1994-09-14 AGENDA
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1994, 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 23, 1994,
REGULAR MEETING.
PG. 3580-3595
PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 25 - OCTOBER 2, 1994,
AS CITIES WEEK IN THE CITY OF MOUND.
PG. 3596
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF
HILLSIDE LANE, CRANE BODINE, 5025 WREN ROAD,
LOTS 1, 2, & 3, BLOCK 1, PID//13-117-24 13 0022;
AND ROLAND BOETTCHER, 1780 HILLSIDE LANE, PART OF
LOTS 5, 6 & 7, BLOCK 2, PID//13-117-24 13 0028;
BOTH IN LINDEN HEIGHTS.
PG. 3597-3625
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT,
RE: SHORELAND MANAGEMENT.
(SUGGESTED DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1994)
PLEASE NOTE THAT DUE TO RECENT CHANGES IN THE
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE, OTHER CHANGES
IN ORDINANCES NEED TO BE MADE TO REMAIN
CONSISTENT WITH NEW CHANGES.
REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AND FENCE ON PUBLIC
DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT BY PHILIP HOFHERR, 4746 ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 8, DEVON. PG. 3626-3639
REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL ON PUBLIC DRAINAGE
& UTILITY EASEMENT BY FERNANDO MAZONLENY, 4758 ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 3, 4, & 5, BLOCK 8, DEVON. PG. 3640-3642
3577
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED 1995 BUDGET; APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE 1995 PRELIM/NARY GENERAL FUND BUDGET IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,408,340; SETTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY AT
$1,808,130; LESS THE HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA)
OF $499,460, RESULTING IN A PRELIMINARY CERTIFIED LEVY OF
$1,308,670; APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR
1995; AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATES.
PG. 3644-3646
RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE LEVY OF THE GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1980 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,075.00.
PG. 3647
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO EXCEED
$24,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE
COST OF OPERATIONS, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS
OF MSA 469, OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR
1995.
PG. 3648
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
B1D AWARD: PUBLIC WORKS STORAGE AREA - CITY OF
MINNETRISTA/CITY OF MOUND JOINT PROJECT FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF SITE AND ACCESS ROAD
RECONSTRUCTION.
(TO BE HANDED OUT WEDNESDAY EVENING)
REAPPOINTMENT OF TOM REESE TO THE LMCD BOARD
OF DIRECTORS.
PG. 3649
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT BASED ON PUBLIC COMMENT
TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW),
AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) IS NOT
WARRANTED AND NO FURTHER STUDY IS REQUIRED FOR
THE PELICAN POINT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT.
SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATION OF A PORTION
OF THE STREET KNOWN AS BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE.
(SUGGESTED DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 1994)
PG. 3650-3651
PG. 3652
APPROVAL OF PAYMENT REQUEST//3, WATER METER READ SYSTEM,
SCHLUMBERGER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,781.45. PG. 3653-3654
APPROVAL OF FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST, PAINTING OF
EVERGREEN WATER TOWER, ODLAND PROTECTIVE COATINGS,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,102.50.
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
PG. 3655-3656
PG. 3657-3676
3578
19.
INFORMATION/MISCEI J~ANEOUS:
Department Head Monthly Reports for
August 1994.
LMCD Representative's Monthly Report for
August 1994.
LMCD Mailings.
Letter from Tim Becker, owner of property on
Three Points Blvd. to Representative Steve
Smith in response to Smith's letter.
Planning Commission Minutes of August 22, 1994.
Committee of the Whole Meeting, Tuesday,
September 20, 19947 (NOTE: Councilmember
Jessen and City Manager will be absent). Do
you still want to hold the meeting?
NOTICE of Met. Council Regional Breakfast
Meetings. Please let Fran know if you
wish to attend and which session.
PG. 3677-3703
PG. 3704-3708
PG. 3709-3723
PG. 3724-3728
PG. 3729-3732
PG. 3733
3579
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 23, 1994
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday,
August 23, 1994, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen, Phyllis
Jessen and Ken Smith. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, City Planners Mark Koegler and Bruce Chamberlain,
City Engineer John Cameron, Building Official Jon Suthefland, and the following interested
citizens: Bob & Sheila Smith, Tom Casey, Frank Weiland, Gerold Esselman, Steve Koch,
LeeAnne Pederson, Michelle Olson, Karen Pedersen, Rita Pederson, Mike & Joyce Dupay, Tim
Miller, Susan Culver, Bradley Curtis, William Michel, Michael & Susan Henning, Randall
Morairty, Michael Kohler, John Blumentritt, John Boyer, Vince Forystek, Lisa Peterson and
Alan Krepman.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve the Minutes of the August
9, 1994, Regular Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
1.1 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER MODIFICATION OF
SECTION 350:76 SUBD. 4 OF THE MOUND ZONING ORDINANCE WHICH
REGULATES TRUCK PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
The City Planner related the background of the proposed amendment. He explained that the
Council wanted to clarify the current ordinance. The current ordinance reads as follows:
Section 350:760. Parking.
Subd. 4. Truck Parking in Residential Areas, No motor vehicle over one (1) ton
capacity bearing a commercial license and no commercially licensed trailer shall be
parked or stored in a platted residential district or a public street except when loading,
unloading, or rendering a service. Recreation vehicles and pickups are not restricted by
the terms of this provision.
The Council explained that this ordinance has been a law for some time but needed clarification
of commercial vehicles. The enforcement, the trucks allowed, and where they would be allowed
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
does not change. This amendment comes about because when the Code Enforcement Officer's
were out looking for all types of nuisance violations and commercial trucks were something they
came upon and wrote some tickets for them based on the current ordinance. The Council was
then asked to define or change the commercial vehicle definition. The complaints were from
the people receiving the tickets, thus the need for clarification.
The proposed amendment would read as follows:
Section 350:760. Parking.
Subd. 4. Truck Parking 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) commercial truck, bus, 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.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
The following persons spoke regarding the ordinance amendment:
Vince Forystek, 3131 Inverness stated that he has walked around his
neighborhood and does not see a problem with truck parking. He expressed
concern that this type of ordinance could affect peoples income if they use the
truck for business.
The Planner explained that in the old ordinance, from a planning and legal perspective, there
was concern about the term one (1) ton capacity and what it means. In one way or another that
term needs to be tightened and the suggested language, from the prosecuting attorney, was to
refer to the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight because that is definable by the plate on the
door or on the vehicle. That was the benchmark. It depends on how you look at it whether it
is more or less restrictive.
The Council asked what trucks would this proposed ordinance allow that would not be allowed
under the present ordinance? The Planner stated that if he were interpreting the existing
ordinance, anything that has over a one (1) ton weight. The Council then discussed the weight
of a vehicle and the amount of weight that truck could carry.
Gerold Esselman, 5870 Lynwood stated that he is against the proposed
amendment because it is less restrictive than the current ordinance.
Tim Miller, Inverness - stated that he is against either of the ordinances because
he drive a semi-truck and brings his tractor home. That is his transportation to
and from picking up a trailer. He stated his stack would be 3 inches too high for
the proposed ordinance and he would be 3,000 pounds too heavy.
2
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
Robert Smith, 3232 Gladstone - stated his van truck is his store. It is licensed
for 15,000 pounds, but he does not carry that much. The vehicle is gone from
8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. Nobody has ever complained. He cannot park it in a
public lot because of the merchandise in it that could be stolen. It is his sole
income for his family. This ordinance would put him out of business. He has
received 2 tickets. Mr. Smith stated he has a garage to keep his vehicle in.
Presently even housing the truck in a garage is not legal. If the truck does not fall within the
limits of either the existing or proposed ordinance, it is illegal.
The Council discussed the pictures in the packet which were provided to show what is being
parked in residential areas currently. The Planner stated the pictures were for information only.
e
Brad Curtis, 5967 Idlewood - stated he would like to see one (1) ton, not gross
vehicle weight.
Lisa Peterson, Vice President of Government Relations for the Minnesota
Trucking Association - stated she misunderstood what the issue was tonight, but
would like to clarify the gross vehicle weight issue. Safety laws are written
around the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) which is a plate applied inside
the door by either the manufacturer of the truck or the rebuilder of the truck.
People can overload or underload a vehicle. The plate does not change. There
is alSO the combination vehicle weight rating which will tell you not only how
much the truck is allowed to carry but how much you could carry in a trailer as
a combination vehicle with truck and trailer. The GVWR is a very standardized
method of measuring what size a truck is and it is available to enforcement
officers without having to weigh the truck by just looking inside the door at the
plate.
The Council asked how GVWR compares to capacity? Ms. Peterson stated that
capacity is whatever someone can put into a truck and still make it move. The
GVWR is what the manufacturer says you should be able to put into a truck and
make it move. In order to obtain capacity you would have to subtract the weight
of the vehicle.
The Council asked about registered gross vehicle weight (RGVW). Ms. Peterson
explained that registered gross vehicle weight is the taxing weight that you would
choose to be taxed at. She stated a lot of people register with a lesser gross
vehicle weight to pay less tax.
The Council discussed "one (1) ton" as being ambiguous, and a totally subjective definition.
Suggestions made were to use GVWR (gross vehicle weight rating). Also the proposed
amendment should refer to on or off street regulation.
3
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
The City Attorney stated that the whole reason for either of these ordinances is to preserve
residential districts as residential, not commercial.
Councilmember Jensen stated that as she recalled when the Planning Commission was discussing
this proposed ordinance there was talk about more requests for housing of these types of vehicles
and also that people would leave more stuff outside so that the truck could be housed inside.
Mr. Miller asked if there is a grandfathered situation for trucks that have been there since before
the current ordinance was adopted. The City Attorney stated that there is no grandfathering.
Grandfathering is just another way of talking about a nonconforming use and this is a storage
regulation, thus the truck storage would still be illegal.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The Council stated that the ordinance needs to refer to on-street as well as off-street parking and
storage. They also discussed allowing commercial vehicles that are housed in a garage. The
Council was split on that.
The Council stated they are trying to visually clean up the town.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jessen to deny the ordinance amending
Section 350:760, Subd. 4., relating to truck parking in residential areas.
The Council discussed whether the proposed ordinance is clear on what vehicles would
be kept out of residential areas. There needs to be more clarification.
The City Attorney pointed out two things:
He stated that if the ordinance were going to be voted upon it would take
4/5 to adopt it because it is part of the zoning ordinance.
If the motion that is on the floor is not to adopt the ordinance as
proposed, he offered the following language:
"No motor vehicle shall be parked or stored in a platted residential district
or public street which exceeds the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight
rating of twelve thousand (12,000) pounds, nor a height of nine (9) feet,
nor a length of twenty-six feet, except when loading, unloading, or
rendering a service. Recreational vehicles and pickups are not restricted
by the terms of this provision. ~
The Council again discussed how the GVW is determined.
A vote on the motion was unanimously in favor. Motion approved.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
The Council consensus was that this ordinance does need clarification. The Council decided to
discuss this further at a Committee of the Whole Meeting to give the Planning Commission more
direction before referring it back to the Planning Commission.
1.2 _PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER MODIFICATION TO THE SHORELAND
MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 350:1200 OF THE MOUND CITY
CODE. -
The City Planner reported that Mound adopted its Shoreland Management Ordinance and it was
submitted to the DNR for their approval. There was a threshold issue that was presented by the
Pelican Point project and as a result the DNR has moved the Mound ordinance to the "top of
the pile". During the past couple of months staff has been working with representatives of the
DNR to address questions and issues that have been raised pertaining to the ordinance. The
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed amendments and recommended approval of the
following amendments:
Section 350:310, Definitions of the Mound City Code of Ordinances are amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 65. Impervious Cover. Any surface impervious or resistant to the free flow
of water or surface moisture. Impervious cover shall include but not be limited to all
driveways and parking areas whether paved or not, tennis courts, sidewalks, patios, and
swimming pools. Open decks (1/4" minimum opening between boards) shall not be
counted in impervious cover calculations.
Subd. 96. Ordinary_ High Water Level (OHWL). A level delineating the highest
water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence
upon the landscape. The ordinary high water level is commonly that point where the
natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. In
areas where the ordinary high water level is not evident, setbacks shall be measured from
the stream bank of the following water bodies that have permanent flow or open water:
the main channel, adjoining side channels, backwaters and sloughs. The ordinary high
water level for the lakes located in the City of Mound are as follows: Lake Minnetonka
= 929.4, Langdon Lake = 932.1, and Dutch Lake = 939.2.
Subd. 106. Public Waters.
Subdivision 15, as amended.
considered public waters.
Waters defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.005,
Lakes, ponds or flowage of less than 10 acres shall not be
Subd. 147. W t_W.e.!!_.~l~d. Land which is annually subjected to periodic or continual
inundation by water and commonly referred to as a bog, swamp, or marsh. The
delineation of wetlands shall be in compliance with the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, Circular 39.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
Section 350:310 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances is amended by adding Subd. llSB,
which shall read as follows:
Subd. l18B. Semi-Public Use. The principal use of land or buildings involving the
assembly or congregation of the general public in facilities that are owned either privately
or by institutions. Such uses include churches, fraternal organizations, museums, etc.
Section 350:1220, Subd. 2 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances is amended to read as
follows:
Subd. 2. l-and Use District Descriptions. Within the shoreland area, land use
descriptions and allowable land uses therein shall be as identified in Sections 350:640 and
350:670. Public, semi-public, commercial and industrial uses without water-oriented
needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on
lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the normal
OHWL setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or
topography, assuming summer leaf-on conditions.
Section 350:1225, Subd. 3 (A) 2. of the Mound City Code of Ordinances is amended as follows:
2. Additional Structure Setbacks. The following additional structure setbacks
apply, regardless of the classification of the waterbody:
~ Setback
Unplatted Cemetery .......................... 50 feet
Right-of-way line on federal,
state or county highway, or
local street ................................ 20 feet
Top of Bluff:
Existing lots of record or lots created through
Minor Subdivisions (3 lots or less)
consistent with Section 330:20,
Subd. 1 of the City Code ................... 10 feet
Major Subdivisions consistent with
Section 330:20, Subd. 2 of the City Code ......... 30 feet
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Section 350:1225, Subd. 6 (B) 1 is amended to read as follows:
AUGUST 23, 1994
Impervious surface coverage of lots in residential zones shall not exceed
30 percent of the lot area. On existing lots of record, impervious
coverage may be permitted by a maximum of 40 percent providing that
the following techniques are utilized as applicable.
ae
Impervious areas should be drained to vegetated areas or grass
filter strips through the use of crowns on driveways, direction
downspouts on gutters collecting water from roof arms, etc.
be
Dividing or separating impervious areas into smaller areas through
the use of grass or vegetated filter strips such as the use of paving
blocks separated by grass or sand allowing infiltration.
Use grading and construction techniques which encourage rapid
infiltration such as the installation of sand or gravel "sump" areas
to collect and percolate stormwater.
de
Install berms to temporarily detain stormwater thereby increasing
soil absorption.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The Mayor closed the public
hearing.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following:
ORDINANCE NO. 69-1994
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF
SECTION 350:310; SECTION 350:1220; AND
SECTION 350:1225 OF THE MOUND CITY
CODE RELATING TO SHORELAND
MANAGEMENT
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3
PELICAN POINT FINAL APPROVAL:
A. ..ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS WORKSHEET (EAW) APPROVAl,
PROPOSED RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR
.PELICAN POINT MULTI FAMILy RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
The Mayor stated there is an issue that has come up today regarding the ownership of the
Pelican Point island. Thus, the Council will only be dealing with the EAW tonight and not the
final plat approval.
7
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
City Planner, Bruce Chamberlain, reported to the Council on the EAW. The staff recommends
that based on comments to the EAW, further study of project impacts is not warranted and an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not needed for this project. Based on public comments
received, the City Council may want to consider adding any or all of the following conditions
to the approval of the final plat.
Revegetation of the storm drainage ditch at the north end of the site shall be
accomplished using primarily native species conducive to growth in this location.
Instructions to this effect shall be included in the construction documents
submitted to the City Engineer.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect
said BMPs.
de
fe
The Developer shall modify Section 9.5 of the Declaration of Covenants to
eliminate the provision allowing improvements to the island to accommodate
picnicking.
The Developer shall prepare and submit to the City Attorney a conservation
easement which establishes the island in Outlot C as permanently protected from
any alteration or improvement.
The Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, along with construction
documents a tree protection plan prepared by an urban forester or arbor, st. In
addition, an urban forester or arbor, st shall supervise construction to insure the
proper protection of vegetation.
The Developer shall prepare and submit to the City Attorney a conservation
easement which establishes bluff areas as defined by the shoreland management
ordinance as permanently protected from any alteration or improvement except
the removal of deal or diseased vegetation.
He reported that the DNR has a concern about a possible wetland on the interior of the site.
The Developer is at this time having a professional wetland delinerator go to the site to
determine if it actually is a wetland. If it is a wetland, there will be alterations to the plat that
will have to be taken into account. He will keep the Council up-to-date on this item.
There were comments to the effect that under the DNR shoreland management rules this project
would qualify for an EIS, that the Council should require a mandatory ElS. Because of the
action of the Council tonight on Mound's Shoreland Management Ordinance, if this falls under
the jurisdiction of the local ordinance, it would not fall under the mandatory category for an
ElS.
The Council discussed the proposed additional conditions a-f.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
The Planner suggested that since the final plat will not be approved tonight the above conditions
can be decided at a future meeting. The real important issues that need to be dealt with this
evening is whether or not an EIS is warranted and whether further study is warranted. The
Council could approve the EAW with potential conditions to be reviewed at the time of final
plat.
The Council all agreed that an EIS is not warranted. The Council also agreed that further study
is not needed. The Council asked that item E be deleted from the final plat approval.
John Boyer of Boyer Building stated he is not in favor of Item F of the conditions because they
would like to have this expanded to allow trimming for a view of the lake. The Planner stated
this can be handled with language in the Shoreland Management Ordinance. Alan Krepman,
RLK Associates, a registered landscape architect, who has been working on the project, stated
that he would like to see a statement such as, "must comply with the standards established in the
Shoreland Management Ordinance," and leave it at that instead of making it more specific. Mr.
Krepman asked that item e. refer to a registered landscape architect instead of an urban forester
or arborist. The Planner stated they will take all of this into consideration when the final plat
resolution is prepared.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen regarding the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet prepared for the Pelican Point multi-family residential
development, the City Council f'mds that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is not warranted and that no further study is required to make said determination.
Information generated from the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) will
be considered as part of the review of the final plat for Pelican Point. Therefore,
the City Council directs staff to prepare a corresponding resolution for consideration
at the next meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.4
CASE//94-54: WILLIAM AND DIANE MICHEL, 5865 GRANDVIEW BLVD.~
PART OF LOTS 85 AND 86, MOUND SHORES, PID#14-117-24 42 0107,
VARIANCE - SCREEN PORCH
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval
subject to some existing impervious surface to be returned to green space. Staff and the
applicant have worked together to come up with something close to the 132 square feet
recommended by the Planning Commission. The Council agreed 1. in the resolution is to be
modified to read:
"1. The City does hereby recognize a 7 foot front yard variance and a variance to
impervious surface coverage of 34 percent (total 64 percent, or 4,787.5 square
feet of coverage), to allow construction of an 11' x 12' screen porch over an
existing deck, subject to: approximately an equal amount (132 square feet) of
existing impervious surface be returned to green space."
Ahrens moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
358
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
RESOLUTION//94-112
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING
SETBACKS AND HARDCOVER TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A PORCH AT 5865
GRANDV1EW BLVD., THAT PART OF LOTS 85
AND 86, MOUND SHORES, PID #14-117-24 42 0107,
P&Z CASE//94-54
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.5
CASE//84-55: BRADLEY CURTIS, 5967 IDt.EWOOD ROAD. LOT 8, BLOCK
10, PID 23-227-24 31 0011, VARIANCE - DECK AND DETACHED GARAGE
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION g94-113
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A HARDCOVER
VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
DECK AND GARAGE AT 5967 IDLEWOOD ROAD,
LOT 8, BLOCK 10, THE HIGHLANDS, PID #23-117-
24 31 0011, P&Z CASE//94-55
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.6
CASE #9~56: SUSAN CULVER, 4701 SUFFOLK ROAD, LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK
14, WYCHWOOD, PID#19-117-23 32 0148, VARIANCE - DETACHED
GARAGE
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-114
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SETBACK
VARIANCES TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
DETACHED GARAGE AT 4701 SUFFOLK ROAD,
LOTS 1, 2, & 3, BLOCK 14, WYCHWOOD, PID #19-
117-23 32 0148, P&Z CASE//94-56
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7
CASE/D~59: MICHAEL AND SUSAN HENNING, 5953 SUNSET ROAD, LOTS
22 & 23. MOUND SHORES, PID #14-117-24 42 0058, VARIANCE - GARAGE
ADDITION
l0
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 1994
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Ahrens moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-115
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING DECKS
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING
GARAGE ADDITION AT 5952 SUNSET ROAD, LOTS
22 & 23, MOUND SHORES, PID #14-117-24 42 0058,
P&Z CASE//94-59
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.8
CASE//94-60: RANDALL MORAIRTY, 4536 DENBIGH ROAD, LOTS 5. 6. AND
SO. 1/2 OF 4, BLOCK 2, AVALON, PID #19-227-23 24 008, VARIANCE - FRONT
YARD SETBACK
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-116
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
ALLOW RECONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF
THE DWELLING AND A DECK AT 4536 DENBIGH
ROAD, LOTS 5, 6, AND NORTHEASTERLY 1/2 OF
LOT 4, BLOCK 2, AVALON, PID #19-117-23 24 0008,
P & Z CASE//94-60
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9
CASE//94-61:
17, BLOCK
.SETBACKS
MICHAEL M. KOHLER, 1744 AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15, 16,
9, DREAMWOOD, PID #13-117-24 24 0007, VARIANCE
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Ahrens moved and Smith seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-117
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE EXISTING NONCONFORMING
SETBACKS TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
DECK AT 1744 AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15, 16 & 17,
BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD, PID #13-117-24 24 0007, P
P & Z CASE g94-61
11
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
COIVIMENTS AND SUGGFSTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.10 RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION RE;
DOCK LICENSE FEES FOR 1995.
The City Manager explained that the POSC held a public hearing regarding the dock license fees
for 1995. There was no one present at the public hearing. The POSC recommended that the
dock license fees remain the same for 1995 as they were in 1994 except that the LMCD fees
have been reduced.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jessen to concur with the Park & Open
Space Cornmi~ion recommendation that the Dock License fees for 1995 remain the
~me as in 1994, with the exception that the LMCD fees have been reduced. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11
RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION RE:
WINTER DOCK STORAGE/REMOVAL1 REVIEW OF "NOTICE" - APPROVAL
OF NOTICE.
The City Manager explained that this was discussed at the POSC meeting. The Park Director
suggested that this notice could be utilized to enforce the existing ordinance, and if a problem
was found to exist this winter when the Dock Inspector does his rounds, the violator can then
be given a second notice and then a third, and if compliance is not accomplished, their dock
license can be revoked.
Councilmember Ahrens stated that her concern is with the docks left in during the winter that
receive damage from the ice and wind. Some of these float out in the spring or sink to the
bottom and can be hazardous to all persons using the lake and the environment. She stated the
Dock Inspector has prepared a list of where docks should and should not be allowed to be stored
in the winter. She stated she feels the city should regulate where docks should be removed
because they are polluting the lake.
The City Manager stated that the POSC agreed to work with the notice they have on page 3472
which would be sent out this year and then monitor the number of problems they have this
winter. That was their recommendation.
Rita Peterson, Halstead Lane - representing several residents who live right across the street
(level with) from Commons voiced concern about how they have to look through the docks and
boat lifts that are stored in the Commons. The Council explained that according to the ordinance
there is winter storage on most of the Commons.
3.2
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
Mike Dupay, 5420 Breezy Road, stated that someone has a roll out dock and boat lift in front
of his house.
Mike Kohler, 1744 Avocet Lane, stated that he feels that the Commons has been there a lot
longer than some of the people who chose to live in that area and people should be allowed to
store their docks and boat lifts on Commons.
The Council discussed how times have changed on the Commons i.e. bigger boats, boat lifts,
etc. The Council asked the POSC to look at the winter storage section (Section 437:10, Subd.
10, a.4.) of the ordinance at their meeting in September and maybe have a hearing on this so
that something can be done this winter. They also asked the Park Director and the Dock
Inspector to see if the storage of dock, boat lifts, etc. can be done to the side of an area so that
abutting properties do not have to look at it all winter. This may have to be done on a case by
case basis.
1.12
RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION RE:
.AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC LANDS PROCEDURE MANUAL ADDINC
EXHIBIT "O" . GUIDELINES FOR ALLOWING PLANTINGS ON
COMMONS/PUBLIC LANDS.
The City Manager explained that the POSC has made some recommendations to amend the
procedures manual to allow plantings on Commons or public lands. Basically the goal is to
maintain and restore the natural look of the Commons by the use of more native vegetation.
There is a listing of the types of species that would be acceptable. Refer to page 3486 and 3487
for the proposed resolution with the guidelines. The POSC is asking for consideration and
approval.
The Council asked about grass because there are areas that are like lawn. The Council
questioned whether it is a goal to turn the Commons into a wild area or natural commons. They
could understand the bluff areas being kept natural.
The Council asked if these guidelines would be binding. The City Attorney stated that the
guidelines all start with "shall not" which seems very mandating or directive. It is not law in
the sense that we could prosecute anyone. The Council discussed changing the language to read
"should or should not", to make it softer. This language was pointed out by City Planner Bob
Day in his memo of August 3, 1994., but it was not reflected in the guidelines that are
proposed.
Councilmember Ahrens stated that the reason this has come about is that when the inventory was
done, there were a variety of plantings found on the Commons. Therefore, a guideline was put
together so that people would know what they could or could not plant on the Commons.
The Council also discussed how people would be notified of these guidelines. They also
discussed the goal. The Council felt that Mr. Day's goal on page 3491 which reads as follows
was a better goal: ". .... the creation of an overall aesthetic appeal throughout the commons
13
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 23, 1994
which will still have the flexibility to absorb modifications in the future." The Council felt the
POSC needs to recognize that certain types of commons have the look or appearance of lawn
or park and they are going to be mowed. This does not seem to be reflected in the proposed
guidelines,
The Council asked that this be discussed at the next Committee of the Whole Meeting and then
it will be sent back to the POSC for further consideration.
1.13 APPROVAL OF SALARY INCREASES FOR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.
The City Manager explained that the salaries of the Mayor and City Council have not been
increased since 1979. Mound's Mayor and Council ranks as one of the lowest paid in their
population category. The proposal is for the Mayor to .go from $1800/year ($150 month) to
$4500/year ($375/month) and the Council from $1200/year ($100/month) to $3000/year
($250/month). These salaries would not go into effect until January 2, 1995. The Council
pointed out that there is no per diem, and there are a lot of extra hours for preparation,
litigation, etc, for which they are not paid.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following:
ORDINANCE g'/0-1994 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 155:35 OF
THE CITY CODE RELATING TO SALARIES OF
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.14 DISCUSSION: CITY'S FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO MOUND CITY DAYS.
The City Manager stated that at a previous meeting the Council asked that this be on the agenda
tonight for discussion.
Councilmember Smith stated that he feels Mound City Days is a very important event for
Mound. The fireworks has become one of the biggest events on the lake. The cost of the
fireworks is $10,000. It is becoming a problem for the Lions to continue to fund the fireworks
because of the State's taxing structure on charitable gambling. He stated he does not feel the
City should fund the entire fireworks, but a portion thereof.
The City Attorney stated there are state statutes that govern what the City can or cannot do with
community events. He stated he will look into this and find the appropriate statutes for the staff.
The Council commended the Dons for all their volunteer hours and work in putting on Mound
City Days.
The Council directed that $4,000 be put in the budget for fireworks, if it is legal to contribute
to this community event.
14
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
1.15 DISCUSSION: "CITIES WEEK".
AUGUST 23, 1994
The City Manager explained the League of Minnesota Cities "Cities Week". The Council
reviewed the events and noted that a lot of the items are already being done in Mound.
The Council thought the poster and essay contest would be a good item for the schools to
participate in. The City Manager will follow-up on encouraging the school to participate in
these contests. A proclamation for "Cities Week" will be prepared for approval at the next
meeting.
1.16 APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIOUOR
LICENSE - MOUND LANFS.
This item was acted upon at the June 18, 1994 meeting. No action was taken.
1.17
DISCUSSION: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
POLICIES AND SEPARATE RFSOLUTION .
MINNEAPOLIS- DEC, 1-4, 199~..
NATIONAL MUNICIPAl,
NLC CONFERENCE
The City Manager stated that cities are invited to submit policy proposals and resolutions for
consideration at the NLC's Congress of Cities in Minneapolis, December 1-4, 1994. The
Council did not have any policy proposals.
1.18 APPROVAL OF FINAL PAYMENT REOUEST - 1994 SEALCOAT PROGRAM
ALLIED BLACKTOP- $25,810.15.
1.19
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Smith to approve the final payment request
of Allied Blacktop for the 1994 Seal Coat Program, in the amount of $25,810.15.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to authorize the payment of bills as
presented on the pre-list in the amount of $342,207.66, when funds are available.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
July 1994 financial report as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
Information on National League of Cities Conference to be held December 4, 1994, in
Minneapolis. Early registration is due in September 19, 1994. If you are interested let
Fran know ASAP. Mayor Johnson, Councilmembers Jensen and Jessen, and the City
Manager asked to have their registrations submitted.
15
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
C.
Letter of resignation from Pat Meisel re: HRA.
appointment until after the first of January.
Information from Rep. Steve Smith re:
AUGUST 23, 1994
The Council decided to hold off on an
Your questions on the state lottery proceeds.
E. Planning Commission Minutes of August 8, 1994.
Parks and Open Space Commission Minutes of August 11, 1994.
REMINDER' Next regular Council Meeting is Wednesday September 14, 1994 rather
than Tuesday, September 13, 1994 due to Primary Election.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at 11:20 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
16
September 14, 1994
PROCLAMATION NO. 94-
PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 25 -
OCTOBER 2, 1994, AT MINNESOTA CITIES WEEK
IN THE CITY OF MOUND
WHEREAS, Minnesota cities are where people live, raise a family, go to work,
and enjoy recreation; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota cities are a grass roots government system which
represents a close relationship between elected officials and citizens; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota cities are home to some 85 percent of the people in
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota cities provide the basic services necessary to ensure the
health, safety, and well being of the people--services such as water, streets, and police and fire
protection; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota cites are essential to the protection and development of
our lakes, rivers, land, and air; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota city officials, city employees, and volunteers should be
lauded for their efforts in providing for the economic growth, safety, and vitality of our
communities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Mound proclaims
the last week in September to be MINNESOTA CITIES WEEK in Minnesota and urges
citizens to take this opportunity to learn more about city government and how they can become
more involved.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PUBLIC HEA RING NO TICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE NO. 94-34
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF A STREET
KNOWN AS HILLSIDE LANE
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
Wednesday, September 14, 1994._ to consider a request to vacate a portion of Hillside
Lane located between Blocks I and 2 in Linden Heights Addition, as shown on the plat
map below.
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
Mailed to property owners within 350' by September 2, 1994. Posted by August 26, 1994. Published in
"The Laker" on August 29, 1994 and September 5, 1994.
printed on recycled paper
PHONE NO.
EPARTMENT OF NATURAL
Region 6 Trails & Waterways, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Minnesota
{612) 772-7935
August 29, 1994
RESOURCES
55106
FILE NO.
SEP 2
Planning and Inspections Department
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Subject: REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF HILLSIDE LANE LOCATED BETWEEN BLOCKS 1 AND
2, LINDEN HEIGHTS ADDITION.
To Whom It May Concern:
I have reviewed the information you provided concerning the above mentioned request. As far as I can determine the
proposed vacation does not end at, or abut public water, and therefore the Department of Natural Resources does
not have any jurisdiction in this matter. That being the case I have no comments at this time regarding the proposed
vacation.
Should you need any further information from the Department please feel free to contact me. I would be interested in
knowing the final outcome of the request, and would appreciate it if you could send me a copy of any resolution(s)
passed with respect to this issue.
Sincerely,
· ys P ·
cc: George Golden, Attorney General' s Office
412.631 STATUTORY CITIES
56
412.631 COMPOSITION OF COUNCIL.
· In any city operating under Optional Plan B, the council shall, except as provided
in sections 412.023, subdivision 4, and 412.571, be composed ora mayor and four or
six council members.
History: 1989 c 30 s 10
412,851 VACATION OF STREETS,
The council may by resolution vacate any street, alley, public grounds, public way,
or any part thereof, on its own motion or on petition ora majority of thc owners of land
abutting on the street, alley, public grounds, public way, or part thereof to be vacated.
When there has been no petition, thc resg, l,~j,~ may be adopted only by a vote of
four-fifths of all members of the council. ~,No such vacation Shall be mad_e unless it)
( appears in the interest oz thc public to do so 5ftcr a hearing preceded
""~'blished and posted notice, in addition, if thc street, alley, public grounds, public
way, or any part thcrcoftcrminatcs at or abuts upon any public water, no vacation shall
be made unless written not,ce of the pctilion or proposed resolution is served
certified mail upon the commissioner of natural resources at least 30 days before thc
hearing on the matter. The notice under this subdivision is for notification purposes
only and does not create a right of intervention by the commissioner of natural,
resources. After a resolution of vacation is adopted, the clerk shall prepare a notice of.
completion &the proceedings which shall contain the name ofthe city. an identification
&the vacation, a statement of the time of completion thereof and a description pt'the
real estate and lands affected thereby. The notice shall be presented to the county
auditor who shall enter the same in thc transfer records and note upon thc instrument.
over official signature, the words "entered in the transfer record." The notice shall then
be filed with the county recorder. Any failure to file the notice shall not invalidate any
such vacation proceedings.
History: 1989 c 183 s 4
date: 8-12-94
Mark Koegl~r !
to:
from: Peggy Jame~r~
Mark, for your information, at the Park Commission Meeting last night,
they asked that you be made aware of this statute. It is their opinion
that the City does not need to give a reason not to vacate, but that
it is the applicant's responsibility to show that it is in the public's
interest to vacate.
They denied the vacation application for Hillside Avenue.
cc: Jon Sutherland
Jim Fackler
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
AUGUST 12, 1994
STREET VACATION REQUEST BY CRANE BODINE AND ROLAND BOETTCHER TO VACATE
"HILLSIDE AVENUE"
Parks Director, Jim Fackler, reviewed the various staff reports, and informed the Commission
that his recommendation is for denial of the vacation.
The Chair asked if anyone present wished to speak on the issue.
Applicant, Crane Bodine, recited and distributed a letter to the Commission, including the
following requests:
The site should be clearly marked with stakes accurately delineating the street
proposed to be vacated. This action should be taken well in advance of the council
meeting so that its members and all interested parties can view the site with an
accurate understanding of its boundaries.
The Parks Department should be willing to propose a reasonable, realistic plan for
future usage of this "walkway". This plan should include privacy consideration for the
abutting private property, safety of the users, and preservation of the nature and
wildlife area.
3. A compromise is not proposed; however, if the Parks Department needed a walkway,
would it be necessary to utilize a 30 foot strip?
4. The correct name of the property to be vacated should be established and used in all
correspondence and hearings.
5. It is incumbent on the city to remove immediately tree stumps and debris left after their
cutting a year or more ago.
Carl Glister of 5008 Wren Road, spoke on behalf of himself and his neighbors who would like
to keep the property public.
Applicant, Scott Boettcher, asked that if the right-of-way is developed into a walkway he
would appreciate advance notification. He is not in favor of a walkway on this property.
The Parks Director clarified that it is the applicant's responsibility to locate the property irons.
Casey cited Minnesota State Statute 412.851 relating to the vacation of streets, and
questioned if it is not the applicant's responsibility to show that it is in the interest of the
public to vacate this street. He does not believe it is the City's responsibility to provide a plan
or a reason not to vacate. Darling stated that regardless of the future intention for this land,
it is the Park Commission's charge to preserve open spaces for all to enjoy.
The issue' relating to the deck encroachment was briefly discussed.
MOTION made by Darling, seconded by Steinbring to recommend denial of the
requested street vacation and that all private encroachments either be removed
from public property or the applicant should submit an 'after the fact'
application for improvements on public lands. Motion carried 6 to 1. Those in
favor were: Darling, Steinbring, Byrnes, Geffre, Schmidt and Casey. Ahren$
abstained.
Schmidt confirmed with the applicant that staff will investigate the proper street name, and
will address the tree stump.
This case will be reviewed by the City Council on September 13, 1994.
August 11, 1994
RECEIVED AT P&OSC MTG
8-11-94.
cC: JON SUTHERLAND
MARK KOEGLER
TO:
The City of Mound
Park and Open Space Con~m~ission and Staff
FROM:
Crane J. Bodine, Resident
5025 Wren Rd, Mound, MN
This communication is in reference to my application requesting
vacation of Hillside Avenue adjacent to my property.
There seems to be a good deal of confusion regarding this matter.
According to my survey, the proper designation is "Hillside Avenue",
yet in the Parks Department memorandum, 'the si~e is referred to as
"Hillside Lane". In the city planner's report, the site is designated
as "Hillside Avenue"? In the public hearing notice, the site is re-
ferred to as "Hillside Lane" as well as in the neighbor's letters.
Additionally, the city planner's report alludes to mature trees
that exist on this site. Some of the neighbors also have mentioned
the trees. We believe there are no trees involved on the ci~ty prop-
erty except on the east end.
The matter of "future use" was raised at the Planning Commission
meeting, Aug. 8, 1994, and that perhaps the site could be used for
access to Crescent Park. That portion of Crescent Park to which the
access leads is marsh and wildlife area now served very nicely by
Sumach Lane with a nature path to the end of the point. It was men-
tioned by a Planning Commission member that perhaps a bridge of some
kind could be built over the marsh. Certainly that wouldn't be in
your planl Fifteen people abreast could walk comfortably on 30 feet
of land. Does that make sense? Additionally, do you perceive that
children are going to make their way from the main park (Three Points
Park) at Gull and Wren up the street to this access point ...and then
enter the marsh?
I submit that these cmncepts are not realistic.
For 27 years, we have peacefully resided at 5025 Wren utilizing
our cottage as a summer home. There is a possibility we may wish to
have our son build a home on our lot abutting the side in question.
If we proceeded with this idea, additional space would mainly serve
the positioning of a structure not to build a larger home nor to dess-
imate our property. It was stat--~ in the Planning Commission...that
this was not enough reason on our part to*-acquire 15 more feed. I
think such reasoning is 'specious. For our 27 years of residency,
this property has been undeveloped by the city. There seems to be no
real or reasonable plan by the city now. We have no plans to block
this space nor to unnecessarily remove valuable trees.
It appears that there are those who simply don't want us to acquire
this site and wish no changes whatsoever at any time.
Finally, to be fair to all parties involved including our neigh-
bors, the Parks Department and Planning Commission should execute the
page 2
following steps in timely advance of the council meeting:
1. The site should be clearly marked with stakes accurate-
ly delineating the street proposed to be vacated. This
action should be taken well in advance of the council
meeting so that its members and all interested parties
can view the site with an accurate understanding of
its boundries.
2. The Parks Department should be willing to propose a re-
sonable, realistic plan for future usage of this "walk-
way". This plan should include privacy consideration
for the abutting private property, safety of the users,
and preservation of the nature and wildlife area.
3. A compromise is not proposed; however, if the Parks De-.:
partment needed a walkway, would it be necessary to util-
ize a 30 ft. strip?
4. The correct name of the property to be vacated should
be established and used in all correstpondence and hear-
ings.
5. It is incumbent on the city to remove immediately tree
stumps and debris left after their cutting a year or more
ago.
I ask you to review and act on this matter as proposed. My re-
quest to vacate is a perfectly legal action taken with the proper pro-
cedures. I don't wish to be characterized as an adversary as I have
no desire to harm the city or its citizens in any manner.
pectfully submitted,
Crane J. ~odine
5025 WreM Rd.
Planning Commission
The Mayor's Office
Roland Boettcher
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 8, 1994
CASE #94-58: REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF HILLSIDE LANE, BY CRANE
BODINE OF 5025 WREN ROAD, LOTS 1,2,3, BLOCK 1, PID 13-117-24-13 0022; AND
ROLAND BOETTCHER OF 1780 HILLSIDE LANE, PART OF LOTS 5, 6, & 7, BLOCK 2, PID 13-
117-24 13 0028, BOTH IN LINDEN HEIGHTS. PUBLIC HEARING,
City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed his report. The applicants are requesting vacation of the
unimproved Hillside Avenue between Hillside Lane and Crescent Road. The lot owned by
Roland Boettcher has a deck that encroaches into the subject Hillside Avenue.
The City needs to assess whether or not any current or future public purpose will be served
by maintaining the property under public ownership. If no such purpose can be identified, an
action to vacate the right-of-way can occur. This request will also be reviewed by the Park
Commission, and their recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council.
The City Engineer, Parks Director, and Public Works Director have reviewed this request. The
Public Works Director, Greg Skinner, concluded that the right-of-way is not needed for either
street or utility purposes, and if the vacation occurs, the maintenance of the sanitary sewer
will become the responsibility of 1780 Hillside Road.
The City Engineer and Parks Director both recommended denial and that the street be retained
for a walkway leading into Crescent Park.
Staff recommended denial. Depending upon the recommendations of the Commissions, the
following comments should also be considered.
If the recommendation is to deny the request for the proposed street vacation, all
private encroachments should either be removed from public property or the applicant
should submit an "after the fact" application for improvements on public lands permit.
Such a permit could identify an allowable time frame for the removal of the
encroachments (2 or 3 years?) and possible a clause escalating the time frame should
the City desire the install a walkway through the Hillside Avenue right-of-way.
If the recommendation is to approve the request for the proposed street vacation, it
sh~)uld be conditioned upon the preparation of a conservation easement that would
prohibit the owners from removing the mature trees that exist within the existing right-
of-way.
5
Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 1994
Staff noted that a response from the DNR has not yet been received.
Hanus questioned the location of the ordinary high water mark. The Building Official clarified
that at the end of the road there is a wetland, however, he believes the ordinary high water
to be at least 50 feet from the end of Hillside Avenue.
The Commission reviewed the amount of property that would be gained by each abutting
owner to be approximately 2,250 square feet. Mueller questioned the possibility of
subdividing the adjacent property in Block 1. The City Planner noted that a subdivision may
be possible, but a revised survey would need to be reviewed in order to determine the
possibilities.
Applicant, Crane Bodine, of 5025 Wren Road, informed the Commission that he is a 27 year
summer resident. He stated that Hillside Avenue has no trees or significant vegetation on it,
that all the trees are actually located on his property. He wants to maintain the integrity of
the area. He stated that if it is important for the City to keep the property for park or
recreational purposes he has no problem with it as long as the integrity of their lots are not
harmed or their privacy is not disturbed. He explained that the Boettcher's maintain the right
of way and cut the grass. If the street was vacated, he would not cut the trees. In the
future, he plans to build a house for his son on his property. He would have no problem with
the City having a walkway on the right of way.
The Commission questioned what plans the Park Commission has for this property, and
questioned how much width would be needed for a walkway. Mr. Bodine noted that there
already is another access to Crescent Park and the wetlands.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing.
Carl Glister of 5008 Wren Road stated that he is not in favor of the vacation, and the he and
his neighbors want to keep the open space. He commented on how Wren Road is wall to wall
houses on the lake side and feels the open space is valuable to the community.
Scott Boettcher, Roland's son, st~.ted that there is only about 15 feet from the end of Hillside
Avenue to the water, and if there is a walkway installed on the right of way, it will not lead
to anything. He stated that if the City does not approve this request, that is okay.
Mueller addressed Scott Boettcher regarding the deck encroachment. Mr. Boettcher stated
that the previous owner had a deck there, and they replaced it and expanded it a little. He
estimated the life expectancy of the deck to be 2 or 3 years. Mr. Boettcher confirmed that
the dog kennel is gone.
Reasons .for the City to retain the right of way, and reasons for the applicant to want the
street vacated were reviewed. Michael commented that he would like to see a plan for the
use of this area from the park commission before he would recommend denial. Clapsaddle
6
Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 1994
does not agree that the City has to have reasons to not give up the land.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Weiland to recommend denial of the
street vacation, and to recommend that the deck encroachment either be
removed or that the proper permits be obtained to allow the deck to remain.
Voss does not feel there is a need to see a plan.
Mueller questioned if the width of the right of way could be compromised, he does not feel
30 feet is needed for a walkway.
Michael commented that he does not feel the property would be a good access, and the kind
of property the access would lead to is not what he would consider a park. Crum agreed and
added that she does not see a reason not to vacate.
MOTION to deny carried 6 to 2. Those in favor were: Clapsaddle, Weiland,
Surko0 Hanus, ross, and Mueller. Michael and Crum opposed.
Hanus stated that he voted in favor to deny, but he agrees with Mueller in that he would like
to see a plan to substantiate their decision to retain the property.
Weiland commented that it is good the Parks Department has the foresight to want to keep
this property and save it for the future.
The Secretary informed the applicant's that this request will be heard by the Park and Open
Space Commission on Thursday, August 11,1994 and by the City Council on September 13,
1994.
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
gO
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Mound Planning Commission, Park and Open Space Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: August 2, 1994
SUBJECT: Street Vacation
APPLICANTS: Crane Bodine and Roland Boettcher
CASE NUMBER: 94-58
HKG FILE NUMBER: 94-5w
LOCATION: Hillside Avenue Between Blocks 1 & 2, Linden Heights Addition
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 and R-lA
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicants are requesting vacation of Hillside Avenue between Hillside
Lane and Crescent Road. Crescent Road is an unimproved right-of-way that is part of Crescent
Park. At the present time, the lot owned by Roland Boettcher has a deck and dog kennel that
encroaches into the existing right-of-way for Hillside Avenue.
In the case of a street vacation request, the City needs to assess whether or not any current or
furore public purpose will be served by maintaining the property under public ownership. If no
such purpose can be identified, an action to vacate the right-of-way can occur. In most cases,
the vacated right-of-way is split between abutting properties. Depending on the details of the
original plat, other ownership transfers might also occur.
This particular vacation request involves both planning issues and park issues. Accordingly, it
is being reviewed by both the Planning Commission and the Park and Open Space Commission.
Both bodies will forward their recommendations to the City Council for final action.
The City Engineer, Park Director and Public Works Director have reviewed the proposed street
vacation. The Public Works Director, Greg Skinner, concluded that the right-of-way is not
needed for either street or utility purposes. He further states that if the vacation occurs, the
Land Use/Environmental· Planning/Design
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160
Hillside Avenue Street Vacation Request
August 2, 1994
Page 2
maintenance of 98 feet of 4 inch sanitary sewer line will become the responsibility of 1780
Hillside Road. Since this is the only utility line in the area, no utility easements would need to
be retained should the vacation request be approved. Minnegasco has also responded that they
do not have any facilities within the subject area.
The City Engineer and Park Director both recommend that the vacation request be denied. Both
of their comments relate to retaining the property as a walkway leading into Crescent Park. John
Cameron points out that such a walkway could also be accommodated by an easement, however,
outright ownership as right-of-way is preferable.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission and 'Park and Open Space Commission have
two options available, either approve the request or recommend that the City Council deny the
request. The Staff recommendation is denial. Depending upon the recommendations of the
commissions, the following comments should also be considered:
If the recommendation is to deny the request for the proposed street vacation, all private
encroachments should either be removed from public property or the applicant should
submit an "after the fact" application for improvements on public lands permit. Such a
permit could identify an allowable time frame for the removal of the encroachments (2
or 3 years?) and possibly a clause escalating the time frame should the City desire to
install a walkway through the Hillside Avenue right-of-way.
If the recommendation is to approve the request for the proposed street vacation, it should
be conditioned upon the preparation of a conservation easement that would prohibit the
owners from removing the mature trees that exist within the existing right-of-way.
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
RECEIVED
3 199
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Inspections
FROM: John Cameron, City Engineer
DATE: July 28, 1994
SUBJECT: Street Vacation Request
Hillside Lane - Case #94-58
MFRA #10798
It does not appear that this right-of-way would ever be needed for
street or utility purposes; however, it could serve as another access
point to Crescent Park, probably more likely for pedestrians rather then
vehicles. The right-of-way could be vacated and a walkway easement
retained, but then there is still the problem that the property owners
envision this as totally their property, where they can do minor
improvements such as plant trees, build storage sheds, construct
retaining walls, etc. This is already evidenced by the encroachment of
a deck and kennel on the existing right-of-way. It is also more
difficult for the City to do improvements when they only have an
easement rather than platted right-of-way.
We do not believe that this street vacation would be in the City's
best interest.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
July 26, 1994
/
Planning & Inspections . ~,, /
( \.zl
ORi~q ~;;tk:;:rr' ~; rekel
In reviewing the attached request to vacate a portion of Hillside Lane, one must look
at the affect it will have on the adjacent Crescent Park. A portion of this park is being
retained as a nature area, and a portion is utilized for city dock sites. At this time,
little or no development as occured in Crescent Park, but I can foresee that
development will happen and access will be a concern to both the nature area and the
dock site locations.
Currently there are three accesses to Crescent Park: Hillside Lane, Heron Lane, and
Sumach Lane. Sumach Lane is being used as an access to Crescent Park. Heron Lane
is located 233 feet to the west of Sumach Lane, and because of its close proximity
to Sumach Lane, when development occurs at this park, it does not pose as high need
for use as an access. On the other hand, when looking at Hillside Lane, in relationship
to providing access, it is a direct link to Three Points Park, Wiota Commons, and the
neighborhood to the west of Crescent Park.
From viewing the surveys supplied by the applicants, it is apparent there is a deck
encroaching onto the unimproved Hillside Lane. There is no evidence on file at City
Hall that indicates an application was submitted to construct this deck within the right-
of-way. Consideration should be given to its removal at this time.
It is my belief that Hillside Lane is an important part of the future use of Crescent Park
and should be retained by the City. Also, this application should be submitted to the
Park and Open Space Commission for their recommendation.
JF:pj
printed on recycled paper
CITY of MOUND
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
.ira 2 8 ~
To:
From
Subject:
Son Sutherland
Building Inspector
Greg Skinner
Public Norks
Request to Vacate Hillside Road
I have reveiwed the request and made a site inspection
t.o vacate Hillside Road. I see no reason that we would need
to keep t. his unimproved road. However, there 'is 98' of 4"
sanitary sewer line for ]780 Hillside Road that ~ould become
the owners responsibility if the request is granted.
printed on recycled paper
3 .t0
Glister, owner of
5008 Wren Rd.
Mound, Mn 55364
3 August 1994
RECEIVED
' OUN & INSP.
To Whom It )la)- Concern--including
Mound Planning Commission and
The Mound City Council
RE: Vacation of the fire lane on Hillside Lane.
between 5025 Wren Rd and 1780 Hillside.
'Dear' Sirs'
We wish to raise several objections to the elimination of the fire
~'~'~ in favor of it ~eing given to the private 'oarties on either
side.
!. Each party already has in their possession 3 lots. if
they wxsh to build additional buildings, it should be done
the ~'~' ~ , _ ess
~cn~ines of what chex. already ~:~oss .
~ - fire laFJe
~. The oa:'~.5 ~.h~ ~ s request.~ng ~ne .
~.his t-;me was not in favor of it when ~Lc~,e other party wanted-to do
· ' _ ' .. ~tv ~u~ent!y -~equesting
~. for hi~ own bu}]ding Froject. The.-,f.~
mo]'e land does not homestead the prcperty he is ~;ishing to add
He ,cants mor. e land so cha~ he c:ar: ~i:e or sell. ~.omc of his land tc
,,n~, w~:=;a,_s to buil'd , without alte~i n~ :.he vl ew and
ma~'ketable value of the ]and the ~ummer resident alread>'
3. if the land is given, it. will be filled, not. left open.
As we know, ~' "e ~ - ' ' in the 3 Po'int. s
~.nez are ,~, open spaces remainxnE
area. Not sp2ittJng it will insure at least 30 f% of open, non-
~ ~ ' this
de. veloped space If given, a house will be bui utilizin~
space and one more lake view w]ll be destroyed.
4. Because this property abuts a wild life nature habitat,
any building could have negative effects on ~he natural
environment, somet'hing we would like to see preserved for' time to
come. We would suggest an environmental impact statement be made
regarding a~y building by any properZies that abut the marsh area,
also to include ourrent residents of the non-homesteaded party.
High density living is likely to negatively affect nature.
5. Adding addi,tional 'buildable property, will increase the
mobile traffic in an already busy loop around Three Points Park.
The corners on each side of Hillside Ln are ,already very dangerous.
Likewise, whcn a home is bufli, because this land is donated, there
will be more on street ',~arking done. Nct onlF will tibia make the
road even more hazardous, but it. will continue to erode our view
with the addition of ano~her lak~side par'l.~ino~ lot..
it has been our er~perience,in residing aZ our- t~,resent, location for
a full. 15 ye&rs, zhat anytime a space becomes availaLle, it gets
filled. Three Points is literally coming to be wall to ~a]l house.
So; -any time there is & CHOICE and a CHANCE to _eave ~ s~oace open~
we can't help but work toward that end. Mound needs commons and
open spaces or we might as we]] live in hi__o'k density :~]aces like
.~[PLS. We want. %o keep a litt[e bit of countrF at, m¢~spher'e.
Thank you., £c,r )-our consideration ~n this mat*-'~-~r.
August 2,
1994
RECEIVED
' F'LAi' ; & INSP.
Planning Commission
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364-1687
Re: Case No. 94-34 regarding a request to vacate a portion of Hillside Lane between
Blocks 1 and 2 in Linden Heights Addition.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We are writing this letter to express our opposition to the request to vacate the fire lane
between Blocks 1 and 2 in the Linden Heights Addition. This property is currently owned by the
City and is undeveloped in a natural state. It rum from Hillside Lane to Crescent Park which is
also mainly undeveloped in a natural state. In this area of Mound, most residential lots are quite
small. However, because the City owns parkland and other property such as this, the impact of
this high density is lessened. If the City vacates this property, trees and bushes that are located
on the property could be destroyed by the new owners. This would take away the natural barrier
between the two lots which is presently enjoyed by the whole neighborhood as well as the two
abutting owners. There is not much "open" land left in the neighborhood, in order to preserve
as much of it as possible, the City should not vacate this property.
Yours ~
Pam Rudy and Bob Rudy
5041 Wren Road
Mound, MN 55364
$I, 13
RECEIYED
Dar,, S inner
,%1¥
August 3, 1994
RECEIVED
AU6
Ci'ty of Mound
Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Gent 1 emen:
We are writing in response to a notice "TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION
OF A STREET KNOWN AS HILLSIDE LANE". We are against the vacation of this
street, and the reasons are listed below. (We have been residents of 5001 Sparrow
Road for 17 years and at 5108 Edgewater Drive the previous four years.)
You don't need to make any changes in ownership of the lane as the property
owners on both sides of the lane currently treat the area as their own
property at this time. I'? they in%end to keep the land in the same condition
as it is now, 'there is no reason to change the ownership. BUT, we have
been told that the residents to the east of the lane plan to give the lot
next to the lane and the lane he wants the city to give to him, to his son
so his son can tear down the mature trees on the lane and build a house.
Mr. Bodine wants the lane given to him so his soil can build a BIGGER house
than he could without the extra footage.
As you know, any vacant land near a lake is soon filled with a house.
Mr. Bodine currently has three lots and owns lakeshore, I don't think
the city should be giving away land just because a person asks for it.
OPEN SPACES and nature areas are very important.for the city to maintain.
If we weren't concerned with 'the feel and look of "country", we might as
well live in Minneapolis. We want to see the trees left as they are.
We also don't want to see a house where there now are beautiful trees,
and a house would block the view that is there when the trees are not in
leaf.
3. The lane also abutts a natural habitat area. Any changes in the lane area
will most definitely impact the marsh and water negatively.
If another house is shoehorned in the area, there will be even more traffic
around the Three Points Park "loop". The current owners of the property
east of the lane apparently don't like to park in their driveway and are
always parked on the very sharp corner at Hillside and Wren. If a house
is built next to the lane, the present driveway area would go with the
new house and the occupants would have to park on the road. There will
be even more on-street parking with an additional house.
We don't think the city should give away land with the proposed use of
being the extra square footage wished for to build a bigger house. The
location of the house is across the street from a large park that is used
by many, many children and families. We don't need any more traffic
around this park. Please leave the area as it is now.
Steve and Lauree Fegers
5001 Sparrow Road
Mound, MN 55364 472-1500
,6\\~e
i~eo
Cf es~en~
BAY¢
23373
DR~VE
h '1 I~ I
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
July 26, 1994
Minnegasco
GTE
Public Works Department
City Engineer
Northern States Power Company
Fire Department
Police Department
Parks Department
DNR
Planning and Inspections Department ~
REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF HILLSIDE LANE
BETWEEN BLOCKS I AND 2, LINDEN HEIGHTS ADDITION.
LOCATED
The City of Mound has received a request from the owners of 5025 Wren Road and
1780 Hillside Lane to vacate the unimproved Hillside Lane located between their
properties. A copy of the public hearing notice is attached for your reference.
Do you foresee a need for this street? Are there any utilities involved? Do you
recommend denial? Please submit your comments or concerns in writing to Peggy
James at Mound City Hall by 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 3, 1994. This request
will be heard at an informal public hearing by the Planning Commission on August 8,
1994. If you have any questions, you may call Peggy directly at 472-0607.
Thank you for your time in reviewing this matter.
pJ
Enclosure
cc: Mark Koegler, City Planner
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
472-0600, fax: 472-0620
APPLICATION TO VACATE
Case No.
Application Fee:
$150
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S ABUTTING PROPERTY:
~.ot(s) I.) 2-, ,B Block
Description of Street or Easement to be Vacated~
Reason for Re~est or In~resg in Property=
'
Day Pho.e ~& Go~O~-'
15-11v-z4. 13 OOa2
PID No.
~4',"i/.s 7~ ~ Aue
Is there a public need for the right-of-way to be retained for a public purpose?
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 removin9 such notices as
may be required by law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Recommendations from Utilities:
Recommendations from City Depts.:
Police Chief Other
NSP Minnegasco GTE
Public Works Fire Chief Engineer
OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
472-0600, fax: 472-0620
APPLICATION TO VACATE
I
Case
Date Filed
Application Fee:
$150
Applicant' s Name '~O(-~. ~ ~ /.--LA"~ tc.~_ ~O [ I~Ci4 ~ ~
Applicant's Address (~O H I~i~ ~, ~O~
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF APPLIC~T'S ABUTTING PROPERTY:
Lot ~[ ~Jfb
Description of Street or Easement to be Vacated:
Day Phone
Reason for Request or Interest in Property:
there a public need for the right-of-way to be retained for a public purpose?
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, maintainin9 and removing such notices as
may be required by law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Recommendations from Utilities: NSP Minnegasco GTE
Recommendations from City Depts.: Public Works Fire Chief Engineer_
Police Chief Other
L.~.~ L '~ESC. Rt
LoT
{%?_..~5d EE D AT
~'~CL.LADI~IG AL. LTNAT Poj~.TIo/',3
. ~ LY I~ ~ £o~T~u,~C~TCg--Lce OF TMC,
,.~ouwH U~0f.., oF sAi o PotZ'TH_ II FZZT
OF L.oT ~'
E.AC 14 o'T~4L~..
9'6
'
I 11
3&~.y
,!
$
(54)
?o
~ ~ ~?)~
C~E S C~F',IT
PARK
ol'o)
)~
IB Oozz
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #94-
Coz
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO
RECOGNIZE AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING FRONT YARD SETBACK
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING PORCH ADDITION
AT 2612 WILSHIRE BLVD., LOT 2, REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 7,
SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT B, PID #24-117-24 12 0009
P&Z CASE #94-62
WHEREAS, the owner, Larry Melsness, has applied for a variance to recognize an
existing nonconforming front yard setback of 20 feet ( +/-) to the attached garage in order to
construct a conforming 10' x 10' sunroom, and;
WHEREAS, this property is located in the R-1 Zoning District, which requires a
minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, a front yard setback of 30 feet to both Channel Road
and Wilshire Blvd., and side yard setbacks of 10 feet.
WHEREAS, the nonconforming garage is in good condition, was issued a permit to
be constructed, and it is unlikely it will be removed at this time.
WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and lot coverage are conforming, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously
recommended approval with the finding that the platted Channel Road is actually being utilized
as a driveway, and therefore reduces the impact of the nonconforming setback.
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 front yard setback of 20
feet, resulting in a 10 foot variance to the required 30 foot setback, in order to
construct a conforming 10' x 10' sunroom as shown on the survey dated May 10,
1961.
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.
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 conforming 10' x 10' sunroom.
This variance is granted for the following legally described property:
Lot 2, Rearrangement of Block 7, Shirley Hills Unit B.
Proposed Resolution
Melsness, #94-62
Page 2
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.
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
CASE #94-62: .LARRY MELSNESS, 2612 WILSHIRE BLVD., LOT 2, REARRANGEMENT
OF BLOCK 7, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT B, PID #24-117-24 12 0009. VARIANCE FOci
CONFORMING PORCH.
Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the staff report.
This property is located in the R-1 Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot area of
10,000 square feet, a front yard setback of 30 feet to both Channel Road and Wilshire Blvd.,
and side yard setbacks of 10 feet.
The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize existing nonconforming setbacks to the
attached garage in order to construct a 10' x 10' sunroom that is conforming. All other
aspects are conforming. The nonconforming garage is in good condition, was issued a permit
to be constructed, and it is unlikely it will be removed at this time.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of a variance to recognize
the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 20 feet, resulting in a 10 foot variance to
the required 30 foot setback, in order to construct a conforming 1 O' x 1 O' sunroom as shown
on the survey dated May 10, 1961.
Concern about the accuracy of the survey was noted. The Building Official commented that
since a permit was issued for the nonconforming garage, and proposed porch is totally
conforming, he did not feel a new survey was necessary, in this case.
The Commission noted that the platted Channel Road is actually being utilized as a driveway,
and therefore, the impact of the nonconforming setback is reduced.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Hanus to recommend approval of the
variance request as recommended by staff. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
This case will be heard by the City Council on September 14, 1994.
CITY OF MOUND
STAFF REPORT
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
DATE:
Planning Commission Agenda of September 1 2, 1994
TO:
FROM:
Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~C~ ~ o
SUBJECT:
Variance Request
APPLICANT:
Larry Melsness
CASE NO.
LOCATION:
94-62
2612 Wilshire Blvd., Lot 2, Rearrangement of Block 7, Shirley Hills Unit B, PID
#24-117-24 12 0009
ZONING:
R-1 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND
This property is located in the R-1 Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot area of
10,000 square feet, a front yard setback of 30 feet to both Channel Road and Wilshire Blvd.,
and side yard setbacks of 10 feet.
The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize existing nonconforming setbacks to the
attached garage in order to construct a 10' x 10' sunroom that is conforming. All other
aspects are conforming. The nonconforming garage is in good condition, was issued a
permit to be constructed, and it is unlikely it will be removed at this time.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of a variance to recognize
the existing nonconforming front yard setback of 20 feet, resulting in a 10 foot variance to
the required 30 foot setback, in order to construct a conforming 10' x 10' sunroom as
shown on the survey dated May 10, 1961.
JS:pj
The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City
Council on September 27, 1994.
printed on recycled paper
· - .. ~.~.2612/WILS,~ IRE .BLVD.,:+ ,MOUN. D, .HN~.' , MELSNESS ADDIT.~ON
PLAT:::'OF~ S 'liVEY
' "~" i : ' ' :':.: ~""~" ' -.,. ",:
.... · .;: :,, .: ~ '.. . . -" · ,
· ' ':'~ :""',,-: ;;~14 ~: ~' :.
'::: (" i hereby' c~ffy .
;':".': mad· a s~ay of ~e'~ location of the build~l~
'-' .on ~e a~ve descend prope~y l~ation
:'. of ~( Idtn~ is shown on
::-.',::.;'i~_;,: ~1; ,, ~. :.., _ .... '.. :....:
C:~:t, TLT1CATIC OF SURV'~'~ ~',. ~, ,,
the p~opert¥ clasc~ib~d ~b6ve a,,d'that e~.... '
da~ Is & cor~e'ct'~ep~esentitlon o[
Planning Commission Date:
City Council Date:
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
City Planner ~ Public Works
City Engineer DNR
Other
Application Fee: $~50.00
,:as,, $o.q44vL
Please type or print the foHowlng information:
Address of Subject Property
Block
Zoning District
Owner's Name
Owner's Address
Use of Property:
Day Phone
~ ~ / ~ :~..",'I: 1...' ,~., ..~/:/c/ /:.,.. ~ .... .....
Applicant's Name (if other than owner).
Address Day Phone
1. Has an application ever been marie for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning
procedure ftr this property? (~es, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution
number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.):
,IS 9<//0 .~ ~.n ;,"' ,~0 ~ ? d~':' "-'- ' '~.'"' --
Variance Application (11/93)
Page 2
Case No.
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 areh, etc.):
SETBACKS: required requested
(or existing)
VARIANCE
Front Yard: S E W ) _~',-, ft. : ,"_. ft. ,,'-~, ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ff. ff. ft.
Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft.
Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft.
Lakeside: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft.
: (NSEW) ft. ft. ft.
Street Frontage: ft. ft. ft.
Lot Size: sq ft sq ft sq ft
Hardcover: 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 ~J, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use:
o
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the
uses permitted in that zoning district?
( ) too narrow ( ) topography
( ) too small ( ) drainage
( ) too shallow ( ) shape
Please describe: '" "~ ' ' ----
( )soil
,Csff existing situation
( ) other: specify
7
Variance Application (11/93)
Page 3
Case No.
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:
Was~ ~e 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 (), No~.. If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
9. Comments:
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.
Owner's Signature
Applicant's Signature
NAME:
ADDRESS:
EXISTING LOT AREA
EXISTING LOT AREA
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
SQ FT X 30% =
-.- SQ FT X 15% =
HOUSE:
LENGTH WIDTH
/ /
.6-4 x ~ ~ =
X =
X =
GARAGE:
TOTAL HOUSE
DRIVEWAY:
TOTAL GARAGE
x
X
TOTAL DRIVEWAY *****************
DECK:
(if impervious
surface under
deck = 100%)
OTHER:
~'
TOTAL DECK
TOTAL DECK @
TOTAL OTHER
TOTAL PROPOSEDHARDCOVER *******************
UNDER (OVER) *****************************
MEETS LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS * * * * * * * * * * * * · ·
BY: /""~' "'~?---~.-~ .~.-,~~.-~-----*."~-~ ... DATE:
/',.,_
?
6
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Rd., Mound, Minnesota
OWNER
ADDRESS
LOCATION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT
TELEPHONE NO t./
STREET ADDRESS ..... '
ADDITION - ' '.' , .....~.~... .. ,
LOT ~
~"' BLOCK
COMPLETION DATE :"; '~ ",: '~)"
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
Survey. [] Energy Comp..
Plat Plan [] Elevations
Structural Plan [] Watershed
TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION
NEW CONSTRUCTION
[] Single Family Sq.
[] Multi-Family Sq.
Ft.
Ft.
[] Commercial Sq. Ft.
[] Industrial Sq. Ft.
[]] Garage - Size -' Sq. Ft.
Iii Deck - Size Sq. Ft.
[] Patio - Size Sq. Ft.
[] Fence - Size Ln. F...
PERMIT FEE $.
SURCHARGE.
S.A.C...
WATER CONN. FEE $
TAPPING FEE $
TOTAI,
.. ' PLAT '
ESTIMATED VALUE
ZONING ,L'~
~. ? ? ~'?w PARCEL
[] Heating Layou ~-t:;', ;~
[] Sewer-Water Locati~)'n' '~ ;'~
~ County Drive~:.Pemp,
REMODELING
[]:'Addition ~:, , ,~, Sq. Ft.
[] Interior - Sq. Ft.
[] Sub Level -Sq. Ft.
[] Roofing -Sq. Ft..
[] Siding - Sq. Ft.
[] Utility Bldg. - Size
Sq. Ft
[] Council Resolution No
ERMIT APPROVAL . ~._~.~
OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE
DATE.
PLUMBING PERMIT NEEDED: ~..
In case permit is granted, I hereby agree to do the proposed work in accordance with description above set forth
and according to the provisions of all ordinances of the City of Mound and of all statutes of the State of Minnesota in
such cases made and provided.
DATE, APPLICANT,, ' ."
//
:4.3U~iD ~DVTg..',:;Y c.~ /S:; IIqG ' "'" ,. ""
',-, .... ~ City U~:l 53Li 7,:-y,';c,,:'d F'.~a.'::~ ;.~'~,m~, 7, tr:ne~:~:.a
srrtved
City In:~pector Uenry T:'u<.~lsen
'I ·
Dn. vLd Pe'Lcrscn, 50BO Sb~,:'aline
Lot 5~ Koh'.'~'n~s Addition
).ccessoD' ~uildlng V:::'i. ance
~,~r. Peters,~n was not present st this 't.'t. me :::> lt~:,m ~ag ':c ~] ,::.'] ','.r'~:..~ [ i.;,t,::
tn meeting.
Larry ;delsne?s~ .',.1;f , 'n ,-'- · ..,., .
Let 2, Rearra:',::,:,:nc-nt of !qock 7, Shirley Hills Unit 3
Side la~ Variance
Mr. ~elsness was
neighbors a....~j~,~.eing t.o the 9 ',',c~ ~'.nl:--':-,,:;~ :r,,:r:,:, of bi~ ~;..~m": ~:~.,:.
~lr. & ~{rs. W. ~.. Pei, erson, 53.:t5 Ba:'tie~.'t b!vd,.
Mr, & k;rs, Art Bert Otto, 5101 P~rtleb-t 3].vd.
~r. & ~rs. Frank ~at~:chek
~r. & ~rs. Terry
D~nnis Ka,gtterh enry,
Newel! moved and i~eiland seconded a motio. %0 d~ny the rc:~.;~e:.:t tcr a
.
Side yard variance (apr, roximate!y
Di.~xcussed. The vo%e was: OberOeck~ Sewe2. l. and
deny cerr'ied.
and air a::d elsa fire
~,e:lan~. - Doesn't provlde ~noui/}-~ a,:;<:es~, ~ to ~,,-.'-,-,f~:<rty....
Jackson - Best use of ir, nd to
Cklair Hesse arriveS.
Os~x'in C. pFluq
·
Lots .~-.!I, ir;cl.~ r'ert of' Lots '~,'.,i~
Special U'~e Fez~:it for Cabinet
GI£NEICkL ZONING LNFOI{]%L~kTION SIIEET
I ADDREss: ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ............ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....
. ~ -z~. ~t Of Record? yes
Required Lot Width. ~O {frontage on an lmp=oved public .trill) ~ no =
Existin~ Lot .idth ~ ~ , Depth~
PRON?; N $ m H ' - --
N
N S
~ZSTZNG ~/OR ~0~8~ 8~B~X8: '
FRONT:
FRONT: N S
SIDE: N S E
-, ~)
'.
6
FRONT: N $ E W
eRONT: N s z w? ~ ·
SIDE: N 3 E
SIDE: N S E W __4' 9~ 6'
N S E W 4'
LAKEs HOPE:
FRONT: N $ E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
SIDE: N S E N
PEA~: N S g W
LAKESNORE ~
:~4)' ........
~_ co
I;
o
o
o
.~?
,i)
cr
August 6, 1994
Dear Friends:
Your support and encouragement was greatly appreciated during our fight for a shelter in
Mound. Somehow all along, I felt that we would not be successful. Perhaps, the council had its
mind made up from the beginning to deny us. From the very beginning I sensed this. Never the
less, I have always kept my sights set for an alternative location. The week of the last public
hearing I had a vision I could not shake. In fact, when the Mound Council denied us at our last
public hearing and everyone was very depressed, I was feeling excited about this new vision. I
was so excited that I made my husband Dan get up at 5:00 A.M. to see if there was potential for a
shelter in this new location. When we arrived at the site and walked through the building, we
immediately realized that this was a far better location and building than the convent we were
trying to move. Have I aroused your curiosity yet? The location is in Navarre at the intersections
of County Road 15 and County Road 19. It is the Grace Baptist Church which has been for sale
for over two years. It will be a perfect shelter.
I have a three-fold purpose to this letter. First, it is to sincerely thank you for your
previous support. Second, it is to assure you that we are still moving ahead. Third, you guessed
it is to ask you for your support in helping us to get the proposal through the City of Orono,
where the building is located. We did learn a lot from our past failures with the City of Mound.
Because of that experience and wisdom gained, we will be successful with the City ofOrono, rm
asking that you send to me a new letter of support addres
letter will be taken to the o;,,, m ........ , , sed. (To Whom it m~hYeCOncern~.sitT?s
'--.-:-,-,-,,ers, t. ouncn, ana concerned neighbors oft propose
Our first planning commission meeting will be held September 19, 1994 at the Orono City Hall
located at Crystal Bay Road and U.S. Highway 12, Orono Minnesota. (612-473-7357)
If you could attend this meeting it would be greatly appreciated. If you cannot be present
please keep us in your prayers.
Sincerely yours,
Valerie J. Hessburg
Executive Director
472-2141 · P.O. BOX 34 · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
September 9, 1994
Mayor Skip Johnson
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
RECEIVE3 '
Mayor Jerome P. Rockvam
City of Spring Park
Spring Park, Minnesota 55384
Mayor Edward Callahan
City of Orono
1335 S. Brown Road
Orono, Minnesota 55323
Dear Mayors Johnson, Rockvam, and Callahan,
I am hesitant to criticize because your community is not my community anymore --
though once it was. However, if you do not know how others feel about your community,
how can you improve it? I grew up in Spring Park and Mound and spent my entire
elementary and high school years there. My concern is your "main street" - the corridor
between Navarre and Mound. It has evolved into a dreadful landscape in the last 30 years.
It appears to be developing as one long, very ugly commercial strip. Land uses are
physically, economically, and visually incompatible. The corridor presents a very
unflattering view of the community. Unfortunately, it is the first thing that visitors and
prospective residents see.
Perhaps development is too far advanced to have redevelopment or a new vision make a
difference. Perhaps three municipalities can not cooperate and coordinate their
development. Perhaps you do not have a vision or can not agree on a vision for what your
"main street" should be. Perhaps there is no political will to institute strong design
controls on future development in the corridor. I hope that none of these are true and that
you can collectively address this community problem. I urge all three of your
municipalities to collectively think about a vision for the corridor and take regulatory and
redevelopment steps to attain that vision.
I think that the long range strength of your community depends on it.
Sincerely yours,
Perry Thorvig
3112 Townview Av.
St. Anthony, Minnesota 55418
RECEIVED 3F_.P I 4
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Monday, September 19, 19!
Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E. Wayzata
(Elevator handicapped access, west entra
5:30 PM, PUBLIC HEARING
establish a Quiet Waters Area, 5 mph s
Minnetonka in the channel north of Ced
5:45 PM, LAKE USE AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
'l.
Evaluation of public hearing testimony and findings of
the 5:30 pm public hearing for consideration of
establishing a Quiet Waters Area, 5 mph speed limit, on
Lake Minnetonka in the channel north of Cedar Point,
Wayzata Bay, with findings and recommendations to the
board;
o
Draft Ordinance amending Sect. 3.07 Watercraft for Hire,
adding Coast Guard Safety Standards in new subdivisions 5
through 9, to consider recommending to the board approval
of the second reading;
3. Draft Ordinance amending Sect. 3.09 Special Events,
changing the licensing authority for special events to
the Sheriff, and providing the Sheriff with criteria
which may be considered in determining whether or not a
special event license should be granted, to consider
recommending approval to the board of the second reading;
4. INFORMATIONAL -- MN DNR proposal to change requirements
for personal flotation devices (PFD's or life preservers)
to meet the Cost Guard rule chaning federal requirements
for lifesaving devices, comment being called for by
Friday, September 16 -- conunittee/boar~ ~ember~ ~n
Support pf or bavinq ~ goncern for this change are Dsked
to call ~he. executive director b_~-10:00 am, FridayL
o
o
Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol significant
activity report;
Special events -- $100 deposit refunds:
A. Antique & Classic Boat Parade, 8/14/94
B. Minnetonka Challenge 5 Mile Swim, 8/6/94
C. Limited Bass Predator Classic , Team & Individual
Events, 7/9, 8/14 and 8/27-28/94
Additional Business
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Staff Report
DATE'
September 9, 1994
TO:
FROM:
City Council
Jon Sutherland, Building Official <~;~-/~,
Greg Skinner, Public Works Superintendent
SUBJECT:
REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AND FENCE ON A
PUBLIC DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT BY PHILIP HOFHERR
4746 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS I & 2, BLOCK 8, DEVON
Background
The applicants are seeking approval to install a retaining wall and fence within a city
drainage and utility easement. A city water main is located within the easement.
Work on the retaining wall and fence was started, but has not been completed. The
contractor has agreed to discontinue the work until authorization is achieved. The
contractor and owner have made every effort to work with city staff.
The applicants are determined to make the improvements citing the need to improve
the use and function of their yard.
As noted by the applicant's 6-29-89 permit for retaining walls, the City has approved
improvements over utilities in the past. Through experience, we have learned that
allowing improvements under these conditions can create future problems when work
is eventually done on the utility.
In this case, due to the persistence of the applicant, staff offered an alternative in the
form of a Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreement. The applicant's attorney drafted
the agreement based on an example provided by staff. Our City Attorney reviewed
the agreement document, and found the document itself is suitable, however, he
recommended that the improvements not be allowed.
printed on recycled paper
Staff Report
Hofherr
Page 2
Comments
It is not prudent to allow improvements within a utility easement that will at some
point interfere with the utility or maintenance of it. This must be balanced with the
right of the owner to use their land. In certain cases, improvements can be allowed
if they will not interfere with the easement or there are no utilities within the
easement. The intent of staff is to change the previous unregulated policy to one of
examining each case and not allowing improvements that will interfere with
easements. The decision of staff may be appealed to the City Manager and then the
City Council if there is a unique circumstance.
Staff has taken the position this policy change must take place after this case.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council approve of the Retaining Wall Maintenance
Agreement as amended to add the signature of the Mayor. This agreement shall be
recorded at Hennepin County, and proof of filing submitted to the City Clerk prior to
issuance of the building permit for the fence and retaining wall.
JS:pj
JS:pj
RET~%INING ~FALL MAINTENANCE ]%GREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, is made this /~ day of August, 1994, by
and between Philip M. Hofherr and Sarah Hofherr (hereinafter
"Hofherrs") and City of Mound (hereinafter "City").
RECITALS
FIRST: Hofherrs are the owners of real estate located in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as:
Lots 1 and 2, Block 8, DEVON, Hennepin County,
Minn~~h-d that part of adjacent, vacated Oxford
Lane accruing thereto.
SECOND: City is the owner of certain utility easements on
the vacated street, Oxford Lane, between Hanover Road and Island
View Road;
THIRD: By Resolution #81-318 dated September 29, 1981, City
allowed Hofherrs access over 1/2 of Oxford Lane. City granted
said vacation of the undeveloped street, Oxford Lane, subject to
utility easements.
AGREEMENT
The parties agree as follows:
1. Hofherrs, their successors and assigns, shall be solely
responsible for the maintenance of the retaining wall over and
across the portion of Oxford Lane subject to the utility
easements. All necessary maintenance, repairs, operations and
replacements of the retaining wall shall be borne by Hofherrs,
their heirs, successors, assigns or subsequent purchaser, as
their sole cost and expense.
TAXPAYER SERVICES
TRANSFER ENTERED
IT 1994
2. The parties acknowledge that, at some point, the City
may be required to perform maintenance of the utility easements
lines located on its property.
3. All necessary repairs and/or replacements of the
retaining wall necessitated by the City's work on its utilities
shall be the sole cost and expense of Hofherrs, their heirs,
successors, assigns or subsequent purchaser.
4. This Agreement shall be binding upon Hofherrs, their
heirs, successors, assigns or subsequent purchaser.
5. That this Agreement will be filed for record with the
Hennepin County Registrar of Titles.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto caused these
presents to be executed the day and year first above written.
Philip M.' Hofherr
Sara~°fherr
STATE OF MINNESOTA §
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN §
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of August, 1994, by Philip M. Hofherr and Sarah
Hofherr, husband and wife.
Notary Public
~[~: g5 HENNEPIN COUNTY
~ ~~~,$s~on ex~ires 8-18-94
CITY OF MOUND
Its:
STATE OF MINNESOTA §
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN §
On this I 7 day of August, 1994, before me, a notary
p.ub%ic, within and for said county, personally appeared
City of Mound and that said instrument/was signed on behalf of
the City and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and
deed of said City.
PREPARED AND DRAFTED BY:
Hutton and Kennedy
1925 Rand Tower
527 Marquette Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Notary Public
ConversatJor Record
PHONE:
~///~//~///~////~////~/£//////////~/~//~/~/~////////////~///////////~/////~//////
I I I I I II I Illl
LJ A NOVC"'~
~"~:~ - v--c~)
4Z,5
0
f-STORY F'R/: t-~TUCK UNDER
GARAGE DW1 LLING
~ 4"/46
,ORAINAGE. AND
'" '" S',i~"oo'4~"w."
SE. RVI CE. ROAD
J
zz
3 ·
oy
\t
; <.x ~ u.
SCALE: ONE INCH
EQUALS 20 FEET
JOEFN0.9.
jEEN ROAD
:_RS LANE)
2
io_SC£ S~4E£T 3~ ~O~
EXTeNSION. F. WATER ON HANO~R ROlO1
HANOVER
L-60
15' PERMANENT EASEMENT
.". :~
ROAD
7
14
I§' PERMANENT EASEMENT.
D 'E
3/33
v 0
' PERMANENT?
EASEMENT
351
September 29, 1981
Councilmember Polston moved the following resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 81-318
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH-THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND VACATE OXFORD LANE FBOM HANOVER ROAD TO ISLAND
VIEW DRIVE AND RETAIN OUI~'UTILITY EASEMENT
pursuant to due and proper not~.ce according to law, a public hearing
was held by the City Cguncil ~'t' the City Hall in the City of Mound
on September 29, 1981,'. ~at 7:3..~JP~M. to consider the vacation of
that portion of Oxford"Lane fr~.m Han~ver'Road to Island View Drive,
and '" " '"
at such hearing all pe'bsbns d~iring'~',to:~e heard were given such
opportunity after which said public hearing was declared closed
by the Mayor, and
this is an undeveloped parcel of land and has never been a street,
as such, and
after review by the City Staff, approval by the Planning Commission,
and discussion by the Council there is not a public need for the
undeveloped street and it is in the public interest to vacate said
undeveloped street, but retain all utility easements, and
one half of this vacated street be added to PID #30-117-23 22 0048
and one half to PID #30-117-23 22 0078.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND,
MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the undeveloped street, Oxford Lane, between Hanover Road
and Island View Drive may be and hereby is'declared to be
vacated, but utility easements are retained.
That the City Clerk and City Attorney are directed to file a
certified copy of this resolution with the Hennepin County
Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles, all in accordance
with M.S.A. 412.851 and MSA 117.19.
A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Councilm~mber Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following
voted in favor thereof: Polston, Swenson, Ultick and Lindlan; the following
voted against the same: none; with the following being absent: Charon;
whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota
472-1155
LOCATION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT
PARCEL #
ADDRESS
ESTIMATED VALUE
ZONING DISTRICT
COMPLETION DATE
PHONE NO. L~m?
I I ~"'" ~
ZIP
TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION - DESCRIPTION OF WORK BEING DONE:
/
01-3151 PERMITFEE$ I,~' I~'~Z~,
/
01-3151 PLAN CHECKFEE $. ,/
01-2222 SURCHARGE $ PERMIT
78-2304
78-3774 S.A.C. $.
73-3155 WATERCONN. FEES
FINAL INSPECTION
73-3744 TAPPING FEE $.
78-3158 SEWER CONN. FEES
DATE.
73-3842
STATIONARY ROD FEE $.
OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE
TOTALS !.~-_~ ~ DATE.
ARE ADDITIONAL PERMITS NEEDED: ELECTRICAL
PLUMBING HEATING
!ermlt Is granted, I hereby agree to do the proposed work tn accordance with description above set forth and according to the provisions of
ances of the City of Mound and of all statutes of tyre State of Minnesota in such cases made and provided. All building permits expire one
er date of Issuance. ·
, /. ,
DATI= /, / ' ( APPLICANT '%,'~ v
/,
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
5341
CITY OF MOUND
Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600 Fax: 472-0620
Tenant/Building Name
The applicant is: '~_owner ~contractor ~tenent
LEGAL Lot Block Addition
DESCRIPTION PID# Plat
OW.E. .ems
Address ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~%~
Phone (H) ~- ~= {W) ~% -~&~, (M)
John
Phone (H) 'y~- ~o ~ - (W) (M)
ARCHITECT Name
&/OR Address
ENGINEER Phone (H) (W) (M)
CHANGE OF FROM:
USE TO:
PRINT APPLICANT'S NAME
VALUATION I
OF WORK: VALUE APPROVED:
SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING.
TIME MMITS ON BUILDING COMPLETION. ALL WORK TO BE PERFORMED P~RSUANT TO A BUILDING PERMIT OBTAINED FOR NEV~ CONSTRUCTION. REPAIRS, REMODELING,
AND ALTERATIONS TO THE EXIP_HIORS OF ANY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT SHALL BE COMPLETED W1THIN ONE (1) YEAR FROM THE DATE OF
PERMIT ISSUANCE. THE PERSON OBTAINING THE PERMIT AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR 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. ESTABMSHING 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 SHAM. BE REQUESTED NOT LESS THAN THIRTY (30) BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE END OF THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY
TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
(OFFICE USE ONLY) SPECIAL CONDITIONS & COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: OCCUPANCY GROUP/DIV: MAX OCCUPANT LOAD I CO.ED ,~OV~
I ZONING
BLDG SIZE (SO FT) · STORIES FIRE SPRINKLERS REOUIRED? I CITY ENGINEER
~U~ITI YES I NOI PUBLIC WORKS
RECEIVED BY I DATE: .: · ' PLANS CHECKED BYe! :.::: APPROVED SYI DATEi::: :!:i:i:: I ASSESSING
I
-to TA-I..~- TIhcc~ ~trF ~
'T'H£ &IT¥ I.OllJ~
To B6 Dc--STI~Y~,
bo&aT -FI-~ ¥
4746 Island View Drive
Philip Hofherr
Devon 37870
Lots 1-2-½ of va¢ Lane
Block 8
30-117-23 22 0078'
Survey. ~ R-2
~H'ANOVER
ISLAND VIEW DR
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-062O
Staff Report
DATE:
September 9, 1994
TO:
FROM:
City Council
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~ 7-
Greg Skinner, Public Works Superintendent
SUBJECT:
REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL ON A PUBLIC
DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT BY FERNANDO MAZOLENY,
4748 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 3, 4, & 5, BLOCK 8, DEVON
Background
The applicant is seeking approval to install rock retaining walls within a city drainage
and utility easement as detailed on the attached survey. There is a public sewer line
located within the easement that may need maintenance at some time in the future.
Maintenance may cause the removal of the retaining walls.
Staff has notified the applicant that we do not recommend the retaining walls be
installed. This area can be graded to a slope to match the adjacent property and
condition.
Recommendation
Staff recommends, if the Council approves :his request, that a Maintenance
Agreement be provided by the applicant suitabie to the City Attorney and that the
agreement be recorded at Hennepin County, and proof of filing submitted to the City
Clerk.
JS:pj
printed on recycled paper
RECEIVED
::L
hr.I'~r...y o,~..~ :.'.., .,..,, :~ ..~ :;
au:'%':... :'£ t~.~., t:,~u~:~:?'i;-,_~ o{' bo'~s j~ /.~ a~ 5: r,~n¢:i; ~,: b:,von~
',oo.t~i&r. of' all ¢::':i::t!r," i~i;.,~.in.-.~ t~.,':l'e3r,. I% coos n:)t .~'~':cr%
Scale: 1" = 30'
Proposed descriptions:
A.
~TJrdon ii. Colf'-i'~6a
L~r.d :;u. rv.~yor -.nd Planner
','~::~ i,:..kr., .?.'.innesota
Lot 5 and the kest 18 feet of Lot £, Block 8, Devon.
'Lot 3, and Lot 4 exceot the West 18 feet of said Lot 4, Block 8, Devon.
PERMIT NO.
CITY OF MOUND
INSPECTI/J3 i NOTICE
M T (.W/ TH F
PHONE
ITE INSPECTION
RADING/EXCAV.
1-1 COMPLAINT
[] FOLLOW-UP
CONTRACTOR ....
[] FOOTING [] PLUMBING ROUGH-IN
[] FRAMING [] PLUMBING FINAL
I'qINSULATION [] MECHANICAL
[] WALLBOARD [] FIREPLACE AT THROAT
[] PROGRESS [] FIREPLACE FINAL
[] FINAL ~ [] DEMOLITION
~ [] CORRECT WORK & "R;OEED ' '
[] CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS. INSPECTOR WILL RETURN
[] STOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR
[] INSPECTION REQUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS
Call for the next Inspection 24 hours in advance.
Owner/Contractor on site '
Inspector ~,. ~J~ ,_~~ / ~¥:rff'~-~jC...lJldj~:~l472-0600
Yellow Copy/Site No~ice White Copy/Inspector'. Fite
Conversation Record
CONVERSATION
PHONE:
September 14, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1995 PRELIMINARY GENERAL
FUND BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,408,340;
SETTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY AT $1,808,130;
LESS THE HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA)
OF $499,460, RESULTING IN A PRELIMINARY
CERTIFIED LEVY OF $1,308,670;
APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR 1995;
AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATES
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,
does hereby adopt the following preliminary 1995 General Fund Budget appropriations:
City Council 59,640
Promotions 4,000
Cable TV 1,380
City Manager/Clerk 184,000
Elections & Registration 2,670
Assessing 51,700
Finance 155,920
Computer 24,800
Legal 103,520
Police 833,350
Emergency Preparedness 4,610
Planning and Inspection 162,280
Street 400,860
Shop & Stores -0-
City Property & Buildings 101,160
Parks 133,530
Recreation 28,960
Contingencies 15,000~
Transfers 140,960
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
2,408,340
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby direct the County Auditor to levy the following preliminary taxes for
collection in 1995:
SPECIAL LEVIES
Bonded Indebtedness
Unfunded Accrued Liability of Public Pension Funds
Total Special Levies
TOTAL PRELIMINARY LEVY
PRELIMINARY TOTAL TO BE LEVIED
FOR 1995
Less Homestead Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA)
Preliminary Certified Levy
September 14, 1994
115,580
33.350
148,930
1.659.200
1,808,130
-499,460
1,308,670
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby adopt the preliminary overall budget for 1995 as follows:
GENERAL FUND
As per above
2,408,340
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Area Fire Service Fund
Capital Improvement Fund
Capital Projects Fund
Cemetery Fund
Dock Fund
Pension Fund
285,330
307,360
-0-
5,840
78,700
'0-
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
677,230
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Recycling Fund
Liquor Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
118,590
345,720
371,690
1.019.480
2
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS
SUMMARY
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Enterprise Funds
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
September
14, 1994
1,855,480
2,408,340
677,230
1.855.480
4.941.050
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, hereby sets Tuesday, November 29, 1994 and Tuesday, December 6, 1994, as
the public hearing dates for consideration of the 1995 Proposed Budget.
September 14, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE LEVY ON THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1980
IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,075.00
WHEREAS, there is a Resolution #80-223 with the Hennepin County Auditor
directing a levy of $4,075.00 for General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1980; and
WHEREAS, it appears thru there will be sufficient funds to cover the principal
and interest due in 1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby direct the Hennepin County Auditor not to make the levy of
$4,075.00 for 1995 taxes payable for the General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1980.
~ombs Fran___~k Roos Associates, Inc.
23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4739
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
September 12, 1994
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT: Mound/Minnetrista
Public Works Material Storage
MFRA #10481
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
On Thursday, September 8, 1994, bids were received and opened for
the Site Grading and Access Road Reconstruction of the new Material
Storage area in Minnetrista. Enclosed is a tabulation of the four (4)
bids received. The low bidder is Imperial Developers of Bloomington, MN
with a total bid of $140,167.00. The Engineer's Estimate was
$135,420.00 and is included in the bid tab. The Feasibility Report
prepared one year ago estimated the construction cost for this project
at $118,400.00. As you are
aware, this project was previously bid on
July 29th at which time the low bid received was for $166,689.50.
As was the case on the first bid, the project was divided into two
parts, Section I - Material Storage Site Grading and Section II - Access
Road Reconstruction. The rebid lowered the site grading by
approximately $36,000 from $136,281.00 to $100,002.50, but on the road
reconstruction, the price went up approximately $10,000.00 from
$30,408.50 to $40,164.50. The net reSults show a savings of $26 522.50
by rebidding the project. ,
The low bidder, Imperial Developers ha
projects throu h o . s contracted fo r'
g ur company previously with s ..... r p lvate
have also completed numerous municipal projects for such cities as Prior
~u~srac~ory results. They
Lake, Plymouth and Eagan. We have checked their references by
discussing previous projects with the different municipalities and find
them to be a reputable contractor. Therefore, we are recommending that
the City award Imperial Developers a contract in the amount of
8140,167.00 for the Mound/Minnetrista Public Works Material Storage
Project.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council
September 12, 1994
Page Two
If yOU have any questions,
will be available at the Council
1994.
JC:3b
Enclosures
or require additional information,
meeting on Wednesday, September 14,
Very truly yours,
MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
Ill
September 14, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO
EXCEED $24,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING
THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
MSA 469, OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF
THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 1995
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound is the governing body of
the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received two resolutions from the Housing
& Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound: one entitled, "Resolution Approving the
Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority Budget for the Year 1995 Pursuant to MSA
Chapter 469", and the other entitled, "Resolution Establishing the Tax Levy for the Mound
Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the Year 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to the provisions of MSA 469, must
by resolution consent to the proposed tax levy of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
of the City of Mound.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City
of Mound, Minnesota, that a special tax be levied upon real and personal property within the
City of Mound in the amount not to exceed $24,000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the said levy, not to exceed $24,000 is
approved by this Council to be used for the operation of the Mound Housing &
Redevelopment Authority pursuant to the provisions of MSA 469, and shall be certified as a
tax levy to the County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before September 15, 1994.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember
The following voted in the affirmative:
The following voted in the negative:
Attest: City Clerk
Mayor
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
August 30, 1994
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City Administrator for the Cities of:
> Deephaven
> Minnetonka
> Minnetonka Beach
> Mound
> Tonka Bay
> Wayzata
Executive Director Gene
Strommen ·
Board Member Terms Expiring in 1994
Our records indicate your board member's three year term
expires this year.
The customary appointment procedure is for new terms to be
effective with the October (26th) board meeting. It is at
this meeting that new board officers are elected. This is
the board's anniversary month, which incidentally starts the
District's 28th year.
Your city council is invited to act upon your board member's
reappointment effective with the October 26 board meeting.
Please advise our office promptly if your records are not in
agreement with this information.
Thank you for processing this important appointment.
612-8~5-3160 HOISINGTON KOEGLER ?69 P02 SEP lB? '94 89:41
RESOLUTION #93-~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND
DETERMINING THAT, BASED ON PUBLIC COMMENT TO AN
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW), AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) IS NOT WARRANTED AND NO FURTHER STUDY IS
REQUIRED FOR TIlE PELICAN POINT MULTI-FA_MII.Y RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit in accordance with the
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board's Environmental Review Program Rules, Minn. Rules,
parts 4410.0200 to 4410.7800, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has been
prepared and approved by the City of Mound and
WHEREAS, through published notice, the City of Mound has solicited public
comment on the contents of the EAW report and
WtHgREAS, written, public comment has been received from a number of parties
and the Mound City Council has reviewed and considered these comments and
WHEREAS, the comments received raise minor environmental concerns about
Pelican Point Multi-Family Development.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota:
Based on comments to the EAW, the City Council has determined that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not warranted for the project.
Based on the comments, no further study is required to make a determination on
the Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
Environmental concerns raised by comments (described below as optional
conditions to final plat approval) will be considered by the City. Council at the time
of final plat approval.
Revegetation of the storm drain~e ditch at the north end of the site shall
be accomplished using primarily native species conducive to growth in this
location. Instructions to this effect shall be included in the construction
documents submitted to the City Engineer.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best
Management Practices. Constxuction documents submitted to the City
Engineer shall reflect said BMPs.
612-835-3168 HOISINGTON KOEGLER ?6? P03 SEP 8? '94 89:42
Co
do
co
The Developer shall modify Section 9.5 of the Declaration of Covenants
to eliminate the provision allowing improvements to the island to
accommodate picnicking.
The Developer shall prepare and submit to the City Attorney a
conservation easement which establishes the island in Outlot C as
permanently protected from any alteration or improvement.
The Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, along with construction
documents a tree protection plan prepared by an urban forester or arborist.
In addition, an urban forester or arborist shall supervise construction to
insure the proper protection of vegetation.
The Developer shall prepare and submit to the City Attorney a
conservation easement which establishes bluff areas as defined by thc
shoreland management ordinance as permanently protected from any
alteration or improvement except the removal of dead or diseased
vegetation.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PUBLIC HEA RING NO TICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CASE NO. 94-68
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF A STREET
KNOWN AS BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE
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, September 27, 1994 to consider a request to vacate a portion of Baywood
Shores Drive (10 feet of th£~ outer edge of the cul-de-sac), legally described as follows:
That part of the 60 foot radius circle for Baywood Shores Drive as shown
and dedicated in the plat of Replat of Harrison Shores which lies outside
the circumference of a 50 foot radius circle having the same center as
said 60 foot circle, except that portion of said circle lying easterly of the
easterly line of the 50 foot radius circle, and lying between the westerly
extensions of the 50 foot right of way for Baywood Shores Drive.
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
Mailed to property owners within 350' by September 13, 1994. Posted by September 13, 1 994. Published
in "The Laker" on September 12, 1994 .and September 19, 1994 (pre-published).
printed on recycled paper
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4739
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
September 7, 1994
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, City Manager
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound, Minnesota
Water Meter Read System
Payment Request No. 3
MFRA #10622
Dear Ed:
Enclosed is Schlumberger's Payment Request No. 3 for work completed
through August 13, 1994, on the subject project. The amount of this
payment request is $64,781.45. We have reviewed this request, find that
it is in order and recommend payment in the above amount to the
Contractor.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please
contact us.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:pry
Enclosures
~3~ ~"5 An Equal Opportunity Employer
09/07/94 11: 39 '~205 83 97 SCHLUMBERGER IND ~ 002/002
.
~ ~,_,
0~0
0 ~ . · . 0~0
o~u c m o ~
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 5544%4739
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
September 7, 1994
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound, Minnesota
Painting Evergreen Water Tower
Final Payment Request
MFRA #9832
Dear Ed:
Enclosed is Odland Protective Coatings Final Payment Request in the
amount of $6,102.50 for painting the Evergreen Water Tower. Because
this work is fully completed, we do not recommend that any amount be
retained.
We have reviewed this project with your Public Works Superintendent
and find that the work has been completed in general accordance with the
plans and specifications. It is our recommendation that the Contractor
be paid in full for this project.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS F~NK ROOS ASSOCIATES, ~NC.
~' ~--~-:~.,;~ *~----
John Cameron
JC:pry
Enclosures
5 (~ ~ ~ An Equat Opportunity Employer
I ,IA
0
000 O0
000
o o.o. lo'
~ ° o,o 2j~
000 O0
O0
000 .00
000 O0
O0 O0
,.-,i (3) ~
0 r- 0 ~
0o~~ 0
0 ~ E
E Z
o
~-,,,
e e
BILLS ............. SEPTEMBER 14, 1994
BATCH 4083 $500,582.11
BATCH 4084 113,848.37
TOTAL BILLS $614,430.48
I I I I
U I I I I
IIIIIII/ II
IIIIIIIIII
I ,11
I I
I I
I I I I
._Ir-',
OLd I
~ *.--, D.:
._1'5'-'-3
g.
Z
Z
I 32
Z
Lu CL'
~J I
<:Z
Z
a:3 I
,< ..J
I
I
o
I ,IA
C~ (~ O~
I I I
I I
I I
rr
Z
U
g II III III
I I I
I
C'
Z
0
I I I
j._ --.,,
{3.._J
n z
__,~ Q,-
n
Li
.J
U
~,,
Z
J
4
I
oo o ~ °° ~oo~
g~oo~ ~o~ o~
oo~o~ooo~
I
z
I
's-
I
I
,0
I I
c::> c>
! I
s-
! ! I
,-I*-1,-.4
Z
Z
0
Z
C~
.
~ o oo ggo_. o oo
II ! III
Z
4 '' J ......... 4 '*'
ZZZI
L£J
Z
Z
gg
::3
U
I I
III
Z
,<
o
Z
._1
u.J I
EL._./
n,.' Z
O' O'
On.,
0
~.. '-)
C
0,.
;Z
= ..... j ....... j4 ............ g .......
W
Il ,11
ZZ
C
0 I
~Z
L~:
o o
Z
I ,ii
IIIIII I I III I
IIIIII I I III I
Z
~-- Z
Un"
0
Z
Z
Z
Z
CD,
r.n I
...J
ZZ
g
..4'
ZZ
On...
Z
x
Z
d
oo ~
o
L~J
- ~
I
! I
,?
L~J
2 .'r',.
I
,,,-,, ._j
Z Z
'3:'3
Z
Z
_J
Z n,.,- Z
"3
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
To~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
Len Harrell
Monthly Report for August 1994
The police department responded to 1,264 calls for service during the
month of August. There were 36 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses
included 3 criminal sexual conducts, 10 burglaries, 22 larcenies, and 1
arson.
There were 74 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 child
abuse/neglect, 5 forgery/NSF checks, 2 narcotics, 14 damage to property,
4 liquor law violations, 7 DUI's, 2 simple assault 10 domestics (3 with
assaults), 9 harassments, 4 juvenile status offenses and 16 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 115 adult citations and 0 juvenile citations.
Parking violations accounted for an additional 23 tickets. Warnings were
issued to 46 individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 2 adults and 3 juveniles arrested for felonies.
adults and 10 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors.
additional 12 warrant arrests.
There were 25
There were an
The department assisted in 6 vehicle accidents, 2 with injuries. There were
35 medical emergencies and 80 animal complaints. Mound assisted other
agencies on 14 occasions in August and requested assistance 16 times.
Fifty-three ordinance violations were inspected.
Property valued at $27,030 was stolen in August.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - AUGUST 1994
II.
INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 3 criminal sexual conducts cases and 5 child
protection issues in August, accounting for 56 hours of investigative time.
Other cases investigated included burglary, narcotics, theft, arson, assault,
forgery/NSF checks, deprivation of parental rights, trespass, runaway, and
harassing communication.
Formal complaints were issued for assault, driving after cancellation,
indecent conduct, criminal sexual conduct, worthless check, possession of
drug paraphernalia, GM DWI, dog at large and minor consumption.
III.
Personnel/Staffin~
The department used approximately 84 hours of overtime during the month
of August. Officers used 145 hours of comp-time, 288 hours of vacation,
197 hours of sick time, and 1 holiday. Officers earned 44 hours of comp-
time.
We are currently short three officers with Hudson and Ewald out sick and
Sgt. Grand at SPI in Louisville.
The investigators have been used to cover some patrol shifts and limit the
overtime where possible.
IV.
Officer Huggett and Rambo attended K-9 trials in August.
Sgt. Grand is attending the Southern Police Institute for 3 months.
The reserves donated 103 hours during the month of August.
POLICE MONTHLY REPORT - AUGUST 1994
PART I CRIMES o ~ o ~ o o o ~ ADULT. JUV-
Homicide
Criminal Sexual Conduct 3 2 2
Robbery
Assault
Burglary 10 1 1 3
Larceny 22 2
Vehicle Theft
Arson 1
TOTAL 36 3 3 2 3
PART II CRIMES
Child Abuse/Neglect
Forgery/NSF Checks ~ 1 1 1
Criminal Damage to Property 14 2
Weapons
Narcotic Laws 2 1 1 1
Liquor Laws 4 4 3 2
DWI 7 7 7
Simple Assault 2 1 1
Domestic Assault 3 3 3
Domestics (No Assault) 7
Harassment 9 1 1 1
Runaway/Incorrigibility/Truancy 4 4 7
Public Peace
trespassing,
411 Other Offenses 16 $ 8 ·
tOTAL 74 1 ~ 28 25 10
PART IIL];&OP~dtT IV
Property Damage Accidents 4
Personal Injury Accidents 2
Fatal Accidents 0
Medicals 35
Animal Complaints 80
Mutual Aid 14
Other General Investisations 713
TOTAL-
' 848
,Honn.o.~'2-~hiidProtection 2
Inspections '~: .. ~'-.'~ 15
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT
AUG~JST 1994
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
THIS
MONTH
Hazardous Citations 42
Non-Hazardous Citations =-'-'
Hazardous Warnings 17
Non-Hazardous Warnings 14
Ve~ba i Warnings 54
Parking. Citations ~-_,c'c'
DWI 7
Over . 10 5
Property Damage Accidents 4
Personal Injury Accidents 2
Fatal Accidents 0
Adult Felony Arrests 3
Adult Misdemeanor. Arrests '-'~
duvenile Felony Arrests :'::
duvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 11
Part I O~enses 3/_-.
Part II O~=fenses 74
Medicals --,~
Animmal C~mplaints 80
Ordinance Violations ~--,
Other Public Contacts 713
YEAR TO
DATE
446
35:--:
1 :B 8
247
518
229
57
46
74
22
21
263
66
231
516
204
766
373
6 ~ 51'.'.?
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
42:B
10'.-.?
1:33
'F~44
260
51
40
57
16
0
1 :--:0
31
52
2:BO
4/_-,3
260
67/_-,
159
TOTAL 1 ~ 264
Assists 3/_-,
Fol low-Ups 78
Henn. County Chiid Protect ion 2
Mutual Aid Given 14
Mutual Aid Requested 16
11~129
374
353
:34
95
63
10~ 505
338
223
38
87
19
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AUGUST 1994
CITATIONS
DWI
More than .10% BAC
Careless/Reckless Driving
Driving After Susp. or Rev.
Open Bottle
Speeding
No DL or Expired DL
Restriction on [iL
Improper~ Expired~ or No Plates
Stop Arm Violation
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
Mi~eiianeo~s Tmgs
ADULT
7
5
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
23
0
3
0
1
0
138
dUV
0
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
AUGUST 1994
WARNINGS
No Insurance
Tra¥~ic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony Warrants
Misdemeanor Warrants
ADULT
1
14
13
0
7
0
0
0
2
45
1
1 0
JUV
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
Run: 30-Aug-94 14:21 PRO03 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Page 1
Primary ISN~s only: No
Date Reported range: 07/26/9~ - 08/25/94
Activity codes: ALi
Property Status: AlL
Property Types: ALL
Property Descs:
Brands: ALl
ModeLs: AlL
Officers/Badges:
Enfors Property Report
STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED
Prop Inc no ISN Pr
Oesc SN
Prop Date Rptd StoLen Date
Stat StoLen VaLue Recov~d
Recov~d Quantity Act 8rand ModeL Off-1 Off-2
VaLue Cede Assnd Assnd
6 Prop type TotaLs:
B Prop type Totals:
O Prop type TotaLs:
E Prop type Totals:
J Prop type Totals:
0 Prop type TotaLs:
P Prop type TotaLs:
R Prop type Totals:
S Prop type TotaLs:
T Prop type TotaLs:
Y Prop type Totals:
**** Report TotaLs:
300
2,824
385
90
16,878
50
5O
4,393
200
1,420
440
27,030
0 1.000
750 7.000
0 3.000
0 2.000
0 4.000
0 1.000
0 1.000
50 14.000
0 1.000
5 7.000
0 17.000
805 58.000
Run: 30-Aug-g4 13:44
Primary ISN~s on[y: No
Date Reported range: 07/26/94 - 08/25/94
7ange each day: 00:00 - 23:59
HOW Receive<~: All
Activity Resulte<J: All
Dispositions: ALl
Officers/Badges: AIl
Grids: ALL
Patrol Areas: AIl
Days of the week: Ali
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING
9012 OPEN BOTTLE
9014 STOP SIGN
38
1
1
1
1
23
4
22
29
7
12
2
2
4
1
1
1
1
1
9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION
9024 ILLEGAL/UNSAFE TURNS
9040 NO SEATBELT
PARKING/ALL OTHER
DAS/DAR/DAC
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED
9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS
9313 FOUND PROPERTY
9314 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS
9500 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ACC/OTHER
9561 DOG BITE
9562 CAT BITES
9564 DOG BARKING
ANIHAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS
9567 DANGEROUS DOG
9700 HEDICAL/SU
Page 1
Run: 30-Aug-94 13:44 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 07/26/94 - 08/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: Alt
Officers/Badges: AL[
Grids: Ail
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week:
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIOENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9710 MEDICAL/ASU 1
9720 MEDICAL/DOA 2
9730 MEDICALS 31
9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 11
9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 7
9802 PUBLIC ASSIST 1
~900 ALL NCCP CASES 2
9904 OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 7
9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 15
9921 INSPECTIONS CITATION 1
9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 2
9931 HANDGUN DENIALS 1
9944 UNWANTED GUEST 1
9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 1
9950 INFO/INT 2
9980 WARRANTS 12
9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 7
9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 5
9993 MUTUAL AIO/6500 8
9994 MUTUAL AIO/ ALL OTHER 1
A5351 ASLT 5-INFLICTS 'ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM 3
A5355 ASLT S-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ 2
Page
Run: 30-Aug-94 13:44 CFS08
Primary ISN's on[y: No
Reported range: 07/26/94 - 08/25/94
'ange each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Carts For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
B1264
B1294
B3394
B3434
B3494
B3734
C3212
D8500
DCSO0
F4275
I3060
J2500
J2900
J2EO0
J3500
J3EO0
L1023
L1053
BURG 1-OTC RES NO FRC-N-UN NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-U-UN NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC NRES FRC-D-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-BUSINESS
DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESS[ON
DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK
ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO NEA-OT STRU-$299 LESS
CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD
TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAFFIC-GM-OTHER
TRAF-ACC-GN-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
TRAF-ACCID-NS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEIl
CSC 1-UNK ACT-PARENT-13-15-F
CSC 1-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-13-15-F
CSC 4-UNK ACT'AC~UAINT-UNDER 13-F
JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
LIQUOR - OTHER
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
4
143OO1
M4199
Page 3
Run: 30-Aug-94 13:44 CFS08
Primary ISN~s on[y: No
Date Reported range: 07/26/94 - 08/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: ALL
Activity Resulted: ALI
Dispositions: ALL
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Patrol Areas: AIL
Days of the week:
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
M5313 JUVENILE-CURFEW 3
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 1
M8199 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS-OTHER 1
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 9
03602 OBSENITY-MS-INDECENT-EXPOSURE-TO ADULT 1
P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 12
P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT 1
TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY 1
TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 2
TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 1
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP 2
TG151 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-MONEY 1
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 9
U1062 THEFT-FE-BY SWINDLE OR TRICK-$2501-$19999 1
U1493 THEFT-FE-B[CYCLE-#O MOTOR-501-2500 1
U1497 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 3
U~018 THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS 2
U'5028 THEFT-MS-ISSUE UORTHLESS CHECK-200 OR LESS 1
U'5498 THEFT-MS-B[CYCLE-#O HOTOR-200 OR LESS 1
Y2230 CRIM AGNST GOVN-G#-ESCAPE TAX-HTR YE# 1
**** Report Tote[s: 375
Page 4
Run: ~O-~ug-9~ 13:56 OFF01
Primary ISN~s on[y:
Date Reported range:
'ange each day:
Dispositions:
Activity codes:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
No
07/26/94 - 08/25/94
00:00 - 23:59
Att
Att
AIl
Ali
MOUND POLIC£ DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 1
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
COOE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING
A5351
A5355
B1264
B1294
B3394
B3434
B3494
ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAH
ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ
BURG I-OCC RES NO FRC-N-UN NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-U-UN NEAP-COH THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC NRES FRC-D-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
BURG 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK NEAP-CON THEFT
C3212 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-BUSINESS
D8500 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION
DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS~UNK-UNK
F4275 ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO NEA-OT STRU-$2~ LESS
CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD
TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAFFIC-GM-OTHER
TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
CSC 1-UNK ACT-PARENT-13-15-F
CSC 1-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-13-15-F
CSC 4-UNK ACT-ACQUAINT-UNDER 13-F
JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
L7071
M3001
I3060
J2500
J2900
J2EO0
J3500
J3EO0
L102]
100.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
Run: 30-Aug-94 13:56 OFF01
Primary ISN's on[y: No
Date Reported range: 07/26/94 - 08/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: ALL
Activity codes: AIl
Officers/Badges: AIl
Grids: At[
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 2
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL AOULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
COOE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNOED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
~4199
M5313
M5350
M8199
N3190
LIQUOR - OTHER
JUVENILE-CURFEW
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
CRUELTY TO ANIMALS-OTHER
DISTURB PEACE'MS-HARRASSING CO~tMUNICATIONS
03602 OBSENITY-MS-INDECENT-EXPOSURE-TO ADULT
P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT
TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY
TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
TG151 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-MONEY
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
U1062 THEFT-FE-BY SWINDLE OR TRICK-$2501-$19999
U1493 TNEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-501-2500
U1497 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500
U3018 THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-200 OR LESS
U3028 THEFT-MS-ISSUE WORTHLESS CHECK-200 OR LESS
tr5498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
Y2230 CRIM AGNST GOVN-GN-ESCAPE TRX-MTR VEH
**** Report Tote[s:
2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 100.0
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
1 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0
9 0 9 7 1 0 1 2 22.2
I 0 1 0 I 0 0 1 100.0
1 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0
11 0 11 9 0 0 2 2
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
9 0 9 8 0 0 I 1 11.1
1 0 I 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
3 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 33.3
2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
I 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
I 0 I 0 I 0 0 1 100.0
95 I 94 55 7.3 ' 8 8 39 41.4
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
September 9, 1994
TO:
FROM:
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~"=~-~E-? -
SUBJECT: August 1994 MONTHLY REPORT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
There were 38 building permits issued in August for a value of ~1,472,347. This continued
the increase in construction activity in both categories of Residential and Commercial. Year-
to-date value is 6,060,861. There were 40 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous permits
issued for a total of 78 permits issued this month, and 519 year-to-date.
PLANNING & ZONING
The Pelican Point platting process is continuing. An ordinance amendment regarding truck
parking has been referred back to the Planning Commission, and the Shoreland Management
Modifications were approved by the Council. The Council acted on 8 miscellaneous zoning
cases this month.
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER (CSO) ACTIVITY
Total CSO contacts for the month of August was 53, in addition to assisting the Building
Official with rental complaints and other issues.
JS:pj
printed on recycled paper
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: AU~ST Year: xg~
I HI5 MONTH YEAR TO DATE
~ VALUATION
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ~ 3 455,086 15 1 853,898
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOS) ""--'----- '
TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX
MULTIPLE FAMILY (S OR MORE UNITS)
TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS / MOTELS)
SUBTOTAL 3 3 455,086 15 1,853,898
COMMERCI_.._.~L (RETAIL/RESTAURANT)
~OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS
SUBTOTAL
8ID
~T TIONS PERMITS VALUATION
ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING ~ ~ 15,952 30 508,171
~DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 4 27,180 13 120,43 i
DECKS 6 17,682 36 130,018
SWIMMING POOLS
'------- ... · I 10,000
REMODEL - MISC RESIDENTIAL 19 48,260 135 447,495
REMODEL. MULTIPLE DWELLINGS
4 325,936
SUBTOTAL
~ 31 109,074 219 1,542,051
~'"uul I I~J~IAL TERA TIONB VALUATION
' VALUATION
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT)
7 113,350
OFRCE / PROFESSIONAL I 10,000 1 10,000
INDUSTRIAL 1 10,459 6 147,986
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS I 887,728 3 2,393 576
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS '
SUBTOTAL 3 908,187 17 2,664,912
RESIDENT L DWELLINGS ~ 1 7
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 6
1 I 13
# PERMITS ~ UNITS VALUATION
-'--------'---- ~ VALUATION
TOTAL
~ ~ ~ *264 6,060,861
· BUILDING 38 264
FENCES a RETAINING WALLS 5 37
SIGNS 1 6
PLUMBING 10 9
, .MECHANICAL 15 83
GRADING 1
S&W, STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 8 31
519
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
September 8, 1994
TO:
CITY MANAGER
FROM: CITY CLERK
RE:
AUGUST MONTHLY REPORT
The City had 2 regular Council Meetings, in September. 15
resolutions were prepared. There was Agenda preparation for each
meeting and items to clear up after each meeting.
I was busy inputting all the budget information into the computer.
We have been getting ready for the Primary Election which will be
held on Tuesday, September 13, 1994. All the ballots arrived. The
ballots all have to be checked and put in the appropriate boxes for
the correct precincts. The memory packs have been programmed by
Hennepin County and all pack have been tested to verify that the
programs are correct. This testing requires that I make up test
decks of ballots with every different voting scenario possible to
check the machines and make sure they are counting accurately~.
There will be two ballots during the Primary (one optical scan and
one paper) because of 4th District County Judge race for Judge
Rice's seat. The Supreme Court determined that one of the
candidates who filed for that seat was not eligible to run. The
ballots had already been printed with that person's name. Thus, we
have a supplemental paper ballot for that office. This is
dejavu from the 1992 Governor's race. I would be happy if this
never happens again.
As you may recall in 1992 parts of Precincts 2 & 6 were in the 2nd
and 6th Congressional Districts. The courts rectified this and
Mound is now completely in Congressional District 3.
Letters were sent to all election judges to notify them of an
instructional meeting that was held on September 1, 1994.
Absentee ballots have been available since the 13th of August. We
have had a number of people request those.
There were the usual calls, questions and research done on specific
items during the month.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Parks
With summer coming to an end and staff beginning to be deleted, we are starting to prepare for fall and
winter. The buoys at the beaches have been removed, cleaned and stored. Half of the picnic tables
and garbage cans have been removed from the parks and stacked, the remaining will stay in the parks
until the end of September or beginning of October. Garbage pick-up has been reduced to once a week
rather than twice, and will end the first pan of October.
Mowing is still taking up most of the maintenance time. The wet weather, along with the intermittent
hot days provides excellent growing conditions. We should see mowing time being reduced by mid-
September, then we can move on to repair projects that are needed.
Docks
Rounds are still being done to every dock site and compliance to regulations are being enforced for dock
repairs and boat registration. With the end of summer here, people are beginning to remove boats and
preparing to store their docks. The Dock Inspector has looked into the questions on winter dock storage
and will be prepared to discuss them at up-coming meetings.
Trees
Three trees were scheduled for removal from city property, along with two areas in need of only
trimming.
Cemetery
Staff has been able to keep up with the addition of the grounds up-keep at the cemetery with the
additional help. I have talked to Phil Haugen who has done the caretaker work for the past few years,
and we will be looking at how he feels next year about resuming his position.
JF:pj
printed on recycled paper
City of Mound
Monthly Report
Utilities
09/08/94
Utility- 94
Month of: August 1994
No. of Customers:
Water
Sewer
Residential Commercial
Total
1,105 120 1,225
1,107 120 1,227
Water Used:
(in 1,000 gallons) 16,514 4,623
Billing:
Water $23,738 $4,992
Sewer $43,037 $12,516
Recycle $3,301 $20
Total $70,076 $17,528
Payments:
Water $28,502 $3,416
Sewer $51,226 $9,611
Recycle $3,565 $15
Total $83,293 $13,042
21,137
$28,730
$55,553
$3,321
$87,604
$31,918
$60,837
$3,58O
$96,335
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-O600
FAX (612) 472-0620
September 8, 1994
To:
From:
SubJect:
Ed Shukle
City Manager
Greg Skinner~
Public Works
August Activity Report
Street Department
Allied started Sealcoating on August 2 and finished on August
4. We swept up the buckshot the week of August 22. After this
I had the City Hall parking lot striped.
We removed the fence around the parking lot at 2020 Commerce
blvd. Some of this fence may be used by the Parks at their
shop.
We received the backhoe attachment for the skid steer loader.
Water Department
The meter project is still going. At this time they have 2200
meters installed. I have sent the final notice to district ~1
and part of district ~2 and the second notice has been sent
to district ~3 and the remainder of district ~2. I spoke with
Frank Becket from Schlumberger about having two installers
work from 12:00 pm. to 8:00 pm. They will start this in
September.
Sewer Department
We installed a driveway apron and road to the L.S. on Lynwood
Blvd. As for the L.S. project nothing has been done this
month. Rice Lake is waiting for the pumps to arrive.
printed on recycled paper
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
M0UND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF A]]~T~T lqq~
FIRE FIGHTERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE
3/8 8/12 ~s H~S mms Ra~
1 .T~FF AN'DER,qEN X X 2 19.00 2 62 6.00 ~79
2 c-?EG Awr~k'~goN X ~ 1 9,)0 0 52 6.00
3 ,Tk-~RY BARB X X 2 19.00 3 l'~ 6.00 78.00
4 PAIl[, RABB X X 2 19.00 2 48 6.00
5 DAVE-~ BOYD X X 2 19.00 4 29 6.00 17~
6 SCOT~f BRYCE X X 2 19.00 1 ] 5 6.00 qo
7 DAVE CARLSON X X 2 19.00 ~ 29 6.00 1 7A
8 JIM CASEY X X 2 19.00 '1 42 6.00
9 STEVE COLLINS X (~ 1 9.50 ?, 27 6.00
10 BOB CRAWFORD X X 2 19.00 Z 37 6.00
11 RANDY ENG'~,~4ART X X 2 19.00 % 32 6.00 lg2.OO
12 STEVE ERICKSON X X 2 19.00 0 53 6.50 ~4.50
13 P~IL FIS~ ~(~ (~ 0 -0- 4 ~4 6.00 204.O0
14 ~AN O~Y X X 2 19.00 0 59 6.00 354.00
15 KEVIN GRADY X X 2 19.00 2 43 6.00 258.00
16 c~i~ m~mSON x ~ I 9.50 3 29 6.00 174.00
17 PAUL HENRY X X 2 19.00 1 20 6.00 L20.O0
18 ~ASON MAAS X X 2 19.00 3 5~ 6.00 330.00
19 .~Om~ NA~S X X 2 19.00 0 29 6.00 174.00
20 ~A~ZS NmSO~ X. X 2 19.00 2 ~4 6.00 204.00
X X 2 19.00 2 17 6.00 102.00
21 MARV N~,qON
Y X 2 19.00 6 47 6.00 282. O0
22 BRET NICCUM
X 2 19.00 4 37 6.00 222.00
23 GREG PAlM
X X 2 19.00 2½ 42 6.00 252.00
24 MIKE PALM
X X 2 19.00 0 28 6.00 168.00
25 TIM PALM
26 GREG PEDERSON X X 2 19.00 0 42 6.25 262.50
27 CHRIS POUNDER X X 2 19.00 2 44 6.00
28 TONY RASbfOSSEN X ~ 1 9.50 2 20 6.00 l?m
29 MIKE SAVAGE X X 2 ,19.00 7½ ~4 6.00
30 KEVIN SlPPRE~L X X 2 19.00 1½ 4~ 6.00 25? CD
31 RON STALLMAN X X 2 19.00 ~ 2~ 6.00
32 TOM SW]~IS01q X X 2 19.00 2 30 6.00
33 BRUCE SVOBODA X X 2 19.00 ~% 39 6.00
X X 2 ,19.00 0 46 6.00 276_ (~l ___
34 ED VANECEK ..
X X 2 19.00 17 41 6.00 246-~
35 RICK WILLIAMS
36 TIM WILLIAMS X E~ 1 9.50 1 32 6.00 192_00
X X 2 19.00 2% 39 6.00 234. CD
37 DENNIS WOYTuKE
~ 3~ 67
90 77½ 167½ 536.50 95{ 1348 14af~S _i 8,125.00
167½ ]~g 636.50
95½ MA~ 1,167.00
/Ur_AL 9,929.50
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
MONTE MON~ TO DATE TO DATE
DNIM OF AUGUST 1994
O. OF CALLS
65 68 420 409
[OUND FIRE .16 18 9Z 80
E~RGEN~Y 25 24 l~ 160
[INNETONKA BEACH ,FIRE 3 2 20 8
m~Gm~ 0 O ) 2
~INNETRISTA ,FIRE 2 2 11 16
~RONO FIRE ,3 ~ 2,6
EM]~GEhK~Y 3 2 1 6 22
;HOREWOOD FIRE O f} f} 4
R~ERGENCY 0 1 4 1
;PRING PARK FIRE 5 4 27 l
~UTUAL AID '' yi~ O ] 4
~~ O 0 1 1
~OlA5 FIR~ CALLS ~9 37 178 149
~OTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 36 t6 7~7
D~CI~ I ~ 6 6
~E ~ / FI~ ~
1 5 7 69
~. OF H~ FI~ %16 61/, 2073 ~ ~n/,
- MOUND ~~ 4~2 5] 4 3296 296g
~T, 7fi6 978 53fiq A77q
FIRM &q q& 337 q2
- MTKA BEACH ~G~ ~ ~ l l
~ bq RA ~ ~ 1 AA
FI~ 37 59 20) ~5
- M' TRISTA ~.~G~ 67 90 572 464
~ 1~ 149 775 769
FI~ 65 92 551
- ORONO ~G~ 65 24 261 %16
~ 1~ 116 812 858
Fi~ o o o 8o
- SHOREWOOD ~G~ 0 18 73 26
~ 0 18 73 106
~I~ 2~ 67 567 392
- SP. PARK ~G~ 90 90 488 906
~ 299 157 1055 1298
FmE 0 15 166 149
- ~ ~ ~Gm~ 0 0 27 30
T~ 0 15 193 179
tOTAL DRILL HOURS 167~ 175 1345 1~7%
tOTAL FIRE HOURS 674 681 3947 32~
tOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 674 736 4~74
~ F~E & ~G~ ~S 1~8 1417 8621 81~7
~UTUAL AID RECEIVED 1 0 ~
tUTUAD AID ~%VgN Q I 5
DRILL REPORT
MOUND-FIRE-DEPARTMENT'
ipline 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 :
Excused
X Unexecused
O Present / Not Paid
I
PERSONNEL
%\J~--J.Andersen
G.Anderson
J.Babb
\ P.Babb
D.Boyd
\ S.
DBryce
jCarlson
Casey
%Z~_S.Collins
\ B
iR'crawf°rd
. .Engelhart
~.EricksonFisk
L\I~ D.Grady
K.Grady
C.Henderson
%]_~_%=P.Henry
J.Maas
J.Nafus
J.Nelson
M.Nelson
B. Niccum ~
Z\I~ G.Palm /' _'. ~
~%~M.Palm ( '7~ J
~\l~_C.Pounder
__ T.Rasmussen
.Savage
.K.Sipprell
R Stallman
%7.~_B.Svoboda
T.Swenson
E.Vanecek
R.Williams
.Williams
.Woytcke
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 :
~Excused
X Unexecused
0 Present / Not Paid
· ~cellaneous :
~\~ J.Andersen
__G.Anderson
J.Babb
~P.Sabb
~D.Boyd
~;~-S.Bryce
~%; ~_~ D.Carlson
J.Casey
S.Collins
B.Crawford
R.Engelhart
Erickson
Fisk
PERSONNEL
D.Grady
.Grady
.Henderson
~[~_P.Henry
J.Maas
J.Nafus
~--J.Nelson
M.Nelson
B.Niccum
.Palm
.Palm
~2'T'Palm n~
~3~_~.Pederso
.Pounder
.Rasmussen
~M,Savage
%~7._K.'Sipprell
B-Stallman
.Svoboda
~T.Swenson
.~/~E.Vanecek
~_R.Williams
~_T.Williams
~l/_D.Woytcke
DATE
/¢¢',/
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
TOTAL MAINTENANCE FOR MONTH OF
J. ANDERSEN
G. ANDERSON
J-,-BABB
P. BABB
D. BOYD
/ S. BRYCE
3 ~. CASEY
S. COLLINS
B. CRAWFORD
R. ENGELHART
S. ERICKSON
P. FISK
D. GR~DY
K. GRADY
C. HENDERSON
/" P. HENRY
J. ~L~AS
J. NAFUS
MEN ON DUTY
,,¢,.f
7/~L M. SAVAGE
r.
~ ~. SWENSON
O E. VANECEK
/?' R. WILLIAMS
/ T. WILLIAMS
~ D. WOYTCKE
J. NELSON
M. NELSON
B. NICCUM
G. PALM
M. PALM
T. PALM
G. PEDERSON
C. POUNDER
T. RASMUSSEN
TOTAL MONTHLY HOURS
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
September 7, 1994
TO: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
FROM: JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR STORE MANAGER ~"/~
SUBJECT: AUGUST 1994, MONTHLY REPORT
The month of August 1994 will come to be known as the month of the
"Strike". First of all, we had the railroad workers strike. How does this affect us?
There are a few products, not many, that I cannot get because they are sitting in
places like Chicago for example. They are normally shipped by rail. Not a big deal so
far, but if it continues for a substantial amount of time we will see a few more items
out of stock. Second, there was and still is the major league baseball players strike,
You can imagine how this cuts into our business. People like to watch the games on
TV, and if it is a hot day a few "brewskies" are naturally in order. Third, and
something which hits closer to home, was the strike by the drivers and warehouse
personnel of East Side Beverage Company in St. Paul. They handle Miller products.
Miller is the number one selling beer in Minnesota. They went on strike Monday,
August 22nd. By the weekend we were pretty much out of most of their products.
This didn't hurt us that much because even loyal Miller drinkers will buy some other
type of beer. Fortunately, everything was settled by Sunday, August 28th and on
Monday, the 29th, we received a full shipment.
In lieu of all this we still had a decent month in regards to sales. For the month,
gross sales were $134,537.61. That's an increase of almost 2.75% over August of
1993 when sales were $130,940. The yearly update report looks like this: gross
sales to the end of August are $968,541. Last year at the end of August we were
at $940,218. So, for the year we are $28,323 ahead of 1993. I am expecting a
better than normal September and December and probably an average October and
November. If this projection holds true, then we are exactly on course of doing
$1,350,000 in net sales as I predicted back in January.
JK:ls
pr~nted on recycled paper
07-Sep-94
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CiTY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
AUGUST FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment activity
Balance: August 1, 1994
Bought:
Money Market 4M - Income Reinvested 264
Money Market SB - Income Reinvested 136
Money Market 1st B - Income Reinvested 818
CD First Bank 4.10 99,508
CP First Bank 4.74 348,101
CP Smith Barney 4.75 198,734
CP Smith Barney 4.80 119,544
Money Market Smith Barney 100,000
Money Market First Bank 600,000
Money Market 4M 50,000
Matured:
Money Market 4M (160,000)
Money Market Smith Barney (98,734)
Money Market First Bank (348,101)
CD First Bank 8.46 (95,000)
CP Dain Bosworth 4.27 (103,750)
CP Smith Barney 4.37 (99,505)
CP First Bank 4.49 (298,808)
CP First Bank 4.45 (248,769)
CP Smith Barney 4.20 (374,694)
CP Smith Barney 4.53 (293,193)
Balance: AUgust 31, 1994 ~901,993
1995 Proposed Bud .qet and Proposed Levy
I worked with the City Manager to finalize the proposed budget
and the proposed levy for 1995.
Fiscal Future Committee
In August I attended the meetings of the Fiscal Futures Committee, which is
one of the many committees organized by the League of Cities
in preparation for the 1995 session of the Legislature.
Presentations on School Taxes and Taxes in general were given.
Analyses on Local Government Aids and HACA were reviewed. Now we are
finalizing the positions that the committee will present for consideration
for adoption as positions for lobbying at the 1995 Legislature in the ama of
fiscal matters.
I also attended the meetings of the Task force on Deposits and Investments.
We are reviewing each Statute on Deposits and Investments with the goal
of proposing changes to the 1995 legislature.
BOARD MEMBERS
William A. Johnstone
Chair, Minnetonka
Tom Penn
Vice Chair, Tonka Bay
Douglas E. Babcock
Secretary, Spring Park
Robert Rascop
Treasurer, Shorewood
Mike Bloom
Minnetonka Beach
Albert (Bert) Foster
Deephaven
James N. Grathwol
Excelsior
Ronald Kline
Minnetrista
Duane Markus
Wayzata
Craig Moiler
Victoria
Thomas W. Reese
Mound
Herb J. Suerth
Woodland
Joseph Zwak
Greenwood
Orono
60% Recycled Content
30°1o Post Consumer Waste
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 612/473-7033
EUGENE R. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
-. RECE 9 SE? 8
TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, t994
FROM: TOM REESE, LMCD REPRESENTATIVE
SUB JECT: AUGUST REPORT - LMCD
1.0 Eurasion Wa~]r~Ofoil Task Force.
1.1 The Haz~s~rs a,~l az¢~ eqvip~nt ~ been puled off tb~ ]~0m
and are being main~ m preparaMon for winter storage.
2.0 Lake M~ement
2.1 When I met witch the P~Y~ ~ Open Sp~e Co~s~n ~t ~n~
~m ~ sonm m~mst m see~ ~ w~
p~nt. I ~ a~ ~se doc~n~ for
~m.
~ ~ ~ co~ ~e:
~ n~ber of ~ b~ on mp~enm~ ~e~ da~.
~e ~ ~s~ of ~- c~ed ~ ~
f~ be~ out ~t ~m ~ ~z ~ boa~ ~w
s~ boa~ ~ e~r, ~h pom~ out
do ~t ~cess~ ~e ~ boa~, at M~t ~t on ~e~.
~n~n~n ~t ~ c~mg = ~ ~j~, ~ ~ ab~ ~ c~ ~t ~ go
out w~n ~y s~ ~ed co~i~.
S~I c~ m boat n~ber
O~ ~ ~ gm~ of be~d Pemo~ Wa~m~t n~bem, ~m zero
~ 1 ~4. ~r c~e ~ ~ s~
~ ~ ~ n~r of ~m
~ ~r of co~ ~t ~ ~ ~w ~m b~ m~ ~ ~er c~..
3.0 General It~]~
3.1 The W~¢zata Lake Walk proposal remsms with the Water Sl~ctures
Com3nitt~. The draft ozdinmuce second draft ~ be ret.'ie3red th~ month with the
ch~-je~ st~ggested m place.
~.~ 1;~hael Thibauit, Gene Slrommen's ]~ght harcl person has left the
LMCD for a new posilion with an eleclzonics f~rn in Deep]raven. Her last day w~
September 2nd. She. ~ be sore~? mi~ as this position has a ]oz~g ra~p t~p time
to it, and requires special skills and attributes. My feeliag is t~t we should improve
the. salary of th~ posil~On, or we '~uql alwa)~ be a ~ ground for ot~r
o~an~alions, eager to hire persons who have proven themselves in this demanding
~nt.
3.3 The Mayors' meeting is scheduled for 7.~0AM September 30th at the
ffices ...... depart fi-om ............ ' ........
LMCD o w~ ~w ~,-,, to
U~ UUJJ~UJ. i~I. UJ~
3.4 Tom ~e~, t~. To~ Bay rep~~ ~ re=i~m.~t from t~ LMCD,
ci~ng ~b pressures, effec~ve at the end of the month. He has been the Vice Chair
4.0 Mon~ ~pccific l~cm~
4. ! Th~ PeBr~a Poia~ proposal ~ ~ ~n off ~ ~e~a of
~ ~ q~n ~ by ~ DNR ~ ~ o~p of ~ ~.
4.2 ~ ~n~n ~ Pe~ ~a~ o~ off ~
~h ~ ~ ~ e~ of Coo~ Bay, ~ ~ ~ d~ ~ G~ ~nt
o~ ob~u ~ ~t s~, ~h ~m at ~ ~h pub~ ~ce~ ~
~ opera~ ~m for ~ at a ~. ~ ~~ w~ of ~
w~h ~ ~ ~ e~o~ by ~~ ~.
4.3 ~ ~p~nt ~ ~ s~d P~Bayco~ d~k~ht~
~~. ~ P~ ~op~ s~ be comp~n~d. It s~ ~ c~ ~ do~.
3 Att~chr~nts · Shoreline BoatCo~t
· Active Bo~t Cotmt Dam 1984-92
· Active Boat Count Dam 1994
Z
~0
zU
OJ
>Z
~Z
UZ
vO
ZU
O~
Zo
7~
JO
Weekend/Holiday Afternoon Aerial Boat Counts
2500
20O0
1500
E
Z 5OO
0
1836
2142
2252
Average
Maximum
1829
1306
· I- + {
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
.(N=6) (N---5) (N=6) (N=11)
Year
RECEIVED SEP g Igg(
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force
Agenda
8:30 am, Friday, September 16, 1994
Norwest Bank Bldg. Conference Rm 135,
Wayzata
1. Introductions, Chair Tom Penn
2. Review, accept/amend minutes of 7/15/94 as previously
mailed;
3. Preliminary report cn 1994 Lake Minnetonka mil~oil
harvest, Gene Strommen;
4. Corps of Engineers/MN DNR report on Garlon 3A (triclopyr)
test treatment in Phelps and Carsons Bays on Lake
Minnetonka, per letter from CoE, Kurt Getsinger and as
supplemented by Chip Welling, MN DNR;
o
8.
9.
10.
11.
MN DNR progress report on:
a. State-wide milfoil infestation experience, new
infestation discoveries;
b. Prevention of spread control efforts at infested
lakes through MN Conservation Corps monitoring;
(Supervisor Tom Hagle report invited)
c. Milfoil road check update;
d. Sonar test treatment updates on Zumbra, E.
Parkers Lakes;
e. Additional priorities;
Zebra Mussel and Exotics Action Plan Subcommittee report
per meeting o~ 9/14/94 (preceding this meeting);
Weed puller evaluation postponement to 1995 season;
Hennepin Parks update, John Barten;
Lake association reports and MN Lakes Association update;
Additional business;
Next meeting, October 14;
8/30/94
RECEIVED 3 1
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
TO:
FROM:
SUB JEST:
City Administrators
Hennepin County Dept. of Environmental Management
Suburban Hennepin Regional Parks Planning and
Engineering
Executive Director Gene Strommen~~
Procedure for Interaction Among Representatives
Responsible for Public Access Ramps
The LMCD board adopted the attached procedure August 24.
This procedure is intended to guide the LMCD and DNR staff as
they coordinate with city, county and agency staff regarding
public access plans and developments.
LMCD and DNR staff request that they be notified when plans
or developments are initiated by outside persons or groups or
by the city/agency itself.
The DNR contact for this purpose is:
Larry Killien, Regional Supervisor
DNR Trails and Waterways
500 Lafayette Rd
St. Paul, MN 55155
Phone 297-2911
LMCD and DNR staff will continue coordinating the Car/Trailer
Parking Agreements with cities/agencies as started during the
Lake Access Task Force study. We will appreciate your
assistance in continuing the development of these agreements.
Thank you for your cooperation.
cc:
LMCD member city mayors
LMCD board members
Larry Killien, DNR Trails & Waterways
$ ?to
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Procedure for Interaction Among Representatives
of DNR, LMCD and Cities/Agencies Responsible for
Public Access Ramps
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors
at its 8/24/94 regular board meeting adopted the following
procedure for interaction among representatives of DNR, LMCD,
cities and agencies responsible for public access ramps.
The purpose of this procedure is to clarify how contacts and
arrangements will be handled among agency/city staff and
contractors in conjunction with appropriate elected public
officials.
THE PROCEDURE ADOPTED IS THE FOLLOWING:
Staff members from the DNR, LMCD and city or agency
involved in public access operation would initially meet
to evaluate the particular access program under
consideration, subject to the standards and procedures
contained in the 1992 Lake Access Task Force report.
Examples:
> Implementation of a lake access car/trailer parking
agreement for an existing access ramp.
> Modification for improvement or change of an existing
access ramp, which may or may not affect car/trailer
parking.
> Exploration of potential new sites for public access.
As the above evaluations move from staff review to
presentation in a public forum, such as a public
committee, commission or council meeting involving
elected officials, representation from the LMCD city
board member, Lake Use and Recreation chair, LMCD board
chair and other interested board members would be
activated by LMCD staff.
Recommendations as a result of the above review would be
brought back to the L%ke Use and Recreation /committee
for review and recommendation to the LMCD board.
The LMCD committee and board would be available to
participate in negotiations.
Adopted 8/24/94
57//
Thursday 8
Saturday 10
Wednesday 14
15
Friday 16
Monday 19
Wednesday 28
Friday 30
RECEIVED -ua 3 1 19 (
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
900 E. Wayzata Blvd., Suite 160
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
473-7033
LMCD MEETING SCHEDULE
SEPTEMBER, 1994
Save the Lake Advisory Committee
5:00 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata
Public Hearing
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park Launch Ramp
8:00 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
Water Structures Committee
8:15 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
Zebra Mussel/Exotics Action Plan Subcommittee
8:30 am, LMCD Office, Wayzata
Nominating Committee for New Board Officers
4:30 pm, LMCD Office, Wayzata
Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force
8:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
Public Hearing
Cedar Point-Wayzata Bay Proposed Quiet Waters Area
5:30 pm, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
Lake Use & Recreation Committee
5:45 pm, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
Administrative Committee
6:30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall, Tonka Bay
LMCD Board of Directors Regular Meeting
7:30 pm, Tonka Bay City Hall, Tonka Bay
LMCD Report to Mayors
7:30 am, #135 Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata
RECEIVED 3 1
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
SPECIAL EVENT CALENDAR
SEPTEMBER 1994
THU, lST
SAT, 3RD
SUN, 4TH
MON, 5TH
THU, 8TH
FRI, 9TH
SAT, 10TH
SUN, llTH
SAT, 17TH
SUN, 18TH
SAT, 24TH
SUN, 25TH
6:15 PM
10:00 AM
10:30 AM
10:00 AM
10:30 AM
1:30 PM
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
7:00 AM
7:00 AM
7:00 AM
10:00 AM
2:00 PM
2:00 PM
10:00 AM
1:30 PM
10:00 AM
2:00 PM
2:00 PM
6:30 AM
10:00 AM
1:30 PM
10:00 AM
2:00 PM
2:00 PM
7:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
MYC sailboat Race, Burton Cup Course
WYC sailboat Race, Burton Cup Course
MYC sailboat Race, Burton Cup Course
UMYC sailboat Race, East Upper Lake Area
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
MYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
UMYC sailboat Race, East Upper Lake Area
Don Shelby U. S. Invitational, Mtka Boat Works
Don Shelby U. S. Invitational, Mtka Boat Works
Don Shelby, U. S. Invitational, Mtka Boat Works
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
MYC sailboat Race, Big Island
UMYC sailboat Race, West Upper Lake Area
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
MYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
UMYC sailboat Race, East Upper Lake Area
Operation Bass, Inc. Redman Tournament
MYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
MYC sailboat Race, Big Island
UMYC sailboat Race, East Upper Lake Area
Wednesday Evening Bassin', Mtka Boat Works
WYC sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
SYC sailboat Race, Big Island
8/23/94
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTi(ICT
ORDINANCE NO. 13 0
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO STORAGE OF WATERCRAFT
ON LAKE MINNETONKA AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES;
AMENDING LMCD CODE SECTION 1.02, SUBDIVISION 41;
· ADDING SUBDiVISiONS 10 AND 11 TO SECTION 2.05
AND SUBDIVISION 55. a) TO SECTION 1.02;
AMENDING SEC"~iON 2.045, SUBDIVISION 3. a),
SECTION 1.02, SUBDIVISION 6), AND SECTION 2.05, SUBDIVISION 9.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, be amended as follows:
Section 1. LMCD Code Section 1.02, Subd. 41. is amended as follows:
Subd. 41. "Restricted Watercraft" means any boat or vessel for use on or stored on
the public waters of the Lake except for bc, at$ ,,, · ..... ~ .... ~:~ n~ , ~ ~,~, ~- ~ '
unrestricted watercraft as defined in this section.
Section 2. LMCD Code Section 1.02 is amended by adding new Subdivision 55. a) as
)WS:
Subd. 55. M "Unrestricted Watercraft" means any boat or vessel for use on or stored
on the public waters of the Lake which is:
a) 16 feet or less in length and unmotorized; or
b) 16 feet or less in length and which uses a motor of lO horsepower or less; or
c) 20 feet or less in length and unmotorized, and which is propelled solely by human
power.
Section 3. LMCD Code Section 2.05 is amended by adding new subdivisions 10 and 11 as
follows:
Subd. 10. Special Rule for Unrestricted Watercraft at Non-Commercial Docks.
Unrestricted watercraft, as defined in Section 1.02, shall not be counted for
purposes of determining compliance with density limitations of this section at
non-commercial docks provided such unrestricted watercraft are not stored on the
water of the lake or on a mechanical lift..
Subd. 11. Special Rule for Unrestricted Watercraft at Commercial Docks.
Unrestricted watercraft, as defined in Section 1.02, shall not be counted for purposes
of determining compliance with density limitations of this section at commercial docks
provided:
a) the watercraft are not stored in the water of the Lake or on a mechanical lift, and.
thc
Board finds that either:
1) the watercraft are used for public rental, are under the exclusive control of.
the rental organization, and do not number more than one such uncounted
watercraft for each 25 feet of' shoreline at the site (unless a greater number is
required by the Board as a public amenity): or
2) the watercraft are used for educational purposes, are under the exclusive.
control of the educational organization, and do not number more than one such
'uncounted watercraft for each 15 feet of shoreline at the site (unless a greater
number is required by the Board as a public amenity).
Section 4. LMCD Code Section 2.045, Subd. 3. a) is amended as follows:
Subd. 3. a) "Off-Lake Storage Facilities" shall mean any dock, mooring area or
launching ramp used by any club, business or association in conjunction with the
storage of boatr, or _restricted. watercraft off the water of Lake Minnetonka.
Section 5. LMCD Code Section 1.02, Sabd. 6. is amended as follows:
Subd. 6. "Boat Storage Units" means a space or facility available for mooring, docking
or storing a watercraft to be used on the Lake. Boat storage unit does not include.
such a s ace or facilit located on land unless it is used in con'unction with a
commercial dock.
Section 6. LMCD Code Section 2.05, Subd. 9. is amended as follows:
Subd.'9. Non-conforming Mooring Areas or Structures. Except as otherwise provided
in this subdivision, this section shall not apply to mooring areas or structures which
are licensed or lawfully in' existence on March 31, 1982. No change in the
configuration of the mooring area or structure which results in an increase in slip size
or Boat Storage Units may be made without first securing a license under this section.
For ur oses of this subdivision the addition of unrestricted watercraft which are not
counted for u oses of determm~n corn hance w~th dens~t hm~tauons ursuant to
subdivisions 10 and 11 are not considered to be an increase in Boat Stora e Units.
When acting on such a license application, the Board shall not limit its consideration
to changes or additions to the facility, but shall consider the entire facility of the
applicant.
This enactment is in effect from and after its passage and publication in accordance
with the enabling act of the District. It is enacted by a majority vote of all the members of
the Board and has the effect of' an ordinance.
Adopted by the LMCD Board of Directors this 23 day of March
Published April 14, 1994
William Johnstohe, Chair
_, 1994.
Douglas E. l~abcock, Secretary
P. ECEIVEEI SEP 6
'LAKE NIINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ORDINANCE NO. 121
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO QUIET WATERS AREAS ON
LAKE MINNETONKA; ADDING SUBDIVISIONS 14 AND 15
TO LMCD CODE SECTION 3.02
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, is amended as
follows:
LMCD Code Section 3.02 is amended by adding new subdivisions 14 and 15 as
follows:
Subd. 14. That part of the channel in the Lower Lake North lying
northeast of Huntington Point and southeast of the Areola Bridge.
Subd. 15. The channel south of Huntington Point between Lafayette
Bay and the Lower Lake North.
This ordinance is in effect from and after its passage and publication in
accordance with the enabling act of the District. It is enacted by a majority vote of
all the members of the Board and has the effect of an ordinance.
Adopted by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of
Directors this 25th day of May, 1994.
/s/ William Johnstone
William Johnstone, Chair
ATTEST:
/s/Douglas E. Babcock
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretary
Published June 2, 1994
CLL69740
LKl10-13
RECEIVER §
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ORDINANCE NO. 132
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO DOCKS USED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE SALE OF FUEL; AMENDING
LMCD SECTION 2.12, SUBDIVISION 12 AND 2.03,
SUBDIVISION 11
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, is amended as
follows:
Section 1. LMCD Code Section 2.03, subdivision 11 is amended as follows:
Subd. 11. Service Consoles and Shelters. The Board may authorize
the construction and maintenance of service consoles or shelters as part of an
annual multiple dock license under this section subject to the following
limitations:
a) the construction and maintenance of consoles or shelters may only
be authorized for use in conjunction with the sale of fuel to the public;
b) the size of thc service consoles may not exceed four and one-half
feet in height, three feet in width and six feet in length, er such smmllcr
dimcnsicnc m~ may ~' ~p~'"~r~-~ by +~'~ B""~' The size of-shelters may not
exceed six feet in width, six feet in length and eight feet in height. The
Board may further restrict dimensions of consoles or shelters for aesthetic o~~
safety reasonsl
c) the size, configuration, design and location of service consoles
and shelters may be specified by the Board. The Board -,will make its decision
on the basis of considerations set forth in Subd. 3 of this section and on the
applicant's demonstrated need for a service console or shelter for the storage
of such items as fire and safety equipment, motor oil, and credit card
machines. Shelters will be permitted only when necessary to shelter electronic
equipment used in conjunction with the sale of fuel or oil;
d) Upon application, the Board may authorize as a part of a service
console, the construction of a canopy for protection from the elements of the
console and personnel engaged in related sales of gasoline and motor oil. The
size, configuration, design and location of such canopy may be specified by
the Board; but in no case shall a canopy;
1) include an opaque vertical surface other than poles and
rigging needed to support the canopy, or
2) have any horizontal dimension greater than 8 feet, or
3) have a greater horizontal surface area than 36 square feet,
or
CLL72488
LKl10-13
i
-' 4) be used for advertising.
e) No service consoles or shelters shall be used for the display or
sale of any goods or merchandise other than fuel and oil.
f) The location~ design, material~ and color of service consoles and
associated canopies and of shelters are subject to approval as a part of thc,
annual license required by this section. The color of such facility shall ba
neutral and unobtrusive so as to blend into the surroundings.
g) Consoles: shelters and associated facf!fties and equipment shall
be eonstruct'ed in compliance with all applicable fire: safety and building
codes.
h) Advertising and lighting shall conform to all applicable codes.
No sign shall use internal lighting.
i) The Board may impose any additional conditions to construction
and maintenance of consoles and shelters which it deems necessary or
appropriate in the interests of the public health~ safety or welfare and
protection of Lake Minnetonka. Conformance to approved design and any such
additional conditions are conditions to the license issued under this section.
Section 2. LMCD section 2.12, subdivision 12 is amended as follows:
Subd. 12. Dock Dimensions. A dock may exceed six feet, excluding
posts, in either its length or width, but not both+. In connection with
issuance of a license under section 2.03: the Board may authorize the
construction and maintenance of docks used in conjunction with the sale of
fuel to the public of up to ten feet in width to the extent deemed necessary by
the Board for safe and efficient fuel sales activities, provided, ..v" ......... .. ~. ~ , +~-~+...~.
4Docks which aro were in existence on June 30, 1982 and which are in
compliance with all the provisions of the LMCD Code other than this section
shall be allowed to continue in their present form without expansion or
modification until such time as such docks are replaced or until 50% or more of
any such dock is damaged or destroyed.
This ordinance is in effect from and after its passage and publication in
accordance with the enabling act of the District. It is enacted by a majority vote of
all the members of the Board and has the effect of an ordinance.
Adopted by the LMCD Board this 27th day of July, 1994.
William Johnstone, Chair
? ~ Published August 11, 1994
Douglas E. Ba.b~ock, Secretary
CLL72488
LKl10-13
RECEIVEB 6
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ORDINANCE NO. 1 3 3
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO MARINE TOILETS;
AMENDING LMCD CODE SECTION 3.04, SUBDIVISION 7
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MIIqNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, is amended as
follows:
Section 1. LMCD Code Section 3.04, subd. 7 is amended as follows:
...... ~, ........... r. ingcr 2pct..ting
Subd. 7. Marine 'l'Olle~s. ~,v ~ ...........
of +~ c+~+~ ~ "~ ..... +- M~ine toilets must ~n w~~~
i ment on the wa~ercra~~
um in usm e u . _ ~~ · = ~~ water o~ the
including overflow drmns. No per
Lake~ directly or indirectly~ from a watercraft, any treated or untreated
sewage or other wastes, nor shall any eontEner of untreated ~ge or other
wastes be placed, left, discharged, or caused to be placed, left or discharged
in or near any waters of the Lake from a watercraft in such a manner
quantity as to create a nuisance or health hazard or pollution of such waters~
by any person or persons at any time whether or not the owner~ operator~
~est or occupant of a watercraft or other marine conveyance.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective on the day following its
publication.
Adopted by the LMCD Board of Directors this 27 day of July
, 1994.
William Johnstone,l Chair
ATTE~ ~- ~;
Douglas E. Ba~.c~ock, Secretary Published August 11, 1994
CLL68612
3
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
August 31,. 1994 ..
RECEIVED
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Commercial and Municipal Marinas and Multiple Dock
Executive Director Gene Strommen
Resolution No. 93 Re. Moratorium on Installation
of New Dolphin Poles at Multiple Docks
A Resolution to Place a Moratorium on the Installation of New
Dolphin Poles at Multiple Docks was adopted by the Lake
Minnetonka Conservation District board of directors on
8/24/94.
Resolution No. 93 is being forwarded for your information and
guidance as it relates to the use of poles to tie on
watercraft moored in slips.
Please note the fourth paragraph of the resolution which
identifies dolphin poles as part of the dock structure.
Dolphin poles will be addressed as part of the 1995 multiple
dock license renewal applications.
Thank you for your cooperation during this moratorium.
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO. 93
RESOLUTION TO PLACE A MORATORILTM
ON THE INSTALLATION OF
NEW DOLPHIN ~OLES AT MULTIPLE DOCKS
WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board
of Directors has appointed a subcommittee to study an
"envelope" concept for multiple docks; and
WHEREAS, the "Envelope" concept subcommittee is looking
at ways to allow changes to slip sizes within the envelope of
a facility, as long as the total square footage of the slips
does not increase; and
WHEREAS, there is a question on how to measure existing
slip sizes where there are dolphin poles placed beyond the
end of the slip, allowing tie-on of a larger boat; and
WHEREAS, dolphin poles are a part of the dock as defined
by LMCD Code, Section 1.02, Subd. 15 and therefore are
unlawful at multiple docks unless approved as a part of the
~ultiple dock license;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lake Minnetonka
Conservation District Board of Directors is declaring a one
year moratorium on the installation of new dolphin poles at
multiple dock facilities. During the period of this
moratorium the Board will not approve installation of dolphin
poles which have not been previously licensed. This
moratorium shall be effective the day following its adoption.
Adopted by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Board of Directors this 24th day of August, 1994.
Attest:
/s/ William A. Johnstone
William A. Johnstone, Chair
/s/ Euqene R. Strommen
Eugene R. Strommen, Executive Director
PROFWR!TE:DOLPHIN.RES
RECEIVED 6
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Saturday, September 10, 1994
Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E Wayzata Blvd, Rm 135
(Elevator handicapped access, west entrance, Wayzata Blvd)
8:00 AM PUBLIC HEARING
1. Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District, New Launch Ramp
Application for the Lake Minnetonka Regional Park, West Upper Lake,
Minnetrista
8:15 AM WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE AGENDA
1. Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District, New Launch Ramp
Application for the Lake Minnetonka Regional Park, West Upper Lake,
Minnetrista
pv~-muTtipl
2.--Boyer--Bui-l~ing--~or e dock
~cint Duvcl'cpmcn%7-M°un~r-Spz~ng~aTk-B~y'~-P'ub{-i~-He~ng-4%ep°r~-
and Findings- ITEM WITHDRAWN AT REQUEST OF APPLICANT
Wayzata Lakewalk; second draft of PUD ordinance as amended by
committee, presented by Scott Richards, Northwest Associated
Consultants, Inc.
Baycliffe Homeowners Association, Minnetrista, South Upper Lake;
New Dock License Application for minor change in dock configuration
Ordinance amending sect. 2.07 Temporary Structures; review for
second reading
e
Pending issues before the committee (not ready for action):
A. Minnetonka Yacht Club, Deephaven, Carsons Bay; new multiple dock
license application pending resolution of issue regarding
shoreline ownership
B. Minnetonka Boat Works, Wayzata, Wayzata Bay; new multiple dock
license, special density license and dock length variance
applications; Pending revised site plan with structures within
200'
c. ,,Envelope" Subcommittee recommendations
7. Additional business
Date: August 31, 1994
RECEIVED SE? 6 199%
Mr. Steve Smith
State Representative
Minnesota House of Representatives
2710 Clare Lane
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Re:
Response to your letter dated August 18, 1994 addressed to Ellen Sones of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regarding my shoreline improvement
project.
Dear Mr. Smith,
I am writing to respond to your letter dated August 18, 1994 addressed to Ms. Ellen
Sones of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regarding the shoreline improvement
project located on Three Points Boulevard in Mound, Minnesota. I am very concerned
with the actions that some local residents have taken against me and I am very
surprised that you as a State Representative not only support, but have participated in
this group by organizing some of their actions.
I have owned this property for over eight years and was very excited to make land
improvements so I could use my land for its intended purpose. I believe the City of
Mound is a great community in which to live. I decided to improve my property by
placing rip rap on the shoreline, clearing and grubbing overgrown vegetation and
removing trash and debris deposited by a few local residents. My plan was to clean up
my property and sell at least one lot so I could proceed with building on another lot in
the future. I was amazed at what occurred after word apparently got out that I was
showing one of my lots to a minority couple. Several neighbors stopped by the property
to ask "What are you going to do with this property?" and "Who are you going to sell
these lots to?" This coincidence leaves me with questions about the motive of those
who have been trying to stop my project.
You and your small group of local residents took action to stop the development of my
property. The result of your actions was very costly to me. Many of these actions were
in violation of state and federal laws. My land had become a defacto nature preserve
for some and a convenient dump for others. A local resident trespassed on my
property and tried to stop my workers by claiming to be a DNR agent. The DNR is
investigating this event because impersonating a DNR official is a felony. The same
local resident trespassed and threatened.that "You will never live here and I will do
what ever it takes to see that you can't develop your land" and that "You are messing
with the wrong guy!"
After being harassed by some neighbors I installed a temporary construction fence and
posted permits and "PRIVATE PROPERTY - NO TRESPASSING" signs to protect
local residents and my workers. All Permits and signs were stolen and my temporary
fence was removed and thrown on my property. Other acts of vandalism included
removing survey stakes, removal and damage to my silt fence, and the workers'
vehicles and equipment was vandalized during construction. Another local resident
"borrowed" rip rap from me and installed it on their property without permission from
myself or the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. This resident has failed to return
the "borrowed" rip rap. . .-'
Many trespassing violations occurred prior to my beginning this project. Over nine
trees that I planted were cut down by local residents. One local resident adjacent to my
property had just cut down a blue spruce pine tree that I planted seven years ago and
she admitted that her husband cut this tree down. According to the DNR, this is a
violation known as "timber theft ". Local residents stored fire wood and boat trailers on
my property without permission. Local resident's docks encroach over my property
line and will, have to be removed. One local resident constructed a raised timber
garden near the lake on my property without my permission or a permit from the DNR.
This garden contained about 120 square feet of black dirt. The resident removed his
timbers, and I removed the black dirt during this project. It occurs to me that you and
your group's holy crusade to stop my project under the guise of protecting ~e
environment and their property fights becomes rather tarnished when these and other
facts are examined. Particularly when one of the main benefits of the project is to
prevent shoreline erosion and maintain water quality. Many of these violations have
been reported to the DNR and the Mound Police Department and are under
investigation.
Here are the facts as I see them. The project was conducted and completed within all
permit regulations. This project received a significant amount of attention resulting in
several site meetings and site inspections involving the DNR, the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District and the City of Mound. Ellen Sones ( Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District Administrator) and Jon Sutherland ( Mound Building Inspector) did a great job
with the site inspections to assure that the work was being completed in accordance
with all regulations. Contrary to your claim, I did not place, "on average, 8 feet of fill,
out into the lake..." I did not place any fill in the lake and, therefore there is none to
remove. The fill placed to stabilize the shoreline while work was conducted for safety
reasons has been removed. Site restoration has been completed, and this project is
finished.
I have some questions for you. Do you, as a State Representative, represent only
residents, or do you represent all tax paying property owners in your district? My father
and I own homes in Minnesota, and we also have owned four lots in your District for
over eight years. Are you interested in using your office as a tool to build consensus
and seek resolutions to disputes or do you intend to use your office as leverage to
address concems of the most vocal or politically advantageous group or your own self
interest?
I belie, de that you failed to do your job as'a State Representative because you should
have i,stened to the concerns of all people before becoming involved and hurling
accusations with only hearsay as evidence. Before becoming involved I expect that
you would seek to understand both sides of a dispute. For your information, every
dispute has at least two sides. And then once involved, your mission should center on
seeking resolution and cooperation. I
Sincerely,
Timothy Becker
Property Owner- District 34A
CC:
State Representative- Edina District
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Members
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Attorney
Mound Mayor and Council Members
Mound City Manager and Building Inspector
Mound Chief of Police and' DNR Lieutenant
Steve Smith.
State Representative
District 34A
Hennepin and Wright Counties
Minnesota
House of
Representatives
COMMITTEES,' COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; HOUSING;
INTERNATIONAl- TRADE AND TECHNOLOGY; JUDICIARY; JUDICIARY FINANCE DIVISION
MINNI~HAHA O. mE. EI<
August 18, i~9~EP, BHEO [~;~TF~ICT
AU$ 2 3
Administrator RECE."
Ms. Ellen*Sones, .
Minnehaha Creek watershed District
14600 Minnetonka Blvd
Minnetonka, MN 55345-1597
RE: Rip-rap on that portion of Harrison's Bay lying between Jones
L~ne and Baywood Lane on property owned by Tim Becket.
Dear Ms. Sones:
Some' days ago I was informed by several of the local residents of
Mound who own ou%lots on the above "lagoon that fillihg of the
permit.
During my telephone discussion with you, you told me that Mr.
Becket was issued a permit by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District to proceed only with laying down rip-rap on top of the old
rip-rap but was not authorized to do anything else, specifically,
Since I have friends and constituents who own outlots on this
particular piece of water, I'Ve had occasion almost weekly to view
Mr. Becket's shoreline for ~ears.
After being informed by residents and seeing that Mr. Becket was
dumping fill into the lake, I discussed the matter with you and I
was assured that a stop work order had been issued and that Mr.
Becket would be required to do the following:
,,remove all fill and put the shoreline back to its original
earth lin=". Then, and only then, would Mr. Becket be allowed
to proceed with rip-rapping pursuant to original permit.
Last Friday, I telephoned you and you said that he had' removed
"most of the fill" and that only .incidental fill" remained. And
therefore the last thing to be done would be seeding, and then the
matter would be "totally resolved."
The same residents, after your phone call, informed me that the
2710 Cl,re Lane. MRu_nd, MInnasota 55384
State Office Building. St. Paul. Minnasota 55155
IR FAX (612) 296-3949
(§12) 472-7664
(612) 298-9188
matter was not resolved. That there is, on average, 8 feet of
fill, out into the lake. remaining along the entire shoreline.
ThaU in fact Mr. Seeker had removed none of the fall.
I subsequently inspected the area and was surprised to see that,
despite your assurance that the fill had been removed, in fact none
9f it has been removed.
The shoreline has been dramatically changed.
the water has been significantly diminished.
been totally changed.
The surface area of
The earth line has
I am aware that a survey was conducted in 1988 when a dredging was
permitted. 'Certainly a survey can again be made and they can be
compared ~nd it will be shown to your satisfaction and the members
of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District that your "assurance,,
that the matter is "resolved,, is definitely not the case.
This matter is not resolved and I want to know immediately what the
District is going to do about it. Surely the residents, of Mound
deserv~ more than this abuse by Mr. Becker with your permission.
This goes beyond a deprivation of the rights of the owners of the
outlots surrounding the above body of water, but it also directly
adversely affects the environmental quality of the lake itself. At
least that is my opinion.
What i= not my opinion i~ that this matt~ has not been resolved
and I expect and herewith demand that the governmental body that
has issued Mr. Becket his permit to "rip-rap,, immediately see to it
that the fill is removed, the earth line is restored, and the lake
is restored to its original quality.
Please advise your inten;ions.
cc:
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District members
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Attorney
Lake Minnetonka Conservation Director and Members
Mound Mayor and Councilmembers
Mound City Manager and Building Inspector
Area Residents
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 22, 1994
Those present were: Chair Geoff Michael, Commissioners Michael Mueller, Frank Weiland,
Jerry Clapsaddle, Mark Hanus, Lisa Crum, and Ed Surko, City Council Representative Liz
Jensen, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Secretary Peggy James. Commissioner Bill Voss
was absent and excused.
The following people were also in attendance: Mark Morairty, Don Bonnicksen, and Michael
Kohler.
MINUTES
The Planning Commission Minutes of August 8, 1994 were presented for approval. A
correction was noted on Page 7, 7th paragraph, first paragraph after the second motion,
should read that Hanus agreed with "Michael", not "Mueller'.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Hanus to approve the Planning
Commission Minutes of August 8, 1994 as amended. Motion carried
unanimously.
CASE #94-60: RANDALL MORAIRTY, 4536 DENBIGH ROAD, LOTS 5, 6 AND SOUTH
1/2 OF 4, BLOCK 2, AVALON, PID #19-117-23 24 0008. VARIANCE FOP,
RECONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF THE DWELLING AND A DECK.
The applicant is seeking an after-the-fact variance to recognize the existing nonconforming
front yard setback of 4.72 feet, resulting in a variance of 15.28 feet, to re-construct portions
of the dwelling. A 10' x 20' two story area at the rear was dilapidated, and it has seen
removed and reframed. New roof trusses have been installed over 31 feet of the rear portion
of the home.
The applicant is also requesting approval to construct two decks within the bluff impact zone.
The upper deck is proposed to be 6' x 20', and the lower deck is proposed to be 15' x 20'.
Building permits have been issued for interior remodeling. Permits have not been issued for
reconstruction of the exterior walls or the roof truss modification. The contractor has stated
that during the remodeling process, after the removal of the interior wall surface, they
discovered the extremely poor construction and condition of the exterior walls.
The footprint has not changed, and during construction, vegetation on the steep slope has not
been disturbed. The buildable footprint of this property is limited by the bluff and the required
setbacks.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 22, 1994
The original dwelling was constructed in 1920. There appears to be a practical difficulty and
hardship in this case in order to maintain reasonable use of the property. A variance of some
sort is needed to maintain a functional and buildable lot. The setback requirements are
partially established for aesthetic reasons, to prevent erosion and disturbance of the bluff.
One option would have been to pull back the once dilapidated portion of the structure to the
east side and not have an after-the-fact situation. However, due to typical construction
techniques this would cause a greater disturbance to the bluff than the existing situation
where everything remains intact. Any further expansion into the bluff by the deck should not
be permitted.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the reconstruction as
shown on the survey dated August 16, 1994. This is limited to the existing footprint and
does not include the proposed deck expansion.
The applicant, Randall Morairty, confirmed that on the upper level, when it was reconstructed,
the joists were cantilevered out 4 feet to allow for a future deck. Originally, there was no door
on the upper level. Contractor, Don Bonnicksen, reviewed the history of the project.
Mueller suggested the deck be constructed to the east of the house. Crum commented that
the appearance of the house has already improved, and she feels that the house would look
better from the lake with decks, and that it would look odd without decks. She also
commented on the dense vegetation and the fact that the house will be somewhat screened
from the lake. Hanus was in favor of allowing some deck to extend the livability of the house.
The small building footprint on the lot was noted. Clapsaddle noted that he is in favor of a
deck, but is concerned about erosion. The applicant confirmed that no stairs are proposed
from the upper deck.
MOTION made by Clapsaddle, seconded by Hanus, to recommend approval of
the variance, as recommended by staff, with the exception that decks be
allowed as follows:
Lower Deck: maximum 10' x 20' deck with not more than 3
piers.
Upper Deck: project a maximum of 4 feet from the house, with
the corners cut off at 45 degree angles.
2
Planning Commission Minutes August 22, 1994
Findings of fact are:
- The appearance from the lake will be enhanced by the decks.
The buildable footprint between the road and the top of the bluff
is very shallow.
Dense vegetation to the east of the house discourages
construction of an addition or a deck in that location.
Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on August 23, 1994.
CASE #94-61: MICHAEL M. KOHLER, 174~ AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15, 16, AND 17,
BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD, PID #13-117-2424 0007. VARIANCE FOR A DECK.
The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming dwelling and deck
in order to rebuild and slightly modify the deck. The proposed modifications are slightly
nonconforming to the front yard setback. There is no further encroachment as the deck
follows the existing footprint and setback. This request results in variances of 1.2 feet to the
required 20 foot front yard setback and 3.4 feet to the required side yard setback. All other
aspects are conforming to the zoning ordinance. The proposal is a logical expansion of the
deck and the corner is cut back to minimize the impact to the nonconforming setback.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request as the
encroachment is minimal, it follows the existing footprint, and it is a reasonable use of the
property.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Weiland, to recommend approval of the
variance as recommended by staff, and approval be based on the modified
survey submitted with the application. Motion carried unanimously.
This case will be heard by the City Council on August 23, 1994.
CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT
Liz Jensen reviewed the City Council Minutes of August 9, 1994, and the agenda for the
August 23, 1994 meeting.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
August 22, 1994
ELECTION FOR VICE-CHAIR
Clapsaddle nominated Michael Mueller for Vice Chair. Weiland seconded the nomination.
Weiland moved to close the nominations. Clapsaddle seconded. Motion to close nominations
carried unanimously.
Commissioner Michael Mueller was elected Vice-Chair.
MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Crum, to adjourn the meeting at 8:40
p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Chair, Geoff Michael
Attest:
4
~ Metropolitan Council
Advocating regional economic, societal and environmental issues and solutions
REGIONAL BREAKFAST MEE TINGS
F OR L 0 CAL OFFICIAL S IN
HENNEPIN COUNTY
Metropolitan Council Chair Dottie Rietow invites you to attend your
choice of two regional breakfast meetings for local officials in Hennepin
County. These meetings will provide an opportunity to talk about issues
the Council is working on, and a time for you to express your ideas
about the Council and your region's concerns.
Chair Rietow will discuss the Council's new Regional Blueprint, as well
as some of the metropolitan issues the Council thinks the legislature may
address in 1995. Your input is an important component of the
discussion regarding matters in Hennepin County.
Please plan to attend one, or both, of the following meetings:
NORTH HENNEPIN:
SOUTH HENNEPIN:
Monday, September 19
7:30 - 9:00 a.rn.
Holiday Inn -- Plymouth
3000 Harbor Lane, at
1.494/Hwy 55
Cost: $4.65
Tuesday, September 27
7:30 - 9:00 a.m
Hennepin County
Government Center
Dining Room, Lower Level
Cos~' $3.90
Cost includes continental breaicfas~ tax and gratuity
RSVP: To register, please call the Council's Executive offices at 291-
6554, by September 15.
Meats Park Centre
Recycled Paper
230 ~;ast Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1634 612 291-6359
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Fax 291-6550 TDD 291-0904
This opinion will be unpublished and
may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (1992).
PI~i()i~T{) i~.1~ ~ ~, ,> ' -
Hennepin County Forsberg, Judge
District Court File No. 91-5671
Dakota Rail, Inc.,
Respondent,
vs.
Jeffrey R. Brauchle
Diane L. Drays
Oppenheimer, Wolff & Donnelly
3400 Plaza VII Building
45 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Mound,
Appellant.
Allen D. Barnard
Caryn S. Glover
Best & Flanagan
4000 First Bank Place
601 Second Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Filed September 6, 1994
Office of Appellate Courts
Considered and decided by .Davies, Presiding Judge, Lansing,
Judge, and Forsberg, Judge.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
FORSBERG, Judge
Appellant challenges the district court's grant of summary
jud97nent for respondent on a breach of contract claim. We affirm.
FACTS
In October 1990, appellant City of Mound (Mound) exercised a
$235,000 option to purchase land from respondent Dakota Rail, Inc.
When extensive negotiations among Dakota Rail, Mound, and the
land's mortgagee Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
did not produce a release of MnDOT's mortgage, Dakota Rail declared
the agreement null and void under its seventh paragraph. Mound
rejected Dakota Rail's declaration. Dakota Rail sued Mound in a
quiet title action. Mound counterclaimed for breach of contract.
Mound later condemned land including that involved in the quiet
title action. The condemnation commissioners awarded Dakota Rail
$429,000. Mound appealed that award to district court. The same
district court heard both the quiet title and condemnation actions.
Both parties moved for summary judgment in the quiet title action.
Mound alleged Dakota Rail was obliged to transfer marketable title
under the agreement. In December 1993, the district court ruled
that Dakota Rail did not breach the agreement and granted Dakota
Rail's motion for summary judgment. Mound appeals from the summary
judgment. On January 21, 1994, this court granted Mound's petition
to stay the condemnation proceedings pending this appeal.
DECISION
On appeal from summary judgment, appellate courts view the
evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom
summary judgment was'granted, and determine whether there is a
genuine issue of material fact or whether the district court erred
in applying the law. Offerdahl v. University of Minn. Hosps. and
Clinics, 426 N.W.2d 425, 427 (Minn. 1988).
Mound claims it is entitled to summary judgment on its breach
of contract claim because Dakota Rail did not produce marketable
title. Paragraphs 7 and 9 of the agreement address Dakota Rail's
duties. Under paragraph 9, "[a]t closing, [Dakota Rail] shall
deliver to [Mound] a quitclaim deed conveying title." Quitclaim
deeds do not guarantee the condition of title. Brame v. Towne, 56
Minn. 126, 128, 57 N.W. 454, 455 (1894). Under paragraph 7:
[Mound] shall have ten (10) days after receipt
of the [title insurance commitment] within
which to determine the marketability of title
to the Property and to make reasonable
objections ("Objection") thereto, if any,
which Objection shall be made in writing. If
the title to the Property is found to be
unmarketable, [Dakota Rail] shall have thirty
(30) days to cure the Objection. If the
Objection is not so cured or waived by
[Mound], then this Agreement shall be null and
void and all earnest money shall be r~funded
to [Mound] upon demand.
Here, Mound objected to MnDOT's mortgage, Dakota Rail did not cure
the objection, and Mound did not waive the objection. Thus,
paragraph 7 rendered the agreement "null and void."
Lucas v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 284, 433 N.W.2d 94, 97
(Minn. 1988), states that "implicit in the requirement that the
seller furnish an abstract of title is the representation that the
abstract is proffered to demonstrate the marketability of the
seller's title." Mound alleges t~hat Lucas, combined with paragraph
7's requirement that Dakota Rail provide a title insurance
commitment~, entitles Mound to summary judgment because Dakota Rail
did not produce marketable title. While such a ruling would be
consistent with the result in Lucas, the relevant language in Lucas
made the agreement null and void "at Purchaser's option." Id., 433
N.W.2d at 96. Here, however, the application of the "null and
~ Mound alleges that the title insurance commitment required
by paragraph 7 is the functional equivalent to an abstract of
title. Dakota Rail does not object to this assertion.
void" clause is mandatory. To adopt Mound's argument would be to
rewrite the parties' agreement, improperly ignoring the mandatory
nature of the "null and void" clause. See Cherqosk¥ v. Crosstown
Bell, Inc., 463 N.W.2d 522, 526 (Minn. 1990) ("[b]ecause of the
presumption that the parties intended the language used to have
effect, [courts] attempt to avoid an interpretation of the contract
that would render a provision meaningless").
In a case involving a similar "null and void" clause, the
supreme court ruled that the vendors were liable for breach of
contract where they did not preserve their ability to tender
marketable title and created a title defect after entering the
purchase agreement. SDace Center, Inc. v. 451 CorD., 298 N.W.2d
443, 450 (Minn. 1980). While Mound claims Space Center applies
here, the case is distinguishable. Here, MnDOT's mortgage predated
the parties' agreement, and Mound knew about MnDOT's mortgage
before entering the agreement.
Dakota Rail's letter of October 12, 1990 states that Mound's
title objections "will be clea~ed at the closing." While this
letter might have addressed Dakota Rail's duty to produce
"marketable title," it did not address the consequences of Dakota
Rail's failure to do so. Also, the parties did not follow the
procedure set out in their agreement for altering the agreement or
waiving rights thereunder. Thus, the "null and void" clause, which
addressed Dakota Rail's failure to produce marketable title,
remained in effect after Mound received Dakota Rail's letter and
rendered the agreement "null and void" when Dakota Rail did not
provide marketable title.
The parties disagree on the effect the instant appeal will
have on the stayed condemnation proceeding. We decline to address
this issue for several reasons, including the parties' inability to
agree whether the land involved in the two proceedings is
identical. Kucera v. Kucera, 275 Minn. 252, 254, 146 N.W.2d 181,
183 (1966) (" [i]t is not within the province of [appellate courts]
to determine issues of fact on appeal").
Affirmed.
RECEIVED
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Monday, September 19, 1994
Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E. Wayzata Blvd., Rm 135
(Elevator handicapped access, west entrance, Wayzata Blvd)
5:30 PM, PUBLIC HEARING
Wayzata Bay, Cedar Point marked channel, proposal to
establish a Quiet Waters Area, 5 mph speed limit, on Lake
Minnetonka in the channel north of Cedar Point.
5:45 PM, LAKE USE AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
· 1. Evaluation of public hearing testimony and findings of
the 5:30 pm public hearinq for consideration of
establishing a Quiet Waters Area, 5 mph speed limit, on
Lake Minnetonka in the channel north of Cedar Point,
Wayzata Bay, with findings and recommendations to the
board;
2. Draft ordinance amending Sect. 3.07 Watercraft for Hire,
adding Coast Guard Safety Standards in new subdivisions 5
through 9, to consider recommending to the board approval
of the second reading;
3. Draft Ordinance amending Sect. 3.09 Special Events,
changing the licensing authority for special events to
the Sheriff, and providing the Sheriff with criteria
which may be considered in determining whether or not a
special event license should be granted, to consider
recommending approval to the board of the second reading;
4. INFORMATIONAL -- MN DNR proposal to change requirements
for personal flotation devices (PFD's or life preservers)
to meet the Cost Guard rule chaning federal requirements
for lifesaving devices, comment being called for by
Friday, September 16 -- committee/board members in
support of .or having a concern for this change are asked
to. call the executive director ~ 10:00 am,. Friday,
September 16.
5. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol significant
activity report;
6. Special events -- $100 deposit refunds:
A. Antique & Classic Boat Parade, 8/14/94
B. Minnetonka Challenge 5 Mile Swim, 8/6/94
Team & Individual
C. Limited Bass Predator Classic ,
Events, 7/9, 8/14 and 8/27-28/94
7. Additional Business