbound Delton Ave to allow westbound cars to pass by cars queued to turn left into the site. Watson Response: My group believes this work is not needed and will create an unsafe condition. The traffic distribution shows just 4 cars entering the site during the AM Peak Hour from westbound Delton Ave. That is 4 cars making this turn over a one hour period. In an effort to show the reality of the situation, I shared with City Staff and Council the study (along with the videos) I did on September 61h that shows a car making this turn eight times between 7:20am and 8:00am and the longest wait time to make WDIE �'E LOPNIENT', LL C this turn was 6 seconds. Based on the distance of the entrance to the intersection and the traffic counts during this time of day, a car turning left off of westbound Delton would have to wait just over 11/2 minutes to cause a back -up into the Delton / Vine Hill intersection. Adding a by -pass lane will create safety issues. The first is a driver heading west on Delton can accidently or intentionally use this lane as a passing lane. Second, for cars exiting the site onto westbound Delton Ave they will have to navigate three lanes instead of two. Although it is not needed, as a condition of approval, if the City wants I will install a sign that prohibits a left turn into the site off of westbound Delton Ave during the AM Peak Hour. E. Reaction to Balance Staff report and conditions of Resolution of Approval. I have read the Resolution of Approval. Although I believe some of the conditions are not needed, I agree to be bound by all of them as stated but as to roadway changes, the conditions should read as set forth above. Thus paragraph Al) under Conclusions of the Resolution of Approval would read as follows (redline shows the changes): "A. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit subject to approval of the building permit by the Excelsior Fire District and subject to the following conditions and conformance with city code, zoning regulations and engineering guidelines. Prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall: 1) Revise the plans or submit the information as directed in the Engineer's memorandums dated April 19, 2017 and August 23, 2017, subject to the approval by the City Engineer, except that the applicant shall: a. Add a 100 -foot right turn lane (with tapers) into the site from east- bound Delton Avenue b. Add a right turn lane from north -bound Vine Hill Road to east -bound Delton Avenue utilizing Shorewood's right -of -way land located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Delton Ave and Vine Hill Road. C. Install and maintain a sign on west -bound Delton Avenue that says "No Left Turn Into Starbucks from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 n.m. weekdays" F. Introduction of Vern Swing and Bruce Malkerson. My traffic expert, Vern Swing, will be present at the City Council meeting to address any questions you or staff may have. Bruce Malkerson, who is my attorney, will also be present and available to address any legal questions you may have. 4 W I"- A LL "T SO N DE VE LOPNIENT, C G. Process. I ask that after you deliberate concerning this application that I be allowed a minute to address any questions or issues that you think have not adequately been addressed. Finally, I ask that if you find that there is not a majority vote in favor of the resolution with the additional conditions I discussed, I ask that you table the vote until there is a full council present. Thank you. h , R 0 0 00 0 ,N a 0 a r - -m . M� �� 0 .9 VJ E' 3 0 o Co y 0001 06 00 <O M N ? O E M 0 M 0] v rn C O O CP N U -- 000a��i M J (n -m . M� �� 0 .9 VJ E' 3 RECEIVED SEP H 2017 CITY OF SHOREWOOD PROPOSED STARBUCKS DEVELOPMENT— SHOREWOOD, MN WATSON DEVELOPMENT'S RESPONSE TO AN ARTICLE IN PIONEER PRESS DATED SEPTEMBER 5, 2017 The City of Shorewood's City Staff received a copy of the above reference article that discussed the traffic issues of the Starbucks store located at the corner of Marshall Avenue and Snelling ( "St Paul Store "). Below are the reason why the St Paul Store is NOT a comparable store to the proposed Starbucks development in Shorewood ( "Shorewood Starbucks'). 1. The St Paul Store is an urban in -fill store with zero setback on a site that is .43 acres. Shorewood Starbucks is a suburban location on a site that is twice the size of the St Paul Store (.87 acres). 2. The St Paul Store has a traffic count of 67,000 cars on the site's two adjacent roads (Marshall and Snelling). By comparison the Shorewood Starbucks traffic count is 35,000 cars on Hwy 7, which is a non - adjacent road. A car entering the Shorewood Starbucks pulls off of Hwy 7 onto Delton Blvd to enter /exit the site. The St Paul Store's entrance /exit is on the hard corner of Snelling and Marshall. 3. Given the site limitations of the St Paul Starbucks the drive -thru lane is significantly shorter and the number of parking stalls is significantly less. For the above reasons, the issues that the St Paul Starbucks is experiencing are NOT applicable to the Shorewood Starbucks. WATSON DE Z°E LOPATENT. 1-1-C, To: Marie Darling From: David Watson Re: Paul Stelmachers' Letter to Lee Gustafson at WSB Date: September 25, 2017 RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2011 CITY OF SHOREWOOD Marie — Below are Vern Swing's comments (in red font) to Paul Stelmachers' letter to Lee Gustafson. Mr. Paul Stelmachers 5210 Shady Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 Mr. Lee Gustafson, Senior Project Manager WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 RE: Proposed Starbucks C.U.P. in Shorewood Hello Mr. Gustafson, I write you asking for you to verify if the following statements are true and could have an impact on the findings of the Spack Traffic Impact Study. (Not a traffic engineer — not qualified to answer these questions.) 1. Spack used the designation of "Pass -By" trips as opposed to "Diverted or New Trips" which would have shown higher counts coming to the area. Land uses have a variety of trips associated them. For example, a stadium is a destination and its trips are typically new trips on the roadway. Homes, Apartments, Offices are all examples of primary destinations and will generate predominantly new trips on the adjoining roads. Other land uses such as gas station /convenience stores, fast food restaurants, coffee shops are not primary destination trip generators but rather are uses that draw trips to their sites from traffic that is already on the adjoining roadways. These trips choose to stop along the way to their primary destination and select the sites based on the ease and convenience of access. For example, WATSON DE VELOPINLENT, LL C most drivers will buy gas from the store on their side of the road, rather than go out of their way to choose a site on the other side of the street. As mentioned, Coffee shops, particularly in the AM Peak Hour, generally do not generated destination based trips, but rather draw from traffic that is already using the adjoining roads. In the AM Peak hour, people stop at coffee shops on their way to work. Generally, during the morning commute, coffee shop customers choose stores that are on the path to their destination and choose stores that they can get in and out of quickly. These trips are considered pass -by trips. To understand whether vehicle trips using a particular land use are destination based or non - destination based, the ITE gathered data from origin /destination (0 -D) studies. These are typically done through customer interviews. The results of the O -D studies conducted at coffee shop developments indicate that during the AM Peak hour 89 percent of the trips are pass -by trips from the adjoining streets. 2. Spack used ITE 91h edition © 2012, which relies on data acquired since the ITE Stn edition, published 5 years earlier in 2007. So the data they are using is 10 years old at worst and 5 years old at best. This is true. The data from studies that are 10+ years old versus studies that are 5 years old shows little variation over that time. While the rate of coffee consumption is on the rise, the rate of new store construction is also on the rise. Again, the off traffic peak store usage may be rising but the peak condition is still dependent on convenience to attract pass -by customers. In the case of the proposed Shorewood location, during the AM Peak, drivers will not choose to leave TH 7 to wait in a long queue to get to the site, to wait in line to get their coffee, to then wait in a long queue to get back to TH 7. They will instead choose a store that is more convenient. Trips destined to the High School, however, are already waiting — for them the detour through the coffee shop site is not inconvenient. 3. Spack used traffic counts only from Delton Avenue, but the Starbucks Representative stated that they used counts of T.H. # 7 (20K /day) in their calculus to decide if the site met their minimum criteria for counts. It appears that they want it both ways: Starbucks is counting on New & Diverted Trips to drive business, yet Spack is not, thereby underestimating the true impact of the development. The above statement is not accurate. Spack's traffic study shows the number of New & Diverted Trips during the AM Peak Hour since that is the existing condition of concern. The study does not disregard Hwy 7, it shows that given the existing condition during the AM Peak there will be very limited New & Diverted Trips from Hwy 7. The volume of traffic on Hwy 7 is obviously important to Starbucks during the non -AM Peak Hour. "'A""" Ii, A /,, DE «L©PmENT, LL C 4. (ITE) Trip Generation Manual suggests that "the user may wish to modify trip generation rates presented in this document to reflect ... special characteristics of the site or surrounding area." (emphasis mine). I am wondering if Spack made any allowances for the VERY'special characteristics of this site or surrounding areas.' Can this be verified? The site is located on a route that provides access to a High School. There are special characteristics associated with school related traffic peaks in terms of when they occur, the intensity, and the duration. This information was all captured in the traffic counts. As for trip generation no "VERY" special characteristics were identified. I spoke at the last Council Meeting but I believe the above topics were not adequately explained to the Council and I am hoping you can either confirm or deny my assertions. The next Council Meeting with this on the agenda in Monday, September 111h and I will be in attendance. Mr. Gustafson, I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Sincerely, Paul Stelmachers 952 - 221 -3321 3 ickv,& Where quality is our nature 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. • Minnetonka, MN 55345 (952) 939-8200 • Fax (952) 939-8244 eminnetonka.com September 25, 2017 Mr. Greg Lerud City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Subject: Vine Hill Road and Delton Avenue-Updated Drawings Dear Mr. Lerud, We received the revised proposed traffic mitigation recommendation drawing from the city of Shorewood on September 18, 2017. In this drawing recommending construction of a right turn lane on the Minnetonka side of Vine Hill Road, the northbound right turn lane has been reduced in length from previous sketches, and we understand that this was following further analysis of the traffic impacts by the city of Shorewood's traffic engineer. From our discussions with your city engineer, the improvements proposed will still address the increase in traffic from the existing conditions that is likely to use Vine Hill Road following the redevelopment of this parcel into a drive thru coffee shop. This construction would continue to propose impactful changes to residents in Minnetonka as well as create future cost impacts to Minnetonka for a future planned trail in this area. As an alternative to the above, the city of Minnetonka also received a sketch on September 21, 2017, which shows an expanded Vine Hill Road on the city of Shorewood side of Vine Hill Road with essentially the same configuration. If in the opinion of your traffic engineer this layout can mitigate traffic to the same degree as the September 18, 2017 recommendations, and it is designed to meet State Aid standards that also accommodate bus turning movements, this would be a preferred solution for Minnetonka. This alternative reduces impacts to the area as well as maintains right-of- way for the future planned trail on the Minnetonka side. We appreciate the city of Shorewood coordinating and including comments from the city of Minnetonka on this project and again request that the improvements recommended by WSB & Associates, Inc. or an alternative agreed upon by WSB & Associates, Inc. are implemented to mitigate traffic in the area resulting from the development. Please don't hesitate to contact me directly if you would like to discuss further. Sincerely, Will Manchester, PE Director of Engineering cc: Geralyn Barone, City Manager Julie Wischnack, Community Development Director Chris LaBounty, Engineering Project Manager Marie Darling, Shorewood Planning Director Alyson Fauske, WSB & Associates Minnetonka— where quality is our nature CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF 19245 AND 19285 STATE HIGHWAY 7 FOR A STARBUCKS WITH A DRIVE -THRU SERVICE WINDOW IN THE C -I ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Watson Vinehill, LLC. (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 (Subject Property) in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A (attached); and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to remove the existing buildings on the properties and construct a coffee house with a drive -thru service window; and WHEREAS, "drive -in facilities or convenience food establishment" are uses allowed only by conditional use permit in the C -1 (General Commercial) zoning district and the Applicant has applied for a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, Applicant's request was reviewed by staff and their recommendations were duly set forth in memoranda to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council, dated March 7, 2017 and April 4, 2017, on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meetings on March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2017, the minutes of which meetings are on file at City Hall, and recommended denial of the application; and WHEREAS, Applicant's request for a conditional use permit was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on August 28, 2017, at which time the staff's memoranda and the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood finds as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT The Subject Property is located in the C -1 (General Commercial) zoning district. 2. The Subject Property contains approximately 36,535 square feet (.84 acres) of land area. 3. Section 1201.04 Subd. 4 of the zoning regulations provides that the purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the City of Shorewood with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety. 4. Section 1201.04 Subd. 4 of the zoning regulations provides that in making the above determination, the city may consider the nature of the effect upon traffic into and from the premises or on any adjoining roads. 5. Section 1201.04 Subd. 1 (d) of the zoning regulations provides that the Planning Commission may consider possible adverse effects of the conditional use, including (but not limited to): a. The compatibility of the use with the present and future land uses in the area; b. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed; c. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. 6. The Applicant's traffic consultants found that the intersections of Vine Hill Road /Delton Avenue and Vine Hill Road /State Highway 7 are currently experiencing delays which causes the traffic to back up and left turning movements to frequently operate with a level of service (LOS) F during the A.M. peak. 7. LOS F indicates delays of more than 55 seconds. Fifty -five seconds are considered the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable traffic signal operations in Minnesota. 8. The Applicant's traffic consultants found the proposed use would increase the number of A.M. peak trips during the time when the area is functioning with LOS F. 9. The Applicant's traffic consultants indicate that during the morning peak period, the level of service, delays and queues are excessive for 15 -30 minutes of the day. When roadways are over capacity, traffic engineering models break down and do not achieve an accurate representation of what is happening in the field. In these periods, qualitative assessments may be used to put the existing conditions and proposed building conditions in perspective. 10. Additionally, the City's Traffic Engineer indicates that the traffic waiting to enter into the drive -thru service lane could back -up and block traffic in the public frontage road (Delton Avenue) causing additional back -ups extending west from the site driveway in the A.M. peak. CONCLUSIONS A. Based upon the foregoing, and the record referenced herein, the City Council hereby denies the Applicant's request to redevelop the site with a coffee house with a conditional use permit for a drive -thru service window in the C -1 zoning district. B. The request for the conditional use permit results in the addition of more traffic in an area with already existing unacceptable levels of service. C. The City of Shorewood finds that the drive -thru service window creates traffic conditions that are incompatible with present and future land uses in the area. D. The proposed use would tend to or actually depreciate the traffic conditions due to the overburdened intersections in the A.M. peak traffic period. -2- E. The proposed use cannot be accommodated with the existing public services, primarily the existing street design, and the additional traffic will overburden the nearby intersections during the A.M. peak period. F. The City of Shorewood finds that the proposed drive -thru service window would further degrade the traffic into and from the premises and the adjoining roads in the area in the A.M. peak. G. The Applicant has reasonable use of the Subject Property without the proposed drive -thru service window. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 25th day of September, 2017. ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk -3- Scott Zerby, Mayor Exhibit A Legal Description of 19245 State Highway 7: Umd si mrted an 04"Cl CJ y ofsbojv"wokl, Cz:varay of Flermq-01n, Slatir, of Minna, -olm, a�5 rollows- That Pairt of'[..,ot 15, fte, Hill, de5cribed as follows, Coni,menrcirg at a pgint on the east Ili,* of sald il,,oto distant 175 feet souUl of tho rothVIS't MITI( or sm'�,d Lot; therrm. West perpendictilar to, said east, line, alorlo, m the hwelnaftor reforred, to as Une "A" a distAnce of 186 feet, to a (virrit,, referred to as pool-A 'X'9" ttlelxvn txwltlnuirwq �'Vosj o1i 5410 Lllu% "A" to the west line aftfie ea�t 330 feet of wild Lot, a sand Utme: "A"' ItMre ending; therlce Korthalwq saf]d West Orle of 010 east 330 feet a distaricxl Of 711 filet 'mole 01' I,oss to (hp: !gAAJhedSte11Y line Crf tile 11ght-of-vwah� of Rate 1,kglriway No, 7; thence northunisterly along said solitllleasterly lino a distanct ,Al 124 dent to tht,, ataual, pairit of begiinriling of the land be, described; tftonce swthemAoty alon a [Inn, which lf woijM Imss thraugh, said point to Rs lntersertDn with a line drawn painallel with, and dl tram 20 fe Mn north from sald Line "Alo; thence East atung said para[,Iel Wrva to Wd oast Nie;, then Ce WrO.1 aloo q said i-wast, line to the ktorser,Goo with the southeasteily line of the rl9ht-or,,woV, of'SPJate lilghway Nol. 7,, ftmce nottli,we5terly and southwElSterly, alorq $,aid ilRe to the air.,Ima I ip(�Int of be.gAnd M,,. EXCEPT Vial rNart 133 feet of tile p,opQ,irty lying noith ofa lli,rua dewll%ed a,, follows: tmimenc:Ing at tfw northe,3st corner of said Lot 15; thence South, Aloinq the east name ref sald Lot a dIstance of 29459 feet to the [joint of begirinling or the dine Ibe ing described, then -e deflecting rig[* 50 de(:Irpe s 4j the mst Mine of said east 133 feot,, and Umre ending. AKs(r&,,,,J Pityperly Legal Description of 19285 State Highway 7: I A'ald sitltullod Ril (he ("i(y oll'shk"mv,,vood, (11ourd), arl-llmmqpir�, S:Ime ell'Nfirmomtul, desg-'libcd m fall,,Rivs,w P,Ar, 1.�: ThAlt Dart Of Lot 15, "Virle [ 01" (fest-rIb'ed as fbilows., Commm6bg at paint on Ova East lirm, or 7Ald lot, OW ant 375 feet South of Nord -P--ast confer theep-of 4F thence due West a distanoo of 197.6 feet to the aktual p6int of beginning; device conMviAnq Alost a dirA;mncm of 132,4 fee"tl Ownice South, alwlq a Vilrie (,xotendtl,jg toe pehit,,30 feet. due East of the HaTtl'Alve5t: cwner afsaki Lot 15, a distance, of 18'. 1 re et, theme, Noithomterlya dIstame of 135,7 fee, more of less, to a point on the West krie of the East 1,97.6 feet, of said Lot 15, di5taint 20 feet, South from the actuall Poir it of beginnling; thenrie,, North to victual point of begin riilnq. Plar 'l ', Tlw est 14.6 feet of (lie Morffi, 20, feet of the East 197,61 feet of 'that part of Lot V "Vine Hill" lying South or a 11ne running dm West from a tiolAlt in ttle East 11ilne of sald lot distant 3'x''5 i "`r rot South from the Northowt wri'mr of mid iLot 15, Rai 9�m That P0,11 of L(A: 15, "V iijei-iilt", doKlribe,4 as to low s, Commencirg at a Point on fly: East line of said lot, dustanit 375 feet SouCh or tM.- Northeastcomer theroQf; thence due West a distance ref 168 ket to the actual point of beginning of the land Ito be &zflbed; Omoe conlJnuing West dlsta;nue of' 112 reet, more or less, to a lilne (J rawn parak I to sand dIsta,ra! 330 fiiet West fturn the East liner ;4 sakl Lot 115 arld Its exWsfm,,, then rR. hlotb along said parallel line a distance of 71.9 feet, rnorc or [ess, to the Sotitheasterty line or the right-of-way of Staco 111191may No,� 7; Men hua;Aedy along the Sclutheasty-erly Or* of said rlUht-of-way of State H ighway No. 7 8i &ntarte of 124 feet?, fficnm Southeasterly to the actual[ po mint af begimlIng I T("11-1-vils of "I'll le, A [ 1 66 ll 74 CITY OF SHORE WOOD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF 19245 AND 19285 STATE HIGHWAY 7 FOR A STARBUCKS WITH A DRIVE -THRU SERVICE WINDOW WHEREAS, the Watson Vinehill, LLC. (Applicant) is the owner of real property located at 19245 and 19285 State Highway 7 (Subject Property) in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A (attached); and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to remove the existing buildings on the properties and construct a coffee house with a drive -thru service window; and WHEREAS, "drive -in facilities or convenience food establishment" are uses allowed only by conditional use permit in the C -1 (General Commercial) zoning district and the Applicant has applied for a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, Applicant's request was reviewed by staff and their recommendations were duly set forth in memoranda to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council, dated March 7, 2017 and April 4, 2017, on file at City Hall; and WHEREAS, after required notice, a public hearing was held and the application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meetings on March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2017, the minutes of which meetings are on file at City Hall, and recommended denial of the application; and WHEREAS, Applicant's request for a conditional use permit was considered by the City Council at its regular meeting on August 28, 2017, at which time the staff's memoranda and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting were reviewed and comments were heard by the Council from the City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Subject Property is located in the C -1 (General Commercial) zoning district. 2. The Subject Property contains approximately 36,535 square feet (.84 acres) of land area. 3. The proposed development includes combining the two properties and redeveloping the site with a coffee shop with a drive -thru service window. 4. The frontage road was re- configured after the subject property was created and the adjacent properties had developed. It has narrow rights -of -way in parts of its extent, problematic curves and challenging intersection geometrics. 5. The site is located in an area with heavy commuter traffic and near Minnetonka High School, which is a heavy traffic generator in the A.M. peak. 6. The adjoining roadways are currently operating at an unacceptable level of service (LOS) F during the A.M. peak and the site driveway on the frontage road is also anticipated to operate at a LOS F in the A.M. CONCLUSIONS A. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby grants the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit subject to approval of the building permit by the Excelsior Fire District and subject to the following conditions and conformance with city code, zoning regulations and engineering guidelines. Prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall: 1) Revise the plans or submit the information as directed in the Engineer's memorandums dated April 19, 2017 and August 23, 2017, subject to the approval by the City Engineer, which includes, but is not limited to: a. Add a 100 -foot right turn lane (with taper) into the site from east -bound Delton Avenue. b. Add a 100 -foot by -pass lane (with tapers) on west -bound Delton Avenue at site entrance. C. Add a right turn lane (with taper) from north -bound Vine Hill Road to eastbound Delton Avenue. 2) Submit any necessary easements (in favor of the City) to accommodate the right -of- way improvements listed above and any necessary approvals from the City of Minnetonka or MnDOT. 3) Consolidate the properties into a single tax parcel and submit a revised certified survey. 4) Acquire any temporary construction easements necessary on the adjacent properties for either demolition of existing improvements or construction of retaining walls. Retaining walls over four feet in height require a building permit. 5) Revise the site plan to include the proposed impervious surface coverage. The maximum allowed is 66 percent. 6) Pick up stray trash on a daily basis on the property and nearby the site to avoid nuisance trash to the surrounding neighborhood. 7) Submit a sound study (or specifications from a speaker vendor) indicating that the sound from the ordering station shall not exceed 50 decibels at the east property line. 8) Limit the hours of operation to 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. and further limit trash service and deliveries to the hours between 9:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. 9) Execute a performance agreement and submit related financial guarantees consistent with the zoning regulations. B. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified copy of this Resolution for filing with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. -2- ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 25th day of September, 2017. ATTEST: SANDIE THONE, CITY CLERK -3- SCOTT ZERBY, MAYOR Exhibit A Legal Description of 19245 State Highway 7: Umd si mrted an 04"Cl CJ y ofsbojv"wokl, Cz:varay of Flermq-01n, Slatir, of Minna, -olm, a�5 rollows- That Pairt of'[..,ot 15, fte, Hill, de5cribed as follows, Coni,menrcirg at a pgint on the east Ili,* of sald il,,oto distant 175 feet souUl of tho rothVIS't MITI( or sm'�,d Lot; therrm. West perpendictilar to, said east, line, alorlo, m the hwelnaftor reforred, to as Une "A" a distAnce of 186 feet, to a (virrit,, referred to as pool-A 'X'9" ttlelxvn txwltlnuirwq �'Vosj o1i 5410 Lllu% "A" to the west line aftfie ea�t 330 feet of wild Lot, a sand Utme: "A"' ItMre ending; therlce Korthalwq saf]d West Orle of 010 east 330 feet a distaricxl Of 711 filet 'mole 01' I,oss to (hp: !gAAJhedSte11Y line Crf tile 11ght-of-vwah� of Rate 1,kglriway No, 7; thence northunisterly along said solitllleasterly lino a distanct ,Al 124 dent to tht,, ataual, pairit of begiinriling of the land be, described; tftonce swthemAoty alon a [Inn, which lf woijM Imss thraugh, said point to Rs lntersertDn with a line drawn painallel with, and dl tram 20 fe Mn north from sald Line "Alo; thence East atung said para[,Iel Wrva to Wd oast Nie;, then Ce WrO.1 aloo q said i-wast, line to the ktorser,Goo with the southeasteily line of the rl9ht-or,,woV, of' Piave lilghway Nol. 7,, ftmce nottli,we5terly and southwElSterly, alorq $,aid ilRe to the air.,Ima I ip(�Int of be.gAnd E Vial rNart 133 feet of tile p,opQ,irty lying noith ofa lli,rua dewll%ed a,, follows: tmimenc:Ing at tfw northe,3st corner of said Lot 15; thence South, Aloinq the east name ref sald Lot a dIstance of 29459 feet to the [joint of begirinling or the dine Ibe ing described, then -e deflecting rig[* 50 de(:Irpe s 4j the mst Mine of said east 133 feot,, and Umre ending. AKs(r&,,,,J Pityperly Legal Description of 19285 State Highway 7: I A'ald sitltullod Ril (he ("i(y oll'shk"mv,,vood, (11ourd), arl-llmmqpir�, S:Ime ell'Nfirmomtul, desg-'libcd m fall,,Rivs,w P,Ar, 1.�: ThAlt Dart Of Lot 15, "Virle [ 01" (fest-rIb'ed as fbilows., Commm6bg at paint on Ova East lirm, or 7Ald lot, OW ant 375 feet South of Nord -P--ast confer theep-of 4F thence due West a distanoo of 197.6 feet to the aktual p6int of beginning; device conMviAnq Alost a dirA;mncm of 132,4 fee"tl Ownice South, alwlq a Vilrie (,xotendtl,jg toe pehit,,30 feet. due East of the HaTtl'Alve5t: cwner afsaki Lot 15, a distance, of 18'. 1 re et, theme, Noithomterlya dIstame of 135,7 fee, more of less, to a point on the West krie of the East 1,97.6 feet, of said Lot 15, di5taint 20 feet, South from the actuall Poir it of beginnling; thenrie,, North to victual point of begin riilnq. Plar 'l ', Tlw est 14.6 feet of (lie Morffi, 20, feet of the East 197,61 feet of 'that part of Lot V "Vine H ill" lying South or a 11ne running dm West from a tiolAlt in ttle East 11ilne of sald lot distant 3'x''5 i "`r rot South from the Northowt wri'mr of mid iLot 15, Rai 9�m That P0,11 of L(A: 15, "V iijei-iilt", doKlribe,4 as to low s, Commencirg at a Point on fly: East line of said lot, dustanit 375 feet SouCh or tM.- Northeastcomer theroQf; thence due West a distance ref 168 ket to the actual point of beginning of the land Ito be &zflbed; Omoe conlJnuing West dlsta;nue of' 112 reet, more or less, to a lilne (J rawn parak I to sand dIsta,ra! 330 fiiet West fturn the East liner ;4 sakl Lot 115 arld Its exWsfm,,, then rR. hlotb along said parallel line a distance of 71.9 feet, rnorc or [ess, to the Sotitheasterty line or the right-of-way of State 111191may No,� 7; Men hua;Aedy along the Sclutheasty-erly Or* of said rlUht-of-way of State H ighway No. 7 8i &ntarte of 124 feet?, fficnm Southeasterly to the actual[ po mint af begimlIng I T("11-1-vils of "I'll le, A [ 1 66 ll 74 m #8A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item REGULAR Title / Subject: MN DOT Local Road Improvement Grant Program Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Public Works Director and Alyson Fauske, City Engineer Attachments: Program Overview, Professional Services Agreement w /WSB Policy Consideration: Should the City prepare a grant application for the MN DOT's Local Road Improvement Grant Program? Background: This corridor and its issues have been discussed numerous times, so additional background is not necessary. The MN DOT's Local Road Improvement program is designed to help make traffic improvements on roadways like the Country Club corridor. There is also an opportunity to partner with Three River's Park District, and perhaps Hennepin County in some parts of the project. But given the short time line between when the application details came out (late August) and the application deadline (Nov. 3) the city will not know if those organizations could provide funding. Additionally, the program is for roads only. The other issues to be corrected — trails, storm water rate and control, are not eligible for cost sharing. The total estimated cost for this project; 32' wide street, curb and gutter, storm water, trail is $4 to $5 million. The city would have to bond for its portion. Financial or Budget Considerations: The grant preparation cost of $3,500 is reasonable. Prior to making the decision to engage with a grant writer, I recommend the council decide a couple of things. First, it is the opinion of the grant preparer that this program will likely rank in the middle of those submitted as the formula favors more densely populated areas. However, staff does not know how many applications will be submitted, and the fewer submitted, the better the odds for funding. The Council must be okay with anticipated long odds for award. Second, and more important, if the grant is awarded, the Council should be committed now that the city is prepared to spend at least the minimum amount to match the grant, but more than likely - much more to complete the work. Going through the process and turning down a grant offer does not reflect well on the city. If, however, work on this corridor is a priority for the city and it will ultimately be done, this is an opportunity to receive a significant amount of money from an outside source so the cost is not entirely on the residents and businesses in Shorewood. Options: Hiring a grant writer, especially given the short window for the application period, is recommended. The council can accept the professional services agreement and move forward with the application; the council could reject the agreement and give staff some other direction. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff, representatives from WSB and Three Rivers Park District met on September 19, and it was the recommendation of that group that this was a worthwhile application to make — even anticipating long odds for approval. Next Steps and Timeline: If the council decides to move forward with an application, staff will work with WSB on the application. Local Road Improvement Program Solicitation Overview In 2017, the Minnesota Legislature appropriated bond funds to The Local Roads Improvement Program established in Minnesota Statute 174.52. Approximately $25.3 million is available for a statewide solicitation to fund projects in the Routes of Regional Significance Account, the Rural Road Safety Account or Trunk Highway Account. The Trunk Highway Corridor Account provide funds to assist in paying the local share of trunk highway projects with local costs related to the trunk highway improvement. For consideration under this account, a trunk highway project must be identified. The Routes of Regional Significance Account provides funds for the costs of constructing or reconstructing city streets, county highways, or town roads with statewide or regional significance. The Rural Road Safety Account funds capital improvement projects on County State Aid Highways (CSAH) that are intended primarily to reduce traffic crashes, deaths, injuries, and property damages. The Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid for Local Transportation Office administers the Local Roads Improvement Program with guidance from the Local Road Improvement Program Advisory Committee. The process and criteria for prioritizing projects for the solicitation are established in the statute and recommended by the LRIP Advisory Committee. In an effort to streamline the review process and announce awards earlier for communities this solicitation, there will be two separate deadlines. An earlier November 3rd deadline for the county and state aid city applicants and a later December 1st deadline for small cities and townships. Projects selected from this solicitation will be constructed and reimbursed with state bond funds. For successful implementation and reimbursement of the awarded funds, applicants are required to follow the state aid project development process for bond projects. These steps include plan approval by their respective District State Aid Engineer and execution of a grant agreement with the state. Funding There is no minimum amount set but the maximum amount that may be requested vary depending on the road authority. Road Authority Minimum Request Maximum Request County -- $1,000,000 State Aid City (> 5,000) -- $1,000,000 Non State Aid City (< 5,000) -- $750,000 Township -- $750,000 The LRIP funds may be requested for the full construction cost of a project, up the maximum amount, or be leveraged with other funding sources on a project. http: / /www. dot .state.mn.us /stateaid /Irip.htm1 4 Solicitation Schedule July 12, 2017 -LRIP Advisory Committee November 3, 2017 *Applications due for Counties and State Aid LRIP Advisory Committee Meeting Cities Reconvenes August 1, December 1, March 2018 2017 2017 •Annouce *Open -Applications due Awards* Solicitation for Non -State Aid Cities and Townships *Subject to change depending on the number of applications submitted and review time needed. Project Selection Project selection will consider geographical distribution and distribution among jurisdictions along with the following criteria: 1) Eligibility. The project must be a local road (street or highway) construction, reconstruction, or reconditioning project under one of the three accounts established in the LRIP. Note: LRIP bond funds may not be used for stand -alone right -of -way acquisition, engineering, or enhancement projects (landscaping, trails, sidewalks, ADA improvements, etc.). 2) Safety. Address a transportation deficiency or improve safety on local roads. 3) Regionally Significant. Demonstrate the regional significance of the route by being classified as a minor collector or higher unless it meets one of the following criteria; a) identified in a regional plan as a farm - market artery, b) part of a 10 -ton route system, c) part of an economic development plan, d) serves as a regional tourist destination, e) provides capacity or congestion relief to a parallel trunk highway or county road, and f) is a connection to the IRC system, trunk highway, or a county road. 4) Be supported by agency board or council and other local agencies impacted by the project. Note: Cities that are not a State Aid city (populations less than 5,000) and townships must have County sponsor. The sponsor must have the support of the County Board. A city or township resolution in support of the project and a county board resolution for support and willingness to sponsor the project must be included in the application package. The sponsor's task could include but are not limited to: • Be the fiscal agent on behalf of the community http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/irip.htm] • Ensure the project meets milestones and dates • Assist local agency in execution of a grant agreement • Develop, review and approve the plan • Submit plan, engineers estimate, and proposal to the DSAE • Let the project • Submit pay requests • Communicate progress and updates with the DSAEs and State Aid Programs Engineer • Assist with project close out 5) Consider availability of other funding sources. 6) Be non - controversial. Note: Projects should have minimum problems or issues that could delay the letting and construction such as right -of -way acquisition, railroad, and historical impacts. 7) Expected useful life. Have a minimum expected life of the project of 10 years. 8) High Impact. Provide letters of support from other local agencies or public /private parties impacted by the improvement. For example, letters of support from area businesses regarding the impact and benefit of constructing a road to a 10 -ton design standard. 9) Projects must be approved for construction letting by June 2020. Preference will be given to projects in 2018 and 2019. Application Overview A copy of the application is attached in Appendix A for your reference. Use the guide below to for assistance in filling out the application. Please keep the descriptions clear and concise. A. Applicant Information 1. Title. Use the drop box to select the appropriate prefix for the applicant. Options listed: Mr., Ms., or M rs. 2. First Name. Provide the first name of the contact person at the agency applying for the funds. This person should be the project manager or sponsor for the project. 3. Last Name. The last name of the person at the agency applying for the funds. 4. Phone Number. The work phone number of the person at the agency applying for the funds. 5. E -mail. The work e -mail address of the person at the agency applying for the funds. 6. Agency. The name of the agency applying for the Local Road Improvement Program funds. 7. Agency Position. The position title or job title of the applicant. 8. Street Address. The number and street name of agency 9. Additional Address line. 10. City. The city where the agency is located. 11. State. The State where the agency is located. http: / /www. dot .state.mn.us /stateaid /Irip.htm1 6 12. Zip Code. The zip code where the agency is located. 13. County Sponsor (if applicable); Check yes if the applicant is a sponsor for a township or for a city with a population of 5,000 or less. B. Project Location 1. MnDOT District. Select the MnDOT District that the project is within. 2. County, The County that the project is located within. 3. City. Provide the name of the city if a portion or the entire project is within the city limits. 4. Township. Provide the name of the township if a portion or the entire project is within the township borders. Note: Cities that are not a State Aid city (populations less than 5,000) and townships must have a County sponsor. 5. Name of Road. Route number or name of the road (County State Aid Highway 5, Main Street S, etc.) 6. Type of Road. Select the type of street the project is on (County State Aid Highway, County Road, Municipal State Aid Street, Local Street, and Township Road) 7. Road Authority. If the road authority is not the agency applying for the fund, identify the agency with jurisdiction of the road the project is on. 8. Road Authority Name. If the road authority is not the applicant and agency applying, provide the name for the contact person from the road authority agency. 9. Project Termini -From. Provide a short description of the beginning location of the project. 10. Project Termini -To. Provide a short description of the ending location of the project. C. Project Description 1. Type of Project. Select the type of work on this project. For consistency in use with State Aid Programs the definition of reconstruction and reconditioning are taken from the Local State -Aid Route Standards, Chapter 8820, for road projects. Reconstruction —the replacement of an existing roadway on a similar alignment Reconditioning — includes resurfacing, replacement, or rehabilitation of the pavement structure to extend the life of the roadway and effectively address critical safety and operation needs through minor improvements to the existing facility. 2. Project Description. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project. Explain what will be removed, put back in or changed. Including and referencing typical sections, layouts, or maps would be helpful to reviewers. For Trunk Highway Corridor projects, reference the trunk highway project number, route, and year that local funds are being requested for. http: / /www. dot .state.mn.us /stateaid /Irip.htm1 7 D. Eligibility 1. LRIP Account. Use the dropdown box to select one of the three LRIP accounts your project is eligible for. If the project is eligible for more than account, select the account that best explain why the project is being implemented. Options listed are: Trunk Highway Corridor Select this option if funds will be used for local costs that are directly or partially related to the trunk highway improvement. Identify the MnDOT project in the project description. Routes of Regional Significance Rural Road Safety 2. Routes of Regional Significance Criteria. Check all criteria that apply to your project. At least one must be identified to be considered a regionally significant route. 3. Economic Development. Describe the project contribution to the local, regional or state economic development or redevelopment efforts. Be specific and reference plans, letters of support, business impacts, community impacts, that this project would have in the region. E. Project Readiness 1. Construction Year. Use the drop -down box to select the construction year that the project is scheduled for construction. Projects should be ready for construction in 2018, 2019, or 2020. 2. Historical /Archeological Impacts. Indicate if the project will affect any historic properties. Historic properties are properties that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places: buildings, structures, objects, sites (including archeological), districts, and properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe. Use the dropdown box to select the statement that best describe the historical /archeological impacts on the project. Choices listed are: • No. There are no historical /archeological impacts • Yes. There are historical /archeological impacts • Not known at this time 3. Railroad Impacts: Indicate if your project has railroad crossings or is adjacent to railroad tracks which may require additional coordination and agreements. Use the dropdown box to select the statement that best fit with the status of the railroad review on your project. Choices listed are: • No RR crossings or RR tracks within 600' • Yes. Necessary RR permit(s) /agreement(s) obtained • Yes. Will obtain RR permit(s) /agreement(s) as needed 4. Project Status. Indicate the status of the design work on the project. Design includes any site surveying or study, developing plan sheets, specifications, and engineering estimates. Use the dropdown box to select the appropriate statement that best reflect the status of the design work on the project. Choices listed are: Design work has not started Select this option if no site survey has been done, project not yet planned /programmed in a CIP or approved by the local jurisdiction. Design in progress Select this option if site survey has been done, project is approved by local jurisdiction to proceed and plans are being developed. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/Irip.htmI ® Design completed (plan completed) Select this option if your project is approved by the local jurisdiction and the plan is approved by the responsible engineer. The plan is ready to be reviewed and approved by the state. 5. Right -of -Way. Indicate the status of the Right -of -Way (R /W) on this project. Use the dropdown box to select the statement that best reflect the Right -of -Way status. No R/W is needed or all work is within owner R/W Additional R/W is needed and is not yet acquired R/W needed has been acquired and documented F. Safety 1. County Safety Plan. Many counties have completed county safety plans in which priority safety projects were identified through a data driven process. These projects on rural county roads may be eligible under the Rural Safety Account or Routes of Regional Significance Account. For this question, indicate if the project or components of the project is identified in a county safety plan. Use the dropdown box to select yes, no, or not applicable. 2. Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. This is an effort to align local safety projects with safety priorities identified in the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. The plan was completed with a thorough analysis of statewide crash data and trends affecting transporting with various stakeholders. It identified seven primary focus areas to help establish safety priorities. Three of the seven focus areas, lane departure, intersections, and speed include engineering strategies for partners to consider when championing safety projects. Use the dropdown box to select a focus area that your project or safety components of your project align with. The three choices listed are: • Intersections Select if your projects makes improvement to an intersection for approaches to an intersection. Sample engineering strategies from this focus area include: improve visibility of signs /signals, pedestrian countdown timers, clear sight triangle on stop or yield controlled approaches, reduced conflict intersections, or roundabouts. See the full list of strategies from plans and partners in the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Lane departures (run -of -road, head -on, sideswipes) Select this choice if your project will make improvements to address lane departure crashes or minimize damage associated with these crashes. Sample strategies from focus area include: curve speed warning systems, shoulder /centerline rumble strips, improve horizontal curves, guardrails, or remove /relocate objects in the hazardous locations. See the full list from plans and partners in the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. • Speeding (over posted speed, too fast for conditions) Select this choice if your project or components of your projects will look to address speeding. Sample engineering strategies from this focus area includes: dynamic speed display signs, automated speed enforcement, or traffic calming measures. See the full list from plans and partners in the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/statea!d/Irip.htmI 3. Transportation Deficiency. Describe the issues or problems on your local road that you are attempting to address. Transportation deficiency could include substandard roadway structure, conditions related to certain types of crashes, capacity, and other conditions that negatively impact the public. Be specific on how the problem or issues were identified and what harm it presents to the traveling public. Answer this question even if your project is identified in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. 4. Improvement. Describe how the project address the transportation deficiencies, improves safety, reduce traffic fatalities, injuries and /or property damage. Be specific as possible in explaining why the project and safety strategy chosen is the most effective and provides the most benefit. Answer this question even if your project is identified in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Multimodal /Complete Street 1. Multimodal Improvements. Depending on where and how local roads are improved both vehicle traffic and non - motorized traffic may benefit. Identify other users of the roadway and describe non - motorized improvements included on the project. Cost Section: Provide source of funding, amount from each source, and the total estimated cost for the project. LRIP finds will be capped at $750,000 for non -state aid cities and townships and $1,000,000 for counties and state aid cities. Any projects less than the capped amount is not required to provide a match. Application Submittal Your agency may submit more than one project for funding support. Complete an application form for each project and attach the following documents: ❑ At least one project location map with routes and project termini labeled ❑ Engineer's Estimate with an itemized breakdown ❑ Project schedule ❑ Local agency resolution ❑ Sponsor agency resolution (if applicable) ❑ Letters of concurrence or support The application form is available for download on the State Aid Local Road Improvement Program website, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/Irip.htm1. To get started download the 2017 application form and save it on a local drive or server. When you are ready to submit the application, save the application form with LRIP, agency and road in the name of the document; e.g. LRIP_RamseyCounty_CSAH30.docx. http: / /www. dot .state.mn.us /stateaid /Irip.htmI 10 WSB 701 Xenia Avenue South I Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 1 (763) 541 -4800 September 20, 2017 Mr. Greg Lerud City Administrator City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Proposal to Prepare Grant Application — LRIP Grant for Country Club/Yellowstone /Lake Linden Dear Mr. Lerud: WSB & Associates, Inc. is pleased to present this proposal to provide services as they relate to preparing a Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) funding application for improvements on Country Club Road/Yellowstone Trail /Lake Linden Drive between TH 7 and Hennepin County Road 19. The information provided on the following pages includes our understanding of the project and the application; a description of the activities to be completed; a proposed schedule to complete the necessary work by November 3, 2017; and a cost estimate for completing the work. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The combination of Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Drive forms an important link between the southern and northern portions of the City of Tonka Bay. Together they provide access to two regional transportation facilities and link residential areas with commercial nodes within the community. The City would like to upgrade these roadways to accommodate traffic in the area and provide opportunities for non - motorized users. The project will include upgrading roadways to state aid standards and incorporate a multiuse trail. To continue advancing and financing this project, the City of Tonka Bay is seeking a proposal to prepare an application for the 2017 LRIP grant offered by MnDOT. Work on the grant will begin immediately upon authorization and will be completed prior to November 3, 2017, so that the city may officially submit the grant. As part of the project, WSB will be required to complete the following as a minimum: • Provide applicant information • Provide information on the project location and maps showing the location of the project • Provide a project description of the proposed improvements and incorporate a project graphic that shows the proposed improvements • Note the project's eligibility • Provide data regarding the project's readiness and note that there are no railroad impacts • Document the project's consistency with the state's or Hennepin County's highway safety plan • Identify existing deficiencies and how the project addresses those deficiencies • Document multimodal improvements • Identify planning -level project costs • Provide the city with a draft letter of support to send to local property owners and support agencies (for redevelopment areas) • Complete draft and final applications The City of Shorewood will need to provide a resolution indicating support for the project/application and commitment to funding the remaining portion of the project. Building a legacy —your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com Mr. Greg Lerud September 20, 2017 Page 2 ACTIVITIES TO BE COMPLETED The following describes WSB's work plan and deliverables for the LRIP application Task 1 — Project Management and Coordination Jack will ensure that internal WSB staff is coordinated in its tasks to produce the LRIP grant application Jack will review the application text and provide local context based on her familiarity with the project area. Jack will also serve as the primary point of contact for the city. She will check in via telephone and /or e- mail to provide updates. Jack will monitor work tasks, schedule and the project budget. Deliverables: updates, monthly invoice Task 2 — Data Collection WSB will review data needed to complete the application. We anticipate collecting the following: • State Highway Safety Plan and the Scott County Highway Safety Plan • Most recent 3 -year and 5 -year crash data from MnDOT • Redevelopment concepts for the County Highway 19 area Deliverables: data used to develop required attachments Task 3 — Technical Analyses The state and county plans will be reviewed for consistency with similar crash types and system improvements needed. Generally, in the Twin Cities — urban areas — intersection crashes, crashes involving pedestrians /bicyclists, etc. are more prevalent. Strategies to address these deficiencies include improving visibility, providing adequate sight triangles, constructing a roundabout, providing sidewalks, etc. WSB will document existing issues and note the appropriate strategies based on the proposed project. WSB will also use the crash data collected in Task 2 to determine the existing crash rate and compare it to district and statewide averages to address system deficiencies. Information already gathered will also be used to discuss operations along the corridor and any known safety problems. Deliverables: results of safety and capacity analysis Task 4 — Cost Estimates WSB will work with the City to develop a cost estimate that includes an itemized breakdown of construction elements. WSB will provide the city with typical sections for use in entering information into its cost estimating procedures. Together we will review and adjust estimates for inclusion in the grant. Deliverables: typical sections, cost estimates Task 5 — Application WSB will complete the application as requested by the city. This task includes answering all the questions in the LRIP form, preparing all the required maps and assembling all the application materials and required attachments. A draft copy of the maps and application will be provided to the city for review and comment. Comments from the city will be incorporated into the final submission. Deliverables: draft application, final application, required attachments Mr. Greg Lerud September 20, 2017 Page 3 SCHEDULE The WSB team will begin work immediately to complete the grant application to meet the November 3, 2017 deadline as well as to provide review time for city staff. A proposed schedule for preparing the application is listed below: Commence Work Upon Authorization Submit Draft Application to City for Review October 13 City Staff Review October 16 - 20 Revise Draft Application October 23 — 27 Final Draft to City October 30 Application Deadline November 3, 2017 PROPOSEDFEE WSB will complete the proposed application for a fee of $3,500. This letter represents our complete understanding of the grant application. If you agree with the scope of services and proposed fee, please sign in the appropriate space below and return one copy to us. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you. Please feel free to contact me at 763 - 231 -4871 with any questions or comments. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. /9%r� - eo Jacqueline Corkle, AICP, PTP Sr. Transportation Planner Greg Lerud City Administrator, City of Shorewood Date #9A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item REGULAR Title / Subject: Quotes to Reroof and replace gutters at the Southshore Center Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Attachments: Quote results Policy Consideration: Should the City accept a quote to reroof the Southshore Center (SSC)? Background: Several years ago, the city's building official, Joe Pazandak, prepared a list of capital projects for the SSC. No action was taken on the repairs primarily due to the underlying ownership issues surrounding the facility. After the city acquired ownership at the end of last year, and following direction from the City Council at the Council -Staff retreat, staff went back to the capital list and developed a preliminary Capital Improvement Plan for the SSC, and that was shared at the August 28 work session. Reroofing was identified as the project most critical to complete. Financial or Budget Considerations: The City Council approved a transfer of $90,000 of excess fund balance to the SSC fund earlier this year. Those funds, combined with $43,000 approved as a part of the 2017 CIP budget provide sufficient funds to complete the project. The budgeted cost to re- shingle the roof and replace the gutters was $45,000. The city received two quotes to do the work — Today's Exteriors, Inc. in the amount of $44,100, and Incline Exteriors in the amount of $42,916. The quotes compare favorably with the estimated cost. Options: The City Council can: 1. Accept the low quote and authorize the work. 2. Reject the quotes and ask other businesses for new quotes. 3. Decide that the work will not be done. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the low quote be accepted. Due to the lateness in the season, it is critical to notify the builder so the work can get on their schedule. The quotes received are from two reputable businesses and the building official is familiar with their work. Staff recommends that the low quote from Incline Exteriors be accepted. Next Steps and Timeline: Staff will notify both contractors of the Council's decision, and work to get on the builder's schedule to have the work done as soon as possible. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 SOUTHSHORE CENTER REROOFING QUOTES Work involves removing existing shingles and felt and replacing with new felt and 40 year shingles; replacing vents and replace gutters. Roof deck will be replaced as needed. Company Today's Exteriors, Inc. Quote Amount $44,100 Incline Exteriors $42,916 #10.A.1 MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Title / Subject: August 2017 General Fund Monthly Budget Report Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Prepared by: Joe Rigdon, Interim Finance Director Reviewed by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Attachments: August Budget Spreadsheet Policy Consideration: A General Fund budget report is provided to the City Council for review on a monthly basis. Background: The following information describes the unaudited financial results of the City's General Fund as of August 31, 2017. Comparisons between year -to -date amounts through August for revenues and expenditures are included to assist in gauging fund performance. r,anaral Find Revenues: • Property tax revenues for the General Fund were $2,654,194 through August 2017, which represents the first half of 2017 property tax collections, and equates to 51.2% of the total 2017 property tax levy of $5,180,996. The second half property taxes will be received in December 2017. • Licenses and permits amounted to 68.2% of budget, or $163,220 through August of 2017. The majority of the revenue consisted of building permits and plan check fees. As a comparison, licenses and permits revenues through August of 2016 were $144,923. • Intergovernmental revenues were $89,959 through 08/31/17, decreasing from $126,841 recorded in the prior year comparable period. The decrease was due to the receipt of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District funds (Christmas Lake inspections) in the first quarter of 2016. • Charges for services amounted to 112.9% of budget, or $43,688 through August of 2017. This compares to $16,628 recorded revenues through August of 2016. • Fines and forfeitures of $41,776 were recorded through 08/31/17 (69.6% of budget), as compared to $22,907 through 08/31/16. • Miscellaneous revenues totaled $178,462 through 08/31/17. Antenna rent is the largest component, and amounted to $155,165 through August 31, 2017. No investment interest earnings are typically allocated to the General Fund until the fourth quarter. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 • Budgeted 2017 transfers in from utility funds of $25,000 were recorded in January 2017. These include $12,500 from the Water fund, and $12,500 from the Sewer fund. • Total General Fund revenues (excluding transfers in) amounted to $3,171,299, or 54.5% of budget through 08/31/17. Revenues through August for 2017 were 1.7% higher than prior year revenues through August 2016. Expenditures: • General government expenditures through August 2017 were $916,610 (61.3% of budget), or 2.0% lower than the comparable prior period. • Council expenditures were higher through August in 2016, due to the inclusion of payments to the Christmas Lake Homeowner's Association. • Administration costs were 62.4% of budget and reflect a shift from contracted administrator services in 2016 to wages and benefits in 2017. • Finance department expenditures were at 69.1% of budget through August 2017, while the Professional Services department expenditures were at 57.7% of budget. • Planning expenditures were at 69.4% of budget and significantly higher through August 2017, as compared to August 2016, largely attributable to employee separation payments. • Public safety expenditures were $1,621,810 through 08/31/17 (75.1% of budget), increasing 10.3% from $1,470,871 through 08/31/16. The increase was largely within police protection costs, but was related to a monthly payment timing difference between years (9 months of service recorded through August 2017, versus 8 months recorded through August 2016). • Public works expenditures totaled $464,015 through 08/31/17 (44.7% of budget), increasing from $450,130 through 08/31/16. • Parks and recreation expenditures amounted to $170,753 through August 2017, a $3,674 decrease from the comparable prior period. • Transfers out to other funds were $0 through August 2016, as compared to $1,804,913 through August 2017. Budgeted transfers out of $1,104,913 were recorded in January 2017 to reflect the availability of the funds during the year. In 2016, budgeted transfers were not recorded until December 2016. Additionally, $700,000 of 2017 transfers from the General Fund were authorized by Council action and recorded in March 2017. • The General Fund exhibited an overall 4.7% increase in expenditures (not including transfers out) from $3,030,383 through 08/31/16, as compared to $3,173,188 through 08/31/17. Removing the effect of the police costs payment timing difference results in an overall 1.5% increase in General Fund expenditures. Financial or Budget Considerations: This report is intended to provide budget to actual and comparative financial information for the General Fund. Options: 1. Accept the monthly budget report. 2. Do not accept the monthly budget report. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the monthly budget report. Next Steps and Timeline: The General Fund budget report for September 2017 will be prepared and distributed in October 2017. Connection to Vision / Mission: The review of periodic reporting of financial information is a component of sound financial management. General Fund Revenues and Expenditures vs Budget Through August 31, 2017 % Collected/ One Year Description Budset Period Amt YTD Budset % Expended Prior Actual General Fund Revenues Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Service Fines & Forfeits Misc Revenues Total General Fund Revenues Other Financing Sources Transfers In Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources General Fund Expenditures General Government Council Personal Services Supplies Other Services and Charges Council Administraton Personal Services Supplies Other Services and Charges Administraton Finance Personal Services Supplies Other Services and Charges Finance Professional Services Other Services and Charges Professional Services Planning Personal Services Supplies Other Services and Charges Planning Municipal Buildings Supplies Other Services and Charges Municipal Buildings 5,180,996 2,654,194 3,022,248 51.2% 2,638,052 239,180 163,220 139,522 68.2% 144,923 90,751 89,959 52,938 99.1% 126,841 38,700 43,688 22,575 112.9% 16,628 60,000 41,776 35,000 69.6% 22,907 213,900 178,462 124,775 83.4% 170,102 5,823,527 3,171,299 3,397,057 54.5% 3,119,453 25,000 25,000 14,583 100.0% 0 5,848,527 3,196,299 3,411,641 54.7% 3,119,453 22,600 14,784 13,183 65.4% 14,784 2,000 2,092 1,167 104.6% 842 116,500 27,461 67,958 23.6% 75,192 141,100 44,337 82,308 31.4% 90,818 402,154 251,106 234,590 62.4% 158,611 20,900 14,289 12,192 68.4% 10,045 42,550 24,963 24,821 58.7% 95,414 465,604 290,358 271,602 62.4% 264,070 142,273 77,582 82,993 54.5% 94,125 15,600 7,560 9,100 48.5% 21,737 17,300 35,978 10,092 208.0% 41,334 175,173 121,120 102,184 69.1% 157,196 236,400 136,354 137,900 57.7% 158,998 236,400 136,354 137,900 57.7% 158,998 178,797 161,785 104,298 90.5% 118,473 450 449 263 99.8% 407 97,000 29,472 56,583 30.4% 8,381 276,247 191,706 161,144 69.4% 127,261 21,300 4,465 12,425 21.0% 5,398 180,000 128,270 105,000 71.3% 131,214 201,300 132,735 117,425 65.9% 136,612 Total General Government 1,495,824 916,610 872,564 61.3% 934,955 General Fund Revenues and Expenditures vs Budget Through August 31, 2017 Fire Protection % Collected/ One Year Description Budset Period Amt YTD Budset % Expended Prior Actual Capital Outlay 256,648 192,486 149,711 75.0% 202,965 Public Safety 629,624 472,191 367,281 75.0% 479.295 Police Protection 178.822 134.219 104.313 Protective Inspections 139.606 Supplies 0 0 0 N/A 2,086 Other Services and Charges 1,180,050 885,658 688,363 75.1% 738,677 Capital Outlay 214,000 160,355 124,833 74.9% 160,749 Police Protection 1.394.050 1.046.013 813.196 75.0% 901.512 Fire Protection Other Services and Charges 372,976 279,705 217,569 75.0% 276,330 Capital Outlay 256,648 192,486 149,711 75.0% 202,965 Fire Protection 629,624 472,191 367,281 75.0% 479.295 Park Maintenance 178.822 134.219 104.313 Protective Inspections 139.606 Personal Services 126,299 88,642 73,674 70.2% 86,079 Supplies 200 0 117 0.0% 245 Other Services and Charges 10,550 14,964 6,154 141.8% 3,740 Protective Inspections 137,049 103,606 79,945 75.6% 90.064 Total Public Safety 2,160,723 1,621,810 1,260,422 75.1% 1,470,871 City Engineer Other Services and Charges 89,725 37,111 52,340 41.4% 52,430 City Engineer 89,725 37,111 52,340 41.4% 52.430 Public Works Service Personal Services 516,365 237,482 301,213 46.0% 222,727 Supplies 160,200 61,496 93,450 38.4% 88,323 Other Services and Charges 166,100 87,013 96,892 52.4% 66,644 Public Works Service 842.665 385.991 491.555 45.8% 377.694 Ice & Snow Removal Personal Services 61,465 14,186 35,855 23.1% 15,827 Supplies 44,000 26,727 25,667 60.7% 4,179 Ice & Snow Removal 105.465 40.913 61.521 38.8% 20.006 Total Public Works 1,037,855 464,015 605,415 44.7% 450,130 Parks and Recreation Park Maintenance Personal Services 115,022 101,481 67,096 88.2% 107,475 Supplies 23,300 8,212 13,592 35.2% 12,992 Other Services and Charges 40,500 24,526 23,625 60.6% 19,139 Park Maintenance 178.822 134.219 104.313 75.1% 139.606 Recreation Personal Services 41,575 25,196 24,252 60.6% 26,454 Supplies 7,700 3,935 4,492 51.1% 1,699 Other Services and Charges 13,900 7,403 8,108 53.3% 6,668 Recreation 63.175 36.534 36.852 57.8% 34.821 Total Parks and Recreation 241,997 170,753 141,165 70.6% 174,427 Total General Fund Expenditures 4,936,399 3,173,188 2,879,566 64.3% 3,030,383 General Fund Revenues and Expenditures vs Budget Through August 31, 2017 % Collected/ One Year Description Budset Period Amt YTD Budset % Expended Prior Actual Other Financing Uses Transfers Out - Southshore Center Transfers Out - EDA Debt City Hall Transfers Out - Equipment Replacement Transfers Out - Street Improvements Transfers Out - Park Capital Total Other Financing Uses Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses 70,000 95,000 40,833 135.7% 0 102,913 102,913 60,033 100.0% 0 120,000 120,000 70,000 100.0% 0 770,000 1,245,000 449,167 161.7% 0 42,000 242,000 24,500 576.2% 0 1,104,913 1,804,913 644,533 163.4% 0 6,041,312 4,978,101 3,524,099 82.4% 3,030,383 General Fund, Net (192,785) (1,781,802) (112,458) 924.2% 89,070