The URL can be used to link to this page

1987-12-22CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1987 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Pledge of Allegiance Approve the Minutes of the December 8, 1987 regular meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: Delinquent Utility Bills PUBLIC HEARING; RESOLUTION Proposed Storm Sewer and Street Improvements on Drummond Road between · .Amhurst Lane and.Devon Lane. Authorizing the City Clerk to Execute' an Order for Removal of a Hazardous Building (Earl & Charlotte Blocher, 59XX Fairfield Rd). RESOLUTION Authorizing the City Clerk to Execute an Order for Removal of a Hazardous Building (Charles R. Jones, 4852/4854 Edgewater Dr.) CASE NO. 87-678: Variance for Access to Public Street for 52XX Lynwood Blvd., Lot 5 and Part of Lot 4, Block 2, Rearr. of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, PID # 13-117-24 34 0018, Jeff Bakken and Earl Bakken. CASE NO. 87-679: Minor Subdivision of Land, 29Xx Westedge Blvd., Lots 5 and 6, Block 13, The Highlands. PID #23-117-24-31 0053, Ronald S. Gehring CASE NO. 87-680: Variance and Subdivision of Land, 5346 Piper Road, Lots 40, 41 and N 1/2 of Lot 42, Whipple Shores. PID #25-117-24 21 0111, Lawrence and Jane McLane. Pg. 3200-3204 Pg. 3205 Pg. 3206-3214 Pg. 3215-3230 Pg. 3231-3254 Pg. 3255-3~62 Pg. 3263-3274 Pg. 3275-3289 3197 10. 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Appointment and Reappointments to Planning Commission: Kenneth Smith - Term Expires 12/90 William Meyer - Ierm Expires 12/90 Brad $ohns - Term Expires 12/90 Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present. RESOLUTION To approve the Location of Nine Common Dock Sites on Lost Lake Channel, City of Mound Property. RESOLUTION To Approve 1988 Commons Dock Site Map with the Addition of 15 New Sites. Appointment to Park Commission: Stephen Burke, 1741 Bluebird Lane. Term expires - 12/90 Authorization Directing the Mayor, City Manager and City Attorney to Settle the City of Mound v. Hagedorn Lawsuit..~ DISCUSSION: Legal Services - Prosecution. RESOLUTION Approving the Renewal of the Recycling Contract with Supercycle. Payment of Bills ,~ · INFORMATIONJMISCEL!.kNEOUS November 1987 Financial Report as prepared by John Norman, Finance Director. B. Park Commission Minutes of December 15, 1987. C. Planning Commission Minutes of December 14, 1987. D. Hennepin County Member at Large 1988 Appointments. Ee Notice and Order for Hearing pertaining to NSP's application for an increase in retail rates. REMINDER: Christmas Party, December 19th, Phyllis.Jessen's, 5189 Emerald Drive, beginning at 7:30 PM. Please bring an hors'd'oeuvre and a tray of treats. See you there! Pg. 3290-3297 Pg. 3298 Pg. 3299-3300 Pg. 3301-3307 P'g. 3308-3309 Pg. 3310-3323 Pg. 3324-3325 Pg. 3326-3327 Pg. 3328-3330 Pg. 3331-3332 Pg. 3333-3340 3198 MARK YOUR CALENDARS - FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 1988, AND JANUARY 23, 1988 - GOAL SETTING TEAM BUILDING SESSION. DETAILS AS FOLLOW'S: Friday, January 22, 1968 5:30 PM to 6:30 PM 6:30 PM to 7:30 PM 7:30 PM to 10:00PM Cocktails Dinner Meyers Briggs Instrument Interpret Results Team Building Exercises Adjournment Saturday, January 23, 1988 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM 8:30 AM to 1:00 PM Breakfast Team Building/Goal Setting Lunch Adjournment The Consultant is Barbara Arney, a well known and respected facilitator for local government and private organizations. The Council, City Manager and Department Heads will participate in both the Friday evening and the Saturday sessions. Locations for the sessions is .-tentatively set for the Lafayette Club. That will be confirmed soon. In addition, .the consultant wants to conduc~' interviews of all participants on Thursday, January 7th. Approximately 30-45 minutes is needed per participant. She will be at City Hall beginning in the early afternoon of January 7th meeting with department heads. I have arranged it so that Councilmembers could stop by on their way home from work in the late afternoon. If there is a problem, I will try to reschedule these interviews for a different date and/or time. Let me know. THEREFORE, PLEASE MARK JANUARY 7TH, (AFTERNOON) JANUARY 22ND (EVENING) AND JANUARY 23RD (MORNING)!! I think this will be a rewarding experience. 3199 .190 December 8, 1987 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL'- DECENBER 8, 1987 The City Council of Mound,. Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, December 8, 1987, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Steve Smith, Councilmembers Don Abel, Liz Jensffn, Phyllis Jessen and Skip Johnson. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, City Planner Mark Koegler, Police Chief Len Harrell, and the following interested citizens: Steve Coddon, James McNamee, Bill McNamee, Sarah Vanstrom, Valerie Hessberg, Russ Falness, Neil Weber and Richard Bienapfl. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. MINUTES MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Smith to approve the minutes of the November 24, 1987 Regular Meeting, as presented. The vote was un- animously in favor. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: CASE ~87-676 - CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR.THE OPERATION OF A DELICATESSEN AND SANDWICH SHDP (CLASS II RESTAURANT) LOCATED AT 5569 SHORELINE BLVD. The Planner explained the request and stated that the Planning Commission and Staff are recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 5 The Mayor opened the public hearing. public hearing. The applicant shall comply with all state and county requirements, inspections and permit procedures. All signs for the new restaurant shall comply with the Mound Sign Ordinance and signage painted directly on the building is expressly prohibited. No one responded. The Mayor closed the Abel moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-210 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLASS II RESTAURANT {DELICATESSEN AND SANDWICH SHOP) AT 5569 SHORELINE BLVD. WIlll CONDITIONS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 191 December 8, 1987 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN "ON]SALE" LIQUOR LICENSE TO ERNEST WILLIAM MCNAMEE, dba THE JOCK CLUB, AT 5241 SHORELINE BLVD. The Police Chief gave a synopsis of the liquor background investigation. The water bill was paid. The remainder of the fees for the liquor license has been paid. The establishment has complied with the County Health Dept. requirements. The only item left is to get proof of all insurance policies. The Mayor opened the public hearing. public hearing. No one responded. The Mayor closed the MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Smith to approve the authorize the issuance of an 'On-Sale' Intoxicating Liquor License and 'On-Sale' Sunday Liquor. License to the Ernest William McNamee, dba The Jock Club, at 5241 Maywood Road, upon receipt of proof of all insurance policies necessary. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. UPDATE ON WESTONKA INTERVENTION PROJECT Valerie Hessberg stated that the.S3000 the City allocated was spent to cover phone costs this year-end to-purchase a much needed copy machine. The Project has 25 volunteers and assisted 80 persons. It is working with Mound and Min- netrista and hopes to expand into Orono. M.S.A. MAINTENANCE FUNDS - REQUEST FOR INCREASE The City Manager explained that this is an annual request. Smith moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTIOU #87-211 RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN INCREASE IN M.S.A. NAIN- TENANCE FUNDS DUE TO INCREASED MAINTENANCE COSTS ON CITY OF HOUHD M.S.A. STREETS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT There were none. LICENSE MOTION made by Jessen. seconded by Abel to authorize the issuance of a Restaurant License to the Taco Deli~ 5569, Shoreline Blvd., subject to all insurance and Conditional Use Permit requirements being met, 192 December 8, 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Abel to authorize_the.payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $113,185.75, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. tion carried. Counciimember Abel was excused at 8:00 P.M. because of illness. LOST LAKE - COUNTRY INN PROJECT REPORT The City Manager reviewed the background of the proposal. He then explained the preliminary overview of tax increment financing for the Lost Lake Country Inn. The cost of the project is estimated at $3,773,826. This does not in- clude the public improvements of channel dredging, docking area, parking lot and trail system estimated at a cost of $550,000, bringing the total project cost to $4,323,826. The developer indicated the ability to privately finance approximately $3,400,000, which, leaves $923,826. The net proceeds of a $505,000 bond issue would.be $380,000. Grants could add an additional $50,000. This still leaves a total project Shortfall of $493,826. The Staff recommendation is nOt to' designate a deVeloper at this time, but to encourage Waterford Development Group to revise the project to make it economically feasible, sell the property on the open market or look at other options. Mr. Richard Bienapfl, Waterford Development Group, was present and agreed that the costs are too great. MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jessen not to designate a developer at this time for the Lost Lake property. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The CoUncil decided to take the Lost Lake property matter under advisement. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A® Department Head monthly reports for November, 1987. Park Commission's Minutes of November 12, 1987. Ce Information on new LMCD boat fee that will be sent out with Dock Ap- plications in late December.~' De Lake level, flow and precipitation summary for October, 1987. 193 December 8, 1987 Ee Invitation to attend open house at Koenig, Robin, Johnson and Wood's Office, Friday, December 4th from 3 P.M. to 7 P.M. MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to adjourn at 8:40 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Hanager Francene C. clark, CMC, City Clerk BILLS ..... DECEMBER 8, 1987 Batch 7113 Batch 7114 Total Bills 29,870.88 83,314.87 113,185.75 3a or' 22 232 2196 72 22 238 4957 71 22 238 5020 31 22 238 5028 61 22 244 5019 31 22 259 4949 01 22 259 5452 42 22 259 5561 21 22 25'9 5656 02 22 259 6557 91 22 262 2857 11 22 286 6040 91 22 292 6033 21 22 298 2965 62 22 301 2910 41 22 310 2630 91 22 313 6300 91 22 317 2992 81 22 318 2871 21 2'2 324 2640 91 22 337 6000 43 22 337 6137 41 22 373 5031,11 22 388 2509 13 22 391 5024 21 22 404 5019 33 22 404 5092 01 Delinquent Water and Sewer $103.27 75.36 148.76 125.07 254.13 76.47 155.25 103.82 151.09 115.58 120.90 127.41 87:.35 127.03 165.08 195.41 197.43 68.OO 197.35 169.58 102.14 98.60 202.35 97.22 131.52 .111.85 .100.36 $3608.38 12 15 87 22 232 2196 72 22 238 4957 71 =~8 5020 3! 77 2:,0 5028 61 '~° 24A 5019 31 Ken Meyer Jim Cagle Linda Nelson Dennis Pride Ronald Hayes 22 259 5452 42 22 259 556! 21 22 259 5656 02 22 259 6557 91 22 262 2857 11 22 286 6040 91 22 292 6033 21 22 298 2965 62 22 301 2910 ~1 22 310 2630 91 22 313 6300 91 22 317 2992 81 22 318 2871 21 22 324 2640 91 22 337 6000 43 22 337 6137 41 22 373 5031 11 22 38g 2509 13 22 391 5024 21 22 404 5019 33 22 404 5092 O1 R.F.Martin Richard Stoik Terry Tepley Michael Nalaske Allison Curtis Peter Solstad Todd Warner Ron Anderson A.Strand .W. Lang John Rasmussen P .C .Braun Michael Beinert Richard Hawks Donald Hunt Tom Lindner Dean Benson Tim Lovett Hunter Lofgren Howard Alton Paul Neuschwander Delinquent Water and Sewer $1o3.27 75.36 148.76 125.07 Pd 254.13 i55.25' Pd. 103.82 Pd. 151.09 Pd. 115.58 120.90 Pd. 127.41 87.35 127.03 165.08 Pd.$100.00195.41 197.43 68.00 197.35 Pd. $100.0P69.58 102.14 98.60 202.35 97.22 131.52 111.85 .100.36 2196 Falrvlew Ln. 4957 Edgewater Dr. 5020 Edgewater Dr. 5028 Edgewater Dr. 5019 Rosedale Rd. ,~ .~ ~ ~ ~+t ~vu. · 5452 Bartlett Blvd. '5561 Bartlett Blvd. 5656 Bartlett Blvd. 6557 Bartlett Blvd. 2857 Highland Blvd. 6040 Hawthorne Rd. 6033 Cherrywood Rd. 2965 Oaklawn Rd. 29~0 Hazelwood tn. 2630 Westedge Blvd. 6300 Bayridge Rd. 2992 Highview Ln. 2871 Pheasant Ln. 2640 Setter Circle 6000 Beachwood Rd. 6137 Beachwood Rd. 5031Woodridge Rd. 2509 Avon Dr. 5024 Glendale Rd. 5019 Shoreline Blvd. 5092 Shoreline Blvd. December 19, 1987 City Of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Proposed storm sewer on Drummond Road to correct (serious?) drainage problem. First of all, some background; 10 years ago when we had just signed a purchase agreement to buy lots 4 & 5 and part of 3, Janet Nelson asked us if we knew that we had just bought property that would soon cave in and all of-the bank between our houses would fall into an old cess pool. She suggested that we get the city to build a retaining wall to correct this. Because we were concerned, we called our real estate agent, Hank Trulson, and they determined that there was no basis to this claim. So far the property has not caved in. The only trouble we have experienced was due to the extraordinary rainfall in the summer of '87; one of the posts in the terracing wall that I put in tipped over and some dirt did wash down which was the case with many homes. The nature of our homes sitting partially on the hill con- tributes to water runoff which we can live with without the overkill of putting in this storm sewer and improving a street that is not used enough to warrant this type of assesment¥~. I would be willing to contribute to drain tile to be laid between the Nelson's property and mine and help dig if necessary, but let's not let hysterics push through a storm sewer to handle another rainfall (12 inches or better) that will probably never happen in our lifetimes. I feel that it would be a good idea to get a factual account of just how much of a water problem the Nelsons and the corner house have in a normal year. From past experience, Mrs. Nelson does tend to exaggerate. I would really like to attend this meeting, but I will be out of town until after the holidays. /~ Sincerely, ~_~__ ~¢ ~ 303 . November 24, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 87-208 RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE REPORT AND SETTING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT FOR DECEMBER 22, 1987, AT 7:30 P.H. .. WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution #87-202, adopted by the Council..on November 10, 1987, a report has been prepared by the City Engineer with reference to the storm sewer and street improvement of Drummond Road between Amhurst and Devon. and this report was received by the Council on November 24, 1987. HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of such street and storm sewer in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pur- suant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated.total cost of the improvement of $12,400 for storm sewer and $11,700 for street improvements. . 2. A'..pub]ic hearing'shall'be held on such prOPosed improvement on the 22nd day of December, 1987, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. and the City Clerk shall give mailed and pub- lished notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Jensen and seconded by Councilmember Johnson. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Abel, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. May6r' / Attest: City Clerk CITY OF MOUND NOTICE OF PUBIC HEARING FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Notice is herebY given that the City Council of the City of Mound will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, December 22, 1987 to consider storm sewer and street improvements on Drummond Road between Amherst Lane and Devon lane, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.011 to 429.111. The area proposed to be assessed for such improvements is all property in Blocks 11 and 12, Devon abutting Drummond Road. The estimated cost of such improvements are $12,a00.00 for storm sewer and $11,700.00 for street improvements. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at th±s meeting. Fran Clark City Clerk City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 553~4 (Published in the Laker December 7th, and 14th, 1987) PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED STORM SEWER AND STREET IMPROVEMENT Drummond Road Mound, Minnesota November, 1987 GENERAL The State of Winnesota recently sold Lots 11 and 12, Block 11, Devon which had previously gone tax forfiet. The City has received a building permit application and survey with a request that the driveway for the proposed house connect to Drummond Road, which is unimproved. A copy of the survey is attached to this report. This street was not improved when the 1980 Street Improvement Rroject was completed in this area because the City had been petitioned not to do so. Drummond Road was gravel at one time, but the City has not maintained it since 1980. Most of the properties adjacent to Drummond Road have changed ownership since 1980 and some of the residents are again using this unimproved street. We have reviewed the request for the driveway and discovered there is also a drainage problem in the area. Most of the runoff from Block ll drains to a low spot approximately 100 feet east of Amherst Lane then across Drummond Road, down the hill and across the yards between two homes located on Island View Drive. The Nelsons, who own Lots 6 and ?, Block 12, have tried to solve the Problem by installing their own drain pipe from the rear yard to Island View Drive, but it is inadequate. STORM SEWER The only viable solution to the drainage problem would be to install storm sewer. There is an existing storm sewer line running from'Island View Drive to the lake, which was abandoned when Amherst Lane was improved. This line could be reactivated and extended to pick up the low area on Drummond Road. Attached to this report is a plan which shows the proposed storm sewer extension. The estimated cost of the proposed storm sewer extension as described herein is $12,400.00. This cost is based on estimated 1988 construction, plus 25% for engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative cost. A detailed breakdown of the cost is attached to this report. The total oo~t of the improvements should be paid by the properties benefitting from the improvement. It is suggested that the costs be assessed to Lots ll through 15, Block ll and Lots 4 through 9, Block 12 on a square foot basis. This calculates to a charge of $0.327/sq. foot. The following table indicates the proposed assessment for each parcel: PROPOSED STORM SEWER ASSESSMENT Parcel Area Proposed Assessment P~D # Lots 11 & 12, Block 11 *Lots 13 & 14, Block 11 Lot 15, Block 11 Lots 8 & 9, Block 12 Lots 6 & 7, Block 12 Lots 4 & 5, Block 12 *City Owned Property 6,400 S.F. $ 2,092.80 6,400 S.F. 2,092.80 3,200 S.F. 1,046.40 8,240 S.F. 2,694.48 7,290 S.F. 2,383.83 6,350 S.F. 2,076.45 25-117-24 ll 0023 25-117-24 11 0149 25-117-24 ll 0150 25-117-24 11 0028 25-117-24 11 8027 25-117-24 11 0026 STREET CONSTRUCTION The other problem that exists is the use of the old gravel roadway (Drummond Road) that is no longer maintained. We do not recommend the City maintain this street unless it is upgraded with a paved surface, which would be very expensive and benefit few residents. We have estimated it would cost approximately $11..~700to improve Drummond Road to a ~6'. width for the 300 feet_ that'is now traveled. A detailed breakdown of this cost is attached to this report. For that reason, we are r_ecommending paving on~¥. that portion from~ ~A~her~t Road~ast to the. propose~...gatch basin,, the ~os_t of which be ~harged t° the parcel applying for the building permit, Lots ll and 12, Bl.ock ll, Devon: ~h.~ cost for paving this portion of Drummond Road to a 16' width would be ~pproxima~ely $1,OOq. The remaining length of DrummOnd would need a shallow swale constructed along the north side to direct runoff towards the new storm sewer. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We believe this project is necessary to provide access and correct a drainage problem and can best be completed as described herein. ADDENDUM TO PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED STORM SEWER AND STREET IMPROVEMENT DRUMMOND ROAD STREET CONSTRUCTION If Drummond Road is imoroved as previously described at an estimated cost of $11,700.00, the proposed assessment would be $26.00 per lineal foot. The following table indicates the proposed assessment for each parcel. PARCEL 25-117-24 11 0023 25-117-24 11 0149 25-117-24 11 0150 25-117-24 11 0019 25-117-24 11 0025 25-117-24 11 0026 25-117-24 11 0027 25-117-24 11 0028 TOTAL CITY OWNED PROPERTY PROPOSED STREET ASSESSMENT DRUMMOND ROAD PROPOSED LEGAL DESC. 'FOOTAGE' ASSESSMENT Lots 11 & 12, BLK 11 Lots 13 & 14, BLK ll Lot 15 Lots 5 & 16, BLK ll Lots 17-20, BLK ll Lots i & 2 & 1/2 3, BLK 12 Lot'4 & 5 & 1/2 3, 8LK 12 Lots6 & 7, BLK 12 Lots 8 & 9, BLK 12 80 L.F. $2080.00 80 L.F. 2080.00 40 L.F. 1040.00 20 L.F. 520.00 60 L.F. 1560.00 40 L.F. 1040.00 50 L.F. 1300.00 40 L.F. 1040.00 40 L.F. 1040.00 450 L.F. $11,700 ESTIMATED COST STORM SEWER EXTENSION - D~UMMOND ROAD ITEM qUANTITY EST. UNIT PRICE TOTAL 12" R.C.P. 205 L.F. ~ $ 25.00/LF $ 5,125.00 Manholes i EACH ~ 1,O00.O0/EA 1,O00.O0 Catch Basin i EACH ~ 700.O0/EA 700.00 Flared End i EACH ~ 400.O0/EA 400.00 Street Restoration LUMP SUM 800.00 Yard Restoration LUMP SUM 500.00 Slotted Drain 20 L.F. 8 20.O0/LF 400.00 Contingencies 975.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST .............................. $ 9,900.00 Engineering, Legal, Fiscal and Administrative Costs 2~500.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST ........................................... $12,400.00 ESTIMATED COST STREET IMPROVEMENT - DRUMMOND ROAD ITEM QUANTITY EST. UNIT PRICE TOTAL Grading 6" Class 5 3" 8ituminous Wear Bituminous Curb Turf' Restoration - seeding Contingencies 200 TON 100 TON 600 L.F. LUMP SUM $ 1,000.00 $ 9.00/TN 1,800.00 $35.00/TN 3,500.00 $ 3.00/LF 1,800.00 LUMP SUM 300.00 900.00 $ 9,300 00' TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST ............................... Engineering, Legal, Fiscal and Administrative Costs 2~400.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST .......................................... $11,700,00 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA "/601 - 7Srd Avenua North $60-3093 D.C. KASIN INC. Mlnneapoli., Minnesota 55428 Denotes ~ood Hub Set ~][garll For Excavation Only t Denotes Surface Drainage Denotes Elevation Proposed Denotes Existing Elevation Area = 6400 sq. ft. Dench~ark: Invert of Sanitary manhole Ha~nond Dr. & Amhurst El. = Type of Building - Tuckunder 947.02 C Top o£ Block Garage Floor INVOICE NO. 21044 F. B. NO. 359-42 SCALE I" _20' O-- DENOTES IRON I-S- Frame ~4833 ~/~i ~l o ~ ~ r - 80.0- P~ no ~ Note: City records indicate sanitary sewer service on this lot to manholt~.on ~nhurst & Ha~nond Dr. Lowest bbst Floor Lots 11 and 12, Block 11,"Devcm" L The o~ly ea,~ement s shown ~ from plata of mcoed or tnfoemltlon pm~vlded by client. ~ hereby certify that this II I true and corm<:t represent-lion of boundarlsl of the above de~rlbed I~nd and the location of ~Jl buildings and vis- Ible ~ncfo~-hmentl, I! lny, fro~l o~'on laid I~',d. ~byus thll 28th dayof October t9 87 81sned R~/n~nd A. Pre,ch, Minn. Reg. N6. 6743 ~ ~ ' ~ .... ~ _ ~ ~AL[ O~BS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC ~T~N~I~N- ~M~ONP ~b. ~'~NI~ MINNEAPOLIS and HUTCHINSON.MINNESOTA ' ~Zl 4~ O~ ~OU~ g~iq- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN ORDER FOR REMOVAL OF A HAZARDOUS BUILDING BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL: The attached Order For Removal Of A Hazardous Building setsforth in detail the facts which determine that the structure is a hazardous building. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Order and shall work with the City Attorney to serve said Order on all interested parties. A copy of said Order marked Exhibit A is attached hereto and made a part of the resolution. Mayor Attest: City Clerk A. THOMAS WURST, P.A. CURTIS A, PEARSON, ,JAMES D. I.ARSON, P.A. TNOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, P.A. CRAIG M. HERTZ ROGE~ ~,1. FELLOWS LAW OFFICES WURST. PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ IIOO I~IRST BANK PLACE: WE:ST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540:~ November 25, 1987 Ms. Jan Bertrand Building Official City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re- Earl'and Charlotte Blocher Property at: 59XX Fairfield Road, Mound, Minnesota Dear.Jan, As per .yoUr ~equest that the City commence hazardous building proceedings for the-demolition of the buildings on the Blocher property, I enclose my proposed City Council order for demolition. If you find this document to be in order, please submit it to the City Council for approval. If the Council authorizes this action, please have the City Clerk sign three copies of the demolition order. Two of the copies should be forwarded to me and the third copy should be retained in your files. If the Blochers do not comply with the demolition order, we will petition the District Court for an order authorizing the demolition of the buildings. After demolition has been accomplished, we will petition the Court for an order approving. the City's costs incurred in enforcing the City Council demolition order, and ultimately we will be submitting various special assessment documents for purposes of collecting the City's expenses with the real estate taxes. Very truly yours, WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, ERWOOD & MERTZ ~/ Craig M. Mertz CMM/lkg ~l (ll CITY OF MOUND Hennepin County, Minnesota ORDER FOR REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS To: Earl F. Blocher and Charlotte F. Blocher NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City of Mound has determined that structures owned by you on premises described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hazardous buildings as defined by the laws of the State of Minnesota, determination being based upon the following facts: a) b) c) d) e) f) condition, g) h) ±) entry, j) k) 1) m) or bath, n)~ o) p) said bearing walls are under-designed and deteriorated, roof is in poor condition and bowed, plumbing is improper and illegal, .heating plant is inoperable, the buildings are unoccupied End unattended, electrical wiring in the main building is in poor the premises are littered with broken glass, interior walls are deteriorated, the buildings cannot be locked to prevent unauthorized chimneys are in poor condition, window sills are in poor condition, exterior walls are not plumb, inadequate sanitary facilities - no interior restroom floors are not level, outbuildings are in poor condition and falling down, steps are falling off the main building. Said buildings constitute a hazard to public safety because of physical damage, dilapidation, dangers of fire, unsanitary conditions, and inadequate maintenance and that by reason of the above facts, the buildings situated on ~ the above-described premises Constitute hazardous buildings within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the above-described premises be made safe and not hazardous to the public health, welfare and safety by being razed within thirty (30) days from' the date of service of this order upon you, said razing to include removal from the premises of all personal property, fixtures and debris, the filling of all excavations to grade with clean fill, disconnection of utilities, cutting sewer and water lines at the curb, regrading the premises to match existing terrain, and the capping of any well and/or septic system on the subject premises in accordance with state regulations. Unless such corrective action is taken to comply with this order within the time herein specified or an answer is served upon the City Clerk within twenty (20) days from the date of the service of this order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this order will be made to the District Court of Hennepin County and the costs of such enforcement, including without limitation, the City's filing.fees, service fees, attorney fees, and witness fees shall ~become-a lien against the real Property on which the subject structures are located. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Dated:. By: ................................... Fran Clark , City Clerk 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota. 55364 (612) 472-1155 %101/Corresp EXHIBIT A That part of Block Seven (7), Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Block 7; thence Northerly along the Easterly boundary line of said Block 7, a distance of 96 feet; thence West along a straight line drawn parallel with the South boundary line of said Block 7, to the West boundary line of said Block; thence South along the West boundary line of said Block 7 to the southwest corner. thereof; thence East along the South boundary line of said Block to the point of beginning; according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. Lot Five (5); Block Eight (8) and that part of Lot Eleven (11), Block Eight (8), which lies Westerly of the Southerly extension of the Easterly boundary line of said Lot Five (5), which said boundary line is extended Southerly to intersect the Southerly boundary line of said Lot Eleven (11), all in the Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. CiTY O? ~i6UND ~ZPO~.T OF ~NSPECT~ON p~LATIVE TO I4AZARDOUS AND D~NGE~0US ._BUILDINg{S) AT ~XX Fairfield ~oad 59XX Fairfield Road." SITE ADDRESS WHAT INSPECTED Cab!n, 3'outbuildings PRINCIPAL USES Seasohal dwel J i. ng DATE OF MOUND 3-1&,-87 . . USE ZONE- R-3, Two family residentia.1 FI:RE ZONE N/A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 5 and that part of LOt.fl lying WlY of the Ely line of Lot ~ extended including adjacent I/2 ot street vacated, Block 8, Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly; P1D Number. 23-117-24 42 00'86 OI.:FNER Earl and Charlotte E. Blocker' ADDP_ESS AGENT 12730 County'Road 15,'Plymouth;'MN, 5544'1 PRONE 546-0056 ADDRESS PANTS PHONE ADDRESS HEIRS PHONE ADDPESS GUARDIAJ~ PH ON E ADDF~SS L!E~-HOLDEP~ PRONE ADDPZ:SS CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDSNG Wood frame PHONE NO. OF STO.~IES 1½ TYPE OF HLATINC,'PLANT__ LP space heater BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZA]~DOUS & DANGEROUS) ELECTRIC LIGHTING AND WIRING CONDITION OF ABOVE KIND OF ROOF CONDITION OF ROOF- No electrlc service Poor Poor None CONDITION' OF BASEMENT CONDITION OF WINDOWS- ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR PROVIDED Broken'91ass'and some Falr tol~C~d 'CONDITION OF SILLS Poor CONDITION OF CHI)~EYS ATTIC: HOW USED Poor Bed~o°ms CONDITION OF FOUNDATION WALL None CONDITION OF BEARING WALLS poor; T s G pine Planks & lapwood siding CONDITION OF NON'BEARING WALLS. Poor COt,~DITION OF EXTERIOR WA3JLS CONDITION OF PLU.~BING Fa I r', but .not. p I umb Poor -no interior restroom or'bath. CONDITION OF OTHER S~ITARY FACILITIES CONDITION OF COOKING EQUIP)~NT MUNICIPAL WATER No WELL Yes rJi r · Mb~ ICIPAL S ~';ER No CONDITION OF INTERIOR, LATH AND PLASTER, ETC. TYPE '.~3~D CONDITION OF FIRE PROTECTION EQuIP~ENT OR FACILITIES Non e · .DI)~ENSION OF BUILDING SETBACKS, FRONT ?' DISTANCE FRO.~q OTHER BUILDINGS 20 X 22 feet; okay REAR ? SIDES ? p£~3. RKS IN GENEP3kL 75 X 120 irregular ~haped'lot size; floors are not level and roof... is sagged; the.3 outbui'ldi.ngs are in poor.'condition'and fallin~ down. BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS) LIST SEPARATELY ALL PEPS:ITS ISSUED FOB. BUILDING BE HEATING PLUMING ---------- None CONCLUSIONS:. IS BUILDING A FIRE HAZAP~? Yes ~HY Open for van~llsm: personal belo.ngi.ngs storage.~hr°.ughoot;'wlring in dwelling is in poor condition. IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY? Yes. WHY Vacant structure unattended, glass broken, · steps fal'] i.ng off bul ]ding.. LP tanks alongside structure not disconnect-ri; water well was hot tested"¥eti' ~UILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH he structure. .'. · Yes WHY Improper and illegal plumbing P£CO~ENDATION: CHECK O~']E REPAIR (LIST ALL REAPIRS REQUIP~D) X REMOVAL Yes WERE PHOTS TAKEN? IF SO, ATTACH COPIES TO THE P~PORT. BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZAPDOUS & DANGEROUS) PREMISES AND FILED REPORTS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BY SIsfiATu Z TITLE Jl -Bert rand I~uildln? Offir?~!, City nf Mn,,nd ATTORNEY REVIEW ATTORNEY ACT ION COUNCIL HEARING COUNCIL' ACTION BUILDING P(~STED' ORDER SERVED TIME -FOR COMPLIANCE HOW SERVED DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE COURT ACTION TAKEN FILED WITH CLERK OF COURT FILED WiTH COUNTY RECORDER DATE · DATE "': 75 YEARS March 16, 1987 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 (612) 472-1155 MK. Earl Blocker Charlotte E. Blocker 12730 County Road 15 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Dear E~rl and Charlotte Blocker: On September 30, 1982, I Wrote you regarding the property, located'off of Fairfield Road in. Mound, and then City Manager Jori.Elam wrote youon May 29, 1985, both requesting that the buildings be removed and the propertylcleaned. Today, Police'Officer Ron Bostrom and myself were at the property, after re- ceiving vandalism report. The Police Department will be contacting you re- gardi'ng your personal property damage. 'You will need to remove all debris from the site and properly secure the building amd/or remove it within 48 hours as per Building Code Section 203. The building.~as posted today.for 'non-occupan.cy. All openings 'in the structure within ten feet of grade '(ground level) Shall be covered with 1/2 inch exterior grade plywood secured.with galvanized 8d 'box nails or equal. The .plywood shail.be accurately.cut to form a snug fit ;nside of the:.opening'casings and sill. The'panels shat~ be securely installed 'by nailing al.] edges with nail spacing not to exceed i2 inch on center. All · openings less than 4 feet by 8 feet Shall.be covered with a single piece of plywood. YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that if you fail to comply with th;s order by March 20, 1987, I will cause the accumulation of debris, etc. to be removed and secure the building to eliminate' the.hazardous Conditions.and the. cost thereof.will be assessed against the aforesaid premises and collected in the manner, provided by said Code of Ordinances, Section 1000. I will need you to contact me wi.thin ten (10) days to.discuss the necessary removal of the. building under the'provisi.ons of City COde Section 1005. l. will be referring all information to the City Attorney to process the remora) as substandard and unsafe structures. if you have any questions regarding this compliance order, please contact me. Yours truly,~ /~7 J~~~n B~rtrand ' Building Official JB/ms May 29, 1985 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55354 (612) 472-1155 Mr. Earl Blocher Charlotte E. Blocher 12730 County Road 15 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Dear Earl and Charlotte Blocher: On Spetember 30, 1982, the City Building Official, Jan Bertrand, wrote you regarding your property located off of Fairfield Road in Mound. Three years have now passed and the neighbors have had t.o live with th~ eyesore caused by the' abandoned house and overgrown weeds. Unless the property house is removed this Summer and the lot cleaned up, the City will begin Hazardous Building proceedings this Fall to remove the building and assess the cost against the property. We will do the same for the weeds. Your attention to this long-term eyesore would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, JE:fc ~ cc: Jan Bertnand CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 30~ 1982 Charlotte E. Blocher 12?30. County--Road 15 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Dear Ms..Blocher: This letter is to confirm our conversation of. yesterday after my inspection of the structures on your property at 59 Fai'r- field Road described as follows: Lot 5 and that part of.Lot ll extended including adjacent 1/2 of.street vacated, Block 8, Minnesota Baptish Summer'Assembly - PID 23-!17-24 42 0086. I bave'.agreed to let the s,tructures be secured by properly boardi.ng up the structu[es when'not in use. The property is presently for sale. Upon the sale of the property, the ne~ ' Owner of the 5uildihgs.will be required to have them removed as per my letter to you dated September 22, 1982. A copy of my previous let.ter is attached. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Jan Bert.rand Buildi.ng Official JB/ms Encl. cc: Assessing ~epartment Water Department 137/82 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD RO~D MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 22, 1982 Charlotte E. Bloc'her 12730 County Road 15 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Dear Ms. Blocher: The structure on .your property .at 59 Fairfield Road (PID 23-117-24 42 0086) in the City of Mound is. in.a deteri.o¥~ted, delapi.tated .and abandoned condition..' The structure should be razed. You have a need to con- tact my off.icewi.thin 15 days to arrange a time we can meet and dis- cuss a schedule for completion of the removal, at your convenience. The following items must be.'i~cluded in your plans, for removal: '1. 'Utilities to bedi..sconnected; water and Sewer lines are to be cut at the curb... 2. Structure to be .removed, including outbuildings, debris, "top 2 feet of foundation, etc. . 3. L'ot to be graded to:match .existing. terrain. 4. Basement floor, to be broken to allow for drainage. 5. Any well and/or sept·i'c/.cesspool at the site is to be filled as per. Minnesota Health Department Code for. abandon wells arid septic systems. yoUr prompt attentiOn to this matter, is greatly.appreciated. Sincerely, Jan Bertrand Building Official JB'/ms 129/82 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN ORDER FOR REMOVAL OF A HAZARDOUS BUILDING BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL: The attached Order For Removal Of A Hazardous Building setsforth in detail the facts which determine that the structure is a hazardous building. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Order and shall work with the City Attorney to serve said Order on all interested parties. A copy of said Order marked Exhibit A is attached hereto and made a part of the resolution. Mayor Attest: City Clerk A. T~O~A~ WURST. P.A. CURTIS A. Pr'ARSON, P.A. dAMe'S D. LARSON. P.A. TI=lOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, CRAIG h4. HERTZ RE C: i :..' :: LAW OFFIC£$ WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD ~. MERTZ IIOO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST I~IN N EAPOLIS, I~1 I N N ESOTA '438'4200 December 15, 1987 Ms.'Jan Bertrand Building Official City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Charles R. Jones property at 4852/4854 Edgewater Drive, Mound, Minnesota Dear Jan, As per~ your request I enclose a proposed City Council Order for demolition of the Jones duplex. If you find this document to be in order, please submit it to the City Council for approval. If the Council approves this action, please have the City Clerk sign 11 copies of the demolition order. Ten of the copies should be forwarded to me, and the llth copy should retained in your files. The extra copies of the City Council order are ordered because there are numerous parties who have interests in the real estate. If.'the owners do not comply with the demolition order, we will petition the District Court for an order authorizing. demolition of'the duplex building. After demolition has been. accomplished, we will petition the court for an order approving the City's costs incurred in enforcing the City Council order, and ultimately we will be submitting various special assessment documents for purposes of collecting the City's expenses with the real estate taxes. Very truly yours, WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ Craig M. Mertz CMM/lkg CITY OF MOUND Hennepin County, Minnesota ORDER FOR REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS BUILDING To: Richard E. Martin, Suzanne M. Martin, Charles R. Jones, State Bank of Mound Minnesota, Paul Sarppo, and Robert Groves. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City of Mound has determined that a residential duplex structure owned or occupied by you on the premises described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, is a hazardous building as defined by the laws of the State of Minnesota, said determination being based upon the following facts: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11)' the roof has sustained severe fire damage and is in danger of collapse, "existing windows are substandard and .do not meet code requirements, '~ exterior cedar shake siding is in need of repair, no provision is soffit, made for ventilation in the roof inadequate venting of northwest section of roof, gable end ventilation is inadequate, exposed electrical wiring coming through window on north exterior wall of east room and the electrical junction box is totally exposed within said room, the electrical junction box serving the window air conditioning unit at the east exterior wall of the laundry room is totally exposed within the room, wiring in northwest bedroom closet does not meet code, the laundry room contains an exposed standpipe and exposed copper gas line from attic space down the exterior wall to the dryer, another gas line is loose within the south wall of the laundry room and extends exposed into the room, i2) 13) 14) t5 ) 16) 17) .18) 19) all electrical conduit and copper gas and water lines to the gas fired boiler and-'water heater run exposed within the room containing the furnace and water heater. the electrical service is substandard, at the closet or pantry area adjoining kitchen, hot and. cold water copper piping runs exposed horizontally through this area, all interior ceiling sheetrock has sustained heavy water damage and would require total replacement, interior wall finish materials- have sustained considerable water damage and require total replacement, the sanitary facilities are not in working order, electric service has not been maintained, and the duplex has not been secured to. prevent unauthorized entry. Said buildings constitute a hazard to public safety because of physical condition, dilapidation, dangers of fire, unsanitary conditions, and inadequate maintenance and that by reason of the above facts, the duplex building so situated on the above- described premises constitutes a hazardous building within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the above-described duplex'premises be made safe and not hazardous to the general public, welfare and safety by being razed within thirty (30)- days from the date of service of this order upon you, said razing to include removal from the premises of all personal property, fixtures and debris, the filling of all excavations to grade with clean fill, disconnection of utilities, cutting sewer and water lines at the curb, regrading the premises to match existing terrain, and the capping of any well and/or septic system serving the subject duplex building in accordance with state regulations. Unless such corrective actkon is taken to comply with this order within the time herein specified or an answer is served upon the City Clerk within twenty (20) days from the date of the service of this order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this order will be made to the District Court of Hennepin County and the costs of such enforcement, including without limitation, the City's filing fees, service fees, attorney fees, and witness fees shall become a lien against the real property on which the subject duplex structure is located. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Dated: By: Fran C]ark , City Clerk 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 (612) 472-1155 # 101/Corresp -3- EXHIBIT A Lots 20, 21, and 22, including the south one-half (1/2) of the vacated thoroughfare or fire lane lying between Lots 19 and 20, Subdivision of Lots 1 and 32, Skarp and Lindquist's Ravenswood, according to the recorded plat thereof. The above described premises is commonly known as 4852/4854 Edgewater Drive, Mound, Minnesota. To Fro ll CITY of MOUND MOUND. MiNNI:-SOTA 55364 612/472-11~ CITY OF ?~UND REPORT OF INSPECTION P. ELATII~ TO HAZARDOUS AND D~.NGEROUS BUILDING(S) AT 52/4854 Edgewater Dr!ye, CI~' OF WHAT INSPECTED PRINCIPAL USES 4852/4854 Edgewater'Drive DATE December 7, 1~87 SITE ADD~ESS Duplex next t;o street' Minnetonka Boat Rentals. Inc. USE ZONE B-2 General Business FIRE ZONE N/A LEGAL I~ESCRIPTION Lots 20, 2] and 22, Subd, ivision of Lots ] & 32 SkaFp F~ tindqui~t'~ Ravenswood; PID # 13-117-24 44 0071 O%:~N ER Richard Martin 1st Contract Holder ADDP.ESS '-A~N5~: OWNFR: ADDRESS ~PAN TS PH ON E 2801 Casco Point Road, Orono, MN PHONE 471 -7987 Paul Sarppo ADDRESS 1~ ErlZ R~ OCCUPANT: Robert Groves PHONE 472-4849 ADDPE.qS ~l..R- -.AK PHONE 472-5822 ADDF_ESS INS.URANCE AGENT: ~_~l 'E ~ ~--H-O 5T~_~ R.S-' State Farm Insurance c/o 'Jennifer Cedarleaf PHONE ADDPJESS 2460 South Highway 100, St. Louis Park, MN. ~;5416 PHONE CONSTPt~C?IO-"{ OF BUILDING Wood frame with block walkout basement 924-9712 NO. OF STOPi~: TYPE O,= HEAT'INC~ PLANT__B°ilers CONDITION OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Water/-f-i re damaged BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZAPDOUS & DANGEROUS) :LECTRIC LIGHTING AND WIRING Inadequate and unsafe ~ONDITION OF A]BO%rE Hazardous - ~IND OF ROOF Wood frame with asphalt.shingles ~.ONDITION OF ROOF· in jeoPardy of c01]apse 3ONDIT~ON ' OF BASEMENT P°°r 3ONDITION OF WINDOWS Poor ;%DEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR PROVIDED Poor CONDITION OF"S ILLS Poor CONDITION oF CHI~.~NEYS Fair ATTIC: HOW USED 0nly insulated - no usable space CONDITION OF FOUNDATION WALL CONDITION OF BEARING WALLS CONDITION ~OF NON-BEARING WALLS CONDITION OF EkTER.IOR WAE.'LS Fair Fair Fair 'Fair and gas'piping are fair to poor ,,- Not in Working. condition - CONDITION OF PLU-~IBING CONDITION OF OTHER S~_NITARY FACILITIES CONDITION OF COOKING EQUIP~IENT None X WELL MUNICIPAL WATER MUNICIPAL S E%~ER CONDITION OF INTERIOR, LATH 7d~D PLASTER, ETC. Water and fi re damaged. TYPE 'D_ND CONDITION OF FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT OR FACILITIES None DIMENSION OF BUILDING 42 X 20 feet with 18 X 20 feet "L"; 12 X 20 foot deck SETBACKS, FRONT Zero feet+-- REAR 50 feet plus SIDES unknown DISTANCE FRoM OTHER BUILDINGS Plus 10 feet. REM~.PYS IN GENEP. AL~ Exposed to weather 4umber is no~ preser~atiy~_tYP~ anH i~ ~,,hjc~ -- to rot with inadequate supports on deck'. Building is in a Genera. Business Zoning District which does not allow a duplex and it is on ~%.~ the same property.with the Minnetonka Boat Rental, Inc. garam3e and ........ ~ $ ........... n=n~v mn November 25, 1987.. (HAZARDOUS & D~NGEROUS) ,IST SEPAPJ~TELY ALL PEP_MITE IEEUED FOR BUILDING !23 Garage 6-20-51 Lot ZZ; #11Z I~emode] Tavern 10-1-61 Lot 22; P LU.~ IN G · Sewer ]0-2-64 ~ 6 Garaqe Remodel 4-1-53 Lot 20; # 2039 Rerooflnq ~-30-70.'tot ~10 Home 4-27-53 Lot 20; #2400 Garage 4-11-71 Lot 21.,; ~20 Duplex apt. 3-22-58 Lot 20; #4427 Utility Shed 6-23-77 #6719 Utility Shed 9-6-84 ~21 Garage"3-22-58 Lot 21 ewer -17-71 Plbg. Lot 21 8-26-71 Concession/bait shop IONCLUSIONS.'. IS BUILDING A FIRE HAZAP.D? Yes ~HY No alarms '.~n building; vacant' bui]dlng not secured from vandals Ss an attractive nuisance. IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC SkFETY? Yes roof; poor wiring which Qas apparent cause of fire[ k~HY Ext'ensive fire damage to IILDIMG A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH :ture'and ele~l:~]c'servjce~not maintained. Yes WHY Potential collapse of roof p.ECO~N{ENDATION: CHECK ONE REPAIR (LIST ALL REAPIRS R.EQUIP.-ED) X REMOVAL WE!~ PHOTS TAKEN? No. Will take. photograPhs when weather 'improves. IF SO, ATTACH COPIES TO THE REPORT. Attached reports from Max Daubenber§er dated December 3, I987. Sketch plan dated May .6, ]985. Hennepin County Tax Appraiser's repor~ prior to fire and 1987 tax record of value Fire Report from Fire Department November 22, 1987. BUILDING iNSPECTION (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS) LAF, ES OF ALL INSPECTORS WHO INSPECTED THE PREMISES AND FILED REPORTS: Jan Bertrand, Building Official and Max Daubenberger0 Engineering Consultant and Fire Chief, Don Bryce. SIGNATURE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BY ATTORNEY REVIEW ATTORNEY ACTIO~I ' · COUNCIL HEARING COD~-NCIL ACTION BUILDING ' POSTEb ORDER SERVED TIF~E FOR COMPLIANCE HOW SERVED TITLE Jan Bertrand Buildi.ng Official DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE COURT ACTION TAKEN FILED WITH CLERK OF COURT FILED WITH COUNTY RECORDER DATE DATE CITY of MOUND 112A ~341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The follow!.ng jsa check list for buildi.ng demolition requirements: . Obtain defn?lition permit before commencing any demolition of structures. Check wi~' all Utility Companies to'disconnect services' for gas, electr|c,.water.and sewer to be cut-and capped at t.he property line, telephone, etc,. before any excavation work commences; 3. Remove all debris and.'foun'dation walls to two.(2) feet below 'grade and break basement slab .to drain subsoil. 4. Fill in and level site and restore grade to match adjoin.lng 'contours. 5.' Erosion control must be in place during vegetation regr°Wth on slopes exceeding a.rat.$o, of. 1 foot in 3'feet. Provide extermination for insects and rodents before de'moli- t!on of the structure. ~xlnspection Department City of Mound JB/'ms *'. "; ,'-c ,;,' r '",r,~',:.~r:d., ErrG!c.'.,er l13a! o~es (~o! mscr,m,nale on Ine Eaf)s of race. color, national or!mn or handicaoged status 3030 Harboi Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 December 3, 1987 Ms. Jan Bertrand Building Inspector City of Mound 5341 MaywoodRoad Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: 4852 and 48'54 EdgewaterDrive Mound, Minnesota Dear Ms. Bertrand: Enclosed. is a summary of the general condition of the subject property.based upon a visual inspectl .on conducted.' on November 30, 1987. A. Exterior COnditions of Dwe~lin9 In general, the exterior walls of this dwelling are in adequate conditionbut would require repair and modification. Examples of necessary repair and modifications are: Existing windows are substandard and do not meet present code requirements. Exterior cedar shake siding is in need of repair and painting. The roof of the dwelling has sustained severe fire damage and is in jeopardy of collapse. Additionally, the ventilation of the roof is substandard. Examples of the substandard ventilation are: 1. No ventilation provisions in the roof soffit. Only one (1) roof vent on the northwest roof section of the L-shaped dwelling. Gable end ventilation is inadequate. December 3, 1987 Ce Interior Conditions of Upper Level of Dwellin9 In general, the interior condition of the upper level of the dwelling is in a severe state of.distress due to fire and water damage. Additionally, numerous substandard construction conditions were observed. The following conditions were observed: The window unit air conditioner in the north exterior wall of the east room has exposed electrical wiring coming through the window from the exterior of the dwelling. The electrical junction box is totally exposed within the e The electrical junction box serving the window air conditioning unit at the east exterior wall of the laundry room is totally exposed within the room. The northwest bedroom closet light fixture and wiring does not meet present code. e e The laundry room contains an exposed standpipe and exposed copper gas line from the attic space down the exterior wall to the dryer. Another copper gas line is loose within the south wall of the laundry room and extends exposed into room. Ail electrical conduit and copper 'gas and water lines to the gas fired boiler and water heater run exposed within the room containing the furnace and water heater. Se Electrical service is via a single electric main at the upper west wall of the double unit dwelling. Separate services provided from the single main with two (2) 15-Watt fused circuits to one unit and one (1) 15-Watt and one (1) 20-Watt service to the other unit. At closet or pantry area adjoining kitchen hot and C°ld water copper piping runs exposed horizontally through this a rea. InteriOr Conditions of Lower Level of Dwellin~ In general, the interior conditions of the lower level of this dwelling are poor due primarily to water damage with minimal fire damage. The following conditions were observed: 2, The lower level exterior masonry foundation walls appear to be in good condition. Ail ceiling sheet?ock has sustained water damage and would require total replacement. Exterior and interior wall paneling or other finish materials have sustained considerable water damage and would require total replacement. December 3, 1987 The lower level living unit contains a separate gas fired water heater and hot water heating system. Both the hot water and ~as fired boiler appear to be quite new with new electrical and gas service prov, ided. 0 Existing electrical service within the lower level unit is substandard. De Other Observed Conditions Inspection of this residence provided the following additional ~eneral comments and observations: The roof has sustained severe fire damage and is in jeopardy of collapse. The existing roof consists of asphalt shingles which are in need of replacement. The condition of this roof would require total reconstruction. The general condition of all wood construction of floor systems, bearing walls and non-bearing walls that have not sustained fire damage are in acceptable condition. 3. No fire protection equipment or facilities exist. The interior of this dwelling would require total gutting and lreconstruction including all electrical and plumbing systems to'meet current code requirements.~ It is our opinion that this dwelling presents a public safety hazard due to potential collapse of the roof structure and electrical service being maintained. This dwelling is easily accessible and is an attractive nuisance for vandals. It is our opinion that this structure should be immediately razed. If you have any questions regarding our noted observations or recommendations, please contact our office. Sincerely, VAN DOREN-HAZARD-STALLINGS, INC. Max J. Daubenber~er Vice President FIRE REPORT · CITY OF MOUND I I "' ,rx WEATHER & TEMPI:RATLL~E WIND DIRE~JON 0.0.$. PER~I~WNQ TUI~NED IN ALARM & PHONEI OWNER'S NAM~ ADDRE~ & PHONE PATIENTS NAM~ ADDRESS. AG~ D.O.8. ¥:?/- COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE EMERGENCY ' RESIDENTIAL .~. ,~/.~/.J./"~/Y)I¢.e..~'~'TFALSE ALARM I TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION REMARKS ,.._. / ~ / / _ / /~/,~. las ~,.~l~_ d~7¢~_~.c'°u'P"E"TUSED " CAUSE OF FIRE LOSS OF UFE ' J LOS~ TO ~,~.. ESTIMATED LOSS TO CONTENT~_~ LOSS OR DAMAGE TO EQUIPMENT ,.SURED ~. ~ TRUCKS USED HOSE · FEET USED LADDERS RAISED MILEAGE TRAV~,~D 7.~ OUT / MIL~GEi / ,N~TRAV~ 2'*' /~'~ / PUMPCANS ELEC.$AW N~. MIL~GE IN TRAVELED LIGHT P~NT BARS ~OF lO. / MIL~GEi / IN TRA% ~KE ~HAUST FAN AXES ~ NO. O~ MIL~GE IN TRAVELED SELF CONTAINED MASKS ~ . Andersen __ . Marschke ~ Palm ,~.?~/~'~,'~, nderson ~D. Carlson .-~ L Heitz ~.~_J. N;fu$ .~G. Pederson ___,. Swer, son ~ ' ~D. Pta,er ~W. Swenson ~ O. Boyd __B. Erlckson ~ M. Klee~rger ~ B Palm - ~ M. Say.ge ~ R. Williams ../WN~R'S NAM~ ADDRESS & PHONE lit PATIENTS NAM~ A~DRE~, AG~ REMARKS MISCELLANEOUS TRASH OR GRASS AUTOMOBILE FALEE ALARM INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL EMERGENCY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT USED CAUSE OF FIRE LOSS OF LIFE LOSS OR DAMAGE ,TO EQUIPMENT ESTIMATED t. OSS TO BUILDING INSURED ESTIMATED LOSS TO coNTENTS INSURED .. TRUCKS USED HOSE · FEET USED LADDERS RAISED ~ NO.~ OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED BOOSTER / I / ,2. i SPECIAL EQUIPMENT NO. OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED 21/,' PUMP CANS ELEC. SAW NO. OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED LIGHT PLANT BARS i, HOURS TRUCK PUMPED NO. OUT MILE. AGE IN TRAVELED TANK PORT. PUMP OZ. BO1'rLES i NO. OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED LAKE EXHAUST FAN AXES I NO. OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED HYDRANT PORT. UGH'rs MISC. NO. OUT MILEAGE IN TRAVELED SELF CONTAINED MASKS I G. ^n~.son J_D. Ca,son 1.- He,= /J. ,.,us ' __L~. Pete,son ~ J. ,ab, ~S, Collins __,, Hen,erson - ~M. N;lson ' ~D. Pla=et I . J. Beaucnamp I ..M. David ~G. Johnson ~& Opi~ T. Rasmussen t D. Boyd B. Erickson ~M. Klee~rger ~B. Palm M. Savage I E Williams /. D. B~ce S. Erickson / B. ~ndsman ~ G, Palm / R. Stallman / T. Williams r~ L~ C~ r~ O0 C~ C~oL3 pq LW r' r~ f~ C~ ',,,,il .... ' ...... '.. ...... Total SECTION II SECTION III ,~CTION IV ]) ~-~f PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE ~0. 87-678 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ESTABLISH A BUILDABLE LOT FOR LOT 5 AND PART OF 4, BLOCK 2, REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 10, ABRAHAM LINCOLN ADDITION TO LAKESIDE PARK; PID # 13-117-24 34 0018; P & Z CASE NO. 87-678 WHEREAS, Jeff Bakken, owner of the property described as a Lot in Block 2, Rearrangement of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, has applied for a variance to establish a 12,871 square foot+ parcel as a buildable lot since the parcel currently does not front on a public right-of- way; and WHEREAS, the Mound City Code requires all lots to contain frontage on'a public right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request and recommended granting the variance due to the fact that the City of Mound previously vacated Laurel Avenue which provided access to the parcel thereby establishing a hard- ship under Section 23.506.1 of the Mound Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby grant the variance'subject to review of the pro- posed easements by the City Attorney, the applicant shall submit a survey of the lot si. gned by a registered land surveyor, all utility connections shall be reviewed and approved by the C'ity Engineer.' The proposed house shall observe a 35 front yard setback from the western line of the Laurel Avenue vacation as per the applicant's site plan attached as Exhibit "A", side and rear yard setbacks shall comply to the requirements of the R;3 Zoning District, and deficient sewer, water and street unit charges are to be paid upon development of the property for Lot 5, part of Lot 4, Blocl< 2, Rearrangement of Block lO, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park; PID # 13-117-24 34 OO18 (5230 Lynwood Boule- vard) Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1987 BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case No. 87-678 Variance for access to public street for 52XX Lynwood B]vd. Lots 5 and Part of 4, Block 2, Rearr. of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Additlon to Lakeside Park; PID # 13-117-24 34 O018' Applicant, Jeff Bakken, and Owner, Earl Bakken, were present. The City. Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed his report. The applicant has a piece of property with 12,871 square feet that does not presently have access to a public street and applicant is proposing to t~ke access from an estab- lished easement. The hardship was created when Laurel was vacated in the past and this property has no direct access and there does not appear to be any reasonable means for providing access; the staff is recommending approval with three conditions listed in his report. Item 3 should read" ..... house shall observe a 35 foot front ...". Koegler commented the reason for the 35 feet was that if Laurel were ever rededicated as a street again, the house would have appropriate setback.. The commission had various questions inclbding how this property would.be assessed for any improvements~ etc. Sohns moved and Jensen seconded the motion to accept staff recommendation approving With the three conditions and with further condition that any-. assessment for improvem~nts be added. The vote was unanimously in favor. This will be on the City Council agenda of December 22, 1987. 3030 Harbor 'L~n~ North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 61~553-1950 FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Planning Commission and Staff Mark Koegler, City Planner ~ December 3, 1987 Variance' (Access to public street) APPLICANT: Jeff Bakken LOCATION: Laurel Avenue, 100 feet north of Lynwood Boulevard CASE NO: ''87-678 V~S FILE NO: 87-310-A31-ZO EXISTING ZONING: Two Family Residential (R-3) flDMPREF~qSIVE PLAN: Multi-Family BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to establish a lot in Block 2, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park. The lot contains 12,871 square feet but does not abut a public street. The applicant is proposing to take access to the property fro~ an established easement which connects to Lynwood Boulevard. This case is virtually identical to one in November of 1986 in which the City granted the same variance for a lot located approximately 100 feet north of this site. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed variance meets the condition of hardship contained in Section 23.506.1 of the Mound Zoning Code because the hardship was created by past actions of the City. At some point in time, the City vacated Laurel Avenue which provided direct access to the subject property. Without Laurel, the property has no direct access and there does not appear to be any other reasonable means for Providing such access. ~ta~ recommends aDproval oE the variance subject to the following condltlon$: The applicant shall submit a survey of the lot signed by a registered land surveyor. ® Ail utility connections shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. ~ The proposed house shall observe a foot front setback from the western line of the Laurel Avenue vacation as per the applicant's site plan sketch. Side and rear yard setbacks shall conform to the requirements of the R-3 zone. CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Fee Paid _~-o Da'te Filed ,,,// .... (Please type the following information) 1. Street Address of Property ~/~/~L .~t~. ~-' ~'~i ix9 tt)0~- ¢)~J~ 2. Legal Description of Property:'~Lo~ ~ 5 '~ ~~ ~ ~ Block Applicant (if other than owner): Address ~q~t~ 5. Type of Request: Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit Zoning Interpretation & Review Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.. Day Phone No. 7~% 12 59 ( ) Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: 6. Present Zoning District '~ 7. Existing Use(s) of Property 8. 'Has an application .ever been made for zoning~iance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken a~d provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. ' ' ' Signature of Applicant ~.~.~,//~,~, ~ ~ { _Date Planning Commission Recom~endatio :, Council Action: 12-14-87 Date Resolution No. Date 12-22-87 Request for Zonl.ng Variance Procedure .D.. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, et . £. Indicate North compass direction F. Any add|tJonal Tnformat|on as may reasonably be requ|red by the City Staff and applicable Sectlons of the Zoning Ordinance. Iil..Request for a Zoning Variance .A. All Information below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Does the present use of the property'conform to all use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (::~ No ( ) If "no", specify each non-conforming use: Ce De Do the existing structures comply with'all area height and bulk regulations for the zone district in which it is.located? Yes o..~) No ( ) If "no.", specify eac. h\non-conforming use: ( ) .Too narrow "( ) Too small ( ( ) Too shallow. ( Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) Topography ("~ Soil ) Drainage ( ) Sub-surface ) Shape (.) Other: Specify: E. Was the hardship d~scribed above created by the action ot~ anyone having property interests in the ]and after 'the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ~ No ()If yes, explai.n: ~U; I~'rOct '~r~-v71;~ t,,t~jl~ F. ~es the herdshTp created by ~ny other men-~ed~chenge, such es the reloca- tion of ~ road? Yes ( ) Ho (~ If yes, explain: G., Are the conditions of hardship for which'you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ) No no, how many other properties are similarly affected? H. ~ha~ is the "minimum ~diflcation (variance) from the area-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land2 (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental [o prope)ty in the sa~one, or to the enforcement of th ls ordinance? / ! RESOLUTION NO. 87- PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 87-679 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL MINOR SUB- DIVISION OF LAND FOR LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 13, THE HIGHLANDS; PID # 23-117-24 31 0053; (P & Z CASE # 87-679) WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements con- tained in Section 330 and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota State Statute and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder; and WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section 330 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound; and WHEREAS, said request for waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Com- mission and the City Council; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that there are special circumstances affecting said properties such that the strict application of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; and that the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial prop- erty rights; and that granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners. · NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Coundil, the City o7 Mound, Minnesota; the request of the applicant for'the waiver from the provisions of Section 330 of the City Code and the request to subdivide the property of less than 5 acres, described as follows: Lots 5 and 6, Block 13, The Highlands; PID # 23-117-24 31 0053. A. It is hereby granted to permit the subdivision in the following manner as per Exhibit "A": Parcel A: The South 65 feet of Lots 5 and 6, Block 13, The Highlands- Parcel B: Lots 5 and 6 except the South 65 feet, Block 13, The Highlands. Upon the further following conditions: 1.All utility service connections and easemen~ shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and his recommendations followed as per his letter dated December Il, 1987. 2.The applicant shall submit a final plat drawing in conformance with Sections 330~35, 330~50, 330:55, 330:60, 330:65, 330:70, 330~75, 330:80 and 330:85 of the Mound Code of Ordinances. 3.Driveway and utility entrances from County Road 44 will require Hennepin County Permit'approva'l. Co It is determined that the foregoing subdivision will constitute a desirable and stable community development and it is in harmony with adjacent properties. RESOLUTION 87- Do The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant for filing in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds, or the Registrar of titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the subdivision regulations of the City. This 10t subdivision is to be filed and recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this resolution. Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1987 Case No. 87-679 Minor subdivision of land - 29XX Westedge Boulevard Lots 5 and 6, Block 13, The Highlands; PID # 23-117-24 31 0053 Applicant, Ronald $. Gehring, was present. The City Planner, Mark Koegler, r~viewed that applicant is proposing to re- subdivide tWO lots to produce two parcels fronting on County Road 44 (West- edge Boulevard) as per shown on Exhibit 1. Both lots will have conforming area, width and setbacks and will have a common driveway with access onto County Road 44, He recommends approval subject to the two conditions and he noted that the Commission has the Engineer's recommendations. Applicant, Ronald Gehring, had nothing to add and no one else present wished to speak on the request. The Commiss|on discussed ~the request including the common driveway. The Planner noted that 'the arena where the driveway becomes common is in the public right-of-way; so we don't have much concern there. However, t'here is room for two driveways, it is just better to have only one access onto County Road 44. Gehring commented the County is requiring a turn around area on these lots. It was also noted that the abuttin§ neighbors were notified of this request. Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to accept the staff recommenda- tion (Planner and Engineer) and approve. The vote was unanimously in favor. This will be on the City Council agenda of December 22, 1987. 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 ~G IO: Planning Commission and Staff FRCM: Mark Ko.gl.r, City Planner ~ DATE: December 2, 1987 SUBJ: Minor Subdivision APPLICANT: Ronald S. Gehring ~ON: Southeast corner of CSAH 110 and County Road 44 CASE NO: 87-679 V~S FILE NO: 87-310-A'32-ZO EXISTING ZONING: Two Family Residential (R-3) (~IVE PLAN: Multi-Family BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to re-subdivide two (2) lots at the corner of 44 and 110. Lots 5 and 6 exist as platted lots with narrow frontages along County Road 110. Mr. Gehrlng is proposing to re-subdivide the lots .to produce two (2) parcels fronting on County Road 44. Separate surveys have been provided for each of the lots and for~ the convenience of the Commission, staff has combined them on Exhibit 1. For discussion purposes, the lots have been labeled as A and B on the staff exhibit. Lot A contains 9,185 square feet and Lot B contains 6,280 square feet. Both lots have conforming area, width and setbacks. As proposed, both lots will access County Road 44 via a combined driveway. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed minor subdivision is consistent with all zoning ordinance requirements. Staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision and waiver of the public hearing subject to the following conditions: All utility service connections and easements shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. 0 The applicant shall submit a final plat drawin~ in conformance with Sections 330:35, 330:50, 330:55, 330:60, 330:65, 330:70, 330:75, 330:80 and 330:85 of the Mound Code of Ordinances. Exhibit I 0 ~ tJ k "0 McCornbs Frank Pops Associates, Inc. Twin Cities St. Cloud 15050 23rd Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55441 Dec, 11, 1287 Telephone 612/476-6010 Engineers Planners Surveyors 0an Bertrand Planning & Zoning City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBOECT: Proposed Subdivision Lots 5 & 6, Blk 13, The Highlands Case #87-679 MFRA file #2113 Dear Jan, As requested we have reviewed the above proposed subdivision and have the following comments and reoommendations. Utilities The Proposed sewer service for parcel B will require an-easement where it Crosses Parcel A. This easement must be recorded at the time the subdivision is filed at Hennepin County. e This long sewer service will need clean-outs as required by the Minnesota Plumbing Code. Verify location of existing sewer service for Parcel B. Location shown on the survey does not match the City as-built records. Easements We would suggest that 5 foot wide drainage easements be required along the north and south sides of Parcel B and the south side of Parcel A. The area to the east of Parcel B is higher and most of the water drains'towards County Road 44. Permits 1. An entrance permit from Hennepin County will be required for the common driveway as shown on the site plan. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me. ~ Sincerely, McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3ohn Cameron Formerly I,,'cCombs-Knutson ;.,ssocia*,es, A~PLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec, 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND "';~=/~'~: FEE $ £7-&.77 FEE OWNER · PLAT PARCEL Location and complete legal description of property iQ be divided: ZONING To be:divided as follows: All supporting'documents, Such as sketch plan's, surveys., attachments, etc. be submitted in 8½" X Il" size and/or ih.copies plus one 8½" X 11" copy. (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number) must · A WAIVER, IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Square feet TO Square feet /fi'/022' C " Reason: (stature). ~ ADDRESS Applicant's interest in the properffy: TEL. NO. DATE This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan- ation given why this is not the case. --- PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Run {2ruuger D iissuulatus, lnG. 8080 Wallace Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (612) 934-4242 En g ineeri n g' .'/. ':7_'_::;.:i. X .... Land SurveyingT::¥ /; ' ' Landscape Architecture Planning'.--. .... .'i'.:~ .... ', Legal Description -.~ _~ha~a~t'?.of.--Lots.5'.:and'6, .Btock:~13, THE HIGHLANDS, according to .the recorded plat t~e'reof-,~ He~epin County, Minnesota,which lieS northerly of the South 65.00 feet thereof. .Rssoc!ates, inc. ~080 Wallace Ro~d ~den Pr~bie. Minnesota 5~44 ¢12) 934-4242 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY .... ~::,.~ Engineering · ~ ",. ":, .... Lar~d Surveying ;::":~ . Landscape Architecture ~ , ::": ','. Planning · Survey for:. P--_..O,k_/ (_..~E H I~ 1 k-J~ Job No. ~O~7 pg. 4o;, j Ito ; N,q ¢0.t ~ ~14o'u' -*-'"'/ qq/, .i I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF ~. A"T'TAC I--{~:: D L E(__...~ L ., f'CGUNTY, MINNESOTA. SURVEYED BY ME THiS ¢ I~ DAY OF OC~'~(::~:~.~-- ,10 <~'7 , ¢ '4 ,~11 'RONAI D L_ KRtJ~GFR ..3 ETon ~ru~-~=r 5~ ~.ss~cl~t=s, I~c. 8080 Wallace Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (612) 934-4242 Legal Description : ::.The.South'65100 feet.of'Lots 5 and-6, Block 13, THE HIGHLANDS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin C'ounty, Minnesota. -. ~on I~r'ucgci-fi, mma~ A~m~ae, :.~..:., ...: _.. ] . ~,0,80 WaJla, ce Fi, od ~'.~....'~7~,.~ J en Prairie, Minne$ola 55344 ~.~t~,.,~,~-~%;.~.:',,.~.~,~:;.-~'.- j CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ~ .... . 1 ~ , ~ 1 ~ , Ho~ I HEREBY OE~TI~ THAT THIS IS A THUE AND GOd,EOT ~EPRESENTATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF SURVEYED BY ME THIS ~ ~ DAY OF O~O~ ~ 49, ~ . ~~"' Sou ?'lq HAZELWOOD LA ~WESTW( WEST E-[~E "~'~--"-B-LVO' RESOLUTION NO. 87- PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 87-680 A & B RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE A PRELIMINARY MINOR SUB- DIVISION AND VARIANCE OF LOT WIDTH FOR LOTS 40, 41, THE NORTH 1/2 FRONT AND REAR OF 42, WHIPPLE SHORES; PID # 25-117-24 21 Olll (5346 PIPER ROAD) (P & Z CASE NO. 87-680 A & B) WHEREAS, the minor subdivision of Lots 40,.41 and N. 1/2 front and rear of 42, Whipple Shores has been submitted in the manner required for platting of land under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 330 and under Chapter 462 in the Minnesota State Statute and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder; and WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section 330 of the City Code has been filed with the~City of Mound; and a lot width variance has been requested for the R-1 Single Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, said request for waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Com- mission and the City Council; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that there are special circumstances affecting said property such~that the strict application of the ordinance, would deprive the applicant of.the reasonable use of his land; an'd that the waiver is necessary for the preservation'and enjoyment' of the Substantia] property rights; and that granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the'City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota; the request of the applicant for the waiver from the provisions of Section 330 of the City Code, preliminary subdivision of. the following described property and lot width variance: Lots 40 and 41; the Northerly half of Lot 42 des- cribed as follows: 'Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 42; thence in a Northwesterly direction along the Norther]y line of the lot to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence in a Southerly direction along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point which is equally distant from the Northwesterly and Southwesterly corners of the lot; thence in a Southeasterly direction to a point in the Easterly line of said lot distant 15 feet from the Northeasterly and Southeasterly corners of the lot; thence in a Northwesterly direction along the Easterly line of said lot to point of beginning. (Since the description does not define clearly the Southerly line of said property, for purposes of this survey, said line is assumed to be a straight line drawn Westerly from the midpoint of the Easterly line of said Lot 42 through an existing iron marker distant 232.30 feet Westerly by the end of an existing fence.) A. It is hereby granted to allow preliminary plat approval and vari- ance subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO. 87- 1. Non-conforming portions of the garage and principal structure on Lot A as shown on Exhibit I shall be removed before final plat approval. 2..1,~_~J_~ti~ity service connections and easements.shall be reviewed by Th~gineer. Th~~~E~n-~ '--S-'~tte----~-~ate-¥-d-Dec. 7, 1987 is part ~minary approval. Utility easements sha_~a~.~~reviewed ancT-~]~-rl:~~ Attorney. 3. The applicant shall submit a final plat drawing in conformance with Section 330:35, 330:50, 330:55, 330.:60, 330:65, 330:70,. 330:75, 330:80 and 330:85 of the Mound Code of Ordinances. 4. Lot B will be assigned 1 Park charge at the current applicable amount, but no less than $300. 5. Failure on the part of the petitioner.to submit a final plat per Section 330 within one year from the date of this approval shall deem the preliminary approval to be null and void. Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1987 Case No. 87-.680 A & B Variance and subdivision of land--5346 Piper Road Lots 40, 41 and N.½ of 42, Whipple Shores; PID 25-117-24 21 0111 Lawrence and lone McLane were present. The City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed his. report of the request to sub- divide a 34,600 squa~re f~ot parcel into two lots; one with existing resi~ dence will have 21.,700 square feet and the other, 12,900 square feet.' The exiSti'ng garage has. an approximately 9 X 12 appendage on the north which is within the required setback and the setbacks on the existing house will be conforming except for a deck on the southwest corner; owner is willing to remove these encroachments. The variance being requested is lot width for Parcel A; frontage measured at the buil.ding setback line is 46 feet rather than the .required 60 feet resulting in a 14 foot variance. The staff recom- mends approval of the minor subdivision establishing the two lots as proposed and granting'of the 14 foot variance subject to four conditions listing in the staff'~eport. He commented on a phone call he received regarding the sizable garage proposed for property and it Could be used 0nly for garaging of'residential vehicles. The Commission had varioUs questions regarding the. sh~d'by the lake ~(only restriction on accessory buildings is tha~ they be above flood elevation), width of the proposed new lot and how the'width was'measured. It was dis- cussed that lot width is show~ as 59.3 feet or .7 feet short of required 60 ft. for Parcel'~ also discussed Was poss'ibility of purchasing some of adjacent par- cels and whether~vari'ance wasn't financial.. The Planner stated lots are large enough, problem is more geometry of way streets are in there; and he felt request represents the minimum variance to make the second parcel build- able. Jensen moved and Michael seconded a motion to approve staff redommendations with the 4 conditions as amende~: 1) Non-conforming portions of the garage and principal structure on Lot A sha.ll be removed before final plat approval; '2) All utility service connections and easement, shall be reviewed ~nd ~ approved by the City Engineer. Utility easements shall also be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. (Other 2 conditions were not changed) The vote on the motion was Meyer against; all others voted in favor. (5 to l) Meyer is opposed because he believes an attempt should be made to have more land purchased; he wants to see lots 60 feet wide in the R-1 Zoning District; believes that Parcel B is only about 53 feet wide on the road. This will be on the City Council agenda Of December 22, 1987. 3030 Harbor Lane Norris, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 ~G ~ planning Co~mission and Staff FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner DATE: December 2, 1987 SUBJECT: Subdivision and Variance APPLICANT: Lawrence and Ione McClane ~LOC3LTI~: 5346 Piper Road CASE NO: 87,680 V~S FILE NO: 87-310-A33-ZO CURRENT ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-l) ODMPR~IVE PLAN: Single Family Residential BACKG~9OUND: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 34,600 square foot parcel into two (2) lots. Lot A, which contains the existing residence, will have 21,700 square feet of area. Lot B, which will be a new buildable lot, contains 12,900 square feet. In addition to the existing residence on Lot A, a detached garage exists on the front of the parcel. 'The existing garage is conforming except for a 7.8 x 12.1 foot appendage which projects off of the. northeast side of the structure. The applicant has indicated that the- appendage will be removed resulting in a conforming detached structure. Subdivision of the parcel will result in conforming setbacks for the existing residence except a deck located at the extreme southwest corner. Again, the applicant is willing to remove the deck thereby removing the encroachment. Subdivision of the property as proposed would require a lot width variance for parcel A. The zoning ordinance requires 60 feet of width for lots in the R-1 zone. Parcel A contains 46 feet of-frontage measured at the building setback line resulting in a 14 foot variance. Parcel B contains adequate area and frontage to allow construction of a conforming residential structure. The site drops off approximately 10 feet from the frontage along Charles Road to the rear of the building setback line. An existing utility easement bisects the front of the lot. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision establishing lots A & B as proposed on the Proposed Lot Divisioa for Lawrence McClane dated 11/23/87, waiver of the public hearing and the granting of a 14 foot lot width variance subject to the following conditions: Non-conforming portions of the garage and principal structure on Lot A shall be removed. Ail utility service connections and easements shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Utility easements shall also be reviewed by the City Attorney. The applicant shall submit a final plat drawing in conformance with Section 330:35, 330:50, 330:55, 330:60, 330:65, 330:70, 330:75, 330:80 and 330:85 of the Mound Code of Ordinances. e Lot B.will be assigned one (1) park charge at the current applicable amount. Mc'Combs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Twin Cities St. Cloud 15050 23rd Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55441 Telephone 612/476-6010 December 7, 1987 Engineers Planners Surveyors Ms. Jan Bertrand Planning & Zoning City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55354 SUBJECT: Proposed Subdivision Lots 40, 41 & 42, Whipple Shores Case #87-580 MFRA #2113 Dear Jan: As requested, we have reviewed the above proposed subdivision and have the following comments and recommendations: Utilities .'. 1. The existing sewer service for the present house crosses diagonally through Parcel B and will probably need to be relocated. An easement across Parcel B for this sewer service should be a requirement. The exact location of the present water service is unknown. This service should be located and if it crosses any portion of Parcel B, an easement will be needed. A new water service from the main in Charles Road will be required for Parcel B. Grading' 1. At the time a house is constructed on Parcel B, grading will be required to direct runoff from the existing house and driveway towards the lake. Access 1. The existing concrete driveway encroaches on new Parcel B and if it is to remain in place, an easement should be required. We would suggest that any requirements imposed as part of the subdivision be included in the resolution and keep in the City's property file, so that any prospective buyer would be aware of such requirements. The problem with the Fc, rmeriy M~,Combs-Knu~sor, 4.ssgcia~es. !nc Ms. Jan Bertrand December 7, 1987 Page Two existing sewer service should be corrected before the City releases the resolution or the applicant could post a bond or establish an escrow account to guarantee that the work is done. Ail necessary easements should also be included at the time the resolution is recorded at Hennepin County. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact US. Very truly yours, McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron OC:djk APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND ~" '~'/~Y ' Sec, 22.03-a ' .-. "' VILLAGE OF MOUND ':-'~-~-~"""'"~'-"' FEE $ -- - ..... OWNER Lawrence &Ione McLane PLAT PARCEL Location and complete I;gal descripti.on of property to be divided: 5346 Piper Rd., Lots 40~ Mound, MN 55364 41 and N 1/2 of lot 42, Whipple Shores · " ZONING R-2 To be~divided as follows: . see attached All be supporting' documents, Such' as'sketch plan's', surveys,, attachments, etc. must submitted in 8½" X .11" size and/or 14.copies plus one ~ X I copy.. (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, squ. are foot area of each new par.cai designated by number} A WAIVER, IN. LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Reason: Square feet TO Square feet oo . TEL. NO. 472-3476 DATE 11/23/87 This application must be s~gned by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan- ation given why this is not the case. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Case No..,/7-& 7~ CITY OF HOUND Fee Date Filed/l/23/8? APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COHHISSION .(Please type the following information) " Street Address of Property 5346 Piper Rd., Motmd Legal Description of Property: Lot 40,41 & N 1/2 front & rea.~ of 42 Block Addition Whipple Shores Owner's Name PID No. ?Rl177~71~111 ® Lawrence &Ione McClane Day Phone No. T~qe 546-7911 Address 5~4~ ~i?=r Rr]... Mound, .M~ Appl !cant' (if other than owner): 55364 Name Day Phone No. Address 5.. Type of Request: : ( ) Wetland. Permit *If 9the~, s'pecify: ',.) , Present Zoning District ~f (X) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) p.U.~. (') Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other Exlsting Use(s) of Property Residence Ha~ an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional 'use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? no if so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken an~ provide Resolution No.'(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify .that all of the a~ove statements and th~ statements contained in any required .papers or plb0s, to be'submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining a'nd removing such . notices., as may be req~ired-by~~_ c~" '~ Sigmature of Applicant~/, , ,O'~/k-^.,~,_~_ . ~.~1'/I _ Date . . · Planning Commlsslon, Recommendation: 12-14-~ Date Council Action: Resol ut. icg. No. ~equest for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2) Case D.. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, e~. E. Indicate North ~ompass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Iil. Request for a Zonin~ Variance .A. All information below, a site plan, as described in Part Ii, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled· B. Does the present use of the property'conform to all use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (~ No ( ) If "no", specify each n~n-conforming use: C. Do the existing structures comply with'all area _height and bulk regulations for the zOne district in which it is.located? Yes (//) No ( ) if "no", specify each non-conforming use: D. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses.permitted in that zoning district? ( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil ( ) Too small Drainage ( ) Sub-surface . ( )'~ Too shallow' Shape (.) Other: Specify: Ee Was the hardship d~scribed above created by the action o~ anyone having property interests in the land after the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (/)~ if yes, explain: F'. Was the hardship created by any'other man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No (~') If yes, explain: Are the conditions of hardship for which you r~quest a variance peculiar o~ly to the property described in this petition? Yes (/g~) No ( ) If no, how many other propert~ies are similarly affected~ What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations' that will permit you to make reasonable Use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? ~/0 WESTSHORE LAKE MINNETONKA OFF)CE 2701 SHOREL)NE DR, #206 NAVARRE WAYZATA, MN 55391 (612) 476-0400 November 30, 1987 Mr. R. Mark Koegler 3030 Harbor Lane Mpls., MN 55441 Subject: Subdivision of Lots 40, 41, & N 1/2 of 42, Whipple Shores, Mound Dear Mr. Koegler: Because these lots are "pie" shaped, the lot. with the existing home and garage will be 47 feet wide at the 30 foot setback after sub- division. The new lot will be 60 feet wide at the 30 foot setback. Where the.exiSting'garage sits'the lot is 60 feet wide. The shed on the north side of the garage and the deck steps are to be removed. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincere ly, . Agent for Lawrence &Ione McLane Merrill Lynch Realty/Burnet Case-No. 87-680 PRoPOSF-.D LOT DIVISION FOR L/L~RENCE N. ~L/~NE WNIpPLE HENNEPIN cOUNT% PERFECT HOPCiE FOR NARROW LOTS PLAN NO, R10J87325A or R10J87325B (without basement)- This plan is only 28'-0" wide it can easily be built on a 40'-0" lot, local codes permitting. An extraordinary entry hall provides a delightful introduction to the wide., open arrangementof the. first floor ,~ unique bay window arra'ngement and open balconied staircase provide the conversation points,of this unusual entry. On this level, living room, dining space 'and kitchen combine in such ~' way that no one, not even the cook, need ever be excluded from activities or conversation. And yet each space has its separate identity, the living room with its interesting fireplace, the dining area graced with a large outdoor deck visible through sliding glass doors and the well appointed L-shaped kitchen separated from the other spaces by. the extended breakfast bar. Laundry equipment and a handy lavatory complete the arrangement on !his level. Upstairs one finds two average sized bedrooms sharing a bathroom with the capability of serving more than one person at a time because of the enclosed water closet. But the gem of this floor is the beautiful master bedroom suite. An enormous walk through closet provides plenty of room for even .the most extensive wardrobe. A lovely skytighted bathroom completes the arrangement. Not many plans can be found that provide so many amenities in such narrow confines. Square feet: First floor 810, second floor 880. TO ORDER PLANS SEE PAGE 138 9O '-' / BA SLr'ME NT PLAN HANDOUT AT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 12-14-87. ~ ,~ ~,~, BLVD Barry Schneider 475-378~ Wayzata, MN Eckley-§chneider Construction Co. Craig Eckley 472-5001 Mound, MN December 17, 1987 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Hound, MN 55364 Attention Ed Shukle, City Manager and City Council Members Dear Mr. Shukle and Council Members: We are requesting that you establish a public commons area lying to the West of the Lost Lake Subdivision and that you issue dock sites on said access area. We propose that all docks and commons will be governed by City dock ordinances. We are also proposing that nine (9) docks be allowed on the channel, according to the attached drawing. The Mound Advisory Park Commission Resolution, dated December 15, 1987, resolved the inclusion.of the ~ine (9) Lost Lake dock locations as commons sites on the 1988 Dock Location Map with the designation that Lots 17 and 18 be included as abutting prOperties. Jellico, a Minnesota Partnership, has agreed to give the City of Mound a Utility and Public Walkway Easement (10 foot wide strip which will consist of a 4 foot wide strip of asphalt with 3 feet of gravel on either side for walkway and maintenance vehicle 'access to Commons and dock site area. This agreement is contingent upon the City of Mound designated the area, abutting the channel and lying West of the Subdivision, as a commons area in accordance with this request that said Lots 17 and 18 in said subdivision be considered abutting properties. Very Truly Yours, ~.~,ley & Schn~i~r Con~ructi ~ Barry G~chneider President BGS/ski on Co. / / 6 5 l: " ..... $o~,/'/~e,'lv lln~ o£ Atorth ,.-' ¢ .} . :, . Be/no 5.0¢ W n~.~T · -- ' ' ' '~ ...... ~ ~ ~ C) '~ - ~ ," ", SOALI ~ - ' 11' ~,,. ~,., , .,,.~.. ~ ' / , t ~,.~-.-~ :~, ~. ~b.~o. ,,o o DEN( : '..:~ B E A R ~ I ~i:', ~ ., NO'Io'ZO*~ OUND" 75 YEARS 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 (612) 472-1155 December 18, 1987 TO: FROM:' RE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR LOST LAKE SUBDIVISION DOCKS In 1979, the City of Mound started proceedings to acquire a section of land on Lost Lake. This land had gone tax forfeit and made up the Lost Lake Subdivision. This property was owned by Nelson Developers and the City sought it for preservation of wetlands, parks and right of way. 'A~ the same time, Nelson Developers had begun their proceedings to reacquire the Property. ' :. To eliminate a dispute over' who had just :right to this property, Nelson Developers and the City of Hound agreed to split the property. Nelson Developers would retain all lands above the 931.5 elevation and the City would have everything below the 931.5 elevation. With this done, a portion of the City's property, from the 930.00 to the 931.5 elevation, was dry (Lake Minnetonka has a high water elevation of 920.4). This area that is dry is currently land locked. The Lost Lake Development blocks access from the east and*the water level of Lost Lake blocks access from all other points. " A proposal was made in 1986 by Eckley-Schneider Construction Jellico Developers (formerly Nelson Developers) that would have 9 dedicated docks only for the homes in the Lost Lake Subdivision. This was turned down by the City Council through advisement of the City Attorney, Curt Pearson (reference letter dated July 2, 1986). In this letter, he states the conditions that should be met, they are: 1) The docks should not be dedicated to only residents of Lost Lake Subdivision, rather open to all Hound residents; 2) The Mound City Dock Ordinance should control the dock sites; 3) Develop a p!a'n for access, location of docks and other public usage. Recently, Eckley-Schneider Construction and Jellico Developers proposed that the City of Mound establish a Commons area with regard to the land discussed above. Lost Lake Docks Memo to Mayor and City Council December 18, 1987 Page 2 ~ Attached is a letter regarding this proposal. It has been presented to the Parks Advisory Commission and they have recommended approval (see December 15, 1987 Special Meeting minutes, item "B" in Information/Miscellaneous on this agenda). The staff recommends approval also and is available to answer any questions. JF:ls WURST, PEARSON, LAR$ON & UNDERWOOD MINNEAPOLIS~ MINNESOTA Jul. y 2, 1986 MaYor and City Council City of Mound, Minnesota Re: Lost Lake Subdivision / Docks Gentlemen: I have been talking with Mr. Larson concerning a question which came up relating to dockage in the Lost Lake Subdivision. I have read the memorandum of May 12, 1986, from Jim Fackler and Dell Rudolph to Ed Shukle. I am confused by the reference to 'Woodland Point, Dreamwood, and Wyckwood since Mr. Larson informs me that those'commons are private commons. I call the'Council's attention to Section 26.9301, Subds. 1 and 2, of the City Code. The Ordinance included the definition of docks for "publicly owned shoreland" and in Subd. 2 license is required on "public structures, road', parks, and commons". It is obvious that the ordinance does not apply, to.private lakeshore and private commons. Reference is also.made'to Sec.tion 26.9303, Subd. 1, whic'h again defines where a license is necessary' Whatever parallel is being drawn between Dreamwood, Wychwood, and Woodland Point and Lost Lake would in my opinion be improper. The lands which abut the Lost Lake Subdivision on the west are publicly owned lands, and if it is the City's desire to make that into a public, park or public docks, they certainly can do so if there are means for the public to obtain access to those lands. In most cases, this will mean public expenditures for preparing .. the access and also for providing t~rails or whatever improvements may be necessary on the publicly owned land.. If we were to obtain an .easement over certain properties in the Lost Lake Subdivision so the public had a way to get to this land, the City Park Commission and Council could decide that docks would be allowed'. If public dockage is to be allowed, then the priorities will be those established, in Section 26.9303, Subd. 6. Mr. Larson informs me that three lots would in effect have first priority since the docks abut those lots. If six additional docks were to be provided in the area, they would be governed by priorities 2 and 3, and there would be no preference given to other lots in the Lost Lake Subdivision unless they happened to be the first to apply and to be awarded the docks. WURST, F~EAR$'ON, HAHILTON, LAR$ON & UNDERWOOD Page 2 Mayor and City Council City of Mound July 2, 1986 I think a plan can be worked out which will permit public docks on the lands abutting the Lost Lake Subdivision, but there should not be any indication that the lands in the Lost Lake Subdivision have priority, but rather that the dock ordinance itself is controlling. It would therefore be the opinion of this office that before any dockage is permitted in this area, a total plan be worked out for access, location of docks, and other public usage of the property. I hope this answers the Council's questions, and we will expand upon this if you desire. CAP:Ih cc: Mr. Ed Shukle Mr. Jim Larson Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE LOCATION OF NINE COMMONS DOCK SITES ON LOST LAKE CHANNEL, CITY OF MOUND PROPERTY WHEREAS, The City of Mound owns property lying west of the Lost Lake Subdivision and east of the main channel access to Lake Minnetonka; and ~ WHEREAS, numbers: the nine sites will be assigned location 55000 55030 55060 55090 A55120 - Abutting property, lot 18 55150 55180 55210 A55240 - Abutting property, lot 17 and will be listed'on the 1988 dock location map; and~ WHEREAS, these above listed Commons docks will be governed under the Mound City Code, Section 437 - Dock Licenses; and WHEREAS, Jellico, developer of the Lost Lake Subdivision, agrees to provide a walk/maintenance access to the Commons docks from Lost Lake Road west towards Lost Lake to the 931.5 flood elevation. This access is to be 10 feet wide with the length determined by location of the 931.5 foot flood elevation line, with a 4 foot wide paved walk surface to .the 931~5 foot flood elevation; and WHEREAS, the Mound Parks Advisory Commission recommended approval of these additional nine (9) dock sites to be listed oh the 1988 Commons Dock site map at their special meeting of December 15, 1987. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Mound hereby approves the addition of the aforesaid nine docks to the City of Mound Commons dock system subject to an easement being given to the City of Mound by Jellico for a walkway/maintenance access to. the Commons docks from Lost Lake Road west towards Lost Lake. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to execute such an easement with Jellico'for purpose previously stated. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember . The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE 1988 COMMONS DOCK SITE MAP WITH THE ADDITION OF 15 NEW SITES. WHEREAS, the City of Mound has over 400 Commons Dock sites; and WHEREAS, Section 437, of the Mound City Code requires that any changes to the Commons system be made prior to January 15. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves the addition of 15 new dock sites to the 1988 Commons Dock system which are as follows: Woodland Point (1) Carlow (1) Lagoon Park/Sinclair (4) Dock ~01200 31630 61190 61215 61240 61265 5~0 The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk A, THOMAS WURST, P.A. CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A. dAMES D. I--ARSON, P.A. THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, CRAIG M. HERTZ ROG£R ~. F'£LLOW5 LAW 0 FFICE;5 WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERT~: It00 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA $$40Z December 16, 1987 Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 1612}338-4200 Dear Ed: Re: City of Mound v. Hagedorn You will recall that a resident residing on the Wiota Commons cut down certain trees and brush between his lot and the lake. This was done contrary to the direction of the Park Department, and this office was directed to commence suit agaimst Mr. Hagedorn. Jim Larson handled the matter and 'suit was commenced and is now in the District Court awaiting trial. We had an ini.tial appraisal which indicated thousands of dollars Of damage, but after the' lawsuit Was st'art.ed we have had it appraised by Otten Brothers who estimated the 'damages at $1,799.30. I am enclosing a copy of Jim Larson's memorandum, and I think that tells the rest of the story. I believe you and Mr. Larson have discussed this and have agreed you should recommend to the City Council that the Mayor and Manager be authorized to settle the matter upon receipt of $1,000 and to grant a Stipulation of Dismissal of the lawsuit and a release to Mr. Hagedorn. I want to make two points. I think that this settlement will strengthen the City's claim to Wiota Commons even though it does not establish title. The only way we can in effect establish the City's title would be to commence a lawsuit and give notice to all the people in Wiota Commons that the City is claiming the property by adver'se possession. We do not recommend this course of action at this time but suggest that the City continue to control this. Commons, put up markers that it is being maintained and managed by the public, and in effect give all of the signs of ownership. We recommend this matter be on the Council agenda for December 22 and that the motion be that the Mayor, Manager, and City Attorney be directed to settle this lawsuit for $1,000. Very truly yours,,.~ Cur~s A. Pearson City Attorney CAP:Ih Enclosure cc: Mayor and Council TO: C.A. Pearson FROM: J. D. Larson SUBJECT: Mound v. Hagedorn DATE: December 16, 1987 We've received an offer of settlement from Mr. Hagedorn's attorney of $1,000. The damage appraisal done by Otten Brothers showed damages of $1,799.30. As you know, Hagedorn has taken the position that the City was not damaged because the City does not own the Wioata Commons. We must establish title by adverse possession in order to prevail in this lawsuit, because the Wiota Commons were dedicated to the private use of the property owners in the Dreamwood Subdivision. We feel we should prevail because the Commons has been maintained by the City for years. Len Kopp advises that the City maintained Wiota Commons for the period he was manager (since 1960). City ordinances have been on the books requiring residents to get permits for trimming trees, changing a slope, or placing a structure or dock on the commons. Staff ~was able to find a few permits'dating back as far ~as 1960.~ McQuillan on Municipal Corporations, §28.15, notes that a municipality, like an individual, may acquire title by adverse possession. The case of B.W. & Leo Harris Co. v. City of Hastings, 59 NW2d 813 (Minn. 1953) talks about the kind of actions a city must establish in order to prove title by adverse possession. Exercising control over the land by requiring permits for dockage, maintenance and construction is the type of control which would support a claim of adverse possession under the Hastings case. Although I think we have a winable case, we would gain nothing by going to trial. We already claim title to Wiota Commons and that would not change as a result of a settlement., This case would not establish title in the city. The cost of a two-day trial on the issues of adverse possgssion and damages would exceed the amount to be gained (the difference between $1,000 and $1,799.30). The statute involved in our claim does permit treble damages, but I do not believe the court would order treble damages where there is a bona fide dispute over title to the trees. In summary, I think the City should accept this negotiated settlement and I so recommend. JL:imk ~ oo MOUND, MN MAYOR STEVE SMITH HOME 472-7664 December 11, 1987 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 5,5364 (612) 472-1155 ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER LEN HARRELL, POLICE CHI' DON BRYCE, FIRE CHIEF Ed Shukle City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Legal Services Dear Ed: I received your letter of December 7 and Curt's of November 11. Curt seems to be under the impression the Council wants to review his civil representation while it does the prosecution. That is not the case. The reason I brought the matter before the Council on October 31 was because I am ~ware of the high cost of both civil and criminal representation for Mound, ~urther I am aware that the present market place fOr. !.egal services is.very cost competitive. There is no - reason Mound cannot take advantage of this. The Council unanimously agreed to review the prosecution. To do that, at the close of the October 31 meeting, the Council un- animously agreed by consensus to have you begin the advertising and solicitation process. Enclosed is a list of legal publications read by the bar. If you have not begun the advertising please do so at once. If you have trouble with that call me, in which case I will call a special me~ting of the Council for Wednesday, December 16 at . 7:00~.M. , ~~~Sin rely SCS:aid Bench and Bar of Minnesota Publication of Minnesota State Bar Association Attn: Allen Helmstetter Suite 403 430 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55401 Ads in "Opportunity Market" $1.00 per word. Written copy and payment must be received by the first of the month in which ad will appear. Finance and Commerce P.O. Box 15045 Minneapolis, MN 55415 (weekly reporter read by attorneys) Ads $1.65 per line, (approximately five words per line) with a two line minimum. Telephone number 333-4246 75 YEARS December 7, 1987 CiTY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER RE: LEGAL SERVICES. At the October 31st goal setting session held at the Lafayette Club, you indicated that you would like to review our legal services contract with Wurst, Pearson, L'arson, Underwood and Mertz. I did look for a' written contract for civil and'prosecution services.· The civil contract dates back about 20 years with Curt Pearson. We did not have a prosecution contract with Curt's firm, specifically Jim Larson. Jim. became the prosecuting attorney in the early 1980's. The prosecution began with. ~he Grathwol FlYm in EXcelsior, who represented a number of~lake communities. Following their tenure, Mr. Gary Phlegar (now with Koenig, Robin, Johnson and Wood, of Wayzata) represented a number of cities including Mound. Mr. Phlegar represented the City for a short time and then a situation arose where a member of the City Council became unhappy with Mr. Phlegar and in effect forced a change. The City of Mound did not solicit experienced persons and the party who was appointed had no experience in the court as a prosecutor and this caused great concern to the Police Department and the public. The morale of the department sank because the department had a lack of confidence in the person providing the service. Subsequent to that situation, there was another change and Desyi ~eterson, who was als~ prosecuting attorney for M~nnetrista and Orono, represented Mound. The process worked well until resigned to become the Minnetonka City Attorney. At that time the Mound City Manager started interviewing several firms. The council had asked Curt's firm if they would do the work on temporary basis, which they agreed to do. Shortly thereafter, they were appointed to do the work permanently. Attached is a letter'dated November 11, 1987, from Curt Pearson regarding a recent request of review for legal services. I think Curt points' out a number of issues.which emphasize the fact we have a very experienced law firm handling our civil and prosecution matters. I do not believe that any changes are necessary. Legal Services Memo to Mayor and Council December 7, 1987 Pa~e 2 Even if a change was being considered, I would not recommend an open bid process to hire new city attorneys. As Curt states in his November 11th letter, if the City of Mound considers changing attorneys, he would recommend that we solicit firms who are experienced in the field. I would definitely agree with his recommendation. The old adage "you get what you pay for", holds true with regard to this issue. I hope this gives you some indication of the current legal services issue. If you have any questions, please contact me. I am sure if you wanted to call Curt, and discuss the matter with him, he would be happy to talk with you about it. ES:ls A. THOMAS WURST, P,A. CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A, ~AMES ~), I_ARSON, THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, ROGER d. FELLOW5 LAW OFFICES WURST~ PEARSON~ LARSON~ UNDERWOOD & IV~ERTZ I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST HINNEAPOLIS, HINNESOTA 55402 November 11, 1987 Mr. Ed Shukle City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Legal Services Dear Ed: This will confirm that over the last couple of weeks we have had numerous calls and correspondence with your office concerning legal services. We have supplied you with volumes of materials on the services, time, what we do, and the other details which involve our day to day activities for the City of Mound. It is my understanding that you are satisfied with the legal services being provided by this office and you have nOt indicated any problems with either the quality of the services or with the charges which havebeen made. It is my further understanding this is coming up because of a suggestion raised by a Councilmember that the City in effect call for competitive bids on this professional service. I believe I have expressed to you my own sensitivity to this suggestion. After representing someone for 20 years and believing that you have a good and strong professional relationship, one naturally becomes a bit defensive when this type of question is raised. I do not know that the City is now or has ever in the past taken bids on professional services for engineering, planning, finances, legal, or any other professional services. This letter is not meant to be confrontational or hostile in any way. This office has very much enjoyed working with you and your staff in representing the City, and I believe our relationship is one which provides that each of us can be candid and open with the others. This is importaht if we are to have confidence in how we handle the matters for the people of Mound. If there are concernSby you, the City Council as a whole, or even an individual Councilmember, we would appreciate having that concern expressed to us so that we could respond directly. In our conversations, you have not indicated any particular matter to which we can respond. I would like to stress the following points: WURST, PEARSON, LARSON~ UNDERWOOD & MERTZ By law, the City Manager hires and fires, and with the City Attorney he does this with the approval of the City Council. This is in the law because the City Attorney is probably in a more sensitive position than any other staff person. You have not indicated that there is any problem with our merit or fitness, and as far as I can detern~ine, you are not dissatisfied with our services. If you and the City Council for some reason determine that you wish to change attorneys, I strongly recommend that you solicit people who are experienced in the field. The "deep pockets" of a municipality are such that cheap legal services may turn out to be extremely expensive to the taxpayers of the City of Mound or any other City. We are proud to represent the City of Mound. Our relationship is long and has never been in jeopardy to the best of our knowledge. The last year or two has brought a series of small questions to you and me concerning those services, and I hope that as your tenure g~ows longer, that will'not be an issue in the future,~BUT if yOu ever have any question about, our services or any constructive criticism (or other type of criticism) please contact me immediately and I will try to be responsive to your concerns. We very much appreciate your candidness in discussing this sensitive issue with Mr. Larson and me, and we hope we have provided you with a satisfactory response. Sincerely, CAP:ih Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney When clients ask you to iump tl,rough hoops, say yes. When they ask yc~u to work overtime, agree. With a smile. If they expect miracle, s, you'd better damn well give them one. And i{ they want you to shed a little blood, sweat and tears on their behalf, then bleed, perspire and cD'. But v,'Eat if you're asked to compromise your beliefs, prin- ci[?les and integrit?. Well, as Sam Goldwyn, the movie mo~l, once said: "I can answer that in two wordsY m. possibleY OUND 75 YEARS CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 (612) 472-1155 December 17, 1987 TO: FROM SUBJECT Ed Shukle City Manager Joyce Nelson Recycling Coordinator Renewal of Recycling Contract Our contract with Supercycle is up as of the end of December. John Luma from Supercycle has proposed a bid of $1,430.00 per month for next year. The way they come up with this figure is based on .40¢ per household, we have over 3,100 households, this bid also includes servicing 4 apartment buildings twice a month. The way they service apartment buildings is by placing 55 gallon drums by the dumpsters. This has been a big success in St. Louis Park. When the barrels are available all the time it makes it very convenient for people to recycle, which in turns raises our tonnage figure and this is what you're aiming for. For the year of 1988 Hennepin County is requiring us to recycle 342 tons of material. Hennepin County also reimburses us 60% of any costs incurred in our recycling program. Hennepin County would reimburse us 70% of our costs if we recycle more than 10% of our waste stream which would be about 380 tons. For the year of 1988 $17,880 was budget Hennepin County would reimburse us $10,728, so the City's share would be about $7,152. RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RENEWAL OF RECYCLING CONTRACT WITH SUPERCYCLE FOR 1988 WHEREAS, the current contract with Supercycle expires on December 31,1987; and WHEREAS, there is essentially only one recycling vendor available for city-wide curbside recycling pick-up; and WHEREAS, we have negotiated a new contract with Supercycle in the amount of $1,430.00 per month for 1988. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves a renewal of the contract with Supercycle at the above stated price of $1,430.00 per month, effective J@nuary 1, 1988, expiring December 31, 1988, and authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to sign the renewal of this contract for 1988. The following resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember · The foIlowing Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk For December 22, 1987 Council Meeting Page 1 December 10, 1987 GAMBLING LICENSE -- Class A (Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-tabs) Renewal - New License Period: 3-1-88 to 2-28-89 American Legion #398 2333 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minn. 55364 Class B (Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-tabs) Renewal - New License 'Period: 1-31-88 to 2-1-89 NorthWest Tonka ~ions AT: The Jock Club 5241 Shoreline Blvd. Mound, Minn. 55364 THIS APPLICATION WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE CHARITABLE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND IF APPROVED BY THE BOARD WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE 30 DAYS FROM ·THE DATE OF RECEIPT (12-4-87), UNLESS A RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL GOVERN- ING BODY IS PASSED WHICH SPECIFICALLY DISALLOWS SUCH ACTIVITY AND A COPY OF THAT RESOLUTION IS RECEIVED BY THE CHARITABLE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE. OTHER GAMBLING LICENSES IN MOUND ARE: Class A - Our Lady of the Lake Class B - VFW Post #5113 Cont'd Page 2 -- December 22, 1987 Council Meeting NEW LICENSE APPLICATIONS Entertainment Permit - License Period December 1987 to 11-30-88 The Jock Club 5241 Shoreline Dr. Mound, Minn. Dinner-Dancing Permit - License Period December 1987 to 6-30-88 The Jock Club 5241 Shoreline Dr. Mound, Minn. BILLS DECEMBER Batch Batch 7121 7122 39,889.97 59,032.49 Total Bills 98,922.46 ~3 ~!o 12/16/87 .... t' ~'"" J.&/~C,i 177.-',?? DEC TELE 3!% !5 DEC 75.10 'DEC TEL; 2,02 DEC TELE .65 DEC TELE 62.2'? DEC TELE !IL::.40 DEC TELE 3:. 15 DEC TELE 1~.,..:._', L!=- TEL: 57,98 DEC TELE 1,014,06 JR)iL-CD 01-41 01-4320-322C. 01 -:.095-3220 Oi 0!-4!$'0-:7220 01 - 4 ':.' 80 - :32?0 7~-7300-3220 7:,::-7E;00-:?,220 71-7!00-3220 ................ ~~m. ~,- V:N'.!Zh: TOTAL !<.')14.(16 D! !'?0 Y .:" .' 7 :.'-:- 7:300-'::.300 204111 14!,20 JRNL-CD 7'?- 731..':<J-2'260 2040 144m20 ........ ~='~'U~--'~-- ~.'.'-', F~O ';,v' . rrI Ol - :'?:?)-23EQ 2.)40 !?. 05 20,00 ~:,,,,~,-~':'":;r= FiRE ...... 20,0'.': ..... ' · ,_ID.: ~, _ ' ,... ~.. 2040 20, O0 F!7: ':' 20,!2 ..:~ KA,~iA ~TG · -,' 5n JRNL-CD 12/16/87 2040 :lEE:EL SES'.V: CE .z~.,:;n:,,_,,..~.,,, Tr,,Ta!,. ,,,. A:::9,26... 0!8'.:-.'} ...... , ,,,n'.,~ ',-'::",TER C'O:'LEF: C', :'.,i '; ?:' ~ ....... :-' COC:LEF: i'~' ¥ (:: O 1-z280-22'.'.,0 2040 57.55 P~E_~HASE CITY OF ~]L~4Z~ TIKE ,.~-,, ,'r r!ESCRIF, TiON Z040 80,00 H~'~=~..OO,..,, CITES o,,.uu JRNL-CD Oi-40i, O-'" I::( 20qO o,] ,9] '?040 VErsa, OR TOTAL !67. i2 0'.' - 1285-0000 D.)40 135. (:iCi 63,20 o:.,~u 2040 63,20 "~' '";' STAKES '~'~, Fir' r','~ ~'~' 01-~270-2200 -~0 25,00 ~'13(.?.'C 1,8'24.00 176,00 56,00 i78,Fx) !37,00 497,00 550,00 56.00 28.00 84.00 2S.O0 28,00 3,S5:~,00 NOV EN~!NEER SERV -,I ^~, ~', ,r-pr,- DI .~.,~F ~ ^'."~ NOV EN~E-::URTRN NOV ~S~ Rg:'BF:TS NOV EN~R-CO NOV ENSR-SETON F'L ESCR[~ NOV ~NP ,~uv-r,=~ Ln, FOR COUNCIL ~,nNL-~LI -4 I'.'."-0-3! O0 t~-~:m:..,d-.',l (,0 .:,-i 0:-2300-0'.%7 67-6000-31C'K: 2d,-5700-3100 6,.-',-60:~-3t00 -2300-0',-"61 -2300-0.%2 62-6000-3i¢~0 }:-4 !%'.-:?,I00 2040 ' ':~ '"'"', 9( '.,_,,~,~n TOTAL ~,: .... !2/!,5/? 12./': 6/:_::7 1!150.00 PURCHASE CiTY DF K,.'b~,~ A.*,~"= DESCRIF'TIO!( PRE-PAiD DATE TIME F3 ? ? i D ..~:;, A..,. ''¢~,~.~, rm. .., ~,t M~:i!(E F.?A! Vm.~'r:m, .......... TOTAL F'[',D FOOn STOFZS P~04',:' P405C:' 12/i6/87 '"' ~ '" ~ ,'/1,.,/,:,7 VERDOR TOTAL 12/16/87 !2/!6/87 , ~=,,,',n.~ T~TAL 12/16/87 !2/16/'87 r. NOun TOTAt .S'4:752 !2/16/87 !2/!6/S7 240,65 ~ ..... 240.E~ / .... NOV O~=O~ 73.2? dRNL-CD 73.29 8,S:, O0 CNL-CD 88.00 30,00 ~%-CD 30, O0 .~o..,, DEC 5:3:5,00 !,Xx%]0 PAY EQUITY STUDY 3)00. O0 n,->:, ~,~ NOV FRT 223.S) ~,,,1 DRIV~.,.,~n~,~,.~ EXF' ~.,.' JNf~L-E:D 4 22.00 jRNL-CD 22,00 '*.50 NOV Oi-,1 Yv-.:,,::,t 0 2940 01-4140-2210 2044,) 71-7100-4200 7 !- !".'2,':-_:5-0000 0!-4397-4100 ",:040 2040 C !-4320-22(K 2040 .; C, 2040 A?-C02-01 DATE T.!A~ STATU.~ ~l~!~ Ri[;SEV!_~ ,~LJSr~TA. VE,CQ,-, TOTAL W5430 WATER F'RODL.':CTS COHF'ANY ¥:;wor, TOTAL 12/!6/87 12/!6/87 k~STONKA~,,~rr'~ ~.~..,m,, ~_,...~:'u .', r~ VESDOR TOTAL FOODS ~:~TL,~x~, SANiTATiON VD-4[!OR TOTAL W5,~.,20 ~/.;.~:,/'-%' ~/ .LOt O/ · ¥¢ ,.~ r.: [ U VENGOR TOTAL !2/16/87 !2/16/87 !2/!6/87 12/!6/87 VENDOR ....;O~Au ;:5700 12/16/::'.7 ' '" .' ,~,.'; o/,:,/ ~L:F:ST- P EA:.:SO~:~ LA:.',S;3~'~ VE!C~O;: TOTAL X5750 !2/16/87 12/16/87 TOTAL 4LL VE~CLq:S PURCHASE JOURNAL CITY OF AMOUNT 168.00 106.50 !06.50 !06.50 3,760.14 3,760.~ o7~.0.64 8.00 12.50 20.50 20.50 66.00 66.00 66.00 75.00 75,00 75.00 195.00 430.50 625.50 625,50 !97.00 !97,00 197.00 !,073.31 1,073.31 1073,3! 3,086.00 3,086,00 ov,:,o. 00 361,45 rESCR!F'TION R~orRS dOC-CD 8/!-9/7 LI~JARDS JR~.-CD CREAM ~UFF~.IEo dRNL-CD NOV GARBAGE ,..,-_r': ~,.~.,, CAP, PET-DEPOT ,.J~N.-u.u ., SHOREWOOD LA!~E ~.,: VD, LAbS JRNL-CD _~.itr',:.H ,,.. ..... ..~ ~.~,....... dRNL-CD ~.!n. F'ROSECLffI ON &A.-CD 73-7300-23~ 20~ OI-4340-42f>g 2(140 01-402~J-2200 0!-4280-2200 2040 01-4340-2330 2(:40 78-7800-3800 2~40 01-4!40-2240 2040 .-' / - ~ o ,)V - z.-',~ 0 20% 01-4110-:3120 2940 DATE TI~E PRE-PAID AXOUNT CHECK NJ. iNV~iDE N~',~:F: [!ATE DATE STATUB ..u, .,~ .., CO~?ANT VENFiOR CiTY OF 4.61- DTSr, ,., ~'. 0~, FRT 229'...57 ~,rXNL-CD !~10.76 iO!O [ATE 12/15, TiME 10.2,% C,,.~,,., ~l HENN CO T~SL..'FZR PRE-PAID 12/i5/87 12/15/87 YD~iDR TOTAL PRE-PAID 12/!5/S7 12/i5/87 VE~O~R TOTAL 37,30 37.30 37,30 69.40 69.40 69.40 FILE DEEDS-TX FORFEIT JRt¢~-CD DEF COK? SHJ:~E !!/2SPR ~NL-CD 0i-4320-41£>3 i010 ,., -' -~ .'~. ~ - ! ~ i010 6?,40 275S2 12/Cz PRE-PAiD ~,r:..: ~u~:~: 'va;'~u~ TOTAL L2721 PRE-PAiD 12/15/87 i2/15/87 LORE~ i(DH~E~ VEN~SR TOTAL 726,67 1,1......, 26.17- ~,:,,~,~,~/ 43.24- ':' 209.45 4074,02 !,31!.17 1311,17 LIQ ;WINE DiSC LiQ Df SC JRNL-CD !0i0 7i-7!00-9510 71-7!00-9520 71-7!00-7530 ; 10!0 iC, iO 2209.45 131t.!7 F'RE-F'A.;D 12/i5/87 *'" ...... ~ ..... L~i~ ..........TOTAL 334.40 167,20 73.35 574.75 574.75 DEC HOSP PREH DEC HOSP PRS:( iCC HOSP PRE;~ JRNL-CD 0i-4340-1510 01 '~"'" ~:~' 10!0 27777 E3170 PRE-F'A;D ~£/J,.~/C,/ 4,677.75 4,677.75 4677.75 NOV 78-2304-0030 4~,77.75 FRE-PAi D 4,026.25 4,026.25 4026.25 JRNL-CD ............ 1,..0 1010 43.16 !6,44 57,43 DES LTD DEC LTD DEC LTD DEC LTD DEC LTD [:lC LTD 01-z140-1523 01-40zJ~-15£0 0!-4190-15£3 01-43ZJ-!520 :i/~5/',_::7 1,2/:5/'87 VD'CC~F.: T,]TAL 12iiW87 i211.'.=,i::'~7 PR-Z-PAiD T47g:} 22/15/;N': ::.:-:_::c :_': ...... : .: ,'=,..c:. 7_-TFL ..... :F-: ;;:_' i;:;.ii FiCA ii/23;F'R '"='" '"" FiCA ~ ~/28F'F, i,t.2.:?.:3 F." SA 242,5:, FiC~ it/28;F. 223,2'P FiCA 217,6'.) JF..XL-CD 4(',::}0 C,q!( JCF:!{EF, 3 41:, 0:1 JRN_-OD 2¥7,,50 =,7 ?':3 r,:* "--~,-, ,~.'.'-:.77 DEC r~Ei;l~;. F',:.E~; 22.{<:, riEL i.E~TAL F'REX 22.00 r2EC ..:C,.73DEC,-,~-,,~'-'-~'; ,,~ F.:,E;": ;';'. g:) [:E_-.' $5,4!, : 2, :."7 .v., F.Ei::f:T:,-i.~TiT~:-E 75-7300-1:40 71-7i00-!440 (1-4230-i440 0!-41i{~-14i3 i0i0 22-41 22-4!70-22(:0 i?.;3.74 !85:?,'P7 27.N3 i2...':.~ ...... CITY OF MOUND 1987 BUDGET REPORT November 1987 91.7 % of Yea r November YTD BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE PER CENT RECEIVED GENERAL FUND Taxes $975,893 -- Intergovernmental 771,O57 4,711 Business. Licenses 13,000 2,503 Non-Business Licenses and Permits 108,100 16,688 General Gov't Charges 33,300 884 Court Fines 94,000 7,042 Charges to Other Departments 20,870 1,134 Other Revenue 57,500 1,544 485,755 417,661 )0,006 153,618 20~135 77,135 13,862 16,427 490,138 353,396 (45 13 16 7 41 2,994 ,518) ~165 ,865 ,008 ,073 49.8 54.2 77.0 142.1 60.5 82.1 66.4 28.6 TOTAL REVENUE $2,073,720 34,506 1,194,599 879,121 57.6 LIQUOR FUND $755,000 58,268 WATER FUND $300,000 23,450 SEWER FUND $565,000 45,542 706,172 284,7O4 518,295 48,828 15,296 46,705 93.5 94.9 91.7 MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK. COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF December 15,' 1987 Present were: Chair Nancy Clough; Commissioners Cathy Bailey, Marilyn Byrnes and Linda Panetta; City Manager Ed Shukle; Dock Inspector Dell Rudolph and Secre- tary Marge Stutsman. Also present were the following interested persons: Barry Schneider, Kyle Wil- berg, Tim King and John Lewman. The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M. The Commission noted the resignations of~Andy Gearhart and Lowell Swenson. MINUTES The minutes of the Park Commission meeting of November 12, 1987 were presented for consideration. Byrnes moved and Panetta seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. The vote was all in favor. DOCKS - LosT LAKE SUBDIVISION Barry .Schneider of Eck.ley-Schneider Construction Company was present for the purpose of requesting establishing a public commons area lying to the West of the Lost Lake .Subdivision and the issuance of dock sites on said access area. Mr. Schneider'is proposing to go by the or. dinances'"relating to docks and commons and how they relate to property lines. He is proposing that 9 docks be allowed · on the channe.1. Dell has measured the area. Mr. Schneider advised that his Company and Jellico wil.1 give the City an Uti..lity and Public Walkway Easement (10 foot wide'strip which will consist of a 4 foot wide'strip of asphalt with 3.feet'of gravel on either side for walkway and maintenance vehicle access to Commons and dock. site area). He thought that Lots 17 and 18 of the Lost Lake Addition would be abutting property owners under the ordinance and be able to receive dock sites on the priority basis. The Commission discussed the request at length and had various questions. · Bailey moved and Panetta seconded a motion to recommend including the 9 Lost Lake dock locations as commons sites on the 1988 Dock Location Map with the designation that Lots 17 and 18'be included as abutting properties. .The vote was all in favor. COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP Clough moved and Bailey seconded a motion to recommend reducing the number of active members from 9 to 7. The vote was all in favor. The Commission discussed that members let the Commission know three months in advance if they do not wish to be re-appointed. Clough moved and Bailey seconded a motion to recommend that Stephen Burke be accepted as a member of t'he Park Commission as of January 1, 1988. The vote was all in favor. ~' COMMONS MAP DOCK SITES Byrnes moved and Clough seconded a motion to recommend approval of the 1988 Mound Commons Map Dock Sites with the addition of 15 new sites as follows: MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 14, 1987 Present were: Vice Chairman William Thal; Commissioners William Meyer, Geoff Michael, Brad Sohns and Frank Weiland; Council Representative Elizabeth Jensen; City Manager Ed Shukle; City Planner Mark Koegler;~Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. Absent and excused were Chairman Thomas Reese and Commissioner Vern Andersen. Also present were the following interested per- sons: Lawrence McLane, lone McLane, Larry McCall, Janet DenBesto, Bob Hortsch, Earl G. Bakken, Jeff Bakken, Holly Lovseth, Ron Predovich, Glenda K. Coates, Jean Graff, Roy O'Donnell and Ronald Gehring. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 23, 1987 were presented for consideration. Meyer asked that vote on motion first page, last paragraph be corrected to show a 5 to 2 vote (Sohns and Meyer voted against) rather than all yeas. Jensen moved and Meyer seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the November 23, t987 Planning Commission meeting as corrected. The vote was unani- mously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case No. 87-678 Variance for access to public street for 52XX Lynwood Blvd. Lots 5 and Part of 4, Block 2, Rearr. of Block 10, Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park; PID # 13-~17-24 34 OO18 Applicant, Jeff Bakken, and Owner, Earl Bakken, were present. The Ci. ty Planner, Ma.rk Koegler, reviewed h~is report. The apPlicant ~as a piece of property with 12,871 square feet that does not presently have access to a public street and applicant is proposing to take access from an estab- lished easement. The hardship was created when Laurel was vacated in the past and this property has no direct access and there does not appear to be any reasonable means for providing access; the staff is recommending approval with three conditions listed in his report. Item 3 should read" ..... house shall observe a 35 foot front ...". Koegler commented the reason for the 35 feet was that if Laurel were ever rededicated as a street again, the house would have appropriate setback. The Commission had various questions including how this property would be assessed for any improvements, etc. Sohns moved and Jensen seconded the motion to accept staff recommendation approving with the three conditions and with further condition that any- assessment for improv~nents be added. The vote was unanimously in favor. This will be on the City Council agenda of December 22, 1987. Case No. 87-679 Minor subdivision of land - 29XX Westedge Boulevard Lots 5 and 6, Block 13, The Highlands; PID # 23-117-24 31 0053 Applicant, Ronald S. Gehring, was present. The City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed .that applicant is proposing to re- subdivide two lots to produce two parcels fronting on County Road 44 (West- edge Boulevard) as per shown on Exhibit 1. Both lots will have conforming area, width and setbacks and will have a common driveway with access onto County Road 44, He recommends approval subject to the two conditions and Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1987 - Page 3 Meyer is opposed because he believes an attempt should be made to have more land purchased; he wants to see lots 60 feet wide in the R-1 Zoning District; believes that Parcel B is only about 53 feet wide on the road. This will be on the City Council agenda of December 22, 1987. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Reappointments for 1988 were discussed. Michael moved and Weiland seconded a motion to recommend appointment of: Kenneth Smi'th and re-appointment of William Meyer and Brad Sohns to the Planning Commission effective January 1, 1988. The vote was unanimously in favor. 2. Work Rules were discussed. Jensen moved and Weiland seconded a motion to change the verbage of Item 23 (last paragraph on' Page 3) to read: "Any member who shall be absent h~m~e~f without leave ....... ". ~he vote was unanimously in f~or. 3. Commission discussed briefly that there should be some revisions to the Zoning Code made; but that should wait until after the Comprehensive Plan "has been completed. ADJOURNMENT -' ' Sohns moved and Weiland seconded a-'motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 P.M. All were in favor, so meeting was adjourned. William Thal, Vice Chairman Attest: Z Z 0 Z Z Z Z .,-1 0 Z 0 Z 0 BEFORE THE HINI~ESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES CO~I{ISSION Barbara Beerhalter Norma McKanna Cynthia A. Kit~inski Robert J. O'Keefe Darrel L. Peterson Chair Commissioner commissioner Commissioner Commissioner ISSUE DATE: December 4, 1987 In the Matter of the Application of Northern States Power Company for Authority to Increase its Rates for Electric Service in Minnesota Docket No. E-002/GR-87-670 NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING PROCEDURAL HISTORY On November 2, 1987, Northern States Power Company (NSP or the Company) filed a petition with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (the Commission) for an increase in electric rates pursuant to Minn. Stat. 5 216B.16 (1986). On December 4, 1987, the Commission issued its Order Accepting Filing and Suspending Rates in this matter. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Jurisdiction The Commission has jurisdiction to proceed with this investigation under Minn. Stat. S 216B.16 (1986); Subdivision 2 authorizes the Commission to determine' all questions of the reasonableness of the proposed rates raised before it. If the Commission cannot resolve all significant issues to its satisfaction, the statute directs the Commission to refer the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings to conduct a public hearing as a contested case pursuant to Chapter 14. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 216B.16, subd. la, a contested case hearing may become unnecessary if the petitioner and all intervening parties agree to a stipulated settlement of the case and the settlement is supported by substantial evidence. In that event, the stipulated settlement shall be referred to the Commission who shall accept or reject the settlement in its entirety. If the Commission rejects the settlement, a contested case hearing will be held. The Commission finds that it cannot resolve all questions of reasonableness of the proposed rates to its satisfaction and that a contested case hearing is necessary to determine whether the proposed rates are just and reasonable or would result in excessive and unreasonable earnings for the Company. Pursuant to the authority in Minn. Stat. ~ 216B.16 (1986), the Commission will order that a contested case hearing be scheduled in this matter. The hearing shall be conducted in such a manner that the Commission may issue its initial decision within ten months of November 2, 1987, or, if a stipulated settlement is filed with the Commission, within twelve months of November 2, 1987. Is the Cap{icl structure and the return on equity that the Company has proposed reasonable? Further, NSP shall offer a witness durln§ the ev[dentiary hearings who has detailed knowledge of the test year b{llin§ units and the foreaastin§ method used to obtain them. This information is needed by the Commission to ~ud~e the reasonableness of the Company's proposed level of revenues and expenses. IV. Procedural Outline The public and evidentiary hearin§s on the Company's petition will be conducted by an Administrative Law Judge appointed by the Chief Administrative Law Jud§e of the State of Minnesota and will be held in compliance with the applicable laws relatinE to the Public Utilities Commission, the contested case provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (Minn. Stat. Ch. la), the Rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings, Minnesota Rules, parts 1~00.5100 - 1~00.8a00, and the Rules of Practice of the Public Utilities Commission, Minnesota Rules, parts 7830.0100 - ?830.4400, to the extent that they have not been superseded by the Rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings. These statutes and rules may be purchased from the Documents Section of the Depprtment of Administration, 117 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155, 612/297-3000. The rules provide ~enerally for the procedural ri§hts of the Parties including: ri§hts to advance notice of witnesses and evidence, r~ht to a p~ehearin§ conference, ri§hts to'present evidence and cross examine witnesses, and ri§his to purchase a record or transcript. Parties are entitled to issuance of subpoenas to compel witnesses to attend and produce documents and other evidence pursuant to Minnesota Rules, part 1~00.7000. Interested persons or groups may petition to intervene as formal parties in the case to present expert testimony and submit briefs. The Administrative Law Judge will hold evidentiary hearings for the presentation of expert testimony by the Company, the Minnesota Department of Public Service, and other a§encies, persons, or groups who have formally intervened. Parties are advised to brin§ to the hearin§ all documents, records and witnesses they need to support their position. Durin& the evidentiary hearings, all parties may present evidence and argument re~ardin§ the issues and may cross-examine witnesses. Any person intending to intervene as a formal party to these hearings must submit a Petition for Leave to Intervene to the Administrative Law Jud§e and serve the petition on all existin~ parties. The petition must state how the Petitioner's legal rights, duties or privileges may be determined or affected by the Commission's decision in the matter and shall set forth the ~rounds and purposes for which intervention is sought, and shall indicate the Petitioner's statutory ri§hr to intervene, if one exists. All parties have the ri§hr to be represented by an attorney, by themselves, or by a person of their choice if not otherwise prohibited as the unauthorized practice of Law. If persons have ~ood reason for requesting a delay of any hearing, the request must be made in writin~ to the Administrative Law Jud§e at least five days prior %0 the hearin§. A copy of the request must be zerued on the Commizsion and all parties. Failure by the petitioner to appear at the hearin~ may result in the rate chan~e being denied. If no interested person appears and contests the proposed rate increase at the hearin&, the rates may be approved as proposed. Followin& the contested case hearin&, the Commission may approve all or any part of the proposed rate increase but may not approve an overall increase ~reater than that proposed by the Company. However, the Commission may adjust rates for classes of customers to levels greater than those proposed by the Company and make other rate adjustments. Parties are advised that if data classified as not public are admitted into evidence, they may become public data unless a party objects and asks for relief under Minn. Stat. 5 14.60, subd. 2 (1984). Any question concernin§ informal disposition of this matter pursuant to Minnesota Rules, part 1400.5900 or discovery of information pursuant to MinnesOta Rules, parts 1400.6700 and 1400.6800, should be addressed to Karl W. Sonneman, Special Assistant Attorney General, 780 American Center Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, 612/296-0410. All other questions concernin~ this hearing should be addressed to the Administrative Law Judge assi§ned: ..Richard C. Luis Office of Administrative Hearings 400 Summit'Bank Building 310 South 4th Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612/341-7610 The lobbying provisions of Minn. Stat. Chapter 1OA apply to general rate cases. If the document that a person files pertains to ratemakin~, ru!emakin~, certificates of need for large energy facilities or contested case rate proceedings, the person may be required to register with the Minnesota Ethical Practices Board under the lobbying provisions of Minn. Stat. Ch. 1OA. Lobbying includes attempting to influence administrative action in rulemaking proceedings, certificate of need cases or contested ratemaking cases. An individual who is eh&aged for pay or authorized by another individual or association to spend money and who spends more than five hours in any month-or more than $250 in a year to influence administrative action must register with the Board and report disbursements for lobbying purposes, includin§ preparation and distribution of lobbyin~ materials, telephone, postage, media advertising, travel and lodging. The statute provides certain exemptions, includin§ an exception applicable to expert witnesses deliverin§ testimony. Persons are encouraged to telephone the Board at 612/296-1720 for additional information. The restrictions on ex parte cor~munications with Commissioners and the reportin§ requirements applicable to staff apply in this :.roceedin~ from the date that this order is issued until the Commission issues its final order and the time to petition for reconsideration expires, or the Commission issues a final order responding to a petition for reconsideration, whichever is later. See Minn. Rules, parts ?845.?300-.?400. ATTAGP[MENT A BEFORE THE MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 400 Sun. nit Bank Buildin5 310 South Fourth Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesota 55~15 FOR THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COM/{ISSIO~ 780 American Center Buildin~ 160 East Kellog§ Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 In the Matter of the Application of Northern States Power Company for Authority to Increase its Schedule of Rates for Electric Service in Minnesota MPUC Docket No. E-OO2/GR-87-6?b OAR Docket No. NOTICE OF koPEARA]~CE Date of Hearing: December 30, 1987, 9:30 a.m. Name and Telephone Number of Administrative Law Judge: Richard C. Luis 612/341-7610 TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: You are advised that the party named below will appear at the above hear[ns' NAME OF PARTY: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: PARTY'S ATTORNEY OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE: OFFICE ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY: DATE: