Loading...
2022-04-26 CC Meeting MinutesMOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 26, 2022 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Centennial Building. Members present: Mayor Ray Salazar; Council members Paula Larson, Phil Velsor and Jason Holt Members absent: Sherrie Pugh Others present: City Manager Eric Hoversten, City Clerk Kevin Kelly, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, City Planner Rita Trapp, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, Orono Police Department Sergeant Tim Sonnek, Joe Bruns, Scott Picha, Nick Meester, Tom & Cindy Notch, Michelle Herrick, Brian Farrell, Stephanie Bollinger, Jeff Bollinger, Jason Zattler, Scott Gates, Mary Davis, Ron Saatzer, Jerry Jerome, Sean Carroll, Dan Saatzer, Margie Saatzer, Leigh Maurstad, Ben Brandt. Consent agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event it will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. Open meeting Mayor Salazar called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda Hoversten added two pages to item 8 of the agenda, the AIS Ambassador Consent Agreement and background on the AIS Ambassador program. MOTION by Velsor, seconded by Larson, to approve the amended agenda. All voted in favor. Motion 4. Consent agenda Mayor Salazar asked for item 4B to be pulled. MOTION by Larson, seconded by Holt, to approve the amended consent agenda. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $157,026.66. B. Pulled C. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-33 APPROVING 2022 SEASONAL REQUEST FROM MOUND FARMERS' MARKET AND MORE IN DOWNTOWN MOUND AND REDUCED FEE DUE TO PUBLICE PURPOSE OF GATHERING 4B. Pulled. Approve minutes: 04-12-22 regular meeting Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 Salazar requested an amendment to the meeting minutes to add the word "not" to a sentence on page 874 of the meeting minutes. MOTION by Salazar, seconded by Velsor, to approve the amended April 12, 2022 regular meeting minutes. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 5. Comments and suqqestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. None were offered. 6. Sergeant Sonnek and the Mound Activity Report for March 2022 Sergeant Tim Sonnek presented the Mound Activity Report for March 2022. Sonnek listed five crashes, seven alarms, nine animal complaints, three assaults, 41 Medical calls, one burglary, one car theft, three DUI's, seven domestic calls, five mental health calls, five thefts, 10 parking complaints, 54 traffic stops and three arrest warrants. Sonnek added there was a total of 263 incidents in March and 290 incidents in March of 2021. Sonnek said three Explorers between the ages of 16 and 20 years -old and their Advisor traveled to Rochester to take part in a competition where they won five trophies and the Explorer Advisor of the year award. Sonnek said Jen Withrow has been hired as the new embedded social worker, noting she worked at Carver County for the last three years and at Nicollet County prior to that. Sonnek said she should be starting at the end of the month. Sonnek said Officer Zach Way is leaving his position and moving to Ely to be a realtor. Sonnek said Orono PD is down three Officers though one new Officer just started and his name is Brandon Sherman who is a recent college graduate who also has worked part-time for the City of Foley. Sonnek added the OPD has made two conditional offers to applicants who are being backgrounded. Velsor asked about the number of Explorers at OPD and Sonnek said the OPD would like to have 6 or 8 but the three they have now are very sharp. 7. Action on revised development applications from Northland Real Estate Group for Northland Mound project involving property generally located southwest of the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and the Dakota Rail Regional Trail on the eastern shore of Lake Langdon and undeveloped street right of ways: Trapp said Council directed staff at the last meeting to prepare five resolutions for consideration which are in the agenda packet which includes a supplemental item from the City Attorney. Trapp said she does have a map of the development area from a member of the public which was provided to the Council. Salazar said the Council is going to entertain public discussion. Leigh Maurstad, 5130 County Road 151, Minnetrista, said she is a former Mound resident and has researched the easement in question since the mid-2000's. Maurstad referenced the City attorney's letter that stated the Council needs to have relevant facts and a standards -based decision on why the proposal should be denied. Maurstad said there are two easements in question. Maurstad said the easement on Lot 18 has been addressed by the City Attorney which allows roughly 20 single family homes and an apartment building to have access to the Lake Langdon lakeshore and dock rights. Maurstad said the attorney said the actions will not impact the easement. Maurstad said she concludes that the actions will effectively land lock the access to the easement with the only access through the Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 Dakota Trail or through the Our Lady of the Lake's (OLL) private parcel. Maurstad said it is not the best interest of the City to create a burden on its citizens to privately resolve the matter and becomes a poor precedent in regards to other City parks and commons. Maurstad said the 2nd easement is established by the plat for the Lynwold Park subdivision which states the two platted roads named Langdon Place and Lake Place (Juniper) are dedicated to the public use forever and these roads lie between lot 18 and the private parcels. Maurstad said selling Lot 18 would be akin to the City selling the park across from Al & Almas. Maurstad said she found a recorded deed for lots 11 & 12 which were purchased due to tax forfeiture in 1963 for $1.00 which stated that the lots were to be used exclusively for street purposes. Maurstad asked if the City notice was sent to affected residents within 350 feet of the proposed development and Smith said notice was sent to everyone in the Lynwold subdivision. Gilchrist said he is not exactly sure what Maurstad is referring to but the City holds title to the land which is not restricted and there are no title conflicts which would prohibit the sale of the property. Cindy Notch, 1250 Morningview Drive, Minnetrista, thanked the Mayor and Council for being patient and allowing all to speak, for their service and to wade through the issue of the land sale. Notch said the last time she addressed the Council she was concerned about traffic on Commerce Blvd. backing up. Notch said she has researched the property for sale and presented the section map of the property. Notch said the platted roads on the property are not owned by either the Meisel's or Northland Mound and this property was deeded to the property owners of the Lynwold subdivision. Notch said there is a 38-page easement agreement between the Miesel's and OLL. Notch said one easement is owned by Meisel and the other easement is owned by OLL. Notch said the covenant in the easement says there are to be no changes to width, fencing, curbing or any other alteration of the blacktop area so this throws out the changes to the easement which Northland Mound proposed. Notch stated the covenant of the private access easement between the property owners states the access is for a section of properties north of the platted east west ROW but is silent regarding the property owned by Mr. Meisel which is south of the platted right of way. Notch said the covenant is silent regarding the properties south of the ROW which means Mr. Meisel/Northland Mound can't use the easement owned by OLL for access to those properties which are south of the ROW. Notch said the right of ways and other parcels are City owned and are also not covered by the OLL/Meisel easement and the Northland Mound Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposal is over land which it doesn't own and doesn't have the rights to traverse through the 50' x 50' OLL easement. Notch said the Council has no choice but to vote down the proposal if the City is to follow private property law. Tom Notch, 1250 Morningview Drive, Minnetrista, said he received information from the DNR which recommended denial of the PUD. Notch mentioned a finding (#2) of fact by the Planning Commission (PC) which he said read due to the redevelopment of the area the purpose of the dedications are no longer needed. Notch said this is totally incorrect and the right of way dedications are to the perpetual benefit of residents. Notch said all five of the resolutions should be denied. Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 Notch said he viewed Hennepin County GIS maps of the development area and if you view older maps of the site you can see fill being added to the site through the years. Notch said this was done in order to raise the value of the property and if this is the case the fill should be pulled out of the area. Notch said he doesn't believe the claim of $300,000 of additional tax revenue would come to the City. Notch said a Tonka Bay development is only creating $165K in tax value. Notch said the site of the Northland development is smaller than the Tonka Bay site and won't bring in the dollars as claimed. Notch said after the other taxing districts and the County and School District get their share of the taxes created, the Northland Mound project will only bring $75K to the City. Jeff Bollinger, 2257 Cottonwood Lane, likes his dead-end street and he likes to take his kayak over the deeded access. Bollinger said this was more difficult to do since the fill being was placed on the site. Bollinger said he thought this was done purposely to make it more difficult to get to Lake Langdon and over the years he said he has abandoned doing that. Bollinger said it is his opinion the residents of the development should get paid and not the developer. Bollinger said the development is lowering the value of his house if he sells it because the access to Lake Langdon will be taken away. Bollinger said residents shouldn't be stepped on and the sale is not an appropriate action. Bollinger said he doesn't drink city water and there are a number of infrastructures needs in the City. Bollinger said he remembers the dumping in the area and for the Council to reconsider this development. Bollinger said if this development occurs, his dead-end street will be opened up to access to the development site Nick Meester 5764 Lynwood Blvd., said he was indifferent to the development until the point he realized his deeded access would be cut off. Meester said it is very difficult to get to the lake right now and he hopes something would be maintained and the access be preserved. Meester said he feels his property rights are violated. Meester said the developer will not allow us through the site and we would not be able to fight against the access being taken away. Ron Saatzer, 5745 Lynwood Blvd. said he once had the Meisel property under contract in order to develop the land. Saatzer said a soil test detected a lot of problems with the soil. Saatzer said this is swamp land and Meisel is misrepresenting his property. Saatzer said now that he knows he has deeded access his property is now more valuable. Saatzer said there was an electrical easement and the soil is a mess. Saatzer said he had a sketch plan of 25 town homes which had to be slab on grade because of the soil on site. Saatzer said if nothing gets developed the City should turn the land into a dog park or some kind of park and to allow access to enjoy the lake as it should be used. Salazar asked Saatzer why he didn't want to develop the site and Saatzer said his Architect said there was a wetland delineation and added he was astonished there was going to be a large apartment built on the site. Saatzer said his plan couldn't fit 22 townhomes on the site and if it doesn't get built Saatzer is in favor of revisiting this thing because it will take work to redevelop the site. Salazar and Saatzer spoke about his prior proposal and said their due diligence showed he couldn't build on the site and he got his earnest money back. Saatzer said if you are going to develop something get your facts straight before it gets on the market. Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 Michelle Herrick, 2630 Westedge Blvd., said she questions why all of a sudden this is a concern to me and she lives directly across the lake from the development. She asked her neighbors about how to get a boat on the lake and was told by them it was from the area of the Northland development. Herrick said she didn't believe this and now believes she has common access rights to the road to put her boat in Lake Langdon from the area of the development. Herrick said there is another access to Lake Langdon off of Commerce Blvd. but it is difficult and you could damage your boat there. Herrick said from what she knows now she is disappointed that the due diligence has not been done. Herrick said the Council should take a long look at the City selling this property and look at the facts and reevaluate the City's position. Salazar ended the public discussion at 7:46 Holt said he has the same issue as Michelle Herrick as he also lives on Lake Langdon. Holt asked whether we know this is correct and this a boat launch area. Gilchrist said a road like that is held in the interest of the public but to keep in mind that there is a lot between the dedicated road and the water and this is essentially private property owned by the City. Gilchrist said this property doesn't serve as a City lake access but the owners who have the benefit of the shoreline easement of lot 18 arguably have rights to access it, but it is subject to debate and is important for the Council to understand that the real estate issues need to be worked out by the City and the buyer. Gilchrist said the easement has been reviewed through the title work of the site and the easement was within the title and is in the record. Gilchrist said in regards to the dedicated roads in the plat there have been recent court of appeals decisions which would suggest these roads have already gone through the Marketable Title Act and there may not be any roads left. Gilchrist said the Marketable Title Act would also apply to the platted roads and could go before the Minnesota Supreme Court. Gilchrist said the point for the Council to consider is that the Council as a body is not a judge though the Council acts as a quasi-judicial body when applying the City zoning code to zoning applications. Gilchrist added the Council is not here to decide real estate matters and rights, nor does it have the authority to do so. Gilchrist said that is ultimately for a court to decide and there are rules around who has standing and there are burdens of proof and he encouraged the Council to apply the zoning code and not real estate concerns when making their decision. Salazar asked about the Marketable Title Act and if it means that easements can be revoked after a period of time. Gilchrist said yes, it is meant to clean away old interests in property after 40 years so those interests could potentially be gone but that can't be determined tonight. Salazar said Langdon Place had a home heating oil company on the site for many years which went out of business and after the business left the land was filled in and the road eliminated for the new property owner's convenience. Salazar said it wasn't right to fill in the road because it wasn't used. Salazar said there was an unimproved road in the area and asked Larson who moved to Mound at age 12 if there was a road and business on site. Larson answered yes to both questions. Larson said it was the 1980's when the business closed. Salazar said this land was filled in illegally and the folks in the subdivision would enjoy the use of the access to the lake and it is a beautiful lake. Salazar said the lot was filled in to the benefit of the property owner and the person who did it isn't here. Salazar asked Larson if she remembers Juniper Road being there and Larson said she did and has lived here for 50 years. Salazar said the resolution requesting the street vacation related to the development was inaccurate as it stated the platted road was never used but that isn't true. Salazar said the platted road wasn't used because it was filled in by the present property owner which Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 precluded folks from gaining access to the lake. Salazar said Lot 18 is marshland and people can get to the lake and put in a dock. Gilchrist said the easement that is recorded on Lot 18 provides to the residents the right to use Lot 18 for a dock. Gilchrist said the easement doesn't go into much detail, such as, if a dock was in use at the time of the easement, or for future dock use or the number of docks which can be used. Gilchrist said the easement doesn't provide access to the dock and its purpose is the right to use Lot 18 for a dock and only for the residents named in the easement grant. Gilchrist said the platted ROW's that lead to Lot 18 are City owned land but Lot 18 isn't dedicated as a Park nor is it a Right of Way. Gilchrist said the Lot 18 easement is not for the general public use nor can the general public have the right to cross Lot 18 to get to the lake. Velsor asked about how many of the City owned lots are being sold to which Hoversten responded that lots 11 and 12 are combined into one Property Identification Number (PID) and Lot 17 has its own PID. Hoversten added that Lot 18 is depicted as two separate sections with one PID, noting in the original plat Lot 18 is plotted out into the water as one contiguous piece of land. Hoversten said the current Juniper Road is the originally platted Langdon Place and Lake Place which were renamed. Salazar and Velsor discussed the nature of Lot 18 and whether it is a Commons to which Salazar said yes. Velsor asked if this is part of the Commons Dock Program which Salazar said the Dock Program is for property on Lake Minnetonka not Langdon. Maurstad addressed the Council and said there are two separate easements for the area; the original Lynwood Place subdivision which allowed the dock on Lot 18 and the re -platting of Lynwold Place, the Kennedy Lot 56 subdivision. Maurstad said the ROW's are dedicated for the public use on each plat and not just to the residents of the two subdivisions. Velsor said he has been part of both Planning Commission and Council and many vacations have been done over the years and for property which is dedicated to the public. Velsor added there wasn't a problem with any of those and questions why this is any different. Hoversten said this is pretty standard language and the ROW under consideration can be rearranged during the platting process to meet the needs of the property owners. Hoversten said there are other similar vacations in which the dedications were fairly standard language such as ROW's. Gilchrist said this is standard plat language and the land is held in trust by the City and the Council has the authority to hold the easements or to decide whether to vacate or not. Salazar said he still had difficulty with it, obviously. Larson said she has intimate knowledge of the area back there. Larson said she and her husband bought her property on Lynwood and she worked for a local attorney who said that you they have access to Lake Langdon and have an access that goes across the property to get to lake. Larson said her kids and husband used the lake and neighbors used the lake. Larson said the attorney told her that in the future should Lake Langdon ever be connected to Lake Minnetonka through Lost Lake you could have dock rights to Lake Minnetonka which makes a big difference as far as property values. Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 Larson said she would like to correct the Preliminary Plat resolution regarding the road not being constructed which she labeled absolutely false. Larson said the section regarding the ROW's which read that they have not been built as City streets is a complete fabrication. Larson added they have been used as set for in the original dedication which Larson said is from January 30, 1908 but there is going to be a long court battle if the aim is to take away an easement in perpetuity. Larson said the Kennedy's who were the developers of the area sold their lots by granting a permanent access to Lot 18 as a lakeshore perk when you bought your lot. Larson said the dedicated ROW grants an access through the area to Lake Langdon though it doesn't give the dock rights to people outside the neighborhood. Larson said there was a fuel oil business and bait business in the development area. Larson said the bait business owner would drive his vehicle to the edge of the shoreline and get in his boat and load up minnows in his commercial vehicle. Larson said teenagers used to party back there and the City put in a trashcan for all the beer bottles. Larson said it is a falsehood that there were no roads there and the public has access from Commerce Blvd. to access to the lake. Larson read part D of the resolution on page 917 of the packet, which read the DNR sent a letter to the City indicating it is not in favor of the proposed vacation because it does not clearly state how the proposed vacation is to be a public benefit. Larson said the application by Northland has been denied twice on December 27th and January 27th by the DNR, a state agency. Larson said it is curious the title company will honor and mention the recording of the title to Lot 18 and the City is completely ignoring the wishes of the Kennedy's. Larson also noted item F of the resolution regarding public interest and said it is up to the City Council to decide. Larson called Item G a complete fabrication which refers to it being in the public interest to vacate the undeveloped and unused ROW's to promote development when we know what happened to these roads. Larson wanted it added to the public record that Patricia Meisel was Mayor of Mound from 1999 to 2006. Larson said she received a call from Greg Skinner, who was a former City Public Works Superintendent of Mound, regarding the site of the development. Larson said Skinner told her that there were bulk oil tanks on site and fuel tankers used the access and road and the land was filled in around the early 2000's. Larson asked for permission from Saatzer to read a document completed 15 months ago from Haugo Geotechnical Services who did a study on the development area. Larson read page five of the report from Haugo Geotechnical Services, that said the origin of top soil fill is unknown but based on historical photographs it appears grading activities have occurred on the site with the most recent activity from 2006. Larson said Haugo did recommend the top soil be removed and replaced with suitable compacted fill. Larson said she watched the trucks dumping fill into the area and reported it to the MCWD who said no report was made on the area. Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 Larson said the Haugo report stated the fill is one to seven feet deep according to the report. Larson said this fill covered up the City streets and blocked access over the Kennedy subdivision. Larson said she doesn't have proof who did it but she believes it is payback from the Meisel's. Gilchrist discouraged the Council in getting into who did what and getting into the history of the site. Gilchrist said the matter before the Council is a zoning proposal. Gilchrist said he has had conversations with Larson about her conflicts of interest. Gilchrist added this conversation at the Council level jeopardizes the Council's position regardless of the Council vote on the proposal. Larson asked if Gilchrist was telling her to recuse herself and Gilchrist said he informed Larson when she speaks on items which could be a conflict of interest it potentially undermines the due process of the proceeding. Gilchrist said he has had conversations with Larson that the project would devalue her property and it is his opinion that Larson has a conflict of interest and should recuse herself and to not vote on the proposal. Gilchrist said he understood that Larson did recuse herself at prior meetings and spoke as a member of the audience. Gilchrist said he is concerned about due process and he let the issue go initially at the start of the discussion because it was around the public road and the public interest in the road but now as the discussion moves to the development he wants to raise the issue with the Council so they are aware of it and should be concerned with it. Larson asked Gilchrist if she should recuse herself and Gilchrist said it is his recommendation Larson said the reason she recused herself at the time was she wanted to be a good Council Member and if there was any hint of a conflict of interest she said she would recuse herself. Larson said she talked to a realtor at the time who thought it would reduce the value of her property but she did not get anything in writing, and since then she called another realtor who put in writing that the development would not cause her to lose value on either of her two properties. Larson said because the properties will not lose or gain value she didn't need to recuse herself. Larson said the second reason she recused herself was because it involved Mrs. Mayor Meisel in which she had two years of litigation against her for conflict of interest in the past. Larson said weeks ago she called her law firm, Larkin Hoffman, to help her get her old records from the Meisel lawsuit. Larson said she was told by Larkin Hoffman that they can't represent her now with the Meisel property because they represent Northland Mound. Larson said this was unethical and she felt because of this she didn't need to recuse herself. Gilchrist responded that his original opinion was based on the self -report of Larson's conflict of interest and was not aware of the different opinion about the property valuation effect of the development. Gilchrist said he wasn't as concerned about the conflict of interest with this new information but Gilchrist said it appeared to be that Larson contacted Larkin Hoffman to instigate a law suit which means she has a direct interest. Salazar said Larson was contacting the law firm for information. Larson reiterated that Larkin Hoffman said they couldn't represent her because they are representing Northland Mound. Brian Farrell of Northland Mound said Larkin Hoffman is the representative on this transaction. Farrell said he was confused that Larson is now not recusing herself when she did recuse herself at all the previous meetings due to Larson's claim the development would reduce her property value. Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 Larson said she received new information regarding the effect of the development on her property value. Larson said she wanted to err on the side of caution prior to receiving the new information. Farrell said he has legitimate concerns if Larson does not recuse herself. Salazar said the burden of recusal is on the Council member and not Farrell. Farrell said during previous Council hearings Larson recused herself to which Salazar said Larson has new information which negates the recusal. Salazar said this is on the conscience of Larson and not the authority of the Council. Salazar said Larson has a clear conscience. Larson said she spoke with Skip Johnson, a former Mayor of Mound, who Larson said couldn't recall a street and roadway being vacated in any area of the City which involved access to water as access to the water is so valuable. Larson said allowing this vacation to happen to an access to water is a precursor of what could happen to our Commons Dock Program if the Council starts vacating roads and the access rights to the water. Larson said the City is setting ourselves up for a flood of developers to remove access to water which have been dedicated to the public. Salazar said he concurs with Larson and her points of contention. Velsor asked to see the site plan for the project. Velsor said the parking space to the south of the building with the small retaining wall could be used to keep access to the lake open. Velsor said the dedicated access is at the shoreline and Juniper Road doesn't go to the shoreline. Velsor said the access is getting to Lot 18. Larson said she has permission from the DNR to put in a dock at the site to reach beyond the cattails. Velsor asked to see an aerial view of the property. Discussion ensued around the Ordinary High Water (OHW) of Lake Langdon as depicted on the documents. Velsor asked if the Council could add a condition of the sale of City property to make a sidewalk access to the lake for paddle boarders and canoers so people can get to the border of the property line of Lot 18. Velsor said this would be a better access than what is there now and get them to Lot 18 to use the lake or put in a dock. Farrell said it is Northland's understanding, based on the title, that the dock easement has been terminated. Farrell said it wasn't improved and it is our Counsel's opinion that the easement has been terminated. Farrell said, based on our analysis and discussion with staff, that this easement was not for the general public but to the benefit to the immediate parcels. Farrell said it is our understanding that Lot 18 was not dedicated to all of the City. Velsor said he was playing devil's advocate and if Lynwold Park has access only Lynwold Park residents could put in a dock. Velsor said if the access is the problem the access doesn't need to be the angled, former gravel road and could instead be a path to Lot 18. Farrell said if that is the Council's determination that Northland could be amenable but it is their opinion based on title search that this was not for citywide access and the dock easement was terminated. Gilchrist said he suspected there is a potential property dispute between parties who would benefit from the access but this isn't a Council decision and trying to find a resolution to the issue is valid but the easement is not a general grant to the public as a whole. Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 Gilchrist said Courts have ruled that if there is a gap between the waterway and the platted row then there is not access as determined by the courts. Salazar and Gilchrist discussed the access to Lot 18 and Gilchrist said there is a significant gap between the OHW level and the ROW with the easement over Lot 18 is for dock use purposes. Salazar and Gilchrist discussed the City owned parcels which will be transferred to Northland. Gilchrist said he argues that Lot 18 is privately held by the City and this is a private easement. Salazar said how are folks supposed to get access to the dock and lake. Gilchrist said the City can't facilitate access to a private easement. Salazar said this land was for the benefit to the citizens of the Lynwold development. Salazar and Gilchrist discussed that the ROW's on the property which have language which dedicates them to the general public use which Gilchrist said is typical language and Lot 18 is a private easement. Salazar said the folks can't get access to the lake if the lot goes private with the sale to Northland. Gilchrist explained that the access easement which may be in dispute would need to be taken to the courts for resolution if the easement is deemed to exist. Salazar and Gilchrist discussed the title company stance on the easement and the request by Northland to not have it reflected. Gilchrist said the title company kept the easement on the title because they didn't feel comfortable leaving it off. Gilchrist said the courts may have to decide this item. Salazar said he is concerned about the 50 x 50 square private easement which was brought up earlier in the meeting. Cindy Notch claimed this easement, which is OLL property, allows for access to some of the interior lots but not all of the lots of the proposed sale to Northland because those lots aren't mentioned in the access easement agreement. Salazar said he had issues with the easement and Notch responded that Northland couldn't use the OLL easement area to alter either of the two easement areas or to fix traffic issues. Farrell said he is comfortable with the language of the easement and the right to improve the area and agrees with Gilchrist and is not the purview of the Council. Salazar said the Council has questions about the development and easement. Larson read from a Kennedy and Graven memo which said the parties may disagree about on issues on whether the easement still exits or its scope but those are private property disputes which need to be addressed by the owners and the City is a property owner and needs to figure this out. Gilchrist said it is not the City's responsibility to resolve the easement issues with respect to a development proposed by another entity. Gilchrist said it is up to the buyer to feel comfortable with going forward with the development. Salazar said all of this has been around since 1908 and then brought up to date in 1972. Salazar said its confusing and we want to do the right thing with our responsibility to our citizens first and foremost. Scott Gates, 4363 Wilshire Blvd. said an important clarification regarding the discussion is property rights don't go anywhere and each party has a right to disagree. Gates said the riparian rights means property which typically adjoins a body of water and these parcels don't adjoin with the OHW over 100 feet away. Gates added the parties don't officially have riparian rights because the property is not adjoined to the lakeshore though they may be granted access through an easement. Gates said he quoted a 1968 case regarding riparian rights and if an easement does exist it does not grant riparian rights. Gates said it is clear that Lot 18 doesn't adjoin the OHW of the lake and the two ROW's don't have riparian rights to the lake. Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 Salazar said there is a private easement over Lot 18 for boat docking purposes for Lynwold Park and Kennedy Subdivision residents to which Gates agreed. Gates said the easement grants a riparian right but Gates said the riparian rights must have access to the body of water and those parcels don't have access to the lake as riparian rights begin at the edge of the water. Maurstad said the issue is that Gates doesn't understand that the Hennepin County mapping system doesn't show parcels which are below the OHW and much of lot 18 is below the OHW level. Maurstad said the owner of Lot 18 isn't an individual homeowner but the City, which is a steward of the public. Salazar asked for the resolutions to be moved. MOTION by Velsor to approve the following resolution, not seconded. Motion fails. A. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED STREET VACATIONS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAT OF NORTHLAND MOUND Velsor asked Gilchrist if the other resolutions can be voted on if the first resolution dies. Gilchrist said, without the vacations, the plat doesn't work as proposed and these are cascading resolutions and without the first resolution the second doesn't work. Gilchrist said there is a ticking clock on the zoning related resolutions and the first resolution wasn't acted on and sits on the table. Gilchrist said without a Council action the Council is precluded from acting on those zoning matters in the subsequent resolutions. Gilchrist said the Council could continue these matters for one more meeting until the absent Council member is present or act on the resolutions at this meeting with an up or down vote. Salazar said he thought if there is no second, the resolution dies and there are no do overs. Salazar added that experience has taught him if there is not a second the motion is dead on arrival. Gilchrist said the motion is dead but the resolution remains on the agenda without being resolved. Salazar said there would be no continuance and did not want to bring the motion back. Gilchrist said the Council would need a motion to readopt the resolution or propose a new motion which would deny the resolution. Gilchrist said if the Council wants to deny the motion by finding it is not in the public interest to vacate the roads then the Council should deny the resolution. Salazar called for a Council member to move to deny the resolution on the street vacations. MOTION by Holt, seconded by Larson, to deny the following resolution. Larson, Holt and Salazar voted in favor. Velsor voted no. Motion carried. A. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED STREET VACATIONS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAT OF NORTHLAND MOUND Salazar asked Gilchrist for guidance on the preliminary plat resolution. Gilchrist said refusing to vacate the roads does create an incompatibility with the proposed plat. Gilchrist said either the resolutions are carried over for denial at the next Council meeting or the Council can deny the resolution due to the streets not being vacated by the previous denial vote. Gilchrist said the Council needs to formally act on the resolution. Is Mound City Council Minutes —April 26, 2022 MOTION by Holt, seconded by Larson, to deny the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. B. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR NORTHLAND MOUND Gilchrist said the PUD doesn't work due to the denial of the previous two resolutions. MOTION by Holt, seconded by Larson, to deny the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. C. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN A SHORELAND AREA FOR NORTHLAND REAL ESTATE GROUP MOTION by Holt, seconded by Larson, to deny the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. D. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR USE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR NORTHLAND MOUND PROJECT Gilchrist strongly recommend to the Council to table the resolution on the already signed purchase agreement. Gilchrist said he would like to look up the potential impact the vote will have on any legal questions. Gilchrist said he would like to think this through and will follow up with advice for the Council. MOTION by Holt, seconded by Velsor, to table the following resolution. Velsor, Holt and Salazar voted in favor. Larson voted no. Motion carried. E. RESOLUTION NO. 22 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SALE OF CITY PARCELS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE VACATIONS RELATED TO THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8. Consider Right of Entry Agreement for Hennepin County AIS Ambassador Vendor Ben Brandt, 6233 Ladyslipper Circle, addressed the Council by stating he received grant funding from Hennepin County to conduct a new pilot program focused on an Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS). Brandt said the AIS Ambassador Program would staff five boat launches in the County to educate owners to inspect their own equipment, educate them on the threats posed by AIS and to inform them on the potential ramifications of new AIS entering the lake. The purpose of the grant and the Right of Entry agreement is to allow staff to be at Surfside Park boat launch. Brandt said staff will work six -to - eight -hour shifts on weekends, beginning on the fishing opener and making interactions through July. Brandt said there has not been an AIS program in the City for about five years and this would be an excellent opportunity. Brandt said the allocation of funds is from the State through the County and there is no cost to Mound nor is there a requirement for people to comply with the ambassador program staff. Brandt said 10 to 20% of boaters will change behavior when inspectors are present so reducing the number of potential boaters transporting AIS from one water body to the next is a priority. Brandt said the Ambassador program is education focused for boaters to check their own equipment. Brandt said tia Mound City Council Minutes — April 26, 2022 there will be no survey or legal requirements to participate but is intended to raise awareness of AIS and to train watercraft owners to complete more thorough inspections in the future. Brandt said part of the education will be to inform the 5 to 6% of boaters who violate the Minnesota drain plug law. Brandt said the other four locations for AIS Ambassadors in Hennepin County are Weaver Lake, West Bush Lake, Long Lake and the Mississippi River in Champlain. Brandt said bringing the AIS Ambassador program to Mound is a good opportunity as Surfside is a busy launch with enough traffic to make a difference. Brandt said he has created a Consent Agreement for the Council to grant approval of the program and to allow access to the boat launch. Brandt added the AIS Ambassador program can be discontinued at Council direction and moved to another location. Salazar said this is an educational program and he thinks it will do a good job. MOTION by Larson, seconded by Holt, to approve the Right of Entry Agreement and Waiver to Trespass Agreement for the Hennepin County AIS Ambassador Program. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Brandt said he will be back in -the fall with a report to Council on the AIS Ambassador program. 9. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments/reports from Council members/City Manager: Hoversten noted the following events: • May 14th — The Mound Minnetrista Special Clean Up Day • May 21 st — Mound Farmers Market & More starts • May 21 st — Island Park Hall Preservation Society/Family Fun Fest at Swenson Park and the Island Park Hall building • Hydrant flushing has started with Public Works crew on the Island next week • May 2nd — City Hall Summer Hours schedule begins • May 30th — City Hall closed for Memorial Day B. Reports: Fire Department —March 2022 C. Minutes: Parks & Open Spaces Commission — February 17, 2022 D. Correspondence: 10. Adjourn ACTION by Holt, seconded by Velsor, to adjourn at 9:46 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Kevin Kelly, Clerk 13 Mayor Raymond Salazar