1992-03-24CITY OF MOUND NHSSION STATEMENT: The City of Mound, through
teamwork and cooperation, provides at a reasonable cost, quality
services that respond to the needs of all citizens, fostering a
safe, attractive and flourishing community.
AGENDA
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
MOUND CITY COUNCIl.
REGULAR MF~ETING
7:30 P.M. TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1992
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Se
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 11, 1992
REGULAR MEETING, THE MARCH 17, 1992
ADJOURNED MEETING AND THE MARCH 17, 1992
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING.
PG.
.PUB~.IC H~.ARING: YEAR XVIII COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM
PG.
~ASE NO. 9~-055: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR
WILLIAM VOSS, 4608 KILDARE LANE, LOT 6,
BLOCK 11, SETON, PID ~19-117-23 21 0028.
PG.
CASE ~9Z-005: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR RICHARD
HENDERSON, 1948 SHOREWOOD LANE, LOT 13,
BLOCK 2, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID ~18-117-23
23 0013
PG.
PRESENTATION FROM FRANK HORNSTEIN, CLEAN
WATER ACTION, RE: REACTION TO CITY
COUNCIL'S POSITION ON THE USE OF ASH FROM
THE HENNEPIN COUNTY INCINERATOR.
PG.
DISCUBSION: RESPONSE FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS RE: CITY OF
MOUND'S REQUEST TO REVIEW THE FEASIBILITY
OF BOAT TRAILER PARKING ON THE EAST SIDE
OF BARTLETT BLVD. FROM THE MOUND BAY PARK
DEPOT TO THE NORTH ENTRANCE TO MOUND
BAY PARK.
PG.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT
756-765
766-783
784-799
800-814
815-832
833
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
BID AWARD~
DROP OFF.
EVENING.)
SPRING LEAF PICKUP AND/0R LEAF
(MATERIAL TO BE DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY
SET BID OPENING DATE FOR 1992 ANNUAL SEALCOAT
PROGRAM (SUGGESTED DATE: APRIL 3, 1992, 11 AM)
RESOLUTION 92- RESOLUTION OPPOSING
GOVERNOR CARLSON'S PROPOSAL TO CUT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AID (LGA) TO CITIES. (RESOLUTION
TO BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY EVENING)
DISCUSSION: MOUND VISIONS PROJECT - COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH GETTING TO PRELIMINARY
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY (MATERIAL TO BE
DISTRIBUTED TUESDAY EVENING)
LMCD COMMERCIAL DOCK LICENSES -
DRIFTWOOD SHORES AND SETON VIEW
PG.
834-839
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR CONTRACT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MOUND AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR
SERVICES (LELS) LOCAL #35 SUPERVISOR/STAFF
SERGEANT AND SUPERVISOR/SERGEANT OF PATROL
FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1991 - DECEMBER
31, 1993 (MATERIAL TO BE DISTRIBUTED
TUESDAY EVENING)
PAYMENT OF BILLS
PG. 840-850
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
ae
February 1992 Monthly Financial Report as
prepared by John Norman, Finance Director
PG.
851-852
Be
Planning Commission minutes of
March 9, 1992
PG.
853-858
Ce
Parks and Open Space Commission minutes
of March 12, 1992 PG.
859-862
Executive Summary of the Proposed Rental
Housing Ordinance as prepared by Curt
Pearson, City Attorney PG.
863-866
As you directed previously, we have scheduled a spring
cleanup. This project is scheduled for Friday, April 24,
1992 and Saturday, April 25, 1992 at the Lost Lake site.
If weather does not permit us to have the drop off at the
site, it will be moved to another site in the downtown
Fe
Ge
He
area of Mound. Joyce Nelson, Recycling Coordinator, has
put this project together and will have several companies
at the site to pick up stated items. One of the
questions that has arisen is: "Should we limit
participation by only offering the program to Mound
residents?" If not, we may be overwhelmed with material
and the project could become unmanageable. Please give
this some thought.
Information from Pioneering Creative
Environmental Solutions (PICES) re:
Hennepin County Incinerators ash -
Road project in the City of Corcoran
PG. 867-869
1992 Annual parks Tour is scheduled for Saturday, May 16,
1992, beginning at 10:45 AM at A1 & Alma's docks. The
Parks and Open Space Commission felt that a public
shoreland tour might be appropriate this year. Merrit
Geyen has volunteered the use of a boat and will only
charge us for lunch at $6.50 per person. The City of
Mound, out of appropriate department budgets, will pay
for the lunches. The City Council, Planning Commission
and the Parks and Open Space Commission are being
invited. City staff will also attend. Please mark your
calendars.
On Monday, March 23, 1992, 7 PM, Channel 20, an eight
minute video will be shown on the remodeling and addition
of Mound City Hall. John McKinley, Police Department,
did the video taping of the project. He also wrote the
script for the video. The Public Access Studio has added
to the video by taking more shots and has edited the tape
to an eight minute showing. Please take a look and let
us know what you think.
Memorandum from Mark Koegler, City
Planner, re: LMCD Lake Access Task
Force meeting held March 11, 1992.
Mayor Skip Johnson has indicated he
wishes to be the City of Mound
representative to this committee.
PG. 870-873
755
27
March 11, 1992
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 11, 1992
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
regular session on Tuesday, March 11, 1992, in the Council Chambers
at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Liz Jensen,
Phyllis Jessen and Ken Smith. Councilmember Ahrens arrived late.
Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, City Engineer John Cameron,
Police Chief Len Harrell, Finance Director John Norman, Liquor
Store Manager Joel Krumm and Insurance Agent Earl Bailey.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith to approve the
Minutes of the February 25, 1992, Regular Meeting, as
submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.1
PRESENTATION OF 1992-1993 COMMERCIAL INSURANCE
PROGRAM - EARL BAILEY, R. L. YOUNGDAHL &
ASSOCIATES
Insurance Agent Earl Bailey summarized the 1992 Insurance Coverage
and premiums. They are as follows:
1991 1992
Property
Crime
Equipment
General Liability
Automobile
Liquor Liability
Emer. Med. Techs.
Public Officials E & O
Police Professional
Worker's Compensation
Bonds
Fireman's A & H
Loss of Income
11,049
293
3,296
49,772
25,285
5,148
INCL.
5,757
INCL.
60,770
1,238
250
9,764 (1)
272 (1)
3,081 (1)
48,011 (1)
23,556 (1)
6,575 (2)
INCL. (1)
5,628 (1)
INCL. (1)
57,845 (3)
1,238 (4)
250 (5)
331 (1)
TOTAL
162,858
156,551
28
March 11, 1992
Specialty Lines:
(1) League of MN. Cities Insurance Trust thru Berkley
Risk Services
(2) Transcontinental Insurance Co. (CNA) thru John
Crowther
(3) League of MN. Cities Insurance Trust thru E.B.A.
(4) Capitol Indemnity
(5) Health Special Risk
Johnson moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-25
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE POLICIES,
PREMIUMS AND COMPANIES AS SUBMITTED BY
EARL BAILEYt R. L. YOUNGDAHL & ASSOCIATES
FOR THE 1992 INSURANCE PROGRAM
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.2 1991 DEPARTMENT N~ADANNUAL REPORT~
The following Department Heads presented their annual reports to
the City Council: Liquor Store Manager Joel Krumm, Police Chief
Len Harrell, and Finance Director John Norman.
1.3 .GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAT.
The City Manager explained that the Governor's Budget proposal is
a $%-plus cut in Mound's revenue base. Based on the current
proposal Mound will lose $155,453 in LGA in 1992. The City Manager
stated that this could mean a cut in personnel if the proposal is
adopted. He also pointed out the inequities of the current
proposal. The Council asked to be kept informed on this subject.
The Manager stated he will be interested to see if out state cities
will be affected the way the metro cities with low revenue bases
are being affected. The Council will discuss this further before
the Committee of the Whole Meeting on March 17, 1992.
1.3 ~ESOLUTION TO GRANT AN EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION #91-72 FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4967 WILSHIRE BLVD. FOR THOMAS NICHOL~
The City Clerk explained that there was a typographical error in
resolution #91-72. The applicant's attorney did not bring the
error to the City's attention and did not file the resolution. Now
the resolution has expired and the applicant is now requesting an
extension.
Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-26 RESOLUTION TO GRANT AN EXTENSION
RESOLUTION #91-72
OF
757
The vote was unanimously in favor.
1.4
29
March 11, 1992
Motion carried.
CASE ~91-057: RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR DEI~NIS ZYLLAt
(REPRESENTING JAMES & JOSEPHINE SHARP) 4925 GLEN ELYN ROADt
LOT 22~ BLOCK 24t 81~DY~OOD POXNTt PID ~13-117-24 11
0097
The City Attorney presented the resolution
prepared.
of denial that he
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-27
RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPLICATION OF
JAMES SHARP AND JOSEPHINE SHARP FOR A
VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4925
GLEN ELYN ROAD
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.5 SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED RENTAL HOUSING ORDINANCE
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to set April 28,
1992, at 7:30 P.M. for a Public Hearing for the Proposed
Rental Housing Ordinance. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.6 BID AWARD: 1992 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The City Engineer 7 bids were received for the 1992 Lift Station
Improvement Project. The base bids were as follows:
Gridor Construction Inc.
Gilbert Mechanical Contractors, Inc.
LaTour Construction, Inc.
Penn Contracting, Inc.
Northwest Mechanical, Inc.
Rice Lake Contracting Corp.
Barbarossa & Sons, Inc.
$207,600.00
$212,859.00
$217,985.00
$220,386.00
$218,800.00
$241,800.00
$372,000.00
The Engineer's Estimate in March of 1992, was $219,200 and this
included 10% contingencies.
He is recommending the award go to Gridor Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $207,600. He further explained that if the Council
accepts Alternates B-E that amount would be reduced by $11,800,
resulting in a contract price of $195,800.
3O
March 11, 1992
Smith moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-28
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE 1992
LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO
GRIDOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$207,600
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR & CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
WARRANTY DEED TO SELL CITY PROPERTY
The City Clerk explained that this is for the closing on the
property (parking lot behind Donnie's Restaurant) being sold to
Turnquist Properties, Inc.
Jensen moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #92-29
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYORAND CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A WARRANTY DEED TO
SELL CITY PROPERTY
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.8 PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to authorize the
payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of
$262,536.49, when funds are available. A roll call vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
ADD ON ITEMS
1.9 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF CITY OWNED
PROPERTY
The City Clerk explained that this has to do with the property that
was approved to be sold to an adjoining property owner at the last
Council Meeting. The property is located on the corner of Tuxedo
Blvd. and Brighton Blvd. and the sale of part of our property will
take an encroachment off city property. The City Attorney pointed
out that the part that was sold should have been subdivided off so
there are not future title problems.
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION %92-30
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION
OF PART OF LOT 16, BLOCK 14, ARDEN
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
31
March 11, 1992
1.10 LICENSE RENEWALS
The City Clerk reported that the following licenses are up for
renewal as of April 1, 1992:
TREE REMOVAL
Aaspen Tree Service
Emery's Tree Service
Shorewood Tree Service
Robert F. Dahlke
Eklunds Tree Service
Lutz Tree Service
HAWKER/FOOD VENDOR
Blue Bell Ice Cream
COMMERCIAL DOCK
A1 & Alma's Supper Club - 24 Slips in Water
Chapman Place Assoc. - 27 Slips in Water
Boat Rental of Minnetonka - 24 Slips in Water
18 Boats Stored on Land
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Ahrens to authorize the
issuance of the above licenses contingent upon all required
forms, insurance, fees, etc. being turned in. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - SECTION 920:1'5 - REGARDING NOISE IN
RESIDENTIAL AREAS
The City Attorney explained that the Prosecuting Attorney has
recommended that an amendment be made to Section 920:15 of the City
Code relating to noise in residential areas because there is
nothing in the ordinances to cover noise other than a party.
Jensen moved and Jessen seconded the following:
ORDINANCE #55-1992
AN ORDINANCEAMENDING THE MOUND CITY CODE
BY AMENDING SECTION 920:15 REGULATING
NOISE IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for February, 1992.
32
Marsh 11, 1992
Be
LMCD Representative's Monthly Report for February, 1992.
LMCD Mailings.
De
Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 1992.
Final & Official Copy of the LMCD Long-TermManagement Plan as
adopted in December, 1991.
Fo
Thank you letter from David Feerhusen, Re/Max, re: meeting on
City's dock system.
Go
REMINDER: COW Meeting, March 17, 1992, will consist of a
meeting with the EDC on Mound Visions Project. Begins at 7:00
P.M. at City Hall.
The Council then discussed adjourning this meeting until 6:30 P.M.
on March 17, 1992, in order to discuss and take possible action on
the Governor's Budget Proposal.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to adjourn this
meeting until Tuesday, March 17, 1992, at 6=$0 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
MINUTES
ADJOURNED REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 17, 1992
The adjourned meeting from March 11, 1992 of the
reconvened in regular session on Tuesday, March 17,
council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Mound City Council was
1992, at 6:30 PM, in the
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Liz Jensen, Phyllis
Jessen, Ken Smith and Andrea Ahrens. Also present were City Manager Edward J.
Shukle, Jr., Finance Director John Norman and Lori Hamm from the "Laker"
newspaper and a representative from the "Wayzata Weekly News".
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
1.1
CONTINUED DISCUSSION: GOVERNOR CARLSON'S PROPOSED LOCAL AID
CUTS
City Manager, Ed Shukle, summarized the discussion held at the March 11, 1992
regular meeting concerning Governor Carlson's proposed cuts in Local Government
Aid. A discussion followed with regard to drafting a resolution and/or letter to
Governor Carlson, the Senate and House Committee Tax Chairs, Representative Steve
Smith and Senator Gen Olson, as well as area newspapers, with copies to the League
of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. Some of the
issues to be incorporated within the resolution include:
6.5% sales tax passed in 1991, which went into the Local Government
Trust Fund
2. Anticipated 1993 cuts
Impact of not cutting other aids from cities who do not receive Local
Government Aid
4. No LGA cuts for counties or townships
5. No aid cuts for schools
6. Levy limit issue
7. Mandates, i.e. presidential primary - no money from the state
8. Limited growth in valuation
9. Severe cuts in local service levels
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 11, 1992
The City Council directed the City Manager to prepare a resolution which the City
Council will review and formally adopt at its regular meeting on Tuesday, March 24,
1992.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith, to adjourn this meeting until
after the Committee of the Whole meeting this evening with the Economic
Development Commission, The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
ADJOURNED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 17, 1992
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on
Tuesday, March 17, 1992 in the council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said
City, reconvening at 9:03 PM.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Liz Jensen, Phyllis
Jessen, Ken Smith and Andrea Ahrens. Also present were City Manager Edward J.
Shukle, Jr. and Finance Director John Norman.
The Mayor opened the meeting. Councilmember Ken Smith addressed the Council
with regard to a meeting held with the chairman of the Firemen's Relief Association
Board; John Norman, Finance Director and Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith indicated that the
issue discussed dealt with the City's reduction in the contribution for the firemen's
pension. Also discussed was the pension benefit. Currently, the benefit is paid at
$395 per month to firemen who have vested (served 20 years or more and have
retired). After that meeting, it was suggested by the chairman of the Relief Board,
Dave Carlson, that a meeting be held with the City Council regarding the pension
2
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 11, 1992
program. The City Council discussed this and agreed that a meeting could be held
that would include the City Council, City Manager and Finance Director. The City
Council agreed to meet with the Firemen's Relief Pension Board 0t their Committee
of the Whole meeting which is scheduled for Tuesday, June 16, 1992, at 7 PM at city
hall.
MOTION by Johnson, seconded by Jensen to adjourn to an executive session
to discuss labor negotiations strategy. The vote was unanimously in favor.
At approximately 10:35 PM, the City Council reconvened in regular session and took
no action regarding the information discussed at the executive session.
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Smith to adjourn this meeting. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 PM.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
3
~INUTE8
COI, M~TTEE OF THE WHOLE
](,~¢H ~7, ~992 - 7 PH
The meeting was called to order at 7:15 PM. Members present:
Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Liz Jensen, Phyllis Jessen, Ken
Smith and Andrea Ahrens. Also present: the Economic Development
Commission: Paul Meisel, Sharon McMenamy-Cook and Jerry Longpre.
Others present were: Bruce Chamberlain, Economic Development
Coordinator; Mark Koegler, City Planner; John Norman, Finance
Director; Gene Hostetler, Design Team; Jo Longpre, interested
citizen; Lori Hamm, "Laker" newspaper; Jerry Clappsaddle, Design
Team and Ed Shukle, City Manager.
Ed Shukle, City Manager reviewed the Mound Visions Project from its
inception. Then he introduced Bruce Chamberlain of VanDoren,
Hazard and Stallings and the City's Economic Development
Coordinator on the Mound Visions project. Bruce reviewed the
project and explained the concept that has been developed by the
Design Team and subsequently endorsed by consensus by the Economic
Development Commission. Bruce went over an outline on the testing
of the concept for the Mound downtown redevelopment study process
and reviewed 12 items. The City Council specifically asked
questions with regard to items 1-4, which deal with planning,
research funding sources/formulating funding assumptions/mix; Lost
Lake feasibility and financial feasibility study (how will it
work?). The city Manager is to prepare a cost estimate on items 1-
4, to be discussed at the next regular council meeting. The
councilmembers each indicated that they were generally supportive
of the concept and that they would like to see the concept happen.
However, patience is needed because development takes time.
The next Committee of the Whole meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,
April 21, 1992, at 7 PM at city hall. The meeting was adjourned at
8:45 PM.
City Manager
ES:is
CITY of MOUND
534~ M~,~WOOD ROAD
MOUND M ',NESOTA 553E, 4
E'2 4~2 1~55
FAX 612, 472 0620
March 20, 1992
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER
RE:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) YEAR XVIII
It is again time to consider programs for the Community Development
Block Grant program administered by Hennepin County. This is the
eighteenth year for the program, hence, year XVIII.
CDBG funds may be used to support and implement a wide range of
housing and community development activities. CDBG funds are
federal monies distributed from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development to urban Hennepin County. We work with county staff on
determining eligibility of programs, technical assistance, etc.
For the past seven to eight years, the City of Mound has been
involved with the continuing program which involves the Westonka
Senior Center and its operation. This center is also funded by the
cities of Orono, Spring Park and Minnetrista. In addition to the
center, we have been involved with the Senior Citizen Counseling
program and Westonka Rides, which is primarily a senior utilized
bus program. In addition to the senior center and counseling
program, we have also spent money on economic development
activities, rehabilitation of private property and assistance to a
local domestic abuse program. Neighborhood park improvements have
also been performed with CDBG monies.
Attached you will see requests from the Westonka Community Action
Network (WECAN), Westonka Senior Citizens and Westonka Intervention
project. The request from the Westonka Senior Citizens represents
a 4% increase over the funds provided by the City in Year XVII.
WECAN has requested a reduced amount due to the fact that Year XVII
included a housing study which WECAN is currently in the process of
completing. Westonka Intervention has requested $5700, which is
printed on recycled paper
MEMO TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL - CDBG FUNDS YEAR XVIII
MARCH 20, 1992
PAGE 2
the same amount they were allocated in Year XVII. We have also
allocated $20,000 to the Mound Visions project for our economic
development coordinator's time on this project. The remaining
balance is for housing rehabilitation of private property.
PROPOSED USES OF YEAR XVIII PROGRAM MONIES:
SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER/OPERATION
$16,698
SENIOR CITIZEN COUNSELING (SUBURBAN COMMUNITY SERVICES) $4,867
REHABILITATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY
WESTONKA INTERVENTION
WECAN (WESTONKA COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK)
DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
TOTAL CDBG FUNDS YEAR XVIII AVAILABLE
$15,823
$5,700
$7,500
$20,000
$70,588
Attached is a resolution approving the program as recommended
above. I am sure that representatives of the three agencies listed
above will be present at the March 24th meeting to answer any
questions that you may have.
ES:is
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
u~
o
0
0
o
Z
z
o
o
o
0
o
0
z
z
o
0
0
~-~ ~ ~0 ~
oo
z
Z
HUBERT H. HUMPtlREY, !ii
A'~R NE ¥ GENERAl,
gTATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF Tile ATTORNEY GENERAL
February 25, 1992
Westonka Community Action Network
5600 Lynwood Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Annual Report
Dear Sir or Madam:
This office has received and reviewed the annual report for the
year ending May 31, 1991 which was recently filed for the above-
referenced charitable organization. All materials have been
properly filed as required. Consequently, your organization's
registration has been continued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
chapter 309, the Charitable Solicitations Act.
Since many grant making organizations and foundations require
evidence of registration with this office, we suggest that you
retain this letter in your files.
Attached is a computer summary of the financial information you
sent us. We are sending it to you so that you may check it for
accuracy. You may also wish to review the figures and percentages
with your board.
Your next annual report and financial statement will be due six
months after the close of your organization's fiscal year.
Very truly yours,
ANNE M. HENSELER
Legal Assistant
AMH: chh
Charities Division
Telephone: (612) 296-6172
Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper
3443-03036
WESTONV~ COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK
5600 LYNWOOD BLVD
MOUND, MN 55364
FYE 910531
INCOME
PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS
GOVERNMENT GRANTS
TOTAL REVENUE
EXPENSES
PROGRAM EXPENSES
EDUCATION $ 0
SERVICES $ 70,452
RESEARCH $ 0
OTHER $ 0
MANAGEMENT & GENERAL EXPENSES
FUNDRAISING EXPENSES
AMT. PAID TO AFFILIATES
EX£]EJS (DE~'ICIT)
PR¢)GHAM EXP. AS A % OF REVENUE
FUNDRAISING AS A % OF CONTRIBUTIONS ( ,N¢;I,UDING GOVERNMENT GRANTS)
MGMT. & FUNDRAISING AS A % OF REVENUE
PROGRAM EXP. AS A % OF TOTAL EXPENS~']S
02-13-1992
$ 48,711
$ 23,760
$ 88,843
$ 70,452
$ 4,174
$ 0
$ o
$ 14,217
79.30%
0.00%
4.70%
94.41%
OPERATING BUDGET:
INCOME:
WHHS & CASH tr~nsfer funds
McKnight grant, Year 2 (from last FY's
deferred revenue for expenses & programs
for this-fiscal year)
Local contributions ($§,000 of this is from
last FY's deferred revenue for expenses &
programs for this fiscal year)
Community Development Block Grants
Meals-On-Wheels service fees
Medtronics Foundation grant ($§,000 from
last FY's deferred revenue for expenses &
programs for this fiscal year)
Carolyn Foundation grant
Interest earned
WeCAN membership dues
Loan repayments
TOTAL INCOME:
EXPENSES:
Salaries
Health insurance
Employer's FICA
Unemployment Compensation
Workers C ompt~nsation
Staff expenses (mileage & parking)
Office rent
Office phone
Printing
Supplies
Accounting
Mailing
Equipment & repair
Training
Property liability insurance
Emergency assistance payments
Meals-On-Wheels expenses
Financial Counseling Program subcontract
Food & Nutrition Program subcontract
Housing planning project printing & mailing
Miscellaneous
TOTAL EXPENSES:
Beginning balance of undesignat<~d funds
Projected total income
Projected total expenses
current fiscal year (June, 1991 - May, 1992)
$28,000.O0
25,00o. co
19,300.00
17,500.00
16,992.00
10,500.00
5,000.()o
1. l 33.00
1,200.
175. o 0
$124,800.00
$32, "'5 O0
2,6!)5 398
2,000 00
3,825 00
2,137 00
3.925 00
3,185 00
3,00O 00
3,00O 00
2,000 00
50O 00
25O O0
40,000 00
17,000 O0
3,000 00
3,000 O0
1,000 00
80 O0
$126,830 O0
$ 3,517.5]
124,800.00
_ 12~;,830.00
~roje~cted ending balance of undesignated funds
............................ ~ ............ ~_~87.51
......................... 22LL-/Z__iZi___
Board designated operating reserve
10,000.00
Board designated capital repair & replacement reserw~ 000 O0
Pr__~ected Undes_~ated Funds 3,
............... 1~487.51
......................... ~2~'~'~ ......
NOTE: Projected amounts of funds in bank at fiscal year's end:
$14,487.51
FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR WeCAN'S LAST FISCAl, YEAR:
WeCAN FINANCIAL SUMNAR¥ - JUNE I,__]~9_~..:-MA___Y__~J.j ~991
WeCAN INCOME:
Source: Percent:
Foundation Orsnts 34%
County & Local Governments 27~
l,ocal I)onat~ons &
Membership Dues 21%
Fees for Service 17%
lnterest Earned &
Miscellaneous
TOTAL INCOME:
Amount:
$30,000.00
23,759.58
WeCAN EXPENDITURES:
I tern:
Direct Payme~ts to
Families in N,:ed
Families
Administration
18,809.33
15,085.25
TOTAL EXPENDITURES:
Surplus
100% $88,842.77
WeCAN BALANCE SUMMARY: JUNE 1, 1990 - MAY 3l, 1991
Beginning Fund Balance:
Total Income:
Total Expenditures:
Ending Fund Balance:
$37,300.78
$88,842.77
$74,626.04
~[16,517.51
Board Designated Operating Reserve for Next
Board'Designated Capital Repair & Rep]acement:
Undesigha'ted Funds:
Fi.~c:t I % ,,ar'
000.00
000. O0
NOTE: $35,000 of liability for deferred revenues for ,,cxt
year's expenses and programs include a $25,000 second year McKnigh
Foundation grant, $5,000 Medtronics Foundation grant
&Nutrition Program, and $§,000 of local contribution fun,is f()r th,
Emergency Assistance Program.
Amount of funds in bank at fiscal year's end = $51,517.51
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -
RESOLUTIONAPPROVING THE PROPOSED PROGI~M
FOR YF.,~R ~III URB~ HEI~EPIN COUNTY
COI~UNITY DEVELOPHENT BLOCK ~I~.NT (CDB~)
FUNDS ~ND AUTHORIZIN~ ITS SUBMITTAL
WHEREAS, the City of Mound, through execution of a joint
cooperation agreement with Hennepin County is a cooperating unit in
the Urban Development Block Grant Program; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has developed a proposal for
the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG Funds made available to it;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice being given, a public hearing
was held in accordance with title I of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974, as amended, on March 24, 1992, at 7:30 PM,
in the Mound City council chambers; and,
WHEREAS, the following proposed use of Community
Development Block Grant funds was developed and presented at the
public hearing consistent with program rules:
Senior citizens Center/Operation
Senior citizen Counseling (Suburban Comm. Services)
Rehabilitation of Private Property
Westonka Intervention
WECAN (Westonka Community Action Network
Downtown Economic Development
Total CDBG Funds Year XVIII Available
$16,698
4,867
15,823
5,700
7,500
20,000
$70,588
that the City Council,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
City of Mound, Minnesota, approves the use of the Year XVIII Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant funds as listed
above and authorizes submittal of the above proposal to Hennepin
County for review and inclusion in the Year XVIII Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant Program Statement of
Objectives and Projected Use of Funds.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Mayor
Attest:
city Clerk
NOTICE ia h~ oivefl ~ 1he City 04'
~.~.
~u~
houleholds; (3) NEIGHBORHOOD
plrlo~l; I.d (7) REUOVAL OF
~1 U~ ~ ~ ~ ~
TOTAL ' 70,~
~e City d Mound, $341 I~ -_y~_ _~,
Mound, MN. 55364. 472-115s
Wn County C)~,c~ of P~anning
~t 348-6418.
Fr~ C. ~,
Affidavit of Publication
State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin.
Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he i~.
an authorized agent and employee of the publisher
of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Min-
nesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are
stated below:
A.) The newspaper has complied wilh all the require-
ments constituting qualifications as a qualified
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute
331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended.
B.) The printed
.... //
which is attached Was cut from the columns of said
newspaper, and was printed and published once each
week fo. / _successive weeks:
It was first published Mo~.
the .. ~ day of ///~/~//~/ ,9q'.__~'
and was thereafter prinlec~ and published every
Monday, to and including Monday.
the ~ day of
19__;
I
Subscribed and sworn t~m/e on this
~"~'_ day of /.//(/~/,)/,/~ , 19~,.~' .
By: ,c/~/ Notary Public
Rate Information
(I) Lowe~ ~ rate pai~ by ~ommerdal use~ ~ oompar.
(2) Maximum rale alowed by law tot above m.~,~__: $10.7S.
(3) ~ mGlua~/dwged kw W3ve ma.er: $5.e4 pM Inch.
SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES
1600 South 2nd Street, Hopkins, Minnesota 5,5343
933-9311
Fax 933-2101
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Wslter Leve~iue
President
Tom Ticen
1st Vice President
Bob Miller
2nd Vice President
Linde Stokes
Secreta~/
Carla Pavone
Treasurer
John Bleeer
Pest President
Derelyn Peifer
:ber-et-Large
an Schroeder
Member-et-Large
Toni Anderson
Kart Daneky
Robert DeGhetto
Alison Fuhr
Merty Ourltz
Commissioner Tad Jude
Leonard Kopp
Connie McCullough
John Nelson
Senator Gan Olson
Steve Rood
Russell Weinsteln
Bob Zageros
Benjemim F. Withhert
Executive Director & C.E.O.
QUA United Way
pported Agency
February 11, 1992
Mayor Ferner (Skip) Johnson and Council
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mayor Johnson and Council Members:
Senior Community Services is requesting $21,565
for the 1992-93 fiscal year from the City of
Mound's share of Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Year XVIII (July 1, 1992 - June 30, 1993)
funds to support the Westonka senior programs and
services. This amount reflects a 4% cost-of-living
increase over the funds provided by the City for
the current fiscal year ($20,736).
Senior programs and services include the
operation of the Westonka Senior Center,
coordination and operation of the Westonka Rides
transportation program, and outreach and case
management to frail elderly individuals in the
community needing assistance. Senior Community
Services strives, in all its programs, to help
people maintain their independence in their
respective communities for as long as possible.
If there are any questions, or you would like to
have our staff discuss any of our services, please
let me know. On behalf of the many elderly who
benefit, thank you for your support of the
programs. We look forward to continuing
cooperation between the City of Mound and Senior
Community Services.
Sincerely, .~.._~--~ -.,, ( .~
~/j~.in F. NJ.thhart
~xecutive Director
cc: Ed Shukle Jr., City Manager
YEAR END REPORT FOR WESTONKA INTERVENTION
FOR PERIOD MARCH 1991 - FEBRUARY 1992
VICTIM STATISTICS:
MARRIED WITH CHILDREN 19
MARRIED WITHOUT CHILDREN 4
SINGLE WITH CHILDREN 9
SINULE WITHOUT CHILDREN 8
PARENT/SIBLING 7
OTHER: HOUSING, FOOD, LEGAL AID 6
TOTAL 53
ANONYMOUS 3
REPEAT CALLS 14
TOTAL 17
GRAND TOTAL 70
Although 70 victims have been helped through Westonka
Intervention, it must be remembered when reviewing these
statistics that ongoing support is a very necessary part of the
program and advocates may work with victims for several months.
With this support, our clients are able to change their situation
and 8tart to live healthier lives.
Westonka Intervention serves the communities of Mound,
MinnetrisLa, St. Bonifacius, Orono, Long Lake and Spring Park -
approximately twenty thousand people. This community based non-
profit organization has been in existence since November of 1985.
It has a board of eleven members and seventeen volunteers. The
ele',-n board members are as follows:
Craig Anderson/Rob Meuwissen
%St. Boni - Minnetrista Police Dept.
Minnetrist~, MN 55364
Rhonda Eurich
St. Bonifacius, MN
553'75
Patti Guttorumson
Spring Park, MN 55384
472-2141 · P.O. BOX 34 · MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364
Len Harrell/Brad Roy
~Hound Police Department
Mound, MN 55364
Dan Hessburg
Minnetrista, MN 55364
Jay Petersen
Mound, MN 55364
Rosemarie Snyder
Mound, MN 55364
Connie Stahlbusch
Mound, MN 55364
Rev. Michael Tegeder
Mound, MN 55364
Barb Thomford
Mound, MN 55364
Joan Underwood
Spring Park, MN 55384
This request for CDBG Block Grant of $5,700.00 is made so that
Westonka Intervention can continue serving the Westonka area.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Violence is a fact of life in Minnesota and violent crimes are on
the increase. The State Department of Corrections estimates that
65,000 domeqtic assaults occur in Minnesota annually. No
community is exempt from violent crimes, but
prevention/intervention programs that exist within a community
according to the League of Women Voter's Study on Domest.ic
Violence, April 1990, "appears to be ideal venues for responding
to individuals who have been violent or at risk for violent
behavior." Due to the demographics of the area, surrounded by
lakes, the area is not easily accessible. This makes it
difficult for county funded programs to service the area. Child
protection workers, and the two closest shelters were not
adequately servicing the area because of the long distance to
travel. In fact, the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board
found that the area is in dire need of social services including
the area of domestic violence. Westonka Intervention, a local
community based program, was created as a response to this need.
PROGRAM OBJECTIVE
The objectives of the program are to increase the communities'
awareness of the problems of domestic violence, to provide
victims with access to support, and decrease numbers of repeated
domestic violence.
People are often not aware that domestic violence is an ongoing
cycle that will keep reoccurring until there is an intervention.
Once they understand that there is a way to arrest the problem or
reduce the incidences, they will ask for help either for
themselves or others.
Batterers need specific treatment for their abusive behavior.
"Abusive behavior is like alcoholism," according to Chuck Switzer
(a former batterer) who's wife M'Liss is the author of CALLED TO
ACCOUNT. He says, "It gets progressively worse. The beatings get
mere intense and they occur more often."
Victims of domestic violence develop a very low self-esteem and
begin to think there is now way out of the abusive situation.
With support and encouragement, they are able to begin better
lives for themselves.
The most dangerous calls for police are domestics. Domestics can
lead to murder and suicides. "If an abuser doesn't get
treatment, sooner or later he/she ends up permanently maiming a
person, killing someone, or killing him/herself," says Chuck
Switzer. Reduced calls to a residence lessens the danger for
police. Advocates aid our police by taking over where the police
are unable. It is difficult for a police officer to drive a
victim to a shelter or hospital, and to tell the victims of
his/her legal options, when they are on call and are short of
time.
METHODS
When the police departments make an arrest in a domestic assault
call, the police dispatch calls the primary volunteer crisis
advocate on a beeper. The primary advocate contacts his or her
partner and they then go to the home of the victim to offer
support, safety, and legal options. The advocate is trained to
provide key information and assist the victim through the process
of prosecution. The advocate gives continued support whether an
Order of Protection is obtained or not. Whenever possible, the
assailant is also informed of the consequences he or she now
faces and the treatment programs available to help them to change
their behavior.
Instructions when receiving a call from the police departments
are specific:
(Weekdays between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
On weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. through Monday morning at
8:00 a.m.)
1. Officer makes an arrest based on probable cause.
2. Officer calls beeper number.
Advocate calls officer after beeper goes off.
4. Police identifies himself/herself and briefly describes the
situation giving the name, address, and telephone number of the
victim.
If no arrest has been made, or if there is a substance abuse,
advocates will arrange for a more appropriate meeting time and
place. The crisis telephone is available between the weekday
hours of 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
The police chiefs have ~ommitted their departments to this
intervention process. The police response includes: Clear
departmental guidelines on arresting when probable cause exists;
contacting Westonka Intervention when an arrest is made;
referring victims to the project even if an arrest has not been
made.
Westonka Intervention arranges child care and transportation
whenever necessary in order to maximize the accessibility of
court services for victims. The project will escort victims and
offenders to support groups. Arrangements and transportation to
shelter, hospitals and housing is also provided.
Volunteers contribute their time to Westonka Intervention in
other ways besides being crisis advocates. A volunteer manages
the crisis hotline daily from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Trained
volunteers speak to local groups and organizations. A volunteer
coordinates the monthly advocate schedule making sure the
schedule flows smoothly and victim record sheets are being sent
in. This volunteer keeps close contact with each advocate
offering help. where needed.
CONCLUSION
Since 1984, Westonka Intervention has assisted 549 victims of
domestic violence. This has been possible due to many volunteers
and the continued support of the cities Westonka Intervention
serves. This commitment not to accept violence as a fact of life
in our communities, but to help men, women and children to lead
more productive lives has allowed Westonka Intervention to
continue to serve our community members for the past 6 years.
Westonka Commumty
Action Network
· Emergency Assistance .Meals mW,heels .Referrals
~ Lyn~x:~ Blvd.
Mound. MN 55364
~612) 472-0742
SERVICE AREA
Greenfield
Independence
Loretto
Maple Plain
Minnelonka Beach
Minnetrista
Mound
Rockford
Spring Park
St. Bonifacius
Tonka Bay
Western Orono
Harch 4, 1992
Mayor and Councilmembers of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers of Mound,
Westonka Community Action Network (WeCAN) requests $7,500 from
Community Development Block Grant Year XVIII funds from the
City of Mound to help cover WeCAN's operating costs.
We take this opportunity to let you know what we have
accomplished over the past year with your help and to give you
a little more information about our group. WeCAN is a
community-based, nonprofit organization, dedicated to helping
low-income people achieve greater self-sufficiency.
WeCAN provides a wide variety of services to low-income
residents in southwestern Hennepin County. We provide
emergency financial assistance, budget counseling, nutrition
education, meals-on-wheels, community planning for affordable
housing, and operate a time-share human service center, where
we arrange for other essential services, such as, public
assistance intake services, family and individual counseling,
and energy assistance application services.
We enclose additional information about WeCAN in the attached
packet.
Thank you for your help in the past. One of our Boardmembers
or I will be at your March 24th CDBG public hearing to make a
short presentation about our request. Please call me at 472-
0742 if you would like any additional information or if you
would like to meet to discuss this material in greater detail
prior to your hearing.
Sincerely,
Kiki Sonnen
WeCAN Director
GREEISFZELD
YeCAN SERVICE AREA
Greenfield 1,450
Loretto 404
Independence 2,822
Haple Plain 2,005
Hound 9,634
Hlnnetrista 3,439
Htka. Beach 573
- 1990 Populations
Rockford 2,665
Spring Park 1,571
St. Boni 1,180
Tonka Bay 1,472
Orono 7,285
TOTAL: 34,500
I~DEPEi
ORONO
~EDIMA
I
I
I
I
I
SIN~ETRISTA
I
L~ ~J
~eCAN SERVICES & PROGRAH8 D~SCRIPTIONS:
Over the past 17 months, WeCAN has built an impressive array of
services. These services and programs include:
Delivery of emergency assistance services to Families in need
or crisis.
Expansion and improvement of our existing Meals-on-I{heels
program to older adults and the homebound.
Providing financial and budget counseling for
res/dents under contract with the Mi nm.sc, t.a
f'ounael lng $orvie. e.
[ow- i n,'ome
[:inane. ~ a I
Providing food and nutrition educationa] s,'r~ir,.,s, which mat~.l~
~in~l,'-paren~s w.ith seniors, undo1. ~'nnt rar, I.
Univer.~ity of Minnesota's Extension Serv~¢-c.
Community planning for affordable housing.
Providing public assistance intake application s~,rv
arrangement ~ith Hennepin County Economic Assistance.
Providing energy and fuel assistance in arrangement ~ith ~{cst
Hennepin Human Services Planning Board.
Providing family and individual counseling in arrangrment
Pyramid Mental Health Center and Relate Counseling Conter.
Co-sponsorship of the Westonka Food Shelf and Pennvwise
Clothing Shelf. '
Co-sponsorship of New Beginnings, which provides social
outings for young adults ~ith developmental ,tiaabiliLies.
WeCAN SERVICES & PROGR~MS DELIVERED TO OUR COMMUNITY:
WeCAN's programs and services have benefitted 826 low-income
households in 1991 and our projections show that services will
benefit 1041 households this year in 1992. The comparison of 1991
statistics to projections for 1992 shows a 26% increase in the
number of households served.
The following is our summary of service statistics, which provide
more details on the numbers of households served and projected to
be served in the future by WeCAN's programs.
1991 SERVICES:
Emergency assistance: $27,159 in vouchers issued to 218 households
(27! children, 19 seniors in these households).
Meals-On-Wheels: 6,681 meals delivered to 68 households.
Energy Assistance: $90,756 in fuel & utility payments made for 282
households.
Public Assistance application services provided to 148 households.
Mental Health Counseling: ~16 hours of family and individual
mental health counseling provided to an estimated 70 households.
Food & Nutrition Education: 84 .hours of classes provided to 32
households, including 18 single parents and 14 seniors. (Service
began July, 1991.)
Financial & Budget Counseling services provided to 8 households.
{Service began Nov., 1991.1
TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: 826
PROJECTIONS FOR 1992 SERVICES:
Emer~ncy assistance: $35,000 in vouchers to 250 households.
Meals-On-Wheels: 7,300 meals to be delivered to 75 households.
Energy Assistance: $100,000 in fuel & utility payments for 300
households.
Public Assistance application services to be provided to 184
households.
Mental Health Counseling: 500 hours of family and individual
counseling, to an estimated 90 households.
Food & Nutrition education to be provided to 70 households, 35 of
which will be single parent households and 35 senior households.
Financial & budget counseling to be provided to 72 households.
TOTAL PROJECTED HOUSEHOLDS TO BE SERVED: 1041
Westonka Community Action Network
Newsletter Neighbors Helping Neighbors Winter, 1991-92
Here's what WeCAN has
accomplished...
As you know, the recession this
year has made 1991 a very difficult
year for many families in our commu-
nity. The good news is that, thanks to
you, WeCAN has been able to help
many of these families make it through
the hard times.
,/' Our latest figures (for our fiscal
year ending May 31, 1991) show that
WeCAN provided emergency assis-
tance to 182 community households,
directly helping 427 individuals,
OhCluding 254 children and 20 seniors.
is assistance was for help with rent,
utilities, food and transportation for
families in need or in crisis.
t~' Our Meals-On-Wheels volunteers
delivered 4,894 hot, nutritious meals to
55 households throughout the commu-
nity.
,~' The West Hennepin Energy
Assistance Office (a part of our time-
share office) provided primary heat
and crisis assistance to 275 households
in our community for a total amount of
$90,756.
~ The Westonka Foodshelf (which
we co-sponsor) served over 1,000
households with emergency food.
~ The Penn)wise Clothing Shop
(which we also co-sponsor) served
hundreds of area residents with Iow-
cost (or free) clothes, household
supplies and toys.
This year we also began offering
several new services designed to help
individuals and families in need get
' lives back on track, and get out
)m under crisis and poverty condi-
with your help!
individual and family counseling
services to Westonka residents in our
office.
~ This fall, we began to offer food
and nutrition classes and financial
counseling to area residents out of our
offices.
For many, 1991 will be remem-
bered as a hard year. But thanks to
the support of many of you, it wasn't as
hard as it might have been. Everything
isn't rosy. We are still in the middle of
a recession. There are still tired,
hungry, frightened children living in
our midst. There are still families in
pain.
But it isn't all bad news. We have
made a difference...and it is important
to remember that. We have had our
successes...and we will have more in
the years to come. Thank you for your
help. We couldn't have done it without
you.
~ Starting last January, Pyramid
Mental Health Center and Relate
Counseling Center began offering
WeCAN's OCTOBER 24TH ANNUAL
MEETING FEATURED A HUMAN
SERVICES FAIR, with over 20 social
service agencies and programs displaying
information about their services. Here
Phyllis Je~sen, Margaret Holste and Kiki
Sonnen are pictured greeting the §0
people who attended WeCAN's Annual
Membership Meeting. Participants at
the meeting heard about WeCAN's
accomplishments over the past year,
learned about the range of services
available to area residents, and elected
WeC~.N's Board of Directors.
This holiday season...support our
community's families in need and crisis
Neighbors
helping neigh-
bors. That's how
we like to think
of WeCAN.
Chances are you
know someone
in our commu-
nity who needs a
helping hand.
Perhaps even
you could use a
little help, a little
encouragement,
a little under-
standing every now and then.
It is amazing how a little help at a
critical time can make aH the differ-
ence in the world to a person in need.
Won't you help us be there for our
neighbors, and yours? Please share
what you can. All donations are tax
deductible. And every dollar helps
build a happier, healthier community
for you and your family.
Please send your check to:
WeCAN
5600 Lynwood Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
A personal story
How WeCAN helps older adults
Hot meals and friendly smiles are snowdrifts after theHalloween storm
home-delivered to local older adults
through WeCAN's Meals-On-Wheels
program. The hot meals nourish the
body. The friendly smiles nourish the
mind and soul.
For the past 17 years, WeCAN's
Meals program has delivered noon
dinners to seniors and homebound
people with disabilities in the
Westonka and Maple Plain area.
Recently the family of Ethel and
Joseph (not their real names) called us
to begin delivering meals to this
homebound couple in western Inde-
pendence. Ethel and Joseph want to
continue living in the comfort of their
rural farm home as long as they can.
But Joseph has Alzheimer's disease,
and Ethel has just had a mild stroke.
WeCAN's Meals-On-Wheels
program now provides hot noon
dinners Monday through Friday to this
couple. Our dedicated volunteer
drivers even made it through the icy
to bring them their meals. Senior
Services is also working with the family
to arrange home health care and social
services so the couple has help arrang-
ing for their other needs.
Ethel and Joseph represent an
emerging need in our community.
Older adults and the homebound in
the Corcoran-Loretto-Greenfield area,
and parts of Independence are not
currently served by a Meals-On-
Wheels program. WeCAN is now
working to expand our Meals-On-
Wheels to this area.
But we need your help.
WeCAN needs your donation to
make this expansion happen. We-
CAN needs new volunteers who are
willing to deliver dinners to the seniors
living in the expansion area. With
your help, we can make sure ali
seniors, no matter where they live,
have access to hol meals and friendly
smiles.
WeCAN volunteer profile
Barb Thomford's volunteerism
sparks community services
Barb Thomford may be retired
from 10 years as head secretary for
Westonka Community Services, but
she still serves our community with
thousands of hours of volunteerism
each year. Barb was one of the
founders of Westonka Community
Action Network, and put in long hours
of community planning and fund-
raising to get WeCAN off the ground.
Volunteer Barb Thomford
Barb remains active with WeCAN by
serving as on6 of the board of directors
and volunteering her time on
WeCAN's emergency assistance
program.
In addition to interviewing people
applying for emergency assistance,
Barb prepares WeCAN reports and
receipts for the county on our emer-
gency services.
Barb also volunteers her time for
Westonka Intervention, which helps
battered women go through the court
process of getting orders for protec-
tion. Recently she was elected as their
new President. She is working on
grass-roots fund-raising efforts, such as
bridge tournaments, to build a
women's shelter in the Westonka area.
Barb's volunteer service also
includes working for the Friends of
Westonka Library, and preparing
braille books through a committee
from Mt. Olive Church.
WeCAN elects
new Board
of Directors
Participants at WeCAN's Oct. 24th
Annual Membership Meeting elected
21 Board Members. Elected to the
three-year terms were Margaret
Holste OVestonka School District
social worker), Lea Harrell (Mound
police chief), Rosemarie Fabrega-
Snyder (businesswoman), Steve
Harpestad (community leader), Bob
lverson (Good Shepherd pastor),
Jerry Pietrowski (Mound Marquette
Bnnk vice president), and Michael
Tegeder (Our Lady of the Lake
pastor).
Elected to two year terms were
Dale Woodbeck (businessman), Craig
Anderson (Minnetrista and St. Boni
police chief), Tom Gamble (business-
man), Val Hessburg (Westonka
Intervention coordinator), Irene
Jezorski (Meals-On-Wheels coordina-
tor), Marilyn Reger (Mt. Olive's Social
Action Committee), and Barb
Thomford (community leader).
Phyllis Jessen (Mound City
Council member), Mary DeVinney
(Food Shelf coordinator), Jeanne
Gelinas OVestonka librarian), Mary
Hurley (Adult Basic Education
program manager), Val Magnus
(Pennywise Clothing coordinator),
Richard $chieffer (Johnson & Wood
attorney) and Bob Tomalka (retired
businessman) were elected to one-year
terms.
Volunteers make
it all possible!
Without volunteers WeC,4N
couldn't operate. We have
volunteers who answer
phones, interview clients,
raise fund. v, deliver Meals-
On- Wheels and much more.
If you are interested in
becoming a volunteer, call
WeCAN at 472-0742.
WeCAN begins hew
Financial & Budget
Counseling Program
WeCAN has begun offering
people with low incomes financial and
budget counseling. This service
provides individualized, confidential
help in managing bills, getting more
out of your available income, and
learning how to prioritize your spend-
lng.
The counseling is provided by
professionals from the Minnesota
Financial Counseling Service. This
new WeCAN program is made pos-
sible by a grant from the Carolyn
Foundation and local donations.
Financial and budget counseling
can help people gain a better under-
standing of how to regain control of
their financial situation. Budget
counselors work with each person to
identify ways to better use their
income, control their expenses and get
out of debt.
WeCAN offers new
~lasses--"Holiday
Cooking on a Budget"
WeCAN has a new and exciting
food and nutrition course underway:
"Holiday Cooking on a Budget."
Single parents, matched with
seniors, learn how to stretch the
family's food dollar during the holiday
season. Subjects include foods in
season, preparing a traditional turkey
dinner, nutritious use of leftovers,
baking holiday girls, entertaining on a
Personal profile
WeCAN officer is business owner
and active community member
Dale
Woodbeck
volunteers
his time as
secretary
for
WeCAN's
21-
member
~: Board of
Directors.
He has
WeCAN Secretary served as
WeCAN's
Dale Woodbeck Vice
President for several years and also
volunteers as West Hennepin
Human Service Planning Board's
chairperson.
In 1989 Eric Gustavson, St.
John's Lutheran Church, and Lois
Gunderson, West Hennepin,
encouraged Dale to become
involved with WeCAN. in the past
two years, Dale has helped move
WeCAN from our start-up to our
current growth phase.
As an officer for WeCAN, Dale
oversees the operations of the
organization, plans for the future
and sets policies. He also volun-
teers his help in fund-raising for
WeCAN so that we can continue to
respond to the community's needs.
Dale lives in Orono with his
wife, Ann, and their sons, 10-year-
old Josh and 4-year-old Sam. Dale
· owns a plastic injection molding
company, Formative Engineering,
in Lester Prairie. He enjoys
coaching youth soccer and playing
racquetball and basketball.
budget, festive ethnic foods and
making your New Year's resolutions
on healthier eating and wiser budget-
ing work all year.
The class instructors are nutrition
professionals from the University of
Minnesota Extension Service's Ex-
panded Food and Nutrition Program.
WeCAN's Food & Nutrition project is
made possible by a grant from the
Medtronics Foundation and local
donations.
WeCAN Board
Members and ,food
and nutrition clazs
t~,nicipants
prepare to serve a
turkey dinner for
43 community
residents, local
public officials
and private
foundation
representatives.
Services provided
by WeCAN
Emergency assistance in
times of crisis.
Community planning for
affordable housing.
Co-sponsorship of the
Westonka Food Shelf.
Operation of the Westonka
Meals-On. Wheels program
for seniors and the
homebound.
Operation of time-share
Human Service Center .for:
~) County's public assistance
intake
~ Pyramid Mental Health
Center
(~ Relate Counseling Center
Food & nutrition classes
Budget&financial
counseling 7~)~
BOARD OF INRECTORe:
Pm~d~t M~rg~rM HolM~
School $oc~1 Worker
V/ce Pm~dent Tom Q..mble
Loc~d Bu=ln,~n
Trea,urm. Len Herrell
Mound Police Chief
S~cr~ Dale Wo~Jbeek
Local Buslnessn~n
~ & St Bom Police Chief
We~onka Food=helf Coordinator
Ro~m~ F~b~-~nyd~r
Commun~y V~
~ C~ C~m~r
C~ Vo~n~
vd ~
W~ ~M~ Pro~ C~rdln~r
M~ H~
W~ ~u~ ~ Edwin ~ager
~, ~ S~d Chur~
V~I ~
~n~ Cbm~ ~d~
~ ~ ~ ~ Com~
R~ ~
~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ke Chur~
C~n~ V~n~
~n~ Vo~n~
Newslel~- I~OdUCliOn: M,ry Br-¢ho
Even/Monday
Even/Tuesday
Even/Tuesday
Even/Tuesday
Even/Tuesday
Thumday, Dec. 12
Tuesday, Dec. 17
Thumday, Jan. 9
1-4 p.m.
9:30 a.m. &
1 p.m.
8 a.m.-4:30 p.m.
1-5 p.m.
1-3 p.m.
3:30 p.m.
6:30 p.m.
3:30 p.m.
Financial & Budget Counseling
Food & Nutrition Classes-
'Holiday Cooking on a Budget'
Public assistance intake
applications
Family & Individual counseling
Energy & Fuel Assistance
WeCAN Board Meeting
WeCAN & United Way meeting on
'Responding to Community Needs'
WeCAN Board Meeting
Note: WeCAN o~m will be cfo$~d for the holiday~:
Dec. 24-25; Dec. 31-Jan. 1 ~nd Jan. 20 (Maudn Luther King D~y).
What WeCAN is all about...
WeCAN is a community-based
human service organization
dedicated to enabling people with
Iow incomes achieve greater self-
sufficiency. WeCAN provides
emergency assistance to families in
crisis, meals-on-wheels to seniors
and the homebound, community
planning for affordable housing,
food and nutrition classes, and
budget and financial counseling.
WeCAN also operates a time-share
human service center providing
energy assistance, public assistance
intake services, and family and
individual counseling.
Serving the communities of:
Roc~otm
LoRg'~ro
~NO
~~STA
SP~G P~
To~ B~Y
Mo~
ST. BO~A~s
Westonka Community Action Network
5600 Lynwood Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
Non-Profit Orgll
US POSTAGE
PAID
Permit No. 131
Mound, MN
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #92-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FOR
LOT 6, BLOCK 11, BETON, PID #19-117-23 21 0028
4608 KILDARE ROAD
P&Z CABE NUNBER 91-055
WHEREAS, The applicant has applied for the following
variances: 726 square foot lot area, 10 foot front yard setback,
9 foot rear yard setback, and 15 foot frontage on an improved
public street, and;
WHEREAS, The applicant is proposing to construct a single
family dwelling with an attached garage, and;
WHEREAS, The subject property is located within the R-2 Single
Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code
requires a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 foot front yard
setback, 6 foot side yard setbacks for "Lots of record," and a 15
foot rear yard setback, and;
WHEREAS, The proposed dwelling will meet the required 50 foot
setback from the Ordinary High Water Elevation, and;
WHEREAS, There is an unimproved platted right-of-way, Black
Lake Lane, between the subject property and the shoreline to Lake
Minnetonka, and Kildare Road is not improved in its entirety
extending to the lake, therefore the subject property is surrounded
by undevelopable open space, and;
WHEREA~the_ .t.ime .t_h.e a ' 'the subject
property it was assu~property had 6,000 square feet in
lot area, _and- ~-~
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
unanimously recommended approval with conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby approve a 726 square foot lot area
variance, a 10 foot front yard setback variance to the
required 20 foot setback, a 9 foot rear yard setback variance
to the required 15 foot setback, and a 15 foot street frontage
variance to the required 40 feet of frontage on an improved
street, to allow construction of a single family dwelling at
4608 Kildare Road, upon the following conditions:
ae
That portion of Kildare Road used as a driveway to serve
Lot 6 should be improved to a minimum 5 ton design by
installing a 6" gravel base and 3" bituminous mat. Curb
and gutter would not be required and the width could be
held to 15 feet.
Proposed Resolution
Page 2
Case No. 91-055
be
The deficient street assessment in the amount of one unit
charge at $1,170.90 must be paid at time of Building
Permit issuance. The charge of $318 for 40 L.F. is to be
waived.
Ce
The sanitary sewer service from Lot 5 be relocated across
Lot 6 with a new connection to the main in Kildare Road.
This would allow the proposed home to use the existing
service originally intended for Lot 6.
de
Private easements running to Lot 5 be granted to cover
both sewer and water services crossing Lot 6. These
easements should be made of record and copies furnished
to the City of Mound.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) of the Zoning Code
with the clear and express understanding that the use remains
as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the
provisions and restrictions of Section 23.404.
It is determined that the livability of the residential
property will be improved by the authorization of the
following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to
afford the owners reasonable use of their land:
Construction of a single family dwelling with an
attached garage per the attached Exhibit 'A'.
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property:
Lot 6, Block Il, Seton, PID #~9-~7-23 2~ 0028.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for
such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has
been filed with the City Clerk.
k~rRIBIT ~A~
MINUTES OF ~ MEETIN~ OF THE
~OUND ADVISORy PLANNIN~ COI~ISSION
NARCH 9,
CASE NO. 91-055: WILLIAM VOSS, 4608 KILDARE LANE, LOT 6, BLOCK 11,
~ETON, PID ~19-~17-23 21 0028. VARIANCE._
City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the applicant's request for a
variance to allow construction of a new dwelling on an undersized
lot with inadequate street frontage. In addition, setback
variances to the front and rear are being requested. .The requested
variances include the following:
~ Variance
Lot Area 6,000 sf 726 sf
Front Setback 20' 10'
Rear Setback 15' 9'
Frontage 40' 15'
Koegler recommended approval of the variances due to the size and
shape of the lot, both of which are criteria listed in Section
23.506.1 of the Mound Zoning Code, upon the following conditions:
1. All setbacks shall be established on a site plan drawn by a
registered land surveyor. Said site plan drawing shall
accompany the building permit application.
2. A 50 foot setback shall be observed from the ordinary high
water line of Lake Minnetonka. This setback shall be shown on
the site plan reference in item #1 above.
Mark Koegler also reviewed a recommendation from the City Engineer.
The situation relating to the sewer and water services for lots 5
and 6 was explained. The sewer service for Lot 5 crosses Lot 6 in
the area of the proposed house. The water service for Lot 5
crosses Lot 6, but will probably not interfere with the proposed
house construction, this will need to be determined by exposing the
line. The deficient street assessment was explained. The City
Engineer recommended approval of the variance upon the following
conditions:
That portion of Kildare Road used as a driveway to serve Lot
6 should be improved to a minimum 5 ton design by installing
a 6" gravel base and 3" bituminous mat. Curb and gutter would
not be required and the width could be held to 15 feet.
The deficient street assessment in the amount of $1,488.90 be
paid (one unit charge at $1,170.90 and 40 L.F. at $318.00).
The sanitary sewer service from LOt 5 be relocated across Lot
6 with a new connection to the main in Kildare Road. This
would allow the proposed home to use the existing service
originally intended for LOt 6.
Pl&nnLnq CommLs. Lon M~nu~e~
N&rch 9, 1992
Private easements running to Lot 5 be granted to cover both
sewer and water services crossing Lot 6. These easements
should be made of record and copies furnished to the City of
Mound.
Mueller questioned the difference between the lot size variance for
the parcel in the Three Points area and this parcel. It was noted
that this parcel abuts two unimproved streets that abut the
shoreline which emphasizes the amount of open space for this
parcel. Mr. Voss commented that when he purchased this parcel he
was under the assumption that it met the 6,000 square foot lot area
requirement.
The Commission questioned if the street assessment charge of
$318.00 for 40 L.F. is necessary.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Hanus to recommend
approval of the variance as requested with the conditions
as listed in the City Planner's report and the City
Engineer's Report, with the exception that the $318.00
street assessment charge be waived since the Kildare will
not be improved and the applicant will be installing a
driveway to meet specifications recommended by the City.
Approval is also recommended due to the fact that the
owner was under the assumption the parcel was 6,000
square feet at time of purchase and there is open space
between the subject parcel and the lakeshore with the
unimproved streets. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on March 24, 1992.
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North. Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
March q, 1992
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
Mr. Jon Sutherland
Planning and Zoning
City of Mound
53ql Haywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 5536q
SUBJECT:
Variance Application - q608 Kildare Road
Case #91-0055
MFRA #8902
Dear Jon:
As requested we reviewed the above mentioned variance application and have
the following comments and recommendations. Greg Skinner and his personal have
spend considerable time attempting to determine which water and sewer services
in Kildare Road are already connected to the house on Lot 5 and which if any
are unused.
From the information available, it appears that Lot 5 was originally
assessed unit and lateral charges, but never paid for a sewer service. When
the home on Lot 5 was connected to the sanitary sewer they used the service
paid for by Lot 6, which connects to the manhole at the end of the sewer main
in Kildare Road. It appears this sewer service crosses Lot 6 in the area of
the proposed house. The original construction plans show a service installed
on the main in Black Lake Lane that was probably intended for the home on Lot
5, except it is too high to be used as a gravity connection.
There are two water service curb boxes on Kildare Road, the westerly one,
of which serves the existing house on Lot 5. As with the sewer service, this
water service also crosses Lot 6, but it may not interfere with the proposed
house construction. This would have to be determined by exposing the line
which could be accomplished when the sewer service is relocated.
The other item we have reviewed is the question of frontage on an improved
street. Kildare Road was improved with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous
paving in 1978. As the survey shows the curb and gutter on this portion of
Kildare Road ends approximately 10 feet short of the westerly property line of
Lot 6. The remaining blacktop was installed at a narrower width, primarily to
provide access to the sanitary sewer manhole. Lot 6 was assessed an area
square footage charge to cover storm sewer constructed as part of the street
improvement project, but was not assessed aunit or front footage charge for
two reasons. First, the full width street did not extend in front of Lot 6 and
secondly, the assessment policy in force at the time did not permit assessing
undersized lots.
~"~(~ An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mr. Jon Sutherland
March 4, 1992
Page Two
If the variances are approved to make Lot 6, Block 11, Seton a buildable
parcel, we suggest that the following conditions be considered as part of that
approval:
That portion of Kildare Road used as a driveway to serve Lot 6 should
be improved to a minimum 5 ton design by installing a 6" gravel base
and 3" bituminous mat. Curb and gutter would not be required and the
width could be held to 15 feet.
The deficient street assessment in the amount of $1,488.90 be paid
(one unit charge at $1,170.90 and 40 L.F. at $318.00.)
The sanitary sewer service from Lot 5 be relocated across Lot 6 with a
new connection to the main in Kildare Road. This would allow the
proposed home to use the existing service originally intended for Lot
6.
Private easements running to Lot 5 be granted to cover both sewer and
water services crossing Lot 6. These easements should be made of
record and copies furnished to the City of Mound.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
US.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:pry
CITY of MOUND
534~ MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND M~NN E S,C, TA
6~2, 472 ~155
FAX (612 472 0620
January 6, 1992
TO;
FROM;
SUBJECT;
Jon Sutherland
Building Inspector
Greg Skinner
Water & Sewer Supt.
Sewer Service for Lot 6, Blk. 11, Seton
The sewer service for Lot 6, Block 11, Seton is currently
being used by the existing house on Lot 5, Block 11, Seton.
Lot 5, Block 11, Seton has not been assessed for a sewer
service, therefore Lot 5, Block 11, Seton will have to make
some arrangements with the owner of Lot 6, Block 11, Seton
for a sewer service.
The water for Lot 5, Block 11, Seton runs thru Lot 6, Block
11, Seton. There is a separate water service for Lot 6, Block
11, Seton.
CC: BILL VOSS
MARK KOEGLER
printed on recycled paper
IIINUTES O~ A HEFT ! NG OF TH[
HOUND ADVi~Y P~ANNING COJ~HISSIO~
Noveni~r 18. 1991
Case No. 91-055~ ~lllli~m Voss~ 4608 K!lc~re
I1~ Seton. PlO #i9-117-23 21 0028. VARIANCE.
Due to an obvious conflict of interest, Commissioner Voss removed
himself From the board for this case.
Building OFFicial, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's
report. The applicant is requesting variances to cOI3struct a new
single-family residence on a vacant lot of record. The variances
being requested include:
Lot Area 72G square fe~
Front Setback 10 Feet
Rear Setback 9 feet
Frontage on an Improved 5treat !0 Feet
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recon~3t~nd approval
of the lot area, Front setback, rear setback, and street frontage
variances as noted above, subject to the following conditions:
All setbacks shall be established on a site pi afl drawing by
a Registered Land Surveyor. Said site plan drawing shall
accompany the building permit application, ~
A 50 Foot setback shall be observed From the oPdlnary high
water line of Lake Minnetonka. This setback $1~11 be shown
on the site plan referenced in item #1 above,
The variances in the case are granted due to the s~e and shape
of the lot, both of which are criteria listed in Set. on 23,506.1
of the Hound Zoning Code.
!
The Building OFficial added a comment regarding ut~ltles.
The
Sewer and Water Superintendent has reviewed this~'~roperty and
pointed out that Lot 5 may require an easement and s~ne coordina-
tion between the neighbor and Mr. Voss. The City ~ngineer has
not reviewed this request yet, however, this could be resolved
prior to this case going to the City Council,
Mueller expressed a concern about the size Of the proposed dwell-
ing and the amount of lot coverage proposed. He also conxnented
on the loss of the neighbors lake view.
The amount of Frontage on an improved street was addressed and
there was some controversy between staff and the applicant. The
applicant stated that the road is actually paved further than
shown on the site plan, even though there ts dirt and grass on
the paved portion which Is not used, it was questlonecl if a lot
Frontage variance is needed,
Voss also noted that he understood there was more than 6,000
square Feet of lot area, The Building Official commented that
the surveyor verified the lot area at 5,2?4 square feet. Voss
would like to confirm this figure.
Mueiler expressed a concern about the site plan showing the
proposed dwelling location, some of the Figures do not seem to be
correct, He suggested a surveyor locate the proposed dwelling on
the lot. Hanus suggested that the ordinary high water elevation
also be shown.
HOTION made by Michael, seconded by Hueiler to t~ie the
request until the applicant can verify the lot area,
stree~ Frontage, placement of the proposed dwelling, and
ordinary high water location with a revised survey. No-
tion carried unanimously.
VanDoren
Hazard
Stallings, Inc.
~¢hico¢C~ · En~ineer~ · ~lonno~s
PLANNING REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mound Planning Commission and Staff
Mark Koegler, City Planner
November 5, 1991
SUBJECT: Variance Application
APPLICANT: William Voss
CASE NUMBER: 91-055
VIiS FILE NUI~ER: 91-310-A14-ZO
LOCATION: 4608 Kildare Road
EXISTING ZONING: Single-Family Residential (R-2)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting variances to construct a
new single-family residence on a vacant lot of record. The lot
which abuts commons property has an area of 5,274 square feet. In
accordance with the proposed plan, the requested variances include
the following:
Lot Area
Front Setback
Rear Setback
Frontage on an
Improved Street
Required Proposed Variance
6,000 sq ft 5,274 sq ft 726 sq ft
20' 10' 10'
15' 6' 9'
40' 30' 10'
COMMENT: The Mound Zoning Code seeks to allow reasonable use of
property. In this case, the shape of the lot is the primary factor
precluding construction of a conforming single-family dwelling.
The proposed dwelling involves a living area measuring
approximately 30 x 45 feet and a 22 x 22 foot garage. Construction
of a home of this size seems reasonable in today's market.
3030 Harbor Lane North, Bldg. II, Suite 104, Minneapolis Minnesota 55447-2175 (612) 553-1950
Voss Planning Report
November 5, 1991
Page Two
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend approval of the lot area, front setback, rear setback and
street frontage variances noted above subject to the following
conditions:
Ail setbacks shall be established on a site plan drawing by a
Registered Land Surveyor. Said site plan drawing shall
accompany the building permit application.
A 50 foot setback shall be observed from the ordinary high
water line of Lake Minnetonka. This setback shall be shown on
the site plan referenced in item #1 above.
The variances in this case are granted due to the size and shape of
the lot, both of which are criteria listed in Section 23.506.1 of
the Mound Zoning Code.
VOSSVAR. P 5 2
CITY OF MOUND
5341Maywood Road
Hound, MN 55364
47Z-1155
Fee $50.00
VARIANCE APPLICATION_
pLANNING & ZONING COHMISSIO~.
(Please type or print the following Information.)
Address of Subject Property 4608 Kildare Lane
Owner's Name William David V0ss
Owner's Address 4619 Kildare Road
Applicant's Nme (if other than owner)
Day Phone 348-8360
Same
Address
Lot (6) Six
Addition Set0n
Existing Use of Pr~erty: Vacant
Day Phone
(11) Eleven
Block
PID No. 1911723210028
Zoning District R-2
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? yes ( ), no (xxJ. If
.yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, and provide resolution
number(s) (copies of previous resolutions must accompany thts application).
VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR:
direction
(x~' Principal Building
setback
requested
( ) Accessory Building
setback
required
Front Yard: ( N~JE W ) 10 ft. 20 ft. 10
Rear Yard: ((~)S E W ) .6 ft. 15 ft. 9
Lake Front: ( N S{~)W ) Ft. 50 ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E(~)) ft. 6 ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) Ft. ft.
Lot Size: ,,,~10~/- sq ft 6000 sq ft OK
VARIANCE
REQUESTED
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
sq ft
a AR I ANCE APPL I CAT 1 ON
ge 2
I. Reason for request
To build single family residence
Does the present use of the property conform to ali regulations For
the zoning dlstrlc~E-~n which It Is located? Yes (x~, No (). If no,
specify each non-conforming use:
Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and
setback regulations For the zoning district in which It is located?
Yes (), No ( ). If no, specify each non-conforming use:
not applicable ~ the 10t is vacant
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent
Its reasonable use For any of the uses permitted in that zoning
district?
(xxx) tM narrow
I It°° sinaI I
~ tM(> shal Iow
topography ! I soil
sub-surface
drainage
shape ) other: specify
Lot is too narrow to allow for front and rear setbacks
®
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone
having property Interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was
adopted? Yes (), No (x~. IF yes, explain
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as
relocation of a road? Yes( ), No (x~. If yes, explaln
the
7. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance
peculiar only to the property described In this petition? Yes ( ),
No (x~. IF no, list some other properties which are similarly
affected? Numerous existinq 10ts of record in the City of Mound are
not large enough to allow for minimum setback requiremenEs
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 ac-
curate. ! consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this
application by any authorized official of the City of Hound for the purpose
of Inspecting, OK of posting, maintaining and renx>vlng such notices as may
be required by law.
0 4-~
b. o
o
z ~-
_J ·
¢~
oo
~- o
o 0
o,--
q-
~..
RESOLUTION WAIVING REQUIRemENTS OF CHAPTER 22
OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING THE DIVISION OP
PROPERTY
'":' :'::""' "/"~---~--?~-tS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
' '''' . ' : , i . .Section 22.00 of the Village Code has been filed 'with the Village
"' ""--'...'".. of Mound. and
.... --::-:',:'. ,'..,' ~WR~ZLEAS, said. request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Commission
': ~'" '"" and tho Village Council, and
-'-:-" :....-: :;'~REAS, it is hereby 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; that the
'"' . waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substan-
'..."':..'i":'~-'. · ·: '- rial property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detri-
:'. .... mental to the public welfare or injurious to other property owners.
...:_: ,., .:iY.'::.:!..N(I~, ~n~0:~E, BE IT RESOLVED BY ThU~ ViLLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUND,
":' '" ' 1. The request of Frank Grab. mini, 'S~.
: .:" ' " for a waiver from the .Drovisions of Section 22.00 of the Village
Code and the request to subdivide property of less than five acres
.. is hereby granted to permit divisiOn of the following propex~y in
. .. the followinj manner: ..
That Lot 4 and l~rt of 7 and 8, Block 11, Seton (Plat ~7~50," ' '"
Parcel 16~5) and Lot 5 (Plat ~7950, Parcel 1640) be oomb~eA
~d ~d ~to two b~ld~ sites. The p~ose of t~e , .
~sion im to pro~de acoes~ to 'Lot 5. (~e at~ehe~..),,.., .'
The~ are ~ sewer a~ ~ter deficiencies.
',.:'..' - ' .', "~ '.:' ". ~r .' ' ' '.
· ,' . .-' .y' v-.' ·-;' .,' .?,
'... """ 1.':".;-,' :' .:..".':: .'
.':'?'.. -' :"-,..,.-' <.' -'.,.2. It is determined that the foregoing division will constitute a
· ':.:: .... desirable and stable comnunity development and is in harmor4v with
· adjaccn~ properties.
' '-Adopted 'this . 14
·,
" ' ' ,' ·
· ~. The Viilaje Cle2k is authorized to deliver a certified copy.of this
resolution to the applicant for filing in the office of the Register
of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles o~Hennepin County ~o show
compliance with the subdivision regulations .of this village.'
PROPOSED RESOLUTION ~92-
REOOLU~ION TO ~I~PROVE ~ V'ARI~CB FOR
LOT 13, BLOCX 2, BH~DY~OOD POINT, PZD ~18-117-23 23 0018
1948 BHOREROOD L~NE
WHEREAS, The applicant has applied for a variance to
recognize an undersized lot resulting in a 2,150 square foot
variance, to recognize an existing nonconforming setback of 45 feet
from the Ordinary High Water to a deck attached to the dwelling,
and a .6 foot side yard setback variance, and;
WHEREAS, The applicant is requesting these variances to allow
construction of a 22' x 30' attached garage with a foyer, and;
WHEREAS, The proposed front yard setback of the addition is
20.7 feet and will be conforming according to Zoning Code Section
23.408 (6), and;
WHERE]%S, There is an existing boat house on the property
which encroaches .3 feet into the neighboring lot and the applicant
has indicated the boat house will be removed.
WHEREAS, The subject property is located within the R-1 Single
Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code
requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet, a 30 foot front yard
setback, 10 and 6 foot side yard setbacks for lots of record, and
a 50 foot setback to the Ordinary High Water elevation, and;
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
unanimously recommended approval with modifications and conditions.
The Planning Commission did not find a hardship to allow the
requested .6' side yard setback variance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby approve a 2,150 square foot lot area
variance and a 5' lakeshore setback variance to al low
construction of 22' x 30' garage addition with a foyer at 1948
Shorewood Lane, upon the following conditions:
a. The existing boat house shall be removed prior to
b,,;
b. The existing water service shall be insulated under the
proposed concrete floor in a manner acceptable to ~the
Mound Sewer and ~ater Superintendent~ ~_ ~.:~?~
Proposed Resolution
Page 2
Case No. 92-003
Ce
The setback to the northwest side property line must
conform to the 6 foot setback requirement and a revised
site plan indicating such must be submitted with the
Building Permit Application.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) of the Zoning Code
with the clear and express understanding that the use remains
as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the
provisions and restrictions of Section 23.404.
It is determined that the livability of the residential
property will be improved by the authorization of the
following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to
afford the owners reasonable use of their land:
Construction of a 22' x 30' garage and foyer
addition.
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property:
Lot 13, Block 2, Shadywood Point, PID #18-117-23 23 0013.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for
such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has
been filed with the City Clerk.
PROPOSED REBOLUTION #92-
RESOLUTION TO 2q~PPROVE & V]tiRI]tLNCB FOR
LOT 13, BLOCK 2, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID #18-117-23 23 0018
1948 SHOREWOOD LANE
P&Z C~SE NUMBER 92-003
~HEREAS, The applicant has applied for a variance to
recognize an undersized lot resulting in a 2,150 square foot
variance, to recognize an existing nonconforming setback of 45 feet
from the Ordinary High Water to a deck attached to the dwelling,
and a .6 foot side yard setback variance, and;
WHEREAS, The applicant is requesting these variances to allow
construction of a 22' x 30' attached garage with a foyer, and;
WHEREAS, The proposed front yard setback of the addition is
20.7 feet and will be conforming according to Zoning Code Section
23.408 (6), and;
WHEREAS, There is an existing boat house on the property
which encroaches .3 feet into the neighboring lot and the applicant
has indicated the boat house will be removed.
WHEREA~, The subject property is located within the R-1 Single
Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code
requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet, a 30 foot front yard
setback, 10 and 6 foot side yard setbacks for lots of record, and
a 50 foot setback to the Ordinary High Water elevation, and;
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
unanimously recommended approval with modifications and conditions.
The Planning Commission did not find a hardship to allow the
requested .6' side yard setback variance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby approve a 2,150 square foot lot area
variance and a 5' lakeshore setback variance to allow
construction of 22' x 30' garage addition with a foyer at 1948
Shorewood Lane, upon the following conditions:
The existing boat house shall be removed prior to final
building inspection.
The existing water service shall be insulated under the
proposed concrete floor in a manner acceptable to the
Mound Sewer and Water Superintendent.
Proposed Resolution
Page 2
Case No. 92-003
®
The setback to the northwest side property line must
conform to the 6 foot setback requirement and a revised
site plan indicating such must be submitted with the
Building Permit Application.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below,
pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) of the Zoning Code
with the clear and express understanding that the use remains
as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the
provisions and restrictions of Section 23.404.
It is determined that the livability of the residential
property will be improved by the authorization of the
following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to
afford the owners reasonable use of their land:
Construction of a 22' x 30' garage and foyer
addition.
This variance is granted for the following legally described
property:
Lot 13, Block 2, 8hadywood Point, PID #18-117-23 23 0013.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or
the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to
Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property
may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing
this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for
such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has
been filed with the City Clerk.
Planning Comm£ssion Hlnutel
Hatch 9, 1992
CABB HO. 92-003: RI:CIIMtD HBliDBRSOII. 1948 OHOREWOOD l,,XNg, LOT
BLOCK 2. BHADYWOOD POINT, PTD jf18-1~7-23 23 0013. VARIANCE.
city Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the applicant's request for a
variance to construct a 22' x 30' garage and foyer addition to an
existing home. The variances being requested include:
Lot Area
Lakeshore Setback
to Deck
Side Setback
Reauired Variance
10,000 sf 2,150 sf
50' 5'
6' .6'
There is an existing boat house on the property which encroaches .3
feet into the neighboring lot. The applicant has indicated that
the boat house is to be removed..
There is a water line serving the home which will under the
proposed addition, this issue was reviewed with the Sewer and Water
Superintendent, Greg Skinner.
Staff recommended approval of the lot area, lakeshore, and side
yard setback variances conditioned upon the following:
The existing boat house shall be removed prior to final
building inspection.
0
The existing water service shall be insulated under the
proposed concrete floor in a manner acceptable to the Mound
Sewer and Water Superintendent.
Mueller questioned if a front yard setback variance is needed since
the required setback is 30 feet and the proposed addition is 20.7
feet to the front. Koegler commented that considering the average
setback of the two adjoining structures, the front yard setback
will be conforming.
The Commission discussed the proposed 5.4' side yard setback from
the proposed addition and reviewed alternative solutions to
alleviate the variance.
MOTION made by Muellor, seconded by Clapsaddlo to approve
the variance as requested with the exception that the .6'
side yard setback variance not be granted due to lack of
hardship, and including the conditions as listed in the
City Planner's report. Motion carried unanimously.
Hoisington Group Inc.
LAND USE CONSULTANTS
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
REPORT DATE: March 3, 1992
PC MEETING DATE: March 9, 1992
SUBJECT: Variance Request
APPLICANT: Richard Henderson
CASE NUMBER: 92-003
HGI FILE NUMBER: 92-1k
LOCATION: 1948 Shorewood Lane
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-l)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to construct an addition to an existing
home including a two car garage and an entry/foyer area. In order to obtain a
building permit, the proposed plan will require three variances, one of which is
directly attributable to the proposed construction.
The existing structure contains tWo non-conforming situations. At the northern
end of the property, an existing deck is located 45 feet from the ordinary high water
level. City Code requires a 50 foot setback necessitating a 5 foot variance. The
existing lot totals 7,850 square feet which is 2,150 square feet under the required
10,000 square feet in the R-1 zone.
According to the proposed plan, the addition to the home has overall dimensions of
22' x 30'. Construction of the addition creates a 5.4 foot setback on the western side
of the property. The provisions of the R-1 district require a 6 foot setback in this area
resulting in a .4 foot variance.
7401 Metro Blvd. · Suite 340 · Minneapo~. MN 55439 . (612) 835-9960
Henderson Planning Report
March 3. 1992
Page 2
COMMENT: The City of Mound continually strives to alleviate the need for
variances. In this case, any improvement of the property involves a variance due to
inadequate lot area and the non-conforming lakeshore setback. It. could be argued
that the need for the side yard setback variance is questionable due to the option of
reducing the depth of the garage by one foot which would apparently result in a
conforming side yard. This would result in a garage measuring 22' x 22'. If the side
yard setback was the only variance involved, staff would tend to support this
approach. Since other variances are involved and since a 22' x 23' garage is within
the realm of "normal" sized garages, this approach takes on less importance.
Two other issues pertaining to this case need to be reviewed. The property contains
an existing boat house in the northwestern comer of the site. The existing boat
house encroaches .3 feet into the neighboring lot. The applicant has indicated that
the boat house is to be removed.
The second issue pertains to existing utilities. The water line that serves the existing
home follows a diagonal alignment that bisects the proposed addition. Section
610:35 of the City Code states "No service or water shut-off shall be installed under
concrete walks, steps, driveways, or other permanent structure, either existing or
contemplated, between the property line and the building to be supplied." In this
case, the City Council either needs to grant a variance to this provision of the Code
or the owner needs to relocate the existing water line.
In reviewing this situation with Greg Skinner, Mound's water and sewer
superintendent, the line may be acceptable in its present location if it is insulated for
its entire length under the concrete floor. He is concerned that without adequate
'insulation, freezing of the line could occur. The line could be excavated and
insulated concurrent with the footing excavation.
RECOMMENDATION: The proposed plan for the addition seems to represent
reasonable use of the subject property. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission recommend approval of the lot area, lakeshore and side yard setback
variances as outlined above conditioned upon the following:
The existing boat house shall be removed prior to final building
inspection.
The existing water service shall be insulated under the proposed
concrete floor in a manner acceptable to the Mound Sewer and Water
Superintendent.
~.- o. ,,o,.,0 IIr'i :::,~%/,--t..,,. !l~Jl
534~. X~Irvoo~o&~, Xo~ ~ S53S41'-' I ,,.u& ~ RmC [1~1
·hon., .~ .oo, ...~ .~-o.o I !--. ___-. ,J I
I L;~Y OF IViOU~JD
Planning Commission Date: .__~.~.C~'~_ Application Fee: $50.00
City Council Date: ., ~'Zq-~Z Case No.~
Site Visit Scheduled:
Zoning Sheet Completed:
Copy to City Planner:
Copy to Public Works:
Copy to City Engineer:
®eeeooeoeeoooe®ooeooo®ooooeo®®e®oooee®o®®oo®eeeoe®o®®®®o®eoo®eo®®~®o®oeoe®
Please t~pe or print the following information:
Address of Subject Property...
Owner's Name
Owner's Address
Applicant's Name (if other than owner)
Day Phone
Address
Day Phone
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Zoning District /~/
Block
Use of Property: ~F3 /~~/~I
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use
permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ( ) no. If
yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and
provide copies of resolutions.
TYPE OF STRUCTURE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR:
( ) Other
( ) Dwelling
Garage
1. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number
of stories, type of use, etc.):
.. ,e-~ ,~ ~. ,,., ,",~ ~ ~.~ ~' ~ ~ . / 5 r o ,~ ~' / ~ o ~ z z_ ~
Variance Appl:i. ea~ion
Pa~e 3
case Ho,
o
Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and
setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located?
Yes (), No (u~. If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe
reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.)
required requested VARIANCE
setback setback
Front Yard: (NS E W ) ft. ft.
Rear Yard:(~S E W ) ft. ft.
Lake Front: ( S E W ) ~0 ft. ~ ft. .~
Side Yard: ~S E~) '~ ft. ~. ~ ft. .~
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft.
Lot Size: ~sq ft ~sq ft ~/1~
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
sq ft
Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the
zoning district in which it is located? Yes (b~, No ( ). If no,
specify each non-conforming use:
o
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent
its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning
district?
( ) too narrow
( ~ too small
( ) too shallow
( ) topography
( ) drainage
( ) shape
( ) soil
(u~-existing
( ) other: specify
Please describe:
®
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having
property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted
(1982)? Yes (), No (~)~. If yes, explain
Variance Application
Page 3
Case No.~~~)_0~_-
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as th~
relocation of a road? Yes (), No (~)~. If yes, explain
8. Comments:
Arethe conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar
only to the property described in this petition? Yes (), No (~. If
no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
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.
Date
Certificate of Survey
for Rich Henderson
of Lot ] 3, Block 2, Sha.dywood Point
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Lot 13, Block 2, Shadywood Point.
~ This survey shows the location of
~ all existing buildings and a pro-
posed oarage in relation to the
boundaries of the above described
property. It does not purport to
show any other impro~ements or
encroachments.
Date : 10-26-88
2 - 13 - 92
Scale: 1" = 30'
o : Iron marker found
RECEIVED
FEB 2 1 1992
MOUND PLANNING & INSP.
all
I hereby certify that this survey
was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am
a duly registered Land Surveyor
under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC.
nMark S. Gronberg m . Lic..No. 12755
Engineers, Land Surveyors, PlaFj~
Long Lake, Minnesota
l
CLEAN WATER ACTION
March 16, 1992
Mr. Edward Shukle
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN
55364
N AR 1 7 992
Dear Mr. Shukle:
I appreicated the opportunity to talk with you last week
concerning the proposal to pave a road in Corcoran with materials
containing incinerator ash.
Please find enclosed materials that summarize our concerns
regarding this project. These include:
* In a recent Federal Court decision, incinerator ash was found
to be a hazardous waste, subject to Federal hazardous waste
regulations.
* the proposal includes the placement of highly toxic fly ash
in the aggregate product. An administrative law judge that is
reviewing the proposed rules for incinerator ash disposal has
recommended that fly ash be separated from bottom ash.
* the Municipal Services Corporation financed health risk
assessment is deficient in many areas.
* the test itself is far too short in duration to get meaningful
results and the liability for environmental problems would be
given to Hennepin County taxpayers
* the test is part of a permitting process for a large ash
processing plant to be located in Hennepin County.
I would like the opportunity to meet with you prior to next
week's council meeting. Thank you for your consideration. Please
do not hesitate to contact me at 623-3666.
Singerely, ~ /?
CLEAN WATER ACTION
Midwest Regional Office · 326 Hennepin Ave. E. · Minneapolis, MN 55414 · 612/623-3666
1418 First Avenue, NE · Rochester, MN 55904 · 507/281-1390 / 2904 West Third Street · Duluth, MN 55806 · 218/628-1191
211 Black Bldg., 118 N. Broadway · Fargo, ND 58103 · 701/235-5431 / RR 1, Box 95 · Stoddard, WI 54658 · 608/788-1398
122 South Grand Ave.,//200 · Lansing, MI 48933 · 517/487-0900
National Office · 317 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE · Washington, DC 20003 · 202/547-1196
Printod on Re~'yclcd Paper
March 22,1992
To the Mayor and City Council
of the City of Mound:
Hon. Mayor and Council:
Enclosed is a resolution from the Dayton Ash Utilization Demon-
stration Project Task Force concerning the ash to asphalt project
that was proposed for the City of Dayton two years ago. This task
force was appointed by the City Council and is the only OBJECTIVE
analysis of the proposed ash to asphalt process to date. The task
force was composed of Dayton citizens who over a two month period
met twice a week. Testimony was given by both sides , the resolu-
tion contains their conclusions .
It is important to note that one of the first recommendations
is to remove the fly ash . The ash from the incinerator is of two
.types,fly ash - that comes from the pollution control equipment
(baghouse) and bottom ash - the ash that falls through the grate
(contains burned and unburned debris). The two types of ash are
generated in SEPARATE parts of the plant and then combined.
Because the fly ash is very toxic (it contains all the things we
didn't want going into the air ,and most of the time tests as a
hazardous waste ) it is mixed with the relatively safe bottom
ash. The end result is the much larger volume of bottom ash
DILUTES the highly toxic fly ash so the combined ash tests less
hazardous. It is our contention that the fly ash should be kept
separate and disposed of as hazardous waste (which it is !). If
this material were plating sludge from a metal plating shop NO
ONE (not even the county) would be allowed to dilute it (say with
a large volume of water as was done in the past ) and release it
into the environment.
The county says this project will prevent us from needing a new
landfill,we will still get the landfill , it will be 40 ft wide
4" deep and 1000 miles long .
In closing I would ask that you pass a resolution asking the
county to NOT use fly ash in this demonstration project but
instead treat it as the highly toxic waste that it is.
I apologize for not being able to attend your meeting tonight,
if I can be of assistance or you have any questions please con-
tact me at 427-2960 evenings or 421-0121 days.
Thank you for your time.
Mayor, City of Dayton
--I.
GERRY SIKORSKI
WHIP AT ~R~E
ENEEGY AND GOMME~CE
OFFICE AND C~IL 8ERVICE
gELE~ COMMt~EE ON
CHI~EN, YOUTH. AND FAMILIES
June 24, 1991
WAIHIN~rON OFFICE
405 CANNON NOU$!
WMHI#O?ON. DC
(2OS) 22~2271
DISTRICT OFFICF.
277 coo~ ~u,~o$ BLVD. i,M.
8~ 414
C~N ~lOl. uN 8s~s
Thc Honorable John Dcms
Chair, Hennepin County Board of Commissioners
Hennepin Count Government Center
Minneapolis, MN 55487
Des. r Commissioner D~rus:
It has come to my attention that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners will
consider a plan this week to test municipal incinerator ash as roadway aggregate in
Corcoran.
I have followed this issue with 8xcat interest since it was first proposed for Dayton.
AS you know, the issue of how and whether this ash should be re-used is receiving close
scrutiny not only in Minnesota, but nationwide. Thc Minnesota proposal will likely be
viewed as a precedent for other states.
I am nog' hearing serious concerns from a number of citizens about the specific
proposal before Hennepin County. They are summarized as follows:
The treated ash pellets contain fly ash which is the most toxic part of thc municipal
ash stream.
The pellets will be used on the wearing surface of the road, exposing the material to
harsh weathering conditions -. leading to the release of toxins, especially lead, into
the environment.
There are no long-term tests built into thc test protocol to determine the full impact
of the process.
The material slated for testing would presumably be manufacturered at a
processing facility in Northwest Hermepin County. The permitting process for such
a facility would begin shortly after the test strip is laid.
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS
! would like to strongly encourage Se Board to t~e these concerns into account
before making any decision re§~u-ding this proposal. As ~lways, I appreciate your good
offices, good work md good friendship,
Commissioner Tad .l'ude ~be~~l'~C°OnR~[$
Commissioner Peter McLaughlin
Commissione~' M~k Andrew
Commission~ Sudy Makowke
Commissioner 3ohn Keefe
Commissioner Randy ,lohnson
CLEAN WATER ACTION
HYTHS AND FACTS ABOUT THE CORCORAN ASH TEST PROJECT
1. HYTH: "The test is only for 600 feet of pavement, its not
really a big deal.'
FACT: The 'test" is the first step in siting a huge industrial plant that will
take tox/c ash from all over Minnesota. Municipal Services Corporation, the
Georgia company conducting the test wants to build this plant within the next
two years. One prospective site placed the plant less than five miles from
Corcoran.
2. ~IYTH.. The treated ash is safe.
FACT~ The pavement will break down. The tox/c materiais--such as lead
cadmium, mercury and chromium will not breakdown. The wear/zig and tearing
of roads releases toxic substances into the immediate environment where
people live.
3. I-[YTH: The ash ks as safe as compost.
FACT: These comparisons axe inappropriate and misleading. The aggregate will
be worn into dusts due to abraa/on resulting from street traffic. Contaminated
street dust (resulting from leaded gasoline and other sources) has been a
ma)or factor in the lead poisoning of children. Lead, even at the tiniest trace
leveis can cause kidney ~]_i=~ease, and neurological disorders in children.
Children playing in or near roads pick up the loose dust on their clothes and
hands and in turn put their hands and or contan%inated food in their mouths.
Small part/cles of lead are readily inhaled and additionally increase the body
burden of lead. The EPA has classified lead as a cancer-causing pollutant- The
standard for residen~i~_! soL[ not only fails to protect against non-cancer toxic
effects but ignores the fact that EPA has ciasskf./ed lead as a probable human
carcinogen.
4. MYTH: "Incinerator ash is benign, besides, the road pellets are treated and
the ash is bound up forever."
FACT= Ash from the Hennepin County incinerator has consistently shown the
characterislfics of a hazardous waste. In fact recent lead samples have
exceeded the Federal Drinking Water Standard by almost 16/) times, and was
.almost 6~% h/gher than the hazardous waste cut-off.
All materials exposed at surface of earth including rock undergoes physical
and chemical processes which weather the material into fine particles. The
proposers have not demonstrated that the aggregate will hold together as well
as natural stone aggregate.
In addition, the pellets will break down over time, the tox/c mate~a[~ will not.
5. MYTH?Lead and other tox/c metals are in the environment naturally, so why
be concerned about these substances in the road?'
FACT, Tox/c heavy metals are concentrated in the combust/on process that
takes place at the incinerator. The h~jh concentrations o! lead, cadmium,
mercury and chrom/um pose a significant health risk, when placed in the
ironed/ate environment of people. Because the safety threshold leve! is so low
any additional exposures to these toxins can produce adverse health effects
part/cularly in fetuses, infants, pregnant mothers, and chJ/dren.
6. I. IYTH, "Its better to recycle the ash, than to bury it in a landfill,
especially since Corcoran is a site for an ash landfi//.
FACT: The leg/slature has dropped the current landf/ll siting process, it is
much less Hkely that sensit/ve groundwater areas such as Corcora/l w/I/ be
included in future siting decisions. Clean Water Action opposed the Land/ill
sit/rig process and worked at the legisLature to drop Corcoran from the sit//lg
process.
Ash 'utiL[zat/on' is not a benign form of recyclinq. You cannot recycle
something that has never been used. Ash is waste. Placmg it. on roads is just
another way to dispose of this waste.
7. I-[YTH.. 'l.Iumcipal Services Corporat/on is a reputakle firm, they %;/J/ see to
it that this is done right".
FACT: MSC's parent company, USPCI was c/ted for 57 separate vioLat/ons due
to improper storaqe of PCB's at its Grassy Mountain fac/l/ty in Utah. The EPA
asked for penalties totalling $1.4 million.
HSC was recently denied a pernUt to dump Hennepin Ccunty's ash in North
Dakota. The North Dakota [{ealth Department cited l.l$C's and USPCI's sloppy
environmenta/ record as one reason for the perm/t denial.
B. I.[YTH: "Corcoran gets a good deal--a free paving Fro}ect"
FACT~ Or/qinally the state of }41nnesota was w/lling to assume the liabi]/ty for
the many env/ronmenta/ risks of this project. Now the legislature is no longer
willing to foot the biLL Corcoran and Hennepin County taxpayers w/l/ ha~e to
pay for damages. What may be free today could have disastrous financial
costs in the future.
CLEAN WATER ACTION
Midwes! Re{ional Office · 326 Hennepin Ave. E. · Minneapolis, 5IN S~414 · 612/62~.:{666
141~ Flrs~ Avenue. NE · Roch~er. MN :~5904 · ~07/281-1390 / 2904 West Third $~ree~ · Duluth, lvlN :I~806 · 21~/62{-il91
411 North Broadway. #20~ · Far{o, ND S8102 · 701/23S-$431 I RR I, Box 9.~ · $~oddard. WI :~465{ · 608/78{.1398
122 Sou~h Grand Ave. #200 · Lansin$, MI 48933 · ~17/487-0900
Nntion~i Office · 317 Pennsylvania Avenue. SE · Washiniton, DC 20003 · 202/~47.11~
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
1616 P Street. NW
Washington. DC 20036
1202) 387-3500
COMMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
ON A "HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF MINNES~A
MSW-ASH UTILIZATION DEMONSTRA~ON PROJECT'
PREPARED BY AWD TECHNOLOGIES. INC..
FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES CORPORATION
COMME~ PREPARED BY
Di~ RICHARD A. DENISON, Ph.D.
SENIOR SCIENTIST
JANUARY 14, 1992
EDF has reviewed the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) prepared by AWD
Technologies, Inc., in support of Municipal Service Corporation's (lVISC's)
proposal to uftliT~ ash as a wearing surface roadway construction material.
Data on the chemical composition of the ash-substituted roadway material
indicate that it contains and leaches far higher -- in some cases, hundreds
of times higher -- concentrations of most toxic heavy metals than do natural
aggregate materials or the soils at the proposed demonstration project. From
this starting point, we find that the HRA is deficient in n~]merous aspects.
Most notably, the ~
· fails to examine risks over the full lifecycle of the u~l~zed ash;
· fails to examine routine events that increase the rate and magnitude of
releases from the roadway during its useful life:
examines exclusively human health risks affecting the general population.
failing to consider occupational risks;
gives scant consideration to environmental risks posed by the project,
despite Its expansive claims to be an envirol~mental as well as human
health assessment;
examines only a subset of the chemicals of concern, particularly for species
other than h-mans, and uses incorrect toxicity values for many of
these;
grossly distorts the role of conservative ass-mptions in risk assessment
procedures;
neglects or downplays several important pathways
exposure to ash-borne toxic substances; and
for release of and
assr, roes without foundation that the TCLP leaching fluids invariably leach
metals more aggressively than water or than will occur in the field.
Each of these deficiencies is discussed at length in these comments. Taken
together, they indicate that the I-IRA falls far short of serving as a s-fficient
assessment of the risks posed by MSC's proposed ash u_tilt~ation project.
INTRODUCTORY
Ash uttlt~tion allows the placement of ash or ash-derived products into
the general-environment, an activity that involves potential exposures that
extend well beyond those from ash ,d, isp_osal, b_oth in m .agni ~t~.,.d_e__~n_d d~r~~
the burden of demonstrating the 'safety" of. any such umizauu,, ~,
must necessarily surpass a higher threshold.
In assessing ash utilt~ation, it is tmpo~_~nt to constantly keep in mind
that thc material being utilized cRffers markedly from the natural material it
2
is replacing. While the engineering properties may be similar (otherwise it
would not be a suitable substitute), the chemical composition is very different.
In the present case in which MSC proposes to substitute treated ash product
(TAP) for a portion of the natural aggregate normally used in the wearing
surface of a roadway, the concentrations of most heavy metals is considerably
higher in the ash-substituted materials. Data from the HRA (HRA Tables 2.1
and 2.5) allow a comparison of both the total metal concentrations and the
TCLP-leachable met~_l concentrations in the ash-substituted aggregate with
those in natural aggregate and in the softs now present in the unpaved
roadway.
This comparison, shown in the Tables below.' demonstrates the
enormous enrichment of most metals in the ash-substituted material. Only
selenium is present in comparable concentrations in the ash-substituted
materials, the natural aggregate and the roadway softs. And most metals are
much more leachable (using the TCLP) from the ash-substituted materials.
For example:
Lead would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at levels
almost 160 times higher than in the natural aggregate normally used
to pave roads, and 32 times higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Mercury would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at
levels 280 times higher than in the natural aggregate and 28 times
higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Cadmium would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at
levels 22 times higher than in .the natural aggregate and 55 times
higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Based on TCLP leaching tests, arsenic, cadmitun, lead, and mercury
would leach from the ash-substituted roadway materials at levels about
The full data sets are attached as Tables I and II.
3
TOTAL ME~ALS ENRICH~NT FACTORS
TAP/Agg: Nat Agg TAP/Agg: Roadway Soils
Arsenic 9.7 1.3
Barium 9.7 11.5
Cadmium 22.0 55.0
Copper 10.5 11.9
Chromium 1.8 6.4
Lead 156.8 31.6
Mercury 280.0 28.0
Nickel 3.5 6.0
Selenium 1.0 0.5
Silver 4.1 5.6
Zinc 32.3 29.2
TCLP METALS ENRICHMENT FACTORS
TAP/Agg: Nat Agg TAP/Agg: Roadway Soils
Arsenic 8823.5 1.2
Barium 1.2 2.3
Cadmium 21.5 164.7
Copper 1.0 1.0
Chromium 1.9 5.7
Lead 157.9 0.0052
Mercury 276.3 48.8
Nickel 0.8 0.4
Selenium 1.0 1.0
Silver 4.0 2.7
Zinc 1.0 5.0
The enrichment factors represent the n-tuber of times higher the
concentration of a given metal in the ash-substituted material is than
in the natural aggregate or roadway softs.
TAP/Agg = 30% treated ash product mixed with 70% natural aggregate
Nat Agg = 100% natural aggI~ate
See foomote 3.
4
8800. 22. 160. and 275 times higher, respectively, than from natural
aggregate.3
As discussed in the comments below, the presence of these metals in
the ash-substituted aggregate at levels much higher than in the materials
ordinarily used to pave roads means that the myriad routine procedures and
steps involved in road construction, maintenance, repair, and removal --
activities not normally considered to pose significant risks -- must be wholly
re-evaluated in Light of the much higher levels of toxic heavy metals.
MAJOR DEFICIENCIES IN THE HlZA
1. The I-IRA f~tl,~ to e,x~mine risks over the full lifecycle of the utilized ash.
Any characterization of risks associated with the uttlt?,ation of ash must
examine the full "lifecycle" of such ash. This is essential because the primary
constituents of ash that pose human health and environment~_l concerns are
heavy metals (e.g., lead, cadmium) and organic chemicals like diaxin. These
toxic chemtcala are permanent or highly persistent, and as such will pose risks
wherever and for as long as they are present in the environment; that is. they
travel with the ash no matter what form it is in or how much time has
passed since its generation or uttlt?~tton.
s Lead is the only metal predicted to leach from roadway soils at a level
significantly greater than from ash-substituted aggregate. In interpreting this
prediction, however, it is important to understand the probable source of this
lead: historical and contin,,tng particulate emissions from vehicles using
leaded gasoline. While the phase-out of lead in gasoline has reduced these
emissions considerably, leaded gasoline still accounts for about 9 percent of
total US gasoline cons,,mption (EPA, "Lead in Gasoline." data for 3rd quarter
of 1989). and pre-1975 vehicles and farm vehicles of any age may still use
leaded gasoline (42 U.S.C. section 7550). Thus. even on the paved road. lead
particulates will st~11 be accumulating. The HRA f~il,~ to account for this
source of lead when comparing the paved and ,mpaved roads.
5
Ur~like the HRA, this lifecycle begins long before actual utilization of the
ash. "Upstream" stages in the lifecycle that need to be explicitly considered
in an HRA include:
· the handling and storage of ash at the site of generation;
· the treatment of ash to render it suitable for uttlt?~ation, including the
disposition of any emissions, residuals or by-products resulting from
treatment;
· transportation of the ash between the sites of generation, treatment,
storage, and actual utilization;
· actual placement of the ash into the enviror~ment in the form in which it
is uttltTed (in this case, as a roadway material), including steps to clean
storage and placement equipment and deal with residuals from the
placement process; and
· fate of the ash during actual use.
The lifecycle of the ash does not end with its utilization, however; it is Just
as import_ant to address risks that may arise after the useful life of the
utilized ash. These "downstream" stages include:
· breaking up and removal of the roadway materials;
· fate of residuals remaining after removal of the bulk of the roadway
mater!_~ls;
· transportation, intermediate storage and processing of the removed roadway
matert_~l;
· ul_ttm~te disposition (e.g.. disposal, reuse, or recycling) of the roadway
material;
6
* if the roadway material is reused or recycled, all of the above steps for the
material throughout its "new" lifecycle.
It is critical to recognize that the HRA examined only one of these many
lifecycle stages: the fate of the ash d~_~_ring act~a_n_! use. Our knowledge about
the chemical and physical characteristics of ash indicates that many (ff not
all) of these other stages are at least as likely to pose risks to human health
and the environment as is the actual utilization stage. Indeed. the
opportunities for dispersal of ash and its associated toxic chemicals are
almost ce~ainly greater on a per-unit-of-time basis for many of these other
steps, and they may well contribute more to overall releases, exposures and
risks associated with ash utilization than the presence of ash in roadway
material during the useful life of the road.
[This is not to say that the actual proposed use of the ash is without
sigr~tflcant risk; as should be clear from the remainder of these comments.
EDF has serious concerns about the specific use to which ash would be put
under this proposal, in particular that it would be placed in thc wearing
surface of thc roadway. N~merous other proposed projects to use ash as a
roadway material take the far more prudent approach of placing the ash in
subsurface materials, rather than in direct contact with forces of constant
erosion (traffic, air, and water).]
At best, the HRA can claim to represent an assessment of risks
associated with one very limited stage in the full lifecycle of utilized ash. As
will be clear from our subsequent comments, however, even this claim is not
Just/fled.
2. The HRA fails to ex, rathe rou~ne events that increase the rate and
magnitude of releases from the roadway during its useful life.'
One major premise behind the exposure considerations of the I-IRA is
that, once the road material is. put in place, releases would occur only
through two routes: gradual erosion of material due to wearing of the
surface, resulting in ~ir emissions in the form of particulates (i.e., dust); and
7
leaching of metals into water that comes into contact with the surface of the
road. The HRA's analysis of both of these pathways assumes that the road
surface stays entirely intact during the entire time it Is In place, and therefore
that releases come only from the uppermost surface of the roadway.
This is obviously a wildly "best-case" assumption: Over time, road
surfaces can be expected to develop cracks and potholes that would expose
more of the ash to wind, water, and vehicular erosion. Road surfaces are
frequently disrupted through construction and repair activities, for e~ample,
when a new sewer line is inst-lled beneath the road. This activity would
entail a variety of additional pathways for exposure during the removal of the
material using Jackhammers and digging equipment, and while the surface
material is absent: dust generation, ponding of water in contact with the ash.
movement of loose pieces or particles during heavy rain, etc. Extreme
temperatures (e.g., freeze-thaw cycles) can also cause distortions and buckling
of road surfaces.
Other routine activities would increase the rate of release of ash
particles and/or their toxic constituents. Snow and ice removal activtUes will
to some extent scour and enhance erosion of the surface of the road. as could
street sweeping or other periodic cleaning activities. The former activities can
also create or enlarge breaches in the road surface.
Am2zingly, the I-I1RA does not even mention the possibility of these
routine occurrences, resulting in underestimation of releases for even this one
phase of the lifecycle e~mtrled in the ~ The only assumed cause of
particulate emissions fi-om the roadway surface is vehicular traffic (see I-IRA
page 32). Even though the I-IRA acknowledges that EPA recowmends that
actual site-specific dust generation data be collected and used in performing
an assessment (an approach that would account for the types of disruptive
activities described above), the authors of the I-IRA chose instead to use "an
empirical equation that is based solely on traffic vol,,me" ~ page 32).
thereby assuring that these activities would be excluded.
8
3. The I-IRA examines exclusively human health risks affecting the general
population, fni]irlg to consider occupational risks.
Use of the treated ash product (TAP) as a substitute aggregate will mean
that workers who ordinarily handle and are exposed to roadway materials will
now be exposed to a material with much higher levels of a broad range of
toxic heavy metals. Protocols for handling natural aggregate materials reflect
the chemical and physical nature of these materials, and even assumirlg they
are adequate to protect workers from risks posed by exposure to natural
aggregate materials, they cannot be assumed to be adequate for controlling
exposures to materials with much higher concentrations of toxic substances.
The points and pathways of exposure to workers are at least as
numerous and varied as, and certainly more intensive than, those affecting
the general population. Moreover, they occur throughout the lifecycle of the
ash: at any point where the ash is handled -- whether at the site of
generation, during storage, treatment or transportation, during road
construction, during subsequent road repair or replacement, during disposal
or recycling of removed roadway materials -- workers can be exposed to the
toxic substances present in ash by dermal. Ingestion. or Inhalation routes.
Despite the obvious high potentio( for worker exposure, the HRA devotes
only one paragraph (on p. 53) to this topE, and even there merely provides a
very weak rationa~ for ex~!~ding these exposures from the si¥_d~ o!together.
There is no evidence presented to support the I-IRA's claim that "protective
measures" workers are assumed to make use of are sufficient to prevent any
exposure. The argument that workers are exposed for a limited period of time
is equally weak: exposures are certain to be much higher than those
occurring to the general population, and while exposures resulting from this
single demonstration project might be limited in duration, wider use of these
materials in road or other construction activities will entail exposures of
greater duration and must be considered ff this demonstration project is to
have any relevance in the real world.
9
4. The HRA gives scant consideration to environmental risks posed bv the
pr0iect, despite its expansive clnims to be an environmental as well as human
health assessment.
Given that ash utilization involves placing ash into the general
environment rather than a controlled disposal site, the potential for exposure
of organisms in addition to humans is significant. The HRA claims to
represent a comprehensive examination of both human and environmental
health considerations. Yet it assumes that only one route of exposure to
organisms in the environment has the potential to produce an adverse health
effect: leaching of contaminants from the ash-substituted roadway material
into a nearby pond. It assumes, therefore, that only aquatic organisms will
be exposed; terrestrial plants and animals are assumed to be unaffected by
any releases from the roadway.
Ironically, the HRA does examine contamination of plants or animals by
ash-borne toxic substances -- but only as a contribution to human exposure
through the food chain. The effects that such exposures would have on the
plants or ax~imals themselves are not considered; nor are the food-chain
effects on organisms considered (e.g., ingestion by animals of contaminated
plants or animals).
5. The HRA examines only a subset of the chemicals of concern, particularly.
for species other than hum_ans, and uses incorrect toxicity values for many
of these..
Equally problematic is the }iRA's inclusion of only a very limited set
of toxic chemicals, primarily heavy metals, in its evaluation of health effects.
This is especially the case with respect to the very limited assessment of the
potential for enviror~rnental effects, even for those on aquatic organisms. This
deficiency is compounded further by the HRA's use of incorrect toxicity values
for most of the compounds it does include.
The HRA limits itself to consideration of only eight heavy metals and
only one of the many highly toxic chemicals that make up the family of
dioxins and furans: 2,3,7,8-diaxtn. This decision, according to the liRA (p.
11) is based on the fact that the eight metals are regulated by the Resource
10
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). and that 2.3.7.8-dioxin is carcinogenic.
Both RCRA and SDWA regulate much larger numbers of toxic
chemicals, however, including other heavy metals and a number of organic
chemicals that have been detected in incinerator ash and are carcinogenic or
otherwise toxic.4 Even among heavy metals, the HRA excludes without
explanation several relevant metals: nickel, copper and zinc (the former is
toxic to humans, the latter two are acutely and chronically toxic to aquatic
organisms in particular). It also excludes selenium, clniming that no EPA
toxicity data for metallic selenium exist; yet EPA has established both a
drinking water standard and an ambient water quality criterion (AWQC) for
selenium.5
The HRA then uses the "short" list of RCRA and SDWA metals -- that
were selected based on consideration of human health only -- as a basis for
selecting the metals of concern to aquatic organism.~. It considers ambient
water quality criteria (AWQC) for only these eight metals, ignoring the
significant toxicity of copper and zinc to aquatic organt-~ms.
4 Incinerator ash is known to contain a broad array of toxic and
potentially toxic organic chemicals. See, for example: EPA and Co-lttion on
Resource Recovery and the Environment (CORRE), Characterization of
Municipal Waste Combustion Ash, Ash ~, and Leachates. EPA 530-SW-
90-029A. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Washington, DC.
March 1990; Karasek, F.W. et al., (1987) "Determination of Organic
Compounds Leached from Municipal Incinerator Fly Ash by Water at Different
pH Levels." Ar~o_~_yt/ca/ChemLstry. vol. 59, no. 7. pp. 1027-1031; Shane et al.
(1990) "Organic Toxicants and Mutagens In Ashes from Eighteen Municipal
Refuse Incinerators," Arch. Env/ron. Contain. Tax/co/., vol. 19, pp. 665-673; and
NUS Corporation. Characterization of Municipal Waste Combustor Ashes and
Leachates from Municipal Solid Waste Land, Is, Monofllls, and Codlsposal Sites,
7 Volumes, EPA Contract No. 68-01-7310, prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, October 1987.
' The drinking water standard is specified in 40 Code of Fed~
Regulat~ns, Part 141; the ambient water quality criterion is discussed In EPA.
"Quality Criteria for Water, 1986," Office of Water Regulations and Standards,
issued May 1, 1986.
11
The HRA's consideration of only one member {2,3,7.8-dioxin) of the
large family of chemicals known as dioxins and furans is unjustified, given
that: (1) numerous other members of this family of chemicals are found in
incinerator ash. (2) numerous other members of this family are highly toxic
and carcinogenic; and (3) equivalency factors are routinely used to translate
the concentrations of the entire family of dioxins and furans into "toxic
equivalents" relative to 2, 3, 7, 8-dioxin. The result is an underestimation of the
risk associated with the presence of dioxins and furans in the ash.
Finally, for the eight heavy metals it considers, the HRA uses as
benchmarks for assessing the safety of the proposed project the drinking
water st_~_ndards (known as Maximum Contaminant Levels. or MCLs) and
ambient water quality criteria (AWQC). However, most of the MCL and AWQC
values listed in the HRA (Table ES-6) are incorrect. Table III (attached) shows
the values listed in the HRA alongside the correct values taken from EPA
publications. The table also lists the AWQC for two relevant metals excluded
from the HRA: copper and zinc.
These errors are not trivial: in particular, except for arsenic, the HRA
used AWQC values that were consistently incorrect on the high side, with the
correct values being anywhere from 2 to 833 times lower than the values
used in HRA. The environmental risks were therefore severely
underestimated, a defect compounded further by the failure to consider copper
and zinc at _~ll,
6. The HRA grossly disWrts the role of conservative ass..rnptions in risk
assessment procedures..,
The HRA repeatedly draws attention to the conservative ass~mptions
used in its methodology;, see, for e~mple, pp. ES-12 through 16. While this
is useful and appropriate as far as it goes, it. is _~n incomplete and biased
presentation of the study results. For example, the report concludes:
"rhe results of this HRA dearly demonstrate that desp/te the
extreme/~ conservative assumpt/ons emp~ in this assessment,
there is no significant h,m~n health risk due to the use of TAP
12
as a replacement for a portion of the aggregate in a section of
bituminous pavement." {page ES-16, emphasis added)
Later, the report states:
"Extremely conservative (worst-case) assumptions have been made
throughout this study in order to provide a large margin of
safety." (page 3)
Unfortunately, the HRA falls to mention several important additional
facts:
(1)
(2}
Conservative assumptions of the sort made in the HRA are routinely
employed to compensate for the substantial uncertainty in such risk
assessments due to the lack of sufficient data charactex~z~ng all
substances of health concern and all pathways of exposure.8
Numerous non-conservative assumptions are also made in this HRA (and
virtually an other HRAs), due to lack of data and other reasons; the
conservative assumptions are used in part to compensate for these
necessary non-conservative assumptions. A list of some. of the non-
conservative assumptions is attached as Table IV. Two examples are:
(a) Many chemicals have yet to be tested sufficiently for toxicity.
in the absence of data af~rmatively indicating toxicity, the
chemicals are assumed to pose zero risk to humnns or other
organisms. In the present HRA. an chemicals present in the ash
other than the eight heavy metals and 2,3.7,8-dtoxin are assumed
to have no toxicity whatsoever.?
6 See further discussion of this in EPA, "Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment," 51 Federal Register 34001, September 24, 1986.
? In some cases, the HRA fails to include estimates of risks for certain
chemicals even where there are known health effects. For example, when
(continued...)
13
{3)
(4)
(b) Many chemicals cause health effects for which standards have
yet to be developed; for example, 2.3,7,8-dioxin is regulated only
as a carcinogen, even though it is known also to cause numerous
other health effects (e.g., on the immune system) at very Iow
doses. These other effects are not considered at all in this HRA.
There is universal acceptance among policy makers and technical
experts that risk managers shotdd err on the side of health and
environmental safety when making decisions in the face of scientific
uncertainty; conservative assumptions used in risk assessment are one
embodiment of that fundamental principle.
The general notion that risk assessments are too conservative (a popular
argument among industry groups as of late) has been challenged by
many reputable risk assessment experts and other scientists.8
For these reasons, it cannot be concluded that the use of conservative
ass;~mptions results in extreme overestimation of the risks of the proposed
project. Moreover, even where some degree of overes_~mation does occur, this
is a deliberate and desirable outcome of stnndard risk assessment procedures,
in keeping with the policy of erring on the side of safety.
The HRA's repeated references to conservative assnmptions, without
concomitant reference to non-conservative assumptions or the reasons for
?(...continued)
characterizing risks from inhalation of airborne particulates, the HRA
estimates a carcinogenic risk for cadmium, but ass~mes no non-carcinogenic
of earimi~m
risk (see HRA Tables 5-1 through 5-3, pp. !~-49). Yet inhalation emphysema
is known to cause or contribute to non-cancer diseases, including
and other lung ailments.
r.,,, vol 14, 1989, pp. 427-467; Center xor
OMB vs ~ ....... ,..~.
M~~L ~o~c~ IOr ~c r u~, ,-
14
such assumptions, is highly misleading and serves to encourage false
confidence in the certainty with which risks can be measured and the "safety"
of the project can be determined. Perhaps more troubling, it also reflects a
basic lack of understanding of the foundations of health risk assessment.
7. The HRA neglects or downplays several important pathways for release of
and exposure to ash-borne toxic substances.
Numerous hidden or difficult-to-discern assumptions underlie the
exposure assessment component of the HRA -- assumptions that consistently
result in underestimation of releases and exposures from the proposed
project. Several of these are discussed here.
The HRA examines several pathways for water-mediated exposure to
toxic substances present in the ash. These include ingestion of
contaminated groundwater or surface water runoff' and dermal exposure
to surface water runoff. For all of these pathways, however, the only
source of contamination is assumed to be the /each/ng of metals from
the road surface into water that comes into direct contact with it. This
means that instead of considering the total metal content of the ash-
substituted material, only the small fraction of the total ~mount of a
metal that leaches using the TCLP is assumed to be a source of water
contamination and subsequent exposure.
What this approach fails to consider is the fact that it is equally
possible for whole particles of ash to be carried by water that comes
into contact with the ash. A significant fraction of ash, as well as
materials eroded from a roadway surface, is in the form of small
particles that are quite prone to transport by water flowing over the
surface. These particles, even ff only insoluble or slightly soluble toxic
substnnces are attached, can be a source of exposure through ground
or surface water contamination, or direct contact with runoff. They can
also contaminate surrounding softs with which humans or other
organisms may come into direct contact through dermal exposure or
resuspended airborne dust. They can nl._~ be taken up by plants or
animals and incorporated into the food chain.
15
The HRA falls to consider these important pathways of exposure, and
as a result underestimates hr, man and environmental exposures via
waterborne routes.
The HRA considers food chain exposures, but limits the analysis only
to direct or indirect contamination of food supplies originating from air
emissions from the roadway surface; only airborne particles of ash
deposited directly onto plants or into water that harbors aquatic life are
ass~_.med to result in any exposure via the food chain (see HRA pages
78-9).
This approach neglects the potcnUal for contamination of plants or
animals with toxic substances originating from waterborne releases of
either whole ash particles or leached toxic substances.. A variety of
specific mechanisms should be examined: for example, uptake of
metals by plants that have come into contact with runoff or with soils
contaminated by such runoff; and uptake by aquatic life that ingest or
absorb water or sediments contaminated by runoff containing leached
metals or ash panic]es.
The HRA's failure to consider these pathways results in underes_flmation
of human exposures via the food chain. Such pathways would also
contribute directly to environmental exposures.
The HRA's consideration of exposure t° airb°me P .a.rticula._t_~ _a,s, StoUm~
that the concentration of metnls on the particulates 1.s e~t. m_v~ cu~c~c
concentrations of the metals in the original TAP/naturm
mixture. No evidence is provided to corroborate this ..ass. ump~o._n,
hn,~-ver and there is nmple reason to believe that it resmus m.a,
........ ' - --- - ...... ,----,-ns on airborne parucies ox
underestimation of the metro
It is well known that particJes of fly ash tends to _be_ .much_s_~en~a~tho~
particles of bottom ash, and they also carry much higher _con ....
of most heavy met_~ls. Indeed, the smaller the fly ash parucie, me
16
higher the concentration of most heavy metals of concern.9 These
smaller particles may be preferentially liberated from the road surface
through erosion, and the smaller the particle, the more likely it is to
become ah'borne. Hence. the smaller particles, along with their higher
concentrations of metals, can be expected to represent a much larger
fraction of airborne particulates than is assumed by using the
concentrations of the original TAP/natural aggregate mixture. The
exposure to toxic substances due to the release of such particles will
therefore be much higher than is assumed in the ~
Although waterborne dispersal of ash particles is neglected in the HRA
{see the first bullet in this section), the same principle applies to them
as to air-dispersed particles: the smaller the particle, the more likely
it is to be carried off by runoff.
Clearly, this assumption made in the HRA represents another example
of a very non-conservative assumption. The best approach to
quantifying the magnitude of the potential underestimation of exposure
resulting fi-om this questionable assumption made in the HRA would be
to directly determine the s/ze and chemical composition of particles that
erode from a roadway surface made using the ash/natural aggregate
mixture. In the absence of such empirical data, a far more .reasonable
assumption would be to assume that particulates have metal
concentrations comparable to fly ash particles in the same size range.
9 This is because in the high temperature of the incinerator, metals
vaporize, only to condense onto particles of fly ash as the combustion gases
cool; because, for a given mass of particles, the surface area of smaller
particles Is greater than larger particles, the smaller particles contain higher
concentrations of the condensed metals. See: Sawell, S.E. et al. (1986)
Assessment of Ash Contaminant Leachability, NITEP Phase II - Testing of the
FLAKT Air Pollution Control Technology at the Quebec City Municipal Energy
from
Centre,W~n~viroFn~ ~en~d~u~s~trl~.__P~°~.g~'ams_B.rar~.ch, Wastewater Technology
" emen Co et . 9S6)
t~,- ~u ~-~uuculate Matter ri'om the Combustion
of Coal and Coal/Refuse Mixtures," Env/ron. Sc/. Techno/., vol. 20, pp.
604-609; Carlsson, K. (1986) '~Ieavy Metals fi-om 'Energy from Waste' Plants
~[ Comparison of Gas Cleaning System.~," Waste Management & Research. vol
pp. 15-20; and Greenberg, I~R. et all (1978) "Composition and Particle Si~
in Refuse Incineration," Environ. Sci. Techno£, vol. 12, pp. 566-573.
17
In calculating groundwater or surface water runoff concentrations of
contaminants leached from roadway materials, the HRA claims that it
a minimal
uses a worst-case assumption: "Both scenarios assume
dilution and attenuation factor of TCLP leachates thereby ensuring that
worst case concentrations are employed in estimating risks from water
related exposures" (HRA page 61). In fact. this "very conservative
attenuation and dilution factor of 32" (HRA page 19) is not all that
conservative ff one abides by another conservative assumption made in
the study, namely that individuals consume water drawn from supplies
within the study area (see HRA page ES-13).
The factor of 32 actually is the value EPA uses to estimate how much
the concentrations of contaminants leaching from a waste site will be
reduced by the time they reach a drinking water well that is 500 feet
away from the site;l° in contrast, the HRA is supposed to assume that
people take their groundwater from within the study area, that is,
within 33 feet of the source of contamination. Obviously, less dilution
and attenuation will occur over this distance than EPA ass~_,rned would
occur over 500 feet, and a factor lower than 32 would be more
appropriate.
EPA actually uses a sliding scale of dilution and attenuation facWrs
ranging from as low as 6 up to 32,~ so the HRA chose the /east
conservative factor, not the most conservative as is implied.
invariabl leach metals more a c~w, .,~
field are ,_mfounded_.
The I-IRA repeatedly states that its use of TCLP leaching values as a
predicWr of leachability of the TAP/natural aggregate mixture is a
conservative assumption because 'it is well documented that the TCLP
~o EPA, 50 Federa/Reg/ster 48902, November 27, 1985.
u EPA, 50 Federa/Reg/ster 48901. November 27, 1985.
18
exu-action procedure, which uses acetic acid. is much more aggressive than
rain or stormwater" (See HRA page ES-14).
This assumption represents a gross over-generali?ation that is not
supported by available laboratory or field data that compares leachability
using the TCLP to: (a) leachabili~ using distilled water or a weak acid rain
solution, applied to either (1) raw combined ash or (ii) treated combined ash;
and (b) actual field leachates at ash disposal sites. These data are discussed
below. ~2
(a)(i) TCLP vs. water leach tests on raw combined ash:
In 1990, EPA conducted a study of laboratory extracts of ash from five
US incinerators, directly comparing the TCLP test~3 with extraction tests using
distilled water CDH20-) or using a weakly acidic synthetic acid rain solution
("SAR"). ,4
,2 An additional concern with the use of only TCLP data is the extremely
limited amount of TAP test data using the TCLP from which "maxim. m"
values are derived. Based on a review of test data submitted to IdPCA by
MSC {conducted by Braun Environmental Laboratories, data sheets dated
8/23/90), it appears that the TCLP values used in the HRA are based on a
single two-day sampling event, from which only four samples were taken for
analysis. Given the enormous heterogeneity of raw ash, both within a given
batch of ash and over time due to changes in input waste, and the potential
for additional batch-to-batch variability to be introduced through treatment,
there is no reason to believe that these data represent the maximum or even
average levels of TCLP leaching of TAP.
~3 The TCLP test actually employs two different extraction solutions. The
"FCLP1 solution" is used on wastes of low to moderate alkalinity; the ~LP2
solution" is more strongly acidic, and is used on wastes that are relatively
more alkaline. Generally,
County incinerator produce aC~lm~bh~,,eda~-fr~°-m~ f_a._cl}i~ ~es Ii. kc the ,H. ennepin
extraction usin~ the TCI.~ ~,~,~e,~ ~.. ~.~x,, aha. meretore wotua require
.... · .,-,~v~. ~.~lVe.~l lne ro rle rill
treatment rocess an P p rary ture of the TAP
reveal whi~p~r "- J~ d the .fact that the records of the TAP TCLP tests do not
TCLP2 r~u.cuu was used, the comparison here will be to both TCLP1 and
{COt;~tE]~P,.,A.~an~d_.__.C_o_a~..tion,.o.n_ Resource Recovex~ and the Environment
,, ,.,,,u~ uc;tenzarlon oj Municipal Waste Combustion Ash, Ash Extracts,
(continued...)
19
This comparison, shown in Table V, reveals m~merous cases in which
metals leached from combined ash at higher levels using distilled water or
synthetic acid rain. or both. than using one or both TCLP solutions. Of the
eight metals shown in Table V, such cases were found for ash from at least
one, and usually two or three, of the five facilities tested. For all of the eight
metals tested, such cases occurred with ash from at least one facility having
acid gas scrubbing (and therefore resembling the Hennepin County
incinerator). 15
Clearly, these data demonstrate that the }iRA's assumption that the
TCLP always produces worst-case leachate values is wholly unfounded.
~4(...continued)
and Leachates, EPA 530-SW-90-029A, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington, DC, March 1990 (hereafter "the CORRE study").
The five facilities, designated A through E, have the following air
pollution control devices (APCD):
A Acid gas scrubber + baghouse
T..... ~,,~,-,, on + b~hous~e~rJ
. facilities A, B and E most closely resemble the Henneptn
Given_that. ....... ,, ....lime-based reagents to neutralize _aci~
County facility ..ua mat m~c~._~,,~,.. ~.A,o *~,e chemical nature of the resul .t~. g
Hlat clr'amatlcauy ~u~.~ ~,- ii1 ttle
gases -- a step . __ - ~t____ r. eili,4~ are ,~robablv the most relevant
ash -- test data ior mese u~cc ~,._- ,~,.,~ ~- ~
following comparison.
r tile raw asll il-Om ~ ~,.~-r -
aol)arently are not avafla?le_ .fo,_~,__a ,o,o o ,~er-based test, have been
-- erator;, only tests using lvic-~, uu ~o__~, ~ .... m the ash at
incin that lead leaches fro
It .is im rt__~nt to note, however,
released, po The average lead level for the first three
s Method 1312.
ers of testing unaer m_~ ~-~-o ~----~ level s e~
quart ....... ~-- ~ in excess of the _ pe~n.
~ul~e~'the TCLP (5,000 mcg/L) that designates a magenta u~ ~ ,~ hazara
20
(a)(ii) TCLP vs. water leach tests on treated combined ash:
Apparently. the only leaching data available on the treated ash product
{TAP) from the Hennepin County incinerator are those using the TCLP.'6
Thus, a direct comparison of TCLP and water or SAR leach test data
conducted on TAP is not possible. However, EPA has been conducting tests
on combined ash treated using a variety of treatment processes, the results
of which are summarized in a draft final report.~7 Most of these treatment
processes entail mixing ash with 1/me-based reagents (portland cement or
cement ldln dust) and various additives. The treated ash from each of these
processes has been subjected to both the TCLP and a distil/ed water leach
test. The results indicate that for three of the four heavy metals compared
in the report -- copper, lead, and zinc, but not cadmium -- most or all of the
treatment processes produced a material that leached approximately the same
or more metal when extracted with distilled water than when extracted with
acid using the TCLP. In particular, for three of the four treated ashes, lead
leached at higher levels using, distilled water than using the TCLP -- in two
cases at much higher levels.
Thus, the fact that the Hennepin County incinerator's ash has been
treated does not mean that the TCLP is the most aggressive test: the data
Just discussed suggest at least a reasonable likelihood that water-based tests
would produce greater leaching, at least for certain metals.
(b) TCLP v~. actual field leachates from ash monot~ll sites:
The I-IRA's claim_ that use of data from the TCLP test is a "worst-case"
assumption also implies that, compared to what would happen in the field,
~6 Numerous attempts were made to determine if data using other test
procedures, such as distilled water, synthetic acid r~tn, or Method 1312 tests.
were available through either MPCA or MSC. These attempts did not uncover
any such data.
~7 Kosson, D.S. et al.. USEPA Program for Evaluation of Treatment and
Utilization of Municipal Waste Combustor Residues: Phase I, Laborotory Testing
of Vendor Processes, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH,
draft final report dated November 1991.
21
that is. in settings where TAP is utilized, the TCLP over-estimates leaching.
A review of availnble data do not support this sweeping conclusion.
The 1990 joint study by EPA and CORRE examined field leachates from
ash monofllls, as well as ash extracts from 5 faciLtties derived using the TCLP
and a similar acetic acid-based test called the Extraction Procedure. or EP.~8
This very limited sampling of field leachates found that the levels of
lead and cadmium were generally considerably lower than those found tn the
E~ and TCLP extracts; however, .field leach~_t~- levels of other metals were
significantly underpredicted or at least not appreciably overpredicted by these
tests. Table VI compares average field leachate levels with average EP.
TCLP1, and TCLP2 extract levels. These data show that the EP and TCLP
tests in some cases actually greatly tw_derestimot~ci the field leachate data:
for arsenic and selenium at Facility A; and for barium and manganese at
Facilities B and E. In other cases, the extracts were quite close to field
leachates: for chromium and manganese at Facility A~ It should be noted
that Facilities A, B, and E are the three facilities examined in the
EPA/CORRE study that use acid gas scrubbing, and therefore most closely
resemble the Hennepin County incineraWr.
~n~i~a~h~_~'~s,~'~-~)-S'~-90-029A, Office of Solid Waste ana j~mergency
Response, Washington, DC, March 1990.'
.... ~-~ ~o~i~ xue~e, couectecl at o111~ O:le tetuu u~ u..~. _ .,
ints in time; most ox mc uau u~~ -.--; ti Y f ash.
oloperation~ and so were not representauve of the long term behavior o
o0
~ °., .°°' '°°
00~o .~o00o
0 0 ·
TABLE III: CORRECTED VALUES FOR MCLs AND AWQCs
USED IN MSC'S HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
Metal MCL Listed Correct AWQC Listed Correct
in HRA MCL in HRA AWQC*
Arsemc 50 50 190 190
Barium 5000 2000** --- ---
Cadmium 5 5 10 1.1
Chromium 50 100 50 11.0'**
Lead 15 **** 50 3.2
Mercury 2 2 10 0.012
Selenium 10 50 10 5
Silver 50 100'**** 50 0.12
Copper
Zinc
12
110
All values are in micrograms per liter (mcg/L).
* Values are EPA's chronic, fresh water, _n_mbient water quality criteria:
at a water hardness of 100 mg/L measured as CaCOa. Criteria for
cadmium, trivalent chromium, copper, lead and zinc are hardness-
dependent; values for these metals at a water hardness of 50 mg/L (the
other "standard" value for hardness) are lower, approximately half of the
values shown.
** Final MCL published at 56 Federal Register 30266, july 1. 1991.
*** Value shown is for hexavalent chromium; value for trivalent chromi~am
is 210 mcg/L.
**** EPA recently changed the drinking water standard for lead. The
standard for lead was reduced from 50 mcg/L to an action level that
specifies that no more than 10% of standing tap water samples may
exceed 15 mcg/L; this requirement is intended to ensure that drinking
water supplies achieve an average lead level of no more than 5 mcg/L.
56 Federal Register 26460, June 7, 1991. EPA has also set a Maximum
Cont_a_mi~ont Level Goal (MCI,G) of zero.
***** Value shown is a secondary MCL for silver; EPA recently deleted the
primary MCL for silver and established the secondary MCL; see 56
'Federal Register 3526, January 30, 1991.
TABLE IV: SOME NON-CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS
USED IN THIS AND OTHER HRAs
Many chemicals have yet to be tested sufficiently for toxicity: in the
absence of data ~iffirmatlvely Indicating toxicity, the chemicals are
assumed to pose zero risk. In the HRA, all chemicals present in the
ash other than the eight heavy metals and 2.3,7,8-dtoxin are assumed
to have no toxicity whatsoever,x
Many chemicals cause health effects for which standards have yet to be
developed. For example, 2,3,7,8-dloxin is regulated only as a
carcinogen, even though it is known also to cause numerous other
health effects (e.g., on the immune system) at very Iow doses; these
other effects are not considered at all in this or other HRAs.
Humans and other organisms are simultaneously exposed to numerous
toxic substances present in ash. Each chemical is assumed to act
Independently of ail the others; that is, the cumulative impact of
exposures to all such chemi_oo[q is a~sumed to be additive, even though
the effects may in fact be synergistic (or antagonistic).
The ash roadway is assumed to be the only source of exposure to the
chemicals evaluated in the HR~ In comparing exposures resulting from
the ash roadway to .regulatory standards, the HRA deems a chemical
"safe" if the level of exposure does not exceed the standard. But the
standard represents the acceptable level of exposure from a/l sources,
not only the ash roadway. There are numerous other sources of
exposure to the same chemicals present in ash. and even ff the ash
exposure does not itself exceed the standard, it may well contribute to
cumulative exceedances of the standard. The HRA does not consider
these other sources of exposure.
Most toxicity data are derived from animal studies, not direct human
studies. Generally, however, only one or two rodent species (rats and
mice) have been tested; it is possible that humans may be more
sensitive to a particular chemical thai1 either rodent species tested.
' In some cases, the HR2, fatl.q to include estimates of risks for certain
chemicals even where there are known health effects. For example, when
characterizing risks from inhalation of airt:~rne parti~, _the._ ~HI~_,_ ,e~___ti~na~_m~"
enic risk for cadmh,m- but assumes no non-carcmogem_c rm~ ~.~a: ~
a carcinog - e
Tables 5-1 through 5-3, pp. a?--a-9). Yet inhalation of cadmium is imown to caus
or contribute to non-cancer diseases, including emphysema and other lung
_ailments.
Human subpopulations may be more sensitive to particular chemicals
than is the general population or the species on which testing was
conducted. These sensitive subpopulations are not treated difl~erenfly
in HRAs than is the general population, however.
The HRA uses reference doses (R/Ds) as the standard of comparison for
exposures to non-carcinogenic chemicals. Reliance on RIDs, which are
based on risks to the general population, may not adequately protect
sensitive subpopulations. (51 Federal Register 1627. January 14,
1986.)2
Virtually no consideration is given to environmental effects; these effects
may occur at levels of exposure lower than those affecting human
populations, as evidenced by the fact that ambient water quoitty criteria
for several metals are set at levels considerably lower than human
health-based dri~g water standards.
Note that the HRA erroneously states that RfDs protect sensitive
subpopulattons as well as the general population; see HRA page 29.
C
TABLE VI: COMPARISON OF ASH MONOFILL FIELD I.F~ACHATES
WITH ACID-BASED LEACHING TEST EXTRACTS
................... As Cr Mn Se
Facility A
Leachate 171 13.7 1,559 147
EPTox 15.5 42 3,086 ND
TCLP1 ND ND 0.82 ND
TCLP2 ND 12.2 2.997 ND
Facility B
Ba Mn
Leachate 9,220 17,600
EPTox 240 821
TCLP1 1,030 2.3
TCLP2 418 1,237
Facility E
Ba Mn
Leachate 3,025 17,800
EPTox 193 3,274
TCLP1 265 1,609
TCLP2 319 3,554
[ND = not detect_~hle]
All values are in micrograms per liter.
july 20, 1990
To the 'Mayor and City Coundl
of the City of Dayton:
Hon. Mayor Corcoran and Councilmen:
Enclosed is a resolution which embodies the recommendation of the Ash
Utilization Demonstration Project Task Force, which was appointed by the City
Council, following its extensive study of the draft permit and all information
available to it at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to advise the Council on
this matter, and after thorough discussion and study, we make the following
recommendations to the City Council:
The application for a permit should be denied at this time, because accurate
standards have not been determined for the protection of the health and safety of
people and agricultural products, including standards for ash utilization, surface
water standards, standards for petroleum testing of TAP-laden asphalt, and
transportation standards for ash and TAP. In addition, the application for a permit
does not contain adequate Plans for storage of TAP other than the test storage site,
for worker safety, for recycling, and for ultimate removal of the TAP-laden asphalt.
Further, no bond has been proposed or required to cover removal of the TAP,
should it be proven hazardous, or for any consequential damages to landowners and
others.
f'~ The Task Force further recommends that all possible efforts to
be
made
induce the Minnesota State Legislature to increase f...~un_ding for the Minnesota PCA,
particularly irvthe~rea- of- funds- for-e~ent~. W~ have serious conc~6'ffC~ti~brra~
~he ;~bility of the PCA to enforce a permit such as this one, should it be issued,.~.
(,....p~ticularly if no bond is required of potential applicants. ~
The Task Force further strongly recommends a moratorium on any further
applications for a permit for an ash treatment facility until (1) a permit application is
made and a permit is drafted and issued which provides for the above concerns; and
(2) adequate testing has been completed and all required test results have been
released, including a road test of at least seven years in duration.
The Task Force further recommends to the City Council of Dayton that it
immediately examine its policies for acceptance of rezoning applications and other
applications for permits for industrial facilities in the City of Dayton to determine
what standards should be met in dealing with hazardous materials and what bond
requirements and application fee requirements should be set for all such applicants.
It should actively seek the assistance of the League of Minnesota Cities, the
surrounding municipalities, and other Minnesota municipalities which have
studied such issues and reached conclusions relating thereto in formulating
uftiform, non-arbitrary standards to be set by the City of Dayton for future
development. It should actively seek citizen input in this connection, including
input from the governmental agencies entrusted with the duty of providing for the
health and safety of the citizenry and of the industries and businesses already located
within the City of Dayton.
The Task Force further strongly and enthusiastically recommends that the
City and County work more aggressively than they already do to encourage
information, citizen education, and citizen participation in recycling, including
hazardous waste collection and recycling of plastics. We have been advised that
there are programs available through Hennepin County which could assist the City
in such programs both financially and through programming, and encourage the
City to utilize all available resources. In regard to the proposed utilization of
incinerator ash, this would help both to reduce the volume and toxicity of the ash
produced in the HERC facility, and would have a long-term beneficial effect on the
landfill problem as well.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
ASH UTILIZATION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT TASK FORCE
'iFASil I~O][C~ I~I~SOLLFIFIION, July 19, 1990
BE IT RESOLVED, that the application for a permit should be denied at this
time, because accurate standards have not been determined for the protection of the
health and safety of people. If, notwithstanding the above, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency decides to issue a permit at this time, the Task Force recommends
the following minimum requirements for such a permit:
1. Citizens Review Board. A Citizens Review Board shall be established to
review all Plans required by the permit, all test results, and any changes to the
permit or determinations of whether testing shall continue or is adequate to allow
further use of TAP or construction of a plant to produce TAP. For any significant
proposed change to the permit or any Plan required to be submitted pursuant
thereto, there shall be a public comment period of not less than thirty days.
2. Length of Testing. Tests shall be devised and standards set to determine the
effect common road chemicals such as road salt, gasoline, oil, and antifreeze have
on TAP, and such appropriate tests shall be run periodically (monthly for air, soil,
and water runoff tests) in varying weather and rainfall conditions and analysis
thereof shall be part of the final report of the test results. The testing period should
run for a minimum of seven years, or until the TAP has deteriorated to a point
where safe road management requires replacement or repair, whichever is first to
occur. The test should not be conducted until adequate tests are identified and
standards are defined to determine the effect of petroleum spills upon the TAP and
the long-term deterioration of the TAP pellets. No consideration shall be given to
full-scale usage until the entire seven years of the test have run.
3. Exclusion of Fly Ash. Fly ash should be excluded from the TAP, and all ash,
whether fly ash or combined ash, exhibiting characteristics of a hazardous waste
should be excluded. There shall be specific plans for separation of rejected ash and
ongoing testing to assure that no rejected ash finds its way into the test material. If it
is not possible to exclude fly ash from the currently-proposed test, a control test
shall be run concurrently with the proposed test strip to test TAP made without fly
ash and all the same tests shall be run as for the control strip and the TAP with ash
strip.
4. Total Composition Testing. Total composition testing and identification of
all chemicals in the ash shall be required, before incorporating the ash into the TAP,
before laying the TAP, upon final disposition of the TAP, and by periodic core
samples throughout the test, and complete records comparing the sets of test results
shall be maintained. Alleged test results previously announced by USPCI vary
greatly from recent HERC test results. No test of incinerator ash substantially
different in composition from current testing shall be used as precedent in any
future permit application for either manufacturing facilities or use of TAP.
5. Toxicity Standards. No TAP shall be used which exceeds the EP toxidty
standards set by the federal government. The minimum standard for
determination of whether a hazard is created upon subsequent testing of the ash and
of the TAP shall be based upon the stricter of the public drinking water or private
drinking water standards, as to all heavy metals, including lead and cadmium. In
addition, a plan shall be developed by the Minnesota PC^, upon final acceptance of
the surface water standards currently under its consideration, to test the wetland
areas and surface waters within one mile of the test site at least annually.
6. Highway Employees, Safety Measures. Before. ',,~.e tr-ansporting--of~ ~JL~Otta~n
ash or the laying of any TAP, all employees who will come~_th the.ash
or TAP shall be fully advised of an~~ropri.ate.s,a, fe. ty.
measures to be taken, and ~~.o ce,cl._,,H_t_o_t_a_l
composition testin~°.,n. _s~h~l- o_c_c~_r
even if le
ha
t .... . Permanent notices shall be posted at the test
site visible in each diredion advising of the presence of the project and where to
obtain further information. The form of such notices shall be submitted to the
MPCA and the Citizens Review Board and approved before installation of any TAP.
7. Core Borings. A minimum of five core borings shall be made along each side
of the test site, and shall be deep enough to ensure that at least three feet of day
underlie each site. If at any boring site the clay shall be thinner than three feet, the
test site shall be abandoned.
8. Bond, Damages. A bond shall be posted by USPCI in the amount of 120% of
the estimated cost of complete removal and safe disposition of the TAP if it were to
be proven hazardous. No part thereof shall be released to the company until (a) the
project has been terminated and shown not to have caused any uncompensated
damage to landowners, tenants, businesses, and residents, and (b) the TAP has been
completely removed and properly disposed of or safely recycled. Any land owner
required to hold money in escrow following a sale because of the existence of the
project shall be allowed to draw upon said bond for such purpose. A landowner,
tenant, resident, or business owning any crops, livestock, well, septic system, or
other assets damaged or diminished in value by said project shall be compensated
for the full value of replacement of said damaged items or reduction in value.
Standards shall be set for all agricultural and dairy products grown or from animals
grazing within two miles of the test site, and tests shall be run at the permittee's
expense to assure that no toxic materials have been incorporated into those products
from the TAP before any sale shall be allowed. Should any residential, commerdal,
or agricultural land be rendered unusable or unsalable because of contamination
from the test demonstration project, the owners thereof shall be compensated
therefor at current market values. Well testing and other reasonable tests shall be
performed, at the expense of the permittee, for all persons residing or owning
businesses within one mile of the test site, if they are requested by such persons, and
no more frequently than annually for any one person. Should any well test indicate
contamination of the water source of such person, exceeding Minnesota toxicity
standards for such wells, new water sources shall be identified and provided for
such person, at the expense of the permittee. The cost of any expert witness fees
required to prove such contamination shall be paid by the permittee, if the ultimate
determination is that the well has been contaminated by the project.
9. Transportation Standards. Article V, Section B of the Draft Permit shall be
changed to read as follows: Standards shall be set prior to the installation of any
TAP for transportation of all ash and/or TAP from any incinerator and from any
storage site to or from the pilot plant in Georgia and to any future treatment plant,
including complete containment of all such ash and extreme caution in transferring
the same from trucks to storage fadlities at such treatment plants. Procedures shall
be devised to be followed by drivers in the case of any accident or spillage, and each
driver shall be trained in such procedures. The Minnesota PCA, USPCI, and the
Citizens Review Board shall be notified of any such incidents within 48 hours of
their occurrence.
10. Removal Plan. A plan shall be formulated prior to the installation of any
TAP which will provide for a fast, complete, and effective removal of all TAP from
the test site in the event the testing provides information that the presence of the
TAP is hazardous, and standards shall be set for identification of interim test results
which would require the immediate removal of the TAP from the roadway. The
Plan shall provide for removal of contaminants from surrounding waterways, soil,
buildings, agricultural products, and aquifers, and shall be coordinated with the
safety procedures to be utilized by any employees handling the TAP.
11. Ultimate Disposal or Recycling. There shall be incorporated into the Closure
Plan, Item X, page 12 of the Draft Permit, a Plan for ultimate disposal or recycling,
which plan shall be formulated before the TAP has been applied for the ultimate
disposal of the TAP, at such time as the road has deteriorated, which include spedfic
proposals for removal, recycling, tracking of hazardous materials, and ultimate
procedures for safe landfilling of any hazardous or nonrecyclable material. Any
material that exhibits characteristics of a hazardous waste shall be disposed of in a
manner appropriate for hazardous waste. The locations of such fa. cilities, and the
total costs of such hazardous waste disposal and handling, shall be part of the Plan.
Unless a significant portion of the TAP can be recycled and the ultimate volume and
toxicity of material to be deposited in landfills will be less than it would have been
had the ash not been incorporated into the TAP, no TAP shall be installed.
12. Moratorium. There shall be a moratorium on plant siting, on any further
consideration of applications for permits, and on environmental impact studies or
statements until all tests described in the permit are completed and fully analyzed.
No large expenditures should be made and no permit application shall be accepted
by the MPCA until a determination is made that the utilization of TAP for roadway
asphalt is safe and economically feasible, so that the argument cannot later be made
that because a great deal of money has already been spent, a bad project should be
completed to avoid waste.
Star Tribune
[[ Es~blished 1867
· Roger Parkinson Publisher and President
· Joel R. Kramer Executive Editor
.. Tim J...McGuire Managing Editor
Robert J. White Editorial Editor . .~'.
' '" Tuesd y~Aug
;1~ '~ ' a ust 21/1990 .
Healthy.skepticism on turmng ash to asphalt
i; it safe to pave I~cai roads With i;cinc~at~r;~h;';'"~eet fe.~eral.lead h.'milA
· ,That question should matter to every person who views that those Emits ;ma~' not oe sumcieat to
i:irives Minnesota's highways or strolls its curb- protect health. '.AS the road 'yields.t(~.traffic ahd
!gdes. And until the answer is plain, drivers and ' harsh v~eather;. ~y fear, .the asphalt 'Could be
~strollers should resisi Hennepin County's enthusi-
asm for turning ash from its downtown incinerator .
into asphalt. At this point,, the plan to test the idea
!this year on a county road looks hasty and risky.
;The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (IvlPCA)
should defer it until public doubts are addressed.
;kt first glance, the ash-to-asphalt deal looks like a
neat way to make tons of incinerator waste disap-
bear. That bit of magic depends on a Georgia firm,
Municipal Services Corp., that says it can change
dangerous ash into innocuous pellets for use in
load paving. To prove its case, the company wants
to test the ash-laced asphalt on a 1,000-foot strip of
County Rd. 81 in Dayton. The two-year experi-
ment could be the first step toward paving other
county roads -- and ultimately, roads all over the
state -- with ash pellets. The MPCA citizen board
is scheduled to decide in late September whether
to approve a permit for the project.
~,11 .of this has made some of the folks in Dayto'n
fretful, and for good reason. They complain that
the pellets slated for testing will include fly ash --
smokestack residue which often contains hazitrd-
clus amounts of lead, cadmium and Other heavy
~!.etals. Though the asphalt itself is expected t0just
ground into a toxic powder' Which cohld COntami-
nate soils and waterwiys"-'and '{vhich playing
children might swallow and inhale.
The project's defenders insist that won't happen,
and that extensive tests will assure thc 'experi-
ment's safety· But several environmental groups
have pointed to holes in the draft permit for the
project: It prescribes no tests for measuring the
amount and effects of dust that may wear off thc
road. It lacks a requirement, included in earlier
drafts, that a sedimentation .basin be built to
monitor and contain runoff from the road. And
the environmentalists criticize the experiment's
two-year time span'-- too short a duration, they
say, to determine whether the asphalt will hold up
safely over time. Those concerns are echoed by 32 :
state legislators, who have urged the MPCA to'!
deny the permit until thc flaws are fixed..~.. ' -
-
County Commissioner left Sparta.
tance to the Daylon test as snorer case .or. me .[
"NIMBY" (not in my back yard) .syt~o... me..B,ut
· Da~onians are ri~.t to insist ..that..tl~_
"and thorough. Until that. deni~! ~ met, stepti--'j
..: .- ',.?.-. :.. %*.'?~':..'~'.-.' .-.:. *'.'.
" ' '.~'::~'; ~' *' :'~ "::'
· ." ..... '-~.-': --,~.L:.~'..-'*-;;'" ' ..... '
publication of Work On Waste USA, Inc., 82 Ju0son, Canton, NY 13617 315-379-g200 December 13. 1990
North Dakota Department of Health
denies landfill permit for Minneapolis ash
On December 21, 1990, the North Dakota Department of Health denied a permit to Municipal Services
Corp., a subsidiary of the United States Pollution Control Incorporated (USPCI) to dispose incinerator
ash from Minneapolis' 1.000 tpd mass-bum incinerator at the Sawyer, ND, landfill. The public comment
period ran from November 3rd through December 10th with a public hearing held in Sawyer on Nov 28-29.
According to Dave Kmshe of Clean Water Action in Fargo, ND: "Minnesota's Hennepin County tried to
ship this ash to Day, on, Medina, Dodge County, and Hopkins in Minnesota. They refused. Now North
Dakota says no." Clean Water Action, Dakota Resource Council, Concerned Citizens for Clean
Water (based in Sawyer, ND), and Citizens for Recycling (based in Minor, ND) worked together to raise
concerns about the permit. These groups, representing citizens across both states, contend that ash is a
hazardous waste and can not be buried in areas that recharge groundwater supplies. For more information
contact Dave Krushe in North Dakota at 701-235-5431 or Frank Hornstein in Minneapolis at 612-623-3666.
For a copy of the full decision from the ND Dept. of Health please send a 45-cent SASE to Waste Not.
Excerpts from
North Dakota's State Department of Health & Consolidated Laboratories
"Findings of Fact
Conclusions of Law and Order", dated 12-21-90.
Background. "Municipal Service Corporation (MSC) of Kennesaw, Georgia, and Sawyer, North
Dakota, owns a landfill site for disposal of non-ha:~ardous industrial solid waste which is located in the SW
Quarter of Section 19, Township 152 North, Range 81 West, Brillian Township, Ward County, North
Dakota. M SC has petitioned the North Dakota State Department of Health and Consolidated Laboratories
(Department) for modification of the current landfill permit to include changes in the construction, operation,
closure, and post-closure maintenance of the site and to dispose of municipal waste combuster (incinerator)
ash in the modified landfill."
X. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, the Department finds that municipal
solid waste combuster ash as proposed for disposal in the modified facility contains certain
constituents known to be toxic to the environment and humans. Among these constituents are the
heavy metals: lead, cadmium, and mercury.
XI. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, the Department finds that lead is
highly toxic to humans, particularly to pregnant women and their fetuses and to preschool-age
children. Recent medical research indicates that even low levels oflead adsorption by children may result in
:~ermanent damage including damage to the nervous system. There is no clear 'threshold level' at
which lead levels in the bodies of children begin to produce adverse effects. These findings
promoted proposals by the Environmental Protection Agency to lower the maximum contaminant level (MCL)
for lead in drinking water and for the Center for Disease Control to lower its action level for blood lead levels
in children. Lead is also a classified possible human carcinogen.
X ll. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, cadmium is a known renal toxin and is
also a probable human carcinogen.
Printed on recycled paper, naturally -
XIII. "Based on thc hearing and comment period record as a whole, mercury can cause damage to n
developing fetus and can cause brain and kidney damage in children and adults. Mercury tends to
undergo 'bio-magnification' in the environment wblch may result in concentrated levels in humnn
foods such as fish.
XIV. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, certain geologists including a
representative of the State Geologist, believe that the site of the landfill poses environmental problems because
of the presence of groundwater aquifers in lignite beds unlerlying and adjacent to the site. Conflicting
testimony was received regarding potential groundwater flow velocity within the lignite beds and through the
clays underlining and surrounding the site. Some geologists feel the clay and lignite bed~ are highly fractured
and that if leachate from the landfill were to escape the landfill cells, it could move more rapidly than
represented by M SC.
X V. "Based on the heating and comment period record as a whole, a substantial amount of both
underground and surface mining of lignite coal has occurred in the vicinity of the landfill site in previous
years. Several former coal miners who worked in the underground mines in the area of the site contend that
the area is more significantly undermined than indicated in information provided by the applicant. Presence of
underground mine works could threaten integrity of the landfill cell liner system and could provide routes for
movement of any leachate which might escape the cells.
XVl. "Based on the heating and comment period record as a whole, thc site is an area of high topographic
relief near thc head of a large coulee system which eventually drains into thc Souris River. Flood conditions
and erosion pose a threat of contamination of surface waters and soil.
XVII. "Based on thc hearing and comment period record as a whole, airborne distribution of ash from
the site poses a threat of soil contamination with heavy metals, particularly lead, which could be
toxic for both animals and humans. This potential exists even in consideration of the fugitive dust
control measures as proposcd by thc applicant.
XVIII. "Based on the heating and comment period record as a whole, containment of wastes and i~achat~ in
the landfill are highly dependent upon design and technologicui features of the landfill and proper operation of
the facility as well as proper closure mad long-term post-closure maintenance of the site. Actual experience
with municipal solid waste combuster ash monofills utilizing the proposed liner and cap systems is
limited (less than five yea'rs). This limited actual experience is not sufficient to indicate that the
containment features will not fail prior to represented time periods.
XIX. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, two methods of transportation (rail and
track) of the wastes are required prior to disposal. The length of and switchover of transportation methods
presents a higher potential for environmental spill and contamination than with less distance and withbut a
transportation switchover.
XX. "Based on thc hearing and comment period record ns a whole, thc Deparlmcnt hats significant concerns
regarding the compliance history of the United States Pollution Control Incorporated (USPCI), the
parent company of Municipal Services Corporation. USPCI Ires been cited for a variety of violations of
environmental roles at waste sites operated by the company in both Utah and Oklahoma. Many of these
violations are of thc type that could be encountered at this proposed fadlity.
XXI. 'Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, MSC indicated that it would continue
disposal even if legitimate and verified contamination were discovered from the site. Such continued
contribution to the source of potential contamination could prove injurious to the environment.
XXII. 'Baaed on the heating and comment period record as a whole, the Department finds the potential
contamination from a facility such as that proposed could re,ah in irreversible environmental damage."
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
,',16 P Street. N\V
'\':~shlng',on. DC 20036
20D 3q--3500
N aoOnaL H ea_d q~a_r t er_s_
257 Park Avenue South
New York. NY 10010
(212) 505-2100
1405 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder. CO 80302
~ 303) 440-4901
5655 College Avenue
Oakland. CA 94618
~415) 658-8008
1108 East Main Street
Richmond. VA _o_19
1804} 780-1297
128 East Hargett Street
Raleigh. NC 27601
t919} 821-7793
1800 Guadalupe
· ~,ustin. TX 78701
1512} 478-5161
january22. 1992
John E. Derus. Chairman
Board of Hermeptn County Commissioners
A-2400 Government Center
Minneapolis. MN 55487
Dear Chairman Derus:
Enclosed please find EDF's review of a Health Risk
Assessment of Minnesota MSW-Ash Utilization Demonstration
Project, prepared by AWl3 Technologies. Inc.. for Municipal
Services Corporation.
Based upon my review of the Health Risk Assessment
(HRA). I find the document to be severely deficient as a
characterization of the human health and environmental
risks posed by the proposed project. As described in my
detailed comments which are attached, the scope of the
HRA is far too limited to serve as a basis for assessing the
risks of the project; even ff one were to accept the limited
scope, the study contains numerous mistakes and
erroneous assumptions, and unjustifiably excludes several
relevant pathways of exposure; these deficiencies render it
inadequate even as an assessment of the narrow range of
risks it does seek to characterize.
Let me also indicate the extent of my experience and
expertise with respect to the characteristics of ash
generated by MSW incineration, and the issue of ash
utilization in particular. These issues have been the major
focus of my work over the last 5 years as a Senior
Scientist at EDF.
I have provided expert testimony on these issues on
numerous occasions, before Congress. state legislatures
and regulatory officials, county and city governing bodies.
I have also served as an expert witness in numerous legal
and administrative proceedings addressing these, issues,
both in the US and Canada.
I serve or have served on numerous boards and
advisory committees at the federal, state, and local level
examining these issues, including committees of EPA's
Science Advisory Board. EPA's Ash Treatment and
Utilization Advisory Committee. and state technical advisory groups for the
development of ash management regulations. I have also published
extensively on these topics, including several technical peer-reviewed papers.
In july of 1990, I submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
extensive comments regarding Its proposed permit for the utt,?atton of ash
from the Hennepin County facility incinerator in construction of a.roadway in
Dayton, MN.
The area of ash utilization is in its infancy and fraught with numerous
unresolved questions. I have attached a paper I have written that addresses
ash utilJzation in general and highlights some of the difficult technical and
regulatory issues yet to be resolved. Because it is so relevant to the issue at
hand, I reproduce the abstract of that paper here:
"As increasingly stringent regulations governing ash disposal are
developed, interest is rapidly growing in developing "beneficial"
utilization of ash. It is critical to ensure that the risk
considerations-that have led to more stringent regulation of ash
disposal are not neglected in assessing the potential for ash
utt//zatton, an activity that allows the placing of ash or ash-derived
products into the general environment, rather than a controlled
disposal environment. Research into the feasibility of ash
utilization has only Just begun to address environmental and
public health concerns. In EDF's view, considerable additional
research will be needed to provide a sufficient basis for
determining whether full-scale ash utilization can be conducted
safely, and ff so, for what applications and under what conditions.
In addition, full-scale ash utilization must be preceded by
thorough environmental testing and the development of a
comprehensive regulatory progr_nm."
While EDF is not opposed outright to demonstration projects of this
general nature, we believe that a full understanding of the risks involved --
and measures to address them over both the short and long term -- are
necessary before proceeding with any such project. The HRA f_~lls far short
of providing the critically needed analysis of the f~,ll range of potential h~,man
and environmental risks posed by the project.
Let me make one final point about the process of preparing and using
an HRA: the need for a thorough review by independent experts of any HRA
accompanying this project. While I have lden~t~ed numerous concerns
through my review based on the areas of my expertise, these issues demand
e~__~mination by a variety of experts in other disciplines: these include human
toxicologists, ecologists and ecotoxicologists, risk assessm_~mt experts,
occupational health experts...epidem. 1olo .g.ists: .ch.lldren's heal_t~__?!~e.~.,.~.~n.d.n~o..
doubt others. In addition, me review snoula araw upon mor~
volunteer time of reviewers like myself. It should ensure that reviewers have
the time and resources to undertake a thorough review.
My concern is that the applicant has undertaken to prepare an HRA
without sufficient understanding or consideration of the full range of issues
involved, and that these shortcomings will be compounded unless a variety
of experts are involved and compensated in a manner that allows them to
justify the considerable time needed to conduct an in-depth review.
I hope that my comments are useful to you in assessing this project.
Please don't hesitate to contact me ff I can be of further help.
Sincerely,
Richard A. Dentson, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Enclosures
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
1616 P Strut. NW
Washington. DC 20036
{2021 387.3500
COMMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
ON A "~TH' RISK ASSE,Y~MENT OF MINNESOTA
MSW-ASH UTILI~ON DEMON~TION PROJECT"
PREPARED BY AWl) TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES CORI~RATION
COMMENTS PREPARED BY
DR. RICHARD A. DENISON, Ph.D.
SENIOR SCIENTIST
JANUARY 14, 1992
EDF has reviewed the Health Risk Assessment (liRA) prepared by AWD
Technologies, Inc., in support of Municipal Service Corporation's (MSC's)
proposal to u~li~-e ash as a wearing surface roadway construction material.
Data on the chemical composition of the ash-substituted roadway material
indicate that it contntn-~ and leaches far higher -- in some cases, hundreds
of ~tmes higher -- concentrations of most toxic heavy metnls than do natural
aggregate materials or the soils at the proposed demonstration project. From
this starting poinL we find that the HRA is deficient in n~merou$ aspects.
Most notnhly, the }iRA:
® ~ to er. amine risks over the full lifecycle of the u-m,-ed ash;
fails to ex--amine routine events that increase the rote and magnitude of
releases from the roadway during its useful life;
· ~_~mtnes cxcluslvely human health risks affecting the general population,
f~lllng to consider occupational risks;
gives scant consideration to enviro~mental risks posed by the project,
despite its expansive claims to be an environmcrlt~! as well as h~man
health assessment;
· examines only a subset of the chemicals of concern, parUcularly for species
other than humans, and uses incorrect toxicity values for ma_ny of
these;
· grossly distorts thc role of conscrvaUvc ass-mptions in risk assessment
procedures:
· neglects or downplays several tmportitnt pathways for release of and
exposure to ash-borne toxic substances; and
· ass-roes without foundaUon that the TCLP leaching fluids invariably leach
met_~_ls more aggressively than water or than will occur in the field.
Each of these deficiencies is discussed at length in these comments. Taken
together, they indicate that the HRA falls far short of serving as a s-fficient
assessment of the risks posed by MSC's proposed ash utilization project.
~ITItODU~~ REMARK~
Ash ui~ll=~tion allows the placement of ash or ash-derived products into
the general cllvironment~ an activity that involves potential exposures that
cxtend well beyond those from ash disposal, both in mal~ltude and duration;
the burden of demonstrating the 'safety' of' any such utilization therefore
must necessarily surpass a higher threshold.
In assessing ash utlll~Uon, it is impotent to const__~ntly keep in mind
that the material being utlll~d di~ markedly from the natural material it
2
is replacing. While the engineering properties may be similar (otherwise it
would not be a suitable substitute), the chemical composition is very different.
In the Present case in which MSC proposes to substitute treated ash product
(TAP) for a portion of the natural aggregate normally used in the wearing
surface of a roadway, the concentrations of most heavy metals is considerably
higher in the ash-substituted materials. Data from the I-IRA (I-IRA Tables 2.1
and 2.5) allow a comparison of both the totnl metal co,~ncentrations and the
TCLP-leachable .metal concentrations in the ash-substituted aggregate with
those in natural aggregate and in the softs now present in the unpaved
roadway.
This comparison, shown in the Tables below,~ demonstrates the
enormous enrichment of most metals in the ash-substituted material. Only
selenium is present in comparable concentrations in the ash-substituted
materials, the natural aggregate and the roadway softs. And most metals are
much more leachable (using the TCLP) from the ash-substituted materials.
For example:
Lead would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at levels
almost 160 times higher than in the natural aggregate normally used
to pave roads, and 32 times higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Mercury would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at
levels 280 times higher than in the natural aggregate and 28 times
higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Cadmium would be present in the ash-substituted roadway material at
levels 22 times higher than in the natural aggregate and 55 times
higher than in the existing roadway softs.
Based on TCLP leaching tests, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury
would leach from the ash-substituted roadway materials at levels about
The full data sets are attached as Tables I and II.
3
TOTAL METAI~ ENRICHMENT FACTORS
TAP/Agg: Nat Agg TAP/Agg: Roadway Soils
Arsenic 9.7 1.3
Barium 9.7 11.5
Cadmium 22.0 55.0
Copper 10.5 11.9
Chromium 1.8 6.4
Lead 156.8 31.6
Mercury 280.0 28.0
Nickel 3.5 6.0
Selenium 1.0 0.5
Silver 4.1 5.6
Zinc 32.3 29.2
3X3LP ~ALS ~NRICHMENT FA~R~,,
TAP/Agg: Nat Agg TAP/Agg: Roadway Soils
Arsenic 8823.5 1.2
Barium 1.2 2.3
Cadmium 21.5 164.7
Copper 1.0 1.0
Chromium 1.9 5.7
Lead 157.9 0.005s
Mercury 276.3 48.8
Nickel 0.8 0.4
Selenium 1.0 1.0
Silver 4.0 2.7
Zinc 1.0 5.0
The enrichment factors represent the n.mber of times higher the
concentration of a given metA! in the ash-substituted material is th~n
in the natural aggregate or roadway softs.
TAP/Agg = 30% treated ash product mixed with 70% natural aggregate
Nat Agg = 100~ natural aggregate
See foomote 3.
4
8800, 22. 160, and 275 trines higher, respectively, than from natural
aggregate,s ,
As discussed in the comments below, the presence of these metals in
the ash-substituted aggregate at levels much higher than in the materials
ordinarily used to pave roadS means that the myriad routine procedures and
steps involved in road construction, mainter~a_nce, repair, and removal --
activities not normally considered to pose significant risks -- must be wholly
re-evaluated in light of the much higher levels of toxic heavy metals.
M'4~.IOR DEFICIENCIES IN TH~ HRA
1. The HRA fatls to exnmtue risks over the f~ll lifecycle of the utili?~l ash.
Any characterization of risks associated with the utilization of ash must
eXamine the full "lifecycle" of such ash. This is essential because the p~tmary
constituents of ash that pose h~man health and environmental concerns are
heavy met_~ls (e.g., lead. c~dmtt~m) and organic chemicals like dioxin. These
toxic chemicala arc permanent or h/tjh/y pers/stent, and as such will pose risks
wherever and for as long as they are present in the environment; that is, they
travel with the ash no matter what form it is in or how much time has
passed since its generation or utilization.
s Lead ks the only metal predicted to leach from roadway soils at a level
significantly greater than from ash-substituted aggregate. In interpreting this
prediction, however, it ks important to understand the probable source of this
lead: historical and contin~tng particulate emissions from vehicles using
leaded gasoline. While the phase-out of lead in gasoline has reduced these
emissions considerably, leaded gasoline still accounts for about 9 percent of
total US gasoline cons~mption (EPA, "Lead in Gasoline," data for 3rd quarter
of 1989), and pre-1975 vehicles and farm vehicles of any age may still use
leaded gasoline (42 U.S.C. section 7550). Thus, even on the paved road, lead
particulates will still be acc~mulatlng. The }IRA fails to account for this
source of lead when comparing the paved and unpaved roads.
5
U~l!ke the HRA. this lifecycle begins long before actual utm~ation of the
ash. 'Upstream' stages in the lifecycle that need to be explicitly considered
in an HRA include:
· the handling and storage of ash at the site of generation;
· the treatment of ash to render it suitable for utilization, including the
disposition of any emissions, residuals or by-products resulting from
treatment;
· transportation of the ash between the sites of generation, treatment,
storage, and actual utilization;
· 'actual placement of the ash into the environment in the form in which it
is uttlt=~-d (in this case, as a roadway material), including steps to clean
storage and placement equipment and deal with residuals from the
placement process; and
· fate of the ash during actual use.
The lifecycle of the ash does not end with its utilization, however; it is Just
as important to address risks that may arise after the useful life of the
utfll~-d ash. These "downstr_~_m" stages include:
· breaking up and removal of the roadway matert_ols;
* fate of residuals remaining after removal of the bulk of the roadway
materials;
transportation, intermediate storage and procesalng of the removed roadway
material;
ultimate disposition {e.g., disposal
material; and
6
or recycling) of the roadway
~the...roadway material Is reused or recycled, all of the above steps for the
material throughout its "new" lifecycle,
It is critical to recognize that the HRA examined only one of these many
lifecycle stages: the fate of the ash di;ring ac_~_~_ol_ use. Our knowledge about
the chemical and physical characteristics of ash indicates that many (ff not
all) of these other stages are at least as likely to pose risks to human health
and the environment as is the actual utiltTation stage. Indeed, the
opportunities for dispersal of ash and its'associated toxic chemicals are
almost certmnly greater on a per-unit-of-time basis for many of these other
steps, and. they may well contribute more to overall releases, exposures and
risks associated with ash utilization than the presence of ash in roadWay
material during the useful life of the road.
[This is not to say that the actual proposed use of the ash is without
sig~i6c~r~t risk; as should be dear from the remainder of these comments,
EDF has serious concerns about the specific use to which ash would be put
under this proposal, in particular that it would be placed in the wearing
surface of the roadway. Numerous other proposed projects to use ash as a
roadway material take the far more prudent approach of placing the ash in
subsurface materials, rather thmu in direct contact with forces of constant
erosion (traffic, air, and water).]
At best, the HRA can ~_l~m to represent an assessment of risks
associated with one very limited stage in the full lifecycle of utilized ash. As
will be clear from our subsequent comments, however, even this claim is not
Justified.
2. .The HRA fails to e~mtne routine ~vcots tho_t incre~.~e the rate and
ma~nitude of releases from the roadway durinff its useful life.
One major premise behind the exposure considerations of the HRA is
that, once the road material is. put in place, releases would occur only
through two routes: gradual erosion of material due to wearing of the
surface, resulting in air emissions in the form of particulates (i.e., dust); and
7
leaching of metals into water that comes into contact with the surface of the
road. The HRA's analysis of both of these pathways assumes that the road
surface stays entirely intact during the entire time it is in place, and therefore
that releases come only from the uppermost surface of the roadway.
This is obviously a wildly "best-case" assumption: Over time, road
surfaces can be expected to develop cracks and potholes that would expose
more of the ash to wind, water; and vehicular erosion. Road surfaces are
frequently disrupted through construction and repair activities, for example.
when a new sewer line is installed beneath the road. This activity would
entail a variety of additional pathways for exposure during the removal of the
material using Jackhammers and digging equipment, and while the surface
material is absent: dust generation, p0nding of water tn contact with the ash,
movement of loose pieces or particles during heavy r_mn, etc. Extreme
temperatures (e.g., freeze-thaw cycles) can also cause distortions and buckling
of road surfaces.
Other routine activities would increase the rate of release of as.,h,
particles and/or their toxic consUtuents. Snow and !ce re~_ _oval ac.tivl_U_~_..w~,.d
to some extent scour and enhance erosion of the surface of the roaa, aa cum
street sweeping or other periodic cleaning activities. The former activities can
also create or enlarge breaches tn the road surface.
routine occurrences, resulting in underestimation ol rtl _e_ases wr even _
phase of the lifecycle examined tn the HRA. The only assumea cause
particulate emissions from the roadway surface is vehicular traffic__ (s~ees ~
-'~'-e 32I. Even though the HRA acknowledges that EPA recomm~nu _
~c"~ual site-specific dust generaUon data be collected and used in performing
an assessment (an approach that would account for the types of disrupUve
acUviUes described above), the authors of the HRA chose _,l,nstead to u_se ~"~a~,
empirical equaUon that is based solely on traffic vol,_,me (HRA pa~e
thereby assuring that these activities would be excluded.
8
A lxl~i~ ot Work On Waste USA. Inc.. 82 JucJson, C~mon, NY13617 315-379-9200 December 13, 1990
North Dakota Department of Health
denies landfill permit for Minneapolis ash
On December 2 !, ! 990, the North Dakota Department of Heahh denied a permit to Municipal Scr¥ices
Corp., a su~idiary of the United States Pollution Control Incorporated (USPCI) to dispose incinerator
ash from Minneapolis' !.000 tpd mass-bum incinerator at the Sawyer, ND, landfill. The public comment
period ran from November 3rd through December 10th with a public hearing held in Sawyer on Nov 28-29.
According to Dave Krushc of Clean Water Action in Fargo, ND: "Minnesota's Hennepin County tried to
ship this ash to Dayton, Medina, Dodge County, and Hopkins in Minnesota. They refused. Now North
Dakota says no." Clean Water Action, Dakota Resource Council, Concerned Citizens for Clean
Water (based in Sawyer, ND), and Citizens for Recycling (Sased in Minor, ND) worked together to raise
concerns about the permit. These groups, representing citizens across both states, contend that ash is a
hazardous waste and can not be buried in areas that recharge groundwater supplies. For more information
contact Dave Krushe in North Dakota at 701-235-5431 or Frank Homstcin in Minneapolis at 612-623-3666.
Fora copy, of the full decision from the ND Dept. of Health please send a 45-cent SASE to WastcNot.
Excerpts from
North Dakota's State Department of Health & Consolidated Laboratories
"Findings of Fact
Conclusions of Law and Order", dated 12-21-90.
Background. "Municipal Service Corporation (MSC) of Kcnncsaw, Georgia, and Sawyer, Norlh
Dakota, owns a landfill site for dispo~l of non-hazardous indtmtrial solid waste which ia located in thc gW
Quancr of Section 19, Township 152 North, Range 81 West, Brillian Township, Ward County, North
Dakota. MSC has petitioned the North Dakota State Department of Health and Consolidated Laboratories
(Department) for modification of the current landfill permit to include changes in the construction, operation,
closure, and post-closure maintenance of ~he site and to dispose of municipal waste combustCr (incinerator)
ash in thc modified landfill."
X. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, the Department finds that municipal
solid waat¢ combuatcr aah as proposed for disposal in Ibc modified facility contains certain
constituents known to be Ioxic ~o Ibc cnvironmcn! and humans. Among lhcs¢ constituents arc thc
heavy m¢lals: lead, cadmium, and mercury.
XI. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, Ih¢ Department finds Ihs! lead ia
highly ~oxic lo humana, particularly Io pregnant women and their fetuses and to preschool-age
children. Recent medical research indicates that even iow levels of Icad adsorption by children may result in
permanem damage including damage lo thc nervous system. There ia no clear 'lhr¢ahold
which lead levels in Ibc bodies of children begin lo produce adverse effects. These findings
~romoled proposals by Ih¢ Environmental Protection Agency Io lower Ibc maximum comaminam level (MCL)
for lead in drinking water and for the Ccmcr for Disease Comrol ~o lower its action level for blood lead levels
inchildren. Lead is also a clarified possible human carcinogen.
X Il. 'Based on lh¢ hearing and commcn! period record as a whole, cadmium is a known renal ~oxin and is
also a probable human carcinogen.
Printed. on ~.cyc/ed paper, naturally-
XIII. "Breed on the heating and comment period record as a whole, mercury can cause damage to a
devdopjn8 fetus and can cause brain and kidney damage io children and adults. Mercury tends to
undergo *bio*magnification* in thc environment which may result in concentrated Icvcls in human
foods such as fish.
XIV. "Based on the heating and comment period record as a whole, ccflain geologists including a
representative of thc State Geologist, believe that thc site of the landfill poses environmental problems because
of thc presence of groundwater aquifers in lignite beds unlcrlying and adjacent to thc site. Conflicting
teslimony was received regarding potential groundwater flow velocity within thc lignite beds and through thc
clays underlining and surrounding thc site. Some geologists feel thc clay and lignite beds arc highly fractured
and that if lcachate from the landfill were to escape the landfill cells, it could move more rapidly than
represented by MSC.
XV. 'Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, a substantial amount of both
underground and surface mining of lignite coal has occurred in thc vicinity of the landfill site in previous
yeats. Several former coal miners who worked in the underground mines in thc area of thc site contend that
the area is more significantly undermined than indicated in information provided by thc applicant. Presence of'
underground mine works could threaten integrity of thc landfill cell liner system and could provide routes for
movement of any leachate which might escape the cells.
XVI. "Based on the heating and comment period record as a whole, the site is an area of high topographic
relief near the head ora large coulee system which eventually drains into thc Souris River. Flood conditions
and erosion pose a threat of contamination of surface waters and soil.
XVII. ']hsed on thc hcaring and comment period record as a whole, airborne distribution of ash from
thc site poses a threat of soil contamination with heavy mc,als, particularly icad, which could bc
toxic for both animals and humans. This potential exists cvcn in consideration of thc fugitive dust
control measures as proposed by thc applicant.
XVIII. "Based on thc heating and comment period record as a whole, containment of wastes and lcachate in
the landfill are highly dependent upon design and technological features of the landfill and proper operation of
thc facility as well as proper closure and long-term post-closure maintenance of thc site. Actual experience
with municipal solid waste combustcr ash monofills utilizing thc proposed liner and cap systems is
limited (leas than nyc yea'rs). This limited actual cxpcricncc is not sufficient to indicate that thc
containment features will not fail prior to represented time periods.
XIX. "Based on thc heating and comment period record as a whole, two methods of transportation (rail and
track) of'the wastes are required prior to disposal. The length of and switchover of transportation methods
presents a higher potential for environmemal spill and contamination than with less distancc and withbut a
transportation switcl~over.
XX. "Based on the hearing and comment period record ns a whole, thc Deparuncnt has significant concerns
regarding the compliance history of the United States Pollution Control Incorporated (USPCI), thc
parent company of'Municipal Services Corporation. USPCI has been cited fora variety of violations of
environmental .les at waste sites operated by the company in both Utah and Oklahoma. Many of these
violations are of'the type that could be encountered at this proposed facility.
XXI. 'Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, MSC indicated that it would continue
disposal even if' legitimate and verified contamination were discovered from the site. Such continucd
contn'bution lo the source of potential contamination could prove injurious to the environment.
XXil. "Based on the hearing and comment period record as a whole, the Department finds thc potential
contamination from a facility such as that proposed could result in irreversible cnvironmen~l_._da_?_..S..c~_ ........
Nm ..................................... ~:_-: ....... 7.-" ............ ~m .............. M{~-'- .................... Mmm.
W A S T £ N O T # 1 2 9 ,4 or on us,4, 48 ,,,.$
Groeps & Non. Profits $$0; Individual $40; Students & Senior~ $35; Consultants & For. Profits $125; Canadians $U$45;
Ovenees $6$. Editors: Ellen& Paul Connetl, S2Ads~ Street, Canton, NY 1.1617. Tel: 315.$79.9200. Fax: 315.379-0448.
Printed on recycled paper,
!! Established 1867
? .
Tribune
· Roger Parkinson Publisher and President
· Joel R. Kramer Executive Editor '
· ,, Tim d:.McGuire Managing Editor
Robert J. White Editorial Editor ~
;1:~- ......... TueSday)August 21/1990 '
Heaithy.skepticism'.on tUrning ash to asphalt
l__? it Safe to pave local roads With i~cine~at;r~a~h?' :'=meet fec~eral lead iimits,' "'
· townspeople cite scientific
;l'hat question should matter to every person who views that those h'mits
Urives' Minnesota's highways' or strolls its curb- protect health. 'At the rbad 'yields to .traffic ahd
~ides. And until the answer is plain, drivers and ' harsh v~eather;, they fear, .the' asphalt 'could be
!strollers should resis{ Hennepin County's enthusi- ground into a toxic powder' Which cohld'Contami-
· gsm for turning ash from its dOwntown incinerator .
into asphalt. At this point, the plan to test the idea
lthis year on a county road looks hasty and risky.
;The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NIPCA)
.should defer it until public doubts are addressed.
~,t first glance, the ash-to-asphalt deal looks like a
neat way to make tons of incinerator waste disap-
pear. That bit of magic depends on a Georgia firm,
Municipal Services Corp., that says it can change
dangerous ash into innocuous pellets for use in
toad paving. To prove its case, the company wants
io test the ash-laced asphalt on a 1,000-foot strip of
County Rd. 81 in Dayton. The two-year experi-
ment could be the first step toward paving other
county roads m and ultimately, roads all over the
state -- with ash pellets. The MPCA citizen board
is scheduled to decide in late September whether
to approve a permit for the project.
~ll.of this has made Some of the folks in Daytdn
fretful, and for good mason. They complain that
the pellets slated for testing will include fly ash --
smokestack residue which often contains haz~rd-
dus amounts of lead, cadmium and Other hear7
/~.etals. Though the asphalt itself is expei:ted tO just
nate soils and waterw:iys"-and '~vhich playing
children might swallow and inhale.
The project's defenders insist that wongt happen,
and that extensive tests will assure the 'ex~ri-
ment's safety. But several environmental groups
have pointed to holes in the draft permit for the
project: It prescribes no tests for measuring the
amount and effects of dust that may wear off the
road. It lacks a requirement, included in earlier
drafts, that a sedimentation basin be built to
monitor and contain runoff fi:om the road. And
the environmentalism criticize the experiment's
· two-year time span'~ too short a duration, they
say, to determine whether the asphalt will hold up
safely over time. Those concerns are echoed by 32 :
state legislators, who have urged the MPCA to'!
deny th.e permit until the flaws ar.e f~. ed.. ?..
County Commissioner Jeff Spartz shrugs off reiis-
tance to the Dayton test as another case'.of, the
"NIMBY" (not in my back yard) syndrome. But
· Daytonians are right to insist that the-lest =:.-'in
:..which they will serv~ as guinea'~igs ~. be both Safe
and thorough. Until that. deniand is'met, skepti--'I
· cism about paving with ash is the' best p01icy.'-~. ,. 'i
CLEAN WATER ACTION
HYTH$ AND FACTS ABOUT THE CORCORAN ASH TEST PROJECT
1. HYTH: "The tes~ is only for 600 fee~ of pavement, its not
really a big deal."
FACT, The "test' is the flr~t step in siting a huge industrial plant that
take toxic ash from all over Minnesota. Municipal Services Corporation, the
Georgia company conduct/rig the test wants to bui/d this plant within the nex~
two years. One prospect/ye site placed the plant less than f/ye mi/es from
Corcoran.
2. MYTH, The treated ash is safe.
FACT, The pavement wilt break down. The toxic materials--such as lead
cadre/urn, mercury and chrom/um will not breakdown. The wearing and tearing
of roads releases toxic substances into the immediate environment where
people llve.
3. MYTH: The ash is as safe as compost.
FACT, These comparisons are inapproprLate and m/sleading. The aggregate wil/
be worn into dus~s due to abrasion tess/ting from s~reet traffic. Contaminated
street dust (result/ng from leaded gasoline and other sources) has been .a
major factor in the lead poisoning of children. Lead, even at the tiniest trace
levels can cause Ridney disease, and neurological d/sorders in children.
Children playing in or near roads pick up the loose dust on their clothes and
hands and in turn put their hands and or contaminated food in their mouths.
Small particles of lead are readily inhaled and addit/onaLl¥ increase the body
burden of lead. The EPA has classitied lead as a cancer-causing pollutant_ The
standard for residentSal soil not only fail_~ to protect against non-cancer toxic
effects but ignores the fact that EPA has classif/ed lead as a probable human
carcinogen.
4. I-[YTH: 'Incinerator ash is benign, besides, the road pellets are treated and
the ash is bound up forever."
FACT: Ash from the Hennepin County incinerator has consistentiy shown the
characteristics of a hazardous waste. In fact recent lead samples have
exceeded the Federal Drinking Water Standard by almost 160 times, and was
.almost 6~% h/gher than the hazardous waste cut-off.
Al/ materials 'exposed at surface of earth including rock undergoes physical
and chemical processes which weather the material into fine particles. The
proposers have not demonstrated that the aggregate will hold together as well
aa natura~ stone aggregate.
In addition, the pellets will break down over time, the toxic materials will not.
5. MYTHJLead and other toxic metals are In the environment naturally, so why
be concerned about these substances in the road?"
FACT, Toxic heavy metals are concentrated in the combustion process that
takes place at the incinerator. The h/gh concentrations of lead, cadmium,
mercury and chrom/um pose a significant health risk, when placed In the
immediate environment of people. Because the safety threshold level is so low
any additional exposures to these tox/ns can produce adverse health effects
particularly in fetuses, infants, pregnant mothers, and children.
6. MYTH8 'Its better to recycle the ash, than to bury it in a landfill,
especially since Corcoran is a site for an ash landfill.
FACTs The legislature has dropped the current landfill siting process, it is
much less likely that sensitive groundwater' areas such as Corcoran will be
included in future siting decisions. Clean Water Action opposed the landfiU
siting process and worked at the legislature to drop Corcoran from the siting
process.
Ash 'u~Jli-ation' is not a benign form of rec¥cUng. You cannot recycle
something that has never been used. Ash is waste. Placing it on roads is just
another way to dispose of th/s waste.
7. MYTH-. 'Municipal Services Corporation is a reputable firm, they %;ili see to
it that this is done rtght".
FACTs MSC's parent company, USPCI was cited for 57 separate violations due
to improper storaqe of PCB's at its Grassy Mountain fac~//ty in Utah. The EPA
uked for penalties tozaUing $1.4 million.
MSt was recentiy denied a permit to dump Hennepin County's ash in North
Dakota. The North Dakota Health Department cited MSC's and USPCI's sloppy
envLronmenta/ record as one reason for the permit denial.
8. blYTH= "Corcoran gets a good deal--a free paving pro]ec~"~
FACT: OriginaJ/y the state of Minnesota was wi111ng to assume the l/ability for
the many environmental risks of this project. Now the legislature is no longer
willJqg to foot the bill Corcoran and Hennepin County taxpayers wil/ have to
pay for damages. What may be free today could have disastrous financial
costs in the future.
CLEAN WATER ACTION
Midwes! Regional Office · 326 Hcnnepin Ave. E. · Minneapolis, MN :~$414 · 612/623-3666
1418 First Avenue, NE · Rochester, MN 55904 · 507/281-1390 ~ 2904 West Third Street · Duluth, MN 55806 · 218/628-1191
411 North Broadway, #208 · Fargo, ND 58102 · 701/235-5431 ~ RR I, Box 9.~ · Stoddard, W! 54658 · 608/'/88-1398
122 South Grand Ave, 11200 · Lansing, M! 48933 · 517/487-0900
National Office · 317 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE · Washifl~ton, DC 20003 · 202/:~47.1
3une 24, 1991
Thc Honorable John Dcrus
Chair, Henn~in County Board of Commissioners
I-lennepin Count Goven'macnt Center
Minncapolis, MN 55487
Dear Commissioner Dca'us:
It has come to my attention that. the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners will
consider a plan this week to test municipal incinerator ash as roadway aggregate in
Corcoran.
I have followed this issue with great interest since it was first proposed for Dayton.
As you know, the issue of how and whether this ash should be re-used is receiving close
scrutiny not only in Minnesota, but nationwide, The Minnesota proposal will likely be
viewed as a pmCc~nt for other states.
I am now hearing serious concerns bom a number of citizens about the specific
proposal before Henncpin County. They arc summarized as follows:
· The treated ash pellets contain fly ash wh/ch is the most toxic part of the municipal
ash stream.
Thc pellets will be used on the wearing surface of the road, exposing the material to
harsh weathering conditions -- leading to the release of toxins, especially lead, into
the environment.
There are no long-term tests built into the test protocol to determine thc full impact
of the process.
The material slated,for testing would presumably be manufacturered at a
processing facility tn Northwest Hennepin County. The permitting process for such
a facility would begiu shortly after the test strip is laid.
THIS STATIONERY PnlNTID on PAPEn MADE OF nECYCLEO FIBERS
I would like .to .s~ongly encourage the Board to take these concerns into account
before making any _d~c_?o_n_ ~,g.ardi~. g.thls proposal. As always, I appreciate your good
offices, good work aha So<x] mcnasmp.
Commissioner Tad Jude
Commissioner Pet~ McLaug~n
Commissioner Fla~k Anch'~w
Commissioner Judy Makowk¢
Commissioner $ohn Keefe
Commissioner Randy Johnson
W~coORSKI
ngre~
(612) 930-2696
Hatch 3.2, 3.992
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
320 Washington Avenue South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468
Hr. Edward 3. Shukle, 3r.
City Hanager
Ctty of Hound
5341 Haywood Road
Hound, HN 55364
RE: CSAH 3.3.0 (Bartlett Boulevard) at Mound Bay Park
Boat Trailer Parking
Dear Ed'
The Mound City Council has requested that our department review the feasibility
of allowing boat trailer parking on the southeast side of CSAH 110 (Bartlett
Boulevard) adjacent to Mound Bay Park.
This segment of CSAH 110 carries 6;950 vehicles per day (1990 flow map count} and
is currently posted 'No Parking Anytime". It is of sufficient width to carry two
lanes of traffic eastbound. The lane adjacent to Mound Bay Park presently serves
as a right turn lane to the Mound Bay Park depot and to the Mound Bay boat launch
facility and parking lot.
For public safety reasons we would be reluctant to allow parking along CSAH 110.
Motorists coming from the west approach this area on a down grade and a curve to
the left. Vehicles and trailers parked along the southeast curb.on the outside
of the curve would present a safety hazard. In addition if parking were
permitted the safety provisions provided by the right turn lanes would be lost.
Based on this information we cannot, for public safety reasons, recommend the
removal of the parking restrictions along CSAH 110 for the purpose of boat
trailer parking.
Should additional information be necessary, please call me at 930-2674.
SDien~~rely'
Transportation Planning Engineer
DLH:gk
cc: P.B. Murphy
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opporlunlty employer
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FID ~PECIFICATIONS FOR ~ITY ~ID~E LEAF ~ICKU?
The City of Mound is requesting bids for a Leaf Pickup.
Please submit a bid on Altervative 1 for picking up the
entire City on April 24 & 25, 1992, and/or Altervative 2 for
suppling and maintaining of roll-offs at the stock pile from
April 12, 1992 thru May 16, 1992. Bid opening will be 10:00
AM on March 24, 1992.
The successful bidder must name site that the leaves will be
deposited.
WHERE WILL LEAVES BE DEPOSITED? ~TW C~/~/~/~ ~dV~
name of site
The successful bidder must furnish liability of not less than
$200,000 for each individual, $600,000 for each occurrence,
and against liability for property damage of not less than
$50,000 for each occurrence.
ALTERNATIVE
5t275.00
Entire City bid, to include dumping
ALTERNATIVE
Suppling and maintaining a 20 yd. roll-off container for
leaves at the stock pile from April 12 1992 thru May 16
1992. , ,
$ 27q_~0 per bn× incl.du~lpi~3tal' to include dumping.
A cashier's check or certified check in the amount of 5% of
the total bid must accompany the bid.
The City of Mound reserves the right to reject any or all
bids.
ompany
CITY of MOUND
March 23, 1992
Governor Arne Carlson
130 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
Dear Governor Carlson:
The City of Mound opposes your proposal to balance the State
of Minnesota budget by making drastic cuts in Local Government Aid
(LGA) to cities. The enclosed resolution brings out a number of
issues that Mound thinks ought to be stated. I will touch upon a
few of the points raised in the resolution.
In 1991 an additional half cent increase was placed on the
state sales tax. The purpose behind this proposal, made by you and
the legislature, was to ar~ that a percentage of that revenue
received from the additional sales tax would be given back to local
governments as property tax relief. Now you want to raid this fund
know~ ~s the Local ~overnment Trust Fund (LGTF) and use
to limit the cuts in ct _ . the mone
apparently convin~ ___~r type~ of state spendln . Y
· . .z .... ~ume ~e is . g You have
cities like Mound ve~v ,,--=-~ _~at~r~ of this. Frankl it
~w., 1.e., LOCAL GOVERNMENT'TRUST ~%~'~ uae ~rue meaning of the
~Y°~ are attacking cities that have s low property tax revenue
· . °~hXew , ~ re~uce from our already approved budg~
12 ~ed g_~und,% LGA by ever 57.3%. This me
This is an 8.2% reduction in Mound's reve
~?f~sees no ~ay to do this unless serv~--T~%_bas~' ~he City of
~=~ ~re re~uce~. Sixty to
==v~nuy percent of Mound,s costs are associated with personnel We
are faced with laying off personnel that provide services that our
citizens demand. Why is it that cities annually become the victim
of the State,s spending problems? You and the state legislature
must balance your budget, cities understand that you are required
by the Minnesota constitution to do so. Please remember that
cities balance their budgets as well. There is no other level of
government more directly accountable to its citizenry than local
government.
printed on recycled paper
Governor Arne Carlson
March 23, 1992
We recognize that your job is not an easy one. Neither is
ours! We recognize that the economy in the United States and,
specifically, within Minnesota, is not at its best right now.
However, cities are trying to make it with what they have. We
believe the State of Minnesota should do the same. We also believe
that cutting only LGA is penalizing certain cities only. We will
do our share, but we think it should be our FAIR SHARE~
Sincerely,
Mayor Skip Johnson
cc:
Senator Doug Johnson, Senate Tax Committee Chair
Representative Paul Ogren, House Tax Committee Chair
Senator Gert Olson
Representative Steve Smith
Don Slater, League of Minnesota Cities
Vern Peterson, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
RESOLUTION OPPOSING GOVERNOR CAI:tLSON'S
PROPOSAL TO CUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA)
TO CITIES
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota is facing a $570 million
deficit at the end of this biennium (June 30, 1992); and
WHEREAS, Governor Carlson has proposed that cities who
receive Local Government Aid (LGA) be cut by $71.6 million in 1992;
and
WHEREAS, the cuts are 8.02% of city revenue base (levy
plus aid) or $158,120 for the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, there are no cuts to aids for counties,
townships, special districts and schools; and
WHEREAS, the proposal destroys the integrity of the
dedicated Local Government Trust Fund (LGTF) less than one year
after it was created; and
WHEREAS, the proposal creates drastic effects on City
budgets this year by cutting 8.02% of City revenue base for
Calendar year 1992, meaning that with the budget year partly gone,
the cuts would be about 12% for the balance of the year; and
WHEREAS, these cuts are on top of cuts of 4% of City
revenue base enacted in the 1991 session for the 1992 budget year;
and
WHEREAS, these cuts are on top of frozen city levy limits
in 1992; and
WHEREAS, the proposal creates extreme unfairness between
local government units by cutting LGA and not cutting other aids
and not cutting aid to counties and townships which provide many of
the same services as cities and not cutting special districts or
schools; and
WHEREAS, cities whose LGA is being cut are still
"mandated,, by state laws to provide certain services and programs
without any financial assistance, i.e. presidential primary, etc.;
and ,
WHEREAS, cities such as Mound are nearly fully developed
and do not have adequate growth in tax base to cover these proposed
cuts in LGA; and
WHEREAS, fees collected for services can be raised only
within reasonable limits; and
W~EREAS, previous LGA cuts to cities have been permanent
reductions in aid and cities are now told to cut more from our
budgets; and
W~EREAS, cities have adjusted to those LGA cuts, i.e.,
the City of Mound has not replaced personnel but has, through
attrition, shifted job responsibilities to existing staff etc.;
and ,
W~ER~AS, in order for the City of Mound to maintain the
current level of service, the proposed cuts of $158 120 cannot
occur; and ,
W~EREAS, if Governor Carlson does get approval of this
proposed cut by the Legislature, the City of Mound will have to
reduce service levels by laying off employees and eliminating
services previously provided; and
W~EREAS, cities are not the problem and should not be the
solution.
?HEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota hereby requests Governor Carlson and the
State of Minnesota to do the following:
Keep LGTF money in the Local Government Trust Fund
as it was guaranteed by the Governor and
Legislature a year ago when the sales tax was
raised to 6.5%.
Find other ways to deal with the budget shortfall
besides cutting cities LGA to a point where drastic
service reductions must take place.
If the State of Minnesota is going to reduce LGA to
cities, then reduce the other forms of aid that
other cities receive, i.e., HACA so that there is
fairness in the cuts.
If there are cuts, counties, townships, special
districts and schools should not be excluded from
any aid cuts.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Attest: City Clerk
Mayor
CITY of MOUND
l0-a
612 472 1~55
zAX ,6'2 472 0620
March 23, 1992
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER
PRELIMINARY DOWNTOWN FEASIBILITY STUDY
As you recall, the City Council directed that Staff prepare a
cost estimate for a preliminary feasibility study using City
consultants and Bruce Chamberlain, Economic Development
Coordinator. This direction came as a result of meeting with the
Economic Development Commission at the City Council's Committee of
the Whole meeting held March 17, 1992.
Attached is a letter dated March 19, 1992 from Mr. Fred
Hoisington of Hoisington Group, Inc. Mr. Hoisington and Mark
Koegler, city Planner, would be doing the majority of the
preliminary downtown feasibility study. Also involved is John
Cameron, the City's Engineer; Springsted Financial and Bruce
Chamberlain, Economic Development Coordinator.
As the letter indicates, Hoisington's fee is estimated at
$1800. The estimated amount of engineering work from John Cameron
is $500. Springsted's work will be done at no charge. Bruce
Chamberlain will be covered under his contract with the City.
Thus, the estimated amount is $2,300.
I would recommend that we charge these expenses against the
contingency account within the general fund. If you have any
questions, please contact me.
Attachment
ES:ls
printed on recycled paper
HUI$1N~IUN IEL No.bl2-B5b-OlbU Mar.2U,92 lb:2O F.U2
Hoisington Group Inc.
LAND IJ$I~ CONSULTANTS
March 19, 1992
Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Preliminary Downtown Feasibility Study
Dear Ed:
Per the City's request, I herewith submit this proposal for a preliminary
feasibility study for the downtown concept plan. Since its intent is to
provide a ballpark estimate to determine whether the project may be
expected to proceed, this analysis will be based on a single large project.
In reality, it is probable that the project will be phased. It will also be
based on a variety of assumptions regarding rental rates and development
values.
If authorized to proceed, the Consultant will:'
1. Prepare a project budget for:
a. Project Costs
1 ) Acquisition
2) Relocation
3 ) Demolition
4) Public Improvements (to be prepared by City Engineer)
5) Administration
6) Contingency
7) Capitalized Interest
b. Project Revenues (TIF, Special Assessments, CDBG, Other Grants)
2. Assist the City's Financial Consultant with calculation of the revenue
stream based on assumed rents and construction costs/values:
I~L NO.Ol~-~3~-31DU
Mound Proposal
March 19, 1992
Page 2
3. Coordinate and direct the work of the City Engineer, City Assessor
and City's Financial Advisor to obtain public improvement costs, land
and structure costs, and tax increment financing calculations.
4. Prepare a brief final report outlining the Consultant's conclusions.
The fee for the above services is estimated at $1,800, an amount that is in
addition to that able to be justified under CDBG. This fee does not include
the services to be rendered by McCombs Frank Roos ($500) or Springsted.
CDBG should be able to cover essentially the first three tasks of the
redevelopment study process dated March 17, 1992.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal to the City of
Mound. If you have any questions, please give me a call. You may simply
provide us with a letter authorizing commencement of the work.
Sincerely,
Fre~Hoisington, AICP
Planning Consultant
FLH/glh
I~L No.blZ-8Ob-OlbU Mar.lF,~2 lb:~b
MOUND DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT STUDY PROCESS
TESTING OF CONCEPT
1.
~ (establish overall parking needs, project area and TIF X
· District boundaries, acquisition and improvement cos.ts (Auditors
? , Road/parking/utilities), planning parameters and design guidelines).X,X ,):
~'~2~ReSearcha. TIF Fundin. Sources/formulate funding assumptions/mlx.~~
b. Special Assessments (429)
e. Community Development Block Grants
d. Other
3. Research Lost Lake Feasibility (...'~
a. Permit feasibility (DNR)
b. Funding sources available
c. Tradeoffs required (DNR requirements)
,,o~,--~/2~I. }reliminarv Financial Feasibility Study (will it work?)
~/v a. Costs '
b. Calculate Revenue Stream
c. Go/No Go
5. Talk with Tenant~ and Owners individually
6. Develop Phasing Plan
7. Formulate Relocation Plan/Policy/Strategy
8. Update Redevelopment/TIF Plan
9. Engineering .Feasibility Study (429)
10. Feasibility Study/ReO~v¢lopment Plan Approval by HRA
11. City Council Publi~ Hearings on Redevelopment Plan (mail notices to
School District and County) and Engineering Feasibility Study.
12. Implementation
Holslngton Group Inc.
3-17-92
MI'NUTBS OF A MBBTI'NG OF THB
MOUND ADVZHORY PARK ~ OPEN 8PACB CO]4MZHSZON
NJtRCH 12~ 3.9~2
approval of the 1992 I.qCD C b]f Asleson to recommend
uDnra~ftwood Shores and Set~-O-~uae-r.cial dock licenses for
nimousl]f, on v~ew. Hotion carried
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIO.N DISTRICT
900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEHONE 612/473-70;
EUGENE R. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BOARD MEMBERS ~ ~ · / · ,, /~~. ,~
IEFD MAR 5
c/o Edward Shukle, Mgr '
5341 [~3~ood Road ~/~
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Shukle,
David H. Cochran, Chair
Tom Reese, V'me Chair
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretary
s~ para
J. p. Boswinkal, Treasurer
Minnetonka Beach
Sco~t Carlson
Minnetnsta
Albert (Bert) Foster
Deept~aven
James N. Grathwol
Excelsior
JoEIlen L. Hun'
Orono
William A. Johnstone
Minnetonka
Duane Markus
Wayzata
Ge~ge C. Owen
Victona
Tom Penn
Tonka Bay
Rot)ert Rasco¢
Shorewood
Robert E Slocum
Woodland
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has received
an application for a Multiple Dock and Mooring Area
license as described on the attached certificate.
It is the policy of the LMCD that all dock license
applications be referred to the appropriate city for
review, and that a certificate indicating compliance
with local regulations be received from the city before
final action of the District on the application.
If a certificate, or a request for delay of certificate
issuance for any reason, is not received from the city
within 45 days of this mailed notice, the District
will proceed with consideration of the application.
Please execute the enclosed certificate and return
it to this office so that prompt action may be taken
on the application.
Sincerely,
MINNETONKA CONSERVATION, DISTRICT
Administrative Technician
RT:Jlm
enc Driftwood Shores Homeowners Association
Seton View
MUNICIPAL CERTIPICATION FOR
MULTIPLE DOCK LICENSE APPROVAL FOR 1992
Section 1.06, Subd. 11 of the Lake Minnetonk~ Conservation
District (LMCD) Code provides:
Compliance with other laws. The issuance of a license
or permit by the district does not relieve any person
from the responsibility of obtaining required licenses,
permits or other permission from any federal, state,
municipal, county or other governmental agency having
jurisdiction over the Lake.
LMCD hereby advises its member municipality that the
following person/firm/organization has applied for a
new/renewal license for a multiple dock and/or mooring area.
DRIFTWOOD SHORES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
c/o Sylvia Ogren, Treasurer, 1756 Lafayette Lane, Mound
55364
Name and Address of Applicant
Outlots 1 & 2, Block 3, Driftwood Shores
Location of Docks
10
Slips and/or -0-
Moorings
I certify that the above license applicant has met the zoning
ordinance and any other city permit or license requirements
of the city of Mound for the facility
described for 1992.
Authorized Signature
Date
DRIFTWOOD' SOCIATION
IN OUTLOT 2, DRIFTWOOD SHORES
DRIFTWOOD SHORES= Subject to
variance order of 8-25-82
N
DATUM =MEAN SEA LEVEL
( NG.V.D. 1929)
GORDON R. COFFIN CO., INC.
ENGINEERS 8 L~ND SURVEYORS
LONG. LAKE, MINNESOTA
NUNIClPAL CERTIPICATION FOR
NULTIPLE DOCK LICENSE APPROVAL FOR 1992
Section 1.O6, Subd. 11 of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District (LMCD) Code provides:
Compliance with other laws. The issuance of a license
or permit by the district does not relieve any person
from the responsibility of obtaining required licenses,
permits or other permission from any federal, state,
municipal, county or other governmental agency having
jurisdiction over the Lake.
LMCD hereby advises its member municipality that the
following person/firm/organization has applied for a
new/renewal license for a multiple dock and/or mooring area.
SETON VIEW
c/o William E. Niccum, 4853 Bartlett Blvd, Mound,. 55364
Name and Address of Applicant
4841 Bartlett Blvd
Location of Docks
Slips and/or -0-
Moorings
I certify that the above license applicant has met the zoning
ordinance and any other city permit or license requirements
of the city of Mound 'for the facility
described for 1992.
Authorized Signature
Date
;ETON VIEW
,~.,, .,
.' ~ ~
:-.,,.,:.:~.~: ,~.~,:, n '
~).~ 'Z ',~ ~ .'~
(~," ~ *One piling to contact ,
. ;
RECEiVr--'U
NOV 2 7 1990
-.. 41c).~
CITX ' of MOUND
March 23, 1992
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER
RE:
APPROVAL OF LABOR CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUND
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS) LOCAL #35
SUPERVISOR/STAFF SERGEANT AND SUPERVISOR/SERGEANT OF
PATROL FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1991 TO DECEMBER 31,
1993
As you know, the Sergeants Labor Agreement had expired
December 31, 1990. Since that time the City has negotiated with
the Sergeants unit and has now reached a tentative agreement with
them for the 1991 through 1993 contract period.
Attached is the tentative agreement. As a part of the
agreement, there are two memorandums of agreement which apply to
retiree health insurance and the early retirement of Sgt. Brad Roy.
Also attached is a resolution approving the agreement as proposed.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
printed on recycled paper
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUND
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS)
LOCAL #35, SUPERVISOR/STAFF SERGEANT AND
SUPERVISOR/SERGEANT OF PATROL
FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1991 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1993
WHEREAS, the City of Mound and LELS Local #35
Supervisor/Staff Sergeant and Supervisor/Sergeant of Patrol, have
gone through the collective bargaining process and negotiated a
labor contract for January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1993
period; and
WHEREAS, both sides have reached a final agreement which
is acceptable to both the City's negotiators and the Bargaining
Unit's negotiators.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound and LELS
Local #35 Supervisor/Staff Sergeant and Supervisor/Sergeant of
Patrol have reached a settlement on the January 1, 1991 through
December 31, 1993 contract per a tentative agreement dated March 9,
1992, attached hereto and made a part thereof.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmember voted in the negative:
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
regular pay and workers' compensation insurance payments for
a period not to exceed ninety (90) working days per injury,
not charged to Employee's vacation or sick leave accumulated
in Sections 1 and 2. (Remainder of section per current
Agreement.)
ARTICLE XXI. SEVERANCE PAY
21.1
The following is the severance pay schedule, based upon
accumulated sick leave, which shall become effective for all
full-time Employees upon reaching tenure of three (3) years
(36 months). (Remainder of section per current Agreement.)
An Employee who is discharged from employment with cause
shall not be entitled to severance pay under this Section.
ARTICLE XXII. ANNUAL LEAVE
22.2
(Add) NO individual promoted or hired to fill a sergeant
position after January 1, 1991 shall be eligible to receive
this benefit.
ARTICLE XXVI. DURATION
Except as herein provided, this Agreement shall be effective
January 1, 1991, and shall continue in full force and effect until
December 31, 1993, and thereafter until modified or amended by
mutual agreement of the parties. (Remainder as per current
Agreement.)
APPENDIX A
Increase salary schedule as follows:
01/01/91
01/01/92
01/01/93
2.5% on base
2.5% on base
2.5% on base
APPENDIX B
ae
The Employer agrees to pay the full premium for Employee only
hospitalization/major medical insurance for each full-time
Employee after thirty (30) days of continuous employment.
The Employer agrees to contribute up to the amounts set forth
below towards the cost of family coverage after thirty (30)
days of continuous employment for each full-time Employee who
elects family coverage under this Agreement:
1992 1993
MEDICA $339.58 $350.00
MEDCENTER $330.95 $341.00
GROUP HEALTH $303.24 $313.00
2
Any additional costs for such family coverage shall be paid
by the Employee through payroll deduction. In no event shall
the Employer's contribution exceed the actual cost of the
coverage selected by the Employee.
Ce
The Employer agrees to pay the full premium for dental
insurance coverage for each full-time Employee who elects
Employee only coverage after thirty (30) days of continuous
employment. The Employer agrees to contribute up to $26 per
month for family coverage for full-time Employee electing
such coverage after thirty (30) days of continuous
employment. Any additional costs for such family coverage
shall be paid by the Employee through payroll deduction.
D. through
G. See attached Memorandum of Agreement.
Additional Items
1. Change gender references to gender neutral.
2. Move items in Appendix B into the main body of the Agreement.
3
MF~OltANDU~ OF
This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into between the City
of Mound (hereafter "City") and Law Enforcement Labor Services,
Inc. (hereafter "Union").
W~R~AS, the City and the Union are parties to a collective
bargaining agreement covering Sergeants with a duration of
January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1993; and
W~ER~AS, the City proposed in the course of negotiations for
the 1991-1993 collective bargaining agreement to delete the
provisions of Appendix B, paragraphs D through G of the 1989-1990
collective bargaining agreement relating to City contribution for
retiree health insurance; and
W~ER~AS, the Union opposed the City's bargaining proposals
relating to retiree insurance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto have agreed to the
following with regard to retiree insurance:
1. The City's proposals for elimination of City contribution
for retiree insurance as set forth in its proposal of December 14,
1990 are hereby held in abeyance pending the Minnesota Supreme
Court's decision in Mower County v. LELS regarding the
interpretation of Minnesota Statutes, including PELRA, relating to
insurance benefits for retirees.
2. Dependent upon the outcome of the above-noted court
decision, the City reserves any and all rights as may be determined
in accordance with that decision relative to the proposals
referenced in paragraph 1 herein, specifically, the right to
eliminate the City's contribution for retiree insurance, which
rights may be exercised unilaterally on or after January 1, 1993.
3. This represents the complete and total agreement between
the parties regarding this matter.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Memorandum
of Agreement to be executed this
1992.
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR
SERVICES, INC.
day of
CITY OF MOUND
This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into between the City
of Mound (hereafter "City") and Law Enforcement Labor Services,
Inc. (hereafter "Union").
W~EREAS, the City and the Union are parties to a collective
bargaining agreement covering Sergeants with a duration of
January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1993; and
W~EREAS, Brad Roy is employed by the City as a Sergeant and
is covered by the collective bargaining agreement between the City
and the Union; and
W~EREAS, Brad Roy has expressed an interest in an early
retirement from his employment with the City; and
W~EREAS, during the course of negotiations for the 1991-1993
collective bargaining agreement, the parties agreed upon the terms
of an early retirement for Brad Roy.
NOW, THEREFORe, the parties hereto have agreed to the
following terms regarding Brad Roy's early retirement:
1. Brad Roy shall retire from his employment with the City
effective June 30, 1992.
2. For the period of July 1, 1992 through February 28, 1993,
the City shall pay contributions for the hospitalization/major
medical insurance and dental insurance coverage for Brad Roy in
accordance with the City contribution amounts set forth in the
1991-1993 collective bargaining agreement for current bargaining
unit members.
3. If Brad Roy relocates his residence outside the state of
Minnesota after June 30, 1992, and thereafter purchases insurance
from carrier(s) other than those through which the City provides
group insurance coverage, the City shall pay its contribution based
upon statements submitted from Brad Roy's new insurance carrier(s).
Such payments by the City shall be made directly to the insurance
carrier(s).
. 4. Effective March 1, 1993, Brad Roy shall be eligible for
d~~contribution for hospitalization/major medical and dental
insurance in accordance with Appendix B, Insurance, paragraphs D
through G of the 1989-1990 Labor Agreement between the City and the
Union.
5. This represents the complete and total agreement between
the parties regarding this matter.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Memorandum
of Agreement to be executed this
1992.
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR
SERVICES, INC.
day of ,
CITY OF MOUND
2
TENTATIVE AGREEMENT
City of Mound
and
Law Rnforcement Labor Services, Inc.
03/09/92
ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION
2.1
Change statutory reference to Minnesota Statutes S179A.12,
Subdivision 10.
ARTICLE XI. DISCIPLINE
11.4
C. Upon completion of an investigation, the subject of the
investigation has the right to know the names of all
complainants.
ARTICLE XII. JOB SAFETY
12.1 (Typographical error) Second provision should be numbered
12.2.
ARTICLE XIX. SICK LEAVE
19.1
Employees shall accrue eight (8) hours of sick leave with pay
for each calendar month of employment.
19.3
In the event of the death of a full-time Employee, the
beneficiary designated by the Employee shall be entitled to
the monetary value of the Employee's accumulated sick leave
in accordance with the table set forth in Article XXI,
Severance Pay.
19.4 A. (Indented paragraph) Delete the word "children" and the
words "spouse's children.,'
(Add at end of indented paragraph) Sick leave requests
of up to three (3) days may be submitted for emergency or
critical illness of a family member not defined above.
Approval of such requests shall be within the sole
discretion of the Employer.
Be
(New provision) An Employee may use personal sick leave
benefits provided by the Employer for absences due to an
illness or injury of the Employee's child for such
reasonable periods as the Employee's attendance with the
child may be necessary, on the same terms the Employee is
able to use sick leave benefits for the Employee's own
illness. The word "child" as it applies to this section
is defined in Minnesota Statutes §181.940, Subdivision 4.
19.5
(Second sentence) After an initial waiting period per injury
as set forth in the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act, the
Employee will be paid the difference between the Employee's
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED
FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, THE PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTIONS
APRIL 7, 1992, SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 & NOVEMBER 3, 1992
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve the following list of
election judges for the Presidential Primary Election April 7,
1992, the Primary Election September 15, 1992 and the General
Election November 3, 1992: '
Anderson, Gunhild
Barkley, Beverly
Bee, Vera
Bostrom, Holly
Brandenburg, Emma
Brown, Lois
Byrnes, Marilyn
Byrnes, Robert
Carlson, Robert
Cooper, Leatrice
Eischeid, Joy
Geyen, Dorothy
Gilbertson, Marian
Gilmore, Arlene
Hall, Marcy
Jerdee, Virginia
Jessen, Phyllis
Johnson, Betty
Johnson, Jeanette
Koenig, Edythe
Lansing, Betty
Leisinger, Duane
Longpre, Jerry
Maxwell, Helen
Meisel, Pat
Messick, June
Nelson, Joyce
O'Brien, Dorothy
Orn, Phyllis
Phleger, Shirley
Pietrick, Audrey
Richter, Ella
Robinson, Jean
Rudolph, Phyllis
Scholer, Ellen
Schwingler, Allen
Schwingler, Ann
Sidders, Barb
Skoglund, Ardelle
Skoglund, LynDelle
Smith, Bonnie
Smith, Marsha
Strong, Betty
Strong, Linda
Wilson, Clifford
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:
BILLS
RARCH 24, 1992
Batch 2032
TOTAL BILLS
$53,501.19
$53,501.19
Z
0
0000
Z
3~*
Z
2:>
0
Z
O0
oggg
J
GENERAL FUND
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Business Licenses
Non-Business
Licenses and
Permits
Charges for
Services
Court Fines
Charges to Other
Departments
Other Revenue
TOTAL REVENUE
LIQUOR FUND
WATER FUND
SEWER FUND
DOCKS FUND
CEMETERY FUND
BUDGET
CITY OF MOUND
1992 BUDGET REVENUE REPORT
FEBRUARY 1992
FEBRUARY YTD
REVENUE
16.7~
PER CENT
REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVEQ
1188850 0 1859 1186391 0.16~
82c)900 87617 27617 793283 3.36~
3860 886 680 8580 80.86~
69500 5861 8518 60988 18.85~
41850 1505 8334 38916 5.66~
75000 5152 5158 69848 6.87~
10000 1508 8878 7188 88.72~
51250 84 312 50938 0.61~
8259410 42OO7 49338 8eloo?e 2.18x
1180000 ~ ?7923 156165 1023835 13.23~
350000 24622 51961 298039 14.85~
650000 52011 106936 543064 16.45~
71000 40204 47819 23181 67.35~
3200 800 1600 1600 50.00M
March 20, 1992
( ITY of MO[ 'ND
TO; Ed Shukle
City Manager
FROM;
Joyce Nelson
Recycling Coordinator
SUBJECT; Brush
There are many different ways to handling brush. I have
enclosed a couple of brochures so you can see the type of
equipment is used in the handling of brush.
1. Seppi grinder could be used to reduce the volume of
a pile of brush. The brush would have to be spread
out for the use of this machine. The cost of the
Seppi would be $175.00 per hour. This machine can
grind up 20 - 30 tons per hour, brush being 6 to
9"in "
diameter. Once the volume is reduced it could
then be hauled to the Maple Grove Tree Site at a
cost of $18.00 per ton.
2. The Tub Grinder looks like an interesting machine
that could grind up most anything. The cost of this
machine is $210.00 per hour, for brush 8" inches in
diameter or less and $300.00 per hour for brush 9"
up to 12", plus $65.00 per hour transportation rate
to and from Minneapolis.
3. To have a roll-off placed at our site the cost would
be for brush under 1 1/2" 10 cu. yd $100.00, 20 cu.
yd. $130.00, 25 cu. yd. $145.00 and 30 cu yd
$160.00 per roll-off. · ·
4. Cliff Lutz hauls brush for Jim Fackler, the last
pile he had removed cost $1,450.00 this was for
about 270 cubic yards of material. Cliff brings his
brush to Eklunds burn site and pays him $3 50 cu.
yd. for disposing. ·
Some serious thought would have to go into monitoring the
site, or we could have people coming from all over to dispose
of their brush and it could attract other items also.
printed on recycled paper
Materials Recycling
Experts in Wood Waste
and
Solid Waste Processing
· Land Clearing
· Mobile Tree and Wood Waste
Chipping and Grinding
· Municipal Solid Waste Processing
· Yard Waste Processing
· Equipment Rental
· Screening of Difficult to Screen
Materials
Professional Environmental
Engineering Staff Including:
· Hydrologist/Geologist
· Solid Waste Composting Expert
· Forester
Partial Listing of
Equipment Available
· Tree Chippers Handling up to 48"
Dia. Logs
· Tub Grinders for Brush, Pallets &
Light Demo Material
· Seppi Grinder for Clearing and Large
Brush Dump Sites.
· 30 Ft. x 8 Ft. Revolving Trommel
Screen with Shredder
· Compost Windrow Turners and
Static Pile Processing Equip.
· 115 Cubic Yard Live Bottom Trailer
Printed on Recycled Paper
Ceres is your source
for help with
Wood Waste and
Solid Waste Processing.
For more information,
just give us a call.
2504 West Co. Rd.B
St. Paul, MN 55113
(6 ! 2) 633-4424
Fax (612) 633-8316
Morbark Model 1100 Tub Grinder
Specifications
GENERAL
Overall Length 37'6"
Height 13'4"
Width for Hauling 11
Weight (With Loader) 42,000 lbs.
Tongue Weight 14,000 lbs.
Axle Weight 28,000 lbs.
Tandem Axle 215x75Rx17.5 Radial Tires
Brakes Air
Stabilizer Legs Hydraulic
Major Components Hydraulic
Towing Arrangement Fifth Wheel
Engine Caterpillar or Cummins
Drive Direct w/Torque Limiter
Horsepower 400 to 525
Fuel Capacity (Tank) 160 gallon
Hydraulic Oil Capacity 120 gallon
TUB FEATURES
11' Diameter Top Opening, 60" Deep
9' Diameter Inside Base Opening
Tub Walls Constructed of 3/8" Steel Plate
Tub Floor Constructed of 1/2" T-1 Steel Plate
Supported by 12 Roller Guides
Hydraulic Forward & Reverse
Hydraulic Tilt
Safety Shutdown Switch
HAMMERMILL & SCREENS
26" x 52" Feed Opening
16" Diameter Rotor with 5 1/2" Cylinder Shaft
40-76 Hard-Surfaced, Heat-Treated Steel Swing
Hammers, 3/4" or 1" Thick
3/4" or 1 1/4" Thick Split Screen
Wear Plate & Screen Area 2,698 Sq. Inches
LOADER & DISCHARGE SYSTEM
Knuckleboom Loader with 25' Extended
Reach and 280' Continuous Swing
Bypass Grapple with 360' Turn
Hydraulic Auger Discharge System
18" Diameter Auger with 28" Discharge Belt
Conveyor
OPTIONS
Electronic Speed Sensor for Automatic Shutdown
Air Conditioner/Heater
Auxiliary Air Compressor
20-40 Fixed Hammers
Electric Power Option Available
Variety of Conveying & Material Handling
Equipment
Magnetized End Pulley with Slide Discharge for
Nails & Metal Extraction Available
Compare Features
Hydraulic tub tilt for easy access to Hammermill rotor accommodates
hammermill, both fixed and swing hammers.
Torque limiter protects engine and
clutch assembly against sudden
shock or overload.
Maintenance free and durable-The
underneath auger discharge is far
superior to a belt discharge.
Pressure compensated hydraulic
system means considerably longer
pump life due to controlled oil flow
and temperature.
26' x 28" discharge belt conveyor
conveniently folds over tub for trans-
Your Local Morbark Dealer ·
Morbark Model 1100 Tub Grinder
Manufactured By:
Recycling Systems, Inc.
8507 S. Winn Road
P.O. Box 1000
Winn, Michigan 48896
Telephone: (517) 866-2381
Fax: (517) 866-2280
5M 1-92R
CITY OF MOUND
1991 BUDGET REF'ORT
EXPENDITURES
FEBRUARY 1992
16.7Z
BUDGET
FEBRUARY YTD
EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE
PER CENT
EXF'ENDED
GENERAL FUND
Council 67280 10612 15801 51479 23.49%
Cable TV 138c) 719 719 661 58.10Z
City Manager/Clerk 166790 13455 23752 143038 14.24%
Elections 14800 14 1690 13110 11.48%
Assessing 46260 3 e 46858 0.02x
Finance 147090 10786 17905 129185 12.17%
Computer 31000 64?3 7413 2358? 23.91%
Legal 83950 1758 4858 79092 5.79%
Police 744890 54493 109694 635196 14.73~
Civil Defense 3350 148 358 8998 10.69%
Planning/Inspections 127000 11578 17289 109711 13.61%
Streets 408900 335?6 666?? 336223 16.55~
Shop & Stores 20180 813 1099 19081 5.45~
City Property 90150 5781 894? 81203 9.92%
Parks 132990 6713 11388 121602 8.56%
Summer Recreation 31610 0 0 31610 0.00%
Contingencies 20000 246 846 19754 1.83%
Transfers 119730 9398 18796 100934 15.70%
GENERAL FUND TOTAL
2251350 166560 306640 1944710 13.62~
Area Fire
Service Fund
Liquor Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Recycling Fund
Cemetery Fund
881600 19554 35559 186041 16.05%
178920 13331 31961 146959 17.86%
353060 25855 41084 311976 11.64%
971190 58068 102159 869031 10.52%
100900 5564 8386 92514 8.31%
4230 0 83? 3393 19.79%
MINUTES OF AM EETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PIJtI~INING CONNISSION
IGLR~ 9~ L992
Those present were: Geoff Michael, Jerry Clapsaddle, Frank
Weiland, Michael Mueller, Bill Voss, Mark Hanus, and Brian Johnson,
City Planner Mark Koegler, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and
Secretary Peggy James. Absent and excused was Bill Meyer and Liz
Jensen.
The following were also in attendance: Richard Henderson, Victoria
Henderson, and Stan Mierzejewski.
MINUTES
The February 24, 1992 Planning Commission Minutes were presented
for changes and/or additions.
MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Hanus, to approve the
February 24, 1992 Planning Commission Minutes as written.
Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NO. 91-005: WILLIAM VOSSt 4608 KILDA~E LANE, LOT 6, BLOCK 11,
SETONt PID ~19-$17-23 21 0028. VARIANCE.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the applicant's request for a
variance to allow construction of a new dwelling on an undersized
lot with inadequate street frontage. In addition, setback
variances to the front and rear are being requested. The requested
variances include the following:
Required Variance
Lot Area 6,000 sf 726 sf
Front Setback 20' 10'
Rear Setback 15' 9'
Frontage 40' 15'
Koegler recommended approval of the variances due to the size and
shape of the lot, both of which are criteria listed in Section
23.506.1 of the Mound Zoning Code, upon the following conditions:
Ail setbacks shall be established on a site plan drawn by a
registered land surveyor. Said site plan drawing shall
accompany the building permit application.
A 50 foot setback shall be observed from the ordinary high
water line of Lake Minnetonka. This setback shall be shown on
the site plan reference in item #1 above.
Mark Koegler also reviewed a recommendation from the City Engineer.
The situation relating to the sewer and water services for lots 5
and 6 was explained. The sewer service for Lot 5 crosses Lot 6 in
the area of the proposed house. The water service for Lot 5
crosses Lot 6, but will probably not interfere with the proposed
house construction, this will need to be determined by exposing the
line. The deficient street assessment was explained. The City
Planning Commission Minutes
March 9, 1992
Engineer recommended approval of the variance upon the following
conditions:
That portion of Kildare Road used as a driveway to serve Lot
6 should be improved to a minimum 5 ton design by installing
a 6" gravel base and 3" bituminous mat. Curb and gutter would
not be required and the width could be held to 15 feet.
The deficient street assessment in the amount of $1,488.90 be
paid (one unit charge at $1,170.90 and 40 L.F. at $318.00).
The sanitary sewer service from Lot 5 be relocated across Lot
6 with a new connection to the main in Kildare Road. This
would allow the proposed home to use the existing service
originally intended for Lot 6.
Private easements running to Lot 5 be granted to cover both
sewer and water services crossing Lot 6. These easements
should be made of record and copies furnished to the City of
Mound.
Mueller questioned the difference between the lot size variance for
the parcel in the Three Points area and this parcel. It was noted
that this parcel abuts two unimproved streets that abut the
shoreline which emphasizes the amount of open space for this
parcel. Mr. Voss commented that when he purchased this parcel he
was under the assumption that it met the 6,000 square foot lot area
requirement.
The Commission questioned if the street assessment charge of
$318.00 for 40 L.F. is necessary.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Hanus to recommend
approval of the variance as requested with the conditions
as listed in the City Planner's report and the City
Engineer's Report, with the exception that the $318.00
street assessment charge be waived since the Kildare will
not be improved and the applicant will be installing a
driveway to meet specifications recommended by the City.
Approval is also recommended due to the fact that the
owner was under the assumption the parcel was 6,000
square feet at time of purchase and there is open space
between the subject parcel and the lakeshore with the
unimproved streets. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on March 24, 1992.
Planning Co~miseion Minutes
March 9, 1992
C/~E NO. 9H-003: RICHARD HENDERSON, ~948 SHORENOOD LANE, LOT
BLOCK 2, 8NADYWOOD POINTw PID ~18-117-23 23 0013. VARIANCE.
City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the applicant's request for a
variance to construct a 22' x 30' garage and foyer addition to an
existing home. The variances being requested include:
Lot Area
Lakeshore Setback
to Deck
Side Setback
Required Variance
10,000 sf 2,150 sf
50' 5'
There is an existing boat house on the property which encroaches .3
feet into the neighboring lot. The applicant has indicated that
the boat house is to be removed.
There is a water line serving the home which will under the
proposed addition, this issue was reviewed with the Sewer and Water
Superintendent, Greg Skinner.
Staff recommended approval of the lot area, lakeshore, and side
yard setback variances conditioned upon the following:
The existing boat house shall be removed prior to final
building inspection.
The existing water service shall be insulated under the
proposed concrete floor in a manner acceptable to the Mound
Sewer and Water Superintendent.
Mueller questioned if a front yard setback variance is needed since
the required setback is 30 feet and the proposed addition is 20.7
feet to the front. Koegler commented that considering the average
setback of the two adjoining structures, the front yard setback
will be conforming.
The Commission discussed the proposed 5.4' side yard setback from
the proposed addition and reviewed alternative solutions to
alleviate the variance.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle to approve
the variance as requested with the exception that the .6'
side yard setback variance not be granted due to lack of
hardship, and including the conditions as listed in the
City Planner's report. Motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 9, 1992
The following changes were made to Section 318:
Line 29: Add condominium units and townhouses.
bines 30 - 33: Re-word to exclude "disclosure documents.,,
Lines 37 - 41: Delete· Verify with attorney.
Line 46: ,,
· · · owner as to any knowledge of damage to the
· · · II "
Lines 68 - 70: " . . within the City without first having
obtained ~ Truth in Housing Disclosure Report.
..... c d ........ to as set out in Section 318:05. The
report, ~A_
..... f-~t~ ~r v.d~r ..... t but ~
~ shall be made available . . .,,
Lines 76 - 79: Delete balance of paragraph after ',
owner.,, · · · the first
Line 85: "minimum e(~}e gity requirements . . .,,
Lines 96 - 99: Beginning with "The form . . ." to end of paragraph
should be moved to "b. The Zoning Disclosure form."
Line 100:
Line 102:
Line 109:
Line 132:
Line 148:
Line 153:
Line 164:
Line 211:
Line 223:
Line 224:
"b. The Zoning Disclosure form shall . . .,,
". · . the present Bse!occupancy is conforming . .,,
"~w~ C_i~ shall provide a copy of . .,,
"second Wednesday,, Mueller questioned if this could
be on another evening, other than a Wednesday which
is commonly a church night.
"In eese the event any . . .,,
"remove a~ Truth in H~using Evaluator,s Certificatp
Qf Competency for just cause . . .,, --
Also delete "($25.00) as an examination fee."
"the secretary-treasurer of the e~m~~oard.,,
"secretary-treasurer of"
"the s~ Board"
Planning Commission Minutes
March 9, 1992
The Building Official reviewed the drafted Disclosure Report Form
and the Disclosure Report Guide with the Planning Commission. The
changes suggested are as follows:
Disclosure Report Form
PAGE ONE
Move "NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS" to Zoning Disclosure Report and add
spaces for townhouse or condominium units.
Add signature line for "Owner's Disclosure" for flood statement.
A typo was noted in second sentence of health and safety
information, "fore" should be "for." Also within this sentence,
persons should be referred to the Minnesota Department of Health
versus a "Minneapolis" department.
Item $3 should read "Mound Disclosure Report Guide."
TWO
Their should also be a category for "NA" - NOT APPLICABLE.
their be more "comment" area?
Could
Item 5, what is 3C?
Item 23, Should their be a specific line for "Central Heating (yes
or no)?
Disclosure Report Guide
The Building Official commented that he has yet to review the
plumbing and mechanical related items with the plumbing inspector,
and the electrical items with the electrical inspector.
Line 76:
Line 93:
Line 98:
A typo was noted "leeks" should be "leaks."
". . . check the beams for splittinq or excessive
sagging . . .
" . . . supporting columns which may indicates a
structural problem . . ."
Lines 109-10: Delete as it is repetitions, same as A.
Lines 194-99:
This section appears to be the same as lines 245 -
249. The Building Official should bring this to
the attention of the plumbing inspector for review.
5
Planning Comm£ss~on ~£nut~s
March 9, 1992
General Discussion - Truth in Housing
Vice Chair Michael commented on the time involved to review this
document and suggested a subcommittee review it in detail and then
bring it back to the Planning Commission. In addition to receiving
interpretations and opinions from a plumbing and electrical
inspector it was suggested that the proposed disclosure form and
guide be reviewed with an evaluator. It was determined that this
professional input be obtained by the Building Official first, then
the updated documents be referred to the subcommittee for review.
Volunteers for the subcommittee are: Michael Mueller, Mark Hanus,
and Geoff Michael. Mueller was chosen to be chairman of the
subcommittee.
MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Mueller, to adjourn
the meeting at 10:23 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
9ice Chair, Geoff Michael
Attest:
6
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSXON
MARCH 12~ 1992
Present were: Lyndelle Skoglund, Brian Asleson, Tom Casey, Shirley
Andersen, Joy Eischeid, Mo Mueller, and Carolyn Schmidt, Council
Representative Andrea Ahrens, City Manager Ed Shukle, Parks
Director Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, and Secretary
Peggy James. Marilyn Byrnes was absent and excused.
The following were also present:
Bargman.
Michael Roach and Margaret
New Commission member Mo Mueller was welcomed.
MINUTES
MOTION made by Casey, seconded bySchuidt, to approve the
Park and Open Spaco Commission Minutes of February 13,
1992 as written. Motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST BY PETITION TO DRE~E BLACK LAKE CHANNEL.
The Park Director informed the Commission that at this time the
City does not have the funds to pay for the requested dredge. A
rough estimate for the cost of the Dredge is $368,500. Margaret
Bargman questioned if the costs were further investigated, she was
under the impression that the Park Commission tables this request
until the March meeting in order to investigate the costs. The
Parks Director clarified that the request was tabled pending
information from the DNR relating to environmental impacts and
criteria for evaluating dredges. This information from the DNR and
related agencies is still in the development stage and is proposed
to be completed by June 1, 1992.
Asleson commented that he does not think the city has ever funded
a dredge in front of private property in the past, and he does not
think they should set a precedence by doing so now.
Margaret Bargman reviewed the history of dredges in Black Lake
Channel and stated that a previous dredge was done incorrectly, and
therefore, her property which originally abutted public lands was
converted to private shoreline.
Michael Roach commented on the poor maintenance of the public
shoreland and stated that a tree from public shoreland fell into
the channel which now makes passage difficult. In his opinion, the
County originally dredged the channel, and therefore it should be
maintained.
Park and Open Space Comm£ssio, Minutes
March 12, 1992
The Parks Director explained that a dredge in this area would be
very expensive since it would have to be a barge dredge and then
the spoils would have to be brought to a truck and then disposed
of. He commented that the Watershed will not allow the spoils to
be disposed of in the middle/island of the channel.
MOTION made by &sleson, seconded by Casey to table the
request to dredge Black Lake Channel until the Commission
rec~ive~ crite~ia.from t~e DNRand other related agencies
~. no? ~o evaAua=e envlromnental impacts of dredging.
Tnxs xnform~tion is due to be released by June 1, 1992.
Motion carrxed unanimously.
The Parks Director commented that he will investigate if trees have
fallen from public lands into the channel, and if so he will
address the issue.
TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY LISTS: REVIEW BY FRAN CLARK, CIT~ CLERK.
The City Clerk reviewed a break down of city property uses,
follows:
as
67 = wetlands/conservation
64 = parks/conservation
94 = under City's control for: streets, drainage, utilities,
city buildings, or cemetery
25 = released to Hennepin County and are currently for sale to
adjoining property owners
5 = released to Hennepin County and are currently up for
public auction
In addition to the 64 parks/conservation, she reminded the
Commission that their are commons areas and unimproved roads that
extend to the shoreline that do not have property identification
numbers, and therefore they are not on the list.
Casey questioned if the City can get back the properties which have
been released for sale. The City Clerk answered yes, however the
City paid a fee to the County to release them, and another fee will
need to be paid to get them back, they would have to be reconveyed.
She suggested that the Park Commission deal with the park land that
they already have.
The City Clerk was thanked for her time and the Park Commission
continued discussion of a plan of action. It was determined that
they will still meet, as planned, on Saturday, April 4th at 8:00
a.m. at City Hall, and at that time they will tour the properties
categorized as "parks with no names" and "released for sale to
Park and Open Space Comm£es£on M£nutes
March 12, 1992
adjoining property owners." The Commission will have to meet in
the small conference room or in Jim's office due to election
activities at City Hall that day.
The Park Commission requested that staff verify with the City Clerk
the procedure and cost to regain the parcels which have already
been released. Staff will also prepare a map to assist the Park
Commissioner's on their tour with the "no name parks" and
"released" properties located.
CONTINUED REVIEW OF ALLOCATION OF BUDGETED FUNDS FOR: BENCHES AND
TRASH RECEPTACLES.
The City Manager announced that due to a potential budget cut of
$158,000, these items may eventually also be cut.
MOTION made by Casey, seconded by Eischeid to table this -
issue until tho next Park and Open Space Commission
meeting following a decision from the legislature
relating to 1992 budget cuts for the City of Mound.
Motion carried unanimously.
Schmidt requested that staff not take all the money away from the
parks budget and that some money be retained for the parks in
Mound. Asleson commented that he would rather see money spent on
maintaining the parks than spend money on benches. Eischied would
like to see funds retained for benches. Casey would like funds
retained for trees, he would like to see Mound be a "Tree City."
MOTION made by Casey, seconded by Andersen to recommend
to the City Council that the Parks'Department receive no
more than a proportionate cut than any other department
in the City.
Asleson suggested that the Park Commissioner's attend a City
Council meeting when the issue of budget cuts is being discussed.
Casey commented that hopefully this statement to the City Council
will let them know how important the parks are.
MOTION FAILED. Those in favor were=
and Mueller. Those opposed were:
Ahrens, Asleson, and Skoglund.
Casey, Andersen,
Eischeid, Schmidt,
The Park Commission requested that Andrea Ahrens, City Council
Representative relate to the city Council that they do not want the
park's budget cut 100%.
Park and Open Space Comm£ee£on Minutes
March 12, 1992
[~MCD COMMERCIAL DOCK LICENSES= DRIFTWOOD SHORES AND SETON ~l~w.
MOTION made by Schmldt, seconded by Asleson to recommend
approval of the 1992 LMCD com~ercial dock licenses for
Driftwood Shores and Seton View. Motion carried
unanimously.
.,ANNUAL PARKS TOUR
Parks Director, Jim Fackler, informed the Commission that staff has
suggested and investigated having the 1992 annual parks tour by
lake using an A1 & Alma's boat. The theme of the tour would be
commons and public shoreland and will give the Commission a chance
to view encroachments and other related park issues from the lake.
The date of the tour is proposed to be Saturday, May 16th from
11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. The Planning Commission, Economic
Development Commission and City Council will also be invited.
_LMCD - Conflict of Interest Policy
Casey questioned if the City of Mound has considered adopting a
Conflict of Interest Policy. Different types of Conflict of
Interest Policies were discussed, such as ethical and financial.
City Council Representative, Andrea Ahrens, suggested that she
raise this issue at a COW meeting to the City Council.
REPORTS
The City Council Representative, City Manager, Park Director, and
Dock Inspector gave their reports. The budget cuts were discussed.
The meeting which was held on February 27th for the realtors was
discussed and it was noted that another similar meeting will be
held in 1993.
MOTION made by Schmidt seconded by Ahrens adjourn the
Parks & Open Space Commission Meeting ~ 9:23 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
4
A. THOMAS WURST, P.A.
CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A.
~IAMES O. I-ARSON, P.A.
THOMAS D. UNDERWOOD, P.A.
CRAIG H. HERTZ
ROG~'R ~J. F'£LLOWS
LAW OF'F'ICE$
WURST, PEARSON, I-ARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
I100 I~IRST BANK PLACE: WE:ST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540:~
March 4, 1992
Mr. Edward J. Shukle
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound MN 55364
[C'U MAR 5 i992
Re:
City of Mound - Rental Housing Ordinance -
Executive Summary
Dear Ed:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of February 12, 1992,
wherein you have asked me to submit an executive summary of the proposed
rental housing ordinance. You indicate this will be discussed at the City
Council's Committee of the Whole meeting, and it is the Council's intention
to review this prior to a public hearing.
I have prepared an executive summary, but it is very short and simple
and basically outlines what the ordinance is trying to accomplish. I have
not gone into the details that are in the ordinance, which at times is
extremely complex and may have meaning to building officials and
contractors but is difficult for lay people to understand.
You will recall that after I initially drafted Chapter 319, ameeting
was held between the City Planner and the then Building Official and the
size of the ordinance was expanded extensively. It was Jan Bertrand's
position that much of what she was going to be asked to administer should be
placed in the ordinance so she would be able to point to something and tell
the landowner why he had to do these things. I believe that much of what she
has inserted in this ordinance relates to materials that are in the Uniform
Building Code and could be adopted by reference to that Code or to other
codes. This is a decision that I believe was discussed in great detail with
you and with the other City officials. I am not sure how this was presented
to the Planning Commission, but I presume that since this is the final draft
that they are submitting to the Council for consideration, that they have
basically reviewed and approved this.
Ed, I want to point out it is difficult to summarize something which
has a good deal of detail. Take the purpose section in Section 319 where we
set out 6 specific reasons for enacting the ordinance. It seems to me that
it is just as easy for the people to read those so they understand the
findings that are being made to justify proceeding with this type of
WURST, PEARSON, LARSON, UNDERWOOD & MERTZ
control. I will be happy to expand this or go into any particular section
raised by the Council, but I don't know how much of a summary you expected or
just what it is the City Council wants. It may be that the Planner and/or
the Building Official can expand on my outline to cover points that they
believe are of special significance to the City Council and to the public
who will be subject to the regulations of the proposed ordinance.
CAP: ih
Enclosure
truly ~s,
City Attorney
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHAPTER 319
This proposed ordinance works together with proposed Section 495
which is the rental housing licensing ordinance. Under that proposed
ordinance, any rental housing must get a license and must maintain the
standards set forth in Chapter 319 (495:45). The purpose and intent is to
protect and regulate the health and safety conditions for our residents.
Summary of Section 319
319:00 Purpose of Housing Maintenance Regulations for Rental
Properties.
a. 6 reasons are set forth establishing the purpose for enacting the
ordinance. These are set forth to indicate purpose and to
justify adoption of the ordinance.
b. The ordinance makes it clear it is not intended to intrude on the
contractual obligation of the landlord and the tenant.
319:05 States the ordinance intends to provide standards to protect the
character and stability of residential areas in the City.
319:10 This is the definition section and sets out explanations of 39
terms used in the ordinance.
319:15 Responsibilities of Owners and Occupants. This prohibits an
owner from renting premises unless they are fit for human
occupancy and meet all applicable legal requirements of the
State or the City.
Subd. 1 and 2 define responsibility of the parties for different
areas of the structure. The tenant is required to take care of
their rubbish and garbage; in multiple units the owner has
responsibility to furnish facilities where the tenants can store
their garbage.
There are 15 specific subdivisions setting out responsibilities
for the varioius areas and covering health and safety issues.
It covers plumbing, heating, lighting, etc.
319:20 Minimum Standards for Basic Equipment and Facilities. This
section requires a kitchen, cabinets, and shelves to store food,
and requires a stove and refrigerator, a minimum amount of
storage space, toilet facilities, a lavatory sink, and a bathtub
or shower.
319:25 Establishes general standards for the structure i.e., the
foundation, exterior walls, roof, windows, doors, screens,
floors, interior walls, and ceilings. This section also
requires the building to be rodent resistant and covers
maintenance of fences and accessory structures.
319:30,
319:65,
319:75
319:80,
319:105
319:110,
Subd. 7 of this section goes into great detail on required safety
elements for stairways, balconies, porches, etc. Subdivisions
8 through 12 set out standards for chimneys, grading and
drainage, yard cover, minimum ceiling heights, and access to
bedrooms and bathrooms.
319:35, 319:40, 319:45, 319:50, 319:55, and 319:60 are all very
technical building code standards which generally follow the
Uniform Building Code. Jan Bertrand was with the City when the
ordinance was first drafted and she wanted all these items listed
in the ordinance. This goes into much more detail than most
ordinances of this nature. These sections cover requirements
for door and window locks, standards for light and ventilation,
electric services, thermal standards, winterizing of the
premises, and very detailed requirements relating to fire
protection.
319:70. These sections appoint the City Manager as the
Compliance Officer and state that inspections shall be during
reasonable hours. They also relate to access and lay out the
process if inspection is refused (city application for court
order).
Unfit for Human Habitation. Sets the standards for declaring a
unit unfit for human habitation, and makes it illegal for people
to occupy the unit after such a declaration until the defective
conditions are corrected.
319:85, 319:90, 319:95, 319:100. Secure Unfit and Vacated
Dwellings. Requires owner to make the building safe and secure
so it is not hazardous to the public health, safety, and welfare.
If the building defects are not corrected it can be declared a
hazardous building and a compliance order will be issued
outlining the process; the owner has a right to appeal and the
Board of Appeals will review the decision.
Restriction on Transfer of Ownership. The owner is restricted
from transferring ownership while a compliance order is pending.
319:115. These sections indicate that failure to comply is a
misdemeanor and allow the City to execute certain compliance
orders.
REC"D MAR ,3 !992
March 17, 1992
TIME IS RUNNING OUT
The Public Works Committee of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners will vote
on the Pioneer Trail test project on Thursday, March 26th.
We have not won yet. We still do not know how Commissioner Tad Jude will vote on
this issue. We are seriously concerned. If you are one of the many people who have
called or written to Commissioner Jude to express your support for the project,
THANK YOU. If not, there is still time to do so. It doesn't hurt to call or write
more than once either.
We will be providing bus transportation to the committee meeting in the Hennepin
County Government Center on March 26th for those who wish to ride We urge you to
plan to attend this important hearing. Only through a show of community support for
this project can we demonstrate to the county commissioners that they need not fear
for their jobs if they support the combined fly and bottom ash testing.
The bus will depart from the Medina Ballroom parking lot, located on Highway 55 in
Medina at 8:15 a.m. on the 26th. If you would like to ride, please call Jeff Spartz
at 371-0233 at any time of day or night. Jeff's voice mail operates 24 hours per
day. We would like to get a preliminary headcount since we might need two buses. A
continental breakfast reception will immediately precede the hearing.
YOU CAN HELP, by writing or calling. Pass this information on to 10 or 20 of your
friends and neighbors and ask them to call or write before March 26th.
Listed on the next page are some good reasons to support the proposed Hennepin
County/MSC Demonstration Project on Pioneer Trail in Corcoran. Pick your favorites
and then use them in letters and telephone calls to the Commissioner, but try to put
them in your own words. (Politicians can usually tell when everybody is saying the
same thing, and then tend to discount its importance.}
CALL OR WRITE (OR BOTH)
Commissianer Tad Jude
Hennepin County Board of Commissioners
A2400 Government Center
300 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55487
Phone: 348-3084
For more information contact:
Judy or Neil Anderson 498-8911 Doris Conzet ....... 498-8192
Sherri or Rodney Blue . . 478-6592 Marvin Johnson . . 479-2274
Marlys or Howard Schlief . . 498-8387 Jeff Spartz ........ 371-0233
Fred Gustin (MSC) .......................... (404)424-1900
We are pleased that the following city councils have passed resolutions or written
letters supporting this effort:
Corcoran Mound
Greenfield Orono
Independence Rockford
Long Lake Rogers
Maple Plain St. Bonifacius
Minnetrista
These will be presented to the Board of Commissioners along with the petitions that
the residents of Pioneer Trail in Corcoran have been circulating for signatures.
In addition, your elected representatives have been working hard to keep garbage
going to the downtown Minneapolis HERC incinerator and out of western Hennepin
County. The following state legislators recently wrote to the editors of the local
newspapers and the Star Tribune to express their concern that the Hennepin County
Board of Commissioners could let the largest investment in county history go down
the drain by not taking the lead in exploring new ways of using HERC by-products:
Senator Gen Olson, IR - District 43
Senator Betty Adkins, DFL - District 22
Senator Patrick D. McGowan, IR - District 48
Senator Gene Merriam, DFL - District 49
Representative Tony Onnen, IR - District 22B
Representative Bill Schreiber, IR - District 48B
Representative Steve Smith, IR - District 43A
Pioneering
Creative
Environmental
Solutions
PICES
Reasons to Support Ash Demonstration Project
Landfill Abatement - there will be fewer landfdls needed for garbage, especially in westem
Hennepin County, if HERC can continue to operate.
Likewise, there will be fewer landfills needed for ash, especially in westem Hennepin County,
if the ash is permitted to be recycled. If the ash has nowhere to go, HERC may have to shut
down, sending mountains of garbage back to landfills.
Conserve natural mineral res.ources by replacing a portion of the rock used in pavement with
synthetic aggregate made from ash.
Provide a more cost-effective method for Hennepin County to manage its HERC ash than by
disposal of the ash in a landfill.
5. Recycling as many waste streams as possible, including the fly ash portion of the ash, is good
public policy. This is one recycling method that could really work well, or at least it should be
given the oppormniw to be demonstrated.
6. The test will not good measure of the effectiveness of the MSC process if only bottom ash
is used.
Using combined ash actually produces a better synthetic aggregate than using bottom ash alone.
11.
12.
The 100 tons intended for use in the Demo project have already been produced using both
bottom ash and fly ash. The aggregate has been tested and proven to meet state and federal
drinking water standards by an independent environmental testing laboratory located in the
Twin Cities. This is the standard of safety established for this project by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency.
The residents of Pioneer Trail, who are most affected, support the project. Call them and ask.
Only a small percentage (about 5%) of the ash cannot be processed into aggregate and would
require landfill disposal. That's 5,000 tons divided by 365,000 tons of garbage per year, or less
than 2% of the original garbage being landrfilled, resulting in a better than 98% reduction
through incineration and then utilization of the ash by-product.
There are sufficient safeguards in plac, e to prevent any possibility of harm to human health or
the environment. These include laboratory t6sting, site monitoring during and for years after
construction to ensure environmental safety, and plans for removal of the road if necessary.
The environmental advocacy groups oppose the beneficial use of ash because it does not further
their political agenda, which is to shut down all municipal solid waste incinerators throughout
the U.S. With the advanced air pollution control systems now being installed, ash disposal is
the only issue that can be contested by environmental advocacy groups, and their last remaining
weapon to use to shut down the garbage burners. A safe, environmentally-acceptable method
of utilizing the ash will take away their last argument against keeping the HERC waste-to-ener-
gy plant open (and require them to find a new way to keep the donations coming in).
PLEASE WRITE OR CALL COMMISSIONER JUDE
WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW
FROM:
DATE:
Mark Koegl~i
March 13, 1992
SUBJECT:
LMCD Lake ACcess TaSk Force
...,. ~Main problems .at. accesses occur at Peak times. ..
° Public perception is that access is free - someone pays - Task Force will
help. determine who.
attended the Lake Access Task Force meeting.~held on March
I .fOllowing tn~/tt~rs ::,werer digCuSsed: :_. :-...~: ~.~ ~!:f,.:,!i:!i~i.;:;: .... . . 11, 1992.
m~ssion~ 'of the.
~ask'F~ce .is to l~ate'7~ reliable car/~afler
p~king 'spaces on L~e 'Minnetonka. ~e Task Force includes 19 mem~r
~groups including cities, LMLOA, Hshing .Groups, ~e DNR and Hennepin
- ar s.
F~rce ..?s, p~t :of~.. the ~plemeha~on
.gement Plan. " ~'" ....
o Task Force needs to verify previoUsly' identified' Sites - are they still
available?
o_ ·Can~. existing marinas supply some public-boat launching and parking?
At this point in the meeting, the Chairman asked for comments from those
present:
o Tad Jude, Hennepin County County is a historical supplier of access
and will continue tO be so in the future. Task Forco needs to look at the
roles of cities and thei¢ount¥. in supplying iiCc~ . Who ~hould fund and
run' boat acCi~es?':' :'-~: :' ~"- - ~ ' -
d." ',.. -~ '.' ' ' '" ':""
Scott C~lson,' a p~cipatory .,pr:ocess
a:';':-~'Vem Haug, Tonka Bay '- C~.~ funds maintenance-'of access (not ~ps).
Milfoil and zebra mussel problems Will ~ complicated by thc addition of
car/~ailcr p~king stMls. Additional access will not benefit
Chairman;s"~esponsc to 'abOve, LMCD's.best 'estimate is that 1,150 boats
~ MINN~rONKA ........ ON INC
I, AKI~ilORB OWNERS &Sa4;~it-,s . _,.,._
P.O. BOX 596, ~,XCRLSIOR. MN 55331.059t~
FROM:
Members of the Lake Minnetonka Access Task Force:
Don German,son, President, LMLOA
DATE: March 11, 1992
SUB,l: Interest Statement
· ' 's with the Lake Minnetonka
The Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners AssocmUon involvement
Access Task Force is to insure that all users: public access, residential l~l~eshore owners,
marinas and yacht clubs, and home associations have fair access to the lake
We are especially interested in insuring the safety and recreational experience for all users. Any
of the actions proposed by this Committee should take into consideration the underlying factor
of the environment for future generations to enjoy.
LAKE NINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM - Public Hearing
7:30 PM - Regular meeting
'Wednesday, March 25, 1992
Tonka Bay City Hall
4901Manitou Road (County Rd 19)
7:00 PM - PUBLIC HEARING
City of Tonka Bay, New Dock License application
7:30 PN - REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
READING OF MINUTES - 2/26/92 Board Meeting
PuBLIc COMMENTS - From persons in attendance not on agenda
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT AGENDA - Items marked * will be approved in one motion unless
removed from consent agenda for discussion
COMMITTEE REPORTS
ENVIRONMENT, Chair Hurt
A. Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force, Chair Penn
B. Independent evaluation of Eurasian water milfoil Weed
Harvesting program
C. Additional business recommended by the committee
WATER STRUCTURES, Chair Babcock
A. Approval of minutes, 3/14/92 meeting
B. Rockvam Boat Yards, Site 2, Dock Length Variance, Coffee Cove;
recommending approval of the length variance to 153' (and the
addition of a 25' make ready dock to accommodate the fishing
boat amenity), instructing Counsel to draft the Order
C. Ron Whinnery, Dock Length Variance, Carsons Bay; recommending
approval of the length variance to 511', instructing Counsel to
draft the Order
Halstad Acres Improvement Assn., New Multiple Dock License,
Halsted's Bay; recommending approval of a 7 slip multiple dock,
accepting $350 as back-licensing fees
Board Agenda, 3/25/92, Pa'ge 2
B. Bean's Greenwood Harina, New Multiple Dock License and Length
Variance, St. Alban's Bay; 1)recommending denial of the
variance to relocate 8 slips beyond 100', 2) recommending
approval of renewal with 3 slips, #101, #T-III & #106,
relocated within 100' -
F. Bupp Dock Length Variance, Carsons Bay; recommending approval
of the Order granting the variance as drafted
G. Multiple Dock License renewal applications:
1) Excelsior Park Tavern, Excelsior Bay; recommending approval
of: 1) amenities as presented; 2) the 32 sllp configuration
for 12 transient and 20 storage to include storage and
operation of 4 charter boats. [The drafting of the Order is
to await applicant's final decision on the new dock plan.]
2) Chapman Place Marina, Cooks Bay; recommending approval with
the new agreement between Chapman Place Association and
Vincent McClellan, dba Minnetonka Dock and Plow Service
3) Poxhi11 Homeowners Assn., Smiths Bay; recommending
approval with relocation of Slip I, a .32' slip with a 40'
canopy, to the right of the main dock subject to letter of
approval from the neighbor
i) David Thomas Development (Bayshore III Addition), South
Upper Lake; recommending approval subject to payment of
outstanding fees
5) Howards Point Marina, South Upper Lake; recommending
approval (with changes in Slips 1-14 per site plan submitted
11/88)
6) Other renewals without change, recommending approval per
3/14/92 minutes
H. New Nultiple Dock License appllcatlons, recommending approval
per 3/14/92 minutes, subject to Board waiving public hearing;
1) Schmltt's Marina, Excelsior Bay;
2) City of Wayzata, Broadway Docks, Wayza[aBay;
3) Clay Cliffe Homeowners Association, Old Channel Bay;
4) Minnetonka Yacht Club, Site 1, Carsons Bay;
5) Eagle Bluff Homeowners Association, Halsteds Bay;
I. First reading of Ordinance relating to Storage of Lake
Maintenance Equipment on Lake Minnetonka;
J. Request to waive late fee for Shorewood Yacht Club, currently
under receivership, recommending denial
K. Additional Business recommended by the committee
LAKB USB AND RECREATION, Chair Foster
A. Report of 3/16/92 meeting; due to lack of quorum no action was
taken,
B. New Special Event Application, Minnetonka Public Schools, Solar
Boat Regatta, Saturday, 6/20/92 (with 6/21/92 as an alternate
for bad weather), Gideons Bay, requesting LMCD waive or reduce
fees and deposit due to school project's limited funding
d~' 3/25/92
n , Pase 3
New Wine and Beer License Applications for A1 & Alma's Charter
Boat I, staff recommendation to waive investigation and fee
D. Fundraising proposal from Tonka Wet Spot, Corp., 3/9/92 letter
E. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol report
F. Additional business recommended by the committee
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE, Chair Grathwol
FINANCIAL REPORTS, Treasurer Boswinkel
A. Statement of Cash Transactions, month ending 2/29/92
B. Audit of Vouchers for Payment
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT, Strommen
A. Prosecuting Attorney Tallen, change of law firm
UNPINISNED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
7:30 p.m., Wednesday~ Pebruary 26~ 1992
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair
Reese at 8:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Thomas Reese, Vice Chair, Mound; Bert Foster,
Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior; Wm. Johnstone, Minnetonka;
Jan Boswinkel, Treasurer, Minnetonka Beach; Scott Carlson, Minne-
trista; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Douglas Babcock, Secretary,
Spring Park; Tom Penn, Tonka Bay; Duane Markus, Wayzata. Also
Present: Charles LeFevere, Counsel; Deputy Cliff schmidt; Sher-
iff's Water Patrol; Rachel Thibault, Administrative Technician;
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director.
Members Absent: David Cochran, Chair, Greenwood; JoEllen Hurt,
Orono; George Owen, Victoria; Robert Slocum, Woodland.
READING OF MINUTES
Babcock moved, Boswinkel seconded, to dispense with the
reading of the minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to approve the
minutes of the January 22, 1992 Board meeting with the following
corrections:
Page 2. COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. ENVIRONMENT A 1) to read:
Reese referred to a communication from John Barren, Water
Quality Manager,' Hennepin Parks, dated 1/2/92, in which an in-
house Parks laboratory for water quality sampling would be imple-
mented.
Page 3. Paragraph 4 Line 9 to read: study. Maple said it is
his belief that .the ~M~D MCWD will ultimately ---
Page 11. B. Management Plan Contract Para 2 Line 4 to read:
requested, is $&T786r46 $1,756.14. There are no other outstand-
ing claims.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from persons in attend-
ance not on the agenda.
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS: There were no announcements from the Chair.
CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION: Foster moved, Grathwol seconded, to approve the
following agenda items:
2.A. Water Structures Committee minutes of 2/8/92 as sub-
mitted. -continued
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 26, 1992
2.C.l.a. Multiple Dock License Renewals without Change:.
Al & Alma's Supper Club, Cooks Bay
Bayview Condominiums, Spring Park Bay
Big Island Veterans Camp, Veterans Bay
Boat Rentals of Minnetonka, Harrisons Bay
Boulder Bridge Homeowner's Assn., South Upper Lake
Cardinal Cove Beach Assn., Halsted Bay
Cedarhurst Association, Robinsons Bay
Chimo Association, Carsons Bay
Cochrane's Boatyards, St. Albans Bay and Excelsior Bay
Crane Island Assn., West Upper Lake
Crystal Bay Service, West Crystal Bay
City of Deephaven, Carsons Bay and St. Louis Bay
Eagle Bluff Assn., Halsted Bay
City of Excelsior, Excelsior Bay
Gayle's Marina, Maxwell Bay
Grandview Point, Carsons Bay
Gray's Bay Resort & Marina, Grays Bay
Gray~s Landing Homeowners Assn., Grays Bay
City of Greenwood, St. Albans Bay & Lower Lake South
Harrison Harbor Twinhomes, Harrisons Bay
Herzog Acres, Wayzata Bay
Jennings Cove Dock Owners Assn., Jennings Bay
Lafayette Club, Crystal Bay
Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Assn., Lafayette Bay
Lakewinds Assn., Spring Park Bay
Libbs Bay Boat Club, Libbs Lake
Loring Acres Beach Assn., West Upper Lake
Maple Crest, Jennings Bay
Meadowbrook Boat Club, Libbs Lake & Grays Bay
City of Minnetonka Beach, Lafayette Bay, Crystal Bay, Lower
Lake North
Minnetonka Boat Works-Orono, Browns Bay & Tanager Lake
Minnetonka Boat Works-Wayzata, Wayzata Bay
Minnetonka.Portable Dredging, Gideons Bay
Minnetonka Power Squadron, Big Island Passage
Minnetonka Yacht Club, Carsons & Lower Lake North
City of Mound
Priests, Cooks, W Upper Lake, Phelps, Black Lake, Emerald
Lake, Seton Lake, Harrisons, Jennings & West Arm Bays
Richard Neslund, Wayzata Bay
Ridgewood Cove Property Owners Assn., Jennings Bay
Art Rossberg, South Upper Lake
Seahorse Condo Assn., Jennings Bay
Seton Twinhomes, Seton Lake
Victoria Estates, North Arm
Walden. Tract X Property Owners Assn., St. Louis Bay
Walters Port Assn., Carmans Bay
City of Wayzata, Wayzata Bay
Windward Marine, Browns Bay & Tanager Lake
Woodend Shores Beach Assn., West Upper Lake
2
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 26, 1992
2. C.l.c. District Mooring Area Renewal Applications:
City of Deephaven, Carsons Bay & St. Louis Bay
City of Excelsior, Excelsior Bay
Minnetonka Yacht Club, Carsons Bay
2.C.l.b. Non-renewing Multiple Dock License - Held in Abey-
ance
RDP Partners, Spring Park Bay, Spring Park
2.E. Deicing Licenses
1) New applications:
a. Leno Mikenas, St. Albans Bay, Greenwood
b. Dan Hessburg, Priests Bay, Minnetrista
2) Deposit Refund of $100
Excelsior Park Tavern - Not deicing
3.D. Special Events:
1. Deposit Refunds $100 each:
a. Ehlert Publishing Group, Wintertainment, 1/23 -
1/25/92
b. Westonka Snoblazers, Fun Run, 1/31/92-2/1/92
c. Lafayette Club, Family Fishing Derby, 2/2/92
d. MN/WI Pro Am Bass Tournament, 6/2/91
E. MN/WI Pro Am Bass Tournament, 8/24/91
f. Lord Fletcher's Broomball, (extra deposit)
3.D.2. Holiday-Johnson Leukemia Crappie Contest 4/18/92.
Waive late fee on renewal application received less than 90
days prior to event, per 2/12/92 letter.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. ENVIRONMENT, Chair Hurr
A. Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force, Chair Penn
Penn submitted the minutes of the 2/21/92 EWM Task Force
meeting.
a. CREW TEAM ARRANGEMENTS. Penn and the executive director
have been working on a plan to cross-train the employees. There
will be full use of shore off-loading, with two crews working one
area simultaneously. There are no plans to use barges. The Task
Force will continue to develop the staffing and position respon-
sibilities.
b. HARVEST TIMING AS A FACTOR OF GROWTH. Penn submitted
the executive director's proposed Aquatic Plant Growth Index to
be used in monitoring harvesting results. It will be necessary
to hire a consultant to accomplish the schedule. The executive
director advised that, before contracting someone to do this, it
will be considered at the next Task Force meeting of 3/17. The
monitoring of the growth is a year around program. The Task
Force will make a recommendation in March. Harvest priorities
are areas of high boat traffic, public accesses and residential
areas.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
February 26, 1992
C. SONAR TREATMENT SITE. St. Alban's Bay and Carson's Bay
will be evaluated as SONAR test sites for treatment of EWM, in
cooperation with the DNR, DowElanco promoting the SONAR product.
Foster said the program would be on a cost sharing basis
with Bay lakeshore owners. A closed bay is needed for SONAR to
be effective.
Babcock asked about the results of the use of SONAR in Libbs
Lake. The executive director said a detailed analysis of the
aquatic plant was not taken by the homeowners prior to treatment.
The homeowners will monitor the 1992 status as to any re-growth.
Johnstone asked about the cost and if Gray's Bay could be
included as a test site. Penn responded Gray's Bay is not suit-
able because of the anticipated heavy water flow through the bay,
over the dam, washing out the herbicide before it could be effec-
tive.
Markus suggested using SONAR's slow release granules. Penn
said he will follow up on the suggestion with the manufacturer.
Boswinkel suggested individuals use Aquacide (2.4-D) for
shoreline treatment rather than treating an entire area.
d. 1992 DNR MILFOIL CONTROL PERMIT APPLICATION. Penn
reported the permit application will be essentially the same as
1991 at 1,881 acres, although it is uncertain if that acreage
will be harvested. An additional proposal would treat 27 acres
at Diamond Reef with 2,4-D. The Minnetonka Yacht Club and Wayza-
ta Yacht Club have offered to share 1/2 of the cost. The execu-
tive director estimated the cost at $4,500.
Carlson asked if this has been done in the past. Penn
responded that the purpose of the control program is to protect
the recreational use of the Lake. The primary impact of treating
Diamond Reef is to make the area free of weeds for public sail-
ing. Carlson's suggestion that this might bring more requests
was answered by Babcock who said requests would be judged on
merit. Babcock also said this matching fund activi'tY could be
encouraged with benefiting organizations.
DNR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ECOLOGICALLY HARMFUL EXOTIC SPECIES.
The executive director said the plan is a result of a 1990
legislative mandate to the DNR. It was released on 1/21. The
plan contains a series of recommendations on controlling EWM,
Zebra Mussel and other aquatic species. It calls for some access
monitoring. This is a concern of the fishing groups who foresee
additional fees. Penn and the executive director are preparing a
response by 2/28.
EXOTICS LEGISLATIVE BILL, HF 1965.
The Task Force did not have time to evaluate the bill to
make a recommendation on it.
Boswinkel said education of the public is important. The
fishing organizations and other special interest groups must be
made aware of the dangers of exotics. He said it is important to
stress the work the LMCD has done the past three years. Research
takes time, action is needed now.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 26, 1992
FRESHWATER FOUNDATION.
A conference, sponsored by the MN Sea Grant Program and the
Freshwater Foundation, will be held on 3/20/92 at Breezy Point on
"Exotics in Minnesota, the Inland Invasion." The executive
director has been asked to participate on a milfoil panel. The
conference is directed at out-state lake associations.
2. WATER STRUCTURES, Chair Babcock
B. Bupp Dock Length Variance, Carsons Bay, Deephaven.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, to approve a dock
length variance for Jeremy Bupp contingent on his maintaining a
seasonal, hand driven dock, with no dredging or pile driven dock
which would unduly damage the wetlands. The dock should be
limited to reach open water, not to exceed 340'. The variance is
conditioned on a satisfactory signed and recorded easement with
Bupp's neighbor, Strot. The LMCD attorney is to draft the Find-
ings of Fact and Order for further consideration. DISCUSSION:
Markus mentioned the letter from the City of Greenwood
opposing the construction of the Whinnery dock, 2 houses down,
also over wetlands. He questioned whether there was a difference
in the two neighboring docks. The executive director said he has
talked to Frank Kelly, Greenwood Counsel. It is the mayor and
counsel's belief that nothing should be built in wetlands. Howev-
er, the DNR does allow it, with specific conditions to protect the
wetlands.
There was discussion as to what constitutes a seasonal dock.
The LMCD Code defines a permanent dock as one which is not season-
ally removed from the Lake. Grathwol commented that not all Board
members agree with that. The discussion noted there are many
locations on the Lake where a hand driven dock is not seasonally
removed where there are no problems with the dock being dislodged
by the ice or
creating a hazard.
The Board members discussed the construction of docks over
wetlands per se, Babcock stated there is a concern about wet-
lands and the decision has to be made on a case by case basis.
He would like to see the LMCD develop a wetlands policy. Rascop
believes the LMCD rules could be more restrictive than DNR rules.
Markus expressed concern about setting a precedent. (By allowing
a hand installed dock over a wetland) Reese agreed that there may
be an effect on some Mound properties which face on wetlands.
LeFevere said the development of the Findings for the vari-
ance is critical, either for approval or denial. There is a
fundamental right to reach navigable water although that right is
not absolute. There may be occasions when that right may be
harmful to the environment, which the LMCD must recognize and
identify.
Penn would like to refer the variance back to the committee.
LeFevere said delaying a decision may result in not finding any
basis for turning down the variance. If in the future something
was determined, the policy could be changed and these two sites
would be grandfathered in.
VOTE: The motion carried, Rascop, Penn and Markus voting nay.
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
C. Multiple Dock Licenses
2. Minor Site Plan Changes
February 26, 1992
NOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of
minor site plan changes per staff report of 1/21/92 for the
following:
a. Driftwood Shores, Harrison Bay
b. Lord Fletcher's of the Lake, Coffee Cove
c. Rockvam Boat Yards, Site 2, Coffee Cove
d. Seton View, Seton Lake
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
VOTE:
3. New Dock License Applications
MOTION: Babcock moved, Boswinkel seconded, to waive
the Public Hearing and approve the following new dock licenses:
a. West Beach Apartments, Coffee Cove - changing dock
length from 80' to 100', with no change in configu-
ration.
· b. Sandy Beach Place, West Arm - Adding an 8' exten- .
sion on the main dock for fishing and waterskiing,
upon condition that no boats are to be tied or
stored on the extension.
Motion carried unanimously.
D. Policies and Procedures Subcommittee
The Board received a summary of staff administrative recom-
mendations and proposed Code amendments dated 1/30/92.
I. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Boswinkel seconded, to direct the
LNCD attorney to prepare the code changes proposed in the memo
dated 1/30/92 in proper form for publication.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
2. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
MOTION: Babcock moved, Grathwol seconded, to approve the
administrative recommendations in the memo dated 1/30/92 except
Deicing Applications and Special Event Applications. Under
Renewal Multiple Dock Licenses - Special Density Licenses, the
reference is to all amenities being provided as a condition of
the license.
VOTE: Motion carried, Rascop abstaining.
NOTION: Babcock moved, Foster seconded, to direct the LMCD
attorney to prepare a Code change to authorize the executive
director to issue Deicing licenses, subject to compliance with
the Code, notifying the Board of licenses issued. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
The Special Event Licenses recommendation is referred to the
Lake Use Committee.
LHCD BOARD .OF DIRECTORS
February 26, 1992
F. DNR Letter to the MC~D Regarding Carlson Real Estate Co
Development in Minnetrista on Halsted's Bay.
Carlson addressed the Board on the subject of a letter the
City of ~innetrista was copied from the DNR regarding the DNR
permit application requirements to be met for dredging in Lake
Minnetonka, in the proposed development of the Carlson Properties
in Minnetrista. Carlson said the City has been working on the
plan for some time. It is their feeling that the Carlson Real
Estate Co. project is constructive and complies with the city's
ongoing environmental protection policies. The DNR is requiring
a plan for the entire development before they will issue a dredg-
ing permit. The city has its shoreland policy in place. It is
Carlson's opinion that this is excessive interference in local
matters.
Carlson asked staff to distribute copies of the letter from
the DNR to the Board members.
3. LAKE USE AND RECREATION, Chair Foster
A. Approval of Minutes. MOTION: Foster moved, Penn sec-
onded, to approve the minutes of the 2/24/92 meeting of the Lake
Use and Recreation Committee as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried
unanimously.
B. Hennepin County Department of Public Works Program for
Lake Minnetonka.
1. The 1992 maintenance program was accepted as sub-
mitted by Denis Bailey, Engineering Technician, Hennepin County
Lake Improvement.
2. MOTION: Foster moved, Penn seconded, to approve
the slow buoy program same as 1991, including the three buoy
arrangement near the Seton Townhouses.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. Resolutions Regarding Low Water
MOTION: Foster moved, Penn seconded, to adopt Resolution
No. 82, Resolution Declaring End to Low Water Condition and Re-
scinding Resolutions #53 and #73.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Babcock said this will require the residential docks with
temporary low water extensions to be brought back to I00' or less
as normal water allows.
E. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Report
Deputy Schmidt had nothing further to add to the report
given 2/24/92 at the Lake Use and Recreation committee meeting.
7
LNCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
February 26, 1992
4. LAKE ACCESS, Chair Grathwol
Orathwol has set the first meeting of the Lake Access Task
Force for Wednesday, March 11, 1992, ?:00 p.m. at the Minnetonka
Community Room, Minnetonka City Hall. Twenty-four people have
been invited including the 14 cities, major agencies, fishing,
homeowning and marina people from around the Lake.
Orathwol presented a proposed agenda and statement of goals
and objectives along with the 1983 Governor's Task Force report
and the 1986 Metropolitan Council's Task Force on Lake Minnetonka
report. This material is being furnished all participants. Board
members should save and bring their material to the 3/11 meeting.
5. FINANCIAL REPORTS, Treasurer Boswinkel
A. The Board received the Statement of Cash Transactions
for the month ending 1/31/92. It was ordered filed.
B. Audit of Vouchers for Payment
Markus questioned the membership fee for the Wayzata
Chamber of Commerce in the amount of $50. He expressed concern
that each of the Lake cities could ask the LMCD to join its
Chamber of Commerce at a potential cost of $700. The executive
director said this is one of two Chambers in which the LMCD has
membership. There is only one other local lake-area chamber,
Westonka. Carlson and Boswinkel expressed the opinion that it is
worthwhile investment, Boswinkel stating it is good place to
state LMCD objectives.
MOTION: Markus moved, Rascop seconded, to not join the
various Chambers of Commerce.
VOTE: Markus and Rascop voted aye. Motion failed.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Babcock seconded, to pay bills in the
amount of $29,386.48. Checks #8355 through #8408.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT, Strommen
A. Request for Proposal (RFP) - Management Plan Objectives
and Selection of a Consultant/agency.
The executive director reported that the DNR will partici-
.pate in the density study of Lake Minnetonka boat use during the
summer of 1992. It will share in half the projected $25,000
study cost. The DNR has also suggested that an attempt be made
to gain participation from Hennepin Parks and the Metropolitan
Council for either staff assistance or possible funding.
The executive director presented a draft Request for Propos-
als (RPF) for the Board's advance information. Advertising for
proposals is planned to start 3/1/92 with a response deadline of
3/16/92.
-continued
LMCD BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 26, 1992
MOTION: Rascop moved, Orathwol seconded, that LMCD officers
and committee chairs be authorized to approve the Request for
Proposals along the lines drafted, with LMCD SERVING AS THE LEAD
AGENCY, entering into a contract with the MN Department of Natu-
ral Resources on a 1/2 cost share of the projected $25,000 study
cost, to include invitations to the Suburban Hennepin Regional
Park District and Metropolitan Council as participating agencies
with either financial and/or staff assistance.
DISCUSSION; Carlson questioned running the ad requesting
proposals before there is approval from Hennepin Parks and the
Metropolitan Council. These agencies will be referenced in the
final contract if they agree to participate, Strommen advised.
Timing is critical to secure proposals in March.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Board Retreat
The executive director suggested implementing a one day
retreat rather than the previously suggested two day retreat.
The meeting would be directed toward new Board member orienta-
tion, review of the LMCD Code, a review of the prosecutor's
services, team building, and an in depth look at the year's
priorities. He proposed the retreat be held on Saturday, April
25, from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., at a location in the Lake area.
He said there would be a need for a facilitator. The Board
concurred in the proposed plan, to be followed by a final out-
line, facilitator recommendation and budget in March.
C. Management Plan
ed.
The final copies of the Management Plan were distribut-
They will be sold to the public for $25.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
With reference to the use of a consent agenda, Rascop sug-
gested a change in the format which will list the consent items
in order rather than distributed through the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Boswinkel seconded, that the meet-
ing be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 10 p.m.
David Cochran, Chair
Douglas Babcock, Secretary
MAR 2,5
LAKE MINNL~rONKA CON$1~ItVATIONDISTRICT
Action Report:
Water Structures Committee
Meeting:
Saturday, March 14, 1992, 7:30 a.m.
Norwest Bank, Wayzata, Community Room
Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Chair, Spring Park; Bert
Foster, Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior; David Cochran,
Greenwood; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Duane Markus, Wayzata. Also
present: Rachel Thibault, Administrative Technician; Eugene
Strommen, Executive Director.
1. Review of Public Hearing Reports
A. Rockvam Boat Yards Site 2, Coffee Cove - Dock Length
Variance
The Board received the report of the Public Hearing held on
2/26/92 to consider the request of Rockvam Boat Yards, 4056
Sunset Drive, Spring Park, Coffee Cove, for a variance to extend
18 slips on Site 2 from 128' to 153' total distance into the
Lake, amending an existing variance to place docks beyond 100'.
The Public Hearing Report contained Findings of Fact and Rockvam
submitted an aerial photo taken in 1988 showing Site 1 and Site 2
from the Lake toward shore. The purpose of the variance is to
allow Rockvam to add a 25' make ready dock to accommodate the
fishing boats he provides to meet amenity requirements for the
special density license. Rockvam reports when the water level
drops below 928.6' the water is too shallow at the make ready
dock. If an extension is added to the make-ready dock, it
interferes with the boats on the main dock backing out.
Grathwol wondered if there is sufficient room to build the
'make ready dock in the existing area. Rockvam responded that the
entire area is too shallow. When the water level goes to 928.6'
the fishing boat motors dig into the sand.
Cochran asked about the minimum distance needed to back up
the boats on the inside slips opening towards shore. Rockvam
responded that under normal conditions they need about 28' to
30'. Cochran suggested running the make ready dock as an "L" and
save 10' to 15'~ Rockvam said that even at 928.6' they would
have a problem. Cochran stated that the committee wants to assure
that any variance granted will have a minimum impact on the Lake.
Markus asked if there were any objections from the neigh-
bors. Babcock talked to one neighbor who said they have no
objection about going out further but would object if the dock
went further to the east side.
In response to Markus concerning staff recommendations, the
executive director stated there is a hardship in launching the
fishing boats. With this variance, Site 2 remains behind Site 1
which is 212' in length. Site i was grandfathered to 200', with
an additional 12' granted for the gas dock, less than the 25'
normally allowed.
MOTION: Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to recommend the
Board approve the Rockvam Boat Yard variance from 128' to 153'
and to instruct the LMCD counsel to draft the Order.
W&te~ ~tructures Committee
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
March 14, 1992
B. Ron Whinnery, Carsons' Bay - Dock Length Variance
The committee received the report of the public hearing held
on 2/26/92 to consider the request of Ronald G. Whinnery, 19780
Cottagewood Road, Deephaven, Carsons Bay for a length variance to
.reach navigable water, for an existing dock that extends beyond
the DUA over wetlands. The dock length requested is ~11'.
Grathwol stated he is in favor of the dock but is concerned
about wetlands. The District is trying to balance the protection
of the wetlands with a minimum wetlands invasion and the riparian
right to a dock. He wanted Whinnery to know that at some time in
the future the LMCD may have to come back to him and ask 'him to
share his dock with a neighbor who would want to do the same
thing.
Babcock mentioned that Whinnery's shoreline at 929.4' is
approximately $30' so the dock length would not exceed his shore
line footage. Cochran suggested some kind of stipulation in the
permit that would indicate it is subject to modification if some
rule is adopted in the future which would affect the dock length.
Babcock said the LMCD Counsel advised that if a rule is adopted
affecting this type of variance the Board could decide whether to
grandfather this and similar docks or to not grandfather them.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to recommend to
the Board approve the ~onald Whinner¥ length variance and the
LMCD Counsel to prepare the Order. The Order should contain
language about future changes.
VOTE: Motion carried, ~ascop voting nay.
C. Halstad Acres Improvement Assn., ltalsted's Bay - New
Multiple Dock License.
The committee received the report of the Public Hearing held
on 2/26~92 to consider the application of the Halstad Acres
Improvement Association, Outlot 1, Halstead Acres Second Addi-
tion, Mound, Halsteds Bay for a new multiple dock license for a
13 slip dock.
Bob Bittle, 2927 Halstead Acres, Mound, represented the Hal-
stad Acres Improvement Assn., consisting of the 13 owners of
Outlot 1. He explained that in 1984 and 1985 the Association
had a 7 slip dock. Now they are proposing to tie boats to the
back of the slips and along the walkway to accommodate 13 boats.
Bittle admitted they did not have a license in 1984 because it
was their assumption that they had the right to the dock without
a license.
The executive director said there was on- going communica-
tion with the Association since 1986. The LMCD Code allows 7
slips based on 365' of shore{ine. It is necessary for all 13
owners to provide documentation showing that 13 slips existed in
1978 to allow them to be grandfathered. Bittle admitted they
cannot provide that documentation, and that 13 slips have not
existed at any one time.
~turea Co. it tee ~'.,~
~ · Grathwol suggested the 13 owners arrive at some method of
allocating the 7 slips among themselves.
The committee discussed whether to back license the multiple
dock to 1986 when communication was initiated. The cost was
estimated at $700.,
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to recommend the
Board approve a Multiple Dock License for 7 slips for Halstad
Acres Improvement Association, Outlot 1, accepting $350 as back
licensing fees.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
D. Bean's Greenwood Marina, St. Alban's Bay - New multiple
dock license and length variance.
The committee received the report of the Public Hearing held
on 2/26/92 to consider the request of Bean's Greenwood Marina,
21945 Minnetonka Blvd., Greenwood, St. Alban's Bay for a variance
and new dock license to relocate slips beyond the 100' zone.
The executive director explained that in 1990 Bean requested
a variance for the docks which are beyond his Dock Use Area. The
variance was denied. He was subsequently granted a temporary low
water variance at that time. The records show that 6 slips were
relocated beyond 100' prior to 1990 without an application or new
multiple dock license which would be required for a change in
configuration.
Rascop noted the MN DNR says an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet would be required.
Babcock noted the following things to consider: 1) The
marina has a grandfathered density at 1:5' 2) three of the new
slips reflect an increase in slip size. 3) The variance would
be for slips outside of the 100' zone. 4) It is an expansion of
a marina greater than 20,000 square feet and would require an
EAW. 5) This type of change would require a Special Density
License.
Cochran pointed out that a recalculation of Bean's shoreline
from the 1990 survey indicated approximately 870' of shoreline.
This would change Bean's density to 1:7'.
Cochran added that if Bean made application for a new multi-
ple dock license and it were granted, the LMCD would not go more
than 1 : 10' under a Special Density License. This is something
Bean should be aware of. Bean responded that it is not his
intention to expand. He has proposed to eliminate three transient
and 1 tie on, therefore the Boat Storage Units would decrease.
If it is necessary he can reduce the size of three slips along
the shore.
Foster said he would like to see the committee be more
flexible, providing Bean does not increase the Boat Storage Units
or Water Storage Units. Foster said that, in view of the diffi-
culty in coming up with car/trailer parking spots, perhaps some
arrangement could be made with Bean for car/trailer parking.
Foster suggested permitting Bean to use the new arrangement for a
year while other studies go on.
3
Water Structures Committee March 14, 1992
Cochran said the issue he has the most trouble with is
allowing permanency to docks extended for low water use. He
believes the docks have to be removed. Babcock agreed, saying
there are just too many issues involved. He suggested perhaps
there could be some maintenance dredging to improve access to the
old slips.
Thibault called the committee's attention to the letters.
from Richard & Cheryl Parris, 21885 Byron Circle, .Mr and Mrs.
John Adams, 21845 Byron Circle and Dave Colwell, 21825 Byron
Circle, objecting to the variance. Bean presented letters from
Hary Kreslin and Cochrane's Boatyard saying they have no objec-
tion.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Markus seconded, to recommend the
Board deny the application of Bean's Greenwood Marina for a
variance to extend slips beyond the 100' zone.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Rascop seconded, to recommcnd
approval of a Multiple Dock License for Bean's Greenwood Marina,
with no changes except to move slips #101, #T-Ill and #106, which
are within 100' to new locations within the existing dockage'.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
Bean asked for the reasons for denial of the variance.
Grathwol said there is a moratorium on multiple dock expansion
for Special Density Licenses. Cochran reminded Bean that he has
more slips now than he would be allowed under a new special
density license..
2. Bupp Dock Length Variance, Carsons Bay; Review Draft of Order
The committee reviewed the Order granting Jeremy and Robin
Bupp, 19860 Cottagewood Road, Deephaven, a variance to construct
and maintain a 340' dock across wetlands to reach navigable
water, subject to contingencies set forth in the Order. Attorney
LeFevere attached a memorandum to the Order detailing reasons for
granting the variance.
Cochran said it would be helpful to future administrations
if there could be some statement that the District does not
visualize this variance as a permanent solution.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend
approval of the Order granting a variance to Jeremy and Robin
Bupp.
VOTE: Motion carried, Rascop voting Nay.
Rascop said the environmental factor is not being addressed.
By granting this variance for a dock through a wetland the Dis-
trict is allowing the inhibiting of vegetation growth. The DNR
report states this is a minimal wetland impact providing there is
a free flow of water under the dock.
~;~!~W&ter 8tructurea Committe~
3. Excelsior Park Tavern, Excelsior Bayl Amenity Presentation to
0ualify for New Dock and Special Density Licenses
Robert Abdo, representing Excelsior Park Tavern, presented a
letter dated 3/11/92, detailing their compliance now with all of
amenity requirements for their multiple dock and special density
licenses. The amenities will include the operation of 4 charter
boats as approved by the Excelsior City Council.
Babcock reminded Abdo that, if in the future they decide to
build more docks, they will be held to the approved 40 slip
configuration. Abdo said the City of Excelsior has approved a 32
slip dock, but not their application for the 40 slip marina.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to recommenH
approval of the Multiple Dock License for the Excelsior Park
Tavern with the amenities as required, for the 32 slip configura-
tion, with 12 transient and 20 storage slips and to direct the
attorney to draft the Order for a 40 slip dock.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
4. Multiple Dock Licenses
A. Renewal Applications
The committee received 3/5/92 list of the 1992 Multiple
Dock License renewal applications with orders, stipulations, etc.
Chapman Place Marina, Cooks Bay
Thibault reported a new operator, Vincent C. McClellan, dba
Minnetonka Dock and Plow Service, Inc. has purchased the docks
from the Chapman Place Association, Inc. The agreement between
the two parties has been reviewed and approved by Attorney LeFe-
vere.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to recommend
approval of the 1992 Multiple Dock License for the Chapman Place
Marina.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Foxhill Homeowners Assn., Smith Bay ·
Foxhill Homeowners Association {HOA), is licensed for 13
slips in the configuration approved in 1985. The renewal
application indicated that they would be using only 8 of the 13
slips in 1992.
Ray Zitzloff, member of Foxhill HOA, has requested a change
to the configuration, moving Slip 1 to the right of the main
walkway. The slip would be offset 40' from the end of the dock
with a 32' finger on the right to accommodate a 40' canopy. His
letter of 3/10/92 explains his reasons for the slip relocation.
Babcock pointed out that Foxhill HOA has a non-conforming
structure, with a density of 1:23' The Code does not allow any
increase in slip size on a non-conforming multiple dock license.
Last year the canopy was permitted under a temporary low
water variance. The slip structure was 32', with a 40' canopy.
..5
Water Structures Comaittee March 14, 1992
In response to concern over the dock being in the setback, Zit-
zloff advised the neighbor submitted written agreement to combine
dock use areas during the low water variance. It was also point-
ed out that Foxhill HOA has a length variance beyond 100' due to
shallow water.
The executive director asked if it would work to keep Slip l
per the licensed site plan, instead of moving it to the right.
Mr. Zitzloff said this other location has been used historically
because of greater water depth.
MOTION: Foster moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend ap-
proval of the 1992 Nultiple Dock License for Foxhill Homeowners
Assn., with relocation of Slip 1, a 32' slip with a 40' Canopy,
to the right of the walkway, conditioned on receipt of a letter
from the neighbor on the west.
VOTE: Notion carried unanimously.
David Thomas Development (Bayshore III Addition), South
Upper Lake
The executive director reported he has had several conversa-
tions with the developer regarding unpaid administrative fees of
$2662.80 on the new dock license application. It was reported
the City of Victoria has restricted the dock to 6 slips until all
8 lots are platted.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, to recommend
approval of the 1992 Multiple Dock License for the David Thomas
Development, subject to payment of the outstanding fees.
VOTE: Notion carried unanimously.
Renewals Without Change - Staff Recommends Approval
MOTION: Rascop moved, Grathwol seconded, to recommend
approval of the following 1992 Multiple Dock License Renewal
Applications:
VOTE:
Navarre Cove Homeowners Association, Carman's Bay
Minnetonka Edgewater Apartments, Spring Park Bay
Shoreline Marina & Yacht Club, Smiths Bay
Subject to Village Certificate (expires 4/18/92):
Driftwood Shores, Harrisons Bay
Hary Kreslins, St. Albans Bay
Lord Fletchers of the Lake, Coffee Cove
Park Hill/Park Island (for 44 BSU), Seton Lake
Seton View, Seton Lake
Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club, South Upper Lake
Motion carried unanimously.
Howard's Point Marina, South Upper Lake
This is a permanent dock with 45 slips and 13 slides, with
76 WSU. The first row of docks, slips 1 - 14, was removed in
VatorStructures Committ~ March 14, 1992
1988 when the area was dredged. When the docks were rebuilt, 13
of the slips were replaced changing from 8' x 20' to 9' x 22'
Slip 14 was moved to the second row of docks next to Slip 15..
The changes were acknowledged administratively, but not approved
by the Board. Attorney LeFevere has raised the question as to
whether a 1' increase in width and a 2' increase in length would
be considered as insignificant changes, or whether these slips
should be brought back to the original size.
Richard Baker, President of Howard's Point Marina, said to
come back into conformance and rebuild the dock to 20' would be
costly as the docks are pile driven. He said he submitted the
new site plan with his renewal in Nov. 1988 and the LMCD Board
approved the license for 1989, before he rebuilt the docks.
Babcock expressed concern that they went to a longer length
when the docks were rebuilt. He suggested increasing the width
of the walkway to 5' or giving two to three years to conform.
Baker said widening the walkway is not feasible. Grathwol said a
1' increase when rebuilding a dock is not a large increase as a
one time thing but could add up over the years. Markus said it
appears to have been a mistake on the part of the LMCD in issuing
the license. He didn't think it was fair for the applicant who
submitted the new site plan prior to rebuilding the docks, to
have to change the dock now.
MOTION: Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to recommend ap-
proval of the 1992 Multiple Dock License renewal application of
Howards Point Marina.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. New Dock License Applications for Changes in Configura-
tion That Do Not increase Slip Size, Number of BSO or WSU
Schmitt's Marina, Excelsior Bay, Excelsior
The committee received Thibault's history of the Schmitt's
Marina Multiple Dock License dated 3/6/92. Thibault submitted a
supplemental memo dated 3/10/92 regarding references to dredging
in the original memo. The applicant is asking to shorten a 91'
extension moving two slips 11' x 24' to the south, along the
shore. The side setback to the south is 130'. There would be
no increase in BSU's, slip size or WSU's. Approval would be
subject to Board waiving a public hearing.
Babcock sees moving the slips to the south as placing them
in a shallow area during low water.
MOTION: Grathwol moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend
approval of a new dock license with minor change for Schmitt's
Marina, subject to approval of the City of Excelsior.
Schmitt objected to having to go through a further review
process with the City for this minor change. Grathwol offered to
discuss the matter further with Schmitt.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Water Structures Conuaittee March 14, 1992
City of Wayzata, Wayzata Bay, Broadway Docks
MOTION: Foster moved, Markus seconded, to recommend approv-~
al of a new dock license with minor change to allow the City of
Wayzata to change the configuration of the docks at the Broadway
Ave. site. The request is to move the main walkway connecting to
shore from the east end of the dock to the center of the dock
per site plan. '
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Clay Cliffe Homeowners Association, Old Channel Bay, Tonka
Bay
MOTION: Foster moved, Grathwol seconded, to recommend
approval of a new dock license with minor change to allow the
Clay Cliffe Homeowners Association a seasonal dock with a change
in configuration per site plan dated 3/4/92.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Minnetonka Yacht Club, Site 1, Carsons Bay, Deephaven
The committee received an application for a configuration
change to move three service boats, one from.the slide on the
west, one from the wood ramp on the southeast and other from the
south of the wood dock on the southeast, to new 10' .x 20' slips
added to the wood dock on the southeast.
Thomas Maple, representing the MYC, said a 12' x 24' slip
had been built in an unauthorized location to accommodate the
service pontoon boat. After discussing the situation with Thi-
bault he became aware that a slip of that size increased the
WSU's and could not be built without violating the moratorium.
The purpose of the new slips is to accommodate the service boats.
One boat. the ll' x 24' pontoon, is used to transport members to
Sites 2 and 3. This change will place all of the service boats
in one location out of the way of the launching crane.
Markus suggested allowing the 12' x 24' slip for the pontoon
for safety reasons in loading and unloading passengers. Rascop
mentioned referring the larger slip request to the Lake Use
Committee for special events. Foster responded that would not be
practical if it had to be removed when not used for special
events.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend ap-
proval of a temporary configuration change to relocate three
service slides to three new slips, one 12' x 24' and two 10' x
20', the reason for the larger slip is the health and safety in
transporting members. The file is to be flagged for considera-
tion in 1993 when the moratorium ends.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Tater Structures Committee '~ ' '~ ' '~ ~';~,? ,March 14~
Ea~le Bluff Homeowners Association,Halsteds Bay Minnetrista
The Eagle Bluff Homeowners Association has applied for a
minor change in configuration and to increase one slip from
to 16'w. This w~ll be an increase of .5 WSU. The setbacks will
be more than adeqUately met.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Markus seconded, to recommend the
Board approve a new dock license for Eagle Bluff Homeowners
Association with a minor change, subject to Board waiving the
Public Hearing.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
5. Exchange of Boat Storage Units from a District Mooring Area
License to a Multiple Dock License
DISCUSSION:
The committee received a report from Thibault detailing
previous action when moorings from a District Mooring Area (DMA)
were transferred'to slips at a ~ultiple Dock License. Included
in the report are questions which need to be answered as a result
of her conversations with Attorney LeFevere regarding the pro-
posed exchange of boat storage units. Attached to the report is
a list of current District Mooring Area licensees and specifics
to the license.
Babcock explained the impetus for the discussion at this
time is a request from the Groveland Assembly Grounds (Methodist
Lakeside) to move five moorings to five lifts at their dock.
Babcock said it is his impression that the Board, in the past,
has wanted to encourage the conversion of DMAs to docks at some
point. The feeling has been that the conversion should be at the
option of the licensee but the District would not issue any more
DMAs. If a change is requested, another question is whether the
exchange should be one to one, or a difference ratio.
Cochran said it is acknowledged that a buoy can be a hazard
to navigation. Fishermen like the buoys, as fish congregate
under the boats in storage. Cocbran sees a good argument for not
having too many 'DMAs. At the same time the committee should be
careful and not close the door. Cochran further noted there are
occasions such as regattas when temporary'buoy fields are neces-
sary.
Foster raised the question as to what would happen if the
Water Patrol issued permits for more than one buoy in a location.
Thibault responded that DMAs are located outside of the Dock Use
Area (DUA). Five or more moorings at one site would require a
license, whether or not they are in the Dock Use Area (DUA).
Babcock said he understands, from the discussion, that D~A's
should not be prohibited entirely but considered on a case to
case basis. There should not be a mandatory requirement to ex-
change DMA's for slips. Not all D~A's would have to be exchanged
at one time, but there could be partial exchange. Grandfathered
marinas with greater than 1:10' should be allowed to exchange on
a one to one basis.
Water Structures Committee March 14, 1992
There was discussion on what size slip should be allowed in
the exchange. It was agreed a I to 1.5 WSU average conversion
was fair.
Rascop questioned what would happen to a person who sold his
sailboat and replaced it with a restricted power boat. He also
asked if this would apply to the municipalities as well as the
other DMAs. Markus Said that in the case of Methodist Lakeside
leaving two DMA's was less safe than five and suggested bringing
them all in or leave them as they are. Babcock said any ex-
changes would have to be on a case by case basis. If a DMA is
relocated to a slip outside of the DUA, a variance would be
needed. Rascop said a structure in the 100' to 200' area is a
non-conforming use. Any changes in that area would need to be
toward conformity, not expansion. Foster said if there is no
change in BSUs or WSUs it is not an expansion.
The results of the discussion will be forwarded to the
attorney to draft an Ordinance.
6. Amended Draft of Ordinance Relating to Storage of Lake Main-
tenance Equipment on Lake Minnetonka, Amending Code Section 2.03,
Subd. 8
DISCUSSION: Markus said the Ordinance should not be so
restrictive as to interfere with commercial work boats doing
their job on the Lake. He believes there should be flexibility.
Cochran said there has to be some limitation on interfering with
private property rights. There was discussion of storage of
charter boats and other commercial water craft at residential
sites, not covered by this ordinance.
NOTION: Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to recommend ap-
proval of the Ordinance relating to storage of lake maintenance
equipment on Lake Minnetonka, limiting the storage to two busi-
ness days before and two business days after work is done on a
site. d)2) is to read "Equipment must be stored within an au-
thorized dock use area, as defined in Section 1.02, and may only
be stored with the permission of the owner of the site."
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
7. Review Status of Unrestricted Watercraft
DISCUSSION: Thibault submitted a summary of slide storage
at Multiple Dock License facilities. A slide is defined as
either a ramp at the edge of the water, partially on the land or
a platform above the water. In some cases the slides are limited
to unrestricted boats and in others there is no limitation.
Rascop said he does not believe any unrestricted watercraft
should be counted for licensing purposes. Babcock said he be-
lieves unrestricted watercraft could be charged 1/2 a WSU because
they do contribute to the density on the Lake. They should not
be counted for BSUs.
Thibault said she has discussed this matter with LeFevere.
He recommends exempting non-motorized canoes from the restricted
category. Storage of canoes on racks relates to the off-lake
tcture9 Commit tee
March 14~ 1992
storage ordinance which is very restrictive. Cochran said he'
could see a problem in administration as there could be a slide
with unrestricted boats with motors over l0 hp transported to and
from the boat. There was discussion as to whether this could
apply to residential property or should it be limited to marinas.
MOTION: Babcock moved, Markus seconded, to recommend the
following:
1) Non-motorized canoes be added to the unrestricted cate-
gory.
2) Investigate with LeFevere an Ordinance change that
slides and off-lake storage of unrestricted watercraft will not
count toward density.
3. The Ordinance be amended to charge 1/2 WSU for off-lake
storage of unrestricted water craft.
DISCUSSION: Foster said this w 11 be difficult to enforce
and unrestricted watercraft should be ignored as they do not add
to the density on peak days. Cochran said this was reviewed by
the Lake Access Committee and the conclusion was that there was
not a problem of boat density from small watercraft and fishing
boats. The emphasis was to allow them.
VOTE: Babcock and Markus aye. Motion failed.
MOTION: Foster moved, Rascop seconded, to recommend the
following:
1) Non-motorized canoes be added to the unrestricted cate-
gory.
2) For multiple dock licensees only, off-lake storage of
unrestricted watercraft do not count for density or WSUs.
VOTE: The motion failed, Markus, Grathwol and Babcock
voting nay.
MOTION: Foster moved, Grathwol seconded, to table the dis-
cussion to the next committee meeting.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Markus was excused.
8. Shorewood Yacht Club Multiple Dock License Renewal
John Taft, Attorney for Holroyd Enterprises, has asked for
waiving the "late fees" on their behalf as the Yacht Club is in
receivership.
The executive director said the St. Albans Bay Marina and
Tonka Bay Marina were in the same situation and paid the late fee
as required for licensing.
MOTION: Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to deny the request
for waiver of the late fee required for licensing the Shorewood
Yacht Club.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Structures Committee
Wotlands Update
Narch 14, 1992
Babcock presented a proposed LMCD policy change for docks
encroaching a wetland area. Rascop said this should be discussed
by the Environmental Committee chaired by Hurt. Babcock felt it
should be discussed because of the variances granted for docks
over the wetlands on Carsons Bay.
Foster suggested limiting the docks to two boats and the
docks be restricted to two boards wide and built far enough above
the water to eliminate shadows which inhibit vegetation growth.
Foster added that he does not believe there are very many people
who are going to put in a 600' hand built dock. Cochran did not
agree, stating there are large areas where the value of the real
estate would be enhanced by being able to get to the water.
Babcock suggested restricting the length of the dock to tile
frontage of the property. He said in some denser areas of the
lake it is possible for as much as 8~ of the wetlands to be taken
up with docks. Cochran said it is possible to control the
length, type and width of docks in the wetlands. Rascop said
this could be compromised by the need to give handicapped access.
Babcock suggested changing the definition of a seasonal dock to
something else so it does not have to be removed. Rascop would
object to changing the LMCD definition to accommodate someone
else.
Cochran suggested appointing a sub-committee to work with
the DNR on the wetlands issue.
10. Adjournment
There being no objection, the Chair declared the meeting
adjourned at 11:30 a.m.
FOR THE COMMITTEE:
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director
Douglas Babcock. Chair
12
ibaUlt
Iorewoo
in' ~e pas t ·
)Und, '!
~ey have had at
or the ' .
uilot."Each.Of
d they are not registe .as an sSociati°n.
. raised tl uestlon as to whether each individJ owner could put
hour at
'':~ property.
Gordon Tulberg, 62'64 Bay Ridge Road, fora'er member of the
association, reviewed the history of the property. He said if the
:' lB owners are-not allowed an individual slip the property becomes
worthless. _
LeFevere said the L~CD Code states each subdivided lot or
:::'::'?:..:; rtain rights. ~ith over'350 feet:o~ shoreline,
· :):~':'i;? gccb~ ~he code, (SeCtlon: 2:0~? ~u~bd.1)'?~'he~ property is
>~.~[~, :? entitled to.? Slips, one for each '§~0:'"of shoreline. Even though
' ~>:the. ouC!ot-,!:s_owned by 13 individuals, they 'cannot have I3 slips.
· J~.~:>::~ The Code uses'~:the number of feet of shoreline, not the 'number
people owning the property.
LeFevere explained that the L~CD ordinance regulation of
boat per 50 feet of shoreline was adopted in August 1978. Non-
conforming facilities exlstin~ at that time were ~rand£athered in.
If there is proof that 13 slips existed in 1978, the L}!CD ~ould
-.:consider randfathering that number ~roviding the license fees
eSted aeri'al photos or
alStad .Aares Improvement Assoc.I Public Hearln$, 2/26/92, Pg.2
Bitt:le responded that tt wx X be d~cuX~ ~o provide apt, o~o
of 13 sllps at one lime at this site prior to 1978. He said that
each of the ~3 properties had lakeshore propert~ with rights to
have a dock at that time (1978) and he believes they should be
able to continue these rights.
LeFevere responded that there is no ~uarantee that every
person owning property is entitled to a boat. Actually, as time
~oes by, the restrictions may become ~reater. It was his
suggestion the owners work out how to allocate the 7 slips.
LeFevere added ~hat if ~he properties are bein~ taxed basnd on the
right to a slip on the lake, they might want to check into this.
The DNR submitted a letter dated 2/26/92 stati,g that a 13
slip dock would require a protected waters permit for a pri~ate
marina ·
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:48 pm.
Pindings:
1. The Halstad Acres improvement Association, represented by
Gordon Xulberg, has submitted a multiple dock license
application for 13 slips on Outlot 1, Halstead Acres Second
Addition, Mound, Halsted's Bay.
2. The association consists of 13 homeowners in Halstead Acres
Second division who each own 1/13 interest in Outlot I. Each
owner is taxed on 1/13 interest in the outlot property.
3. Outlot 1 has 365' of lakeshore which would provide for 7 slips
under the current code Section 2.02, Subdivision 1.
4. The application is for 13 slips to provide I slip for each
member.
5. The area was developed in the ]ate 1950's. The out]ot was
deeded to the 13 homes not on the lake to provide, lake access.
6. A seasonal dock has been maintained at this site since the
1970's. The number of slips varied each year depending on how
many homeowners used the dock. No evidence has been provided
that a 13 slip dock ever existed at this site.
7. To grandfather the 13 slip dock with a density of 1 boat per
28' of shoreline, the applicant would have to provide evidence
that the structure existed with 13 slips before the Code
ordinance was adopted in August 1978. Back-licensing to 1978
for the proven number of slips would be required, including
payment of fees for each year back-licensed.
8. The DNR has determined that a new 13 slip dock would be
considered a private marina and would require a DKR protected
waters permit.
New
Second Addi-
commun'i¢
~-"Mound', represented the Hal-
iitihg'~0f the 13 owners of
and 1985 the Association
sing 'to. tie boats to the
~ to accommodate 13 :boats.
in 1984 because it
,..the dock without
i- gOing communica-
LMCD Code allows 7
S': necessary for all 13
slips existed in
ttle admitted they
13 slips have nOt
~' s'ome method
tCk license the multiple
initiated. The cost was
, to
:ense for 7 slips for Halstad
1, accepting $350 as back
imously.
/ FEB 3 1992
LEGAL DESCRIPT.TON OF PREMISES SURVEYED: ti+ , . ~"1'~
Outlet 1, /IAI, STEAD ACRES 2ND ADDITION
This stirrer intends to show the boundaries of the nbnve describec~ ~: ~ron marker found
pro~rty, ~nd tha location of an e~istinq fence, dock and light o: Iron marker set
~le thereon. It does not purport to show anF othe~ ~impr~vem~llts Rearings shown are
based upon an n~;stnned
or encroach~ent~, datum.
: .~--.-- ,~.~,,,~,,.,,~,.,,..,..,~,~,~,..~.,~-..~..,,,,¥.,,,.~,-~,~ I,~" ,-.-. I
~ I ~ ~I ; ' ~,a~t~llamaduly~istenM'CivilEn~i~ra~rvt~mu~r t~l
~L~~ '"""~'~'~"'""'"'I~ "-~"'"
Action Report: Lake Use Committee
Meeting:
4:30 p.m., Monday, March 16,
Norwest Bank, Wayzata, Community Room
Members Present: James Grathwol, Excelsior; Thomas Reese,
Mound. Also present: Sgt. Wm. Chandler, Sheriff's Water Patrol;
Rachel Thibault, Administrative Technician; Rick Dyer, Fishing
Community Representative; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director.
A quorum was not present. No action was taken on any items.
There was a discussion of selected items to accommodate the
public in attendance.
Special Events
A. New Applications
Minnetonka Public Schools, Solar Boat Regatta
The District has received an application from the Minnetonka
Public Schools to hold a Solar Boat Regatta, Saturday, 6/20/92,
or 6/21/92 as an alternate for bad weather on Gideons Bay. The
applicant has asked LMCD to waive or lower the application fee.
John E. Anderson, Minnetonka High School, explained the
regatta is a result of a school science project using solar pow-
ered boats to demonstrate use of a renewable energy source.
There will be from 10 to 12 boats involved. Their speed is about
6 mph. The request is to waive or reduce the permit and deposit
fee because this is a school project with limited funding.
The members were sympathetic to the request but were uncom-
fortable about establishing a fee waiver precedent. One sugges-
tion was to collect the fee and make a donation to the school in
that amount from the Save the Lake Fund.
No action was taken. The application and request are for-
warded to the Board for further consideration.
The following items are forwarded to the Board without
recommendation because of the lack of a quorum.
3. New Application for Wine and Beer Licenses for Al & Alma's
Charter Boat I.
Request to waive the investigation and investigation fee
because of previous approval for Al & Alma's other six licenses.
4. Fundraising proposal from Tonka Wet Spot, Corp., 3/9/92
The Tonka Wet Spot, a personal watercraft rental store, has
offered to donate $1 per T-shirt sold to the "Save the Lake"
fund. The T-shirts have the phrase "Locals Only" - Lake Minne-
tonka on them. Grathwol and Reese, while appreciative of the
offer, did not feel the phrase on the T-shirts is a message with
which the District would want to be associated.
$. Water I~trol Report
March 16, 1992
Sgt. Chandler reported as follows:
* There have been 30 through the ice incidents: 14 cars, 12
snowmobiles, 1 ATV, 2 people, I animal. All of the vehicles
which went through the ice have been recovered.
* Chandler will have the annual report available in April.
He is preparing a narrative to accompany it.
* A bill introduced in the legislature strengthening provi-
sions of the DWI law would also include a BWI conviction on a
driver's driving record. A prior DWI conviction, including
recreational vehicle offenses for DWI, wOuld also be considered
in a BWI conviction, making the BWI a gross misdemeanor. This
would bring the BWI portion of the law in line with the DWI
penalties.
* The Water Patrol is working on its 1993 budget. They are
requesting one more full time deputy and one more patrol boat.
Currently there are 5 full time deputies and 4 boats for the
entire county.
* Responding to a question from Reese, Chandler said depu-
ties spend the spring and fall season doing most of their train-
ing and equipment maintenance. Lake observations are made year
around. During the peak times, summer and winter, the Water
Patrol needs to increase its staff. During some of those times
they can call on other divisions for assistance.
* The PCA did a decibel study on the St. Croix River and
found a way of making decibel testing easier. Personal Water-
craft manufacturers have shown interest in order to make their
new models in compliance. The executive director said in many
cases, it is the operator who makes changes in the exhaust system
from the original equipment which originally met decibel require-
ments.
6. Other
Charter Boat Diesel Fueling at Excelsior Municipal Dock.
The executive director reported a call from the Excelsior
Fire Chief expressing his concern over plans to fuel the charter
boats with diesel fuel dispensed from trucks at the Excelsior
docks. The Fire Chief is concerned about a spill and the need
for supplies at the fueling site to control any spill.
John Anderson, Chairman of the Excelsior Park and Recreation
Committee, spoke to the need for controls. The city does not
want to prohibit the fueling. It is developing an Ordinance to
cover the safety and environmental needs. He asked for LMCD
support.
FOR THE COMNITTEE
Eugene Strommen, Executive Director
Bert Foster. Chair
2
LAKE PlINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
~arch 10, 1992
To;
From;
Subj:
Lake Use & Recreatdon Committee
Rachel Thibault
A1 & Alma's Wine & Beer License applications
A1 & Alma's has had on-sale wine and beer licenses on 6
charter boats since 1988. In 1990, they planned to sell A1 &
Alma's I and they purchased A1 & Alma's XII. The Board
approved the transfer of the wine & beer licenses from I to
XII.
To date, they have not sold A1 & Alma's I, so new w~ne and
beer license applications have been submitted for this
charter boat.
A public hearing is required for the new licenses, and w~l
be held in April. Staff recommends waiving the background
investigations and investigation fees for the new
applications.