The URL can be used to link to this page

1994-04-12J I lit I ,! ,,iii, J ~,~, teamwork and cooperation, provides at a reasonam~ cu~[, ,i,,-,,u o .v_.v..7_-i IiresPond to the ne~s of all citizens, fostering a safe, attractive and flourishingI AGENDA CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 1994 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 22, 1994, REGULAR MEETING. PG. 958-967 PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 19, 1994, AS BERT LARSON DAY IN THE CITY OF MOUND. PG. 968 PUBLIC HEARING.'. CASE g94-12: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT //277, SHIRLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, 2450 WILSHIRE BLVD., PID//24-117-24 12 0059. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A PUBLIC SCHOOL. PG. 969-992 ~E__.~: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR WILLETI'E CONSTRUCTION, INC. 4744/4748 HAMPTON ROAD, LOTS 25, 26 & 17, BLOCK 10, PEMBROKE, PID #19-117-23 33 0203. PG. 993-995 CASE//94-09: MARK HANUS, 4446 DENBIGH ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1 AVALON, PID #19-117-23 24 0001. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE. PG. 996-1016 ~: PAUL & PAT MEISEL, 5501 BARTLETF BLVD., LOTS 22 & 23, AUDITOR'S SUBD. #170, PID #24-117-24 23 0007. ~: VARIANCE FOR ADDITION (PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS ITEM IS BEING HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS 4/11/94 MEETING). PG. 1017-1029 953 I ,11 Iii I ,! ,,iii, ~ ~, 8. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT. 9. RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: SECTION 350:760, SUBD. 4, TRUCK PARKING IN RF_~IDENTIAL AREAS_. PG. 1030-1051 10. RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: RE TIME LIMITS ON BUILDING COMPLETIONS. PG. 1052-1055 11. RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: SECTION 330:120, DESIGN STANDARDS, PUBLIC SITES AND OPEN SPACE AND PARK LAND DEDICATION. PG. 1056-1063 12. DI~_C~_~: CLARIFICATION ON 1994 SUMMER PARKS AND LIFEGUARD PROGRAM. PG. 1064-1074 13. L.M.C.D. REPRESENTATIVE TOM REESE- LMCD REPORT. PG. 1075 14. Bm AWARD: 1994 ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK PAINTING - EVERGREEN TOWER. PG. 1076-1079 15. Bm AWARD: 1994 SEALCOAT PROJECT. PG. 1080-1082 16. APPROVAL OF CAR/TRAILER PARKING AGREEMENT WITH LMCD AS IT PERTAINS TO MOUND BAY PARK PUBLIC ACCESS. PG. 1083-1087 17. ~~_Q~: DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSES RELATING TO PRIVATE STRUCTURES ON PUBLIC LANDS CASES. SET PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOUND ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 350:25, TO ALLOW "COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES (16 OR LESS)" IN THE B-2 ZONING DISTRICT. (OLD FINA GAS STATION). B. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITY (16 OR LESS), WITHIN THE B-2 ZONING DISTRICT AT 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. (OLD FINA GAS STATION). C. A MOVING BUILDING PERMIT TO ALLOW A BUILDING TO BE MOVED FROM 2385 COMMERCE BLVD. (OUR LADY OF THE LAKE CHURCH CONVENT), TO 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. (OLD FINA GAS STATION). (SUGGESTED DATE: MAY 10, 1993, 7:30 P.M.) PG. 1088 954 II I it i ,s ,,il~, , 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION'S (MTC) DECISION TO DELETE THE 4:51 A.M. BUS STOPS AT BARTLETt BLVD. (COUNTY ROAD 110 W.) AND WESTEDGE BLVD. (COUNTY ROAD 44) DUE TO LACK OF RIDERSHIP, EFFECTIVE MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1994. PG. 1089-1095 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FOR PID #24-117-24 11 0019, LOTS 1, 2, 3, 14 * 15, BLOCK 7, SECTION - 2541 WEXFORD LANE (FRANK AND MARY SEGNER). PG. 1096-1099 LICENSE RENEWALS: HAWKER SET-UP PERMIT PG. 1100 LICENSE RENEWALS: PAYMENT OF BILLS. GAMES OF SKILL POOL BOWLING AMUSEMENT DEVICES RESTAURANT PG. 1101 PG. 1102-1114 iNFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS ~ A. Department Head Monthly Reports for March 1994. B. L.M.C.D. mailings. C. Letter from Senator Gen Olson in response to my letter re: proposed legislation for LMCD. D. Letter of apology from Mark Saliterman pertaining to an incident that recently occurred at Headliners. PG. 1115-1141 PG. 1142-1150 PG. 1151 PG. 1152 FJ Mound City Days Parade announcement. Please handle your own arrangements for riding in the parade. Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 1994. Letter of thanks from Scott Schmieg, 1736 Bluebird l. atne to the Mayor, City Council and Staff regarding the review and subsequent approval of a remodeling project. Memo from Multiple Dock Owner's Association. PG. 1153-1154 PG. 1155-1158 PG. 1159-1160 PG. 1161 955 Memo from the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) re: City Unity Day Resolution and Rally scheduled for Thursday, April 21, 1994, in St. Paul. Notice from Hennepin County on upcoming Town Meeting. Information from Hennepin Parks on a number of issues including development of the Lake Minnetonka Regional Park. Information from City of Robbinsdale re: state legislation in the area of pawnshops. A readable copy of the bills that were questioned at the last meeting on the expenses paid out for dental insurance. The dollars do add up correctly. REMINDER: Committee of the Whole meeting is scheduled for April 19, 1994, 7:30 PM. REMINDER: Annual Parks Tour, Thursday, April 21, 1994 at 5:45 P.M. PG. 1162-1166 PG. 1167 PG. 1168-1181 PG. 1182-1196 PG. 1197-1198 956 Mound City Council Minute~ MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 22, 1994 March 22, 1994 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, March 22, 1994, in the Council Chambers al 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen, and Ken Smith. Councilmember Phyllis Iessen was absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Edward $. Shukle, Ir., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, Building Official Ion Sutherland, and the following interested citizens: Nancy Lanz, Cathy Bailey, Ellen Scholer, Bernie & Mary Malcheski, Dotty O'Brien, Leonard Kopp, Susan Wilkens, Bernice Putt, Charlie Warner, Kiki Sonnen, Bill Jacobwith, Mary Moon, Pat Shay, Dave Willette, Clark Lillehei, Tom Melcher, and Jerry Kohls. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 1.0 MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith to approve the Minutes of the March 8, 1994, Regular Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.1 RECYCLOTYO WINNER The Mayor announced that $I00 Westonka Dollars will be awarded to Gary Potas, 2128 Centerview Lane for recycling the week of March 14, 1994. 1.2 PI, JBLIC HEARING; YEAR XX COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK. GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM The City Manager reported that the following is being proposed for Year XX in the Community I)cvelopment Block Grant Program (CDBG): ~,CrlVITy Rehabilitation of private property Westonka Community Action Network (WECAN) Westonka Intervention Westonka Senior Center - Operations Community Action for Suburban Hennepin (CASH) $28,991 $ 8,000 $ 5,700 $24,670 $ 2.500 $69,861 Mound City Council Minutes March 22. 1994 The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following persons from the following organizations spoke about their programs: Charlie Warner, Community Action for Suburban Hcnnepin (CASH); Nancy Lanz, Westonka Intervention; Cathy Bailey, Wcstonka Senior Center; Sue Wilkens, Westonka Rides; Leonard Kopp, President Westonka Senior Center; and Kiki Sonnen, Westonka Community Action Network (WECAN). The Mayor closed the public hearing. Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION g94-36 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJF. Elt_D USE OF FUNDS FOR 1994 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (CDBG) The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.:5 CASE //94-08: REQUEST FOR OPERATIONS PERMIT - THE TORO COMPANY. 5320 SHORELINE DRIVE The Building Official explained that Toro is seeking approval of a modification to the original permit to allow a warehouse expansion of 16,772 square feet. This will not result in additional employment. Toro previously received approval for a trailer parking area on the west end of the site with a capacity of 12 trailers. That same approval contained a provision requiting Balboa to provide a landscaping plan which included tree, shrubs and berming. They were also required to post a performance bond in an amount up to $15,000. The landscaping improvements were never completed and the performance bond was not posted. The Planner noted in his memo that it is unlikely that the landscaping referenced would significantly mitigate noise coming from the Balboa site, but it would have provided a visual buffer. He emphasized that the landscaping requirements were the responsibility of the building owner, not Toro. The Building Official noted that there have been complaints in the past few months about noise from the late night operation of trucks including loading/unloading activities. The Staff recommendation is approval of the requested Operations Permit modification to expand the warehouse area by 16,722 square feet. Clark Lillehei, Director of Operations for Toro Company, stated that the addition of this warehouse space could help with the night noise problem. It will help internally store more product so that they can handle the increased activity during the daytime hours and it will help reduce the activity that they have in the evening. Mr. Lillehei reported that for the total of 3 shifts Toro employes close to 300 people. Mound City Council Minutes March 22, 1994 Willaim Jacobwith, 5280 Lynwood Blvd. submitted the following signed by 7 persons: Citizens Complaint of Toro Operations ~ "The citizens of Mound would like to see changes made in the way Toro operates. The households living near the Toro building want to register the following complaints. TRUCK TRAFFIC & NOISE: Trucks use the parking lot as a truck stop idling engines hours at a time, excessive motor reving and fire burning by employees, trucks driving over curbs sending vibrations through nearby windows. BUILDING NOISE: EXHAUST FUMES: permeate houses. Trucks idle hours at a time causing exhaust fumes to We wish to see all truck traffic restricted between the hours of 7 PM and 7 AM. The construction of a sound barrier. Move driveway entrance to west side of building connecting directly to Highway 15. Stop all unnecessary truck idling for hours at end." William ~Iacobwith, 5280 Lynwood Blvd. Mary E. Moon, 5280 Lynwood Blvd. Pat Shay, 5348 Lynwood Blvd. Teri Hentges, 2212 Centerview Lane Gerald W. Kohls, 5424 Lynwood Blvd. & 5408 Lynwood Blvd. ScoR Olson, 5440 Lynwood Blvd. The following people reiterated their complaints: Mary E. Moon, Pat Shay, and Gerald Kohls. Mr. Jacobwith also stated that there are more trailers there than are allowed. Mr. Kohls stated that there was a truck parked there last week all night with his Thermo King refrigeration running. Mr. Kohls also suggested that the semi's could be parked in the CR's lot off of County Road 15 and the employees could park where the trailers are parking now. The Council discussed trying to find a way for the City, Welsh, Toro and the neighbors to deal with this. 3 Maech 22, 1994 Mound City Council Minutes Dave Willette, 4542 Lost Lake Road, stated he would be out of town when Case ~4-10 comes back to the Council. He asked if he had to attend if all the items are cleared up. The Council stated no, he did not have to attend. The City Manager explained that 6 bids were received on March 10, 1994. follows: Rice Lake Contracting Corp. Gridor Construction, Inc. Newmech Companies, Inc. Northwest Mechanical, Inc. Elliott Contracting Corp. Latour Construction, Inc. $445,400.00 $466,300.00 $586,698.00 $489,500.00 $498,500.00 $602,600.00 They were as $469,300.00. The apparent low bidder was Rice Lake Contracting The Engineer's estimate was proposal and recommended awarding the bid to Rice Corp. The City Engineer has checked the Lake Contracting Corp. The Engineer recommended not taking the alternate pumps and the alternate protective coating. Ahrens moved and ]ensen seconded the following resolution: AWARD THE 1994 LIlY STATION RF~OLUTION//94-39 RF~OLUTION TO RICE LAKE PROJECT TO IMPROVFMENT AMOUNT OF coNTRACTING CORP. IN THE $445,400.00 The vote was unanimously in favor. 1.7 Motion carried. - 1 4 R PARK AND BEA ItPR GRAM .__L 'ELICAN pOINT The City Manager reported that the POSC talked about the Pelican point property at their last meeting. They are aware that a sketch plan has been submitted by a potential developer. They feel because this is about the last open space in the City, they would like to get citizen 6 Mound City Council Minutes March 22, 1994 participation or input on the City purchasing this property. The POSC has recommended that the Council look at the cost of a citizen survey about purchasing the property and the cost of a bond referendum to purchase Pelican Point and other potential open spaces. They would like tO know how much it cost the school district to promote their last bond issue and find out election costs. The City Manager stated he thinks this is premature action by the POSC because the property is currently privately owned and is being looked at by a potential developer. This could be looked at later if nothing happens with the potential developer. The Council discussed the issue and stated it would be wonderful to have this area remain open but felt it was unrealistic to think the City could come up with three million dollars to purchase it and "X" number of dollars to maintain it. The City Clerk stated it would not cost anything additional to put a question on the ballot if it was done at the same time as the Primary or General Election. A special election could cost approximately $5,000 - $7,500. The Council asked the City Manager to contact the school and obtain the information they got from their survey. The Council stated that this property is not currently available for purchase so this cannot be considered at this time. No action was taken. - 1994 SUMMER PARKS AND BEACH PROGRAM The City Manager stated that the POSC has recommended approval of the 1994 Summer Parks & Beach Program. There is a 2% increase in the cost over 1993. The Council asked for details on the "Evening Program Staff (Westonka Drop In Youth Center) 6 Hour/wk X 8 weeks X$6.00/hr X 2 staff = $634.00". The City Manager referred to the POSC Minutes of March 10, 1994 which read in part," .... monies previously allocated for the "evening parks program" held at Mound Bay Park have been shifted to pay for "evening program staff" for the Westonka Drop In Youth Center. The Council asked that approval of this item be held over to the next meeting to get further information. - ANNUAL PARKS TOUR The City Manager stated that there are two dates suggested by the POSC, April 7 or April 21. The Council suggested April 21. Councilmember Smith stated he would be out of town on that date. 1.8 LICENSE ISSUANCE RENEWALS Issuance of the following licenses is proposed: Garbage - 1/1/94 to 2/28/95 - Best Disposal Services (Aagard West, Inc.) 7 Mound City Council Minutes Tree Removal - 4/1/94 to 3~3~95 - Aaspen Tree Service Eklund's Tree Service Emery's Tree Service Lutz Tree Service Shorewood Tree Service The Tree Stump Co. 1.9 March 22, 1994 MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Smith to authorize the issuance of the above listed licenses contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being submitted. ~F~qOLUTiON SUPPORTING AN APPLICATION FOR INTERMQDAL SURFACE AN RTATI NEFFi IEN YA T I TEA The City Manager explained that at the last meeting the Council authorized the Planner to go forward and prepare an application for ISTEA funding. This requires a resolution which was presented to the Council. Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RF3OLUTION//94-40 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND SUPPORTING AN APPLICATION FOR ISTEA FUNDING FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE LOST LAKE CANAL FROM DOWNTOWN TO LAKE MINNETONKA The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.10 pAYMENT OF BILLS~ Councilmember Jensen asked that the amount paid to Delta Dental be checked with the Finance Department because the total did not add up. Staff will check and report back. MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to authorize the payment of bills in the amount of $380,688.54, as presented on the pre-list, when funds are available except for the following: $242.00 McCombs Frank Roos - for Munson Removal $3,175.00 Smith Construction Co. - Munson Boathouse both charged to the Commons Dock Fund A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 8 March 22, 1994 Mound City Council Minutes Councilmember Ahrens stated she is opposed to paying for these not because they are paid for with City funds but because they are only being paid for by dockholders funds. The Council asked the City Manager to contact the surrounding towns to f~nd out how they administer their public dockage and rental units, the amount of money generated and what they spend it on. MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Johnson to authorize payment of the following: $242.00 McCombs Frank Roos - for Munson Removal $3,175.00 Smith Construction Co. - Munson Boathouse with the amounts to be allocated to a specific fund at a later date. This to be a discussion item at the first meeting in April when there is a full Council. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. !NFORMATIQN/MISCELLANEOUS~ Financial Report for February 1994, as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director. Memo from Multiple Dock Owner Association. Legislation being promoted by Gabriel Jabbour, Orono Councilmember, re: LMCD. The Council liked the idea of changing the make-up of the LMCD, with only 7 members. This would be done by forming districts of the 14 cities. They questioned the geographic make-up of the districts, i.e. Victoria, Minnetrista and Minnetonka Beach or Spring Park, Tonka Bay and Wayzata. The funding for this would be from a watercraft surcharge as follows: 40% borne by the municipalities and 60% borne by the district from the allocation it receives from the state water recreation account on account of the metropolitan area residents $3 surcharge as provided in Section 1. The Council supported the legislation in concept but asked for clarification on how the districts are made up. Letter of Thanks from Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Off~ce re: Investigator Truax's involvement in a recent case. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of March 10, 1994. 9 Mound City Council Minutes March 22, 1994 F. Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 1994. REMINDER; Committee of the Whole meeting is scheduled for April 19, 1994, 7:30 PM. Spring Clean-Up will be April 22 & 23, 1994, at Lost Lake. We will be accepting fluorscent tubes for a price. Brush will not be accepted during this weekend. MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Smith to adjourn at 10:00 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager Attest: City Clerk 10 gJ I D i · , ,ii, , & PROCLAMATION NO. 94- DECLARING APRIL 19, 1994, AS BERT LARSON DAY IN THE CITY OF MOUND WHEREAS, H.B.R. Bert Larson has been a valuable member of the Mound community for at least 57 years; and WHEREAS, hc graduated from Mound High School in 1939; and WHEREAS, he was the second President of the Mound Business Association in 1948; and WHEREAS, he was President of the Mound Chamber of Commerce in 1967; and WHEREAS, he was a City Council Member in 1958 and became Mayor in 1959, a position he held until 1963; and WHEREAS, his years of service have been marked by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, he has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom he has come into contact; and WHEREAS, he has also been a member of the Mound Masonic Ixxige for over 48 years and has earned the highest award that can be given, the Hiram Award. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Skip Johnson, Mayor of the City of Mound do hereby proclaim April 19, 1994, as BERT LARSON DAY and further, urge all of our citizens to join me in observance of this occasion. Adopted unanimously on the 12th day of April, 1994. Mayor Skip Johnson Councilmember Andrea Ahrens Councilmember Liz Jensen Councilmember Phyllis Jessen Councilmember Ken Smith PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (6! 2) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 CASE NO. 94-12 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A PUBLIC SCHOOL KNOWN AS SHIRLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED IN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 12, 1994 to consider the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit as requested by Indepdendent School District 277 to allow expansion of a public school (Shirley Hills Elementary) located within the R-1 zoning district. The expansion consists of a media center addition and a north entry addition. The subject property is located at 2450 Wilshire Boulevard., and legally described as follows: All that part of Block 2, lying Northerly and Northeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point in the Southeasterly line of said Block 2 with the intersection of the Southwesterly line of "Re-Arrangement of Block Seven (7), Shirley Hills, Unit B" extended Northwesterly; thence Northwesterly in a straight line to the point of intersection of the extension Southeasterly of the line between Lots 7 and 8, Block 3, Shirley Hills, Unit D, and the Westerly line of said Block 2, and there terminating, except that part of said Block 2 lying Southeasterly of the Southeast line of Tract F, Registered Land Survey No. 739, and Northeasterly of the extension Southeasterly of the Southwesterly line of Tract G, said Registered Land Survey No. 739, and except that part of said Block 2, lying North of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly line of Registered Land Survey No. 739, and the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24; thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said Registered Land Survey No. 739 a distance of 33 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Westerly and parallel to the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24 to the Westerly line of said Block 2, in Shirley Hills, Unit D, Mound, Minnesota, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Fr~ncene C. Clark,'-~ity Clerk (Mailed to property owners within 350' by April 1994, and published in 'The Laker' on March 21, 1994.) g~ ~1 . ~ printed on recycled papor PROPOSED RESOLUTION #94- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A "PUBLIC SCHOOL" LOCATED IN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 277 (SHIRLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY) 2450 WILSHIRE BLVD. PID #24-117-24 1 2 0059 P&Z CASE #94-12 WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 277 has applied for a Conditional Use Permit as required by Section 350:640 of the Mound City Code; and WHEREAS, the school is a "grandfathered" use and as a result, it does not currently have a permit; and WHEREAS, the proposed improvements at Shirley Hills School involve a new north entry vestibule addition of approximately 300 square feet, and a new media center/library addition, approximately 3,250 square feet; and WHEREAS, Shirley Hills School complies with all existing zoning requirements, including setbacks, parking and hardcover; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, as follows: The City does hereby grant a Conditional Use Permit for a Public School in the R-1 Single Family Zoning District as the expansion of Shirley Hills School is consistent with the ordinance criteria found in Section 350:525 of the Mound City Code. The drawing labeled "Site Plan", site "CUP-l" is hereby incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit as an exhibit of recognized existing facilities and approved expansion. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for the following legally described property: All that part of Block 2, lying Northerly and Northeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point in the Southeasterly line of said Block 2 with the intersection of the Southwesterly line of "Re-Arrangement of Block Seven (7), Shirley Hills, Unit B" extended Northwesterly; thence Northwesterly in a straight line to the point of intersection of the extension Southeasterly of the line between Lots 7 and 8, Block 3, Shirley Hills, Unit D, and the Westerly line of said Block 2, and there terminating, Proposed Resolution Page 2 Case//94-12 except that part of said Block 2 lying Southeasterly of the Southeast line of Tract F, Registered Land Survey No. 739, and Northeasterly of the extension Southeasterly of the Southwesterly line of Tract G, said Registered Land Survey No. 739, and except that part of said Block 2, lying North of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly line of Registered Land Survey No. 739, and the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24; thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said Registered Land Survey No. 739 a distance of 33 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Westerly and parallel to the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24 to the Westerly line of said Block 2, in Shirley Hills, Unit D, Mound, Minnesota, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County. This Conditional Use Permit 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. l'he property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with ennepin County and paying all costs for such recording. Eos ARCHITECTURE Eos · NUMBER OF PAGES ( ~ ) INCLUDING COVER SHEET: Original will be sent via: ( ) Mail ( ) Messenger ( ) Federal Express (~) Will Not Be Sent Comments: PLEASE CALL IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS FAX I ,,I '\ *- .5,5:0' qTv PROJECT DATA OWNER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 277 WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS MOUND, MINNESOTA ZONING R1 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIRED) SETBACKS 30'-0' FRONT 30'-0' SIDE 15'-0' REAR BUILDING DATA LOWER LEVEL MECHANICAL FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR MEDIA CENTER / MECHANICAL FIRST FLOOR VESTIBULE EXISTING 2,000 GSF 38,100 GSF 27~00 GSF ADDITION SUBTOTAL ADDITION SIZE AS PERCENTAGE TO EXISTING GROSS BUILDING TOTAL 67,300 GSF LOT COVERAGE (IMPERVIOUS) BUILDING (incl. overhangs) DRIVES / PARKING WALKS / MECH PAD STREET EASEMENT TOTAL TOTAL LOT SIZE PROVIDED REQUIRED 30.00% MAX. PARKING PROVIDED REQUIRED VEHICLES 90 90 HANDICAP SPACES 5 5 TOTAL 95 95 * REQUIRED PARKING CALCULATION BASED ON 27 CLASSROOMS LANDSCAPING & TREE PRESERVATION TREES ** AS PER SITE SURVEY *** SITE PERIMETER DIVIDED BY 50 PROVIDED WOODED AREA + 34 ** REQUIRED 71 *** REFUSE TRASH / RECYCLING PICKUP PROVIDED EXISTING REQUIRED YES HEIGHT CITY ORDINANCE BUILDING **** **** EXCLUDING EXISTING CHIMNEY ACTUAL 26'-0' MAXIMUM 35'-0' · ," i hi, hi, . . :,~ ,,, , I , · ~ ~IBIT 'A' . ~ ~ ,'~,~l ~qi'Tl~: I,~ ~ ~i I~ ~, I / / / / / / / / ~ / / / q~ MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 14, 1994 CASE #94-12; INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #277, ~HIRLEY HILL~ ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. 2450 WIL~HIRE BLVD., pID #24-117-2412 0059. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit. He explained that all schools within a residential zone require a conditional use permit in conformance with Section 350:640of the Mound City Code. The school is a "9randfathered" use and as a result, it does not currently have a permit. Proposed improvements at Shirley Hills School involve a new entryway addition, approximately 300 square feet, and a new media center/library addition, approximately 3,250 square feet. Shirley Hills School complies with all existing zoning requirements, including setbacks, parking and hardcover. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow the expansion and improvement of Shirley Hills School. If the Commission concurs with this recommendation, the following motion is suggested: The Planning Commission finds that the conditional use permit for the expansion of Shirley Hills School is consistent with the ordinance criteria found in Section 350:525 of the Mound City Code. The drawing labeled "Site Plan", site "CUP-1" is hereby incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit as an exhibit of recognized existing facilities and approved expansions. Chair Michael opened the public hearing. Jensen stated that Frank Matachek asked her to inform the Commission that he supports the request. There being no further comments, Chair Michael closed the public hearing. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Mueller, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously. This recommendation will be reviewed by the City Council on April 12, 1994. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CITY of MOUND 534~ MAYWOOD ROAD J}~D L'!NNESOTA55364'1687 ~6i2i 472-0600 FAX (612i 472-0620 CASE NO. 94-12 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A PUBLIC SCHOOL KNOWN AS SHIRLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED IN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 12, 1994 to consider the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit as requested by Indepdendent School District 277 to allow expansion of a public school (Shirley Hills Elementary) located within the R-1 zoning district. The expansion consists of a media center addition and a north .,~r.~.ntry addition. The subject property is located at 2450 Wilshire Boulevard., and legally .Jescribed as follows: All that part of Block 2, lying Northerly and Northeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point in the Southeasterly line of said Block 2 with the intersection of the Southwesterly line of "Re-Arrangement of Block Seven {7), Shirley Hills, Unit B' extended Northwesterly; thence Northwesterly in a straight line to the point of intersection of the extension Southeasterly of the line between Lots 7 and 8, Block 3, Shirley Hills, Unit D, and the Westerly line of said Block 2, and there terminating, except that part of said Block 2 lying Southeasterly of the Southeast line of Tract F, Registered Land Survey No. 739, and Northeasterly of the extension Southeasterly of the Southwesterly line of Tract G, said Registered Land Survey No. 739, and except that part of said Block 2, lying North of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly line of Registered Land Survey No. 739, and the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24; thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said Registered Land Survey No. 739 a distance of 33 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Westerly and parallel to the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Range 24 to the Westerly line of said Block 2, in Shirley Hills, Unit D, Mound, Minnesota, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Francene C. Clark,'-~ity (Mailed to property owners within 350' by Ap~1994, and published in 'The Laker' on March 21, 1994.) printed on recycled paper Hoisington Koegler ~ Inc. DD PLANNING REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: Mound Planning Commission and Staff Mark Koegler, City Planner March 4, 1994 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit - Shirley Hills School APPLICANT: Independent School District #277 CASE NUMBER: 94-12 HKG FILE NUMBER: 94-5b LOCATION: 2450 Wilshire Boulevard EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-l) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: School BACKGROUND: Shirley Hills School is located in a residentially zoned area. All schools within such zones are required to have a conditional use permit in conformance with Section 350:640 of the Mound City Code. The school is a "grandfathered" use and as a result, it does not currently have a permit. At the present time, Independent School District #277 is planning an addition to Shirley Hills School. In order to construct the new addition, the City of Mound will first need to issue a conditional use permit in accordance with the Code. Proposed improvements at Shirley Hills School involve a new entryway addition and a new media center/library addition. Construction within the interior of the building is also included in order to bring the facility into compliance with ADA requirements. The entryway addition totals approximately 300 square feet and the media center/library addition totals approximately 3,250 square feet. COMMENT: Shirley Hills School complies with all existing zoning requirements including setbacks, parking, and hardcover. The expansion of the building will not impact abutting properties because of the existing setback distances and due to the nature of the land uses surrounding Land Use / Environmental ' Planning / Design 7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 83%3160 Shirley Hills School Conditional Use Permit March 4, 1994 Page Two the school. The school is encompassed on three sides by public streets and the fourth side abuts a church. An existing wooded area currently separates the church property from the school site. Minor landscaping improvements are shown for a planting bed that is adjacent to the new entryway. The Mound Zoning Code contains minimum landscaping provisions that are applicable to institutional properties. These provisions, however, are typically not applied to minor building expansions such as the one planned for Shirley Hills School. The addition in this case represents less than a 10% expansion of the total footprint of the school. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow the expansion and improvement of Shirley Hills School. If the Commission concurs with this recommendation, the following motion is suggested: The Planning Commission finds that the conditional use permit for the expansion of Shirley Hills School is consistent with the ordinance criteria found in Section 350.'525 of the Mound City Code. The drawing labeled "Site Plan", sheet "CUP-I" is hereby incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit as an exhibit of recognized existing facilities and approved expansions. SHIRHLS.CUP Apphcatlonfor I ,,.-,J' ;,,~-~.' '. .... ~ 1 USE ~ / P~D D~~~ C~y o~ No~ S341 ~ood Road~ Ho~d, ~ 55364 Phonel 472-0600; FAx~ 472-0620 PlannLng Coa~iosion Date: City Council Date: DlstrLbution: city P,anner, City gngineer: Public Works: ,I ... ,o. q4-l Conditional Uae Permit Fee, S200,O0 architect: David N. Naroney, AIA EOS Architecture 21Vater Street Excelsior, HN 55331 PI*a.. o, p,,-t th. fono. i.g i,,o,.,.,tlii; ........................................... Add, ese of Subject P,opert~ ~t-.~C) (~;~h;y~. ~. ~0u~, ~ddre~e ~ Da~ ~hone .~ of Surveys., ~)l { ~ 1~. Day Phone ~ DES~I~IOM OF SU~ Zoni~ District ~-[ {ximtin9 Use Of Pro~rty* P~);C '~ Of Pro. ced Use as L[st~ In the Zoning Ordinance, ~{(C {F~S OF ~ PRO~SgD USg~ Lilt ~pacts the pro~n~ ume will have on pro~rky in the vicinity, including, but not l~lt~ to traffic, no~se, light, e~ke/~or, parking, and descrl~ the stepe taken to mitigate or el~lnate the If appllc~le, a develo~ent schedule shall be attached to this application providing reason~le~arantee~ for the c~pletion of the pro~sed develo~ent. Est~at~Develo~nt ~st of the Project: ~SIDENTI~ DE~P~NTS O~Y: N~r of Structures: Nu~e~ of ~elling Unite Per St~cture: ~t ~ea Pe~ ~llLng Unit: sq. f~. Total ~t krea: ~q. Ham an application ever ~en ~de for zoning, variance, conditional use ~lt, or other · oning pr~u~e for this p~o~rty~ ( ) yes, ( ) no. If lei, list date(e) of application, action taken, resolution n~(m) and provide copie~ of resolutionm. ~tpert~ O~ner"e ~tqnatura II ,,! i ~ , ,1~, 50 0 50 150 Scale 1 inch = 50 feet DESCRIPTION: All thet pert of Block 2, lying Northerly end Northeesterly of the following described line: Beginning ote point in tl~e Southe(]sterly line of sold Block 2 with the intersection of the Southwesterly line of "Re-Arrengement of Block Seven (7), Shirley Hills, Unit 13" extended Northwesterly; thence Northwesterly in o streight line to the point of intersection of the extension Southeesterly of the line between Lots 7 end 8, Block 3, Shirley Hills, Unit D, end the Westerly line of soid Block 2, end there termineting, except thor pert of soid Block 2 lying Southeesterly of the Southeost line of Trect F, R(~T~ ered Lend Survey No. 7.39, end Northeosterly oi the extension Southeesterly of' the'~ Southwesterly line of Trect G, seid Registered Lend Survey No. 739, end except thet pert of said Block 2, lying North of the following described line: -Beginning et the intersection of the Westerly line of Registered Lend Survey No, 739, end the North line of Section 24, Township 117, Renge 24; thence Southerly dong the Westerly line of seid Registered Lend Survey No. 7.39 o distence of 33 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Westerly end perollel to the North-line of Section 24, Township 117, Renge 24 to the Westerly line of seid Block 2, in Shirley -lills, Unit D, Mound, Minnesoto, <~ccording to the plot thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in end for sold Hennepin County. Ill i 'X .j .'" '" II i,I I,I SUBMITTAL t.lCtHr't KlrlCw~. ~ fromm GUTH [ [ M,,IHlaOilO3.7:~ 'T .D .C -B GOTH TZS8 ~1'C ;T9 X'VA OZ:CT Number of Pages Transmitted (excluding cover sheet) Message: ,, If you do not receive all sheets, please call (612)546-3434. Hard copy to follow via mall , ,Yes ._.~.No ~I m 3.6~:.00.,00N 0ff'O~;E' /,~_~/, // .,'I" 'aA'lB 2EIIHS"IIM L GENEILaL ZONING INFOI~L~TION SIIEET Required Lot Width: Existing Lot Width SETBACK$ REQUIRED: (frontage on an improved publLc Itrmet) _, Depth · SIDE: N S · W RE. ARt N S · # -d~KESHORE: $0' {l~aaured from ,X~STING AND/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS: PRINCIPAL BUILDIN~ w FRONT NO. , ?, IS THIS PROPERTy CONFORMING? BY: ACCESSORY BUILDING FRONT: N FRONT: N S SIDE: N S · # 4' or §' SIDE: N S E W 4' or REJ,~: N S E W 4' LAXESHORE: S0' fmeaoured from O.H,W.I ACCESSORY BUILDIN~ FRONTz FRONT: SIDE: SIDE: REARz WXLL TN[ PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS CONFOIU4? YES DATE / / NO., (g) 1 (25)/ 8 F (8) c (5) $ (4) K r 12) 45' 15' t6' Z97. ~ k (3) ... RLS i (14) 0 (~0) ,%,0 t350038 I0 (~) 16) , (5O) I PROPOSED RESOLUTION//94- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR 4744/48 HAMPTON ROAD LOTS 25, 26, AND 27, BLOCK 10, PEMBROKE PID #19-117-23 33 0203, P&Z CASE//94-10 WHEREAS, applicant, Willette Construction, Inc. has submitted a request for a Minor Subdivision in the manner required by City Code Section 330 and Minnesota State Statute Chapter 462, and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder, and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA 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, 10 foot side yard setbacks, and a 15 foot rear yard setback, and WHEREAS, all proposed setbacks, lot area, and lot coverage are conforming. The proposed lot area for Parcel A is 6,911 square feet, and the proposed lot area for Parcel B is 6,911 square feet, and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision has been found to be consistent with the regulations setforth in the City Code, 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 Council does hereby approve the minor subdivision establishing Parcels A and B from Lots 25, 26, and 27, Block 10, Pembroke, subject to the following conditions: AJ A final grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved by the City Engineer at the time of building permit application. Be The Certificate of Survey shall be modified to show the water service location on Lot A and the sanitary sewer and water locations on Parcel B. Ce Sanitary sewer and water services for Parcel B shall be installed prior to the recording of the subdivision or a suitable financial guarantee shall be provided to the City to ensure such installation. De Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the City including the following: 1) a five (5) foot width along all side lot lines, and 2) a 10 foot width along both the front and rear lot lines. The applicant shall prepare and have the City review the above described easements. Whatever costs are associated with the review on the part of the City and in recording shall be paid by the applicant. One deficient street unit charge shall be paid in the amount of $1,768.45 before release of the resolution. Fe Park dedication fees in the amount of $1000 shall be paid for Parcels A and B before release of the resolution. Go A hard surface driveway shall be installed prior to the final occupancy permit being issued. The Minor Subdivision is approved according to the following proposed legal descriptions and according to the attached Exhibit A: Parcel A: Lot 27 and the West 20 feet of Lot 26, Block 10, Pembroke. Parcel B;. Lot 25 and that part of Lot 26 lying easterly of the West 20 feet of said Lot 26, Block 10, Pembroke. It is determined that the foregoing subdivision will constitute a desirable and stable community development and it is in harmony with adjacent properties. The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant. The applicant shall have the responsibility for filing this resolution in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the subdivision regulations of the City. The applicant shall also have the responsibility of pay all costs for such recording. This lot subdivision is to be filed and recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this resolution. MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 22, 1994 1.4 CASE g94-10: WILLETTE CONSTRUCTION. INC., 4744/4748 HAMPTON ROAD. LOTS 25, 26 27. BLOCK 10. PEMBROKE. PID #19-117-23 33 0203; MINOR SUBDIVISION The Building Official explained the request. The Staff and Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions as listed in the proposed resolution. The City Attorney pointed out that most of the things required in the proposed resolution are being put off until sometime in the future and that in his opinion this is contrary to the intent and wording of the subdivision ordinance which indicates that either these things are done or there is a surety bond or letter of credit posted to insure that they will be done. He suggested that the following be done before the division is allowed: (1) pay the $1,000 in park dedication fees__; (2) pay the deficient street unit charge ($1,768.45); (3) there should be arrangements made on how the sewer and water is going to be handled; and (4) someone has to take responsibility for how the easements are prepared (who is going to draft them and who is going to pay for i0. This is to insure that all the items are handled in a timely manner and someone down the line does no~ ga stuck with the expenses. The Attorney pointed out that surveys do not grant easements. You have to get them through a dedicated plat or you have to have documents that convey easements. On the proposed resolution, add to item D as follows: "The applicant shall prepare and have the the City review the above described easements. Whatever costs are associated with the review on the pan of the City and in recording shall be paid by the applicant.' Item F should read: "Park dedication fees in the amount of $1,000 shall be paid for Parcels A and B before release of the resolution." Item E should read: "One deficient street unit charge shall be paid in the amount of $1,768.45 before release of the resolution.' The applicant asked that he be given a list of the things that ne.~ to be done and he will get them done. MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to continue this item to the f'wst Meethag in April to allow staff to revise the proposed resolution. The vote was unanimously In favor. Motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION #94- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING SETBACKS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE AT ~.~.~.~6 DENBIGH ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, AVALON PID #19-117-23 24 0001, P&Z CASE #94-09 WHEREAS, the owner, Mark Hanus, has applied for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming 4.1 foot side yard setback to the principal structure, and a 1.7 percent hardcover variance to allow construction of a detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks; and WHEREAS, the maximum amount of impervious surface allowed for this property is 30%, and incorporating the proposed garage, the total amount of impervious surface will be 31.7%, however, the slight amount of excess hardcover is mitigated on the site due to the existing topography that slopes towards the lake over predominantly green space; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA 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, and a 50 foot setback to the ordinary high water elevation, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval subject to a visual inspection by the Building Official to address potential drainage for the abutting property to the east as a result of the new garage construction, and to determine what type of solution is needed, if any, to solve potential drainage problems. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby approve a variance to recognize an existing non- conforming side yard setback resulting in a 1.79 foot variance, and a variance to impervious surface coverage of 127.5 square feet, or 1.7 percent, to allow construction of a conforming 26' x 24' detached garage. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance 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 350:420. Proposed Resolution Page 2 Case #94-09 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 26' x 24' detached garage. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: Lot 1, Block 1, Avalon. 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. B ENCI-IM,4 J I il i · , ,Il, , I ii, MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1994 ~ MARK HANUS, ~,~.~.6 DENBIGH ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, AVALON, PID #19-117-2524 0001. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE. Mark Hanus removed himself from the Planning Commission for the review of this case. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the applicant's request for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming 4.21 foot side yard setback to the principal structure in order to construct a detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks. This request also results in e hardcover variance of 127.5 square feet, or 1.7 percent. The effects of this slight amount of excess hardcover ere mitigated on this site due to the existing topography that slopes towards the lake over predominantly green space. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request as the construction of the garage is a reasonable use of the property, it is conforming to setbacks and the impact on hardcover is minimized by the fact that drainage and storm water is effectively contained on this property. Mr. Hanus noted that the driveway will not slope towards the street, and therefore, will not drain directly onto the street. Abutting neighbor to the east, Oswin Pflug, expressed a concern about drainage onto his property. The Building Official noted that by conducting a field inspection he could verify if the neighbors property will be impacted, and it is possible that gutters or the direction of the roof on the garage could solve these issues. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsadclle, to recommend approval of the variance request as recommended by staff, with visual Inspection of drainage Issues, and require gutters or some other solution that is feasible to solve drainage problems. Motion carried unanimously. This case will be heard by the City Council on April 12, 1994. CITY of MOUND MOUND. MINNESOTA fi5364-1687 i612) 472-0600 STAFF REPORT FAX {612)472-0620 DATE: Planning Commission Agenda of March 28, 1994 TO: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff FROM: Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~,.¢. SUBJECT: Variance Request APPLICANT: Mark Hanus CASE NO. 94-09 LOCATION: 4446 Denbigh Road, Lot 1, Block 1, Avalon, PID 19-117-23 24 0001 ZONING: R-lA Single Family Residential ~UND The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize a 4.21 foot nonconforming side yard setback for the existing dwelling in order to construct a detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks. The request also results in a hardcover variance of 127.5 square feet or 1.7 percent. The effects of this slight amount of excess hardcover are m~tigated on this site due to the existing topography that slopes towards the lake over predominantly green space. This property has received two previous variances by resolutions 92-44 and 91-70 (attached). It has been the policy of the City in the past to promote garages to ease the accumulation of clutter. The natural location of a garage on this site is in this location as close to the street as possible to minimize the amount of hardcover. The applicant and the Planning Commission may wish to consider placing the driveway with a slight pitch in order to drain onto green space and away from the street, thereby further reducing the impact of the hardcover. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request as the construction of the garage is a reasonable use of the property, it is conforming to setbacks, and the impact on hardcover is minimized by the fact that drainage and stormwater is effectively contained on this property. JS:pj The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case will be heard by the City Council on April 12, 1994. printed on recycled paper I .,m VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF MOU~D 5341 Maywood Re&d, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 >lanning Commission Date' city Council Date: Application Fee: $50.00 Site Visit Scheduled: Zoning Sheet Completed: ~-Z~-~4 Copy to City Planner: Copy to Public Works: Copy to City Engineer:. .~..~/~.~.¢ Please type or print the following information: Address of Subject Property ~~ b~-/l~:3~ ~, Owner's Name ~-~ /-~'ID'S Day Phone Owner's Address Applicant's Name (if other than owner) Address Day Phone LEGAL DESCRIPTION Addition Block / PID No. / c/_ !17- 2,~ 2"/ Zoning District ~ lA Use of Property: 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 Detailed descripton of proposed coQstruction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): ~ )~ 2~' ~ ~'~1[ ~{~ o~ ~ ~ OOO £iance Application age 2 Case No. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, eno setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No ~0- 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: ( N S E W ) Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) Lake Front: ( N S E W ) Side Yard: ( N S~W ) Side Yard: ( N S E W ) Lot Size: ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. &' ft. ft. 1.7 ' ft. ft. ft. ft. sq ft sq ft sq ft Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (7~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) drainage ( ) existing ( ) shape (-/.~ other: specify (~ too narrow ( ) too small ( ) too shallow 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 ? fiance Application age 3 Case No. Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No 0Q- If yes, explain Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes (), No 0Q- If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any re~ired 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 applicant,, si ature -- Date ~O /?i~' c/?/ I0o . NAME: ADORE$S: EXISTING LOT AREA EXISTING LOT AREA crr( OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS 7~ 8,~"' SQ FT X lS% -. I/,~"'2.~ LENGTH WIDTH HOUSE: _2..? x ? = ~ X -- TOTALHOUSE ******************* GARAGE: 24 x 2q - /~2z/ X TOTAL GARAGE ~.~')Z~.2'~'~' x __~0 . 2.0.8/ x - TOTAL DRIVEWAY (i~ ~mpe~v~o~. I~ X N - ~ surface under ~ ~ ~ ~0 deck = 100Z) TOTALDECK *'''''''''''* ~O TOTAL DECK ~, 50%··*'''''''''·'' 2& x .Y - /z::W .... X TOTAL OTHER '''''''''''*''''*'· /,,2 zt TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER UNDER~OVER)) · · lJgT.~' I MEETS LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS * * * ' ' ' ' ' ' *' ' ' ' ' YE8 "/'-NO Y: DATE: J ,J Jl i · , ,1~ , I il, ! I I I! MAR~ N~ NU,4 WE¢T ~I?E ELEVATION I i...INE H~R~k3NY ENGINEERING ~ 612 472 0620 NAME: ADDRESS: EXISTING LOT AREA EXISTING LOT AREA LENGTH WIDTH HOUSE: x zo = X TOTAL HOUSE //45/ GARAGE: TOTAL GARAGE *****··t··*******· DRIVEWAY: + Z~.~ x - ~2q TOTAL DRIVEWAY . ~ ~ ~ ~ deck = 100~) TOTALDECK · "* TOTAL DECK TOTAL PROPOSED MEETS LOT COVER~,GE REQUIREMENTS t · t · · t ·, t · · · · t YE$.._~..~ NO III B ILl · · , ,1~ , Ii ia, /004, ~,ILL ,E~L,, j / Z × ~ TI~ E'ATL-I~ ?LATE' i ~ ~. F~U~E T~ATEF ~O~E PLATE~ fi ~" ~bF AN~ ~ALL ~H~ATHIN~ G. E" ~6A~ gAF ~I~IN~ I oo~ 65 April 28, 1992 RESOLUTION %92-44 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ADDITION AT 4446 DENBIGH ROAD~ LOT 1~ BLOCK 1~ AVALON~ PID %19-117-23 24 0001 P&S CASE NUMBER 92-007 WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to construct a conforming 9' x 12' addition to the west side of the property. A 1.79 foot side yard setback variance for the principal structure and a 9.49 foot front yard setback variance for the detached garage are requested; 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 50 foot setback to the ordinary high water elevation; and WHEREAS, all other setbacks and lot area are conforming; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the same variances with Resolution ~91-70 on May 28, 1991 to allow construction of an addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby approve a variance recognizing the existing nonconforming side yard setback of 4.21 feet to the principal building and an existing 7.9 foot front yard setback to the detached garage to allow construction of a conforming addition at 4446Denbigh Road, contingent upon the preparation and execution of a recordable Agreement that the City can enter the property remove and specially assess the costs of removal of the existing nonconforming detached garage if not removed by May 28, 1993. 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. April 28v 1992 It is determined that the liYability of the residentia! 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= a. Construction of a conforming 9' x 12' addition. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: Lot 1, Block 1, Avalon, PID %19-117-23 24 0001. This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles tn 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. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Jessen and seconded by Councilmember Jensen The following voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. following voted in the nega' none· Attest: City Clerk ' atuLve: 119 May 28, 1991 RESOLUTXON #g1-70 RESOLUTXON TO CONCUR WXTH THE PLANNXNG COMMXSSXON TO RECOGNXZE EXXSTXNG NONCONFORMXNG SETBACKS FOR Lot Iv Block lv Avalonv PXD ~19-117-23 24 0001 (4446 Denbigh Road) P&Z CASE NO. 91-008 WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming setback from the principal building to the east side property line of 4.21 feet and a nonconforming detached garage setback 10.51 feet from the front property line for Lot 1, Block 1, Avalon, PID #19-117-23 24 0001, and; WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing construction of a conforming 29t x 17t two story addition, and a 20e x 26e second story addition onto the existing structure, and; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-2 Single Family Zoning District which according to the City Code requires a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 15 foot rear yard setback, a 50 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water of 929.4, 6 foot side yard setbacks for "lots of record", and a 20 foot front yard setback, and; WHEREAS, there is a nonconforming workshop below grade at the lakeside of the dwelling setback approximately 39.6 feet from the Ordinary High Water elevation which the owner proposes to remove, and; WHEREAS, Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) provides that alterations may be made to a building containing a lawful, nonconforming residential property when the alterations will improve the livability thereof, but the alteration may not increase the number of units, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend approval due to practical difficulty. NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby recognize the existing nonconforming setbacks for the property located at 4446 Denbigh Road, Lot 1, Block 1, Avalon, PID ~19-117-23 24 0001, contingent upon the following conditions: 120 May 28, 1991 a) The Planning Commission finds that a condition of practical difficulty exists in the strict interpretation of the Zoning Code relative to this property. b) A side yard setback variance of 1.79 feet is hereby granted for the addition of a second story and an addition to the south side of the existing home with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions of the Zoning Code. c) A front yard setback variance of 9.49 feet is hereby granted for the existing accessory building garage with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions of the Zoning Code. This detached garage is to be re~oved from the proper~y withi~ tw~ years from the date of approval of the variance, d) The Planning Commission recognizes a potential situation relating to the lakeshore property which is City owned, and of which the applicant has installed a dock on this City property. The Planning Commission refers this matter to the City Council for the appropriate action. 0 The City Council authorizes the violations and authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) 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 alterations to a nonconforming use of the property to afford the owner reasonable use of his land. To construct a conforming 29' x 17' two story addition, and a 20' x 26' second story addition onto the existing structure which will have a nonconforming side yard setback of 4.21 feet and a conforming lakeshore setback after removal of the workshop/concrete slab at the lakeside. Inspection, by the Building Official, of the lakeside area after removal of the workshop/concrete slab to be done prior to any addition construction. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: 121 May 28, 1991 Lot 1~ Block 1, Avalon, PID %19-117-23 24 0001. 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 Hennepln County and paying all costs for such recording. The building permit shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. The foregoing resolution was moved by Mayor Johnson and seconded by Councilmember Jensen. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Jess,n, Johnson and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Mayor Attest: City Clerk ACCESSORY BUILDING FRONT: N S · W SIDE: # S · # 4' or 6' SIDE: R S g w 4' or ~' ~SHO~: 50' ~mea~uced fr~ FRONT FRONT SIDE: SIDE: LAIq. E S HOR~ ACCESSORY BUILD,fIG WILL THE PROPOSED IMPI~OV~NTS CONFORR? YES~ NO . DCC ~ ( 55 CITY of MOUND STAFF REPORT 5341 MAYWOOD ~OAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472 06~3 FAX (612) 472-~620 DATE: Planning Commission Agenda of April 11, 1994 TO: FROM: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Official SUBJECT: Variance Request for Addition APPLICANT: A. Paul & Patricia Meisel CASE NO. LOCATION: 94-17 5501 Bartlett Blvd., Lots 22 & 23, Auditors Subd. No. 170, PID /I24-117-24 23 0007 ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential BACKGROUND The applicant is seeking variances for the construction of a kitchen and dining area to the existing nonconforming dwelling. There are several nonconformities. Please note the supplemental zoning sheet attached. The proposed addition is shown to be setback 24' to the channel that goes between Lake Minnetonka and Lost Lake on what would be the side yard with a 10 foot setback. The applicant has submitted two hardcover calculation sheets. The second sheet with conforming calculations considers the boulevard that is a privately held commons, and the cobblestone paver driveway at 50% impervious surface. The manufacturer of the paver system states the amount of percolation can vary from 5% to almost 100%. This addition would encroach approximately 17' closer to the channel than the existing structure and it is proposed in this location partially to maintain the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake and reduce the impact as much as possible. It is difficult to define a hardship in this case, the only other rationale for granting a variance is practical difficulty. When considering practical difficulty it must be found unreasonable to require conformance with the ordinance due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owner has no control. Practical difficulties may arise due to functional and aesthetic concerns. The owner states their need for the addition is to serve the use and function of the home and that due to the existing floor plan this is the only practical location. Io17 printedonrecycledpaper A. Paul & Patricia Meisel 5501 Bartlett Bird. Page 2 COMMENTS This property is uniquely situated abutting both the main body of Lake Minnetonka and the navigable channel to Lost Lake. The proposed addition is conforming to the normal shoreline setback of 50' to the south. All of the existing structures are encroaching into the required setbacks, however they are very well maintained and are not likely to be removed at this time. The DNR/State Rule (6115.330) states, in part, that structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to adjoining setbacks provided the proposed building site is not located in the 25 foot shore impact zone. The proposed addition encroaches I foot into the shore impact zone. The existing garage on this parcel and the existing dwelling on the parcel to the east are both setback less than the proposed addition to the channel and are not likely to be removed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission Recommend approval of the variance request due to practical difficulty, with the following findings of fact: Unique circumstances apply to this property due to the fact that it abuts a channel that is not the main body of the lake and therefore the visual impact from the lake is less. The proposed addition is conforming to the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake. This property abuts a private commons area or green space, and when considered reduces the impact of the nonconforming impervious surface. JS:pj The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case will be heard by the City Council on April 26, 1994. Iol8 Supplemental Zoning Sheet 3/28/94 by Peggy James 5501 Bartlett Blvd. Principal Structure: Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: Okay = 100' + to street. Okay = 40' to side. Existing Structure = 41' setback to OHW -- 9' variance Proposed Addition = 24' setback to OHW = 26' variance Encroachment of 7.9' to required 15' setback. 34' setback to OHW -- 16' variance. Cabin / Little House: Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: 1.2' setback to Bartlett -- 18.8' variance. Chimney encroaches 1' over line (4' setback required). Okay. Okay. Okay. Garage (detached): Front N: Okay = 24.4'. Side W: Okay. Channel E: 14' +/- to OHW = 36' setback variance. Rear S: Okay. Lakeshore S: Okay. FLOODPLAIN: According to the survey, a portion of the existing crawl space of the dwelling is in the floodplain, however, the main floor and the addition is not. Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution: ~/Z.Cl/q~ City Planner City Engineer Other VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, ~ 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 Public Works Application Fee: $50.00 Case NO. (~"4 -I ~ Please lyi~.' or print the following information: AdJress ,,f Subject Property Block Addition._ District Owner's Name Use of Property: ~,~= 4:. / Owner's Address ,~5:_~5~,~/ ~x~r-JJ~?". ~/a'dj/. Day Phone Applicant's Name Of other nan owner) Address Day Phone Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, (WK6. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. 2. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): - Variance Application (11193) Page 2 e 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 (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): e SETBACKS: required requested VARIANCE (or existing) Front Yard: (N~ EW) c.~45' ft. 1,~' ft. Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ~z,~. ,~ ft. Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ~//,. ft. Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. 74,5~ ft. Lakeside: ( I~E W ) ,qT-) ft. .~ ,,,/ft. : (NSEW) ft. ft. Street Frontage: ft. q ~ ft. Lot Size: sq ft /? .5-g&sq ft Hardcover: sq ft o~79/~ sq ft rio Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (,~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use: 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 ( Please describe: ( ) topography ( ) soil ) drainage ( ) existing situation ) shape (z34ther: specify Variance Application (11/93) P~g¢ 3 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 (t...)~[f yes, explain: e Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? No (). If yes, explain: Yes ( ,~ Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition.* Yes (), bio (~:~:no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? o 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. Applicant's Signature Date Date .( ~0o .24!- -. '--:-'£g.3-.. :T ~2 Hinnefonka CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DIVERSIFIED CONSTRUCTION OF LOTS 22 & 23, AUD. SUB. NO. 170 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA lazy Courtland, MN 507-359.257o Twin Cities Office 612-641-8070 MN WATS 1-800.422-0751 FAX 507-354.7320 ,,~"' i {'~..ourtla~d'- [" i,~ Tandscape i "',~ Lproducts ', \., ', = P.O. Box 32 \ Courtland, MN 5~60_21 ; ..... 507-359-2570 - March 25, 1994 Mr. Paul Metsel 5501 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN Dear Mr. Meisel: It is'difficult'to determine the amount of water that per- culates through the joints of a interlocking paver brick surface. The width of the joint, type of joint sand used, degree of compaction and slope of the surface all determine the amount of water that drains through a paver surface. There- fore, the amount of perculation can vary from 5% to almost 100%. Sincerely, April 1 2, 1994 PROPOSED RESOLUTION #94- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION AT 5501 BARTLETT BLVD. LOTS 22 & 23, AUDITORS SUBD. NO. 170, PID #24-117-24 23 0007 P&Z CASE//94-17 WHEREAS, the owners, a. Paul and Patricia Meisel, have applied for a variance to allow the construction of a single story addition consisting of a kitchen and dining area, and a second story addition approximately 21' x 8' to follow the existing footprint for master bedroom, and WHEREAS, there are several nonconforming issues relating to this property, as follows: Principal Sl~ructure: Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: Okay = 100' + to street. Okay = 40' to side. Existing Structure = 41' setback to OHW = 9' variance Proposed Addition = 24' setback to OHW = 26' variance Encroachment of 7.9' to required 15' setback. 34' setback to OHW = 16' variance. Cabin / Little House: Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: 1.2' setback to Bartlett = 18.8' variance. Chimney encroaches 1' over line (4' setback required). Okay. Okay. Okay. Gara~le (detached): Front N: Okay = 24.4'. Side W: Okay. Channel E: 14' +/- to OHW = 36' setback variance. Rear S: Okay. Lakeshore S: Okay. FLOODPLAIN: According to the survey, a portion of the existing crawl space of the dwelling is in the floodplain, however, the main floor and the addition is not. and Proposed Resolution Case 94-17, Meisel April 12, 1994 Page 2 WHEREAS, two hardcover calculation sheets were received from the applicants. The first sheet reflects an overage of 2,111(+/-) square feet. The second sheet reflects conforming hardcover, however it also takes into consideration the abutting boulevard that is a privately held commons, and the cobblestone paver driveway at 50% impervious surface. The manufacturer of the paver system states the amount of percolation can vary from 5% to almost 100%, and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District, and WHEREAS, the existing garage on this parcel and the existing dwelling on the parcel to the east are both setback less than the proposed addition to the channel and are not likely to be removed, and WHEREAS, the addition would encroach approximately 17' closer to the channel than the existing structure and it is proposed in this location partially to maintain the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake and reduce the impact as much as possible, and WHEREAS, this property is uniquely situated, abutting both the main body of Lake Minnetonka and the navigable channel to Lost Lake, and WHEREAS, the DNR/State Rule (6115.330)states, in part, that structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to adjoining setbacks provided the proposed building site is not located in the 25 foot shore impact zone. The proposed addition encroaches I foot into the shore impact zone, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval of the variance request due to practical difficulty, with the following Findings of Fact: Unique circumstances apply to this property due to the fact that it abuts a channel that is not the main body of the lake and therefore the visual impact from the lake is less. The Proposed addition is conforming to the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake. This property abuts a private commons area or green space, and when considered reduces the impact of the nonconforming impervious surface. Proposed Resolution Case 94-17. Meisel April 12, 1994 Page 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby grant a 26 foot lakeshore setback variance to allow construction of an addition, and also hereby recognizes the following existing nonconforming setbacks to allow construction of the addition as proposed: Principal Structure: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: Cabin / Little House: Front N: Side W: Current: 41' Current: 7.9' encroachment Current: 34' Variance: 9' Variance: 22.9' Variance: 16' Current: 1.2' Current: 1' encroachment Variance: 18.8' Variance: 5' GaraQe (detached}: Channel E: Current: 14'(+/-) Variance: 36' Hardcover: Calculating the driveway at 50%, but excluding boulevard/commons property: .4% or 63.6 square feet va.riance is recognized. The allowable impervious surface coverage is 5,250 square feet. Approval of this variance is subject to the following conditions: a. The lowest floor elevation for the new addition shall be at 933.0 or above. An as-built survey detailing the floor elevation of the new addition shall be provided as required by the Building Official. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance 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 350:420. Proposed Resolution Case 94-17, Meisel April 12, 1994 Page ~t o 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 story kitchen/dining area addition, and approximate 21' x 8' expansion of second story to follow the existing footprint for master bedroom. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: Lots 22 and 23, Auditor's Subdivision No. 170. 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. J ,I III i · , ,11, , I MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 11, 1994 (~ASE #~4-17: A. PAUL & PATRICIA MI=ISI=L, 5501 BARTLL~I'T I~LVD.. LOT,~ 22 AUDITORS SUBD. NO. 170, PID 8'24-117-2423 0007. VARIANCE FOR ADDITION. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the applicant's request for variances to allow the construction of a single story addition consisting of a kitchen and dining area, and a second story addition approximately 21' x 8' over a portion of the existing for master bedroom. There are several existing nonconformities, as follows: Principal Structure: Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: Okay = 100' + to street. Okay = 40' to side. Existing Structure = 41' setback to OHW = 9' variance Proposed Addition = 24' setback to 0HW = 26' variance Encroachment of 7.9' to required 15' setback. 34' setback to OHW = 16' variance. Cabin ! Little House:. Front N: Side W: Channel E: Rear S: Lakeshore S: 1.2' setback to Bartlett = 18.8' variance. Chimney encroaches 1' over line (4' setback required). Okay. Okay. Okay. Garage (detached): Front N: Okay = 24.4'. Side W: Okay, Channel E: 14' +/- to OHW = 36' setback variance. Rear S: Okay. Lakeshore S: Okay. FLOODPLAIN: According to the survey, a portion of the existing crawl space of the dwelling is in the floodplain, however, the main floor and the addition is not. The proposed expansion is shown to be setback 24' to the channel that goes between Lake Minnetonka and Lost Lake on what would be the side yard with a 10 foot setback. The applicant has submitted two hardcover calculation sheets. The second sheet with conforming calculations considers the boulevard that is a privately held commons, and the cobblestone paver driveway at 50% impervious surface. The manufacturer of the paver system states the amount of percolation can vary from 5% to almost 100%. The addition would encroach approximately 17' closer to the channel than the existing structure and it is proposed in this location partially to maintain the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake and reduce the impact as much as possible. Ptsnning Commission I~inutes Case #94-17, Meisel Page 2 It is difficult to define a hardship in this case, the only other rationale for granting a variance is practical difficulty. When considering practical difficulty it must be found unreasonable to require conformance with the ordinance due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owner has no control. Practical difficulties may arise due to functional and aesthetic concerns. The owner states their need for the addition is to serve the use and function of the home and that due to the existing floor plan this is the only practical location. This property is uniquely situated abutting both the main body of Lake Minnetonka and the navigable channel to Lost Lake. The proposed addition is conforming to the normal shoreline setback of 50' to the south. All of the existing structures are encroaching into the required setbacks, however they are very well maintained and are not likely to be removed at this time. The DNR/State Rule (6115.330)states, in part, that structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to adjoining setbacks provided the proposed building site is not located in the 25 foot shore impact zone. The proposed addition encroaches 1 foot into the shore impact zone. The existing garage on this parcel and the existing dwelling on the parcel to the east are both setback less than the proposed addition to the channel and are not likely to be removed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommended the Planning Commission Recommend approval of the variance request due to practical difficulty, with the following Findings of Fact: Unique circumstances apply to this property due to the fact that it abuts a channel that is not the main body of the lake and therefore the visual impact from the lake is less. e The proposed addition is conforming to the 50 foot setback to the main body of the lake. This property abuts a private commons area or green space, and when considered reduces the impact of the nonconforming impervious surface. Mueller noted that there are very few other properties within Mound that are located on channels and have this unique type of property. Also, the use of the channel will not be hindered, and the view will not be further restricted as the existing garage is already closer to the channel than the proposed expansion. Voss commented that he does not have a problem with the addition as it does not encroach closer to the channel than the existing garage. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Mueller to recommend approval of the variance as recommended by staff, including the Findings of Fact. This case will be heard by the City Council on April 12, 1994. Jl FAX ~£z 472 0620 .' CITY OF'~10UND ANCHOR SCIENTIFI ~ 001 CITY' OF M6UND ~,,..~,L,~ /. ,.,.1' AR D COVE R CALC ULATi 0 N S NAME: 4OOnESS; EXISTING LOT ARE/{ EXISTING LOT AREA HOUSE: GARAGE: DRIVEWAY:" /7~o /75' SQFi' X 80% = ~zso. o .SQ Dr x 15%. = .z.~z_6-..,~ LEN~.G~TH "' 7.~. % 9.7 TOTAL 'GARAGE ' " DECK: X ":' (if impervious ;.;._ X = surface under ! deck = 100;[) ::~ TOTAL DECK .,.' TOTAL DECK '.7 ' ' ' OTHER:cwe,,,v -.;:'. z~-.z' 'X - ~o.z == TOTAL OTHER ***************.**** TOTAL PROPOSEDHARDCOVER ******************* MEET8 LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS"*- · * * · · · · · ,., ,., · · . Io24 NAME: ADDRESS: CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS EXISTING LOT AREA EXlSTI'NG LOT AREA ~.~ SQ FT X 30% = / ~.~ I, 1~ SQFT X 15% = LENGTH WIDTH HOUSE: X = X = GARAGE: DR~EWAY: DECK: (if impervious surface under deck = 100~) TOTAL HOUSE * fi.~. z. x 4o.s 9,0 x ~,~ TOTAL GARAGE t'-" X = ~P~ 30 "~, TOTAL DRIVEWAY ***************** X = X = TOTAL DECK ************* 12.0~ .? BY: TOTAL OTHER ******************* TOTAL PROPOSED HAROCOVER .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I :~3/3. (; I UNDER (OVER) ************************** :::~ ~ 7.--¥ MEETS LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * , ~.YES NO / I I GENERAL ZONING LNFOILMAT1ON SIIEET (frontage on an ~p~oved ~blic Zxisting ~t Width ~ ~ Z ~/~ -, Depth L~5 / ~/- .t~eetl I~x'rSTING AND/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS: FRONTI N S E SIDE: N S W A t~ SlDB: N S W # S w LA~SMOII~ I ~ IS I~~RT¥ CONFORNING? YES NO~ ? A¢CESSOA~ BUILDING tFRONT: FRONT: SIDE: SIDE: P~AR: YES ~ 0 I 0 0 0 Ii I ill ! · , ,ii, , Ii Il, MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1994 ./ QROINAN(~E AMENDMENT DISCUSSION; SECTION 350:760. SUBD, 4, TRUCK PARKING IN RE$1OENTIAL AREAS. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. He also handed out a copy of Brooklyn Park's revised ordinance on this topic which was given to him by the City Attorney. The proposed ordinance amendment as prepared by Mark Koegler is as follows: 'Section 350:760, Subd. 4. Truck Parkin¢~ in Residential Areas. Off- street parking facilities accessory to a residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of licensed and operable passenger automobiles, pickup trucks, and recreational vehicles. Additionally, no more than one (1) truck and/or trailer not to exceed the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds nor a height of nine (9) feet nor length of twenty-six (26) feet shall be allowed, provided they are stored at all times within an enclosed garage." Hanus questioned if the Planning Commission intends to require that commercial vans or pickup trucks be parked in garages. Mueller questioned if the weight restriction should be eliminated as some pickup trucks could weight 15,000 pounds. Bird stated that she is in favor of using conditional use permits to determine who can park a vehicle outside on their property as some areas may be more conducive to allow it. It was noted that neighbors move. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle to recommend to the City Council that the following proposed zoning amendment be presented for approvals at the required public hearings: "Section 350:760, Subd. 4. Truck Parkina in Residential p, reas. Off-street parking facilities accessory to a residential usa shall be utilized solely for the parking of licensed and operable passenger automobiles, pickup trucks, and recreational vehicles. Additionally, no more than one (1) ;gmmerclal truck, bus. =.-.al!or trailer not to exceed the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds nor a height of nine (9) feet nor length of twenty-dx (26) feet shall be allowed to be oarked outside., ;.-cvldcd ok,.,,, ...... ,.,, MOTION carried 5 to 1. Those in favor were: Clapsaddle, Mueller, Michael, Vosa, end Hanus. Bird opposed for reasons previously stated. This recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council on April 12, 1994. /030 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. rnm MEMORANDUM TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner DATE: March 22, 1994 SUBJECT: Truck Parking in Residential Areas At the Planning Commission meeting on March 14th, the Commission discussed the issue of truck parking in residential areas. At that meeting, there were almost as many opinions on issues as there were people present. In other words, creating a new truck parking provision is not an easy task! Among the comments offered that evening, the Commission expressed consensus that only one commercial vehicle should be allowed per lot, commercial vehicles housed in garages are acceptable (up to a certain size - ie. semi tractors), and that consideration should be given to regulating trucks by height and length. Attached, you will find a draft of a new ordinance provision which seeks to accomplish these primary objectives. As you will see, it does not restrict commercially licensed vehicles since many of the vehicles in question can be licensed as personal vehicles rather than commercial vehicles. The weight limit used is 12,000 pounds (Mfg. GVW). It is difficult to differentiate various vehicle types within an ordinance provision. For example, how do you differentiate or do you want to differentiate between a van that is used as part of a plumbing business compared to the same size van that is used for passenger transportation? This question as well as others that are likely to be raised will need to be addressed before a final ordinance amendment draft is ready for additional review by the City Council. In an attempt to help clarify the types of trucks regulated by the draft provision, examples of acceptable tracks and examples of those that would be excluded from residential areas are enclosed. Land Use / Environmental · Planning / Design 7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 ' (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160 Section 350:760, Subd. 4. Track Parkirtg in Residential Areas. Off-street parking facilities accessory to a residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of licensed and operable passenger automobiles, pickup tracks, and recreational vehicles. Additionally, no more than one (1) truck and/or trailer not to exceed the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds nor a height of nine (9) feet nor length of twenty-six (26) feet shall be allowed,(_pmvided they are stored at alt times' ~thi'~'an'enetosed garage.~ ASTRO CAR,GO VAN SPECIFICATIONS SERIES G'~ (1~.)' ~l~d (Mi/~i)' BIGINE AVAIl.ABILITY 2WD' 2WD' Regular-Body Edended-Body 5400 5600 1720-1785 1858-1922 SAE Net HP @ RPM Torque (Ib,-fl.) @ RPM 4 3L (262 cu. in.) V6 w/EFl" 165 @ 4000 235 @ 2000 S S TIUUISMISSiON AVAILABILITY 4-speed OD automatic: electronically controlled, with brake interlock S CllASSIS FEATURES Battery: 600 cold-cranking amps/hr. S E,~akes: power hydraulic, self-adjusting (front disc/rear drum) S - Anti-lock brake system: 4-wheel (ABS) S - Booster Vacuum - Fronl rotor size (in.)-- diameler and thickness 11.86 x 1.04 - Rear drum size (in.)-- diameter and width 9.5 x 2 Foel tank: 2/-gal. S Generator: lO0-amp S Locking rear differentia 0 Sleeting: power S Fronl suspension: indepefldenl coil springs - Axle capacity (lbs.) 2800 - Spring capacity (/bs.) 2800 ~:q, ear suspension: hypoid drive ~ composite leaf springs ....... S - Axle ca.city (1~.) 3150 - Spring cavity (lbs.) 2492 ,Vheels (in.) (4) 15 x 6.0 (1) 16 x 4.0 Standard lire~ -- all-season radiaP P265/75R-15 S S S Vacuum 11,86 x 1.04 9.5x2 S S 0 S S 2~ 2~ S 3150 3150 (4)15x6.0 (I) 16 x 4.0 P215~5R-15 -- Standan~ 0 -- O~nal I Afl. Wheet-Ofive model ava/table only as an incomplete vehicle; must be certified as a complete vehicle by a designated upfitler 2 Gross Vehicle Weight includes vehicle, pas~rs, equipment amy cargo. H~ '~i44/Rs require optional e~uipmont. 3 Paj4oad includes passengers, equipment and cargo Higher payloads require optional equipment Pa)4oad ratings are based on engineering test weights at lime o/printing and reflect all ava/table eng, Electronic Fuel Injectioo. $195 HP Enhanced Vortec V6 included w~th A/I-Wheel-Drive model (see note 1). 8 Includes T145/~00-16 compact.~oare tire. There are strong reasons why Astro is the best-selling mid-size ~T~O ~~O. cargo van in the are just a few. Astro is sized for maneuverability and fits most garages. There's plenty of room inside-- an Astro Extended-Body CargoVan gives you a full 200.1 cu. ft. of cargo space (with the front passenger seat removed). It's rear-wheel drive, with the highest towing potential in its class. Astro's 4.3 Liter Vortec V6 is the biggest V6 on the road. Safety features include astan- dard driver's facial air bag* and steel side-guard door beams. Astro. The mid-size van from Chevy Truck: the most depend- able, longest-lasting line of trucks on the road. "Always wear safety kits, evefl witt:, air bags Astro Cargo Van Custom Vinyl interior in Gray. G-CUTAI~/AY VAN CHASSIS SPECIFICATIONS .................... 125" Wheelbase 146" Wheelbase GVW range (lbs.)' ' ................................................................................................................................................................. 9200-10,000 9200-10 500 Payload range (lbs.)' ....................................................................... 3274-5482 2939-6121 ENGINE AVAILABII. JTY ....... ~E Net H? @ RPM "T~i~e 57L(350cu. in.)HD'V8Gasw/EFI, --- 190@4000 ............ ~'@2~i00 ................................................................. ~ .................................... $ ................... · ..... 7.4L (454.cu?.~ HD' V8 Gas W)EFi~ ' 230 @'3600 ............ ~85'~:i600 (~ ...................................... (~ ........................ 6.5L {400Cul in.)HD, v8 Diesel ..... 160 @3400 ................. ~90'@"i~00 ......................................................................... ~ ..................................... (~ ............................. TRANSMIssION AVAiLABi~ ...................................................................................................... ....................................... S' ................................... CHASSIS FEATURES Ba"e,~i 600'C°ici-cra.kJng ~,~'i. i,~ai ~'~,:/~'With °~'tio?/~i'~.~/;~;~i;~) ........................................................................................ ~ ....................................... § Brakes: p~w~i ,~'dra,,c.' ~ri:a~ju~iing '(~,:~'i ,,.'~r~a; ~,~) ......................................................................................................... ~ ....................................... § - Anti-lock brake system: 4-wheel (A~S) S S - Booster: Hydro-Power S S - Front rotor size (in.)-- diameter and thickness 12.5 x 1.54 12.5 x 1.54 - Rea! drum size (in.)-~.diameter and width 13.0 x 3.50 13 0 x 3 50 Fuel tank: 33-gal. .................................................................................................................................................................. S S Generator: lO0-amp ......................................................................................... S ..................... S Rear locking differential .......................................................................................... .............. 0 ........................ 0 Steering: power ....................................................................................................... ..................... S Front suspension: inde~ndent -- coil springs S S - Axle capacity dOs.) 4000 4000 - Spring oapa¢ity (/b$.) 4000 4000 Rear suspension: hypoid drive ~ leaf springs S S - Axle capacity (lbs.) 6000' 6000' - Spring capacity (lOs.) 6000' ............. 6000~ Wheels (in.) 16 x 6.5 16x65 Standard tires: all-season radial ........ -- single rear LT225/75R-16E - Standard tires: all-season radial -- dual rear - LT225/75R-16D S -- Standard. 0 -- O~ional. ~ Gross V~hicte Weight includes vehicle, passe~gers, equipment and cargo. Higher SVWR$ require optional equipment ~ Payload includes passenger~, equipment and cargo. Higher ~yleads equipment. Payload ratings are based on engir~fi~j test weights at time of printing and reflect all available engir~s. ~ He~/y-Duly Emissions. 4 Electronic Fuel Injection. 5 7500 with optional dual rears. ~ 7200 with optional dual N07~' Tire luad rang~: D (8-ply), ~ (~O-pty). G-CUTAWAY VAN EXTERIOR DIMENSIONS MODEL CG31303 CG31603 Rear Wheels.. ....... Single/DuaI Singl?/Dua.i' A Wheelbase (in.) 125.0 146.0 D Overall length (in.) (without rear bumped 199.4 220.5 C Maximum Width (in.) ....... 7912/9219 ....... Bumper to axle (in.} D Front 31.6 31.6 E Rear 43.0 43.0 F Cab to rear axle (in.) 75.7 96.7 G Cab't~iend°!.frarne (in.?i'iiiiii"iii1ii8171 'i I 81.7' G · The G30 Cutaway Van chassis is a rugged, work-proven platform ~-~T~A~ ~ ~~. for van bodies. i~ ~O~[N ~U~T~O~[~I. A great choice for delivery routes, this CheW cutaway van comes in two wheel- bases: 125" and 146", with stan- dard single or optional dual rear wheels available on both. Other important commercial advantages: big load-carrying capacities, with GVWRs ranging from 9200 lbs. to 10,500 lbs., 5.7L 190 HP Gas V8 standard, with a 7.4L 230 HP Gas V8 or 6.5L 160 HP Diesel engine optional. Front axle capacity is 4000 lbs. and rear axle capacity is 6000 lbs. with single rears, 7500 lbs. with optional dual rears. Chevy G-Cutaway Van. CREW-CAB CHASSIS-CAB SPECIFICATIONS SERIES ......... 3500 (l-ton) GVW range (/bs.)'-- 2WD (C Series] 9000-10.000 GVW range (lbs.)' -- 4x4 (KSeries) 9200-10000 Payload range (lbs.)'--2WD r'¢ Series) 3561-4816 Payload range (lbs.)' 4x4 (Kseries) 3370-4397 ENGINE AVAILABILITY SAE Net HP @ RPM Torque (lb-fl.)@ RPM 5.TL (350 cu. in.)HD'V8w/EFI' 190@4000 300@2400 ' "S ........... 7 4L (454cu. in)HD~ V8 w/EFI" 230@3600 385@ 1600 0 6 5L (400 cu. in.) HD' V8 Turbo-Diesel 190 @ 3400 385 @ 1700 0 TRANSMISSION AVAILABILITY 5-speed Heavy-Duty OD manual S 4-speed OD automatic: eleclronically controlled 0 Transfer case: NP 241 (8W4401 with dual rear wheels) (K Series only) S CHASSIS FEATURES Battery: 600 cold-cranking amps/hr. S Brakes, hydraulic: self-adjusting (front disc/rear drum) S - Anti-lock brake system: rear-wheel~' S - Boosler: Hy-Power S - Front rotor size (in.)-- diameter and Ihickness 12.5 x 1.26 - Rea[ drum size (in.)i- diame!er and width 13x35 Fuel tank: 34-ga!.~ S Generator: lO0-amp S .................... Locking rear differential 0 Sleering: power S :ton* suspensioni independent (cot/sprtn tn 2WO. totst°n in 4x4) S - 2WD axle capacity (lbs.) 4100 - 2WD spring capacity (lbs.) 4100 - 4x4 axle capacity (lbs.) 4500 - 4x4 torsion bar capacity (lbs.) 4500 :tear suspension: hypoid drive-- leaf springs i i . . S - Axle capacity (lbs.) 6084, .... ~eels (in.) 16.0 x 6.5 ~tandard lites: all-season radial LT245/75R-16E )ptional lites: dual rear all-season radial LT225/75R-16D -- Slandard. 0 -- Oplio~al f Gross Vehicle Weight includ~ vehicle, passenge's, equipment and cargo H~her GVWR$ re~Jire optional equipment. 2 Payload includes passengers, equipment and cargo Higher payloads require optic ~Tu~ment Payload rapngo are based on engineenng lest weighls a~ time of printing and reflect afl a~ailable enginas 3 Heavy-Ouly Emissions. 4 Electronic Fuel In~clion. $ Operational in 2VttO mode onl)~ $ 35 gal./of models with opt/~ I~$el power. ? 7500 lbs. with optional R05 dual rear wheels, axle and springs. ~OTE: Tire/nad range: O (8-ply), £ (IO-ply). lo 3 We set it up for you by mount- ing our 4-door, 6-passenger FULL-SIZE CREW-CAB CHASSIS'CAB. Crew-Cab RUGGED, ROOMY AND READY. body onto a strong and rugged Chew C/K3500 168.5 "-wheelbase chassis with 2WD, 4x4 and single or dual rear wheels. Then you add your dump, stake, tank, utility or other specialty body from an independent supplier. The resulting truck will carry your crew of up to six in roomy comfort and can tote a payload of up to 4816 lbs., when properly equipped (indudes passengers, cargo, body and equipment). Crew-Cab ChByenne vinyl interior in Blue. CHEVY VAN SPECIFICATIONS ,41to W GlO G20 G36 G30/CGP' G30/C&'W' SERIES ...... Payload range (lbs.)~ EN~T"' YAUBIUT~ ' SAE Net Hp @ RPM 7.4L (4~Cu. i~.) HD'V8 w~Fff 65L (4~. i~.)V8 Di~el 155 ~ ~ 65L (4~cu. in.) HD'V8 Diese! ~ 1~ ~ 34~ mAKM~i~ AVAUB~ 4-sp~d OD a~o~t c e ~trofii~lly controlled, w~th b~ake interlock CHRIS F~R~ Brake: ~r hyd~ulic, ~lf-adjusling (front di~r~r drum) - Anti-I~k b~ke s~t~: 4-~1 (ABS) - Front rotor size (in.) diameter and thickne~ - R~r drum s ze (in)-- d ameter and width Fuel tank (~1.) Generator: l~amp R~r I~ing differential Torque (lb.-A) @ RPM 230@2000 230 @ 2400 265 @ 2400 310 @ 2400 300 @ 2400 275 @ 1700 290@1700 6000 6600-6875 7100-7400 1579-2039 1629-2697 2433-2785 S S 0 0 - 0 86OO 92O0 3388-3932 3829-4288 S S S 0~ S S S " S S S S S S S S S 11.86 x 1 29 11.86 x 1.29 12.5 x 1.28 11 15x275 11.15 x 2.75 13.0x 2.5 22 22 22 S S S 0 0 0 ' S S S s S S S S S S S S S 12.5 x 1.28 12.5 x 1.28 13.0 x 2.5 13.0 x 2.5 22' 22' S S o 0 S S Steering: power ........................... S S S Front suspension: independent ~ mil Springs S S 3400 3400 4000 4000 4000 - Axle capacity (lbs.) 3400 3400 3400 3900 4000 - Spring capacity (lbs:) S S S S S Rear suspension: hypoid drive -- leaf springs 3500 3500 5700 5700 6000 - Axle capacity (lbs.) 3400 3800 5400 5400 6000 (!bs:) 15x6.0 i'5x6.0 !6x6.5 .16x6.5 16x6.5 T res P215/75R-15 a -season rad al S - - - Tires: P225/75R-15 all-season.radial 0 - - T res P235/75R-15 all-season radial · _ ....... S - - Tires: LT225/75R-16D all-seas~n radial _ 0" S S Tires: LT225/75R-16E all:season radial - s - Standarcl 0 -- Optional. I C6P and C6W are optional Heavy-Dub/Chassis Equipment PackaJes. 2 Gross Vehicle Weight includes vehicle, passengers, equipment and cargo. Higher GVW~ require optional equipment. 3 Payload ir passengers, equipment and cargo. Higher payloads rmTuire optional equipment. Payload ~iegs are t~ on e~gineering test results al time of printing and reflect all available engines. 4 Afl gasoltne engines have Electronic F~,I In,, 5 5.7L engine standard with 7400 GVW. ~ Heavy-Duly Emissions. ? Standard in 146'-wh~tbase model; optional in 125'-wheelbase models. ~ 33-gal. with 146'-wheelbase model. ~ 1,25'.wheelbase models only. IIOTE: Tir~ load rar~: 0 (8-ply), E (10-p~,). li.g'630 FORWARD CONTROL P-CHASSIS SPECIFICATIONS G~ ~noe (1~.~ ~11,~ // 12~141~ / %~ ~"~ ~/~-~':: .............................................................. ' ......................................... ~:~4~ ......................... ~:~ ................................. ~E AV~ ..................................................................................................... :: ~EN~ H~ ~'RPM ........... ~0~'//~::~:~'~' ~M ...................................................................................................................................................... 4.3L ¢~2~ -.~ j'H~. ~'~ w~i~ ......... i~'~'4~ ....................... ~'~'~ ~ .................................................................................................................................................................. S S 5.7L (3~ ~./n.) H~ 7.4L(4M~.'/n.)H~w~, ......... ~-~ ..................... ~.~.~ ...................................... : ....................................... Y ....................... ~:SL ¢~ ~.'~,.)~ ~ Di~ ~'~'~ ................... ~'b'~ ............................................................................... ~ ..................................... .~ ....................................... ~i~ ~v~ ..................................................................................................................................................................................... ~ ........................................ ~ oD %~i ~ ..................................... ~ ........................................ ~:~:oD.,~.c'::~,.~:~O:.~.~.~:~..~,,e~.~- ........................................................................................................... ~ ...................................... -~ ...................................... ~IS F~a~ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ~,e~ ~ ~,~'~,."¢~'~,~'b~i~'~,~7~i~¢;b) ............................................................................................. ~ ...................................... -~ ...................................... B~k~: PO~ hYdm~iiC, ~:~j~i~O"(/~'d/~~ ................................................................................................................... ~ ...................................... 'S' ...................................... - Booster D~I ~d~ulic ~r - Front ro~or size (/~.)-- d~er and thic~ 12.5 x 128 12.5 x 1 - R~r drum size (/n.)-- di~er and wi~ 13.0 x 3.5 - - R~r rotor s~ (/~.)-- di~er and thi~ - 125 x 1 ~ ~"k~ ~L ~ ................................... :'"S'": ................................... Generator: i~p S ....................................... ~ ...................................... ~a~inO~ Po~r S ..................................... S' ................... ' ..................... F~O"~U~i~,':'i~- ~ii'~p'r~,~ .................................................................................................................................... ~ ...................................... ~. ...................................... - ~le ~ci~ (/~.) - Spring ~ci~ (/~.) R~iO,~ ~'d~-~ai'~O~' ......................................................................................................................................... ~ ...................................... 'S' ........................................ - ~le ~ci~ (/~.) 7~ 11 ~ls fin.) ............................................................................................................................................... 16x6.0 19.5x6.0 S -- ~. 0 -- ~. ~ ~ v~/c~ ~e/ght/~1~ ~/~, ~ ~t ~ ~. N~ 6~ ~/~ ~/~/~/~. ~ I<~. 6~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~b ~/~. ~ p~/~/~ FORWARD CO.mOL ~ ~a~u~ ¢/,.~ .... ~25.o ............ ~'~:0 .......................... ~'~7:b ..................... ~ ~ ......... I ~mll length fin.) (.~ ~ar ~r)'" '2~4:8 ................ ~:8 ......................... ~:8 ........................ ~:4 .......... =.Ground.lo t~ of r~r ~ fin.) ............ 2~:9 .................... .~:!. ........................... ~..~ .......................... ~:~ .......... I I ii ,i~, I ii, The truck-tough 1994 Forward Control P-Chassis gives you the FORWARD CONTROL P-CHASSIS. durability of FOUNDATION FOR SUCCESS. a ladder-type frame plus the smooth ride of independent coil spring front suspension. Now available with an optional 6.5 Liter Diesel HD V8, it's an ideal foundation for your next forward control vans. With GVW ratings up to 14,100 lbs.* and four wheelbases-- 125", 133", 157" and 178"- the Forward Control P-Chassis is a proven commercial performer you'll find easy to adapt to a wide range of applications. · 14,500-1b. G'PA/R avai/al~le attn scl~ool bt~ cflas~is. Chevy Forward Control P.Chassis. C/l( Ci'i'ASSlS'l~AB SPECIFICATIONS SERIES GVW fang@ (lbs.)' 2 2WD (C Series) ~6P~ (3/d-ton)' ~.VW. range (Ibs.)'~ 4x4 (K Series) Payload ra~ge'~lbs.~o'2 ~'~'Series) R~g2Cab ....................................... 8600 4010-4574 ;:'ayload range (lbs.)*-- 4x4 (KSeri~) Reg.-Cab ......... 3547-4209 ERe, litE AVAIl. ABILITY. .... SAE Nef HP @ RPM '" Torque· (IblLlt.) @ RPM .TL (350 cu. ;n.] HD, V8 w/Eh' 190@ 40OO 30O @ 240O S ?.4L (454cu. in.)HD' V8 w/EFI' 230 @ 3600 385 @ 1600 0 ..SL HD, VS'Tu Diesel@·3 0o ........ 385 @·1 0o ........ 0 111ANSMiSSlON AvAuBiLiTY ..... . ....... 5-speed Heavy-DutY OD manual $ ~speed OoiaufQ~'ti¢:'el~rOniCaily controli~ ............. 0 ~ransfer case (KS@lies only]' NP 241 Or 'with optional'dual rear wheels, 8W4401 S mASSm Fr~.mR[s ...... , 3500 f~-ton) I0,00O-11,00O 10.0O0-12.0O0 4488-G044 4103-G0O2 3500 (l-ton)' 90O0-10.00O 9200-10,000 4308-4916 4693-5295 C3500 HD (1- 15,0o0 q33~ S S S 0 0 0 0 0 0 S S S 0 0 0 S _ 5rakes, hydraulic: self-adjusting (front diSC/rear #~um) ........................ S S - Anti-lock brake system: rear-wheeF S S S' S' S S S S - 8oosler: dual S S S S - Front rotor size (in.)-- diameter and thickness 12.50 x 1.28 12.50 x 1.28 1250 x 150 14.25 x 1.5~ - Rear drum size (in.)-- diameler and width ~uel tank 13.00x2.50 13.00x2.50 13.00x3.50 13.75x 1.5 - Regular frame: 34-gal. S S - Straight frame: 22-gal. - - Geneiator: io0-amp - - S S Rear locking differential S S S S S S S ~ronl suspension': i~dependefll' ~cm7 SPring in' 2wOi io/s)on' bar in 4x4) .......... S S S S ' - 2WD axle capacity (lbs.) 3800 3800 4100 5000 - 2WD spring capacity (lbs.) 3600 3600 4100 5000 - 4x4 axle capacity (lbs.) 4250 4250 _ - 4x4 torsion bar capacity (lbs.) 4500 3750 3750 4500 _ Rear suspension: hypoid drive-- leaf springs' S S - 2WD axle capacity (lbs): dual rears S - 2WD spring capacity (lbs.).. dual rears 6084/- 6084/7500 7500 - 4x4 axle capacity (lbs.),. dual rears 11,00O 60001 - 6084/7500 8600 - - 4x4 torsion bar capacity (Ibs.).'dual rears 16.0x 6.5 ' 16.0 x 6.5 " 16.0x 6.5 S'landard lites:' ali-S~s°"'iadial' ~ 2wD LT245/7~R~i6E ...... LT245/75R.16E LT225/75R.16D 225/70R.19.~ ~tandard (ireS: afl-s~asod radial ~ 4x4 LT245/75R-i6E .... ET245f/;SR_16E LT225/75R-16D 19.5~ 6.0, Jpt~onal hres.! See your Chevy Truck dealer for sizes'and model reStrictions. ' ' ~ -- Sta~arrl 0 --Oplional. ! Regular Frame (model 30903). ~ Straight Frame (models $1003 and 31403] ~ Gross Vehicle Weigh/includes vehicle, p~rs, equipment and cargo. Higl~r GVWRs require optional equ · Payload includes passengers, equipment and cargo. Higher payloads require optional equipment. Payload ratings are based on engineering lest weights at time of printing and reflect all available engines. $ Heavy-Duty EmL · £1ectron~c Fu~I Injection. ? Operational in 2WD mode only. ~ Four-wheel disc brakes. ~ Front suspension on C3500 HO has/-beam leaf springs. IIITE: Tk~ loaf range: C (6-p~,), O (&ply), E (10-ply), F (12-ply). A C/K2500 or 3500 Chassis- Cab with a comfortable Chew FULL-SIZE CHASSIS-CABS Regular-Cab and your van, AND HD CHASSIS-CABe retriever, dump, BIG GVWRS, BIG COMFORTe stake or other commercial body could be an ideal combination. Especially if GVWRs up to 11,000 lbs. (2WD) or 12,000 lbs. (4x4) are important. Need even more? Meet the C3500 HD: with 15,000-lb. GVWR and a solid I-beam, 5000-lb. capacity, front axle/leaf spring front suspension. All 3500 Series straight-rail frame Chassis-Cabs have dual rear wheels and parallel, flat-top frame rails with the 34" spacing most body suppliers prefer. C3500 Chevy ZWD Reguler-Cnh C~nssis. Cab in Victory Red with stahe hody provided by en Independent supplier. Subd. 2 c. 'Vehicles licensed with .Disability_ Plates, or displaying e Disability Parking Certificate. d. One-ton passenger vans used solely for transporting persons. Vehicles with Minnesota license plates carrying a designation of "SB" (school bus). Section 725:33. Snow. No person, except a physician on an emergency call, shall park or leave a vehicle on any street when there is more than two inches of snow on the street and snow is falling or has fallen within the previous 24 hours or snow ia blowing or has been blowing within the previous 24 hours. Section 725:36. For Sale or Washlna_. No person shall park a vehicle upon any roadway for the principal purpose of displaying such vehicle for sale, washing, greasing or repairing such vehicle except repairs necessitated by an emergency. Section 725:39. Subd. 1. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to erect signs indicating no parking upon either or both sides of any street adjacent to any school property when such parking would, in his opinion, interfere with traffic or create a hazardous situation. Subd. 2. When official signs are erected indicating no parking upon either side of street adjacent to any school property as authorized herein, no person shall park a vehicle in any such designated place. Section 725:42. Narrow Streets. Subd. 1. The Engineer is hereby authorized to erect signs indicating no parking upon any street when the width of the roadway does not exceed 20 feet, or upon one side of a street as indicated by such signs when the width of the roadway does not exceed 30 feet or for snow removal. Subd. 2. When official signs prohibiting parking are erected as authorized herein, no person shall park a vehicle upon any such street in violation of any auch sign. Section 725:45. One-Way Streets. In the event a highway includes two or more separate roadways and traffic is restricted to one direction upon any such roadway, no person shall stand or park a vehicle upon the left-hand side of such one-way roadway unless signs are erected to permit such standing or parking. The Engineer is authorized to determine when standing or parking may be permitted upon the left-hand side of any such one-way roadway and to erect signs giving notice thereof. ~ {) l~Section 725.32 added by Ordinance #1993-720 CC: ?L/~I',I~I~G CO~,~T_SSIO~ 3-28-9/4. 6action 725:30 Section 725:30. ~ILI~, No person except e physician on an emergency call shall park e vehicle on any street between the hours of 2 a.m. end 5 a.m. of any day from October 15th in one calendar year until April 15th in the following calendar year. Section 725:31.24 Hour Limitation. No person shall perk e vehicle on any street in the CH or a period longer than twenty-four (24} consecutive hours. Section 725.32. Truck. Bus. Trailer. and Eaui_oment Perkinp In Residential Areas. No per~on shall park and/or store on any street immediately in front of e property used es · place of residence, and on the same side of the street as a property that Is used as a place of residence, any commercial vehicle, or any trailer, farm vehicle or farm equipment, or construction equipment except as provided below. Subd. 1. For the purpose of this section, a commercial vehicle shall be defined as: Any vehicle with Minnesota license plates carrying a designatin of "BY" (bus, except es provided below), "CZ" (commercial zone truck); or Any vehicle with Minnesota license plates carrying a designation of "Y" (truck with Minnesota base plate) or "T" (farm truck), and displaying on the lower right corner of the license plate any gross vehicle weight designation of "F" through "T"; or c. Any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight in excess of 9,(XX) lbs. Commercial vehicles described above shall include but are not limited to buses, dump trucks, tow trucks, truck-tractors, step vans, cube vans, delivery trucks and the like. Subd. 2. Commercial vehicles, trailers, farm vehicles, farm equipment, and construction equipment shall be subject to ell other provisions of this ordinance; however, the prohibitions of this Section shall not apply to the following: Commercial vehicles that are actually in the process of being loaded or unloaded in the due course of business. Commercial vehicles that ere directly ancillary to construction end parked within 1,000 feet of the related construction site. Section 725:30 amended by Ordinance #1983-424(A) Section 725:31 added by Ordinance #1983-424{A) Section 725.32 added by Ordinance #1993-720 Je,5'O MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 14, 1994 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DISCUSSION: SECTION 350:760, SUBD. 4, TRUCK PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREA~ Photographs of commercial vehicles currently being parked within residential areas in the City of Mound were distributed to the Commissioners for viewing. The Commission discussed what types of vehicles would be acceptable in residential zones, and which ones are not. They also discussed if vehicles should be allowed in residential areas if they are stored within a garage. Jensen commented, that in her opinion, if the vehicle is the same type of vehicles that can be purchased for personal use, such as a van, or a pick-up, it should be allowed to be stored outside, even if it is commercially licensed; any other larger type truck should be required to be stored within a garage, and semi trucks should not be allowed at all. Following is a summary of suggested revisions for the ordinance: Allow only I vehicle per parcel. Commercial trucks that are comparable to vehicles used for personal use, such as pick-up trucks or vans, should be allowed to be stored outside in residential zones. Commercial trucks may be allowed to be parked in a residential zone if they are housed within a garage. Could regulate by height (no more than 10 to 12 feet), and length (24 to 26 feet long). Enforce on a complaint basis. Semi trucks are not acceptable. The City Planner will draft a revised ordinance for review by the Planning Commission at their meeting on March 28, 1994. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1994 pROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: TIME LIMITS ON BUILDING COMPLETIONS. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. The following terminology was proposed: "Section 300:10, Subd. 5. Time Limits on Buildina Comoletior}. Al work required to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations to the exterior of any building or structure in any district shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit issuance. The person obtaining the permit and the owner of the property shall be responsible for this completion. A violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor offense. The City Council may extend the time for completion upon written request of the permittee, establishing to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council that circumstances beyond the control of the permittee prevented completion of the work for which the permit was granted. The extension shall be requested not less than thirty (30) business days prior to the end of the one- year period." The Building Official added that he would also like this section to be retro-active. Hanus stated that the way this proposal is written, it sounds like all work needs to be completed, including decks, stoops, etc. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Muellar, to accept the proposed ordinance amendment for Time Umits on Building Completions, with the following changes: 'All pxterior work required to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations {e-tke-ex~*ede~ of any building or structure in any district shall... · MOTION carried unanimously. The Planning Commission gave the Building Official their blessing to check with the City Attorney on the issue of making the ordinance retro-active. Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. mD To: Mound Planning Commission From: Mark Koegler, City Planner Date: March 10, 1994 Subject: Time Limits on Building Completion On February 28th, the Planning Commission reviewed the City Council's request to prepare an ordinance regulating building completion. The Planning Commission's recommendations were as follows: 1) Only the exterior of buildings should be regulated 2) The provisions should apply to all types of structures, and 3) The time frame should be limited to one (1) year. These recommendations were the basis for the attached draft amendment which has been reviewed by the City Attorney. The Planning Commission should review this draft amendment and determine if further analysis is needed. It the di'aft is acceptable, the Planning Commission will need to hold a public hearing on the issue. The issue can then be referred to the City Council for final action. Enclosure Land Use / Environmental · Planning / Design 7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160 Section 300:10. Building Pemxits, Application. Subd. 5. Time Limits on Building Completion. All work required to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations to the exteriors of any building or structure in any district shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit issuance. The person obtaining the pemait and the owner of the property shall be responsible for this completion. A violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor offense. The City Council may extend the time for completion upon written request of the permittee, establishing to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council that circumstances beyond the control of the permittee prevented completion of the work for which the permit was granted. The extension shall be requested not less than thirty (30) business days prior to the end of the one-year period. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 28, 1994 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: TIME LIMITS ON BUILDIN~ COMPLETIONS, City Planner, Mark Koegler, explained that the City Council requested the Planning Commission further examine the issue of restricting the amount of time allowed for building completion. This issue was raised because there have been a number of instances where building construction has been started but takes a number of years to complete. A survey conducted by White Bear Lake on this issue was reviewed by staff. The survey indicated that communities generally approach this issue in one of three ways: 1) Ordinance provisions are enacted controlling the time allowed for completion of the exterior of the building, 2) Ordinance provisions require total building completion with specified time limits, or 3) Communities employ the Uniform Building Code (UBC) provisions which allow construction to continue indefinitely provided that the work is not abandoned for a continuous period exceeding 180 days. Mound currently handles building completion by employing the UBC provisions. Issues the City Council would like the Planning Commission to consider include: 1) should such an ordinance apply only to the exterior finish of a building or should it regulate total completion? 2) Should such provisions apply to all types of structures including residential, commercial and industrial buildings as well as accessory structure? 3) How much time should be allowed for building completion? Based on comments offered during the City Council discussion, the Council is generally leaning toward regulating exterior completions only, applying such provisions to residential structures only, and allowing a one year completion time. Does the Planning Commission concur with this direction? Staff confirmed that if the ordinance was amended and someone did not finish the exterior in the required time, the type of enforcement used would be to issue a citation. Weiland would like to require the exterior to be done within 6 months and then enforcement be handled administratively. The Building Official noted that he would prefer a time period of 1 year for completion of the entire exterior (except paint). Michael is in favor of 6 months, for both residential and business, and exterior only. Sutherland noted that the commercial businesses have not been a problem, however, if the Commission would like commercial included, that is okay. Sutherland also requested that a clause be included that makes the ordinance amendment retroactive. Johnson is in favor of allowing I year for completion, he feels 6 months is too short. It was agreed that accessory buildings should be included. Koegler will draft language and bring it back to the Commission. III II II, MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1994 ~OPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT; SECTION 330:120. DESIGN STANDARD~. PUBLIC SITES AND OPEN SPACES AND PARK LAND DEDICATION. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. The report concluded that the Planning Commission needs to consider whether Mound's residential park fees need to be revised and if modifications need to be made regarding the fees on lots containing existing structures. Hanus suggested that the park fees be charged per units constructed as this is when the demand on the park system increases. It was noted that this it would be difficult to keep track of who and when a park fee is due; also, the burden of the park fee should lie with the developer, not the builder/owner. The secretary reviewed a motion made by the Planning Commission on May 10, 1993, as follows: "MOTION made by Meyer, seconded by Hanus to inform the City Council that the Planning Commission is in favor of charging a park dedication fee only for newly created buildable lots. Motion carried unanimously." MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsadclle, to recommend to the City Council that Section 330:120 of the City Code relating to Park Dedication fees be amended for minor subdivisions so that only the newly created buildable lots be charged a park dedication fee (i.e. one lot being split into two should pay only one fee; or one lot being divided into three lots should only pay two fees). Motion carried unanimously. There was some discussion regarding the Teal Pointe subdivision and why they were charged only $500 per lot versus 10% of the market value. Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. BD TO: Mound Planning Commission FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner DATE: March 22, 1994 SUBJECT: Park Dedication The City Council recently directed staff to investigate the park dedication requirements found in Mound's Subdivision Ordinance. The intent of this request was to review the existing requirements focusing on park dedication issues that have occurred over the past few years. The City Council feels that modifications to this code may be needed and has asked for the Planning Commission's input and recommendation. Over the past few years, two primary issues have arisen regarding residential park dedication requirements. They are: 1) The amount charged, and 2) Collection of park fees for minor subdivisions. Mound's current park dedication requirements are found in Section 330:120 of the City Code. The ordinance requires park dedication either in the form of land or cash in lieu of land equivalent to 10 percent of the fair market value of the land. This includes a 10% residential park dedication or cash in lieu of land in an amount not less than $500 per lot. Subdivision 3 of Section 330:120, defines a minor subdivision and establishes a fee structure. This provision states: "A minor subdivision is a case where three residential lots or less are to be subdivided or created by a division and in those minor subdivisions the park land dedication shall be pursuant to a schedule to be set by resolution of the Council. In no case shall the cash dedication fee for minor subdivisions be less than five hundred dollars ($500) per lot being created." Application of this provision has resulted in the payment of park fees for each lot that is part of a subdivision. For example, if a land owner has a 20,000 square foot parcel and subdivides two I0,000 square foot lots, two park fees are collected, even if a home exists on one of the parcels at the time of subdivision. Another example, if a land owner had two lots of record that were combined in the past, the separation or re-division of those parcels would result in the collection of two park fees. Both members of the Planning Commission and City Council have questioned the collection of a park fee for the lot containing the existing structure. Both groups have supported park fees for newly created lots. laY/ /and Use/Environmenrd , Plannirtg/Design 73001~etroBoulentd/SuJte525 , ~rmeapolis, l~inn~so~ 5~439 ' (612)835-9960 . F~x: (612) 835.3160 II 612-835-3160 MU I b l N~ I Ut~ KU~-L~Lt'K ,.,11:361 Park Dedication Memorandum March 22, 1993 Page 2 In order to determine if Mound's Park Dedication requirements for residential properties and fees associated with the subdivision of land are consistent with other communities, a survey of several municipalities and their requirements for park dedication wa~ conducted. The results are provided in the chart below: City Land Dedication for Cash D~lica6on for Minor Subdivisions of Residential Subdivisions Residential Subdivisions Land Subjec~ to a Fee Mound 10% 10% of Total Fair Market 1. All vacant lots Value 2. Any lot with an existing structure Hopkins 10% (0-..5 urfit/acre) $200 Apartments or 1. All vacant lots I1% (6-10 unit/acre Towohomes (lots with an existing 12% (11-15 unit/acre) $500 Single/Two family Unit structure are not 13% (16+ unit/acre) chargr, xi) Shorewood 8% $?50/unit 1. All vacant lots (lots with an existing charged) Shoreview 10% of total area to be 10% maximum of fair market 1. Only ne~ vacant platted value of land to be developed lots Tonka Bay 10% Pair Market Value 1. Only ~ew vacant lots Minnetonka Reasonable portion of the $400/unit for Single-family 1. Only ne_~w vacant site; not less than 10% lots $300/unit for Townhomes/Duplexes $250/unit for Apartments _ Wayzata 7% $300 or 7% of land value for 1. All vacant lots Single Family/other (lots with aa existing Residential structure are not $850 or 7% of land value for charged) Two Family Park Dedication Memorandum March 22, 1993 Page 3 Minnetrista The greater of 1) proposed dwelling units/acre or 2) zoned density DU/A Acres/DU % 0-.1 10+ 2.5 .1-.2 5-10 2.5 .2-.5 1-5 5 1-2 I 10 2-3 1/2. I ! 3-4 1/3 12 4-5 1/4 13 5-6 !/5 14 6-7 1/6 15 Equivalent Market Value 1. All vacant lots 2. Any lot with an As the chart above indicates, residential park dedication fees for both land and cash in lieu of land varY from community to community. Specifically, land dedication requirements range from 2.$%-15%. Some of the communities in the "cash dedication" category use market value to determine a cash fee. Comparisons cannot be made for this method. However, of those communities that can be compared, park dedication fees range from $300-$800 and 7- 10%. These ranges indicate Mound's fees for residential properties tend to be "average" based on these surveyed communities. Of these communities, only one other community besides Mound charges park dedication fees on subdivided properties containing an existing structure. In this regard, Mound is inconsistent with the majority of the communities surveyed. However, Mound is consistent to the majority of communities charging park fees for existing vacant lots that have been subdivided. In conclusion, the City Council has determined there is a need to look at the current Code regarding park dedication. Mound's park dedication fees seem to be "average", and somewhat consistent with several of the communities surveyed. However, Mound's collection of park fees for subdivided properties containing an existing structure is inconsistent with the majority of the other communities surveyed. Based on the information presented above, the Planning Commission needs to consider whether Mound's residential park fees need to be revised and ff modifications need to be made regarding the fees on lots containing existing structures. c:xmound~9~-l~urb Mound City Code Section 330:120 Section 330~120. s 't s e 9nd Park Land Dedication Subd. 1. ~ublic Sites and open Space;. Where a proposed playground other public site shown on the adopted park, . , or . . Comprehensive Plan or official map ls embraced, in part or in whole, by a boundary of a proposed subdivision and such public sites are not dedicated to the City, such public ground shall be shown as reserved land on the preliminary plat to allow the City the opportunity to consider and take action toward acquisition of such public ground or park by purchase or other means prior to approval of the final plat. Subd. 2. Park Land Dedication~ In every plat, replat, or subdivision of land allowing development for residential, commercial, industrial, or other uses or combination thereof, or in a planned development area, or where a waiver or variance is granted, a reasonable portion of such land and/or cash shall be set aside and dedicated by the tract owner or owners to the general public as open space for park and playground purposes or public ponds except where adjustments to lot lines do not create additional lots. Ten (10) percent of the property may be used for residential, multiple-family residential, commercial business or industrial purposes shall be deemed a reasonable portion. Said land shall be suitable for public use as parks and playgrounds or for one of the aforementioned described purposes, and the City shall not be required to accept land which will not be usable for parks and playgrounds or which would require extensive expenditures on the part of the public to make them usable. Subd. 3. At the city's option, except for minor subdivisions as herein defined, the subdivider shall contribute an equivalent amount of cash, in lieu of all or a portion of the land which the City may require such owner to dedicate pursuant to Subd. 2 hereof, in accordance with the schedule to be set by resolution of the Council which cash contribution shall be a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total fair market value of the land being divided. In no case shall the dedication in cash be less than $500 for each lot being created. A minor subdivision is a case where three residential lots or less are to be subdivided or created by a division and in those minor subdivisions the park land dedication shall be pursuant to a schedule to be set by resolution of the Council. In no case shall the cash dedication fee for minor subdivisions be less than five hundred dollars ($500) per lot being created. Subd. 4. Where the owner provides for public use, neighborhood park amenities such as, but not limited to, tennis courts, ball fields, open space or other recreational 6-26-89 Mound City Code Section 330:125 facilities, the City may reduce the amount of land to be dedicated or the cash contribution in lieu of the facilities Subd. 5. Cash contributions required by Subd. 3 hereof shall be made prior to filing the final plat. Subd. 6. This section shall not apply to the division of platted lots which are being combined with other existing lots to increase the lot sizes to conform to the larger sized lots required by the Zoning Ordinance. This exception is in recognition of the need to put undersized lots together to bring them into conformance with zoning requirements adopted after the original subdivision of properties, many of which predate any zoning regulations of the City. (ORD #30-1989 - 6-26-89) Section 330:125. Road Namipq add House Numbering. Subd. 1. Road DesiqnatioDs. The use of road, street, avenue, parkway, trail, drive, boulevard, way, court, terrace, and circle suffixes shall be used in identifying location and direction of roads. Roads shall be designated as follows: Roads that both originate and terminate on the same street are circles. be e® Cul-de-sacs (dead ends) are named courts. A road shall hay. only one name for its entire length. No two roads shall be named alike, that is, have the same name or have similar sounding names. The name of a road will change only if the road changes direction 45 degrees or more at the point if deviation. If the proposed street is an extension of an existing named street, that name shall be used. In all other cases, the name of any street previously used within the county shall not be used unless such use is consistent with the county or community street naming system. ge Street names shall not include the word "wood" (i.e. Gumwood, Maywood, etc.). Io1,,I 6-26-89 I[ I itl i n , ,~, , MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 10, 1993 PARK DEDICATION FEE The Commission continued discussion on this issue and the general consensus was that on lot splits the fee should only apply to newly created buildable lots, and lots with houses existing on them should not be charged. Sutherland commented that he had discussed this issue with the City Planner from Prior Lake and they have criteria they use to determine fees based on the amount of park property existing in the area where the subdivision is proposed. He also commented that our ordinance may exceed the maximum 10 percent of the lot value we are allowed to collect by State law. MOTION made by Meyer, seconded My Hanus to inform the City council that the Planning Commission is in favor of charging a park dedication fee only for newly created buildable lots. Motion carried unanimously. MINIYI'ES OF A MEETING OF THE MO~ ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMI~RSION ':"~ ......JULY 8, 1993 pARK DEDICATION FEESt Secretary, Peggy James, explained that the City Council, at their meeting on April 13, 1993, requested that the Park and Planning Commission provide input and opinions on the park dedication fee ordinance relating to minor subdivisions. She reviewed that the City Council was advised by the City Attorney, that the way the ordinance is written, for a subdivision of one lot into two, two park dedication fees must be charged, even when one of the lots remains with a house on it. The Planning Commission, at their meeting on May 10, 1993 recommended that a park dedication fee be charged only for newly created "buildable" lots. Ahrens stated, in her opinion, only one fee should be collected for each newly created lot, regardless if there is an existing house; for instance, there is one vacant lot being divided into two lots therefore only one fee should be collected, or if there is one lot being divided into three lots only two fees should be collected. Casey believes the whole idea of the park dedication requirement is to create green space for developments, either by dedicating land or a fee which can be designated to improve existing park lands. MOTION made by Ahrens to recommended that a park dedication fee be charged for only those additional lots beinq created, above and beyond the existing lot. For example, where one lot becomes two lots, one fee of $500 should be paid, or where one lot becomes three lots, two fees totalling $1,000 should be charged, regardless if there is an existing dwelling. The reason being that an owner of an existing lot would not be required to pay a park dedication fee to build a house if they did not subdivide their property. Motion seconded by Schmidt. Motion carried 3 to 2. Those in favor were Ahrens, Andersen and Byrnes. Casey and Andersen opposed. Casey commented that he would like the flexibility that the fee be "no less than $500". Casey referred to Subdivision 3, and commented that he would like to see this section amended for clarification. Motion made by Casey to recommend the following amended to City Code Section 330:120, Subd. 3, 0'. . · dedicate pursuant to Subd. 2 hereof, in accordance with the schedule to bo set by resolution of the Council which cash contribution shall.be e--~t~hr~~ of ten percent (10%) of tho total fair market value of the land being divided ......-- -h-l~ '~- ~-~--t~-- z_ be . or b0 less than $500 for each lot being created.,, Ahrens seconded the motion. Ahrens questioned Casey if he would consider a friendly amendment to the motion which would give the city the discretion to choose how to charge the park dedication fee, be it 10% of the value or $500 per lot. Casey did not accept the amendment. Notion failed I to 4. Casey was in favor. Those opposed were Ahrens, Andersen, Byrnes, and Schmidt. WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS /NDE. PENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 277 5600 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55.364 Michael (3. Looby, Director of Communi~ Education and Services 472-034! 3124194 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Jim Fackler, City of Mound ~ Jim Glasoe, Recreation Coordinator, ',/ \ 1994 Summer Parks and Iffe~td Programs "~ Thanks for your phone ~ .t~i.'$ m.o.ming relative _ .p E.S lbest can d Lifeguard programs for 1994. I will at-tempt to answer your qu~u,.,n:, ,,~ · With respect to the request for a breakdown of the C.E. Staff time items, I offer the following. The item is perhaps poorly named and program coordination might better describe it. Some of the items that are included in the eoordin.ation are ti .m.e that I. _sq?n,d_.,__ ,.~,~. · in , supervasmg ano evaluating /armwx~matelv 175-200 hours) annually .p~g ..... ~. ........... ":"h [~,",~-,2i:, and lifeguard orol~rams In addition, mose oonars.go are not customarily ]den.tifi~..m con. __t~__t~.e~s_L.S.o~m~.e.f~~,?tw~i.e~h ~eetails the park preparation, printing and _mamng o.i our ou..m,ls~., ,.~,~-~._,~_~__._~,,~ ..... I u ano account~ and life uard rograms, t, crsonnc, pa . . fo, mp_ oy , ua~-~,.~, ~ -., ' ' fl er oevelo merit iunctlons Ior att handling of phone calls, word processing functions, y P staff projects. Rationale for Youth Center designated as park site, please sec thc attached sheet. Lifeguard in .service time represe, nts hou,~_~ ..... s, first .:A ,~D~ o,,,~ ,.meroencv nroceaures i nc mmli~ t,, a F,-l~"' "_"~ '_'"0 ~. · ._. . mu, ~z ,x ,~.-. -, o r ' 'mentm WltnOUI llfe~uard trainin~ certi~c~te through Red Cross programs c~..be .dem.. . training? What happens is that most staff do not tram m me wrater, aha therefore, are not conditioned to perform in an emergency. Further, the test for a lifesaving certificate is knowledge and skill attainment. In the water, under emergency conditions, can be critical if inservice training does not occur each summer. If you have any questions, please call me 472-0343. I Look forward to working with you again this Summer. CC: Mike Looby, Director of Community Education and Services Westonka Youth Drop-In Center Designated Park Site for Summer 1994 1. The Westonka Youth Drop-In Center is currently serving: a. Average of 40 youth per time open b. Youth ranging in ages from 5th through 12th grade c. Approximately 50% of the youth utilizing the Drop-In Center are in grades 5-8 1. Westonka youth in grades 5 through 12 need: A public site where they can meet and socialize A safe and healthy environment in which to meet and socialize Opportunities to engage in meaningful activities Opportunities to have control over and to take responsibility for their actions Avenues to learn and practice "responsible leadership" Supervised activities available in the afternoon and evening 1. The Westonka Youth Drop-In Center provides: a. Public site where youth in grades 5-12 can meet and socialize b. Safe and chemically free environment c. Supervised activities d. A hub for Youth Service and Youth Leadership activities for youth in grades 5-12 that will be continued through the summer months e. Avenues for positive interaction with adults in the community Iot.$ II j Iii i ,J , ,~ , IVIINUTF-S OF A I~_~.TING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPAOE COMMISSION MARCH 10, 1G94 Present were: Chair Carolyn Schmidt, Vice Chair Tom Casey, Commissioners Marilyn Byrnes, Peter Meyer, David Steinbring, Janis Geffre, and Mary Goode, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, and Secretary Peggy James. Commissioner Bill Darling and Council Representative Andrea Ahrens were absent and excused. MOTION made by Casey seconded by Byrnes to approve the Park end Open Space Commission Minutes of February 10, 1994 as written. Motion carried unanimously. _1994 SUMMER PARKS AND BEAQH PROGRAMS; Jim Glasoe, Recreation Coordinator for Westonka Community Education and Services reviewed the history of the parks and beach programs for the benefit of the new Park Commissioners. He reviewed the proposed 1994 budget for the Parks Program and denoted changes from the 1993 budget. The 1994 budget reflects a 2 percent increase. Glasoe noted that monies previously allocated for the "evening parks program" held at Mound Bay Park have been shifted to pay for "evening program staff" for the Westonka Drop In Youth Center. Glasoe stated that there has been higher demand for staff people at the Drop In Youth Center than there has been for the evening parks program. The Commission requested that Glasoe prepare figures at the end of this season reflecting what percent of Westonka School students utilize the Parks Program. Schmidt noted that in 1995 the Park Commission hopes to get some more volleyball courts within the parks, and also a public skating rink. She suggested that the youth at the drop in center could help coordinate volleyball tournaments and/or activities involving the skating rink. Glasoe believes it will be feasible for Community Services, the City of Mound, and the Hockey Boosters to work together and develop a skating rink at the softball fields by the Pond. He would hope to have both open skating and the hockey rink. He explained that the Hockey Boosters purchased the boards which they used this last year from the City of Wayzata, and they have also purchased a light. Glasoe reviewed the 1994 proposed cost estimates for the Beach Program, and noted that the only significant change was the additional lifeguard hours at Centerview Beach. The increase in attendance at Centerview Beach warrants more lifeguard services. MOTION made by Byrnes, seconded by Geffre to recommend approval of the 1994 Parks and Beach Programs as presented by Westonka Community Education and Services. Motion carried unanimously. This recommendation will be reviewed by the City Council on March 22, 1994. LABOR: PARKS PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 36 HRS/WK X 9 WKS X $9.25/HR INCLUDING BENEFITS PARK COORDINATORS 18 HRS/WK X 6 WKS X $4.50/HR X 5 PARKS INCLUDING BENEFITS PARK ASSISTANTS 18 HRS/WK X 6 WKS X $4.25/HR X 5 PARKS INCLUDING BENEFITS $ 3,298.00 $ 2,675.00 $ 2,575.00 MOUND BAY AFYERNOON STAFF 15 HRS/WK X 8 WKS. X $5.00/HR X 1 STAFF INCLUDING BENEFITS $ EVENING PROGRAM STAFF 0Nestonka Drop In Youth Center) 6 HRS/WK X 8 WKS. X $6.00/HR. X 2 STAFF $ *Benefits included in the above figures calculated at 10% COMMUNITY EDUCATION & SERVICES STAFF TIME EQUIPMF31T (Softball,Parachutes,Games,Coolers etc) SUPPLIES (Paints,Paper,Craft Supplies,Snacks) TRANSPORTATION (40 Hrs.@10.00 + 270.00 milage 634.00 $1,800.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 670.00 TOTAL $12,710.00 LABOR: LWEGUARD SUPERVISOR 175 HRS. @ $11.00/HR (7 weeks X 5 days X 5 hrs/day) SURFS]DE BEACH 1280 HRS.@ $6.50/HR (78 days x 8 hfs x 2 guards) CENTERVIEW BEACH 686 HRS. @ $6.50/HR (7 weeks x 7 hfs x 2 guards) TWO SMALL BEACHES 320 HRS. @ $6.00/HR (7 weeks x 2 beaches x 3.25 hrs/day) INSERVICE: 125 HRS. @ $6.50/HR *Benefits included in the above figures calculated at 10% COMMUNITY EDUCATION & SERVICES STAFF TIME MILAGE (ROVING GUARD AND SUPERVISION) 465 MILES @ .26/MI = $2,214.00 = $8,924.00 = $4,905.00 = $2,112.00 = $ 894.00 = $1,800.00 = $ 121.00 = $ 250.00 TOTAL = $21,220.00 The parks program is sponsored by Westonka Community Education and Services in cooperation with the City of Mound. Activities and games galore will be offered Monday through Friday mornings of each week at selected parks. Each week has a theme and daily activities will revolve around that theme. Daily activities include: crafts, games, music, sports and other learning activities. Two qualified staff will ensure fun for every child. DATES: June 21 -July 30 (no program July 2 & 5) LOCATIONS: Community Center, Philbrook Park, Swenson Park, Three Points Park and Highland Park. MORNINGS AT THE PARK Ages 5-12 Monday through Thursday 9:00 a.m.-Noon Activities are planned tor each of the individual parks. Activities include: arts & crafts, co-ed games, sports, skill demonstrations, and other activities aimed at the specilic age and interests of program participants. AFTERNOONS AT MOUND BAY PARK All ages Parks program staff will be at Mound Bay Park Monday through Friday from Noon to 3:00 p.m. Activities will be planned and recreational equipment such as volleyball and frisbees will be available for checkout from the staff. CITY of MOUND EVENINGS iN THE PARK Special activities are planned for Tuesday and Thursday evenings in the Pond area. Activities will be planned for all ages including children, teens, and parents. Please come and enjoy an evening of fun. Activities will run from 6:30-8:00 p.m. PARK PROGRAM TRIPS FOR KIDS These trips will be chaperoned by the Summer Recreation Staff. Each trip is open to ages 6-13. Participants must ride the bus to and from each event. FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION, SEE PAGE 6. SUMMER JOBS AVAILABLE The Community Education and Services Department has many summer employment opportunities available with a wide variety of programs. For more information, and for an application, please contact the Community Education and Services office at 472-0341. SUMMER SWIMMING FOR KIDS (At the Beaches) Once again we will be offering an opportunity tor kids to learn to swim at their neighborhood beach. Lessons will be held Monday, Wednesday and Friday of each week. We are adding three extra days and, therefore, will not have a rain day makeup unless rain exceeds three days. Fee: $20.00 (S weekl) Monday, Wednesday, Friday June 21-July 23 (no class July 2 & 5) #6340 #6341 #6342 Centervlew Beach .................... 3:00 p.m. Mound Bay Park--Surfslde ............. 1:00 p.m. Pembrook ........................... 2:00 p.m. CLASS TIME FOR THE REST OF THE LESSONS TO BE ANNOUNCED BY THE INSTRUCTOR. If first class is rained out, come Wednesday at the same time. Minimum enrollment is 10 at a beach. LIFEGUARD~ AT THE BEACHES MOUND BAYPARK (SURFSIDE) Lifeguard hours are posted on the beach. This beach opens Memorial Day weekend and closes Labor Day weekend. Lifeguard is on duty when temperature is at least 70 degrees. MOUND BEACHES INCLUDE: Witchwood Beach, Centerview Beach, and Pembrook Beach. From June 21 to July 31, lifeguards will patrol the beaches from 1:00-4:00 p.m. They will be on duty 7 days per week when the temperature is at least 70 degrees. Io'/0 Week of 8/21 M T W Th F Belmont 7 5 8 11 6 Highland 5 6 6 8 6 Mound Bay (Pm) 19 23 21 26 29 Philbrook 10 11 10 7 9 S weneon 14 20 11 8 15 3 Points 20 18 17 20 15 Week Of 6/28 M T W Th F Belmont 6 g 8 10 x Highland 8 9 7 6 x Mound Bay (Pm) 26 19 15 21 x Philbrook 9 7 8 5 x S wen~on 16 22 23 20 x 3 Points 15 11 13 10 x Week Of 7/5 M T W Th F Belmont x 8 7 8 9 Highland x 8 6 10 12 Mound Bay (Pm) x 26 29 26 31 Philbrook x 5 5 7 10 Swenson x 14 19 21 27 3 Points x 9 10 11 14 Week Of 7/12 M T W Th F Belmont 10 x 9 7 11 Highland 5 x 6 7 9 Mound Bay (Pm) 28 x 26 30 33 Philbrook 9 x 6 7 6 Swenson 16 x 21 18 23 3 Point~ 9 x 8 4 12 Week Of 7/19 M T W Th F Belmont 9 10 8 6 11 Highland 12 9 7 11 9 Mound Bey (Pm) 23 18 22 26 22 Philbrook 5 6 8 7 10 S wenson 3 8 16 19 23 3 Pointe 12 6 9 10 8 Week Of 7/26 M Belmont 10 Highland 10 Mound Bay (Pm) 26 Philbrook 4 Swanson 18 3 Points 8 T W Th F 9 6 9 10 7 5 11 10 20 14 23 22 10 6 5 10 18 14 17 23 7 9 10 8 TOTALS WEEK I 391 WEEK 2 303 WEEK 3 332 WEEK 4 320 WEEK 5 353 WEEK 6 359 (5 Days) (4 Days) (4 Days) (5 Days) (5 Days) (5 Days) GRANDTOTAL 2,058 28 Days ;UMMER PARKS PROGRAM 992 ATTENDANCE FIGURES Week of 6/15 M T W Th F Comrn Center 0 R 0 0 0 Mound Bey (Am) 5 R 9 9 10 Mound Bay (Pm) 8 R 9 12 10 Philbrook 10 R 8 7 7 Sweneon 14 R 11 8 15 3 Pointe 20 R 17 20 15 Week Of 6/22 M T W Th F Corem Center 0 0 0 0 0 Mound Bay (Am) 7 10 8 12 10 Mound Bey (Pm) 6 15 10 11 11 Philbrook 7 6 6 5 13 Swenson 4 8 10 9 4 3 Pointe 15 1 1 13 10 12 Week Of 6/29 M T W Th F Corem Center 0 0 0 R X Mound Bay (Am) 8 11 8 R X Mound Bay (Pm) 11 8 9 R X Philbrook 7 5 5 R X Sweneon 8 11 6 R X 3 Pointe 12 7 10 R X Week Of 7/6 M T W Th F Belmont X 17 22 16 20 Mound Bey (Am) X 10 6 4 15 Mound Bey (Pm) X 14 10 12 10 Philbrook X 5 6 7 6 Sweneon X 8 12 11 9 3 Points X 10 8 4 12 Week Of 7/13 M T W Th F Belmont 17 16 R 16 16 Mound Bay (Am) 12 6 R 11 9 Mound Bey (Pm) R 8 R 9 9 Philbrook 5 6 R 5 10 S weneon 3 8 R 8 13 3 Pointe 12 15 R 10 8 ! ,J Iii I J ,,'~, Week Of 7/20 M T Belmont 17 14 Mound Bay (Am) 8 13 Mound Bay (Pm) 10 15 Philbrook 4 26 Swanson 5 8 3 Points 8 7 w Th F R 10 12 R 11 15 R 13 17 'R 5 10 R 7 12 R 10 8 Weak Of 7/27 M T Belmont 20 14 Mound Bay (Am} 4 8 Mound Bay (Pm) 10 12 Philbrook 11 4 Swanson 9 10 3 Points 10 13 W 19 10 15 0 7 10 Th 18 8 14 0 4 20 F 16 12 12 0 2 14 TOTALS GRANDTOTAL WEEK I 224 (4 Days) WEEK 2 252 (5 Days) WEEK 3 126 (3 Days) WEEK 4 254 (4 Days) WEEK 5 232 (4 Days) WEEK 6 265 (4 Days) WEEK 7 306 (5 Days) 1,659 29 Days LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 · WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 ° TELEPHONE 612,473-7033 EUGENE R. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BOARD MEMBERS William A. Johnstone Chair. Minnetonka Tom Penn Vice Chair. Tonka Bay Douglas E. Babcock Secretary, Spdng Park Robert Rascop Treasurer, Shorewood Mike Bloom Minnetonka Beach Albert (Bert) Foster Deephaven James N, Grathwol Excelsior Ronald Kline Minnetdsta Duane Markus Wayzata Craig Moiler Victona Thomas W. Reese Mound Herb J. Suerth Woodland Joseph Zwak Greenwood TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL DATE: APRIL 7, 1994 FROM: TOMREK'~,LMCDRHPRESHNTATiVE SUBJECT: MARCH REPORT- LMCD !.0 Ea'Ltio! Wet__,~nilfoilT~tlr Fa. ,~ ~uuu tu some m me tnown oeos. -i:nm is a difference of opinion am.ong experts on what the weed does in the winter time, and when it starts its sFmg growth. The Water Patrol wiJl do the photography as part of their dJve 1.2 The Hennepin Parks relx~ts no correlation between 2-4D treatments O,ono and theind.dence of we~d. development. Other f_sa_ors seem to be having an effect 1.3 lam alzachi~ a copy of the DNR1993 gammllf~lr~jX]rt one:xotic~. For those interested, it is a weJ[] done report, worth reading. 2.0 l~ke Manane~em_ pt..= 2.1 Wehave ~ with ClearAir, Inc. todothe 1994 boat count. a.~e~is.~d~e_~_~e~. ,o~.. er .),. ear._ Tl~i.'s ~ we will not be doing the interviews of , me mougnt oetn~ rant the (lam taus gathered does not seem to vary much in c~n~~. W.e. wfll .prob. ably do the interv~ews aRsin in 199~. TheMonnd oas oocts COml~cate tins the boat count ~orvey. Tom McCtfferyis w~king closely with us to: 3.0 3.1 Wear~ relatin~ to lakesideh~-'~J? with the _~ting of alit ir of model ca-~nances one for the LMCD dealin~ with lights .~hi n~ ,g out on the ;vat~ b...c~d ~.e d.ock .u?e..s~.., .and a companion one for comment and adoption o_.y__m_.,e_ maes so that. l~ope~..y, ligh. l:~ng ?n land can be s~ed and controlled in a Iuannea. Onel~esently~dentifiedis atthe Wayzata Yacht CI~. 3.2 The board resolved to return the levy funds deemed in excess of necessary6 re°nth °lm'atin~ reserves to the citiesin the 1994 and 1995budget years. 3.3 LMCD Chair Bill Jolmstone's 16 year old son wa~ tr~ically til!ed by a .. 3.4 A lowered dock license fee of $7.50 per BSU was adopted by the This ~ figure jointly arrived at by the marina owners and the LMCD that I o'/.5'==. -- McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. 15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone 612/476-6010 612/476-8532 FAX Engineers Planners Surveyors April 5, 1994 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: RECEIVED , PR City of Mound, Minnesota Painting EverGreen Watertower Contract Award MFRA #9832 6 1994 Dear Mayor and Council Members: On March 31, 1994, bids were opened and read aloud for painting of the 300,000 Gallon watertower on EverGreen Road. Six (6) bids were received. The bid tabulation for these bids is enclosed. The low bidder was Odland Protective Coatings, of Rockford, Minnesota, with a total base bid of $84,300.00, and $37,500.00 for Alternate A. The base bid was for the exterior of the tank and the alternate for the interior of the tank. We have carefully checked the proposal and find it to be in order. The EnGineer's Estimate for the exterior was $160,000 and the interior $40,000.00, for a total estimate of $200,000.00. As you will note, all but one base bid was below our estimate, with the low bidder beinG substantially lower. We have checked the references of Odland, which included many watertowers in the Metro area and received nothing but excellent reports. The paint suppliers also Gave favorable recommendations; therefore, we are recommending that the City award a contract, in the amount of $121,800.00, to Odland Protective CoatinGs, for the base bid and Alternate. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Very truly yours, John Cameron, City EnGineer JC: j mk Enclosures An Equal Oppodunity Employer - BID TAB - CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA PAINTING 300,000 GALLON ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK MFRA #9832 ODLAND PROTECTIVE COATINGS, INC. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1. EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING, CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS 2. LETTERING LUMP SUM LUMP SUM LUMP SUM $ 79,800.00 $ 3,500.00 3. WELDING 100 SQ.INCH $ iO.00/SI $ 1,000.00 TOTAL BID ...... $ ............... 84,300.00 4. ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS $ 37,500.00 DELOUGHERY PAINTING CO. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1. EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING, CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS LUMP SUM LUMP SUM $131,000.00 2. LETTERING LUMP SUM $ 600.00 3. WELDING 100 SQ.INCH $ 10.00/SI $ 1,000.00 TOTAL BID ..................... 8132,600.00 4. ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS $ 24,000.00 JO7? - 1 - H&H WATERTOWER, INC. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1. EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING, CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS 2. LETTERING 100 SQ.INCH LUMP SUM LUMP SUM $ 1.75/SI $134,000.00 3,500.00 175.00 3. WELDING TOTAL BID ................................................. 5137,675.00 0 ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS LUMP SUM $ 30,200.00 TMI COATINGS, INC.. ITEM OUANTIT~ UNIT PRICE 1. EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING, CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS 2. LETTERING 3. WELDING 100 SQ.INCH LUMP SUM LUMP SUM $ 10.00/SI TOTAL BID ..................... 4. ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS LUMP SUM ~OTAL $136,000.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 7,500.00 $146,300.00 38,900.00 - 2 - RAINBOW, INC. ITEM EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING, CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 8135,800.00 LUMP SUM LUMP SUM 2. LETTERING LUMP SUM 8 4,400.00 3. WELDING 100 SQ.INCH 8 70.00/SI $ 7,000.00 TOTAL BID ..................... 8147,200.00 4. ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS 8 49,500·00 TENYER COATINGS, INC. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL EXTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING· CONTAIMENT, AND INCIDENTALS 2. LETTERING 3. WELDING 100 SQ.INCH LUMP SUM LUMP SUM 8 10.O0/SI $157,000.00 8 2,000.00 8 1,000.00 TOTAL BID .................... 8160 000 00 4. ALTERNATE "A" - ADD ON ALTERNATE FOR WET INTERIOR SURFACE PREPARATION, REPAIR, COATING AND INCIDENTALS LUMP SUM 8 51,900·00 - 3 - McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. 15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone 612/476-6010 612/476-8532 FAX Engineers Planners Surveyors April 5, 1994 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound, Minnesota 1994 Seal Coat Program MFRA #6173 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Enclosed is a tabulation of the bids received on Friday, March 31, 1994, for the 1994 Seal Coat Project. Bids ranged from a low of $26,795.00, submitted by Allied Blacktop, Inc., to a high of $32,996.60. The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $28,000.00. Public Works is very pleased with the work done in the past by Allied Blacktop; therefore, we reco~end Allied Blacktop be awarded a contract in the amount of $26,795.00. If you have any questions or need additional information, Please contact us. Very truly yours, MoCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron JC: jmk Enclosures An Equal Opportunity Employer - BID TAB - CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA 1994 SEAL COAT PROGRAM MFRA #6173 ALLIED BLACKTOP COMPANY e ITEM BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SEAL COAT (CRS-2), FURNISHED AND APPLIED FA-2, CLASS C SEAL COAT AGGREGATE, APPLIED QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 30,000 GAL $ 0.745/GAL $ 22,350.00 1,500 TON $ 2.43/TON $ 3,645.00 FA-2, CLASS A CRUSHED GRANITE SEAL COAT AGGREGATE FURNISHED AND APPLIED 40 TON $ 20.00/TON $ 800.00 TOTAL BID .............................................. $ 26,795.00 ASTECH CORPORATION e ITEM BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SEAL COAT (CRS-2), FURNISHED AND APPLIED FA-2, CLASS C SEAL COAT AGGREGATE, APPLIED QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 30,000 GAL $ 0.75/GAL $ 22,500.00 1,500 TON $ 4.25/TON $ 6,375.00 FA-2, CLASS A CRUSHED GRANITE SEAL COAT AGGREGATE FURNISHED AND APPLIED 40 TON $ 19.00/TON $ 760.00 TOTAL BID .............................................. $ 29,635.00 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS, INC. ITEM QUANTITY UNI____~TPRICE TOTAL BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SEAL COAT (CRS-2), FURNISHED AND APPLIED · 30,000 GAL $ 0.666/GAL $ 19,980.00 2. FA-2, CLASS C SEAL COAT AGGREGATE, APPLIED 1,500 TON $ 6.10/TON $ 9,150.00 FA-2, CLASS A CRUSHED GRANITE SEAL COAT AGGREGATE FURNISHED AND APPLIED 40 TON $ 32.50/TON $ 1,300.00 TOTAL BID .............................................. $ 30,430.00 CALDWELL ASPHALT, INC. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SEAL COAT (CRS-2), FURNISHED AND APPLIED 30,000 GAL S 0.85/GAL $ 25,500.00 2. FA-2, CLASS C SEAL COAT AGGREGATE, APPLIED 1,500 TON S 4.51/TON S 6,765.00 FA-2, CLASS A CRUSHED GRANITE SEAL COAT AGGREGATE FURNISHED AND APPLIED 40 TON $ 18.29/TON $ 731.60 TOTAL BID .............................................. $ 32,996.60 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 April 8, 1994 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER LMCD PARKING AGREEMENT Sometime ago this matter was brought before the City Council at the request of the LMCD. As you recall the LMCD through a subcommittee has been working on developing parking agreements among the municipalities dealing with public access to the lake that are within cities to eventually arrive at the number of 700 car/trailer parking spaces within the Lake Minnetonka area. After working with LMCD staff and DNR personnel, we have now identified 32 parking spaces that are within 1500 feet of the Mound Bay Park access and 11 spaces which are within 2000 feet of the access giving a total of 43 spaces that can be identified for use as car/trailer parking. Attached is a proposed Lake Access Parking Agreement between the LMCD and the City of Mound as it relates to the Mound Bay Park access. I am recommending that the City Council approve this parking agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the agreement. If you have any questions, please contact me. ES:Is pr~nted on recycled paper J ,J JJ I I , ,i~ , ~A~E RINNETOHKA CONSERVATION D[ETRZCT Coneervmtton Dtmtrl=t (L~CD) end the ( City of Mound both public oorpormttons orgmnized mad existing under the W/TNESSETH: WHEREAS the LHCD and ( City of Mound ) are Jointly ;oncerned vtth provtdLng public boating s¢ceSl to Lake Rlnneton~a, and WHEREAS the LMCD and ( City of Mound ) recognize that HOW, THEREFORE, it La agreed by the L~CD 'and ( City of Mound ) that the oondttlons for car/ara%let parking ~or the public access %denttfled on the ohecWll'st %dent~ied ss ExhtbLt 'A° end Parking Site Plan uS, meet Park~ng Standardl on the IN WITNESS WHEREOF, %he L~CD ind( City of Mound ) have caused thte agre~=en% to bo duly executed %his _..__ · LAKE MIHHETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT! City of Mound AGENCYICITYt_ By_ e Checklist for Svalueting Lake fiinnetonka' Public Access Car/Trailer Parking. Agreements Acceme ieee , Mound Bay Park City _ City of Mound Lake Zone Ho. Car/Trailer (C/T) Parking by Locationi &. Off-street, on access site . . . . . .. . . COn-mite designated trailer parking off grace te acceptable if vehicle ie parked on graded or paved sur£ace.) b. Off-street, remot~ from accsec site . . . . · Distance In feet from access alta c. Onoatreet, Ieee than l, see feetm · Designated signed C/T only, count leex of · Not signed, count 75% of spaces available ._~ d. On-street, 1,5el ~eet to 2, ecs · Designated signed C/T only, count Xeex o~ ¢/T parking spaces available . .. . -0- · Not signed, count 75X of spaces available 11 Vehicle Only Parking Spaces - these count up to lex of total number o~ ¢/T spaces on lotm # o~ standard vehicles spaces g' x ID' : -0-. # o~ handicapped vehicle IpaOea 12' X 19' 0 Total # of vehicle only IpiCes . . . . -'-~-'- ' Count total vehicle only epical or IGX o~ # of spaces total C/T parking apices in lots Total, oar/trailer parking spaces at lite . . . COOPERATIN8 PROVISIONSI e Access site plan illustrating each C/T apace vith tdequate ~ngress, egress, and maneuvering acceptedi $ignage provided at aoceee late La clear, aesthetically attractiv~ consolidated for easy updittng 'in cooperation with LMCD. All spaces are available on unree~ricted, first- come, first-served baste, from ~emorial Day to Labor Day, SiCS pm Friday until midnight Sunday, F~ty peToent (55X) of IpaCee meeting PaTking Standards ire iVllllble veekdaye. AlII on-street parking spaces meet the fa,loving Itlnderdll e. Mlnl~u~ length o£ ~ ~eet per epics b. Adequate shoulder v~dth to preclude door opening into trl~lo line. P,ge 2 , Pub~Sa Acaeee Car/Tra~er Park~ng Agree'men% provLded. -aLree% ¢lr/~rl~ler perking epa~ee ire O? ...... e~ree% name on & temper&fY bott moorLng ~aGt&i~Y la provided I number o~ boa~e equal it ~he ramp aide ~or ~gX o~ ~he G/T perking epaoe~ I~ the ei%e ~or ~/T per~ng iplcel be%yeah ~,5~ ~ee~ end ~ /~ remervee %he rSgh~ to mike ohengee Agen y Y-- ---- -~-itree% parkLng or Ln icceee ~? P*~".'~: .... ~-e~onl~ed perking ~KgD oJ int~o~pe~ed ohangee. C$~Y re~a~ne ipprovl~ privilege on any lo, ieee. ~ in agenoy regu~a~ing parking h~ghvlyl i~:.~ng rel~ric~lonl on Goun~y or l~l~e C/T parking In ~he v~oin~Y ot in i~ceoe ll~ · ~ .Sa recogn~.ion o~ ~.he viluab~e recr~.lonll oppor~un~ee o~ered on I,.)~e ~nne~onk~. ------- ! LANGDON ~,1 II II II II :: ,,-- II II el -'1 IoLIr WOO0 hlond Twin Pork ;00 II Z Z o STATlr [TT Mound Boy Pork E~oot Londlng 60610 60715 Idlewood Access ~ITY OF MOUND, MOUND BAY PARK Car/Trailer Parking Inventory. Identified June, 1993 Amended Oct, 1993 PUBLIC HEARING NO TICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: ....... I1. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOUND ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 350:25, TO ALLOW "COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES (16 OR LESS)" AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE B-2 GENERAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT. 2. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITY {16 OR LESS) WITHIN THE B-2 ZONING DISTRICT AT 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. (OLD FINA). 3. A MOVING BUILDING PERMIT TO ALLOW A BUILDING TO BE MOVED FROM 2385 COMMERCE BLVD. (OUR LADY OF THE LAKE CHURCH CONVENT), TO 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. (OLD FINA). NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound will hold a public hearing on May 10, 1994at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the City of Mound offices at 5341 Maywood Road. The following will be considered under one application: 1. Zonin;t Ordinance Amendmen~ to Section 350:25 to allow "Community Residential Facilities (1 6 or less)" as a conditional use within the B-2 General Business Zoning District. 2. Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a "Community Residential Facility (16 or less) at ~1730 Commerce Blvd., Mound, located within the B-2 General Business Zoning District. The proposed use will include the office of the Westonka Intervention as well as a temporary shelter for victims of domestic abuse. The subject property is legally described as follows: 'That part of Lot 27 and that part of the adjoining County Road, all in 'Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka,' described as beginning at a point on the West line of Government Lot 4, Section 13, Township 117, Range 24 distant 1099.71 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Government Lot 4, thence North along said West line 251.11 feet; thence Easterly deflecting to the right 88 degrees 30 minutes, a distance of 275:09 feet to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 275 feet East, measured at right angles from the West line of said Government Lot 4; thence South along said parallel line 258.3 feet to an intersection with a line drawn East at right angles to the West line of said Government Lot 4 from the point of beginning, thence West along the last described line 275 feet to the point of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof except that part which lies West of a line drawn parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said Section 13." 3. Movin_a Buildin~ Permit to allow the Our Lady of the Lake Church convent building currently located at 2385 Commerce Blvd., Mound, to be moved to 1730 Commerce Blvd., Mound, as legally described above. City Code Section 300:25 states, "No such building or structure shall be moved to a location within the City unless it will . . . be a building or structure of the same general character and appearance as other buildings or structures in the vicinity." All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk ' Published in 'The Laker" April 25, 1994. Mailed to property owners within 350' by April 29, 1994. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 April 8, 1994 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ^ s.o,,. 110 WEST AND COUNTY ROAD 44 (WESTEDGE BLVD.) Attached is a petition that we received earlier this year requesting discontinuation of the MTC Bus route in the Evergreen Road/Garden Lane area in the City of Mound. Upon receipt of the petition, I contacted the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) regarding the resident's concerns over noise, safety, street deterioration, etc., that they expressed in their petition. The MTC was very responsive in looking at the situation. They have been discussing a number of riders that are on each of the bus routes which currently run throughout the day in that area. As you recall, this route was established in 1992 because residents in the area of County Road 44 and County Road 110 were interested in having a bus stop rather than having to drive to the bus stop in downtown Mound. Although, the numbers are not large as far as ridership goes, there still appears to be people that are using the bus. The first route that passes through that area is at 4:51 am. In talking with MTC, it appears that it is rarely being used and now the MTC is recommending that this particular route, at that time, be discontinued. They will still appear at the bus stop in downtown Mound, but will not arrive at 4:51 in this area. The next bus in the County Road 110 and County Road 44 area is between 6:10 am and 6:41 am. That route and others through the day will continue until more information is obtained from drivers concerning ridership. In addition, the MTC is intending to do a telephone survey within the next few months in this area to determine ridership. I must say that they are cooperating with the City on this project and certainly understand the concerns of the residents. I have been in contact with a spokesperson for the people that submitted the petition, and they are understanding and willing to work with us as well. pr~nled on recycled paper The resolution attached specifically addresses the early morning bus stop in that area and proposes to delete it from the route schedule. If you have any questions, please contact me. ES:Is RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION'S (MTC) DECISION TO DELETE THE 4:51 AM BUS STOP AT BARTLETT BOULEVARD (COUNTY ROAD 110 WEST) AND WESTEDGE BLVD. COUNTY ROAD 44) DUE TO LACK OF RIDERSHIP EFFECTIVE MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1994 WHEREAS, since 1992 an early morning bus route at 4:51 am passes through the County Road 110 and County Road 44 (Westedge Blvd.) area; and WHEREAS, residents in the Garden Lane, Evergreen Road and Westedge Blvd., area have petitioned for removal of the bus route in the area; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) has studied ridership in the area; and WHEREAS, the MTC has determined, due to lack of ridership at 4:51 am, that there is no reason to continue this particular route through the County Road 110 and County 44 area. THEREFORE, NOW BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council, City of Mound, Minnesota hereby approves the MTC's decision to discontinue this particular route as referenced above effective June 6, 1994. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council supports the continued study of the remainder of this particular route by the MTC as it attempts to address the problems identified by area residents. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk Io91 January 2, 1994 We, the residents of Garden Lane and Evergreen Road, want the MTC bus changed to another route. W 7o/05-7 - y ~..s'-.6' .'-/ 7' ~ . ~?:~-. 7' 73/ ~_J,L-] z. - April 12, 1994 RESOLUTION//94- RESOLUTION AUTHORING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FOR PID//24-117-24 11 0019, LOTS 1, 2, 3, 14 & 15, BLOCK 7, SETON - 2541 WEXFORD LANE (FRANK & MARY SEGNER) WHEREAS, the City has received a request from the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development pertaining to a CDBG housing rehabilitation loan for Mrs. Frank and Mary Segner; and WHEREAS, Mr. & Mrs. Segner are refinancing their mortgage and the lender requires that the City subordinate its lien in favor of their mortgage; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Office of Planning & Development has assured the City that there is sufficient equity in the property to ensure that the City's interest is protected. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a Subordination Agreement for PID//24-117-24 11 0019, Lots 1, 2, 3, 14 & 15, Block 7, Seton (Frank and Mary Segner) - 2541 Wexford Lane. Hennepin County An Equal Opportuni~ Employer RECEIVED April 1 1994 Edward J. Schulke, Jr., City Manager, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound MN 55364 Dear Mr. Schulke: Enclosed is a Subordination of Repayment Agreement associated with a housing rehabilitation loan for Frank and Mary Segner. Mrs. Segner is taking out a second mortgage and the Associates Industrial Loan Compnay (the lender) requires that the city subordinate its lien in favor of its mortgage. There is sufficient equity in the property to ensure that the city's interest is protected. If there are no objections to the Subordination, have the document executed by the Mayor and yourself, have it appropriately notarized and then please return it to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at 541-7082. Sincerely Jim Graham Senior Planner Enc. Office Of Planning & Development Development Planning Unit 10709 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 260 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55305 (612) 541-7080 FAX:(612) 541-7090 Re.cie, SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made as of this day of , 1994, by and between the City of Mound (,,Lienholder") and Associates Industrial Loan Company, WHEREAS, Frank Segner, by Mary Segner, guardian, and Ruth Segner, husband and wife, (,,Borrowers") executed and delivered to Lienholder a repayment agreement dated 8th June 1990, filed of record on 26th September 1990, with the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as Document Number 2126227 (Certificate 563520), covering the following described property, located in the aforesaid county and state (the ,,Property"): Lots 1, 2, 3, 14, and 15, Block 7, Seton WHEREAS, Frank Segner, by Mary Segner, guardian, and Ruth Segner, husband and wife, executed and delivered to Associates Industrial Loan Company a mortgage on the above described Property, dated, 1994, filed of record on 1994, with the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as Document No. , in the amount of $16,000.00; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the' parties hereto, and the purpose of this Agreement, to make the aforesaid mortgage to Associates Industrial Loan Company in all respects senior, prior and superior to the repayment agreement of Lienholder. NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, and in order to induce Associates Industrial Loan Company to advance funds upon its mortgage, Lienholder does hereby subordinate the lien of its repayment agreement to the lien of Associates Industrial Loan Company's mortgage and all extensions, modifications and renewals thereof and all advances and further advances thereunder, notwithstanding that the Lienholder's repayment agreement was executed and recorded prior to the execution of and recordation of Associates Industrial Loan , rt a e, and agrees that all right, title, lien and interest acquired Company s mo g g ....... b-' foreclosure proceedings or by Associates Industrial Loan uompany exu~=~ ~ otherwise, under its mortgage, shall be prior and superior to any and all rights, title, lien and interest heretofore or hereafter acquired by Lienholder under the Lienholder's repayment agreement. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Lienholder has caused these present to be executed the day and year first above written. Lienholder: City of Mound By Skip Johnson, Mayor of the City oi Mound By Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager of the City of Mound STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1993, by Skip Johnson, Mayor of the City of Mound, and by Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager of the City of Mound, a body corporate and politic of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the City. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development, A-2300, Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487 ] I Ill i n , ,j,, CITY of MOUND 5341 U, AYf,/OOD SCAD MOLiND MI~'iNESOTA 5536,:' ~687 6c,2 472 0605 FAX ;6~2, 4'2 {(23 April 4, 1994 TO: FROM: RE: CITY COUNCIL FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK LICENSE RENEWAL - Expire 3/31/94. New License Period 4/1/94 to 3/31/95. Approval contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being submitted. Blue Bell Ice Cream A1 & Alma's Supper Club printed on recycled paper I10o April 19, 1994 CITY of MOUND 53z~ MAYWOOD ROAD MOIJND MiNNESOTA55364-!.~97 612~ 472-0600 F4X ~6!2~ 472-0620 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK LICENSE RENEWAL - Expire 4/30/94. New License Period 5/1/94 to 4/30/95. Approval contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being submitted. A1 & Alma's Supper Club American Legion Post #398 Headliners Bar & Grill VFW Post #5113 Pool Headliners Bar & Grill VFW Post #5113 ..Bowling Mound Lanes Amusement Device American Legion Post #398 Headliners Bar & Grill VFW Post #5113 Restaurant A1 & Alma's Supper Club American Legion Post #398 Domino's Pizza #1974 Happy Garden Hardee's Headliners Bar & Grill House of Moy Mound Lanes Scotty B's Subway Sandwiches VFW Post #5113 11Ol printed on recycled paper ] ,l ii i n ~ ,t, BILLS April 12, 1994 Batch 4034 Total Bills $114,411.55 $114,411.55 · · · · · · · · · · · Ill ~ ~ ~ '"*' 0 i U I I II IIIIII I 0 ! J Z 0 Z 0 Z~ 0 ZZ · 0~0 ~0 Z 0 ! II 05" Z 0 I10f. ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~OOoo ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z CE. Iio?---:- J I Ill I ,= , ,~ , I I ! ! o I I ~ ~ ?~? , , , , , Z 0 .~., z Z Z I t~Z ~3~ "~ o 8oo8oooo~8 oo~§oo~oo IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII Z 0 Z 0 0 0~' Jill I I ii I n ~ ,~, ! -r r, ///~. ~ O0 O0 O0 0000 0000 000 O0 I I I II II II I III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo o ooo II ! I III J Z ~:::) Z PROCLAMATION NO. 94- PROCLAIMING WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1994, SCHOOL AGE CHILD CARE DAY IN THE CITY OF MOUND WHEREAS, the Minnesota School-Age Child Care Alliance in conjunction with the Minnesota Association of Education of Young Children are celebrating the Week of the Young Children, April 17-24, 1994; and WHEREAS, School-Age Child Care (SACC) programs provide a safe, caring place for approximately 23,000 children grades K-6 before and after school and during school vacations in public and private schools and 25,000 children in family child care homes throughout Minnesota; and WHEREAS, providing programs that expand children's learning opportunities and made available support for working families and those experiencing temporary family-related difficulties is critical if children are to succeed in school; and WHEREAS, quality programs are the key prevention strategies in preventing violence, substance abuse, vandalism, poor mental health, pre-gang activity, school failure and teen pregnancy; and WHEREAS, quality SACC programs represent a worthy commitment to our children's future; and WHEREAS, by calling attention to the need for quality SACC programs, these groups hope to improve the availability and quality of such services to the 200,000 children who are home alone when they are out of school and their parents are at work. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Skip Johnson, Mayor of the City of Mound, Minnesota, do hereby proclaim Wednesday, April 20, 1994, to be SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE DAY in the City of Mound. WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS EVDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 277 5600 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 Michael G. Looby, Director of Community Education and Services 472-0341 April 7, 1994 Mayor Skip Johnson City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RECEIVED APR Dear Mayor Johnson, The Week of the Young Child is an annual, national observance of the great importance of children and programs serving children. This year it is being celebrated from April 17-24. As a part of this observance the Minnesota School-Age Child Care Alliance in conjunction with the Minnesota Association for the Education of Young Children are celebrating School Age Child Care Day on Wednesday, April 20, 1994. The local school-age child care providers in the Westonka area are joining together on April 20th for a community celebration at 3:45 P.M. at Shirley Hills Primary School. Please join us for this celebration and tribute to children. Those participating include: Home Child Care Association KidConnection-Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church Shoreline Early Childhood Development Center, Inc. Westonka Adventure Club-Westonka Public Schools Westonka School Age Kids Core-Sc John's Lutheran Church Most importantly, please join Governor Amc Carlson in proclaiming Wednesday, April 20, 1994 to be School Age Child Care Day in the City of Mound. Enclosed is a copy of the Governor's Proclamation for the State of Minnesota which I would encourage you to use. Your support would be greatly appreciated as we continue to strive to provide safe, caring places for the children of our community. Please call me at 472-0341 if you have any questions or would like any further information. Sincerely, Douglas L. Peterson Westonka Community Education and Services CITY OF HOUND 4 7 Z- i..[-r.~ QUASI PUBLIC FUNCTION PORTABLE SIGN APPLICATION Portable signs used for the purpose oF directing the public used in conjunction with a governmental unit or quasi-public Function. The period of use shall not exceed ten (10) consecutive days and requires approval of the City Council. Signs shall be placed on the premises of the advertised event. A permit is required, however is exempt From all fees. / I/1.~ ADDRESS OF SIGN LOCATION NAME OF APPLICANT (if other than owner') APPLICANT'S ADDRESS. PHONE PHONE PLEASE INDICATE NUMBER OF SIGNS APPLYING FOR: / DESCRIBE TYPE OF 5IGN (m~tertals, is it illuminated, etc.) :~_~.I _ ~ ~ I .... SIZE OF SIGN REOUESTED: LENGTH OF TIME TO BE ERECTED: DESCRIBE REASON FOR REOUEST: h i gh x w i de = sq. Ft. Date ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Recommendation: APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON: Mound City Code Section 365:1S Subd. 10. Except as may be specifically authorized by this Subd. 10 and Subd. 9 (f) of this Section 365:15, portable signs are prohibited. A portable siSn used for the purpose of directing the public ~ay be permitted under the following conditions: (a) Said st~n is coincidental to, or used in conjunction with, a governmental uniC or quasi-public functionl and (b) The period of use of said sign shall not exceed ten (10) consecutive days; and (c) Signs shall not be used more than four (4) times during a calendar year; and (d) Prior approval of a majority of the City Council shall be required for the use of any such sign; and (e) Signs shall be placed ~n the premises of the advertised event; and (f) Such signs shall require the issuance of a permi~ but will be ex~np~ from all fees; and (g) In the instance of a multi-use facility, only one seasonal sign may be placed on the premises at any one time. April 7, 1994 CITY of MOUND 534i MAY~.', 73~ ROAD MOUND. MINNESSTA 553641687 (612 ~-2C630 FAX (6'2 ~-2 9620 To: From: Subject: Ed Shulke City Manager Greg Skinner P. W. Superintendent March Activity Report Street Department We spent the month preparing our sweepers for cleaning the streets and sidewalks. Storm drains were also cleaned out. We posted road restriction on March 7. Water Department We opened meter bids on March 1. Schlumbeger was the low bidder. We will be meeting with in April to start the project. Jerry Henke will be the field supervisor for the project. The water mainbreaks have slowed down to just 1 for this month. We had our annual inspection from the MN. Health Department this month. We will receive their report in about 2 months. Sewer Department The bid opening for the lift station project was March 10. Rice Lake Construction was the low bidder. We will be meeting in April to start the project. We have received quotes for some sewer line repairs in the Three Points area. We have some broken pipes that is causing some I/I. We will start these repairs this month. I have moved from the Public Works office. My office is on the 5 floor at City Hall. II1 ' printed on recycled paper CITY of MOUND 5341 f,'~AYWOOD ROAD MOUND I,j!NNESOTA55364 ,,~: 2,472-0690 FAX 6a2~472 0620 April 8, 1993 TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: RE: CITY CLERK MARCH MONTHLY REPORT There were two city Council meetings in March. Agendas for these meetings were prepared. There were minutes, 9 resolutions from these meetings. The following items were some of the highlights of the month: - Licenses for Tree Removal were prepared, applications reviewed and licenses issued. - Licenses application forms were sent out for Restaurants, Games of Skill, Juke Boxes, and Bowling Alley - Got materials together for the May 1 Hennepin County Auction where Mound will be selling 4 vehicles. - Attended the Minnesota Clerk's & Finance officers' Association Annual Conference in St. Cloud. - Continued to input the Minutes for 1994 into the Clerk's Index Program. - Monitored the Uniform Election Day bill that is at the Legislature. - Set up a system for dog licenses on Rapid File so that Finance and the Police Dept. can sort by owner, address, dog's name, tag number, etc. - Bids were opened on the following: water meter reading equipment; 1994 lift station improvement; Evergreen water town painting; and 1994 sealcoat project. fc printed on recycled paper Ill& CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 April 1, 1994 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR OPERATIONS MANAGER MARCH 1994 REPORT For the first time ever in March, we went over the $100,000 mark in sales. Gross sales for the month were $101,592. In 1993, gross sales for March were $96,951. An increase of just shy of 5%. We were also up 120 customers over the same month last year. If my calculations are correct, and nothing bizzare occurs over the next nine months, I predict that we should have approximately $50,000 more in sales in 1994 than we had in 1993. That should put us right around $1,370,000 in net sales. As far as profits are concerned, again barring any unforeseen problems, the additional sales should translate into an extra $10,000 for the City. March is never really an exciting month around here. Ice fishing in on the wane, people can't get their boats out yet, and the only event happening in March, which doesn't amount to much, is St. Patrick's Day. But pretty soon the weather should get better, cross your fingers and things will begin to bust loose around here. JK:ls prmted on recycled paper MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MOUND, MINNESOTA FOR MONTH OF MARCH 1994 FIRE FIGHTERS 1 6 8 9 11 BOB CRAWFORD 3/: 12 RANDY ENGELHART 13 STEVE ERICKSON 14 PHIL FISK 15 DAN GRADY 16 KEVIN GRADY 17 CRAIG H~ERSON 18 PAUL HENRY 19 BRAD LANDSMAN 20 RON MARSCHKE 21 JOHN NAFUS 22 JAMES NELSON 23 MARV NELSON 24 BRET NICCUM 25 GREG PALM 26 MIKE PAlM ~ Tm PALM 28 GREG PEDERSON CHRIS POUND~ 29 TONY R~SS~ MIKE SAVAGE 31 KEVIN S IPPRELL RON STAiLMAN TOM SWENSON 34. 35 ED VANECEK RICK WI LLIAI~ Tm WILLIAMS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 114.00 ~ 66.00 ~2.~____ ~os.m.___ 208.00 132.00 192.00 102.00 102.00 120.00 66.00 120.00 186.00 114.00 60.00 102.00 F]~E 442.50 16~ ~ _~ 73½ 1,167.00 §, 236.50 MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT ~ ~ TO DATE TO DATE D. OF CALLS 40 38 137 129 IOUND FIRE 5 6 20 22 ~I~RGIiLq~'Y 14 22 63 60 {INNETONKA BEACH FIRE,, , 3 2 8 3 EMERGENCY O 0 0 0 {I NNETR I STA FIRE ] O 3 7 )RONO FIRE 3 ! ? l~q~ 3 3 8 6 ;HOREWOOD FIRE 0 o o 0 EMER.GENCY I 0 1 0 ;PRING PARK FIRE 5 O 5 10 {UTUAL AID .FIRE N O · 1. ] El~G~qCY 0 n O 1 :OTAL FIRE CALLS 17 9 47 COTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 23 29 90 ,,D~CIAL 0 0 3 4 LESI DENTIAL ,3 ~ q ] ? ;RASS & MISCELLANEOUS 3 1 6 !.u-m n n ~ ~0. OF HOURS FIRE 142 98 %98 51 - MOUND ~]~GEI~ 256 436 1 ~7~ 1ORR ~ 3gR 5~/~ 1 7RI 1 FIRE 32 /.1 12~ 25 - MTKA BEACH I~q}3~GFNCY O O O O 'IYYCAJ~ 32 41 12N ? FIRE 9 0 51 1 ?N - M'TRISTA ~,IERGENCY 87 12 , 174 TOTAL 96 12 225 1fl6 FIRE 81 25 178 1 - ORONO .fliER~ 31 38 102 · 11,~ t~Tr. AL n2 63 ~n FIRE 0 O 0 o - SHOREWOOD ]~4]~GENCY 2~ o 22 fl .TOTAL 22 0 22 O FIRE 77 0 12 7 - SP. PARK I~ ,G~ 0 56 lsl TOTAL 77 56 ~?A .F. IRE 0 0 96 - )4rrUXL ~D .)~E~Y 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 q6 60 COT^L DRILL HOURS 16~ 162)~ &Rn 475 COTAL FIRE HOURS 341 164 11%'. 993 COTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 396 542 1668 1463 DT. AL FIRE & I~GENCY HOURS 737 700 2802 {UTUAL AID RE,CEIVED O O 2 1,, {UTUAL AID O2VEN O O ] ] MOUND-FIRE-DEPARTMENT DRILL REPORT Discipline and Teamwork Critique of fires Pre-plan and Inspections Tools and Apparatus Identify Hand Extinguisher Operation Wearing Protective Clothing Films First Aid and Rescue Operation Use of Self-Contained Masks pumper Operations ~ - Fire Streams & Friction Loss House Burnings Natural/Propane Gas Demos. Ladder Evolutions Salvage Operations Radio Operations House Evolutions Nozzles & Hose Appliances Hours Training Paid : OExcused X Unexecused 0 Present / Not Paid ~cellaneous : PERSONNEL J.Andersen .Anderson .Babb .Babb · Boyd %7~]_~_S.Br¥ce %~.D.Carlson ~.Casey .Collins %Z~_~B.Crawford .Englehart S.Erickson 7_%/Z_P.Fisk D.Grad¥ K.Grad¥ C.Henderson %3~z_P.Henry .Nafus .Nelson .Nelson .Niccum .Palm .Palm .Palm G.Pederson ~~K c'P°under T.Rasmussen .Savage .Sipprell [ Stallman Swenson ~~T 'Vanecek .Williams .Williams .Woytcke DRILL REPORT Discipline and Teamwork Critique of fires Pre-plan and Inspections Tools and Apparatus Identify Hand Extinguisher Operation Wearing Protective Clothing Films First Aid and Rescue Operation Use of Self-Contained Masks 'MOUND-FIRE-DEPARTMENT. Pumper Operations Fire Streams & Friction Loss House Burnings Natural/Propane Gas Demos. Ladder Evolutions Salvage Operations Radio Operations House Evolutions Nozzles & Hose Appliances Hours Training Paid : ~ Excused X Unexecused 0 Present / Not Paid Miscellaneous : PERSONNEL z..j ,~dersen .G.Anderson J. Babb ' %~_~=P.Babb ~%_~_7_ D · Boyd % S ~t~-~ DBryce jicarlsOn Casey ~%~ 7_S .Collins ---' B.Crawford ~.~ S ' Englehart Erickson ~t~P'Fisk D.Grady % K Grady ~ClHenderson %~F_P.Henry %~Z_J.Nafus _t~Z~J.Nelson ~%-/z_M.Nelson Niccum % iPalm Z%/~M'Palm ~ l~.Palm .Pederso C.Pounder T.Rasmussen %~Z__ M.Savage ~LT.K.Sipprell ~%_~LT_R.Stallman T.Swenson E.Vanecek %Z~_~_R.Williams T.Williams D.Woytcke 9 MOUND FIRE DE?ARTMEN~TT TOTAL MAINTENANCE FOR MONTH OF ~ /?33_- O j. ANDERSEN j~____ G. ANDERSON ~.% j. BABB ~. p. BABB D. BOYD D. BRYCE ~ S. BRYCE ~ D. CARLSON t~ _ J' CASEY ~. _ S. COLLINS /.,~, __ R. ENGELHART S. ERICKSON __~_~_~ p. FISK ~ _ D. GRADY ON ~.~_ j. NAFUS ~ _ j. NELSON ~ ~__ M. NELSON ~ _ B. NICCUM ___~ G. PALM ~ _ M. pALM ~ _ T. PALM 0 _ G. PEDERSON ~ _ C. POUNDER T. RASMUSSEN ~ _ M. SAVAGE ~z~ _ K. SIPPRELL ~/ _ R. STALLMAN ~ _ T. SWENSON ~_____ E. VANECEK __~ C. HENDERSON _~ T. WILLIAMS p.HENRY _~.D. WoYTCKE B. LANDSMAN 9L. R. MARSCHKE TOTAL MONTHLY HOURS _ LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472-0621 Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle Len Harrell Monthly Report for March 1994 STATISTICS The police department responded to 1,064 calls for service during the month of March. There were 24 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 criminal sexual conduct, 3 burglaries, 1 aggravated assault, 15 larcenies, and 3 vehicle thefts, and 1 arson. There were 54 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 2 child abuse/neglect, 1 forgery/NSF check, 4 narcotics, 10 damage to property, 2 liquor law violations, 7 DUI's, 3 simple assaults, 3 domestics (0 with assault), 4 harassments, 4 juvenile status offenses and 14 other offenses. The patrol division issued 118 adult citations and 0 juvenile citations. Parking violations accounted for an additional 33 tickets. Warnings were issued to 51 individuals for a variety of violations. There were 8 adults and 14 juveniles arrested for felonies. There were 20 adults and 5 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 8 warrant arrests. The department assisted in 11 vehicular accidents, 2 with injuries. There were 14 medical emergencies and 86 animal complaints. Mound assisted other agencies on 12 occasions in March and requested assistance 5 times. Property valued at $98,949 was stolen in March. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - MARCH 1994 II. INVESTIGATIO~ The investigators worked on 4 child protection issues and 3 criminal sexual conduct cases which accounted for 33 hours of investigative time. Other cases that were investigated include assault, burglary, criminal damage to property, robbery, a death, theft, harassipg communications, narcotics, fraud, liquor violations and absenting. Formal complaints were issued for felony theft, receiving stolen property, aggravated robbery, and charging officer Gary Lotton with possession of a controlled substance and official misconduct. III. Personnel/Staffinq The department used approximately 61 hours of overtime during the month of March. officers used 96 hours of comp-time, 32 hours of vacation, 196 hours of sick time. officers earned 65 hours of comp-time. Sgt. Bill Hudson continues to be out on sick leave and has notified me that he has applied for long term disability through P.E.R.A. It does not appear that Sgt. Hudson will return to work. IV. Ail officers attended an in-service firearms qualification in March. officer Ewald continues in the Wilson Leadership Program. Three officers attended training regarding the use of force and OSHA regulations. I attended and was chairman of the Minnesota chiefs of Police spring Training Conference held in Bloomington. I attended courses on cultural diversity, serial criminality, police officer Bill of Rights, employee discipline, total quality management and the future of law enforcement in Minnesota. 112 1 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - March 1994 V. Reserves The Reserves donated 309 hours during the month of March. Four reserves completed the Hennepin County Auxiliary Police Training course this month. We currently have 10 active reserves within the unit. OFFENSES REPORTED CLEARED UNFOUNDED ~CH EXCEPT. CLEARED 1994 CLEARED BY ARREST ARRESTED ADULT JUVENILE PART I CRIHES Homicide 0 0 0 0 Crimina[ Sexual Conduct 1 0 0 0 Robbery 0 0 0 0 Aggravated Assautt 1 1 0 0 Burgtary 5 0 0 0 Larceny 15 0 0 9 VehicLe Theft 5 0 0 1 Arso~ 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 13 5 1 0 0 TOTAL 24 PART I1 CRIMES Chi td kbuse/Negtect 2 Forgery/NSF Checks 1 Criainat Damage to Property 10 Ueap~s 0 Narcotics ~ 4 Liquor L~s 2 DWI 7 Si~pte Assautt 5 Domestic Assautt 0 Domestic (No AssauLt) 3 ~arass~ent 4 Juveni te Status Offenses 4 Pub[ ~c Peace 0 Trespess~ng 0 ALt O~her O~fenses 14 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 2 7 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 8 8 0 1 1 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 14 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 TOTAL 54 PART Ill & PART IV Property Damage Accidents 9 Perso~at Injury Accidents 2 Fatat Accidents 0 gedicats 14 Animal Ca,pLaints 86 gutuat Aid 12 Other Generat Investigations 845 2O TOTAL 968 Hemepin County Child Protection Inspections 15 TOTAL 1, 28 19 II ,& MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT MARCH 1994 GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY THIS MONTH Hazardous Citations 69 Non-Hazardous Citations 35 Hazardous Warnings 14 Non-Hazardous Warnings 14 Verbal Warnings 68 Parking Citations 33 DWI 7 Over .10 7 Property Damage Accidents 9 Personal Injury Accidents 2 Fatal Accidents 0 Adult Felon~ Arrests 8 Adult Misdemeanor Arrests 28 Juvenile Felony Arrests 14 Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 5 Part I Offenses 24 Part II Offenses 54 Medicals 14 Animmal Complaints 86 Ordinance Violations 57 Other Public Contacts 845 YEAR TO DATE 144 140 64 122 201 120 21 17 34 8 0 11 76 20 11 67 132 66 237 75 2,531 TOTAL 1,393 Assists 25 Follow-Ups 32 Henn. County Child Protection 3 Mutual Aid Given 12 Mutual Aid Requested 5 4,097 124 193 11 33 19 LAST YEAR TO DATE 152 147 42 33 458 138 23 15 20 3 0 9 67 5 13 60 134 95 167 1,902 3,483 152 45 12 27 2 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH 1994 ADULT CITATIONS 7 DWI More than .10% BAC 7 Careless/Reckless Driving 2 Driving After Susp. or Rev. 5 0 Open Bottle Speeding No DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired, or No Plates Stop Arm Vid~ation Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield Equipment Violations H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance Illegal or Unsafe Turn Over the Centerline Parking Violations Crosswalk Dog Ordinances Code Enforcement Seat Belt MV/ATV Miscellaneous Tags TOTAL 57 1 0 1 0 0 1 4 1 23 0 1 33 0 4 0 4 0 o 151 JUV. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH 1994 WARNINGS No Insurance Traffic Equipment Crosswalk Animals Trash/Derelict Autos Seat Belt Trespassing $ Window Tint Miscellaneous TOTAL WARRANT ARREST~ Felony Warrants Misdemeanor Warrants ADULT 1 11 11 0 2 22 0 0 0 0 47 0 8 JUV 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Run: 2~-Har-94 13:56 PRO03 Primary IS#'s o~Ly: #o Date Reported range: 02/26/9~ o 03/25/94 iActi¥it¥ codes: ALL ~ropert¥ Status: ALL Property Types: ALL Property Descs: Att Brands: Att #oders: Att Officers/Badges: Att Prop Prop inc no rs# Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Tp Desc SN Stat Stolen Vatue 0 Prop type Totals: 80,000 S Prop type Totals: 90 C Prop type Totals: 1,185 O Prop type Totals: 310 G Prop type Totals= 80 I Prop type Totals: ~ 11,575 ,,~*~ Prop type Totals: 1,944 L T Prop type Totals: 110 X Prop type Totals: 3,500 Y Prop type Totals: 155 **** R~rt TotaLs: 98,949 MOUND POLICE DEPARTHENT Enfors Property Report STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED Date Recov~d Quantity Act Brand Recov~d Vatue Code 0 1.000 40 2.000 0 1.000 310 2.000 ~ 1.000 0 2.000 ~2 7.000 0 2.000 0 1.000 110 5.000 832 24.000 Mode t Page Off-1 Off-2 Assnd Assnd .11 o Run: 29-Nar-gJ, 8:51 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 02/26/94 - 03/25/94 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 #o~ Received: Activity Resulted: A[~ Oispositions: AIl Officers/Badges: Grids: Patrol Areas: Days of the week: AIl MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Ca[Is For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9000 SPEEDING 57 9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 1 9016 FAILURE TO YIELD 1 9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 3 9020 CARELESS/RECKLESS 2 9026 OVER THE CENTER LINE 1 90~6 OBSTRUCTEO VISION 1 9040 NO SEATBELT 4 9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 17 9140 NO PARKING/gINTER HOURS 16 9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 5 9210 PLATES/NO'IMPROPER-EXPIRED 1 9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 23 9301 LOST PERSONS 2 9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 9 9313 FOUND PROPERTY 2 9314 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED 1 9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 2 9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 7 9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC. 2 9452 H & R ACCIDENTS g/TICKET 1 9560 NEOICAL/AB 1 Page ,J I Iii i J , ,J~,, Run: 29-Mar-~/, 8:51 CFS08 Primary ISN'; o~Iy: No Date Re. fred range: 02/26/94 - 03/25/94 T~"~'~"~-ange each ~y: OO:OO - 23:S9 ;L/ H(>~ R~eived: Ali Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: AIl Grids: AIl Patrol Areas: Al~ Oays of the week: Al~ ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION 9563 DOG AT LARGE 9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 97'50 MEDICALS 9751 MEDICALS/DX 9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 9802 PUBLIC ASSIST ALL HCCP CASES OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 9943 PROWLER 9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 9980 WARRANTS 9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 9993 MUTUAL AID/6500 9994 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 9996 MUTUAL AID/NARCOTICS A2525 ASLT 2-THREAT BOOILY HARM-FIREARM'CHLD°ACQ ~ ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAH A5355 ASLT S-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACG A5500 ASLT 5oTHRT BOOILY HARM*NO ~EAP-UNK RELAT NOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Carts For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 1 6 15 2 1 1 8 6 1 1 1 1 1 Page 2 1132, Run: 29-Mar-9~, 8:51 CFS08 Prir~ry ISN's c~ly: No Date Reported ra~e: 02/26/94 - 03/25/94 Tir~ ra~e each day: 00:00 - 23:59 H~ R~eived: Att Activity Resutt~: AIl Dis~siti~s: Att Officers/B~es: Air Grids: Att Patrol Areas: At~ Days of the week: A{t ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Carts For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS A5502 ASLT S-THRT BUOILY HARM-NO ~EAP-ADLT-ACQ 1 B1260 BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN WEAP-UNK ACT 1 B333~ BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-O-UNK WEAP-CON THEFT 1 B3794 BURG 3'UNOCC NRES FRC-U-UNK ~EAP-COH THEFT 1 D3550 DRUGS-SCH 2 NARCOTIC-POSSESS-COCAIN-OTH CHAR 1 D8500 DRUGS-SMALL AHOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION 3 Fl111 ARSON 1-INHAB-NO gEA-SG RESID-$20000 MORE 1 %3060 CRIN AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 1 J2500 TRAFFIC-GH-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 1 J2EO0 TRAF-ACC-GN-AL 10 MORE-UNK %NJ-UNK VEH 1 J3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-ORIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIOUOR 6 J3EO0 TRAF'ACC-MS-AL 10 HORE'UNK INJ-UNK VEH 6 K600~ DEPRIVE OF PARENTAL RIGHTS-UNK ~EAP-CHLD-FAH 1 L1021 CSC 1-UNK ACT'PARENT-UNDER 13-F 1 ~001 JUl/EMILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER 1 W,I~ LIOUOR - OTHER 1 N5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 4 N319D DISTURB PEACE-#S-HARRASSING CONMUNICATIONS 4 P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GN-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1 P~110 PROP DAHAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 9 01296 STLN PROP-FE-POSSESS-OTH PROP-2500-34999 1 TB99C THEFT-NORE 2500-FE-OTHER-SCH 1-2 CT SUB 1 113. Page Rm: 29-Mar-9/, 8:51 CFS08 Primary ISN's o~[y: No Date Reported range: 02/26/9/~ - 03/25/9/, ~"J""-ange each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: Att Activity Resulted: Att Disposi tiDeS: AtL Officers/Badges: Att Grids: Att Patrot Areas: At~ Days of the week: A~ ACTIVITY C~OE DESCRIPTION MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Ca[is For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE VEH'MORE THAN 2500-FE'THEFT'SNOg408ILE CRIM AGNST AZ)MN JUST'MS'FALSELY REPORT CRIME CRIM AGNST GOVN-GI4-MISCONDUCT PUB OFF'EMPLOYER NUMBER OF INCIDENTS TCO:~9 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-OTH PROP TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TF029 THEFT-201-5OO-ffi-BUILDING-OTH PROP 1 TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GN-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 1 TG029 THEFT-LESS 200-ffi-BUILDING-OTH PROP 1 TG031 THEFT-LESS ZOO-gl-COIN MACH-MONEY 1 TcT'~'~ THEFT-LESS 200-ffi*MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP u30i8 THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS 1 U3~98 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS U3558 FRAUD-MS- F I N- TRAN- CARD- NO- CONSENT- 200- LESS V1021 VEH THEFT-FE-OVER $2500-AUTO 1 V1024 VEH THEFT-fi-OVER 2500-SNC~ILE 1 VA024 1 X3190 1 Y2090 1 Report Totats: Page Run: ~9-M.ar-94 8:23 OFF01 Prieary ISN's only: No Oate Reported range: 02/26/94 - 03/25/94 Tine range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Dispositions: Att Activity codes: At[ Officers/Badges: All Grids: Att MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS Page 1 ACT ACTIVITY CODE DESCRIPTION A2525 ASLT 2-THREAT BODILY HARM-FIREARM-CHLD-ACQ A5354 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM A5355 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLO-ACQ A5500 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM'NO WEAP-UNK RELAT A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ B1260 BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN I~EAP-UNK ACT B3334 BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-CON THEFT B3~ BURG 3-UNOCC NRES FRC-U-UNK WEAP-CON THEFT D]550 ORUGS-SCH 2 NARCOTIC-POSSESS-COCAIN-OTH CHAR 08500 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION Fl111 ARSON 1-1NHAB-NO WEA-SG RESID-$20000 MORE I3060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD J2500 TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR J2EO0 TRAF-ACC-GN-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH J3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-ORIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR J3EO0 TRAF-ACC-NS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INd-UNK VEH K600~ DEPRIVE OF PARENTAL RIGHTS-UNK ~EAP-CHLD-FAM L1021 CSC 1-UN[ ACT-PARENT-UNDER 13-F N3001 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER M~199 LIQUOR o OTHER #5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS P2110 PROP OANAGE-GN-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENOING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 1~n 0 ~,~.0 0,0 Run: 29-Hgr-9& 8:2~ OFF01 Primry ISN's only: No Oate Reported range: 02/26/94 - 03/25/94 T~'~'lnge each day: 00:00 - Z3:59 ~ Dispositions: Att Activity codes: Att Officers/Badges: Att Grids: Att HOUND POLICE OEPARTHENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL COOE DESCR[PTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT Q1296 STLN pROP-FE-POSSESS-OTH pROP-2500-34999 TB99C THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-OTHER-SCH 1-2 CT SUB TC029 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-OTH PROP TC159 THEFT-501-ZSOO-FE-NOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TF029 THEFT-201-5OO-G/4-BUILDING'OTH PROP TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GI~-NOTOR VEH-OTH PROP T~ THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP TG031 THEFT-LESS 200-GI4-COIN MACH-MONEY TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP U~018 THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS U~288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS U3558 FRAUO-MS-FIN-TRAN-CARD-NO-CONSENT'2OO'LESS VI021 VEH THEFT-FE-OVER $2500-AUTO V1024 VEH THEFT-FE-OVER 2500-SNO~BILE VA024 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-SNC~dMOBILE X3190 CRIN AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-FALSELY REPORT CRIME Y2090 CRIM AGNST GOVN-GM-MISCONDUCT PUB OFF-EMPLOYER 0 9 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 I 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 I 0 1 I 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 8 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 ***,~.* Report Totats: 7O Page 2 29 ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... AOULT dUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED 0 0 1 1 11.1 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 1 0 I 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0o0 0 1 0 I 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 3 0 3 75.O 0 0 1 I 100.0 0 1 0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 0 1 100.0 0 1 0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 0 1 100.0 20 12 9 41 58.5 04-Apr- 94 TO: FROM: RE: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR MARCH FINANCE DEPARTMENTREPORT March investment activity Bou_clht: Money Market 4M 90,000 Inst Govt Inc Piper - Income Reinvested 17,181 Money Market 4M - Income Reinvested 1,092 Matured: Money Market 4M (120,000) CP Dain Bosworth (99,115) CP Dain Bosworth (98,989) CP Dain Bosworth (98,926) Balance: ~ MarCh31:;!9~ Audit Auditors from the CPA firm of Abdo Abdo & Eick were with us for a couple of weeks this month. Their audit of the 1993 City financial activity is progressing as scheduled. A report to the City Council will be presented at the April 26, 1994 meeting. Legislative Conference On March 24th Ed, Fran and I attended the 1994 Legislative Conference. In the financial area the LGA and HACA cuts that would be necessary to balance the estimated $29.5 million shortfall in the local government trust fund is of great concern. The City of Mound would lose an estimated $26,327 if the Legislaturedoes not act on the issues related to the Local Government Trust Fund. The legislature needs to stabilize the LGTF and resolve the current shortfall. 1 37 CITY of MOUND 534" MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND L"tt'.~NESOTA 55364 1687 :612~ 472-0600 FAX 6!21 472 0620 PARKS DEPARTMENT / Parks The parks shop has been undergoing painting most of March by the Sentence to Service group from Hennepin County Corrections. This has disrupted our normal preparation of equipment for the spring because all of the equipment is stacked so we can't get at it. We have received the new play structure for Mound Bay Park and have verified with the Minnesota Tree Trust the installation. This structure is planned to be installed in May. The fishing pier for Centerview is scheduled for delivery the first of June. This could not be sooner due to the DNR needing to wait until after the fishing opene~ so they will have time. Cemetery With the thaw we have seen the repair work that needs to be done from the winter burials, though it's not as bad as a few years ago when we had a early snow and no frost. We still had about six plots that need repair. This has to be done by a week before Memorial Day. Docks March is always busy for the Dock Inspector because the majority of the permits come in. This year we will have a surplus of applicants, this was common before the drought we experienced. We will try to provide help in searching for a shared dock site, but will have to not fill some application needs due to lack of sites. Trees Because of weight restrictions, trees currently marked have to wait for removal. We only marked three trees in March. printed on recycled paper CITY of MOUND MOUND. MINNESOTA $5364-1687 (612) ,~72-0600 FAX (6t2)472-0620 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 8, 1994 TO: City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff FROM: Jon Sutherland, Building Official SUBJECT: MARCH 1994 MONTHLY REPORT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY In March there were 50 building permits issued for a construction value of $824,980, this brings year-to-date value to $1,121,039; this is oUr biggest construction start in more than six years (that's as far back as I checked). This activity includes building permits for three new single family dwellings with an average value of $132,000, not including the lot. Two houses are riparian to Minnetonka, and one old house was demolished to make-way. Road restrictions will be coming off about April 15, and activity at the front counter is picking up, as usual. ,PLANNING & ZONING The Planning Commission and City Council was very busy with the normal amount of zoning cases, in addition the Planning Commission received reports from our City Planner, Mark Koegler, on Truck Parking in Residential Areas, Time Limits on Building Completions, and a proposed Ordinance amendment regarding park dedication fees. The City Council will take action on these issues at some time in the future. _RENTAL COMPLAINTS Five rental complaints were acted on this month. The snow is gone, and complaints are picking-up. Eight exterior storage violations were acted on with citation warning letters given. Additional derelict vehicle information and other Community Service Officer activities are listed in the Police Report. printed on recycled paper March 1994 Monthly Report Planning & Inspections Page 2 TRAINING & EDUCATION I attended the Annual International Conference of Building Officials School in Denver, Colorado from the 7th through the 1 1th. The highlight of this education was an in- depth class on progressive administrative procedures given by Jere Kersnar, City Manager of Carmel by the Sea (Clint Eastwood was the Mayor). It was interesting to have a City Manager tell us Building Officials how to run our departments from a Manager's perspective. I appreciated the opportunity to attend. JS:pj City of Mound BUII,DING ACTIVITY REPORT Month: mRC. Year: x994 , , mo nnu~ ~ n , YEAR TO DATE ~']~ ~/¢TIOI~ IIPERMITSIIUNITSI VALUATION ~ IUNITS I VALUATION SINGLE FAMILY O~ACHEO 3 ,, 3 393,29~ ~ 476,917 ,SINGLE FA~LY A~ACHED (CONDOS) ~O FA~LY I DU~EX MULTI~ FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITS) TRANSIE~ HSG. (HOTELS I MOTELS} ,SUBTOTAL 3 3 393,296 6 476,917 ~ I PERMITS VALUATION I PERMITS VALUA~ON COMMERCIAL (RETAI~ESTAURAN~ OFfiCE I ~OFESSIONAL . INDUSTRIAL ~BLIC / SCHOOLS SUBTOTAL I I"' II I .... ~ I PERMITS VALUATION I PERMITS VALUATION ~umn°N$/ALT~TION8 i ............... ,, ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL eU~LD~NG 3 68,386 5 98,886 DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS [ 13,0~6 ' DECKS ] ~ 2,000 I ~ 2,000 SW~MMWG POOLS ~EMOO=L. M~SC RESiDENTiAL ~ 4 46,673 25 82,053 REMODEL - MULT;PLE DWELUNGS [ 180,000 3 303,000 ~UBTOT~ 19 307,059 3~ 508,995 '1 I I," I "' TI ~ PERMITS VALUATION ~ PERMIT~ VALUATION COMMERCIAL ¢RETA~Lm[STAURA~T) 2 9 ~ ~ O0 3 9; 600 INDUSTRIAL 2 115 ~ 527 6 125 t 527 PUBLIC I SCHOOLS DETACHED ACCESSORY aUBTOTAL 4 124,627 7 135,127 omou~O~ , I" ~',~.M~TS, I RESiDENTiAL DWELLINGS I I - 2 - NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 3 - 3 TOTAL D~I 4 J P~RMITS I UNITS VALUATION ~ VALUATION TOTAL 30 824,980 ~ ~, 12] ,039 *~0 ' BUILDING 50 7 FENCES & RETAINING WALLS MECHANICAL 6 2 2 GRADING 0 0 S&W, STREET EXCAV., FffiE. ETC. 3 7 TOT&L J 74 143 I I I . I n , ,t, RECEIVED LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Administrative Committee Meeting Report 5:30 PM, Wednesday, February 23, 1994 Tonka Bay city Hall Present: Bill Johnstone, chair, Minnetonka; Bob Rascop, Shorewood; Bert Foster, Deephaven; Joe Zwak, Greenwood; Tom Reese Mound; Tom Penn, Tonka Bay; Jim Grathwol, Excelsior; Executive Director Gene Strommen, Administrative Technician Rachel Thibault. 1/28/94 QUARTERLY MAYORS' MEETING REVIEW: Johnstone commented that there was a good turnout for the mayors' meeting with 9 cities represented. Excelsior, Mound, Minnetrista, Minnetonka Beach and Woodland representatives gave positive feedback on the LMCD. The overall sense is that the cities do not want the LMCD dissolved, they just want improvements. Foster said that a Deephaven city council member commented that the city councils turn over frequently. He suggested holding an evening meeting and inviting all the council members as well as the mayors to explain about what the LMCD is and does. PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULING: Johnstone suggests holding public hearings before the committee meetings. That would reduce the number of meetings people are required to attend and speed up the process for variances and other applications. Foster was in support of this idea. Zwak asked if the public would also be allowed to be heard at the board meeting. Saturday morning is not a good time for a public hearing. Rascop pointed out that staff would not have time to do a public hearing report or an in depth report. Strommen pointed out the importance of applicants bringing in the information on a timely basis. Applicants put pressure on staff to proceed with applications that are late or incomplete. Johnstone said he would ask the board to think about it and discuss it further at the next administrative committee meeting. COMMITTEE MEETING FREQUENCY AND CONSOLIDATION: Johnstone asked each committee chair to consider if it needs to meet each month. He wants to address the concerns that the LMCD has too many meetings. Johnstone also asked if any committees could be combined. For example the Eurasian water milfoil (EWM) task force could be combined with the Environment committee. Penn said he saw no problem with these two committees being combined as long as neither one was "stifled". Rascop said that certain members of the EWM task force may not be interested in the environment meeting. Strommen pointed out that the · 2- environment committee meetings have been eliminated except for board education and data base Collection. FUND BALANCE AND 1994 BUDGET ANALYSIS: The committee members reviewed a six year income/expense analysis (1989 - 1993 actual and 1994 budget) put together by Strommen. Johnstone said that two issues need to be addressed. 1) What is the appropriate fund balance amount. 2) How does the LMCD get the funds to equal that amount. Johnstone recommended that there be a six month administrative reserve and a one year EWM harvesting program reserve. Rascop asked about any projects in the future that might need to be funded. Johnstone said that the LMCD could ask the cities for funding on an annual basis as the need arises. Strommen pointed out that as a result of the fee study the dock license fee revenue would likely be significantly reduced. If the license fee revenue decreases, the cities will have to contribute more. Rascop recommended reducing the reserves in the 1995 budget, as opposed to 1994. If the LMCD refunds money to the cities at this time, it would look like the LMCD is trying to buy friends. Rascop pointed out that the LMCD gave the cities a reduction in their levies the year the dock license fees were raised. Then the cities expected the levy amounts to stay that low and were upset when the levies returned to the previous rate. Foster asked if the LMCD needs to keep reserves for legal fees. Johnstone said that the LMCD should keep reserves for legal fees. He maintained that six months reserve should be enough. The committee agreed to recommend that the LMCD maintain a six month administrative reserve and a one year EWM harvesting program reserve. There was discussion on the EWM harvesting program. Penn said that harvesting is the only feasible method of EWM control at this time. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION REVIEW, SEVERANCE AGREEMENT: The executive director and the administrative technician left the room during this discussion. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 PM. Executive Director I1't$ TO: INFO TO: FROM: LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT City Administrators City Mayors Treasurer Bob Rascop.~~/ 3/24/94 SUBJECT: Board Action on 1994 Budget Adjustments Your Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors approved adjustments to the 1994 LMCD budget on March 23. This action completes budget adjustments for this year. The 1994 administratrive levy is now reduced to $25,117. You will recall that the board initially adjusted the 1994 budget in February, reducing the administrative levy from $103,500 to $77,742, a reduction of $25,758. This reduction brought the 1994 budget within the .00242% levy allowance. The board then reviewed its fund balances. The administra- tive fund balance is projected to be $209,000, and the milfoil fund balance is projected to be $120,000 as of 12/31/94. At its February meeting, the board adopted a resolution that affirms six months operating costs as its administrative fund balance. The board further resolved that it would reduce the 1994 and 1995 budgets by half of the excess administrative fund balance each year. This excess is $79,250, half being $39,625. This amount plus an additional $13,000 reduction in Contract Services budget brings the net administrative fund levy to $25,117. A recap is as follows: Previously budgeted 1994 administrative levy -- $103,500 Less adjustment to .00242% level - $25,758 Less 1/2 of excess fund balance 39,625 Less Contract Services adjustment _13,00Q Net Adjusted City Admn Levy $ 25,117 The board affirmed a one year operatingcost for the milfoil fund balance. The annual milfoil operations is approximately $125,000, the projected budget for 1994. The milfoil budget is therefore not adjusted. The city levy remains at $63,000 An adjusted 1994 budget and new administrative levy allocations are enclosed. Adjustments will be made to cities with payments as of the April board meeting. Cities not yet fully paid will receive an adjusted balance due notice. Chair Bill Johnstone joins with the entire board in supporting the cities through these fund adjustments. The 1994 and 1995 LMCD levy needs represent temporary low levy requirements as the fund balances are adjusted. 0 0 0 0 000~0000000000 00000000000000 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1994 Budget As Amended 3~23~94 1992 1992 .R, .E..y ~ H g. !~: i::i?: i~ ii:~::i::i~, i~::.i:i ii:~:~ii::~: ~iiii~ii:i Budget Actual LMCD Communities Admn Levy $107,230 $107,230 $60,000 $25,117 $0 $0 $43,432 $65,383 Reserve Fund Allocation $38,000 $46,347 $45,000 $45,000 Court Fines $85,000 $138,595 $117,300 $112,000 Licenses & Permits $8,000 $14,336 $7,000 $6,000 Interest, Public Funds $0 $4,000 Shoreland Rules, DNR City Grants $20,000 $16,000 Shoreland Rules, DNR Consultants $10,000 $8,000 $0 $2,000 $0 $15 $0 $0 .... :'827 ; Other In.c0me :'""~ '": .... :'": "n"'::~:~:~:':~:~:~:~::~:~::!~,23°; $330,523:~:~:~:::~:~ ............................... SdbTotal~ Aaminis[rauo ~ '~: ~i~i~:~:~:~:~:~:~:::~:::~ ~ .............. ' ....... (a) income Prepaid at' 8o%in'1992" LAKEMINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT RECEIVED ';tAR ,/8 1993 1994 Budget Budget 9 EW Milfoil Program $63,000 $63,000 863,000 $63,000 a City Levy $170,000 $0 857,280 $0 b Other Public Agencies $7,930 810,000 $17,000 $25,512 c Private Solicitation 80 $0 $0 $47,000 d Reserve Fund Allocation $0 $17,722 $5,700 ___~6,0_0_~_, ~SubT ................................................................ ye The Lake Program: ~,~ $9 054 $10,000 820,000 10 Sa - - '~ - -'-..', ~4 000 84,000 a Private uonations $O_~q,~uo ' ' ~4"--~ .......... · : ...: .........................:: ..::.: :..:.:: :::: ::~i ~i...i ........ '"'" 8450,004.:: 8420,§42 !'.::$409,50011 DISBURSEMENTS ADMINISTRATION Personnel Services: 8104,500 8106,643 $105,700 $106,150 1 Salaries 80 $0 815,000 $0 mt Plan Impl/PT Tech. ,~-, nr~0 $18,777 818,000 $!9,600 _2 _Mg .... ,,---fit Contributions ........ ~- -~ -~'~~5.-~.~ 13~0~::i:iii:$.! 25i7:5.01:: :~ t-mploy~ uu,,~ ............. . ..... ====================== ...... :~:ii!:::To t a i~:R:.e..r.$.0~.0, el .$ e(:~d;.e S.ii:::iiiiiili:::i::i::ill :: ::i~: ~::i/:::~:::~:i~:/:~::~::~i~i~:/,~:~: ~:~:~:~:~::::: :~ ........ Contractual Services: $10,130 $10,461 $10,482 811,600 6 Profe~s'o ...... .._- ., .-:'-::?::':~:i. !::i::i::=::::i: ~ili:i~ii.: 815,680 ' ~:: Total COntractual :~erwces.:~:::. ~ :~.::.::.~::~:~.~:~:~:~ ............. ................... '::- Office & Administrative: $3,500 $3,888 $3,500 $4,300 8 Office, General Supplies $2,350 $2,045 $2,300 $2,000 9 Telephone 84,000 $3,082 $4,000 $4,000 10 Postage $4,500 $1,682 $3,000 $3,000 11 Printing, Publ. $1,700 $1,480 82,000 $2,000 12 Maintenance, Office Equipment $200 8250 $2OO $235 13 Subscriptions, Memberships $5,200 $4,804 $5,800 $5,000 · urance, Bonds 2 300 $2,129 . ~2,500 $3,000 14 Ins . . ._._~$ , ----- ~,360~:: $23,550i ~.16 :: T°tal Office & Admin ....... ii:i:~:::.i.::i:i:~i:i!iii:i:i:i:~::'~!:~:i:~i'i-' ...... ~---~ It¥1. Page 2 1992 1992 1993 1994 Budget Actual Budget Budget Capital Outlay: 17 Furniture, Equipment $2,000 $4,423 $5,000 $3,000 Legal 19 Legal Services $18,000 $16,095 $25,000 $20,000 20 Prosecution $25,000 $30,O11 $27,000 $30,000 21 Process Service $300 $30 $200 $200 22. i!:]~o tall Legal il i.i i.i i. ii~ .!.i..i.l.i.~il.i.i.7.'.~..!.i.i.l.i..i.l.i.~..i..~.i.i.i. .i.l.ii.i.~..~..~..~ 43,300.I ...~. $ 46,136 ......... $ 52,200.. !.... ~ 50, 200. Contract Services/Studies 23 Shoreland Rules, DNR Consultant $10,000 $3,075 $0 $2,000 24 Shoreland Rules, DNR City Grants $20,000 $3,000 $0 $4,000 25 Lake Use Density Study $12,000 $14,750 $0 $7,000 26 Wetland Inventory Mapping $1,500 $O $O 27 Public Information, Legal Notices $3,000 $100 $3,000 $2,000 28 Public Access Studies $4,000 $1,435 $2,000 29 Mgmt Plan Environment Implementation $0 $O $27,500 $15,000 30 School District Boater Ed. Program $0 $0 $5,000 $10,000 3. !.' To~al.. Co. nti.a.¢.t iSe~.vlc~s!S t ~d.!eSl ::;iiii! iii ill i!iiii~iiiii!ii~iiii!i~iiiiii!:.~i~i:~. $.50,500 i:i ii~: $ 22,360~: ~:$ 37,500 .~ $ 40,0001 CONTINGENCY/MISCELLANEOUS 33 At approx. 5% of Admn Budget $11,500 $0 $0 $0 34 i: :.TO.TAL.ADMINISTRATION $268,230: :: $233,071 .: :$272,732 ::::$259,500 Eurasian Water Milfoil (EWM} Weed Harvesting Program 35 Barge Service $114,000 $0 36 Trucking $32,000 $20,956 $35,280 37 Personnel $45,000 $25,363 $43,560 38 Equipment Ins., WC Ins, FICA, $31,000 $19,113 $9,040 39 Opn,Supplies,Fund Raising $16,000 $16,847 $30,400 40 Contract Services $0 $O $9,250 41 Contingency (at approx. 5%) $12,000 $12,897 $6,380 EWM EQUIP. INFORMATIONAL: Reserve Fund a Accrued for Equipment Acquisition $50,000 $35,000 LAME MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 g. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, Minnesota SS391 473-7033 LMCD MEETING SCHEDULE APRIL 1994 Thursday Saturday Wednesday Friday Monday Wednesdmy 9 13 IS 18 27 Save the Lake Advisory Committee 5:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Public Hearing New dock license applications 8:00 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Water Structure~ Cor, mlittee 8-00 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Meeting 8:00 am, Wayzata City Hall, 600 ~ice Street, Wayzata Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8'30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Public Hearing New charter boat liquor license applications 6:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Lake Use & Recreation Committee 6:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Administrative Committee 6:30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting 7'30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall Wednesday Advance Early May Meeting Notice 4 LMCD report to Mayor~ & City Council members 7-00 pm, Minnetonka Community Center 14600 Minnetonka Blvd, Minnetonka RECEIVED ;.;AR LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, Minnesota 55S91 47S-70SS AMENDED 3/2194 LMCD MEETING SCHEDULE MARCH 1994 Wednesday Wednesday Thursday ~ -urday Monday Wednesday Friday 2 9 10 12 14 23 25 Fee Study Subcommittee 4:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Multiple Dock Envelope Subcommittee 5:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Save the Lake Advisory Coamlittee 5:00 pm, Norwest Bank Board Room Wayzata LMCD Lake Access Committee 7:00 pm, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Water Structures Cor, mlittee 7:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Lake U~e & Recreation Conu~ittee ,5:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Administrative Committee 6:00 pm, Tonka Bay City Hell Public Hearing - Slow/No Wake Zone Adjustments 7:00 pm, Tonka Bay City Hell LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting 7:30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hell Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 am, # 13S Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Thursday 31 Lake Acces Committee Meeting 7:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata RECEIVED .PR 4 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE 7:30 AM, Saturday, April 9, 1994 Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E wayzata Blvd, Rm 135 (Elevator handicapped access, west entrance, Wayzata Blvd) AGENDA 1. Pemtom Co./Blan~or Corp. new multiple dock license application for Trillium Bay subdivision, Minnetrista, Halsteds Bay; Public hearing report and findings for 17 slips; 2. Colson Dock Length Variance, 3219 Lakeshore Blvd., Minnetonka, Libbs Lake; draft findings and order granting a length variance for a 200' dock over wetlands, per conditions stated by the Board; 3. Kent carlson Dock Length Variance, 21650 Fairview Street, Greenwood, Lower Lake South; Public hearing report and findings; 4. S&ndy Beach Place, 3995 North Shore Drive, Orono, West Arm; new multiple dock license, minor change from six to five slips per City of Orono requirements due to loss of one qualifying land structure; 5. Resolution setting fees for 1994 licenses, excluding unrestricted watercraft at non-commercial docks or where provided as an amenity for a special density license; · ResOlution setting new fees for multiple dock licenses starting in 1995 per agreement with multiple dock owners as recommended by the board on 3/25/94; 7. city of Shorewood application to DNR install three dry hydrants on Enchanted Island to provide on-site water supply for fire fighting; 8. Pending issues before the committee (informational-not ready for action): a) Envelope concept subcommittee review per 3/9/94 report; b) Beans Greenwood Marina, Greenwood, St. Albans Bay, new dock license application for minor change in slip location; c) Arvidson new dock license application, request for public hearing is pending response from City of shorewood as to eligibility for a multiple dock with rental slips on this site; d) Minnetonka Boat Works, Wayzata, application for new dock license, variance and special density license received too late to set a public hearing prior to Water Structures Committee, staff recommends public hearing prior to 4/27/94 board meeting; e) Minnetonka Yacht Club new multiple dock license application, pending resolution of issue regarding shoreline ownership; Committee to address conversion of slides to slips and ..... necessity for a special density license; ~. Additional business IIS'o GEN OESON Assistant Minority I.,~ader Senator, Districl 34 ]3] State Officc Building St. Paul, Minnesota 551~ (612) 296-1282 Home: 6~50 ~ua~ Road 110 Wes~ Mound. Minnesota 553~ (612) ~72.3~ Senate State of Minnesota Edward J. $chukle, Jr. City lganager City o£ N~und 5341 Nay~od Road Mound, MN 55064-1687 April 6, 1994 Dear Ed: Thank _you for your letter re~ardin- ~s~- governing the LMCD. T - ~ ~- ~= ~,~ an ~aw ~ ....... . he document you have shared with ~he Lak~ ~.-~ycon~a.mayors ana city councils is draft lan~,~ ~-~ v ~i~ s=a~ an~ the revisor re are a Jabb ......... P ~. t the request of Councilman ~_.~y~f_o~_vr?~o. an~ tot n~s us% tncorporati,a elements' he ,.,~a~vea snouAa~e changed. The purpose was to have a basis for further discussion in the quest for agreement among lake communities.as to appropriate changes in the structure, functions, and f~nanclng of ~he LMCD. There was neve~ any intention on mypart to introduce this as a bill. ~ycond~tion for such an action is pretty strong agreement on the proposal among the lake area communities. · Bringing local disagreements to the Legislature ls no~ greatly appreciated. We have enough trouble dealing with conflict on broader policy issues. Thank you for calling ~omyattention the distribution of the information and the questions it has raised. Sincerely, Gen Olson State Senator GO:cd cC= Representative Steve Smith Mayors and City Councils of Deephaven,' Greenwood, Woodland Excelsior, lti~netonka, Minnetonka Beach, Mlnnetrista, Orono, Shorewood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Victoria and Wayzata Gene Strommen, I2iCD COMMrfTEES · Education · Environment & Natural Rcsourccs· Rulcs and Administration * Taxes and Tax Laws · Transportation and Public Transit SERVING: D¢lan., Fra~klin Townshi.p, Grccnficld, Hanm, cr, ]ndcpcndcncl:. Long Lake. Lorctto, Maplc Plain. Mcdina. blinnctrlsta, MounO. Orono. lbiymouth, Rockford..Rockford Township, St. Bonifacius, Spring Park ' 472-14'15 s241 Shoreline i~lvd., A~ound, Mlnnesot~ 553&4 HEADLINI~RS BAR & GRILL, INC. · Diamond Hill Center 4301 Highway 7, Suite 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Mayor Skip Johnson City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RECEIVED ,-,i-'R- 4 1994 March 31, 1994 Dear Mr. Johnson, It came to my attention yesterday that the following incident occurred in my establishment a few weeks ago. A police officer with the city of Mound had been accused of involvement with cocaine. The news of this had spread through the community. Subsequently on a friday or saturday, a different police officer was making his usual inspection within Headliners. The band playing that evening subsequently stopped playing, and announced to the audience, something to the effect, "Here is the Mound Police. Maybe we can buy some cocaine". Upon hearing of this incident, I called the bar manager, Brian Kelley, to confirm with him what happened. He informed me that the incident basically occurred as stated above. He said that I was not informed of it at that time. We took care of this situation in the following manner: - We informed the band that they would not be playing in Headliners again. - We contacted the police officer present that night to apologize. - We were offended of the crude remark, as were many patrons. The band had no right to use my establishment as a forum to reflect their disrespect for the Mound Police. I personally have the utmost respect for the Police Department, and therefore add my apology for what happened. I hope that a good working relationship can continue with the City and its Police department, and I will do all in my power to maintain it. Sincerely, Mark Saliterman gS'2_ March 26, 1994 Mound City Days is happy to announce our annual celebration June 17, 18, and 19, 1994. We had an excellent parade in 1993 and anticipate 1994 to be bigger and better. The Northwest Tonka Lions and Lioness are sponsoring the celebration this year and we are looking forward to making it better than ever. We invite you to join us on Saturday, June 18 and participate in the parade with your float or other parade unit. Please fill out the enclosed Parade Registration Form to let us know that yo" will participate. We would like to have this filled out and returned by May 28, 1994. Should yo decide to join our parade we will be getting back to you with a map of how to get to Mound, our staging area, parade time, etc. If you have questions please call. Sincerely, Avie Lippert Jackie Greenslit Parade Co-Chairpersons 5515 County Rd. 151 Mound, MN 55364 We are looking forward to having you join us. TELEPHONE # 472-4245 (Avie) 472-0710 (Jackie) )15 NORTHWEST TONKA LIONS AND LIONESS CLUBS 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364 · 472-1155 PARADE MOUND CITY DAYS CE!.F. BRATION REGISTRATION FORM JUNE 18, 1994 PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY GROUP/COMPANY REPRESENTED ADDRESS PHONE CONTACT PERSON NAME ADDRESS CITY & ZIP PHONE # (HOMI~) (woful) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE PARADE UNIT RIEl F. ASE OF LIABILITY: In consideration of the fight to participate; I, and any others with me, hereby release the Mound City Day's Celebration Committee, the City of Mound and their employees or agents or any others from any known or unknown damages, injuries, losses, judgments, and/or claims from any cause or factor involved. Further, each entrant expressly agrees to indemnify all of the foregoing entities, persons and bodies from any and all liabilities resulting from the conduct of entrants, spectators, or any participant assisting or cooperating with entrant and under direction or control of entrant. OPERATION: The Mound City Day's Celebration Committee, the City of Mound and their employees or agents reserve the right to restrict entrants to acceptable behavior during any and all activities. Violation of behavior deemed unacceptable by any hosting bodies will subject individual to removal. Signature: Date: pI.F. ASE RETURN THIS FORM TO: AVIE LIPPERT, PARADE CO-CHAIRPERSON 5515 COUNTY ROAD 151 MOUND, MN 55364 PHONE # 472-4245 (Avie) 472-0710 (Jackie) MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1994 Those present were: Chair Geoff Michael, Commissioners Michael Mueller, Bill Voss, Jerry Clapsaddle, and Mark Hanus, Building Official Jori Sutherland and Secretary Peggy James. The following were absent and excused: Commissioners Frank Weiland and Brian Johnson, and Council Representative Liz Jensen. The following were also in attendance: Oswin Pflug. MINUTES The Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 1994 were presented for approval. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Mueller, to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 1994 as written. Motion carried unanimously. CASE 894-09: MARK HANUS, ~.~.~-S DENBIGH ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, AVALON, PID #19-117-23 24 0001. VARIANCE FOR GARAGE. Mark Hanus removed himself from the Planning Commission for the review of this case. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the applicant's request for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming 4.21 foot side yard setback to the principal structure in order to construct a detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks. This request also results in a hardcover variance of 127.5 square feet, or 1.7 percent. The effects of this slight amount of excess hardcover are mitigated on this site due to the existing topography that slopes towards the lake over predominantly green space. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request as the construction of the garage is a reasonable use of the property, it is conforming to setbacks and the impact on hardcover is minimized by the fact that drainage and storm water is effectively contained on this property. Mr. Hanus noted that the driveway will not slope towards the street, and therefore, will not drain directly onto the street. Abutting neighbor to the east, Oswin Pflug, expressed a concern about drainage onto his property. The Building Official noted that by conducting a field inspection he could verify if the neighbors property will be impacted, and it is possible that gutters or the direction of the roof on the garage could solve these issues. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recommend approval of the variance request as recommended by staff, with visual inspection of drainage issues, and require gutters or some other solution that is feasible to solve drainage problems. Motion carried unanimously. This case will be heard by the City Council on April 12, 1994. J J JJ I ,J , ,1~ , · ", Plannin9 Commission Minutes March 28, 1994 ~ORDINAN(~E AMENDMENT DISCUSSION: SECTION 350:760. SUBD. 4, TRUCK PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. He also handed out a copy of Brooklyn Park's revised ordinance on this topic which was given to him by the City Attorney. The proposed ordinance amendment as prepared by Mark Koegler is as follows: 'Section 350:760, Subd. 4. Truck Parkin~l in Residential Areas. Off- street parking facilities accessory tO a residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of licensed and operable passenger automobiles, pickup trucks, and recreational vehicles. Additionally, no more than one (1) truck and/or trailer not to exceed the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds nor a height of nine (9) feet nor length of twenty-six {26) feet shall be allowed, provided they are stored at all times within an enclosed garage.' Hanus questioned if the Planning Commission intends to require that commercial vans or pickup trucks be parked in garages. Mueller questioned if the weight restriction should be eliminated as some pickup trucks could weight 15,000 pounds. Bird stated that she is in favor of using conditional use permits to determine who can park a vehicle outside on their property as some areas may be more conducive to allow it. It was noted that neighbors move. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle to recommend to the City Council that the following proposed zoning amendment be presented for approvals at the required public hearings: 'Section 350:760, Subd. 4. Trv~k Pprkino in Residential Areas. Off-street parking facilities accessory to · residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of licensed and operable passenger automobiles, pickup trucks, and recreational vehicles. Additionally, no more than one (1) ~ truck, bus, m~l/or trailer not to exceed the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds nor a height of nine (9) feet nor length of twenty-six (26) feet shall be allowed ~0 be parked o~side. I::C'.'~dcd .... , -... MOTION carried ~ to 1. Those in fevor were: Clap~ddle, Mueller, Michael, Voss, and Hanus. Bird opposed for reasons previously stated. This recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council on April 12, 1994. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: TIME LIMITS ON BUILDING COMPLETIONS, Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. The following terminology was proposed: IlS& Plann/ng Cornm/ssion M/nutes March 28, 1994 "Section 300:10, Subd. 5. Time Limits on BuildinQ Completion. Al work required to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations to the exterior of any building or structure in any district shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit issuance. The person obtaining the permit and the owner of the property shall be responsible for this completion. A violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor offense. The City Council may extend the time for completion upon written request of the permittee, establishing to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council that circumstances beyond the control of the permittee prevented completion of the work for which the permit was granted. The extension shall be requested not less than thirty (30) business days prior to the end of the one- year period." The Building Official added that he would also like this section to be retro-active. Hanus stated that the way this proposal is written, it sounds like all work needs to be completed, including decks, stoops, etc. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Mueller, to accept the proposed ordinance amendment for Time Limits on Building Completions, with the following changes: 'All exteripr work required to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations t= t.~= ==tcSor= of any building or structure in any district shall... ' MOTION carded unanimously. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: SECTION 330:120. DESIGN STANDARDS, PUBLIC SITES AND OPEN SPACES ANO PARK LAND DEDICATION. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the City Planner's report. The report concluded that the Planning Commission needs to consider whether Mound's residential park fees need to be revised and if modifications need to be made regarding the fees on lots containing existing structures. Hanus suggested that the park fees be charged per units constructed as this is when the demand on the park system increases. It was noted that this it would be difficult to keep track of who and when a park fee is due; also, the burden of the park fee should lie with the developer, not the builder/owner. The secretary reviewed a motion made by the Planning Commission on May 10, 1993, as follows: "MOTION made by Meyer, seconded by Hanus to inform the City Council that the Planning C(~mmission is in favor of charging a park dedication fee only for newly created buildable lots. Motion carried unanimously." March 28, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recommend to the City Council that Section 330:120 of the City Code relating to Park Dedication fees be amended for minor subdivisions so that only the newly created buildable lots be charged a park dedication fee {i.e. one lot being split into two should pay only one fee; or one lot being divided into three lots should only pay two fees). Motion carried unanimously. There was some discussion regarding the Teal Pointe subdivision and why they were charged only $500 per lot versus 10% of the market value. MOT. ION made by Voss, seconded by Clapsaddle, to adjourn the meeting at 9:41 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Chair, Geoff Michael Attest: 4 PR ES 0 I'~TE D FIRST-CLASS 199,11 Marsh 7, 1994 RECEIVED 2 g lgg( To: All Multiple Dock Licensee From: The Multiple Dock Owner Association As you know, the LMCD attempted to charge the multiple dock owners 15.00 per water storage unit (wsu) for the 1993 season. The Multiple Dock Owner Association challenged them, resulting in a fee of only 10.00 per wsu and a one year cost analysis study to determine future fee structures. The committee engaged in hewing the study contained three persons from the Multiple Dock Owner Association and the final results were presented to them last week. The LMCD will propose to the total board, with the help of our committee, a recommended fee of 7.50 per wsu for the 1995 season. In subsequent years the 7.50 fee will increase only in keeping with cost-of-living increases. This represents a reduction of 50% fi'om the 15.00 originally proposed for 1993. A meeting for all multiple dock owners to be held 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 16, 1994 at the Excelsior Park Tavern. Please attend. If you cannot attend but wish to have some input, the committee members to contact are Gabriel Jabbour 379-2321, Jerry Rockvam 471-0011, and Paul Pederson 473-2550. Your continued financial support of this organization is needed as we continue to incur costs for mailings and legal expenses. Our involvement has saved each member 33% in 1993 and 1994, and 50% for 1995 on. Please forward 5% of your license fee as minimum token of support so that we may continue informing you of issues. All checks should be payable to Lake Minnetonka Multiple Dock Owners Association, P.O. Box 324, Spring Park, MN. 55384. It is our intention to assist the district to operate more efficiently and become less adversarial in dealing with the multiple dock issues. We ask that you do the same and be compliant. I1 ,1 llt I ! , ,ll~ , I II, League of Minnesota Cities 3490 Lexington Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55126 (612) 490-5600 TO: Mayors, Managers/Administrators/Clerks FROM: League of Minnesota Cities President and Mayor of St. Cloud, Chuck Winkelman RECEIVED DATE: March 30, 1994 CITY UNITY DAY RESOLUTION AND RALLY Thursday, April 21 will be Minnesota Cities Unity Day. To celebrate this event, I would like you to do three things: · Pass the enclosed resolution at your next council meeting and send copies to your Legislators and the Governor; · Send the enclosed news release to your local paper; (be sure to fill in the blanks with your city's name and your mayor's name) and; · Encourage one or two people from your city to attend the Cities Unity Day Rally at the State Capitol on April 21st (see enclosed registration) CITY GOVERNMENT MAY ONCE AGAIN BE DEALT WITH UNFAIRLY IN THE TAX BILL UNLESS YOU COME. We must make sure the Governor and Legislature are hearing our message: cities are not.. a "special interest' lobbying on their own behalf at the Legislature; cities are a partner in the government of Minnesota, providing city services to the over three million people who live in cities as well as those who come to our cities to work, for entertainment, or receive an education. Almost every person in Minnesota uses city services on a daily basis. ILL2. CITY UNITY DAY RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Minnesota Cities; and is a member of the League of WHEREAS, Thursday, April 21 1994 is Minnesota Cities Unity Day; WHEREAS, cities working together have established the League of Minnesota Cities action agenda for the 1994 session of the legislative; and WHEREAS, in the closing days of the 1994 session many of these issues remain unresolved; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF that: I. The Legislature and Governor restore the shortfall in the Local Government Trust Fund which they created so that there will be no cuts in government aid (LGA) and homestead agricultural aid credit (HACA) in 1994, and provide reliable additional funding for LGA and HACA in future years to preserve the fiscal stability of cities; 2. Preserve and improve the ability of cities to expand their boundaries in order to provide city services to all who need them; 3. Remove the aid penalties in manufacturing and redevelopment districts so that cities will not be penali?ed for improving their local economies. 4. Increase funding for roads and transit; 5. Establish a new program to clean up landfills and adequately fund pollution clean up grants and; 6. Support the other legislative initiatives of the League of Minnesota Cities. (Note: Send copies of this resolution to your Legislators and the Governor). NEWS For Immediate Release For more information call Duke Addicks, Director of Intergovernmental Relations, Imague of Minnesota Cities (612) 490-5600. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES PRESIDENT DECLARES CITY UNITY DAY. "Thursday, April 21st, will be the first City Unity Day." League of Minnesota Cities President and Mayor of St. Cloud Chuck Winkelman declared. 'The League of Cities Board of Directors has authorized a City Unity Rally at the State Capitol to demonstrate that all city officials throughout the state are working together to improve the delivery of city services to the over four million people who live, work and receive an education in one of our communities." The city of at its meeting on the declaration of Cities Unity Day, according to Mayor joined in "Residents of Minnesota Cities appreciate the ability of cities to provide services at a reasonable cost,' League President Winldeman continued. 'Drinkable water, plowed and maintained streets, sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation programs, police and fire protection are all taken for granted. But city government leaders are also working to improve the local economy, ensuring that there are decent jobs and adequate housing for all. ' "To do this, city government needs fiscal stability," Winkelman adds, "Every city would like to be fiscally independent from state assistance, but the local property tax base often is inadequate to provide the financial resources to achieve this goal. The state contributes about five percent (just over five hundred million dollars) of its annual revenues to help cities maintain these services. This assistance to cities, in the form of homestead agricultural credit aid and local government aid, helps us to keep property taxes down.' "If the Legislature and the Governor would help us strengthen our own local economies we could rely even less on state aids, and an improved property tax base would mean lower taxes for all.' -over- 'The Legislature and Governor seem reluctant to help cities, and the re~idehts Who use"¢ity services daily. A modest 5 % increas6 in.state aid payments would-help us avoid prOi~ny tax increases next year. We're seeking more authority to improve Our local e~nO~tes, through the use of tax increment financing to pay ~ portion of the ebst of new mantl~'aCiu'ring and redevelopment, and a greater ability to manage.the growth of our c0mmtmities through a more efficient boundary adjustment process.' 'By rededicating ourselves to the goals of all the cities in Minnesota and wOrking 't6g~ther through the League of Minnesota Cities; 'we ~,an: send a strong mesgage t6'the state: ':e~tther help cities maintain their viability o~ accept lhe: responsibility fdr their dec~lin~.' League of Minnesota Cities CITY UNITY DAY RALLY TIIURSDAY, APRH. 21 9:00 a.m. Coffee and Rolls 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. Briefing Then walk to the Capitol to confront our Legislators outside the Senate and House Chambers. Meet at the Kelly Inn near the State Capitol in St. Paul Find out how the Legislature will affect cities in the closing days of the 1994 session. Tell your legislators how they can help cities achieve fiscal stability and improve their local economy. THIS WILL BE THE CRITICAL TIME WHEN THE OMNIBUS TAX BILL WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT DEAL ADEQUATELY WITH OUR ISSUP-~ IS BEING FINALIZED. Your presence will strongly influence the outcome of this legislative session. We hope that one or two persons from every city in the state will attend. Return the registration below to Julie Johns, Legislative Secretary at the League. YES! CITY UNITY DAY RALLY. WE'RE COMING TO ST. PAUL TO THE LEAGUE OF MINNF3OTA CITIES (please print or type) City Name Name Name Registration Fee $5 in advance, $5 at the door. (Please make advance registration if at all possible so we can have an adequate number of brief'rog papers) Make check payable and mail to: League of Minnesota Cities Attn: Finance Department 3490 Lexington Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55126 Hennepin County Commissioner Emfl_y Anne Staples invites you to a Town Meeting..' · Meet the commissioners and talk one-on-one. · Tell the Board what matters most to you and your community. · Help the Board set priorities for the next county budget. City of Mound ATTN: Ed Shuk. le 5341. Maywood Road Mound MN 55364 FIRST CLASS U.S. POSTAGE PAID MPLS., MN PERMIT NO. ~.75 ~2 hhh,hh,,Ih,lh,,h,h.lhlh,h,hh,,hh,h,,lllh,,i 114, Henn m - Town Meetings MARK YOUR CALENDAR! THE COUNTY BOARD ¢OMIN~ TO YOUR COMMUNITY Monday, April 11, 7 p.m. Zion Baptist Chuxch 612 Elwood Ave. N.. Mlnneopolls Monday, April 18, 7 p.m. Crystal City Hall, council chmnbers 4141 Douglas Drive. Crystal Thursday, April 28, 7 p.m. Maple Grove City Hall, council chambe~ 9401 Fembrook h:me. Maple Grove Wednesday, May 4, 7 p.m. Southdale Area LU:~my, meeting ~oom 7O01 York Ave. $.0 Edlna Monday, May 9, 7 p.m. The He~'t of the Beas~ Theater 1500 E. Lake St.. Mtnne(q~olts Thursday, May 12, 12 noon · . H®nnepln County ~ovemment Cente~ 3OO S. 6th St.. Mtnnec~s ,I ,I it I I , ,j, , i RECEIVED HAR Z 8 1994 Le[1slatlVe lnlormer ¢- Mar~ 14, 1994 LAKE MINNETONKA REGIONAL PARK DEVELOPMENT FUNDING Funding for Phase I Development of Lake Minnetonka Regional Park is included in the Metropolitan Council Parks Bonding Bill request - H.F ~2047 and S.F. #1733. This bill requests an appropriation of $14,780,000 for Regional Park System capital projects to match $13.3 million in regional bonding. A total of $4 million is included for Lake Minnetonka Regional Park ($6 million is the cost of Phase I Development). The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission has requested the remainder of Lake Minnetonka Phase I Development funding in a LCMR project proposal. Hennepin Parks requests your support for full funding of the Metro Parks Bonding bill. Attached for your information is an u. pdated Lake Minnetonka "Briefing Paper" and development concept map. COON RAPIDS DAM/WALKWAY REHABILITATION FUNDING The Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners adopted rehabilitation as its proposed management plan option for the Coon Rapids Dam, contingent upon receipt of funding and implementation of an acceptable long term plan addressing the future responsibility of the Dam. Funding is being requested through the state of Minnesota's Dam Safety program capital budget request to be matched by regional funds identified in the Metropolitan Council's FY 1994-95 CIP for Regional Parks. Attached for your information is an updated Coon Rapids Dam "Briefing Paper." MINNESOTA SKI SAFETY ACT SUPPORT A bill known as The Minnesota Ski Safety Act - H.F. #165 to define responsibilities, rights, and liabilities of downhill ski area operators and skiers has for the third year in a row been introduced for legislative consideration. As the operator of the Hyland Hill.~ Downhill Ski Area and being an organization concerned about the safety of all skiers, Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners supports the current bill and requests consideration of your support for its passage during the 1994 session. HENNEPIN PARKS SUBMITS PPOJECTS FOR FY 1995-96 LCMR FUNDING Hennepin Parks submitted eight proposals, consistent with LCMR funding priorities and criteria, for consideration of LCMR FY 1995-96 grant awards. The project proposals represent a variety of natural resources management improvements and enhancements of outdoor education and outdoor recreation opportunities for our constituents as well as those of the region and state. Attached is a listing and brief description of the project proposals. In addition, the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission submitted a project proposal for partial funding for Lake Minnetonka Regional Park on behalf of the Regional Park System. HENNEPIN PARKS BOARD - PROPOSAL FOR TOTAL APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS A bill, House File #2116, author Myron Orfield, was submitted relating to the appointment of certain metropohtan area special boards and county officials. It is expected that the author may modify this bill which was introduced on February 28, 1994; however, right now the bill proposes specific changes which will dramatically change the manner of determining the membership of the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District Board of Commissioners. Currently, five board members are elected from representative districts and two are appointed by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. This bill proposes that all seven commissioners be appointed by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. At its March 3, 1994 meeting, the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners took action opposing this proposal. PARK DISTRICT COMMISSlONI~.~ Commimioner Park District CORCORAN, Madllma 493-8O07 42~-5717 Srookllm Cen~r Brooklyn Park Osseo Champlin Robbinsdale ¢orcoran Dayton ~,~NZ~g, Rosemary ~ 789~13 Commissioner Park District Fort SnelUn8 St. Anthony Hopkins · , · MARQUARDI', tinda (Vice Chair) Maple Gm~ ~ Park Maple Plain Tonka ~y. Medina Wayzata Medicine Lake Woodland R~n~um, Sr~u~ Kay O. 473-O89O TAUBR, M~cia I'L 932-0807 Commissioner Park District 3 - Elected ~ New HOl~ Golden Valley St. Louis Park ~h4/informer.94 RECEIVED 2 8 1994 HENNEPIN PARKS LAKE MINNETONKA REGIONAL PARK BRIEFING PAPER Update - March, 1994 Hermepin Parks requests your support of the Metropolitan Council's 1994-95 Capital Improvement Program for Regional Parks at a funding level of $14.8 million to match the $13.3 million that will be generated by regional bonds. Partial funding for Phase I Development for Lake Minnetonka Regional Park ($4 million) is included in this capital funding request. Fulfilling a Dream, a Priceless Heritage A major park on Lake Minnetonka has been envisioned since the early 1900's. Lake Minnetonka, one of the largest lakes in the state at 15,000 acres, has always received a great deal of public interest and has been used as a recreational retreat. Until the purchase of the 292 acre Regional Park, less than 3% of Lake Minnetonka's 111 mile shoreline was in public ownership and most of that use was severely restricted through parking and other limitations. Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will provide to the public a significant opportunity to enjoy one of the most beautiful natural resources in the metropolitan area and the state of Minnesota; a lake that has been frequently referred to as a "priceless heritage." "The Time is Now" for Lake Minnetonka Regional Park Lake Minnetonka Regional Park, when fully developed, is expected to serve over 400,000 people annually. Once completed, Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will be a great asset to the state of Minnesota, the metropolitan area, and to the communities surrounding it. The acquisition and planning of Lake Minnetonka Regional Park represents a significant public investment and commitment. An expectation has been created that Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will soon be open for public use. The "time is now" to fulfill this commitment and provide citizens access to the lake and enjoyment of the park's natural and cultural resources and planned activities. If full development funding is received, Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will be under construction this year as the plans, specifications, and bid documents have been prepared and this project is ready to go out for bids. Developer's Agreement - Resolution of Support Approved by the City of Minnetrista The plarming process for Lake Minnetonka Regional Park has been extensive, involving many public task forces and meetings. Hennepin Parks and the City of Minnetrista have worked together and, as a result, the revised Development Plan and Developer's Agreemen. t. has been adopted by both the Minnetrista City Council and Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners. In addition, the City of Minnetrista passed a resolution of support in January of 1994for the development of Lake Minnetonka Re~onal Park utilizing state funding. Il'lO HALSTED BAY .+ CARYER ~ RESERYE ,f PHASE II DEVELOPMENT STONE LAKE '4- LAKE MINNETONKA LAKE ZUMBRA ~ .~, ~ LAKE MINNETONKA REGIONAL PARK development plan Phase I Development - Estimated Cost $6 Million (1994 cost estimate) The development of Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will be divided into two phases. Phase I Development will encompass construction of all facilities in the 115 acres east of the proposed realigned County Road 44. Specific facilities to be included in Phase I Development include: 1. Boat access/docking 5. Visitor Center 2. Fishing 6. Cultural Resource Interpretation 3. Picnicking 7. Bike/Hike Trails 4. Swimming 8. Recreation Support Facilities Boat Launch: The boat ramp will provide access to the lake. Make ready docks will be provided at this location. Vehicle parking will be located on the plateau at the top of the hill for 48 car/trailer combinations. Multiple Boat Docks: Permanent boat docks will provide for transient boat dockage. A total of 20 slips will be regulated by Pubhc Safety personnel. An emergency services dock will be located near the Visitor Center. Fishing Piers: Handicap accessible fishing piers will be located along the shorehne with access from the Visitor Center and boat launch area. Visitor Center: A Visitor Center will be developed at the existing "Gagne" residence and will support uses such as archaeological, historical and cultural interpretation, park operations, park ranger, and a variety of other visitor services. Swimming Pond: A swimming pond of approximately 1.75 acres in size is proposed for the area immediately south of the large central hill. The pond will have a maximum depth of 6 feet and will have 1,000 lineal feet of shoreline. A concession building and toilet facilities will be constructed as support facilities to the swimming pond. Picnic Areas: General picnicking will be provided throughout the park under Phase I construction. A total of 12 acres is available for picnicking in and around the swimming pond, wooded areas and hills. Trails: Paved bike/hike trails will be provided throughout Phase I Development, as well as, along both sides of the new county road reahgnment. Also, trail connections will be provided at current and/or proposed city access locations. Phase H Development - Estimated Cost $2.55 Million (1996 cost estimate) Future Phase II Development will include construction of all roads, parking and recreation facilities west of the proposed County Road 44 realignment. Specific facihties to be included in Phase II Development include: 1. Halsteads Bay Boat Access (32 spaces) 2. Fishing 3. Picnicking 4. Bike/Hike Trails 5. Recreation/Support Facilities 6. Trail Connections shl/Ikmtnka.brf ,11 ,,11 I~J J J ~ ,11, , I il, HENNEPIN PARKS REC;EIVED COON RAPIDS DAM BRIEFING PAPER UPDATE - MARCH 1994 Brief Summary of Problem ,, The Coon Rapids DaIh~'ig'ii"i~ajor...'featgr~--.within Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park, which is located on both sides of the Mississippi River in the cities of Brooklyn Park and Coon Rapids. The Dam structure is over 80 years old and due to normal wear has deteriorated to the point where the structural deficiencies have threatened the safety and integrity of the Dam. The walkway connecting the regional park property on the east and west sides of the Dam was closed in December, 1992 at the request of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. An engineering study of the Dam conducted by Hennepin Parks in 1993, confirmed the need for structural repairs, identified the scope of repairs, and proposed alternative repair technologies. This engineering analysis was used by the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners to prepare a management plan for the Coon Rapids Dam. In addition, public meetings were held and written comment solicited to determine public sentiment on the future of the Dam. Options considered included: rehabilitation, removal and hydroelectric power generation. Engineering estimates for rehabilitation of Dam and construction of an independent bicycle/pedestrian walkway is $6.2 million. Hennepin Parks Management Plan After months of study and consideration of public input, the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners at its December 16, 1993 meeting, adopted a resolution establishing rehabilitation as the preferred management plan for the Dam and walkway, pursuant to the following contingencies: (1) That the Park District receive, during fiscal year 1994-95, needed funding from the state of Minnesota Dam Repair Program and Metropolitan Council regional park funding totalling $6.2 million, and (2) That an acceptable long-term financial plan addressing future dam/walkway repairs and rehabilitation be established. 1994 Funding Request before the State Legislature Hennepin Parks has requested a ~.1 million funding match for the Coon Rapids Dam be included in the DNR's 1994 State Capital Funding Request Dam Safety Cost Sharing Program for Publidy Owned Dams. This match equals the $3.1 million jointly requested by Hennepin Parks and Anoka County in the Metropolitan Area Regional Park System Capital Improvement Program to be funded with regional bonding. Funding requests for the DNR are reviewed by the House Capital Investment Committee and Senate Environment and Natural Resources Finance Division. As of February 5, 1994 the Governor's funding recommendation for dam repair, reconstruction and removal includes $2.5 million for Coon Rapids Dam repair. This is $600,000 short of the $3.1 million that is actually needed to facilitate the rehabilitation. We ask your support to increase the allocation to the DNR to provide full matching funds needed to complete the project. (over) Feasibilit~j/Practicality of Hydropower Development as a Solution The analysis by Stanley Consultants, Inc. shows that based on certain assumptions regarding the elevation of the reservoir, the rate paid by NSP for the power which is generated, and the bond interest rate on money borrowed to do the project, that hydropower is feasible at the Coon Rapids Dam. However, any large increases in bond interest rates, failure to negotiate a favorable power purchase agreement with NSP, and/or failure to politically or legally hold the pool up in the winter to a greater extent than we do today, will mean that hydropower will not serve as an acceptable solution. Hennepin Parks is also concerned that it is not the appropriate agency to be operating a hydropower facility. The Hermepin Parks Board has established that if rehabilitation is done, it will be accomplished in a manner that will not preclude hydropower generation in the future. Timing of Dam Rehabilitation Once funding is approved and an acceptable partnership addressing a long term plan for future public financial responsibility is identified, it will take several months to finalize rehabilitation designs, choose a gate system, prepare plans and specifications, secure necessary permits, and enter into contracts. If funding is approved by May 1994, it is estimated that the project could be bid out in the winter of 1994-95 with construction actually beginning in early 1995. The construction is likely to take more than one season to complete because of the amount of work that needs to be done, the difficulty of the work, the unpredictability of the weather and the probability that specialized equipment will have to be ordered and manufactured. For Further Information Contact: Douglas F. Bryant, Superintendent 559-9000 / 559-6719 (TDD) Copies of Hennepin Parks' Coon Rapids Dam Management Plan Options Report (includes engineering analysis) is Available Upon Request (Previously Distributed to Suburban Hennepin Legislators) Coon Rapids Dam Briefing Paper Background and History History, of Hennepin Parks and Coon Rapids Dam The property surrounding Coon Rapids Dam and the Dam structure, located over the Mississippi river between Coon Rapids and Brooklyn Park, was obtained by Hennepin Parks in 1969 from NSP. The Dam stmc~e was purchased for a nominal fee of $15,000, and as part of the agreement. NSP gave Hennepin Parks 225+ acres of parkland and $300,000. In 1974, NSP followed with an additional $500,000 for dam repairs. The last maior repairs to the Coon Rapids Dam structure were completed in 1976, at a cost of approximately $2.8 million. The structural condition of the Dam and its walkway has deteriorated over time. Hennepin Parks has been conducting annual in-house engineering site analysis, to insure public safety while the Dam has continued to be functional. Since 1978, possible reuse of the Dam for hydroelectric power generation has been pursued by both public and private developers who would have been responsible for existing and future repairs as part of any hydropower project; therefore saving unnecessary expenditure of tax dollars. Hcnnepin Parks has recognized the need to secure funds to repair thc Dam, even before there was a immediate concern regarding its safety. In 1988 and again in 1990 matching funds for dam repairs were requested from the state legislature by the Department of Natural Resources as permitted under Minnesota law. Grant monies were not allocated in either year. It was not until 1991 that a determination was made that the structural condition of the Dam had deteriorated to the degree that its safety and integrity were in question. A 1992 inspection resulted in the closing of the walkway. Public Benefits of Coon Rapids Dam Although Hennepin Parks is the responsible agency, little value is provided to suburban Hennepin taxpayers who financially support the park system. Only 181 homes on the Hennepin County side directly benefit from a recreation pool created by the Dam. Logically, the Dam should be owned/managed by a government agency with a broader taxpayer base or should be in private ownership. Recreational amenities created at the Dam serve a regional metropolitan population and do not just serve suburban Hennepin taxpayers. Hydro-electric power was generated at this site from 1913 - 1966; and as an alternative, the site could be reactivated. Hydro-power is an environmentally friendly, renewable resource that should be captured and used where viable. A hydro-power facility may be able to generate revenue to cover operating costs and present/future dam repairs, over and above repaying the capital improvement costs. The walkway provides a trail linkage between the Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park property on the east and west sides of the Mississippi river and the Dam creates a recreational pool extending up stream for 5.4 miles. The pool is used by the public for fishing, boating and waterskiing. The Dam and walkway attract 30,000 - 40,000 (1989 use figure) sightseers annually, to experience the rushing waters of the Mississippi River as well as serving as a unique historical/cultural interpretation. In 1990, total park usage was recorded in excess of 200,000 visitors per year. The amenities provided by Coon Rapids Dam are consistent with the objectives of the Mississippi National River Recreation Area (MNRRA) Management Plan. The Coon Rapids Dam is located within the MNRRA corridor. sh4/crdinfo.5 RECEIVEr SUMMARY OF HENNEPIN PARKS' FY 1995-96 LCMR PROIECTS Redevelopment: Regional Environmental Education Center at Anderson Lakes The Richardson Nature Center, located in the Hyland Lake Park Reserve in Bloomington, is ideally situated for introducing large numbers of inner-city and suburban school children to the natural world. However the facility, a converted residence, has long been identified in need of a major expansion and re-development in order to meet current demand and to adequately serve the metropolitan area in a manner similar to other full service nature centers. The Environmental Education Center 2000, Study of Environmental Education Centers, conducted by the DNR and funded by the LCMR in 1992, identified the need to improve this Nature Center. This grant proposal requests funding for the construction of a full-service nature center, within the Hyland-Bush-Anderson Lakes Park Reserve, replacing the existing Richardson Nature Center. The proposed center would be a unique environmental education facility, an '~mvironment Living Center" which would promote an environmentally responsible lifestyle through programs, exhibits and activities and through the manner in which the fadlity is designed and operated. The "Environmental Living Center" would not only better serve the southwestern metropolitan area as a nature center, but would also be a unique regional resource, providing 'qaands on" experience for many aspects of lifestyle decision making related to topics such as: energy conservation, waste management, water quality protection, the home environment, and being an environmentally responsible consumer. Total Cost Estimate: $2,130,000 Hyland Lake Park Reserve Bike/Hike Trail Rehabilitation - Improvement Project The 5.1 mile bike/hike trail at Hyland Lake Park Reserve was paved in 1972. Trails were designed for bicycling and walking, with trail widths of 8 ft and curves/grades meeting bicycle use standards at the time. Hyland Lake Park Reserve is one the most heavily used parks in the Hennepin Parks system with an annual attendance of approximately 456,000 visitor occasions. Specifically, bike/hike trail use has increased dramatically over these 21 years. Trail use in 1975 was calculated at 15,500 and in 1993, 76,000 user occasions. Because of this intensity of use, its age, and normal wear and tear, the trail is in need of certain maintenance improvements to keep it in a safe and useable condition. These increasing volumes and types of trail uses are resulting in use conflicts, i.e. walkers, bikers, in-line skaters. In addition, high-use urban recreation facilities, which include trails, should be modified to better accommodate persons with varying abilities. This project would address these safety and use issues by widening the trail to 12 feet, overlaying the surface of the trail and making certain drainage and realignment improvements. This project is intended to be the first in a series of major bike/hike trail rehabilitation projects, starting with parks experiencing the highest use and determined to have the greatest need for safety improvements. Total Cost Estimate: $660,470 & LCMR Projects - 2 - 1/20/94 Site Selection and Design of Regional Residential Environmental Education Center The metropolitan area does not have a public residential center for environmental education. Both the E.E.C. 2000 Study of Environmental Education Centers and the Minnesota Environmental Education Plan identify the need for such a facility within the metro area. This proposed project grant would fund a consultant to work with Hennepin Parks staff to conduct an evaluation study to select an optimum site with a Park Reserve and then working with representatives of the educational and interpretive communities, prepare the program/concept and design development plans for sitework and architecture for the regional residential environmental education facility. Development funding would be requested in future LCMR Project cycles. The site plan would be developed in consideration of state of the art knowledge of universal design concepts and incorporate resource conservation technology within the facility design. The residential environmental center would be available to serve schools and groups from the metro area and around the state. The reduction in travel time and transportation costs would make overnight outdoor education experiences more access~le to many school children. Total Cost Estimate: Study Grant for LRT/Scott Regional Trail and State DNR Minnesota Valley Trail Connection The south corridor of the LRT Regional Trail passes within one mile of the junction of the Scott Regional Trail and the State Minnesota Valley Trail. Unfortunately, this direct and important connection is dependent on using, for trail purposes, the causeway and bridge that carry U.S. 169 across the Minnesota River and flood plain. With the opening of the "mini-bypass" bridge (on present U.S. 169), the old bridge over the river is available for trail use. The causeway, however, would need to be shared by trail and road uses. The problem is that the trail would be lower than the road and even the road is subject to flooding (as in the summer of 1993). Despite these obstacles, the trail connection is important. The connection would immediately link over 20 miles of the Minnesota Valley Trail (Belle Plaine to Shakopee) to 11 miles of the LRT (Hopkins to Chaska). Upon completion of the Scott Regional Trail to Shakopee, an additional 13 miles (including three regional parks and the City of Prior Lake) would be added. With a short connection from Hopkins to Minneapolis, the entire city of Minneapolis Trail system would be available. With further connections to be implemented in 1994, the connection would provide a trail from Belle Plaine to the end of the Gateway Trail, a trail almost 100 miles in length. The study would focus on four aspects of the trail connection: 1. How often would the connector trail be flooded at various elevations on the causeway? 2. What is the probability of building a trail on the road causeway, given safety and flooding considerations? LCMR Projects - 3 - 1/20/94 Aside from loss of trail use (during flooding and cleanup), what are the impacts of flooding on a trail? This would involve consideration of special construction requirements to lessen flood damage and surveying existing trails that flood periodically. 4. What are the costs of establishing a trail that would be compatible with the roadway, the flooding and the flood plain/wetland complex? Total Cost Estimate: $25,000 Baker Park Reserve Campground Rehabilitation Project Baker Park Reserve's overnight campground was developed in 1979-80. This campground has 210 campsites suited for tents, trailers and motorhomes and serves approximately 59,000 visitors annually. The original development provided a main shower/toilet building and three additional toilet buildings spaced out around the main loop. Since the original construction, the Park District has added showers at the west toilet building, electrified two camper loops (27 sites) and completed various planting projects for screening purposes. The campground serves the metropolitan area as well as visitors and is becoming somewhat outdated when measured against park guest expectations. Additional improvements are needed to better meet current service demands, improve sanitation, and facilitate greater user satisfaction. The proposed project grant would fund the improvements including: Addition of electrical plug-ins for the balance of the interior loop: Sites with electrical plug-ins have been the most requested and heavily used sites in the campground. Most modern campers are requesting the availability of electricity. Operationally, these sites have proven to be advantageous because of the reduction in the use of gasoline powered generators, which create undesirable noise. A total of 97 additional electric sites would be added. - Increase vehicle pad lengths: Some state-of-the-art recreation vehicles have increased in length since the original campground design and construction. To accommodate this trend toward increased recreational vehicle length, several campground spurs will be increased in length or realigned to provide a pull through spur. A total of 5 spurs would be redesigned to accommodate larger RV's. - Improve sanitary facilities: In an effort to reduce disposal of "gray water" throughout the campground area, a 175 sq. ft. centrally located dishwashing facility will be constructed. As part of this LCMR Projects - 4 - 1/20/94 building, a fish cleaning area will be provided to properly dispose of wastes assodated with fish cleaning. Total Cost Estimate: $251,522 Installation of Alternative Energy Applications for Public Recreation This project proposes the use of photovoltaic technology and composting toilets to provide improved amenities at three public camping or picnic facilities within Hennepin Parks as an alternative to traditional septic systems which disrupt large areas of soil and vegetation. The project will also provide opportunity for experiential public education regarding alternative energy. The project will be designed to demonstrate that it is economically feasible and environmentally responsible to provide these support amenities at remote sites in natural areas through use of photovoltaic energy, in a manner that does not compromise the scenic resources. The project will also demonstrate that photovoltaic cells are cost effective in remote site applications. Total Cost Estimate: A Holistic Approach to Reforestation With Native Species This project would restore to native forest vegetation, a 200+ acre tract of former "Big Woods" forest in Lake Rebecca Park Reserve, which is currently dominated by monotypic stands of non-native grasses. A multitude of natural and man-made factors can affect reforestation success, necessitating a holistic approach to this project. A wide variety of inter-related techniques will be employed to maximize reforestation success including: · Controlling the impact of whitetail deer through the use of fencing. · Reducing competition from exotic grass vegetation through mechanical and chemical techniques. · Establishing new native deciduous woodland plant communities through seedling planting, natural and artificial seeding, and tree spade installation of large seed- bearing trees. · Implementing a cooperative effort with municipalities to collect urban leaf waste to be used as a soil amendment and mulch for newly established trees and shrubs. · Developing monitoring systems to make comparisons between the results of the various demonstrated techniques and reforestation efforts on similar but un-fenced sites. Total Cost Estimate: Children's Experiential Forest: Growing Up Together Proposed is a youth environmental education project directed at the development and on-going natural resources management of a 100 acre tract of land within a Hennepin Park Reserve with an outdoor education facility. Each year a group of approximately 30 young people will be selected from a diverse cross-section of schools and organizations in the Metro region to participate in a week-long intensive training program, aimed at investigating natural resources management issues, landscape design, and the integration of human activities into the natural environment. LCMR Projects - 5 - 1/20/94 These "land stewards" will develop a management plan for the property and meet periodically during the year to monitor its implementation. Work projects prescribed by the plan will be conducted by youth groups and school classes that visit Hennepin Parks for environmental education activities. The proposed project is similar to a national youth program conducted by the U.S. Forest service in the San Bernardino National Forest. The projected outcomes of this project are: (1) an out-of-classroom opportunity for young people to accept responsibility for the management of a natural area, (2) a land management plan which will promote environmental education; healthy outdoor recreation opportunities; youth participation; responsible ecosystem management; and utilize universal access design concepts, (3) increased awareness of natural resources management professions. The proposed project grant will fund a project coordinator, recruitment and selection of participants, camping accommodation and food, tools (shovels, soil testing kits, field guides, etc.) and a portion of materials required for work projects during the first two years of the program. Hennepin Parks will provide a 50% match for the cost of erosion control fabric, topsoil, wood chips, fencing material, bare root trees, signs. Total Cost Estimate: $70,000 msl :lcmr9596.sum · I it I i , ,il,, I It CITY OF ROBBINSDALE 4221 LAKE ROAD )BBINSDALE, MINNESOTA 55422 TELEPHONE: (612) 537-4534 CITY COUNCIL April 5, 1994 Skip Johnson, Mayor City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1687 RECEIVE[}/ ?R 6 199 Dear Skip, I enjoyed our visit at the National League of Cities Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C. We spoke about pending legislation at the Minnesota State Legislature regarding pawnshops and I thought you might like an update, as well as the information we have gathered on pawnshop regulation. Since we last spoke, the State Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee passed S.F. 1702 which would require a study be conducted by the Commerce Department on the pawnshop industry in Minnesota. The bill is currently on General Orders and waiting for passage by the full Senate. The companion bill, H.F. 2980 was approved by the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee and has been referred to the House Economic Development Infrastructure and Regulation Finance Committee. History has shown that the people least able to afford it seem to be the people who frequent pawnshops. We are not trying to put anyone out of business, however, we feel it is important to protect the rights of our citizens. As we feel strongly about this issue, the City Council passed the enclosed resolution in support of the legislation and sent copies to the bill's authors, who are also the City's respective legislators, Senator Reichgott Junge and Representative Lyndon Carlson. We would hope that the City of Mound might join us in passing a similar resolution and forwarding copies to its respective legislators. Your time and thoughts are important to me on this issue and I would be happy to answer any further questions you might have. Please free to contact me at home (588-2502) or at work (332-0552). Thank you for your participation in this matter and I look forward to working with you in the future. Sincerely, bbinsdale Com~ber, Ward II Enclosure RBZ/ds AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER II 8~ Exhibi~ ~ Senate State of Minnesota TO: Tom Krucger FROM; Pat McCormac,k, Senate Research DATE: J~y 15, 1993 ,/ RE: Pawnshops Pawnbrokers and pawnshops arc regulated by counties. Minnesota Statutes 471.924 through 471.929 allow counties to regulate the existence of pawnshops, and to cooperate with municipalities. A municipality may also regulate by ordinance the pawnshops within its boundaries, but must file the ordinances with the county and cooperate with the county. There arc other restrictions on pawnbrokers, including restrictions on their selling an item too soon (609.81) and on thc loans they may give (56.2,6). Essentially, however, the industry is regulated at the county level, with cities also having some ability to make ordinance~s. Most states also place regulation in the hands of the city or county. A given city or county may want to restrict where a pawnshop is located (zoning) and may want to require a license. I would recommend to Mr. Zagaros that he call the relevant county board and ask if they have any regulations for pawnbrokers. If they do not, he could propose a city. ordinance for Robbinsdale, requiring a license and placing other restrictions on the business. The state does not become involved in these matters. PJMcC:jb ROBERT A. AL. SOP ~.rd~ j. BUBm COUleE A. JAM~ $. BOL,M~ DAVID J. JOH~ R. *WKLL,FNGTON H. [.AW HOLMES & GRAVEN CliARTERE~ 470 PIIIsbu~ Ceuter, Mmm~ooJis, Mlnn,~so~ $5402 (612) 327.93O0 337-9310 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL 337-9217 JOHN M. L,F. FL*~tF~ ROBF. IT J. I.,IHDAL~ LAUBA IL MOLI.~r BAIL~.B.A L. PORTWOOD J,q.M]~ M. STJtOMMEN JAJdZS J. ~HOMSON. JL LAIIY M. WEBTHFIM BONNIt I~ WILKINS- GAIY P, WINTr~ DAVID L. G~AVEN OF COUNSEL ROBERT C. CARLSON ROBEIT [.- DAVI~SON October 5, 1993 Mr. Robert Zagaros City of Robbinsdale 4221 Lake Road Robbinsdale, MN 55422 RE: Pawnbroker Rates Dear Mr. Zagaros: John Dean asked me to respond to your inquiry regarding the maximum rates which a pawnbroker may charge on a pledge. Our research revealed the following. Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.81 provides that a pawnbroker who "lends money on a pledge at a rate of interest above that allowed by law" is guilty of a misdemeanor. Section 609.81 does not specify the maximum rate of interest. However, the notes to the statute refer to the Minnesota Regulated Loan Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 56.001 to 56.26. The Minnesota Regulated Loan Act has existed in some form since 1939, and the statute has been interpreted not to apply to persons engaged in the pawnbroking business, unless the pawnbroker was making unsecured loans. In 1981, the legislature enacted Section 56. 002, which expressly excepts licensed pawnbrokers from the application of the statute. I spoke with a staff member of the department of commerce (the agency that enforces the Minnesota Regulated Loan Act), and the staff person confirmed that the department does not regulate pawnbrokers or the rates charged by pawnbrokers. Despite our research, we were unable to locate any statute or case that resolved this paradox: (1) pawnbrokers can be prosecuted for charging a rate of interest above that allowed by law, but (2) there appears to be no law that sets a maximum rate of interest on pledges. The department of commerce advised that, when property is pledged, the transaction is not considered a loan and the amount charged is not considered interest. Our office can request the attorney general to provide an opinion regarding this matter. If the attorney general confirms that there is no limit on pawnbroker pledge fees, you could provide the opinion to local legislators as a first step in seeking legislative amendments to impose limits. Because the City must pay for an opinion Mr. Robert Za~aros October 5, 1993 Page 2 of the attorney general, our office will not request an opinion unless directed by staff or the council. Please let us know if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, HOLMES & GRAVEN, CHARTERED Corrine A. Heine cc: Fran Hagen Senate Counsel & Research FaX ~1~ ~ Exhibit Senate State of Minnesota FROM: DATE: RE: Tom Krucgcr Tomas Stafford, Scnnte Counsel (29(>-4395),~ Jamuary 5, 1994 ~; tnter~s~ Ch~ ...... Minnesota Statute. t, seetibn 609.81 provides that a pawnbroker who "lends money on a pledge at a rate of interest above that allowed ~ law" is gusty of a misdemeanor. Unfortunately, Minnesota Statutca do not set a maximum rate of interest on pawnbroker pledges, rendering section 609.81 unenforceable as it relates to pawnbrokers. There m'e s~,eral options available to eliminate this contradiction. The option~ vary according to thc rate of interest thc lcgi,daturc wi~hes to apply to pawnbrokers. Our office could draft legislation limiting pawnbrokers to one of the maximum intcrest rates applicable to vazious entities, such as credit cards (18%), industrial thrifts and loans (21.75%), or Minnesota Regulated Loan Act licensees (33% on the unpaid balance of a principal amount under $750 and 19% on the unpaid balance of a principal amount exceeding $750). Additionally, thc legislature could simply mandate a spc~-'ific intcrcst rate applicable only to pawnbrokers. Al print, thc Minnesota Regulated Loan Act, Minnesota Statutes, .~-tiom 56.001 to 56.26, does not apply to pawnbrokcrL In fact, section 56.002 of thc Act was amcndcd in 1981 to specifically exclude pawnbrokers. Section 56.131 of thc Act contains maximum interest rates of 33% and 19% applicable to certain licensees. The Act could be ~mcndexl to cover pawnbrokers. If you would Uke our office to draft legislation on one or mom of these options, please let us know. TLS:cg ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 13 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Exhibit A bill for an act relating to commerce: regulating the interest rate charged by pawnbrokers; prescribing penalties; amending Minneso%a Statutes 1992, section 609.81. BE IT ENACTED BY TH~ L~GIgLATUR~ O? THE STATS OF MINNESOTA: Section !. Minnesota Statutes 1992, section 609.81, is amended to read: 609.81 [MISCONDUCT OF PAWNBROKERS.] Subdivision 1. [MISDEMY~ANOR.] Whoever in business as a pawnbroker does any of the following is guilty of a misdemeanor: (1) Lends money on a pledge at a rare of interest above that allowed by Saw subfivision 2; or (2) Possesses stolen goods and refuses to permit a law enforcement officer to examine them during usual business hours; or (3) Sells pledged goods before the time to redeem has expired; or (4) Eavlng so£c pledgee goods, refuses to disclose to the pledgor the name of the purchaser or the price for which sold; or (5) Makes a loan on a pledge to a person under lawful age, without the written consent of the person's parent or guardian. Subd. 2. [RATE OF INTEREST.] A pawnbroker may contract for and receive interest, calculated accordin? to the actuaria~ method, not exceed!no the ~reater of the followinc: (:) ~ne total cf: ti) ~3 percent per year on that part of the unpai~ balance of tBe psin~Epa! amount not exceeding $750; and (ii) !9 percent per year on that part of the unpaid balance of the principal amount excee~in~ $750; or ,(~) a minimum :barge of SiO. The defi~,tion~ ~ontained ~ ~¢~iPn 5~,OD1 appl~ t~ thi~ subdivision. TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Francis D. Hagen, Sr., City Manager March 8, 1994 Council Support of Pending Legislation Regulation on Pawnshops Regarding Proposed Interest Rate During the 1993 licensing season many resident~ voiced concerns about the price, penalty or interest rate charged to customers of pawnshops. After the licensing was approved, the City Council directed staff to study whether or not interest rates were regulated, and if so, who regulated them. Analysis/Conclusion: The study showed there were no regulations. A contact was made to Senator Ember Reichgott Junge's office last summer regarding the regulation of pawnshops. A memorandum from Senate Council & Research to her staff, .Exhibit 2, states that pawnbrokers and pawnshops are regulated by counties and recommended the city contact the County. A contact was made with Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat's office and it appeared the County would not propose regulating pawnshops. A letter from City Attorney Corrine Heine, Exhibit 2, says that Minnesota Statute, Section 609.81 provides that a pawnbroker who "lends money on a pledge rate above that allowed by "law" is guilty of a misdemeanor, however, it does not specify the maximum rate but notes that the statute refers to the Minnesota Regulated Loan Act, MN Statute Sections 56.001 to 56.26. Heine further states that in 1981 the legislature enacted Section 56.002 which expressly excepts licensed pawnbrokers from the application of the statute. Upon further contact with Senator Reichgott Junge, a memorandum from Thomas Stafford, ~, suggested they could draft legislation limiting the amount of interest pawnbrokers could charge. In response to that memo, Senate File 1702, .Exhibit 4, was introduced by Senator Reichgott Junge and referred to the Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee where a hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday, March 9, 1994 at 12:00 noon in Room 112 of the State Capitol Building. Representative Lyndon Carlson will introduce a companion bill in the House of Representatives on Thursday. It has been suggested the City Council adopt a resolution in support of this legislation. Memo - Resolution 4942 Page 2 March 8, 1994 Recommendation: Staff recommends a motion to dispense with the reading and order the adoption of Resolution No. 4942: "A RESOLUTION RF~~G THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO ENACT LEGISLATION IMPOSING A LIMIT ON THE RATE OF INTERF_~T PAWNSHOPS CAN CHARGE AND SUPPORT PASSAGE OF SF1702," as shown in - F~ian~is D. Ha~n,-Si., ~ty Manager Ir'lo Member Zagaros moved and Member Hol. tz seconded a motion that the following resolution be read and adopted this 8th day of March, 1994. RF~OL~ON NO. 4942 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO ENACT LEGISLATION IMPOSING A LIMIT ON THE RATE OF INTEREST PAWNSHOPS CAN CHARGE AND SUPPORT PASSAGE OF SF1702 WHEREAS, the city of Robbinsdaie has a practice of licensing pawnshops within the City; and WHEREAS, during the 1993 licensing season, many residents raised the concern that the price, penalty or interest rate practiced on the patrons of the pawnshop were unnecessarily harsh; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that pawnshop customers or patrons are frequently in dire financial straits and are less capable of securing alternative financial assistance; and ; WHEREAS, the city council has determined that it would be to the public's benefit and welfare that the existing practices of pawnshop financing be regulated or controlled; and WHEREAS, the capacity of an individual city to effectively regulate pawnshop practices and protect the citizens is insufficient. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Robbinsdale that it does hereby request that the state legislature enact legislation that would impose a cap or limit on the rate of interest that can be charged by pawn shops operating in the state of Minnesota against their patrons or customers. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Robbinsdale that they hereby support passage of SF 1702 during the 1994 legislative session. The question was on the adoption of the resolution and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Johnson, Blonigan, Zagaros, ltoltz, l~ayor Robb and the following voted against the same: l~one WHEREUPON SAID RESOLUTION WAS DECLARED DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 1994. A2TF. ST: ) '-.-Joh(4son,/~t~ity Clerk' - ~/~o"~y . R0bb//~Iayor 2 4 5 6 7 9 l0 12 13 15 2O 22 23 [COUN~Zt. I TLG A~achme*~ k M ............... morea to amend S.F. No. %702 as Delete everything a[ber the enaetin~ clause and "Beotlon 1. [~TUD¥ OF PAWNBROKER INDUSTR¥,] ~be commissioner of comme~cer in consultation with attorne~_~e~eral,_ 9ha!l._conduct a study of the pawnbroker ~.dustry £9 Minnesota~ and snell report ~[~ findin~mt eonclqs.~on~, and reoo~endation~ ~o the legislature by,..December ~t 199~, on the following: Li) the cur~en~ licen~ing~and regulation Of pawnbrokers pol[tical3~bdivisions[ the effe.pt[veness o~ ~hat liCenm~n~ and cegu~ption, and whether th. re is a need for licenl%.n~ and ,regulation_ by the state~ (2) the current practices used in the industry_ fpr Yaluin~ pawned objecte~ aS securi_ty for a loan and the fa~.gess of the values attributed to those objects by pawnbrokm~s; !~) the rate Of interest oh~.r~e~ on paw~pker loans in,,~he stat~_.and whether the state should establi~ a maximum ~ate interest for pawnbroker loans; and .... (4) th% rate of interest on pawnbroker'loans ~rmi.tted other Delete the title and insert~ "A bill for an act relating to co~erce; directing the co~issioner of co~rce to conduct a study of the Minnesota pawnbroker industry,' 11't2. S.F. 1702 Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee Testimony of Brent Waddell March 9, 1994 Mr. Chair, members of thc committee, my name is Brent Wadde]l. I am an attorney with the Legal Services Advocacy Project. We represent (approx.) 280 legal aid attorneys working out of 23 offices throughout the state to provide free legal assistance in civil matters to (est.) 470,000 low income Minnesotans. The Pawnbroker Industry would tell you that, in lending small amounts of money on a short-term basis, they provide a service in a realm where no other lenders operate. There is some truth to that. What is not stated, however, is that for the low income eoasumer, who makes up the largest segment of their client base, the pawnbroker is not the lender of choice, but the lender of necessity. Thes~ loans are arranged between parties of unequal bargaining power, and that reality invites abuse. In preparing for my testimony today, I visited with staff in 16 of our legal aid offices around the state to get a feeling for the types of cases coming in oar doors involving pawnbrokers. Here is a sampling: &. An 86 year old gentleman in the Brainerd, MN, area (living on $450/mo. social security) pawned a possession for $100. He had to pay $20/mo. to have the pawnbroker hold that item until he could come up with the $100 needed to redeem it. This was 20% per month. 240% per year, for a secured loan! $100 was a small percentage of the value of the item; and, should one single monthly payment of $20 be not made on time, the item became the property of the pawnbroker. Am elderly lady in Crow Wing County pawned some jewelry for a $150 loan. The pawnbroker demanded that the monthly payment be paid in cash. This meant that she had to go to his shop to make the payment. When she became ill (and was bed-ridden a few days before the payment was due), she called and asked for a few extra days to bring in the payment. The pawnbroker refused and she lost her jewelry, for a fraction of its value. A man in Mille Lacs County pawned his van, with a current book value of $2000, for a 90 day loan of $500. The interest on this loan was 25% per month, compounded monthly! That's $125 interest thc 1st month. $156.25 interest the 2nd month. $164 interest the 3rd month. At the end of 90 days, he owed the $500 loan plus $445 in interest charges! At that rate, he would have owed $5,820 at the end of one year for that $500 loan. An annual interest rate of 1164%! That's what 25%/mo., compounded monthly, amounts to. I I , ,1~ , I ii, The ordy documentation of this loan was a pawn ticket, and 2 monthly bills showing the ¢ompoundin§ interest. No written contract. No disclosure of terrm. The pawnbroker in this case was so sure of the borrower's inability to repay the lo~n that he so]d the van (for - a nice profit) be{ore the expiration of the 90 day agreement period. When Legal Aid gets involved in these cases, they invariably settle out of court. Members of the Committee, if anyone tells you that Pawnbrokering is a highly regulated business, they're mistaken. Many counties don't even license them, Crow Wing and Atkin counties, for example. If anyone tells you that Pawnbrokering is a "risky" business, they're mistaken. There is nothing risky, about giving you a loan for 10-25% of the value of your vehicle; with an interest rate that would make the most jailed lender positively giddy; and, taking possession of the vehicle with the right to sell it the moment you miss a payment. ff anyone tells you that valuation of used merchandise is difficult, they're mistaken. Bring me anything you want. If I don't know what its worth, I'll make a conservative guess; and, then, I'll offer you a loan for 25% of that! If you don't like it, don't take it. But, low income consumers, economically vulnerable, too often don't have that choice. l.f anyone tells you that competition in the market place prevents abuses and makes this indust~ "self-regulating", they're mistaken. We have an industry with a client base that has no where else to go. Self-regulation here is akin to saying that instead of one fox guarding the hen house, we have two. What the first can't eat, the second is more than happy to. Members of the Committee, [ do not mean to tell you today that the whole Pawnbroker Industry is bad; or, that it doesn't provide an important service. I do hope to impress upon you, however, that it needs some uniform, storewide regulation. I hope to impress upon you that thousands of economically vulnerable, low income Minnesotans are entitled to some consumer protection to prevent abuse. They are entitle to a full disclosure of the terms of the loan they are getting. They are entitled not to be forced by need to pay more than the value of the service they receive. For these reasons, the Legal Aid offices of Minnesota support thc motivation and intent of S.F. 1702. We disagree, however, with permitting this industry a 33% interest rate. My co-worker, Mr. Fuller, is here to comment about that issue. March 25, 1994 Dear Minnesota pawnbroker: We have auended the initial meetings of the Minnesota Pawnbrokers Association (MPA). We commend this organization on its forward thinking agd,~fiative, but are hesitant to give the MPA our support. The purpose of this letter is to form an alternative professional association for pawnbrokers in Minnesota. We feel there are two basic weaknesses with the MPA. (1) The MPA is tied too closely to the law rum of Larkin, Hoffinan, Daly & Lind#ten, Ltd. (LHDL). Although we agree that legal and political representation is an important part of any professional organization, (especially for our industry and its current exposure to pending legislation), we feel that LHDL has taken too active a role ha org~,r2z/ng the N~PA. The selection of an appropriate law firm would be one of the highest priorities of our alternative organization. (2) The MPA includes in its membership pawnbrOkers who have caused problems for the industry. Although it's important to be part of a professional industry association, we cannot lend our business reputations and professional operating practices to the MPA. The first order of business for our organization will be the establishmem of objective criteria for membership and a strict code of conduct. All prospective members, including the undersigned, will be subject to initial and ongoing scrutiny of their business practices, and strict adherence to the code of conduct. Due to the pending legislation, we must solidly, our ranks, organize our association, establish operating criteria,, and rake appropriate actions. If you are interested or would like to discuss our operating philosophies, please contact us by phone or mail. We are not in competition with MPA. We are an alternative to the MPA. Respectfully, Bob Peltier, owner Bob's Viking Pawnbrokers and Jewelers St. Paul, established in 1985 phone # 612-222-8677 Hal & Dorothy Krieger, owners Plaza Pawn, Inc. Richfield, established in 1987 phone # 612-866-0027 Andy & Joo' Herman, owners Hy's Loan Office, Inc. Minneapolis, established in 1936 phone # 612-332-3455 If we have missed someone in your area, please give them a copy of this. Thanks. ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ O0 O0 O0 000 ~ 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I II 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Z 0 Z ~ m~ mm oo ~o~ ~ oo o ~ ~ oo oo o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ooo ~ o z ~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ oo o ~ ~ oo oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ooo ~ ~ ~ ~oooo~ oo ~ o~ o~ ~ i ,I , ,~i , I IL RECEIVEEI/ PR1 Z LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 473-7033 LMCD MEETING SCHEDULE REVISED APRIL 1994 Thursday Saturday Wednesday Friday Monday Wednesday 7 13 15 18 27 Save the Lake Advisory Committee $-00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Public Hearing New dock license applications 7-30 sm, ~135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Water Structures Committee 7-30 sm, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Meeting 8'00 am, Wayzata City Hall, 600 Rice Street, Wayzata Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8-30 am, #135 Norwe~t Bank Bldg, Wayzata Public Hearing New char~er boat liquor license applications 6:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Lake Use & Recreation Committee 6-00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata Administrative Committee 6-00 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall 7-00 PM, Public Hearing New Dock Licenge Application, Tonka Bay City Hall LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting 7'30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall Wednesday Advance Early May Meeting Notice LMCD report to Mayors & City Council members 7-00 pm, Minnetonks Conmlunity Center 14600 Minnetonks Blvd, Minne~onks City of Mound Monthly Report Utilities Month of: April 1994 Residential No. of Customers: Water 1,062 Sewer 1.066 Water Used: (in 1,000 gallons) 17,533 Commercial 121 121 4,002 04/11/94 Utility-94 Total 1,183 1,187 21,535 Payments: Water $20,186 $5,712 $25,898 Sewer $41,389 $14,275 $55,664 Recycle $2,621 $24 $2,645 Total $64,196 $20,011 $84,207 Billing: Water $25, 517 $4,341 $29,858 Sewer $47,399 $11,912 $59,311 Recycle $3,186 $21 $3,207 Total $76,102 $16,274 $92,376 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force Agenda 8:30 am, Friday, April 15, 1994 Norwest Bank Bldg., Conference Room 135, Wayzata 1. Introductions, Chair Tom Penn /OFO 8. 9. 10. 11. Review, accept/amend minutes of 3/25/94 meeting; 3. MN DNR Report: a. Fund allocation for 1994 in support of existing EWM infestations, report on allocations; b. Corps of Engineers matching effort on EWM research; c. Sonar whole lake 1994 study progress report; Evaluation of the control considerations identified in the Zebra Mussel exotics presentation of Gary Montz per 3/25/94 Task Force minutes; Examination and inspection of EWM carry-over plant growth by diving at north shore of Spring Park Bay; EWM situation analysis issues and actions (carried over from 3/25 meeting) -- discussion on proposed actions; a. On shore/aesthetics and recreational; b. Near shore/aesthetic and recreational; c. Off shore/recreational; d. Near shore and off shore/ecological e. Boat landings -- ecological and recreational Lake association reports; Hennepin Parks update; Additional business Next meeting, May 13; Adjourn RECEIVED APR. 1 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT i To: Brigitte Kay Reuther Weekly News, Inc. 240 S. Minnetonka Ave. Wayzata MN 55391 From: Eugene R. Strommen Executive Director 473-7033 Date: April 4, 1994 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE WINE AND BEER LICENSES FOR AL & ALMA'S AVANT GARD~ CHARTER BOAT The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District will hold a public hearing at suite 160, Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E. Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, 6 PM, Monday, April 18, 1994 for applications from Merritt Geyen, President, A1 & Alma's Supper Club, Inc., 5201 Piper Road, Mound, for wine and beer licenses for the charter boat A1 ! Alma's Avant Garde. The charter boat will be berthed at and operated from A1 & Alma's Supper Club docks in Mound. The licenses will be transferred from the A1 R Alma's ~charter boat which was sold. - ~ ' nnetonka Conservation Dls~r~c~ Lake M~ 04-t1-1994 612 473 ?033 L~CD P.O1 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT April 11, 1 994 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LMCD Member Cities and Mayors Executive,Director Sene Strommen ~ Cob Burandt Letter of March 31, 1994 The Burandt letter of March 31 raised some issues we believe should be addressed for your clarification on these subjects. We understand the cities and mayors were copied on Mr. Burandt's letter. We therefore appreciate a copy of our reply to Mr. ~u~andt he circulated to the mayors who we understand were copied by Mr. Burandt. I[ you are unable to locate Mr. Burandt's letter, we will he happy to FAX or mail a copy o~ it to you. Thank you [or your understandin~ on this subject. Poet-It~ brand fax ~ransmi~l memo 7~1 l,o~ ,._~ 04-11-~994 12:49 P,02 612 473 ?033 LMCD : LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 EAST WAYZATA ~OULEVARD, SUITE 150 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA ~5391 · TELEPHONE 817./473-7033 Apri 1 11, ! 994 EUOENER.~TROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Hr. Cob Burandt BOARDM~MBERS 11650 Yukon St. WlilimA. John$~ne Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Chllr, Mlnnetonka Vice Ch~lr, Tord~a ~ Reap Tm~sur~, Mike Bloom Mlnnelon~ Alan (BeA) ~ephaven Jame~ N, Ex. Islet fish,Id ~lnnetrl~ Duene Gr~g ~olte~ V~tori~ ~om~S W. Uound He~ J. Suenh Wo~tmn~ ~seph Zwak Greyed OrOnO Dear ~r. Burandt, Your Narch 31 letter references LNCD's request for bids for truck hauling of lake vegetation from Lake Minnetonka for the 1994 season. We offer our comments to answer points you raise. Lake vegetation, or lake weed terminology in the case of this bid outline, is a general reference to material being removed from the lake. We the. ~_ ..,....~,, ~. reasonably understood ~o believe cn~ ~=----?-- :7,,_~, .~ other forms cz include Eurasian water m~A~u~, ?,,r lake plants which exist in the lake. The actual truck contract cost for the 1993 hauling mechanically removed lake vegetation ~as of · 95. There were $20,324. Truck load trips ~ere 1 _ . . full load equivalents as a result o! some ~rucK 171 than full capacity. On the basis of oads at less 95 t~uck load trips, the cost per t~u~k load is This cos~ includes truck load time b~ the $104. harvester, round trip ~o the disposal site. Truck or 1993 were $40/hour, or an average 2.6 lares -- ck loading and round trip. ?he.G?? ~our? ~er.~_, .... stated was based on the ~o~ %rucA loa~ ~o=~ z~~ 0. ThOSe 'q93 .eed harvest ope~a~ion cos~_~.~4'32ens,s not '- ~- -~ -^urse, include consiasrmu~ exp ~ ,~. ated to the truck contract. ~o~ =~.r~r=, ~"~ nt of time the harvesters spend in'travel ~he a~ -uttin' site to the off lo~d ~rom cn~ ~ ~ d within to a minimum. Harvesting is planne . ' o the of[-load site. Cities ama marinas ~roximxty t -. .- -,~-~4n- use of sites for this purpose, a ~[¥t~"-~"[en minutes to reach OUr tO accumulate anu v , take an h . harvested. the of~ load s~te from the area being ion of BMCD purchasing its own ba~ges ?ho uggest ma or oonc.rn is has en COn~L~ ' _, a. 14m4 ~O W~L~ · ·vess . load site. such % {irg_ - --' ~^ad limitations, -loaded. ~a~ge it can be of~ ..... ~--~ ~[f-load site, end travel time ~o --~-- ~--*ors in using a barge. handling costs are majv~ 04-11-1994 12:49 612 473 7033 LMCD P, 03 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Cob Burandto 4/11/94, p; 2 re learned of those factors during 1991. vhen we used Minnetonka Portable Dredging's barge service. Crane requirement ~or off-loading is another equipment and cost factor, other Concerns involve storage for. the ten months the barge is not in use, insurance, maintenance and added personnel to operate it. We find the contract truck hauling with existing off-load convenience makes the current truck program cost-effective.. Your February 5 letter suggesting LNCD have-its own custom truck built to specifications you euggested was discussed in our telephone conversation in February. It was pOinted out in this conversation that LMCD.can be best served through contracting with existing commercial operations for the eight weeks that harvesting takes place. The multi-agency Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force is kept in[ormed throughout the season on LHCD'a harvest operations at its monthly meetings. This group's consensus assists'in bringing direc~ion to the LMCD Eurasian water mil[oil control program. re invite you ~o consider bringing your suggestions to the regularly scheduled monthly Task Force ~meetings where a dialogue serves in reaching consensus. Your letters, widely circulated to cities and other agency and public officials, tend to be premature in the information being brought to their attention, re lack the opportun£ty to present the additional in~ormation you may .need so you may.appreciate the full set of circumstances on a given subject, we do ~elcome your input and encourage it on a closer one-on-one basis. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on items affecting Lake Minnetonka and its environment. ~ugene R. Strommen Executive Director LNLOI President LHCD Member Cities LNCD Board Members Lt'ICD P. 0 3. ~d-11-1994 13:49 612 473 ?033 Cob Burandt 11650 Yukon Street Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (612) 755-5676 March 31, 1994 lax transml~d'mem° 7671 Mr. Gene Strommen. I2/CD 900 East Wayzata Blvd., Suite 160 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Strommen: Thank you for sending m.e a ?_o_py .of the solicitation for bids for t~e IMCD Eurasian Mflfofl disposal program , ! that this solicitation makes very little reference to , M first obse_rv.ation, s . __ elation and Lake WeedS. I dent Y Mflfofl aha a 'lot of reference to.Lake Veg . . :. Eurasian _ - ' v ent in matters relevant _to.a. quaUc t the ese of thc LMCD s invol em recall the purp er se then dealing with Eurasian Mflfofl. I trove vegetation was for an.y..oth~ _p..~u?~ ,,._ · ~CD collectin~ money under the auspice some concerns _a~.oul; .me legatl~ m_ u,~ ~-, ~'~vertin~ this fun into ,,¢ ~'.urasian MflfoU control end subsequently gradually di o ding . ~.~:lng naUve aquatic, vegetation. By my_calculation, t~.e..LMCD s?e~_t~'~;~:0tol~ l~:t93cfs~mo~Sg00l~elrd~c~p lot~a~kof loads of aquatic vegeT, atlon. -tzla~ weed. removed'fr_o.m .Lake Mi~._e_w__n~_..., If I were to offMe~rn~t~tPJn~P~Vaatoel)ehna~waa~r~ .00 er truckloact of weeds r=mu,ed from Lake ...... $500 p '- '--'- like truck sto-s and Eurutan Mflfofl . our vublic access wouto 1oo~ ~' - harvesting. . _ - ..... : ~-- --,~an~ered saectes clusLricatton. would likely oecome aesun=u ,u, ~,,,- ~ ,- calculations and observation, the LMCD harvestem, ge_nerally s~,p__en,~ _more B my . _ _ tin weeas. ~requenuy. Y s orr mod= than they do harves g weeas. time in the ~an P _ an the do hauling _ -~,,.,-,,,,o-~ *~clm soend more time per daY.p.m'k_e.d th{,_~ _e,~r_,._,~ .... ,~+",', the ~'~'e~r~ obvious that disposal ts not vemg llanatea LMCD weed harvesting program. l never see the same nu~_ _vc~ y~..,,~_;_"_'~'-~..: ~...~,, .~o~ bs that is sitting in an ount of the money ra~=u is a significant am ......... ,-- a--~,--+o,~ to ~urchase of equipment to LMCD bank accou ..... exp ___,_. ,~.., *~e LMCD, like most government 1 urasian Mflfou, I am assumus~ contro E , d and the interest is being encies ith ex a' mone : haS.t s m_o.n . s~lphoncd off for purposes other man ortgmauy m~¢nu=~. In my opinion, the public is entitled to see this money spent on the purpose for which the donations were granted tax deductible status. APR 1994 i _.M.C,.D. 04-11-1994 13:50 612 473 7033 LI"ICO P.02 Mr, Gene Strommen March 31, 1994 Page 2 Mb' enclosed letter of February*Si 1994, which was never responded to. describes a truck which could significantly decrease the cost of disposing of MIU'ofl. The Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners AssoclaUon evaluatedmv idea and. '. .... . , s_u.,b.?equ.ently, agreed to cover, m.y ?peases_ to pursue the avail'ability of a surplus .,minute... u'u .eli as an .appropriate cn_assis for the disposal truck, The downslzing of me rnmtary nas resulted in a slgnlfl~t amount of surplus equipment which is available to the LMCD for nothing more than the cost of transportation and paperwork. I also encountered Tom Bemdt from Rogers_, MN who Just published a book on military trucks. His expertise in military trucks In comparable to Tom Reese's expertise in StevemDuryen automobiles. If the ideal disposal truck is to be built, Mr. Berndt would be the appropriate Person to contract with to select the best truck.' I would find it hard to believe that anyone could deny that Brad Stannard would not be the most qualified person to oversee the fabrication of the disposal apparatus for this track. I belic~e that with a more intelligently managed operational scenario, this truck could handle all the disposal needs of the LMCD weed harvesting' program. On the ht~ee.r hand, tha_t's not much to boast about because with better management all narvesUng that was done by the LMCD in 1992 and 1993 could have been, done with two (or less) harvesters, The management scenario I propose suggest that the LMCD should utilize, some of its dedicated funds to purchase at least one of Gayle's Marina's barges, In scenarios where the disposal truck was in route to or from a disposal site, the harvester could empty onto the barge. Barge disposal could also be utilized in situations where the harvesting site was not close to a suitable public access, f we are going to u_t_lll~e a barge, we need to use it intelligently. The LMCD arvesters even with their limited cargo container lifts, could empty broadside onto the barge. A harvester such as the Stannard, Evans, Gillies and Burandt weed puller (hybrid technology) with the higher lift cargo container, could empty on top of the shorter LMCD piles. The weed puller could also be uttlt~_ed u a conveyor to stack weeds transferred to the weed puller from the LMCD harvester, The barge could be transported with a simple linkage connecting it to one of the ue~har~e..ste.rs. At. the end o_f the day.or early, the next morning, the barge could oauea at a s. ne s.u .Ch as Mlnnetort~a t~redging or a marina into the disposal or a convenuonm aump truck. I have also enclosed a picture of art ' attachment for a crane or backhoe that could facilitate more efficient unloading of the barge. The operational cost of this disposal scenario would be a fracUon of the cost of the previous and current disposal scenarios utilized by the LMCD. * ........ P. 03 LMCO Mr. Gcnc Strommen March $1, 1994 Page 3 The cost of this equipment is moot because the funding Is pre.dedicated and the LMCD's possession. Please consider the content of this letter as an alternative proposal for the LM Eurasian Mllfoil disposal program. With MiSsionazy Cob Burandt CCl LMLOA LMCD Board Members Mayors LMCD Member Cities Enclosures 04-11-1994 612 473 7033 LI"ICD P. ~4 Cob Burandt 11650 Yukon St NV/ ~ l~pido, l~ 55433 (612) 755-$676 February $, 1994 Lake Ninnetonka Conservation Conservation District 900 East Wayzata Boulevard Suite 160 Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear LICDBoardMember: Weed Pulling appears to be advanclnf aa weed cutting appears to be falling from favor aa the preferred aetna to address the Evra~ian Milfoil problem on Lake Mirmetonka, v fie ween pulters will likely remove sreater maes of Milfoil per acre and per hour aa compared to weed cutters. ~lmt~ lift sa t~ rear c~veyer ~hich liBit8 t~ ability of the ~ ~~O t~ utilize ba~g? e~i~ien~ly wit~t ex~aive oe~y sta~ing ~ne ~. ~l~a.oargen wmcn ~ia ~ve ~n a~r~r/ately utiliz~ to mcre~e t~ efficiency ~d ~cre~e t~ ~ot of Mtlfoil die.ssi. With or without barfs disposal there exists & need to reduce the expense of trucking the weeds to disposal sites. It would seem obvious that tho traction problem at disposal sites, especially in tho wet early part of the harvesting season, would warrant an all wheel drive transport scenario, There are several other secondary problems associated with the previous disposal sceAarios utilized by the LMCD, One of these problems is that the trucks/trailers previously utilized are not able to stack the weeds at the disposal site and the weeds compact rapidly after they are dumped. The subsequent result of this scenario 1o that th~ lateral area of the disposal sites aren't utilized to their fullest capacity or require a secondary operation to stack the compacted weeds into taller piles. Another factor decreasing the efficiency of weed disposal is the weeds are being transported in quantities that are either under utilizing the maximum weight carryirt~ capacity of the truck and/or ere under utllizins the maximum load ca~rying capacity of the roadway. The LMCD disposal scenario utilizes a secondary conveyor al~aratus to get the weeds fron the harvester to the truck. L'ven with the secondary conveyor the truck loedingocenario currently utilized by the LNCD can't fill a long box truck without an eddittorml operation to move the weeds to the front of the truck. The expense of the secondary conveyor could be avoided if ~.,_.,~.~ispoeal truck were self loedins and had sufficient lenfth behind the rear FEB ? 1994 P.e5 L~lCD 04-11-[994 13=51 473 ?033 wheels to link up directly with a weed harvester in a boat ra~p load transfer scenar is. lure b~in{ painted l~re is t~t t~ t~l weed die.ssi truck ~e ptc - - ' r. ~ever t~ c~to~ rear ~yor ~d rear ~ve~r lilt ~ ~ester ~d ~tiM it on ~ all w~el drive military or ~nt t~ck cl~s is. It*s no gre&t secret that I would be thrilled to s.ee the jovernment 8et The ~overnMnta ta~e over of the weed out of the weed harvestin~ business, sti business has caused finan¢t&l,hatdahtP on priv&te weed h~-vesters that surpasses your. co~pru.~-~_,,; .._ ~..a ,~,,,_ cash flow available to ideal disposal truc~ ourselves ,, wv ,-.. ealit of the ~atter is the LMCD has fur~.in~ i_n th~ Unfortunately the r. Y _ the rivals I~arveste.rB u ssi truck and P , necessary to build tlm~_ ide~.l dS po t wrn~eat couldn t bank d out o! business by lee ~o that haven't alr.e~.y t~.e.n [o_r.c_e~.._]=.o to build this truck. collectively collateral~ze ~nc letters purpose is to request that the LMCD consider Consequently tht. s .... I truck. Our sub~lu_~n.t fa.dins the co. st.ructl? .of }ha pr.oP~__s~_d!~s~l~::d to espty our weeds into this t the private harvesters u= m~,,~ . request iB t~ ........... o- '~ truo cost of disposing of our weeds truck for a fee tna~ repruu=--= This proposal exemplifies the benefit obtainable fro~ inner?tie, n_ coordination which is the politically correct s0dus operandi in tl~e 1~o s. I look forward to receivir~ a response to this letter. with Missionary Zeal, Cob Burandt 04-11-1994 473 7033 LMCO I t t I i i I 473 ?033 LMCD P. 07 I U, pril, 199 CiT oF mounD SUN ERSTER MON TUE WED THU MARCH 1994 $ M T W T F $ ! ~ 3 4 S S ? I I 10 11 12 13 14 1S te 17 18 Hound City Days Committee Meets et 7 PH "Planning Commission Meets 7:30PM *City Council Heeling 7:30 PH MAY 1994 id T W T F S 3 4 S 8 7 10 I1 t2 13 t4 te 17 18 19 20 81 Perk and Open SPice COHHISSION Heets 7 PH FRI SAT 2 Jim Fackler's Retirement Party (.4pn7 Fool's/ lrDC IAL ....... meets 7 am RECYCLE Committee Par'k'~Lm DAY of the & Council RT THE b/hole Rnnual LOST L(IKE 7:30 PM Parks Tour SITE ON IS S:4S PH 8 ;Ikl - S PM Heels 7:30 PM FULL MOON City Council Meeting ?:30 PM Secretery'l Day PUBLIC HEARINGS IN APRIL: #4-11 ~lannlng Cgmmissioq 1. An amendment to the Mound Zoning Ordinance, Section 320:25, to Mow 'Community Residential Facilities (16 or less)' as a Con~ond Use within the B-2 General Business Zoning Dist. 2. A CUP to allow a Community Residential Facility (lB or less) within the B-2 Zoning Distdct at 1730 Commerce Blvd. (old Fine) 3. A moving bull(ting permit to Mow a building to be moved from 2385 Commerce Blvd. (Out Lady of the .... Lake Church Convent) to 1730 Commerce Blvd. (old Fine) )2 ~ To consider Issuance of a CUP to allow the expansion of sPublic school located known as Shidey Hills Elementary school located In the R-1 Single farnliy residential zoning district. ~ CHAMBER'S 'CLEAN SWE~'p'~ 8:30-10:30 em, meet et Jubilee Foods, brln~l 9toves, Arlzesll IAL RECYCLE DAY AT THE LOST LI~KE SITE ON IS 8 RM - S PM