1994-10-11 AGENDA
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1994, 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
e
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1994,
REGULAR MEETING.
PG. 3910-3917
PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER MODIFICATIONS
TO THE ZONiNG ORDINANCE, SECTION 350:645,
RELATING TO THE RECENT CHANGES IN THE
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE.
PG. 3918-3924
CASE g94- : APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR
PELICAN POINT, BOYER DEVELOPMENT CORP.
PG. 3925-3937
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE LEVY ON GENERAL OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1978 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$11,633.00. PG. 3938
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES. PG. 3939
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
PG. 3940-3949
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS.
Department Head Monthly Reports for
September 1994.
PG. 3950-3975
L.M.C.D. Representative' s Monthly
Report for September 1994.
C. LMCD mailings.
PG. 3976-3999
3908
LMCD - Ordinance Relating to Shoreline
Requirements and Calculations of Boat
Storage Density on Lake Minnetonka.
Final Report of the 1992 Lake Minnetonka
Lake Access Task Force - LMCD.
REMINDER: Committee of the Whole Meeting,
Tuesday, October 18, 1994, 7:30 P.M.
PG. 4000-4001
PG. 4002-4039
3909
CITY OF MOUND
CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION
FOR BRIAN CATHERS
WHEREAS, congratulations and recognition are in order for
eleven year old Brian Cathers for his quick thinking and assistance given to
Anthony Locken on October 4, 1994; and
WHEREAS, a catastrophe was avoided because of the quick and
calm response given to seven year old Anthony Locken who had fallen from a
tree and become impaled four feet off of the ground on a post; and
WHEREAS, this skillfull action in averting what could have
been a tragic loss to family, friends, and the community was a humanitarian act
deserving special recognition by the governing body of this City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the
sincere appreciation of the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, and
all citizens at large of this community, are hereby extended to Brian Cathers for
his actions.
Adopted unanimously on the 1 lth day of October, 1994.
Mayor Skip Johnson
Councilmember Andrea Ahrens
Councilmember Liz Jensen
Councilmember Phyllis Jessen
Councilmember Ken Smith
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday,
September 27, 1994, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Liz Jensen, and
Phyllis Jessen and Ken Smith. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City
Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and the
following interested citizens: Meyer (Mike) Gold, Dick Gibson, Elaine & Ron Gavin, Darlene
L. Murphy, Mark Earhart, Howard & Louise Hagedorn, Ton Holmstrorn, Denise Hanson,
Richard Indritz, Steve Swenson, and John Austin.
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
September 14, 1994, Regular Meeting, as submitted. The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
1.1 PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF ^
OF THE ADJACENT CUL-DE-SAC KNOWN AS BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE
CASE//94-68: MEYER (MIKE) GOLD, 5395 BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE, LOT£
15 & 16, BLOCK 6, REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES
The Building Official explained that the applicant is requesting a 10 foot section all the way
around the cul-de-sac be vacated. The section is not being used as street. Minnegasco has
asked that we retain the utility easement. The Planning Commission and the Staff recommended
approval.
The City Attorney stated that he has rewritten a portion of the proposed resolution. The
conditions under the Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved should read as follows:
The City does hereby approve the request to vacate a portion of the street easement for
the cul-de-sac on Baywood Shores Drive, legally described as follows:
That part of the 60 foot radius circle for Smaber Blvd. aka. 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 Smaber Blvd. (aka. Baywood Shores Drive), subject to the
City of Mound retaining a drainage and utility easement over the portion of the
street herein vacated.
e
A certified copy of this resolution shall be prepared by the City Clerk and shall be a
notice of completion of the proceedings. It is the responsibility of the owner to record
this certified resolution in the office of the County Recorder and/or the Registrar of
Titles, as set forth in M.S.A. 412.851.
The City Attorney also suggested that the legal read what the plat reads, Smaber Blvd, (aka.
Baywood Shores Drive).
The Council agreed with the City Attorney's suggestions on the proposed resolution.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one responded. The Mayor closed the public
hearing.
Jensen moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-127
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE VACATION OF A
PORTION OF A CUL-DE-SAC KNOWN AS SMABER
BLVD. (AKA. BAYWOOD SHORES DRIVE),
REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES, BLOCK 6, LOTS
15 & 16 AND BLOCK 5, LOTS 1 THROUGH 7
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.2
CASE //94-63: RON GAVIN, 5000 ENCHANTED ROAD, LOT 1, BLOCK 21,
SHADYWOOD POINT, PID #13-117-24 11 0069, VARIANCE FOR PORCH AND
DECK.
The Building Official explained the request. He noted the item #1. in the proposed resolution
should read as follows:
"The City does hereby grant a variance to recognize the nonconforming front yard
setback of 7.1 feet from Heron Lane resulting in a variance of 2.9 feet, to allow
construction of a porch and a deck, subject to the following conditions."
The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
37//
RESOLUTION//94-128
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SETBACK
VARIANCE TO HERON LANE TO CONSTRUCTION
A PORCH AND DECK AT 5000 ENCHANTED ROAD,
LOT 1, BLOCK 21, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID//13-
11%24 11 0069, P & Z CASE//94-63
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3
CASE //94-64: MARK EARItART (CONTRACTOR), 4913 THREE POINTS
BLVD., LOT 4, BLOCK 4, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID //13-117-24 11 0009,
VARIANCE FOR ADDITION.
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
The Council questioned the amount of hard cover on this property. The Building Official
explained that removal of a portion of the driveway would not have a significant impact on the
existing situation that is very effective in managing and filtering the storm water on this site.
The City Attorney suggested the/gl, of the conditions in the resolution be modified to read as
follows:
"The City does hereby grant a variance recognizing the existing nonconforming lakeside
setback of 43 feet, the nonconforming side yard setback of 5 feet, and the nonconforming
impervious surface coverage of 47% or 2,892 square feet, to allow construction of a
room addition and a porch. The Council further finds that the existing drainage system
is designed to channel storm water from the hard cover areas through a small holding
pond abutting 3 Points Blvd. This holding pond removes fines and other pollutants
before the water runs over a grassy swale to the lake. This variance is being granted
with the express understanding that the holding pond and the swale will be maintained
and continued in its present configuration."
All other conditions remain the same. The Council agreed.
Ahrens moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-129
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FOR AN
ADDITION AT 4913 THREE POINTS BLVD., LOT 4,
BLOCK 4, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID//13-117-24 11
0009, P & Z CASE//94-64
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.4
CASE//94-65: JOHN AUSTIN (CONTRACTOR), 2700 WESTEDGE BLVD., LOT
1, BLOCK 2, BATDORF'S FIRST ADDITION, PID //23-117-24 24 0029,
VARIANCE FOR ADDITION.
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Jensen moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-130
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FOR AN
ADDITION AT 2700 WESTEDGE BLVD., LOT 1,
BLOCK 2, BATDORF'S FIRST ADDITION, PID//23-
117-24 24 0029, P & Z CASE//94-65
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.5
CASE//94-66: RICK HANSON, 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOV'T.
LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID #23-117-24 24 0008, VARIANCE FOR DETACHED
GARAGE.
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
The Council did not waive the fee for the variance.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-131
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LOT AREA
VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD.,
PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID
//23-117-24 24 0008, P & Z CASE//94-66
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.6
CASE //94-67: TONY HOLMSTROM (CONTRACTOR), 3128 PRIEST LANE,
LOT 3, BLOCK 2, HIGHLAND SHORES, PID//23-117-24 34 0077, VARIANCE
FOR DECK.
The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-132
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FOR A
DECK AT 3128 PRIEST LANE, LOT 3, BLOCK 2,
HIGHLAND SHORES, PID//23-117-24 34 0077, P & Z
CASE g94-67
4
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.7
CASE g94-69: WAGNER SPRAY TECH CORP., 5306 SHORELINE DRIVE
IBALBOA BUSINESS CENTER), PID//13-1124 34 0096, OPERATIONS PERMIT.
The Building Official explained that this will be a warehouse area of approximately 20,000
square feet. The Operations Permit would be valid for up to 32,000 square feet. This use is
in conformance with all applicable building, health and fire codes.
Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RE~OLUTION//94-133
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN OPERATIONS
PERMIT FOR WAGNER SPRAY TECH
CORPORATION, 5306 SHORELINE DRIVE
(BALBOA BUILDING)
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.8
PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR LAND ALTERATIONS (RIPRAP): STEPFIEN
SWENSON, 4865 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 7 & 8, BLOCK 14, DEVON~
DOCK SITE//43575, DEVON COMMONS.
The Building Official explained the request. The Park & Open Space Commission recommended
approval.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION//94-134
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS
PERMIT FOR LAND ALTERATIONS (RIPRAP) ON
DEVON COMMONS, DOCK SITE //43575, 4865
ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 7 & 8, BLOCK 14,
DEVON
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.9
PUBLIC LAND PERMIT TO ALLOW TRIMMING OF VEGETATION ON
WIOTA COMMONS ABUI'TING 1748 AVOCET LANE, LOTS 15 & 16, BLOCI~
9, DREAMWOOD, DOCK SITE//13690 - HOWARD HAGEDORN.
The Building Official explained the request. The Park & Open Space Commission recommended
approval.
Ahrens moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
5
RESOLUTION//94-135
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SPECIAL PERMIT
TO ALLOW TRIMMING OF VEGETATION ON
WIOTA COMMONS ABUTTING 1748 AVOCET
LANE, LOTS 15 & 16, BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD,
DOCK SITE #13690
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.10
SET PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to set the following public hearings
on special assessments for October 25, 1994: CBD (Central Business District),
delinquent utility bills, and unpaid mowing charges. The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
1.11
PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT - BENEFIT DANCE FOR STEVE KOKALES
(LYNETTE BOSMA) - AT VFW, OCTOBER 15, 1994, 8:00-12:30. (APPLICANT
ASKED THAT FEE BE WAIVED)
This item was removed from the Agenda at the applicant's request.
1.12 REQUEST FROM RICE LAKE CONTRACTING TO EXTEND COMPLETION
DATE FOR THE 1994 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT TO NOVEMBER 18,
1994.
The City Manager explained that the reason for the extension request is that the pumps just
arrived on site. The City Engineer recommended approval. The Council asked the City
Manager to make sure this extension does not add additional cost to the project.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to approve the request of Rice Lake
Contracting to extend the completion date for the 1994 Lift Station Improvement
Project to November 18, 1994. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.13 PAYMENT REQUEST #3, 1994 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT, RICE LAKE
CONTRACTING - $104,051.60.
The City Manager stated that the City Engineer has recommended approval of the payment
request.
6
1.14
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Jensen to approve Payment Request//3, 1994
Lift Station Improvement Project, by Rice Lake Contracting in the amount of
$104,051.60. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
.PAYMENT OF BILL~
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Smith to authorize the payment of bills as
presented on the pre-list in the amount of $103,303.23, when funds are available.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
_.ADD-ON ITEMS
1.15 .SET BID OPENING
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Ahrens to set October 17, 1994, for the bid
opening of the bids for snow removal from the Central Business District and
authorizing the advertisement for bids. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.16 RESCHEDULE NOVEMBER COUNCIL MEETING
1.17
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Johnson to reschedule the 1st Council
Meeting in November to November 9, 1994, due to the Election being held on
November 8, 1994. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
.SET PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Smith to set November 9, 1994, for a public
hearing to consider the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Class IV
restaurant - nonintoxicating liquor service for Happy Garden at 2212 Commerce
Blvd. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
Ao
B.
C.
D.
August 1994 Financial Report as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
Park & Open Space Commission Minutes of September 8, 1994.
Planning Commission Minutes of September 12, 1994.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Information Items.
7
MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at 8:50 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
8
!
ORDINANCE NO. 71-1994
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 350:645, SUBD. 1,
RELATING TO CONSISTENCY WITH THE SHORELAND
PROVISIONS IN SECTION 350:122~ SUBD. 6(b) 1
The City of Mound Does Ordain:
Section 350:645, Subd. 1 is amended to read as follows:
Subd. 1. C]~l_C_q.Y~t~. 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 to up to a maximum of 40 percent consistent with the provisions
identified in Section 350:1225, Subd. 6 (B) 1.
A'I'TEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council October 11, 1994
Publish in The Laker Newspaper - October 17, 1994
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mound City Council, Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: September 20, 1994
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Modification
The City Council recently adopted Ordinance No. 69-1994 which implemented minor changes
to the Shoreland Management Ordinance. One of the provisions contained in 69-1994 was a
change in impervious cover. Impervious cover restrictions are also found in Section 350:645 of
the Mound Zoning Code. This provision also needs to be modified for consistency with the
Shoreland Provision which is contained in Section 350:1225, Subd. 6 (B) 1.
In order for these ordinance sections to be consistent, the following is recommended:
Omit the current language in Section 350:645, Subd. 1. which reads:
Subd. 1. Lot Coverage. Impervious surface coverage of lots shall not exceed 30 percent
of the lot area. Open patterned decks and stairways shall be counted as 50 percent
impervious cover providing that they are installed over a permeable surface. Those
constructed over an impermeable surface or are impermeable themselves shall be counted
as 100 percent impervious cover.
Substitute the following language in Section 350:645, Subd. 1. which reads:
Subd. 1. Lot Coverage, 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 to up to a maximum of 40 percent consistent with the provisions identified
in Section 350:1225, Subd. 6 (B) 1.
Note: Ordinance 69-1994 modified the definition of Impervious Cover. Therefore, it is not
necessary to specifically address decks in the replacement Lot Coverage language identified
above.
Land Use / Environmental ' Planning / Design
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 83%9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER MODIFICATIONS
TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 350:645,
RELATING TO RECENT CHANGES IN THE
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, October 11, 1994 in the Council
Chambers, 5341 Uaywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. to consider modifications to the Zoning
Ordinance, City Code Section 350:645. The proposed modifications are due to recent
changes approved in the Shoreland Management Ordinance relating to hardcover
restrictions to increase the amount of allowable impervious surface on residential lots.
All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given
the opportunity to be heard.
Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
(To be published in "The Laker" September 26, 1994)
**~:.MOUND CITY 'CODE
SECTION 350:645
Section 350:$45. General Requirements AnDlioable to AI~ Res~e~-
rial Districts.
Subd. 1. Lot Coverage. Impervious surface coverage of
lots shall not exceed 30 percent of the lot area. Open
patterned decks and stairways shall be counted as 50 percent
impervious cover providing that they are installed over a
permeable surface. Those constructed over an impermeable
surface or are impermeable themselves shall be counted as 100
percent impervious cover.
sub4. 2. Permitted Accessory Use~. Within any Residential
District, Accessory buildings shall be permitted subject to
the following restrictiDns:
A®
Each individual accessory building shall not
exceed 1,200 square feet of gross floor area.
Accessory buildings shall not exceed a total
gross floor area of 3,000 square feet or 15% of
the total lot area whichever is less.
Ce
The total number of accessory buildings for lots
measuring 10,000 square feet or less shall be
two (2). On lots exceeding 10,000 square feet,
accessory buildings shall be limited to a total
of three (3).
S%~bd. 3. Swimming Pools and Hot Tubs. Within any
Residential District, swimming pools and 'hot tubs shall be
permitted subject to the following restrictions:
Ae
Swimming Pools. Swimming pools having a water
depth of two (2) feet or more which are operated
for the enjoyment and convenience of the
residents of the principal use and their guests
are permitted provided that the following
conditions are met:
Swimming pools shall be subject to the
following setbacks:
Side yard ............ 10 feet
Corner lots, from side street . . 15 feet
Rear Yard ............ 15 feet
Lakeshore, from O.H.W ...... 50 feet
From any structure on same lot . 10 feet
From principal building
on an adjoining lot ....... 20 feet
64 3/15/93
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 City of Mound Does Ordain:
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 ail
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 Water..._.._._~s.
Subdivision 15, as amended.
considered public waters.
Waters defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.005,
Lakes, ponds or towage of less than 10 acres shall not be
Subd. 147. Wetland. 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.
Section 350:310 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances is amended by adding Subd. l18B,
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. T~nd 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:
~etback From 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
Section 350:1225, Subd. 6 (B) 1 is amended to read as follows:
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.
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 areas, etc.
3q a,.3
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.
Install berms to temporarily detain stormwater thereby increasing
soil absorption.
SS/SKIP JOHNSON
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council August 23, 1994
Published in the Official Newspaper, The Laker, August 29, 1994
RESOLUTION #94-m
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND
GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR PELICAN POINT
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the final plat of Pelican Point has been submitted in the manner
required for platting of land under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 330.00 and under
Chapter 462 of the Minnesota State Statues and all proceedings have been duly conducted
thereunder, and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on May 23, 1994 and June 14, 1994, held a public
hearing pursuant to Section 330.00 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances, to consider the
approval of the preliminary plat of Pelican Point Subdivision located on property described as:
A tract of land comprising Lots 35, 36, 37 and 38, "Phelps Island Park, First Division"; those
parts of the abandoned street and alley in "Phelps Island Park, First Division" designated on said
plat as Private Street and Private Alley; and a part of Government Lot 5, Section 19, Township
117, Range 23; all described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly line of said Private Alley with the
Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly line of Lot 38, "Phelps Island Park, First
Division"; thence Northwesterly along the extension of said Southwesterly line 200.00
feet; thence Northeasterly 200.00 feet, more or less, to a point on the Northwesterly
extension of the Northeasterly line of Lot 35, "Phelps Island Park, First Division", distant
266.80 feet Southeasterly from the intersection of the Northwesterly extension of said
Northeasterly line with the Southeasterly line of Tuxedo Boulevard dedicated in the plat
of Avalon as Tuxedo Road; thence Northwesterly along said extension 266.80 feet to the
Southeasterly line of said Tuxedo Boulevard; thence Northeasterly along the Southeasterly
line of said Tuxedo Boulevard to its intersection with a line which is parallel with and
20.00 feet Northeasterly from the Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of
said Lot 35, thence Southeasterly along said parallel line 286.80 feet; thence
Southwesterly, parallel with the Westerly line of said Private Alley, 20.00 feet to the
Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 35; thence Southeasterly
along said extension and along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 35 and its Southeasterly
extension to the shore line of Lake Minnetonka; thence Southwesterly along said shore
line to its intersection with the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said
Lot 38; thence Northwesterly along said extension and along the Southwesterly line of
said Lot 38 and its Northwesterly extension to the point of beginning.
A tract of land comprising Lots 19 through 34 inclusive, "Phelps Island Park, First
Division"; those parts of abandoned alleys and streets, "Phelps Island Park, First
Division:, designated on said plat as Private Alley and Private Streets; and a part of
Government Lot 5, Section 19, Township 117, Range 23; all described as follows:
Beginning at the most Westerly comer of Lot 34, "Phelps Island Park, First Division";
thence Southeasterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 34 and its extension to the
shore line of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northeasterly along said shore line to the Westerly
line of Lot 73, "Phelps Island Park, First Division"; thence Northerly and Northeasterly
along the Westerly and Northwesterly lines of said Lot 73 to the shore line of Lake
Minnetonka; thence Northwesterly and Northerly along said shore line to its intersection
with the Southeasterly extension of the center line of the Private Street adjoining the
Northeasterly line of Lot 19 "Phelps Island Park, First Division"; thence Northwesterly
along said extension and along said center line and its Northwesterly extension to the
Westerly line of said Private Alley; thence Southwesterly along said Westerly line to its
intersection with the Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19;
thence Northwesterly along said extension to the Southeasterly line of Tuxedo Boulevard
dedicated in the plat of Avalon as Tuxedo Road; thence Southwesterly along the
Southeasterly line of said Tuxedo Boulevard to its intersection with a line which is
parallel with and 20.00 feet Northeasterly from the Northwesterly extension of the
Southwesterly line of said Lot 34; thence Southeasterly along said parallel line 286.80
feet; thence Southwesterly, parallel with the Westerly line of said Private Alley, 20.00 feet
to the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 34; thence
Southeasterly along said extension to the point of beginning.
Lot 73, "Phelps Island Park, First Division."
Subject to the proprietary and sovereign rights of the State of Minnesota in all that
portion of the land lying below the natural ordinary high watermark thereof; not
intending, however, to deprive the fee owners of the usual riparian rights that attach to
the land riparian to navigable public body of water incident to the ownership thereof.
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and the requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the City Code of
Ordinances of the City of Mound.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota:
A. Final Plat approval is hereby granted for Pelican Point Multi-family Residential
Subdivision as requested by Boyer Building Corporation subject to compliance with all of the
conditions found in the City Engineer's report dated August 18, 1994 set forth and incorporated
herein as part of the document, all of the conditions of preliminary plat approval (Resolutions
94-78) set forth and incorporated herein as part of the document, the following additional
conditions and any conditions added to this list as a result of findings of the EAW:
The Developer shall secure all applicable permits as defined by the City Engineer
from all entities with jurisdiction over this project.
2. Perm/ts for docks shall be obtained from the DNR and LMCD as applicable.
Park dedication fees shall be collected in the amount of $124,000 prior to filing of the
final plat.
o
o
o
o
No construction activity shall occur on the site and the final plat shall not be filed until
a new stormwater management permit is issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District and any wetland mitigation requirements on the property have been determined.
Construction documents showing additional requirements placed on the project in this
regard shall also be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the final plat
being filed or construction activity beginning.
The Developer shall provide the City Attorney all necessary information to conduct a
title search and make a clear title opinion prior to filing of the final plat.
No structures shall be built or placed upon the island (Outlot C) without specific
modification of the Conditional Use Permit.
Prior to the City releasing the final plat, the Developer shall sign a development contract
furnished by the City. The development contract shall stipuate that construction of all
items covered by said contract shall be completed within a specified period of time of the
City releasing the final plat. As part of the development contract, the Developer shall
furnish the City with a performance bond or an irrevocable letter of credit or other form
of security approved by the City Attorney in the amount of 125% of public improvements
or $380,000.
o
The Declaration of Covenants shall be amended to include a description of bluff area
limitations as stated in the Mound shoreland management ordinance. The Covenants
shall also include a map showing designated bluff areas.
o
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for homes in the subdivision until utilities
and access servicing the homes are approved by the Fire Chief and Building Official.
10.
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~t
City Engineer.
11.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect said
BMPs.
12.
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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said
plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith
by the subdivider and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith
without further formality, all in compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the City of Mound Code of
Ordinances.
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Mound City Council
FROM: Bruce Chamberlain, City Planning Consultant
DATE: October 5, 1994
SUBJECT: Final Plat Approval for Pelican Point Multi-Family Residential Development.
APPLICANT: Boyer Building Corporation
CASE NUMBER: 94-28
HKG FILE NUMBER: 94-5g
LOCATION: 2820 Tuxedo Boulevard (Pelican Point)
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-I)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
OTHER RELATED REPORTS: City Engineer's report prepared under separate cover.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pelican Point Multi-Family Residential
Development is a proposed 40 unit twinhome development on the 13.7 acre site known as
Pelican Point. Pelican Point lies on the shore of Lake Minnetonka and includes an island a
short distance from shore but unattached to the mainland. The development will make a
street connection to Tuxedo Blvd. in a single location. A loop street known as Pelican Point
Circle and cul de sac known as Pelican Point Court will serve the interior of the development
and will be dedicated to the City. The development will include a trail system leading to a
water oriented accessory structure on the beach of the site. Also proposed at the beach is a
40 slip marina with a single pier connecting to the mainland.
COMMENTS: Several issues regarding development of Pelican Point will be addressed as
part of the final plat approval. In addition to the items listed below, the City Engineer has
prepared a report under separate cover that addresses other items.
mo
Environmental Assessment Worksheet - Acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit
(RGU), the City of Mound prepared and approved an EAW and submitted it to the
Land Use/Environmental . Planning /Design
7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 ' Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160
Pelican Point Planning Report
October 5, 1994
Page 2
MN Environmental Quality Board for distribution and comment on July 18, 1994.
The City Council reviewed comments and passed Resolution ~/94-126 on September
14, 1994 stating that an ElS is not warranted and no further study is required to make
a determination. Staff recommendations include conditions 10-12 based on public
comments to the EAW.
Park Dedication
In accordance with the Mound Subdivision Ordinance the Mound Park and Open
Space Commission recommended at their June 9, 1994 meeting to accept a cash
dedication in lieu of land in the amount of $124,000 due prior to filing of the final
plat.
Co
Preliminary Plat Approval
Preliminary plat approval was granted with thirty conditions by the City Council on
June 28, 1994 (Resolution 94-78). Preliminary plat approval includes a conditional
use permit to designate the site as a Planned Development Area (PDA) with variances.
Use of the island in Outlot C
The Developer indicated at the May 23 Mound Planning Commission meeting that the
island will remain natural and as a result the preliminary plat was approved under that
premise. Section 9.5 of the Declaration of Covenants submitted by the Developer
states that "... the Association shall have the right to improve the island which is part of Outlot C for
picnic purposes for the benefit of the Members and to trim and remove such vegetation as may be
desirable in connection with access to and maintenance of such picnic facilities and areas." If the
City Council finds picnicking to be a low impact use without significant departure
from the preliminary plat, it can allow the change as part of the final plat approval by
simply approving the covenant as it is stated. If the City wishes to go to greater
lengths to preserve the island in its natural state, the City Council could include one or
both examples stated below as conditions of final plat approval.
The Developer shall modify Section 9.5 of the Declaration of Covenants
to eliminate the provision allowing island improvements 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.
Eo
Protection of bluff areas in Outlot C
Bluff areas are protected from disturbances such as grading, clear-cut tree removal,
construction, etc. by the Mound shoreland management ordinance. To insure that
homeowners in the Pelican Point development are aware of these restrictions, language
should be included in the Declaration of Covenants along with a site map indicating
restrictions and locations of bluff areas on the site. If the City Council wishes to
further restrict use within the bluff areas, a condition could be added to the approval
of the final plat such as the one stated below.
October 11, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 94-136
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR
PELICAN POINT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
UNDER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, the final plat of Pelican Point has been submitted in the manner
required for platting of land under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 330:00 and
under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota State Statutes and all proceedings have been duly conducted
thereunder; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on May 23, 1994 and June 14, 1994, held a public
hearing pursuant to Section 330:00 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances, to consider the
approval of the preliminary plat of Pelican Point Subdivision located on property described as:
A tract of land comprising Lots 35, 36, 37 and 38, "Phelps Island Park, First Division";
those parts of the abandoned street and alley in "Phelps Island Park, First Division"
designated on said plat as Private Street and Private Alley; and a part of Government Lot
5, Section 19, Township 117, Range 23; all described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly line of said Private Alley with the
Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly line of Lot 38, "Phelps Island Park,
First Division"; thence Northwesterly along the extension of said Southwesterly
line 200.00 feet; thence Northeasterly 200.00 feet, more or less, to a point on the
Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of Lot 35, "Phelps Island Park,
First Division", distant 266.80 feet Southeasterly from the intersection of the
Northwesterly extension of said Northeasterly line with the Southeasterly line of
Tuxedo Boulevard dedicated in the plat of Avalon as Tuxedo Road; thence
Northwesterly along said extension 266.80 feet to the Southeasterly line of said
Tuxedo Boulevard; thence Northeasterly along the Southeasterly line of said
Tuxedo Boulevard to its intersection with a line which is parallel with and 20.00
feet Northeasterly from the Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of
said Lot 35; thence Southeasterly along said parallel line 286.80 feet; thence
Southwesterly, parallel with the Westerly line of said Private Alley, 20.00 feet
to the Northwesterly extension of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 35; thence
Southeasterly along said extension and along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 35
and its Southeasterly extension to the shore line of Lake Minnetonka; thence
Southwesterly along said shore line to its intersection with the Southeasterly
extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 38; thence Northwesterly along
said extension and along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 38 and its
Northwesterly extension to the point of beginning.
281
October 11, 1994
A tract of land comprising Lots 19 through 34 inclusive, "Phelps Island Park,
First Division"; those parts of abandoned alleys and streets, "Phelps Island Park,
First Division", designated on said plat as Private Alley and Private Streets; and
a part of Government Lot 5, Section 19, Township 117, Range 23; all described
as follows:
Beginning at the most Westerly corner of Lot 34, "Phelps Island Park, First
Division"; thence Southeasterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 34 and
its extension to the shore line of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northeasterly along
said shore line to the Westerly line of Lot 73, "Phelps Island Park, First
Division"; thence Northerly and Northeasterly along the Westerly and
Northwesterly lines of said Lot 73 to the shore line of lake Minnetonka; thence
Northwesterly and Northerly along said shore line to its intersection with the
Southeasterly extension of the center line of the Private Street adjoining the
Northeasterly line of Lot 19 "Phelps Island Park, First Division"; thence
Northwesterly along said extension and along said center line and its
Northwesterly extension to the Westerly line of said Private Alley; thence
Southwesterly along said Westerly line to its intersection with the Northwesterly
extension of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19; thence Northwesterly along
said extension to the Southeasterly line of Tuxedo Boulevard dedicated in the plat
of Avalon as Tuxedo Road; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of
said Tuxedo Boulevard to its intersection with a line which is parallel with and
20.00 feet Northeasterly from the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly
line of said Lot 34; thence Southeasterly along said parallel line 286.80 feet;
thence Southwesterly, parallel with the Westerly line of said Private Alley, 20.00
feet to the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 34;
thence Southeasterly along said extension to the point of beginning.
Lot 73, "Phelps Island Park, First Division".
Subject to the proprietary and sovereign rights of the State of Minnesota in all
that portion of the land lying below the natural ordinary high watermark thereof;
not intending, however, to deprive the fee owners of the usual riparian rights that
attach to the land riparian to a navigable public body of water incident to the
ownership thereof.
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and the requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the City Code of
Ordinances of the City of Mound.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota;
282
October 11, 1994
A. Final plat approval is hereby granted for Pelican Point Multi-Family Residential
Subdivision under PDA requirements, as requested by Boyer Building Corporation subject to
compliance with all of the conditions found in the City Engineer's report dated August 18, 1994,
set forth and incorporated herein as part of the document, all the conditions of the preliminary
plat approval (Resolution//94-78) set forth and incorporated herein as part of the document and
the following conditions;
The Developer shall secure all applicable permits as defined by the City Engineer from
all entities with jurisdiction over this project.
e
Permits for docks shall be obtained from the DNR and LMCD for the construction of 40
docks to serve the development. The City strongly favors Plan "A" which has been
presented to this City Council and which results in the construction of 40 dock slips off
the mainland, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution. It
is understood that dock density is being used from that part of Outlot C which is called,
"the island", to complete the 40 dock slips. In the event the DNR or the LMCD do not
approve Plan "A", the Council approves Plan "B", a copy of which is attached. This
would result in 28 docks being constructed off the mainland and would allow the
construction of 12 dock slips off the most northerly part of that part of Outlot C, referred
to as "the island". In either event, a Conservation Easement shall be prepared and
dedicated to the public which keeps that part of Outlot C, which is referred to as "the
island", in a natural state and will prevent all construction of any structures on that part
of Outlot C, called "the island", except the limited area necessary to access the 12 dock
slips if Plan B is necessary.
The Council is approving 40 dock slips and strongly requests the DNR and the LMCD
to approve Plan A. The applicant has argued that the land would allow 57 dock sites off
the mainland and the island and the Council is not precluding an application for more
than 40 dock sites if Plan A or Plan B are not approved by the DNR and the LMCD.
Park dedication fees shall be collected in the amount of $124,000 prior to filing of the
final plat.
No construction activity shall occur on the site until all applicable provisional or final
permits have been issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other
applicable agencies.
The Developer shall provide the City Attorney with Homeowner's Documents and
Declaration of Covenants for his review and approval. The Developer shall also provide
the City Attorney with information necessary to conduct a title search and make a clear
title opinion, all prior to filing of the final plat with Hennepin County.
283
I ,I , i~ i 11
October 11, 1994
Lot 8, Block 2 on the final plat shall reflect a modification to the utility easement as
defined by the City Engineer.
Prior to any work on the site, the Developer shall sign a development contract furnished
by the City. The development contract shall stipulate that construction of all items
covered by said contract shall be completed within a specified period of time and shall
require compliance with all City Codes not modified by this resolution. As part of the
development contract, the Developer shall furnish the City with a performance bond, an
irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of security approved by the City Attorney in
the amount of 125% of the cost of all applicable public improvements necessary to be
completed prior to filing the final plat. The Developer shall also provide the necessary
escrow funds required in Section 330:30 of the City Code.
The Declaration of Covenants shall be amended to include a description of bluff area
limitations as stated in the Mound Shoreland Management Ordinance. The Covenants
shall also include a map showing designated bluff areas.
The plat shall be filed with Hennepin County within 240 days of the City Council
approving the final plat (October 11, 1994).
10.
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for homes in the subdivision until utilities
and access servicing the homes are approved by the City Engineer, Fire Chief and
Building Official.
11.
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.
12.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect said
BMPs.
13.
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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said
plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith
by the subdivider and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith
without further formality, all in compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the City of Mound Code of
Ordinances.
284
October 11, 1994
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Smith and seconded by
Councilmember Ahrens.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Ahrens, Jensen, Johnson and Smith.
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
none.
Councilmember Jessen was absent and excused.
SS/SKIP JOHNSON
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
285
Pelican Point Planning Report
October 5, 1994
Page 3
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 dead or diseased
vegetation.
Fo
Existence of a wetland on the site
Comments through the EAW raised the possibility that a wetland exists in the area of
the proposed detention pond. The Developer has since had a professional wetland
consultant investigate the site and prepare a report. The wetland consultant determined
the presence of two wetlands on the site, one in the detention pond area and one close
to the north property line. The wetlands fall under jurisdiction of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District and according to the report will likely require mitigation if
they are disturbed by development.
The report is dated August 30, 1994 but was not received in the office of the City
Planner until October 4. The Watershed District has not yet received the report but
has indicated that, based on our discussion, a new stormwater management permit will
need to be issued for the project. They also indicated that if wetland mitigation is
required, a public hearing process will be completed prior to issuing a new permit.
The City of Mound can approve the final plat with the condition that Watershed
District requirements be met.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the final plat for the Pelican Point
Multi-Family Residential Development subject to the conditions listed below and those found
in the City Engineer's report dated August 18, 1994 plus any additional conditions the City
Council deems appropriate such as those listed in the COMMENTS section above. If the
Council concurs with this recommendation, a suggested resolution is enclosed.
The Developer shall secure all applicable permits as defined by the City Engineer
from all entities with jurisdiction over this project.
2. Permits for docks shall be obtained from the DNR and LMCD as applicable.
o
Park dedication fees shall be collected in the amount of $124,000 prior to filing of the
final plat.
No construction activity shall occur on the site and the final plat shall not be filed
until a new stormwater management permit is issued by the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District and any wetland mitigation requirements on the property have been
determined. Construction documents showing additional requirements placed on the
project in this regard shall also be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior
to the final plat being filed or construction activity beginning.
395o
Pelican Point Planning Report
October 5, 1994
Page 4
o
The Developer shall provide the City Attorney all necessary information to conduct a
title search and make a clear title opinion prior to filing of the final plat.
o
No structures shall be built or placed upon the island (Outlot C) without specific
modification of the Conditional Use Permit.
Prior to the City releasing the final plat, the Developer shall sign a development
contract furnished by the City. The development contract shall stipulate that
construction of all items covered by said contract shall be completed within a specified
period of time of the City releasing the final plat. As part of the development
contract, the Developer shall furnish the City with a performance bond or an
irrevocable letter of credit or other form of security approved by the City Attorney in
the amount of 125% of public improvements or $380,000.
o
The Declaration of Covenants shall be amended to include a description of bluff area
limitations as stated in the Mound shoreland management ordinance. The Covenants
shall also include a map showing designated bluff areas.
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for homes in the subdivision until utilities
and access servicing the homes are approved by the Fire Chief and Building Official.
10.
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.
11.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect said
BMPs.
12.
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.
$731
j,,j ii J ,J, , , J~J. J
RECEIVED 2 g lgg4
STATE OF
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
30
50g_ LAFAYETTE ROAD * ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA * 55155-40~
DNR INFORMATION
(612) 296-6157
September 23, 1994
Mr. Ralph Turnguist
RE: PELICAN POINT ISLAND (Tract 38, of Township 117 North, Range 23 West,
of the Fifth Principal Meridian, [.~innesota)
Dear Mr. Turnguist:
We have been advised by the Bureau of Land [lanagement, Eastern StateS,
Division of Cadastral Survey, that their ]969 survey erroneously concluded
that the above mentioned island existed as such in 1858, when Minnesota was
admitted to the Union. They acknowledge that the island was actually part
of a penninsula prior to 1914. It is therefore their opinion that, the
United States having previously divested its interest in the island, the
transfer of the island to the State of Minnesota under the Minnesota Public
Lands Improvement Act of 1990 is void.
Based on this finding, a copy of which is attached, the department has
withdrawn its claim to Pelican Point Island. We have instructed our legal
counsel to prepare a quit claim deed for the record.
Fle~e contact John Helmberger (296-7946) or Sharon Hall (297-2582), in the
Bureau of Real Estate Management, if you h~ve any questions about this
matter.
Sincerely,
~~.j..r;~2) 297_2572' amen/
Attachment
cc:
Judd Broyer, [~idamerica Bank
Jeff Lang, CbJ. cago Title and Insurance Co.
John Boyer, B~yer Building Corp.
Eugene Strom~en, Lake ~[~ne~omka Conservation District
Ed Shukle, Mound C~ty Hanaqer~
Alan Held
FROM GRAY,PLANT& MOOTY 9.23.1994 14:51 P. 2
United States Department of the Interior
BuRIr. Au OJ~ LAND MANAGEMKNT
23, ~994
Hr. Alan H~ld
G~&y, Plan~ ~oo~y, ~oo~y & Benn~, P.A.
3400 City Centez'
MinneapoXi., M~nnesota 55402-37~6
th£e o££lcm of m land title dispute ~ween your client
Hr. Ralph C. Turnquimt and the sta~m o£ Minneso~a. T~e eree o~
dispute, known locally es 'Pelican Point Island" ~volveS e~
This letter s~ts forth ~he opt~o~ CE th~s o~Ce ~
~he aforementioned title d~spute.
not hesitate t~ ~vnt~gt this office.
Sincerely,
FROM GRR¥,PLRNT& MOOT¥ 9.25.1994 14:52
P.
United States Department of the Interior
~UI~..~U OF L~D MANAGEMF. NT
g~-70SO
SEP Z 3 199~1
500 h&fayctt= Road
St. Paul; M£nn~so~a
Dear Nr. Lawler:
~his o££tce o£ a land ~l~le dispute ~O~ween his client
Mr. Ralph C. Turnquim~ and Zhe s:a:e O~ ~lnneeo=a. The area
dispute, known locally as "Pelican Point Xsland," involves an
island dec,gna%ed as Tract 3e; of Township 117
Range 23 wsG~ of ~h~ Fi£th Principal ~eridian~ M~nne$0~a.
As part of a land inventory oondu~md b~ ~lx~ Lake 8=e~ee PrOJeQ~
Off~oe of the bureau o~ ~ Management (DL~)~ ~h=
this fi=ld investigation, l~ was detsrmin~a ~laC
planime~rically surve~e~ ma Trac~ 3B, oon~ainin9 X,6 sores as
eepicted upon tho plat of survey eo~ep~ed April
On the basil Of =he l~?: survey~ this island
Law 101-'44~# ~tat. L020.
, i
FROH GR~V,PL~NT~ MOOTV 9.23,~994 14:52 P. 4
?he TuFn~uist'S claim £o based on Cho contention ~ha= ~his Xo~d
was not an island but a s~all penifloul& of land oonneoted ~0 4~he
adjoining upland ~nd w&s lnoluted with the pa=oAt [or ~overnment
lc~ 5t o£ soGtion ~9. In support o£ ~hia clai~, numerous
hist~rlcal documents h~vo bean submitted which demo. strata ths~
from 1879 ~o i~3~ uurvey~ &nd maps o£ the area depict the Land
in question as a peninsula, O~her dooumen~a beginning An lJl4
depl~ this ~and ab an ls~and ab At exists today. From ~heae
documents, it ia ~oadL~y apparent that ~ ~annel vas CUt aoromw
the peninsula circa 19Z4 pr~ably to f~ollttato s~oamship
From ~he information submttted~ ~ls office mua~ conclude that
~he 1969 investigation and 8ubeoquen~ planimet~l~ survey of L972
failed =0 consider all available information and ~onsequently
reached an erroneous conolusion. Tho ~eland dam~gnate~ ae
Trao~ 38; Tow;tmhip 117 North, ~ange 23 Wo~, Fl~th Principal
MerXdlan, ~inneeo~a wa~ ~n fac~ prior to L9~4; & pen~nou~&
attached ~o ~he upland.
TAb meanders frontlDg sea:lan 19 of the 18S~ original ~urvoy ou~
acro~u this narrow peninsula, leaving unuurva~ed land~ betwee~
tho original meander line end the ac:ual shoreline o£ ~ka
Mlnnetonka. This condition would leave one remaining possib~l~ty
for a claim of Federal ~wnership ~n the disFu%~d area based upon
an erroneous omisoion of t~e emiginal SUrVey.
A meander line is surveyed to determine :he sinuosities o£ & ~ody
of water for the purpose of calouXeting tho acreage of adjoining
riparian lobs. In the ~bsenoe of prima fac£~ fraud or a~ error
so ~ros8 as =o ¢onsuitu~o £raud~ Uhe uour~u have ruled ~ha~ ~he
boundary o£ riparian lots ~x~ends ~o the actual ~hureline a~ ~a
not limi:ed to tho acreage recites in :he pause= iron =ho United
Sta~es.
Discrepancies between the location of ~e original meander lines
and ~he ac=ual shor~ of a body of wa~er fall in~o ~wo ~la~eee,
con~titute erroneous omission. The guidelines f~r de~ermining
fROM GR~Y,PLRHT& MOOTY 9.23.1994 14:53 P.
that la~s were ~l~tea ~om an of~iciaXly ~iled
aI a resul~ ol gro~ error or fraud, At
~nvino~? evidence that the o~iginal
In ~.$. v. z~aer et al., 338 F. supp. 9~4 (1972) it was heXd that
in order to constitute grOSS ~r~or, ~16 true area must have been
undersea=ed by substantially bore than one third. True area
define~ as the area returned in the original survey plus the
alleges om~t~d area.
Art examina=ion of ~he area in question revs=la the= tho
difference be~een tho actual nhoreline o~ Luke Minnotonka and
the or~nal ~eanders o~ the same amounts to ~ar less than one
~h£rd of the ~rue area.
Cons~dering o~hcr JudiciaLly evolve~ £au~or~ L~ is ~noluded
there is nothing in th~ records of this office or in the
info~mation subml=~ed with your letter to indicate fraud by the
original surveyor ~n the pleoament of the original meander line.
The~e ~$ also no=~in9 of re~ord to ind£oa=e that the om~tted area
was any more valuable ~han the sur=ounding surveyed lands~
be proven by clear and convincing evidenc~ that tho original
survey was groe~ly in error; therefore, th~ United States asserts
no olaim to the area b~tween the record meander line and the
aouual shoreline o£ Lake Ninn~tonkm in front of 1o~ 5,
section
states has lurveyed and disposed of public lands, the courts may
protect the private rights acquired against interference by
correc=lve surveys subsequently made. Orauin ~ Paws11
Township 117 North, Range 23 West, of the Fifth Prin~ipal
~eridian, ~innesota, was in error and is hereby canceled. The
excess area fronting lot s, section 19 of the aforementioned
~ownahip, does not mae= the criteria for omitted lands and
wl~h the pa~on~ to said lo~ ~.
oual div~s~e~ its
Hsridian, ~lnne~°ta,_~°_~n"_~Ii.'l~'of 1990, publio Law
101-442, 104 8~a~, 1020 iS VOid,
II I!
October 11, 1994
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE LEVY ON THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVF34ENT BONDS OF 1978
IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,633.00
WHEREAS, there is a Resolution #78-302 with the Hennepin County Auditor
directing a levy of $11,633.00 for General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1978; and
WHEREAS, it appears that 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
$11,633.00 for 1995 taxes payable for the General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1978.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITION ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 8, 1994
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve the following list of
additional election judges for the General Election November 8,
1994:
Lisa Guest
Marie Jorland
BELLS
October 11, 1994
BATCH 4094
Total Bills
$67,180.27
$67,180.27
Z
I ,Il
o
?
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 1994
FIRE FIGHTERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE
9/19 9/26 ~ k~R~ HZI1RS RA/E
1 ,]~.;~.+' ~,NI)'~PR'~N X X 2. ]q.O0 5 46 6.00
2 GP~c ANTi,PROW X ~ 1 9.50 2 59 6.00
3 ,I~RRY RABB RETIRED 9/10 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 6.00 48.00
4 PAI~, RABB X X 2 19.00 2 4~ 6.00 270.00
5 DAVE, W)Yr) X X 2 19.00 3 27 6.00 ] 62.00
6 SCOTT BRYCE X X 2 19.00 14 25 6.00 150.OO
7 DAVE CARLSON X X 2 19.00 0 18 6.00 108.00
8 JIM CASEY X X 2 19.00 0 18 6.00 108.00
9 STEVE COLLINS X X 2 19.00 2 22 6.00 132.00
10 BOB CRAWFORD X X 2 19.00 7 27 6.00 162.00
11 RANDY ENGELHART X X 2 19.00 2 15 6.00 90.00
12 STEVE ERICKSON X X 2 19.00 0 38 6.50 247.00
13 PHIL FISK X X 2 19.00 1½ 10 6.00 60.00
14 DAN GRADY X X 2 19.00 10 40 6.00 240.00
15 KEVIN GRADY X X 2 19.00 2 24 6.00 144.00
16 CRAIG HZNDERSON X X 2 19.00 1 37 6.00 222.00
17 PAUL I.IENRY X X 2 19.O0 13~ 30 6.00 180.00
18 JASON MAAS X X 2 19.00 1 44 6.00 264.00
19 JOHN NAFUS X X 2 19.00 2 29 6.00 174.00
20 JAMES NELSON X X 2 19.OO lk q% 6.00
21 MARV N~qON X X 2 ~9.00 1~ 23 6.00
22 BRET NICCUM X X 2 19.00 2~ 28 6.00
23 GREG PAlM X X 2 19.00 0 22 6.00 ] ~2.00
24 MIKE PALM X X 2 19.00 0 24 6.00 144.00
25 TIM PALM X X 2 19.00 2 33 6.00 198.00
26 GREG P~EP, SON X X 2 19.00 0 23 6.25 143.75
27 x x 2 19.00 2 23 .00 138.00
28 Tom z ross (ED 0 -0- 0 i .00 6,00
29 MIKE SAVAGE ~ X 1 9.50 7 23 6.00 138.00
30 KEVIN SIPPt~I::I','L X X 2 19.00 2 25 6.00 150.00
31 RON STALLMAN X X 2 19.00 2 19 6.00 114.00
32 TOM SWanSON X X 2 19.00 2 38 6.00 228.00
X X 2 19.00 2 26 6.00 156.00
33 BRUCE SVO~ODA
X X 2 19.00 0 39 6.00 234.00
34 ED VANECEK ..
X X 2 19.00 12½ 23 6.00 138.00
55 RICK WILLIAMS
X ~ 1 9.50 1 23 6.00 138.00
36 TIM WILLIAbIS
X X 2 19.00 1½ 28 6.00 168.00
37 DENNIS WOYTCKE
~4 33 67
85 82½ 167½ 636.50 107½ 1010 ~ 6,084.75
167½ I]~l.q 636.50
107½ ~ 1,167.00
/UrAL 7,888.25
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
IMtS. .LAST THIS' YEAR LAST YEAR
~ONTH OF SEPT]~ 1994 MON~ MON/}I TO DATE TO DATE
~O. OF CALLS
50 65 470 456
{OUND FIRE 9 16 101 88
E~RGEI~ 20 25 186 177
{INNETONKA BEACH FIRE Q 3 20 9
I~IRERGENCY O O 1 z
(I NNETR I STA FIRE 0 2, ] 1 20
KMERGENL~ fl 4 37 29
)RON0 FIRE I 3 2,7
f~MERGENCY 4 3 2{3 2,4
~HOREW00D FIRE 0 0 D 4
EMERGENCY 0 0 4
;PRING PARK .F. IRE 3 5 2,8 Iq
I~'~RGEr~'Y 6 4 2 q
IUTUAL AID-' FIRE ] D 5 6
mtERGE~ 0 0 , 1 1
:OTAL FIRE CALLS 14 29 192 167
:OTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 36 36 ?78
DP~MERCIAL 1 1 7 7
LESIDENTIAL 4 /, 3q
~DOSTRIAL O O O
;RASS & MISCELLANF~S 2 8 fid 51
%UTO 1 1 6 8
'~ALSE ALARM / FIRE ALARMS 5 15 74 53
~0. OF HOURS FIRE 236 314 2309 1975
- MOUND ICM~GEI~ 3§0 452 36~6 3261
TOTAL 596 7~ 5965 5236
FIRE O 49 332 99
- MTKA BEACH ]~tERC, MNC"f Q Q 11 52
TOTAL O 49 ~Y~3 151
FIRE O 37 203 365
- M' TRISTA I~.ItCRGENCY 107 67 679 549
TOTAL 107 104 .882 914
FIRE ],~ 65 566 518
- ORONO .]SMERGENCY 61 65 322 ,. 464
TOTAL 76 130 888 982
FIRE 0 o 0 8o
- SHOREWOOD ]~4ERGENCY O O 7) 41
~ O O 73 121
FIRE 54 209 621 407
- SP. PARK MMERGEI~ 143 90 63]
TOTAL 197 299 12,52, 1425
FIRE 34 0 200 164
- MUTUAL A.ID EMERGf~;CY 0 0 27 30
TOTAL 34 0 ZZ7 194
~OTAL DRILL HOURS 167~ 167~ 1512~ 1467~
~OTAL FIRE HOURS 339 674 4285 3608
~OTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 671 674 5~A~ 541 5
ITIAL FIRE & IR~ERGENCY HOURS lO10 1348 q6~l
IUTUAL AID RECEIVED O 1 4 ?
IUTUAL AID O~VEN 1 0 ~
City of Mound
Monthly Report
Utilities
Month of: September 1994
10/06/94
U ti l ity - 94
Residential
Commercial
Total
No. of Customers:
Water
Sewer
Water Used'
(in 1,000 gallons)
1,063
1,067
21,390
120
120
5,878
1,183
1,187
27,268
Billing:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Total
Payments:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Total
$28,348
$41,172
$3,174
$72,694
$19,916
$40,638
$3,098
$63,652
$6,310
$14,668
$2O
$20,998
$5,709
$13,725
$22
$19,456
$34,658
$55,840
$3,194
$93,692
$25,625
$54,363
$3,120
$83,108
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 Shulde
Len Harrell
Monthly Report for September, 1994
STATISTICS
The police department responded to 1,052 calls for service during thc
month of September. There were 35 Part I offenses reported. Those
offenses included 1 criminal sexual conduct, 6 burglaries, 1 aggravated
assault, 25 larcenies, and 2 vehicle thefts.
There were 79 Part I1 offenses reported. Those offenses includ6d 2 child
abuse/neglect, 2 forgery/NSF checks, 2 narcotics, 14 damage to property, 4
liquor law violations, 8 DUI's, 5 simple assaults, 9 domestics (5 with
assaults), 5 harassment, 12 juvenile status offenses and 16 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 101 adult citations and 4 juvenile citations.
Parking violations accounted for an additional 8 tickets. Warnings were
issued to 34 individuals for a variety of violations.
There was 1 adult arrested for a felony. There were 29 adults and 2
juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 11 warrant
arrests.
The department assisted in 16 vehicle accidents, 6 with injuries. There
were 32 medical emergencies and 66 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 20 occasions in September and requested assistance 10
times. Fifty-nine ordinance violations were inspected.
Property valued at $22,359 was stolen in September and $5,164 recovered.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - SEPTEMBER, 1994
INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 3 criminal sexual conducts cases and 4 child
protection issues in September, accounting for 41 hours of investigative
time. Through the first three quarters of 1994, there have been 37 child
protection cases and 8 criminal sexual conduct cases. Other cases
investigated included burglary, theft, assault, forgery/NSF checks,
deprivation of parental fights, domestic assault and violation of order for
protection, reckless use of a firearm, theft of a motor vehicle, hit and mn
personal injury accident, indecent conduct, trespass, runaway, and harassing
communication. The investigators were required to work 10 shifts in patrol
during the month.
Formal complaints were issued for criminal damage to property, worthless
check, switching vehicle tabs to avoid taxes, and minor consumption.
Ill.
Personnel/Staffing
The department used approximately 87 hours of overtinae during the month
of September. Officers used 12.5 hours of comp-time, 115 hours of
vacation, 296 hours of sick time, and 6 holidays. Officers earned 41 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.
Officers attended in-service training for firearms and defensive tactics in
September. Two officers attended a sexual harassment seminar and a
police officer up-date.
Sgt. Grand is attending the Southern Police Institute for 3 months.
I attended the fall conference for emergency managers for 3 days. The
training consisted of an update on reporting requirements, a presentation
on the Hibbing airplane crash, media relations and planning and a recap of
the flooding disaster and recovery projects.
The reserves donated 173 hours during the month of September.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
SEPTEMBER 1994
OF~'~NSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLF_~u~ED BY ARRESTED
REPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARF~D ARREST ADULT JUV
PA~T I CRIMES
Homicide
Criminal Sexual Conduct
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny
Vehicle Theft
Arson
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 0
6 0 1 0 0 0
25 0 5 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL
35 I 6 I I 0
PART II CRIMES
Child Abuse/Neglect 2 0 2 0 0 0
Forgery/NSF Checks 2 0 0 1 2 0
Criminal Damage to Property 14 0 1 0 0 0
Weapons 0 0 0 0 0 0
Liquor Laws 4 0 0 4 2 2
Narcotic Laws 2 0 0 2 2 1
DWI 8 0 0 8 8 0
Simple Assault 5 0 4 0 0 0
Domestic Assault 5 0 1 4 4 0
Domestic (No Assault) 4 0 0 0 0 0
Harassment 5 0 0 0 0 0
Juvenile Status Offenses 12 0 3 8 0 8
Public Peace 2 0 0 2 3 0
Trespassing 0 0 0 0 0 0
All Other Offenses 14 0 1 8 8 0
TOTAL 79 0 12 37 29 2
PART II & PART IV
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Mutual Aid
Other General Investigations
TOTAL
10
6
0
32
66
19
743
876
HCCP
Inspections
TOTAL
3
59
1,052
18
3O
11
MOUND POLICE DEPA/~TMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT
SEPTEMBER 1994
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
Hazardous Citations
Non-Hazardous Citations
Hazardous Warnings
Non-Hazardous Warnings
Verbal Warnings
Parking Citations
DWI
Over .10
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Adult Felony Arrests
Adult Misdemeeanor Arrests
Juvenile ~elony Arrests
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests
Part I Offenses
Part II Offenses
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Ordinance Violations
Other Public Contacts
THIS
MONTH
58
31
7
9
5O
8
8
8
10
6
0
3
37
1
11
35
79
32
66
59
743
YEAR TO
DATE
504
389
145
256
568
237
65
54
84
28
0
24
300
36
77
266
595
236
832
432
7,262
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
458
476
123
231
1,021
275
56
44
59
18
0
30
211
36
61
256
543
298
836
6,967
TOTAL
Assists
Follow-Ups
HCCP
Mutual Aid Given
Mutal Aid Requested
1,261
34
29
3
20
10
12,390
4O8
282
37
115
73
11,999
396
254
44
103
34
3q$7
SEPTEMBER 1994
DWI
More Than .10% BAC
Careless/Reckless Driving
Driving After Susp. or Rev.
Open Bottle
Speeding
No DL or Expired DL
Improper, Expired or No Plates
Stop Arm Violations
Failure to Yield
Equipment Violations
H&R Leaving the Scene
No Insurance
Illegal or Unsafe Turn
Over the Centerline
Parking Violations
Crosswalk
Dog Ordinances
Code Enforcement
Seat Belt
MV/ATV
Miscellaneous Tags
TOTAL
8
8
1
5
3
39
0
2
4
1
1
0
18
0
1
8
0
3
0
2
0
5
109
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
No Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony
Misdemeanor
SEPTEMBER 1994
0
7
2
0
3
18
0
0
0
4
34
2
8
JUV
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,. .... ,Ii J I,, Iii I ~1
Run: 27-Sep-94 16:02 PRO03
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Primary ISN~s only: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
Activity codes: At[
Status: ALL
Property Types: All
Property Descs: Alt
Brands: At[
Models: All
Officers/Badges: Alt
Enfors Property Report
STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED
Prop Prop
Tp Desc
lnc no lSN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Date Recov'd
SN Stat Stolen Value Recov'd Value
Quantity
Act Brand
Code
Page
Model Off-1 Off-2
Assnd Assnd
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Report Totals:
8,000 5,000 2.000
1,364 150 5.000
5 5 2.000
30 0 1.000
695 0 4.000
3,025 0 14.000
435 0 3.000
261 0 2.000
10 0 1.000
1~221 0 8.000
7,313 9 6.000
22,359 5,164 48.000
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:17 CFS08
Primary ISN's on[y: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received:
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions: AIl
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Patrol Areas: AIl
Days of the week: Alt
M(XJND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING 39
9001 J-SPEEDING 3
9012 OPEN BOTTLE 3
9014 STOP SIGN 4
9016 FAILURE TO YIELD 1
9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 1
9020 CARELESS/RECKLESS 1
9022 EXNIBITION DRIVING 1
9026 OVER THE CENTER LINE 1
9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 3
9040 NO SEATBELT 2
9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 8
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 5
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 2
9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 18
9221 J-NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 1
9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 1
9309 FOUND/RUNAWAY 2
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 3
9313 FOUND PROPERTY 5
9314 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED 1
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 5
Page
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:17 CFS08
Primary ISN'$ onty:
Reported range:
Irange each day:
How Received:
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Patrol Areas:
Days of the week:
No
08/26/94 - 09/25/94
00:00 - 23:59
Att
Att
Att
Att
Att
Att
ALt
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9440 H/R PERSONAL INJURY ACC.
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS
9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC.
9563 DOG AT LARGE
9565 DOG LICENSE
9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS
DANGEROUS DOG
9710
9720
9730
9731
9732
9800
9801
9802
99O0
99O4
9920
9930
MEDICAL/ASU
MEDICAL/DOA
MEDICALS
MEDICALS/DX
MEDICALS/CI
ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED
DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT
PUBLIC ASSIST
ALL HCCP CASES
OPEN DOOR/ALARMS
INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
HANDGUN APPLICATION
HANOGUN DENIALS
WARRANTS
MISC. VIOLATIONS
1
7
1
1
1
4
4
22
1
1
7
4
1
5
7
1
11
998O
999O
Page 2
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:17 CFS08
Primary ISN~s only: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: Ail
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: ALL
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
~2 MUTUAL AID/8100 9
g<~3 MUTUAL AID/6500 5
~4 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 3
~996 MUTUAL AID/NARCOTICS 2
A2512 ASLT 2-THREAT BOOILY HARM-POS FRRM-ADLT-ACQ 1
A5335 ASLT 5-INFLT BODILY HARM-KNIFE ETC-CHLD-ACQ 1
A5351 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM 5
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC 1
A5354 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM 1
A5355 ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ 3
A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 1
B3494 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WRAP-CON THEFT 2
B4090 BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-U-UNK ~EAP-UNK ACT 1
B4~90 BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK ~'EAP-UNK ACT 1
B49~0 BURG 4-AT FRC RES-D-UNK ~EAP-UNK ACT 1
B4990 BURG 4-AT FRC RES-U-UNK ~EAP-U#K ACT 1
C~211 FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON 1
DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UN[ ~
13060 CR[N AGNST FAN-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 1
J2500 TRAFFIC-~M-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 1
J2EO0 TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH 1
J3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIOUOR 7
Page
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:17 CFS08
Primary ISN~s only: No
Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Now Received:
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: ALt
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patro[ Areas: All
Days of the week: ALL
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
J3EO0
L7041
M3001
M3003
M4199
M5313
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
CSC 4-UNK ACT-OTHER FAM-UNDER 13-F
JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
JUVENILE-HABITUAL TRUANT
LIQUOR - OTHER
JUVENILE-CURFEW
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
STALKING-UNK DEGREE
DISTURB PEACE-MS-PUBLIC NUISANCE
N0310
N3070
7
1
2
1
2
1
10
1
2
5
11
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
$
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT
P3130 PROP DAMAGE-MS-BUSINESS-UNK INTENT
TB029 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-BUILDING-OTH PROP
TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY
TC159 TNEFT'501-2500-FE-MOTOE VEH-OTH PROP
TC169 THEFT'501'2500-FE-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
TF159 THEFT-2OI'5OO-GM'MOTOE VEH'OTH PROP
TF169 THEFT-201-5OO-GN-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-HOHEY
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-G~-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
Page 4
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:17 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges:
Grids: At[
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week:
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
TG169 THEFT-LESS 200-GM-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
U1497 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 I
U3017 THEFT-MS-BY CHECK-201-500
U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS 5
U3497 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 2
U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
VA022 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-TRUCK-AUTO
VA023 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-TNEFT-MOTORCYCLE
Page
**** Report Totals:
330
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:30 OFF01
Primary ISN's on[y:
Date Reported range:
range each day:
Dispositions:
Activity codes:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Ho
08/26/94 - 09/25/94
00:00 - 23:59
All
Att
ACT ACTIVITY
CODE DESCRIPTION
A2512
A5335
A5351
A5352
A5354
A5355
A5502
B4390
B4930
C3211
DCS00
I3060
J2500
J2E00
J3500
J3E00
L7041
10001
N4199
M5313
ASLT 2-THREAT BODILY HARM-POS FRRM-ADLT-ACQ
ASLT 5-INFLT BODILY HARM-KNIFE ETC-CHLD-ACQ
ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM
ASLT 5'MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC
ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM
ASLT 5-1NFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ
ASLT 5-THRT BOOILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ
BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT
BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
BURG 4-AT FRC RES-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
FORGERY-MS-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON
DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK
CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD
TRAFFIC-GM-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
TRAF-ACCXD-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
CSC 4-UNK ACT-OTHER FAM-UNDER 13-F
JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
JUVENILE-HABITUAL TRUANT
LIQUOR - OTHER
JUVENILE-CURFEW
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 1
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
1 0 1 0 I 0 0 1 100.0
1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
5 0 5 0 4 0 1 5 100.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
3 0 3 1 0 0 2 2 66.6
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
3 0 3 1 1 1 0 2 ~.6
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
1 0 I 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
7 0 7 0 7 0 0 7 100.0
7 0 7 0 7 0 0 7 100.0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
2 0 2 0 :~ 0 0 Z 100.0
I 0 I 0 O, I ' 0 I 100.0
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:30 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 2
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
COOE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
N0310 STALKING-UNK DEGREE
N3070 DISTURB PEACE-MS-PUBLIC NUISANCE
N3190 DISTURB PEACE'MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS
P3110 PROP DAMAGE'MS'PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT
P3130 PROP DAMAGE-MS'BUSINESS-UNK INTENT
TB029 THEFT'MORE 2500-FE-BUILDING'OTH PROP
TNEFT'501-2500-FE-BUILDING'MONEY
THEFT'501-2500'FE-MOTOR VEH'OTH PROP
THEFT'501-2500-FE'WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
THEFT-201-5OO-GM-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-GM-BUILDING-MONEY
THEFT-LESS 200-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-GM-MATERCRAFT-OTH PROP
THEFT-FE-B[CYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500
THEFT-NS-BY CHECK-201-500
THEFT-NS-SMOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
TMEFT-MS-BIC¥CLE-NO #OTOR-201-500
TMEFT-MS-B[CYCLE-NO #OTOR-200 OR LESS
VEH-MORE TNA# 2500-FE-THEFT-TRUCK-AUTO
TC021
TC159
TC169
TF159
TF169
TG021
TG059
TG159
TG169
U1497
U3017
IJ~497
LG498
VA022
10 0 10 1 0 7 2 9 90.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 I 100.0
2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
5 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0.0
11 0 11 10 0 0 1 1 9.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 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
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
I 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
3 0 3 ~ 0 0 0 0 0.0
3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
5 0 5 I 0 0 4 4 ~.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
1 0 I 0 0 0 I I 100.0
1 0 I 1 O' 0 '0 0 0.0
Run: 27-Sep-94 15:30 OFF01
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Page 3
Priory ISN~s only: No
Date Reported range: 08/26/94 - 09/25/94
range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: Att
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
ACT ACTIVITY
COOE DESCRIPTION
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
yA023 VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-MOTORCYCLE
I 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0
**** Report Totals: 106 1 105 49 27 11 18 56 53.3
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 6, 1994
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~~'~ '
SEPTEMBER 1994 MONTHLY REPORT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Construction activity has continued its upward climb. Both residential commercial activity is
up. Thirty-nine building permits were issued for September for a value of $634,837. This
brings year-to-date value to $6,695,698. There were 33 plumbing, mechanical, and
miscellaneous permits issued for a total of 72 permits this month, and 591 year-to-date.
PLANNING & ZONING
There were 15 Planning and Zoning cases acted on this month. The Pelican Point Final Plat
approval is anticipated and development of the site is planned to start this fall.
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER (CSO) ACTIVITY
Total CSO contacts for September was 59.
RENTAL
Several rental complaints have been received and are in progress.
JS:pj
prmted on recycled paper
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: $ F. PTEMBRR Year: 1994
THIS MONTH
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED /4 4 360,830 19 2,214,728
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOS)
TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX
MULTIPLE FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITS)
TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS I MOTELS)
SUBTOTAL 4 4 360,830 19 2,214,728
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT)
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS
SUBTOTAL
RESIDENTIAL
ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING 7 91,584 37 599 755
DETACHED ACCESS DRY BUILDINGS 3 26,160 ! 6 146,591
DECKS 3 16,200 39 146,218
SWIMMING POOLS 1 1 O, 000
REMODEL- MISC RESIDENTIAL 20 78,063 155 525,558
REMODEL - MULTIPLE DWELLINGS 4 3 2.5,9 3 6
SUBTOTAL 33 212,007 252 1,754,058
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) ! 60, O00 8 173,350
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL [ ! 0,000
INDUSTRIAL ] 2,000 7 149,986
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS 3 2,393,576
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
SUBTOTAL 2 62,000 19 2,726,912
[ DEMOLITIONS II ~/PERMITS I ' UNITS I VALUATION II # PERMITS I VALUATION
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 7
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 6
TOTAL DEMOLITIONS
13
I PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION ! UNITS VALUATION
TOTAL 39 4 634,837 19 6,695,698
I *303
PERMIT COUNT I THIS MONTH I YEAR-TO-DATE
· BUILDING 39 303
FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 5 42
SIGNS 1 7
PLUMBING 12 106
MECHANICAL 6 89
GRADING 0
S&W, STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 9 40
TOTAL I 72 I 591
372
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
City Manager
Greg Skinner ~
Public Works
September Activity Report
Street Department
Me have finished all of the street repairs for need for
winter plowing. We have one patch on Piper Rd and the Dakota
Rail crossing at Fairview Ln. yet to complete and we will not
be getting any more asphalt.
We hauled quite a bit of material out of lost lake this
month. We will have very little to move when we move to
Ninnetrista.
Water Department
The meter installation are just about complete. As of 10-3294
we have 2921 installed. There is about 300 left to install.
we have had our training on the reading devices and 3oyce is
training on the computer.
We flushed fire hydrants this week.
Sewer Department
The L.S. project is moving very well. We have 6 station on
line now with the other 5 to be on line in a couple of weeks.
We repaired a sewer line on Piper Rd. that cause the driveway
apron to settle.
printed on recycled paper
J,,J Ii I ,I, , I~, I ~11
06-- Oct-- 94
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SEPTEMBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment activity
Balance: september Ii 1994
Bought:
$5,901,993
Money Market 4M - Income Reinvested 3
Money Market SB - Income Reinvested 51
Money Market 1st B - Income Reinvested 576
CP Smith Barney 4.87 183,968
CP Smith Barney 4.74 258,724
Money Market First Bank 100,000
Money Market Smith Barney 60,000
Matured:
Money Market Smith Barney (58,724)
Money Market First Bank (200,000)
CP First Bank 4.10 (99,508)
CP Smith Barney 4.80 (119,544)
CP Smith Barney 4.29 (99,502)
CP Smith Barney 4.53 (372,187)
$5,555,850
Balance: september 30, 1994
GFOA Annual State Conference
The 1994 Minnesota Government Finance Officers Annual Conference
was held in Alexandria, MN on September 21-23, 1994.
It was a very productive three days for me. I had the opportunity
to meet and to talk to a good number of city finance officers,
investment advisers, and other people involved in municipal finances.
The conference was well prepared and allowed me to attend highly
informative presentations.
John Norman, the present president of the Mn GFOA, did an excellent job
in leading the official meetings of the organization.
I appreciate the opportunity given me to attend and I thank the City Council
and the City Manager.
Water Meter System
As the new meters are being installed, Joyce is doing her best to keep
the billing process moving. Not an easy task. She has to deal with the
limitations of the software, the old meter readings and the new meter readings,
and differences between the outside readers and the inside meter.
Once all the meters have been replaced and the software has been installed
properly, hopefully things will get back to normal.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
October 6, 1994
TO:
CITY MANAGER
FROM: CITY CLERK
SEPTEMBER MONTHLY REPORT
The City had 2 regular Council Meetings, in September. 18
resolutions were prepared. There was Agenda preparation for each
meeting and items to clear up after each meeting.
The Primary Election was September 13, 1994. We had a 29% voter
turnout this year. The one nice thing about this election was that
the entire City of Mound in now in one Congressional District
again, #3. As you may remember two years ago we had 2 split
precincts and were in two districts, 2 & 6.
The special assessment hearings will be held in October. These
special assessments are for Central Business District Parking
Maintenance, unpaid mowing charges, and delinquent utility bills
which will be placed upon taxes. Hearing notices were made up and
have been submitted to the newspaper for publication. The mailed
notice requires additional information and this also was done.
There were over 300 delinquent utility bill letters worth a little
over $56,000. All notices were mailed. The tax books have to be
consulted on each one of the proposed assessments to be sure the
notice is mailed to the proper person.
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
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
October 4, 1994
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR OPERATIONS MANAGER
SEPTEMBER, 1994 MONTHLY REPORT
Simply put, the gross sales for the month of September were (in the vernacular of
today's youth) awesome. I thought we were doing extremely well in September of
1993 when the sales were $113,106. We surpassed that figure last month by
$10,081! Thus, with 3/4 of the year behind us, sales to this point are $1,O91,728.
That puts us $38,404 ahead of last year at this time. As I mentioned in last month's
report, I expect to have an average October and November. However, I also anticipate
that with the way Christmas and New Year's fall this year, we should have our
biggest month ever. Keep your fingers crossed, knock on wood, throw salt over your
shoulder, do what you have to to keep things rolling.
If you are a holder of Visa or Mastercard, you may now use them to purchase items
at your Mound Liquor Store. I have always had an ethical problem with the purchase
of alcohol on a credit card basis, especially the revolving interest types. Times have
changed. Banks are offering "Debit Cards" more and more these days. These cards
will eventually, someday, replace the checkbook. People have been inquiring lately
as to why we don't offer this service. Rather than lose sales, I determined it was time
to move into the "90's". The drawback is the start up cost plus the percentage they
charge us for each transaction. But if we can average more than $25,000 in usage
in a calendar year, then the percentage charge will drop. To meet this goal, we need
to average slightly over $81 day. We had the system up and operating the last week
in September. For the first week, we had $452 in Visa/Mastercard sales which
equates to $75 a day. People will use it more and more when they find out we are
offering this service and I see no problem in achieving our goal. I see this really
helping us especially when we have a lot of "out of towners" visiting us in the
summer. And of course it will be used a great deal during the holidays. This will be
a great benefit to us and will help to further increase sales. I would like to give thanks
to Ed Shukle, who gave me the go ahead, to Gino Businaro, who can figure out the
implementations much easier than I can, and to Gayle Burns, who now has more
paperwork to handle.
JK:ls
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PARKS DEPARTM'E
SEPTEMBER 1994 MONTI-II,Y REPORT
Parks
As always, the fall season begins the preparation for winter. We begin by completing projects that have
been put off due to the beaches and mowing taking the most time during the summer. The staff is down
to two seasonal workers now, and they will be around until the first of November. We have pulled all
of the picnic tables from the parks and are repairing them now. This time is better for this due to the
spring time being too busy and seasonal personnel coming back later in the spring.
We have removed to old baseball field back stop at Langdon Park in preparation for the new one
planned fro next year. Plans for the improvements at Dundee and Edgewater Parks are being rough
drawn for the Park Commission. I have contacted the Minnesota Tree Trust again for installation in
the spring and they said they would be able to do it. They id a great job at Mound Bay Park this year
and are a real benefit for providing this service.
Docks
We are finishing up with the repair work required by the removal of the two boat houses on Devon
Commons. What's left is the finish work at 4737 Island View Drive where the home owner is re-
landscaping and the compensatory removal of fill to provide for the fill that was placed in the two boat
house sites that was below the flood plain.
The seasonal beaches have been opened up for boat removal and the dock inspector will begin rounds
for insuring proper dock storage.
Tree Removal
One tree was removed and two areas were trimmed on City property during September. Three other
trees are marked for removal and one for trimming that will be done in October.
Cemetery
September saw no burials and the staking of open plots won't be done until the middle of October.
,: RECEIVED OCT 3
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Meeting Notice and Agenda
Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol
Review of Joint and Cooperative Agreement
and 1993 Recommendations
7:30 am, Wednesday, October 5, 1994
American Legion Club, 949 Wayzata Blvd. E., Wayzata
Welcome and introductions, Lake Use and Recreation
Committee Chair Bert Foster
1993 recommendations review as outlined on letter of
11/3/93;
1994 code enforcement operational review. Sgt. Bill
Chandler;
Joint and Cooperative Agreement review for recommendation
to the Lake Use and Recreation Committee;
1994 recommendations to supplement the Joint and
Cooperative Agreement;
6. Additional business;
7. Adjourn
RECEIVED OCT
L~KE I~'rNNETONI~ CON~ERV~TI'ON DT~TR'reT
®
7:30 am, Saturday, October 8, 1994
Norwest Bank Bldg, 900 E Wayzata Blvd, Rm 135
(Elevator handicapped access, west entrance, Wayzata Blvd)
D_~ ~ to establish a Special Rule for Non-continuous
Shoreline of Dock Use Areas in Close Proximity;
Bo~er Building Corp., multiple dock license application for Pelican
Point Development, spring Park Bay, Mound, to consider:
a. MN DNR Bureau of Real Estate Management letter of 9/23/94
re. island ownership by Ralph Turnquist;
b. Public Hearing Report and Findings;
c. Revised site plan showing water depths, with 40 slips
positioned north of island on the mainland;
d. LMCD response to Environmental Assessment Worksheet
recommending:
> Lake protection from erosion during construction meeting
LMCD Runoff Management Plan Policy 4 affecting water runoff
quality and quantity;
> Control green area (lawn) runoff to lake by use of natural
vegetation buffer strip and control use and types of lawn
fertilizers affecting quality of water runoff;
> Use of dock lighting which avoids offensive impacts on the
water surface;
Wayzata Lakewalk; third draft dated 9/29/94 of PUD ordinance as
amended by committee, presented by Scott Richards, Northwest
Associated Consultants, Inc., for City of Wayzata;
,,Envelope" Subcommittee, set final meeting to review
recommendations;
Pending issues before the committee (not ready for action):
A. Minnetonka Yacht Clu~, 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 applicant's revised site plan with all
structures within 200';
6. Additional business
(9/30)
3977
.: RECEIVED OCT
3 199
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SHORELINE
REQUIREMENTS AND CALCULATION OF BOAT STORAGE
DENSITY ON LAKE MINNETONKA; AMENDING LMCD
CODE SECTION 2.02 BY ADDING SUBDIVISION 5
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, Section 2.02 is
amended by adding new subdivision 5 as follows:
Subd. 5. Special Rule for Non-Continuous Shoreline of Dock Use
Areas in Close Proximity. The Board may authorize shoreline from one or
more sites (the "transferor sites") to be counted as part of another site (the
"transferee site") for the purpose of computing permissible boat storage
density. Applications for permission to transfer boat storage density shall be
made in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 2.03 and shall be
processed as a part of the applicant's multiple or commercial dock Ucense
application. Criteria to be considered by the Board in evaluating whether to
approve such application shall include all criteria set forth in Section 2.03,
subd. 3a). No such permission to transfer boat storage density shall be
g'ranted by the Board unless the following additional conditions are met:
a)
The dock use areas of each transferor site and the transferee
site may be no more than 150 feet apart.
b)
The credit for boat storage density transferred from any
transferor site may not exceed one restricted watercraft for each
100 feet of shoreUne of the transferor site (with fractional
watercraft counted in accordance with subdivision !).
c)
The total boat storage at the transferee site may not exceed one
restricted watercraft for each 35 feet of shoreline of the
transferee site (with fractional watercraft counted in accordance
with subdivision 1).
d)
No variances, other than temporary low water variances, may be
~anted for construction of docks at the transferee site.
e)
Neither transferor site nor transferee site may have shoreline
comprised in whole or in part of wetlands.
f)
As long as the transferee site is used for the storage of more
restricted watercraft than this Code would allow without the
transfer of boat storage density under th_is subdivision:
i)
the transferor sites and the transferee site must be in
common ownership; and
CLL76705
LKl10-13
fi)
no docks or boat sto~age is permitted on the t~nsferor
sites; and ~,
the transferor sites must be maintained in essent!~]!y'a
natural state and may not be used for residential dwelilng
ul~its or commercial uses.
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 day of
., 1994.
William Johnstone, Chair
ATTEST:
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretar~
(:L~76705
LT~.X0-13
(Rev. 7-92)
the premises, if different from the applicant, (d) if the applicant
is not the owner, an explanation of the interest which the
applicant has in the property, (e) a showing that all requisite
permits, licenses and approvals from the local municipality have
been obtained and that the requirements of any other governmental
authority have been met, and (f) a plan showing the design and
location of the facility including all Boat Storage Units. The
application shall include such other information as the Executive
Director may require to assist the Board in consideration of the
application for the license. The application shall also be
accompanied by a license fee which shall be established from time-
to-time by resolution of the Board; provided that no fee shall be
required for applications for launching ramps owned and operated by
municipalities or other governmental agencies which are available
for use by the general public without payment of fees or other
charges. An additional deposit in an amount established from time
to time by resolution of the Board shall accompany the application
to cover legal, surveying, engineering, inspection, maintenance or
other expenses incurred by the District. The Board shall approve
all expenses charged against the deposit, and the unused portion
thereof shall be returned to the applicant. The application shall
state that the applicant agrees to reimburse the District for any
legal, surveying, engineering, inspection, maintenance or other
expenses incurred by the District in excess of the amount of the
deposit. No such deposit shall be required in the case of renewal
applications under Subdivision 13 of this Section or new license
applications required by Subdivision 6 of this Section which do not
require a public hearing, unless a hearing is requested by the
applicant pursuant to Section 1.06, Subd. 12.
Subd. 2a. As Built Survey. Upon completion of the dock
installation, the licensee shall provide an as-built survey of the
docks and site indicating the 929.4 foot shoreline, a line
indicating the 100 foot distance from shore, dock dimensions,
setbacks from property lines and witness marks for seasonal docks.
The Executive Director may waive this requirement for seasonal
docks.
~ ..~ '-- Subd. 3. Issuance of License. Licenses required by this
section may be issued after a public hearing by the Board. Proceed-
ings for the issuance of~a license and the granting of a variance
under Section 1.07 may be combined and conducted as one proceeding.
The Board may impose conditions on the granting of a license, which
conditions shall be in writing.
a) Review Criteria. In exercising its discretion in
granting or denying licenses, the Board may consider, among other
things, the following:
1) Whether the proposed facility is compatible with the
LMCD watercraft density classification criteria.
-20-
(Rev. 7-92)
2) Whether the proposed facility will be structurally
safe for use by the intended users.
3) the facility will comply with the regulations
contained in this ordinance.
4) Whether the proposed facility will create a volume
of traffic on the Lake in the vicinity of the facility which
will tend to be unsafe or which will cause an undue burden on
traffic upon the Lake in the vicinity of the facility.
5) Whether the proposed facility will be compatible
with the adjacent development.
6) Whether the proposed facility will be compatible
with the maintenance of the natural beauty of the Lake.
7) Whether the proposed facility will affect the
quality of the water of the Lake and the ecology of the Lake.
8) Whether the proposed facility, by reason of noise,
fumes or other nuisance characteristics, will tend to be a
source of nuisance or annoyance to persons in the vicinity of
the facility.
9) Whether adequate sanitary and parking facilities
will be provided in connection with the proposed facility.
10) Whether the proposed facility will serve the general
public as opposed to a limited segment of the public or a
limited geographical area.
11) Whether the facility will obstruct or occupy too
great an area of the public water in relationship to its
utility to the general public.
b) Factors Not Considered. The use of multiple dock or
mooring areas or launching ramps on the Lake for the purpose of
increasing non-riparian property values is not a valid
consideration in licensing such facilities.
Subd. 4. Implied Consent to Inspection. By making
application for a license, the applicant consents to permitting
officers and agents of the district to enter upon the applicant's
premises at all reasonable times to investigate the application and
to determine whether the ordinances of the district are being
complied with. The application form shall contain a statement to
this effect.
Subd. 5. Construction and Maintenance Standards. Construction
of licensed multiple docks or mooring areas, launching ramps and
commercial docks must comply with all local, state and federal
-21-
DNa INFORMATION
(612) 296-6157
STATE OF
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
3O
5C)~_ LAFAYETTE ROAD * ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA * 55155-40,~
September 23, I994
RECEIVED 3 lgg
Mr. Ralph Turnquist
RE: PELICAN POINT ISLAND (Tract 38, of Township 117 North, Range 23 West,
of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Minnesota)
Dear Mr. Turnquist:
We have been advised by the Bureau of Land flanagement, Eastern States,
Division of Cadastral Survey, that their ]969 survey erroneously concluded
that the above mentioned island existed as such in 1858, when Minnesota was
admitted to the Union. 7~ey acknowledge that the island was actually part
of a penninsula prior to 1914. It is therefore their opinion that, the
United States having previously divested its interest in the island, the
transfer of the island to the State of Minnesota under the Minnesota Public
Lands Improvement Act of 1990 is void.
Based on this finding, a copy of which is attached, the department has
withdrawn1 its claim to Pelican Point Island. We have instructed our legal
counsel to prepare a quit claim deed for the record.
Please contact John Nelmberger (296-7946) or Sharon Hall (297-2582), in the
Bureau of Real Estate Management, if you have any questions about this
matter.
Sincerely,
297-2572
Attachment
cc:
i %..
Judd Broyer, [lidamerica Bank
Jeff Lang, Chicago Title and Insurance Co.
John Boyem, Boyer Bui]ding Corp.
Eugene Strommen, ].ake Mtnnetonka Conservation District
Ed Shukle, Mound City M~naqer
Alan Held
SEP [; D i994
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Public Hearing:
Boyer Building Corp., Multiple Dock License
Application, Pelican Point Development,
Mound~ Spring Park Bay
Meeting:
8 A.M., Saturdays July 9, 1994
Norwest Bank Bldg., Wayzata, Room 135
Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Chair, Spring Park; James
Grathwol, Excelsior; Jos. Zwak, Greenwood; Wm. Johnstone, Minne-
tonka; Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Duane
Markus, Wayzata; Herb Suerth, Woodland.i Also Present: Charles
LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Rachel Thibault, Administrative Techni-
cian; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director.
Chair Babcock convened the Public Hearing at 8 A.M.
The committee received a packet from Thibault, dated 7/1/94,
describing the application of John Boyer, Treasurer, Boyer
Bldging Corp., for a new multiple dock license. The application
is for a 40 slip seasonal dock on Outlot C of the proposed Peli-
can Point development on Spring Park Bay in Mound. The packet
included a letter from LeFevere, dated 6/28/94, site plans and a
letter from Skip Johnson, Mayor, City of Mound.
LeFevere's letter reviewed the issues involved with the
transferring of density credit for 12 slips from the island which
is not contiguous, to the mainland at Pelican Point development
which has shoreline for 28 slips, to allow all the 40 slips on
the mainland. The letter from Mayor Johnson stated that the City
of Mound supports the 40 slip dock on the mainland.
John Blumentritt, representing the developer, used a 1989
aerial photograph of the property to explain the development.
The proposal is to develop 20 sites with two single story town-
houses on each lot. The property consists of 15.5 acres on the
mainland and .75 acre on the island. There will be an accessory
structure on Outlot C. Outlot C comprises the entire shoreline
of the development and will be controlled by a homeowners associ-
ation. He said the City of Mound has given a go-ahead for the 40
docks. Blumentritt said they have contacted the MnDNR. The
time line is to begin construction in the fall of 1994 with a
three year time frame for completion.
John Boyer, Developer, said that at one time the island was
a peninsula. In about 1910 a channel was dredged to create a
harbor between the mainland and the island. In 1979 a court
established that the land under the water of the channel is the
property of the people of the State of Minnesota without affect-
ing the riparian rights of the owners.
Boyer said the shoreline frontage of 1,387 feet on the
mainland will allow 28 boat slips. The island frontage of 1,471
feet will allow 29 boat slips, for a total of 57 slips. The
application is for 40 slips in one location on the mainland to
leave the island in a natural state.
Boyer said the site plan submitted for the dock location is
not accurate. Water depth tests indicate the dock will have to
be located further to the northwest.
PUBLIC HEARING - Boyer Building Corp.
July 9, 1994
Grathwol observed that the District has not, in the past,
considered that everyone in a development is entitled to a slip.
Grathwol asked if Boyer would consider a conservation easement of
some type for the island as an amenity. Boyer said the intent is
to preserve the island as is with a picnic site on a natural flat
area. Blumentritt said their desire to leave the island natural
is one reason for placing the docks on the mainland rather than
on the island.
Johnstone asked LeFevere to comment on the use of the island
as lakeshore for the development and the possibility of granting
a variance for the 40 slips on the mainland based on an agreement
that the island will not be developed. LeFevere said rather than
granting a variance there would have to be a code amendment
recognizing non-contiguous lakeshore under certain circumstances
for density purposes. -LeFevere's letter of 6/30/94 details the
problems which could arise if restrictions and limitations are
not put on such a transfer.
Johnstone asked LeFevere if the District could require a
conservation easement for the island. LeFevere said he would be
reluctant to state that the District has a right to do that on
land. He did say the District could require that there be no
dockage on the island with the transfer of the rights to the
mainland. If, for instance, a dwelling were to be built on the
island in the future, there would have to be a transfer of dock-
age from the mainland back to the island.
Markus asked if there are other similar circumstances on the
Lake. Partyka mentioned the large wetland island at the Carlson
property in Minnetrista. Other locations such as Spray Island
were mentioned.
Skip Johnson, Mayor, City of Mound, said the Boyer proposal
is the best proposal the city has seen for the use of the proper-
ty. He said that if the property were to be subdivided into 50'
lots the boat density would be greater, 40 slips makes more sense
than 56 docks divided between the mainland and the island, one-
half of the property has no docks on it. Johnson said the neigh-
bors are in favor of this development.
Ed Chanin, Maslon, Edeman, Borman & Brand, said he is will-
ing to work with LeFevere'to develop a code change which will not
create problems on the other areas of the Lake.
Ail interested parties having been given an opportunity to
be heard, the Public Hearing was closed at 8:34 A.M.
Findings:
Boyer Building Corp. has submitted an application for a 40-
slip multiple dock at the proposed Pelican Point Development
on Spring Park Bay in Mound. The 40 slip dock is proposed
to be located on the mainland, on Outlot C, which comprises
the entire shoreline of the development plus an island, will
be commonly owned by a homeowners association.
PUBLIC HEARING - Boyer Building Corp. July 9, 1994
There are 1387 feet of shoreline on the mainland of Outlot C
and 1471 feet of shoreline on the island. The LMCD Code,
Sect. 2.02, Subd. 1, would allow 1 boat per 50' of contigu-
ous shoreline or 28 boat storage units (BSU) on the mainland
and 29 BSU on the island. The applicant wishes to transfer
12 BSUs from the island and put 40 slips on the mainland,
leaving the island natural with no docks. However, the code
does not allow for the transfer of BSU's from non-contiguous
sites.
The City of Mound supports allowing a 40 slip dock on the
mainland, rather than have dockage on the island.
A code amendment is required before the transfer of BSUs
from the island to the mainland could be allowed.
The applicant advised that the site plan submitted 6/30/94
will not work because of inadequate water depths. A new
site plan will be prepared for the next meeting.
WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE MEETING
July 9, 1994
Babcock expressed the committee's appreciation to the City
of Mound for its communication.
Babcock noted that, in the case of municipalities, the
District al lows the transfer of density by combining non-
contiguous shoreline, including fire alleys, in shoreland calcu-
1 at ions.
Orathwol said his reaction to the information he has is that
28 slips is enough. He doesn't see a way to allow the transfer
of density without creating the problems mentioned by LeFevere.
The only way he would consider this is if a positive public
benefit were obtained by the transfer of density from the island.
He believes the MnDNR would limit putting bridges out to the
island. He could see a limitation on the use of the island which
would limit the District's exposure to transferring the density.
Babcock said the LMCD ordinances do not al Iow what the
applicant is asking, as t'he island was not contiguous as of 1978.
LeFevere said it is clear that the ordinances would have to be
changed. A variance would not apply in this case.
Johnstone said he i.s not, at this time, in favor of an
ordinance change to allow this. He said there may be ways of
eliminating the risk. If the District limits the applicants to
28 slips with the rest on the island it wouldn't be restricting
them from the normal use of their property. Given that they can
use the shoreline, the Board could look at a minor amendment to
the ordinance to permit non-contiguous land being combined.
For the committee's information, the portion of the property
description referring to the public easement for the channel was
read. LeFevere said the public has rights within the channel,
not affecting the riparian rights of the island owner. The
reference to riparian rights should not confuse the issue, the
application should be considered treating the island as separate
from the mainland as shown on the drawings.
3 9f3'
PUBLIC HEARING - Boyer Building Corp.
JULY 9, 1994
WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE
July 9, 1994
Skip Johnson, Mayor, City of Mound, said there are criteria
for granting variances. In this case there may be a reason for a
variance because a governmental agency developed the channel ,
creating a hardship for the owner. Thibault said she understands
a previous owner dredged the channel.
John Blumentritt, representing the developer, said he has
talked to the ~4nDNR regarding annexing the mainland and the
island with a seasonal bridge. The response from the DNR was
that is something to consider but they do not favor it. The DNR
favors the mainland configuration.
Babcock observed that in light of the current ordinances,
the island cannot be considered as a contiguous parcel. The
committee is also waiting for a new _site plan for the docks and
the water depths. The cbmmittee can consider how many boats it
wants to see at this site or the application can be tabled for a
month.
Grathwol said he believes the committee needs more informa-
tion. He would not want to proceed ahead of the applicant. He
would want to know what kind of dock will be built and its loca-
tion. Grathwol said if there is a transfer of boat slip credits
from the island to the mainland there has to be something posi-
tive for the public.
Ed Chanin, Maslon, Edelman, Borman & Brand, attorneys
representing the applicant, said they would be happy to go along
with some public benefit as a condition. He said it is important
for the project to know whether there wil 1 be 40 or 28 slips.
Chanin asked for L~ICD approval for 40 slips on the mainland, pro-
vided they meet certain conditions in an ordinance amendment so
as to not create problems on the rest of the Lake. They are
agreeable to conditions for preserving the island in a natural
state.
Babcock suggested al lowing the transfer of dockage rights
from the island to the mainland at 25% of the normal 1:50'
level, not allowing any dockage on the island, without any vari-
ances at the destination site.
Johnstone advised the developer that at the present time
they are entitled to no more than 28 slips on the mainland. If
they proceed with a purchase agreement they are doing it at their
own risk. Johnstone said he is prepared to look at an .amendment
to the code which would allow a transfer under certain circum-
stances. He would advise the applicant to work on something
which would answer the questions raised at this meeting.
Responding to a question from Rascop, LeFevere said the
island could be dedicated to the public through the city or the
state. LeFevere said he understood the applicant was willing to
leave the island natural, but was not talking about a public use
of the island.
Blumentritt said the property is being developed under a
homeowners association agreement (HOA). The property adjacent to
the lakeshore, Outlot C, is owned by the association. The
island could have restrictions in tile HOA, that it will be left
in a natural state. He said the homeowners do not ~vant the
public to bring boats to the island.
4
PUBLIC HEARING - Boyer Building Corp. JULY 9, 1994
WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE July 9, 1994
Rascop asked if Mound allows docks on property without a
principal structure. Mayor Johnson responded that it does.
Grathwol said he would find the application more passable if
the public had some rights such as a conservation easement on the
island, not necessarily picnicking and camping. A conservation
easement would be to limit development on ~the island and enhance
the natural appearance.
Partyka said another option could be a layout with 28 slips
on the mainland and 12 on the island with the possibility of
transferring 12 to the mainland. Partyka said he would support
an ordinance amendment with tight controls to allow this.
Babcock asked if the island could be developed for a house.
It was understood that it would not be possible because of set-
back requirements.
Babcock suggested the following directions to the LMCD staff
and the developer's attorney in considering an amendment to the
ordinance: .
1. In transferring Boat Storage Units (BSU) from non-con-
tiguous sites they must be immediately adjacent or within a
limited distance.
2. The amount to be transferred to be limited to a percent-
age of the available BSUs.
3. There is to be some public amenity.
4. The area to which the BSUs are being transferred must be
practical for development without any variances.
5. Wetlands are to be excluded.
6. All docking rights are to be transferred from the one
site to the other in total.
7. Allow the Board the right to turn down the transfer if
it impedes navigation, the boat density is too high, or it
creates an unforeseen situation.
8. The staff is to determine what other islands around the
Lake are available for development.
Grathwol said trying to determine where the 929.4' OHWL is
in wetlands can be difficult.
Item 5 was discussed as to whether it is more desirable to
transfer BSUs from wetlands to developable property than to have
500' long docks through the wetlands.
Mayor Johnson said this development is more desirable at 40
slips than if the property were to be developed in individual
lakeshore lots with the maximum boat storage at each site. He
added that in many cases the private property owner will rent out
boat slips the owner does not need. Rascop suggested rental of
slips by homeowners is solvable if the city has an ordinance
prohibiting commercial use in a residential area. Babcock said
the law requiring titling of boats may help in the enforcement of
renting slips at private property.
Blumentritt asked about the possibility of extending the
dock out more than 100' if the water depths require it. That
would require a variance and the public hearing process could
delay action further. Babcock suggested staying within the 100'
LeFevere suggest'ed the developer submit several options for
the dock location.
~'.~,±C~N..FU±N'±' - Boyer Suilding Corp.
dULY 9, 19~4
WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE
July 9, 1994
The executive director reported the City of Mound has pre-
pared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Pelican
Point development. He provided the committee with the EAW high-
lights, dated 7/8/94, supplementing information provided in the
LMCD new multiple dock license application. The EAW is open for
comments through 8/20/94.
The executive director said he will talk to the Environmen-
tal Quality Board (EQB) to see if the EAW will satisfy the re-
quirements for a response from the District on the docks as well
as for the land. Docks are identified in the EAW. The LMCD
comments include a mention of the effect of lighting on the Lake.
MOTION: Partyka moved, Zwak seconded, to table the Pelican Point
application to the next Water Structures Committee meeting.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
!
I
I
.r"
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
August 23, 1994
TO:
FROM:
Executive Director Eug
SUBJECT:
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the
Pelican Point Multi-family Residential Development
BACKGROUND:
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) received
information on the above EAW. On June 2 the LMCD received an
application from Ralph Turnquist/Boyer Building Corp. for a
New Multiple Dock License for 40 boat storage units (BSU).
A public hearing was conducted July 9 by the LMCD Water
Structures Committee on the above application. The public
hearing findings point out that a code amendment would be
required before the applicant could transfer BSU's from the
island to the mainland. The applicant also determined that
the site plan submitted June 30 will not work because of
inadequate water depths. A new site plan is to be prepared
by the applicant.
The committee tabled the application to the next Water
Structures Committee meeting to allow the applicant the
opportunity to prepare a revised dock plan taking into
account various options discussed by the committee. The
applicant advised that it was not prepared to appear before
the committee in August and asked for the application to be
held until the September me'ting.
The LMCD Water Structures Committee also received an LMCD
staff summary of the EAW at its July 9 meeting. The
committee took no issue with the points made in the staff
summary, copy attached. The committee was concerned as to
whether the LMCD would be required to conduct a separate EAW
for the dock application, since the dock is expected to
exceed 20,000 sq. ft., the threshold where an EAW is
required.
LMCD staff learned from Environmental Quality Board staff
that as long as there are no objections to docks being
included in the development as presented in the EAW, the EQB
would not require a separate EAW on the dock installation.
LMCD staff finds that the dock references in the EAW fairly
state the developer's intent regarding the inclusion of a
multiple dock facility in the development. LMCD points out
that it does not yet have a specific dock plan that it can
EAW COMMENTS, Pelican Point Development, 8/23/94, P. 2
consider as to how the dev%loper will locate the 40 slips in
relation to the property in question. Dock is estimated to
be 0.7 acres in area.
EAW COMMENTS:
LMCD staff offers the following comments on points made in
the EAW:
LAKE IMPACT:
> The forty (40) boat dock will be roughly 60 feet away
from shore.
COMMENT: The developer's June 30 dock plan indicates
that the dock structure will likely extend to 100 feet
away from shore. This distance is within the
allowances of the LMCD Code.
> Dock will contact shore by only a single pier.
COMMENT: LMCD code would not prohibit more than a
single shore contact by the dock.
Erosion control measures will be installed during
construction, and once site is developed an on-site
stormwater system (basin) will control stormwater
discharge to the lake.
COMMENT: LMCD Management Plan Runoff Management
Policy 4 calls for protection of the lake from
detrimental effects of serious erosion during
construction and to ensure that runoff from the
developed site is of good quality. Cities are
encouraged to require erosion and sedimentation control
plans as further identified in this policy.
PHYSICAL IMPACTS ON WATER RESOURCES:
> Existing drainage ditch on and adjacent to site
channels runoff into the lake.
> Sedimentation pond will be constructed in upland area
with outflow structure, skimmer device. Runoff
QUANTITIES after development will not exceed current
levels.
COMMENT. Same reference to above comment on erosion
control, concerning Runoff Management Policy 4,
addressing the QUALITY of water receiving the lake as
well as the QUANTITY.
WATER QUALITY -- SURFACE WATER RUNOFF:
> Overland flow from roofs, green areas to lake.
COMMENT: Roof drainage expected to flow through
properly designed sedimentation basin meeting Policy 4
concerns noted above. Green area runoff to the lake
can be effectively improved as to water quality by EAW
COMMENTS, Pelican Point Development, 8/23/94, P. 3
providing for a buffer strip of natural vegetation
between the standar~ residential lawn and the lake.
Natural vegetation buffer strip guidelines are
available through the Hennepin Conservation District
and MN DNR. Controlled use and types of lawn
fertilizers also effect the quality of water runoff.
ADVERSE VISUAL IMPACTS:
> While the applicant states there are no visual impacts
the LMCD Lake Use Committee has been evaluating the
impact of light glare from docks and lakeshore
structures beaming intrusively out over the water.
The city is understood to be sensitive to this concern.
The LMCD will work with the developer on dock lighting
which avoids offensive impacts on the water surface.
The LMCD Water Structures Committee, Board of Directors and
staff are prepared to continue working with Boyer Building
Corp. and Mound city officials and staff in arriving at a
quality development for the city and a compatible
environmental and recreational outcome for Lake Minnetonka.
CC: Boyer Building Corp.
LMCD Board Representative Tom Reese
LMCD Water STructures Committee
DNR Metro Waters, Ceil Strauss
Hennepin Conservation District, Carolyn Dindorf
3 f3
J, ,il J ,m, Jll~, I
Attorneys at Law
· A. ALSOP
H. BATTY
j. BUBLrL
JOHN B. DEAN
MARY G. DOBBINS
STEFANIE N. GALEY
CORRINE A. HEINE
JAMES $. HOLMES
DAVID J. KENNEDY
JOHN R. LARSON
WELLINGTON H. LAW
CHARLES L. LEFEVERE
JOHN M. LEFEVRE, JR.
ROBERT J. LINDALL
July 21, 1994
HOLMES & GRAVEN
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 337-9300
Facsimile (612} 337-9310
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL
1612) 337-9215
ROBERT C. LONG
LAURA K. MOLLET
BARBARA L. PORTWOOD
JAMES M. STROMMEN
JAMES J. THOMSON, JR,
LARRY M. WERTHEIM
BONNIE L. WILKINS
GARY P. WINTER
DAVID L. GRAVEN (1920-1901)
OF COUNSEL
ROBERT C. CARLSON
ROBERT L. DAVIDSON
T. JAY SALMEN
Mr. Ed Chanin
90 South 7th Street #3300
Minneapolis, MN 55402
RE: Pelican Point Development
Dear Mr. Chanin:
I represent the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) as legal counsel. The LMCD
is a public body of the state of Minnesota created and operating pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
§ 103B.601 et seq.
You have requested that I provide you with a letter describing the operation of the LMCD Code
of Ordinances as it applies to a proposed development by Boyer Building Corporation on Pelican
Point in the city of Mound, Minnesota.
I have been informed that the applicant in this case owns mainland real property on the shore of
Lake Minnetonka with a shoreline of approximately 1,387 feet and a nearby island which is not
attached to the mainland with a shoreline of approximately 1,471 feet. The applicant is seeking
approval from the LMCD to construct a multiple dock facility for 40 boat slips. A license from
the LMCD is required by LMCD section 2.03. Under section 2.02 of the code, no docks may
be constructed on the lake which provide storage for more than one restricted watercraft for each
50 feet of continuous shoreline on a site on the lake. Under the current code provisions, the
application of this rule would allow up to 28 slips on the mainland and 29 slips on the island,
assuming the shoreline measurements noted above are correct. The current code provisions do
not allow the combination of shoreline for the mainland and the island. However, there is no
prohibition in the code against construction of slips on the island as a separate site.
The density limitations just described establish a maximum limit of slips which may be licensed
under the LMCD code. However, the code does not establish an automatic entitlement to
~ ,c_o~nstruct the maximum number of slips allowed. In considering whether to approve a license,
JUL 8 2 I9:9 4 .
LKllO-4
L.M.C.D.
Mr. Ed Chanin
July 21, 1994
Page 2
the LMCD considers a number of factors which are set forth in section 2.03 of the code. I have
attached a copy of section 2.03 for your reference. Following a public hearing and consideration
by the board of the LMCD of the review criteria set forth in section 2.03, subd. 3, the board may
decide not to authorize the full number of watercraft which might be permitted under section
2.02. Until final action is taken by the board of directors, I can give no assurances that the
maximum number of slips will be allowed. However, I am not aware of any factors at this time
which would lead me to believe that the board would limit the number of slips constructed to a
number which is less 28 slips on the mainland and 29 slips on the island assuming an appropriate
and acceptable size and configuration of dock facilities.
Very truly yours,
Charles L. LeFevere
CLL:ckr
cc: Gene Strommen
73519
10-4
PHONE NO.
STATE OF
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106
772-7910 FILE NO.
July 25, 1994
Mr. John Boyer
Boyer Building Corporation
18283A Minnetonka Boulevard
Wayzata, MN 55391
RE:
PERMIT APPLICATION 94-6240, 40-SLIP SEASONAL DOCK, SPRING PARK
BAY, LAKE MINNETONKA (27-133-11).
Dear Mr. Boyer:
This is to advise you that the agency comment period for your
permit application is over; however, there are three main
outstanding issues to be addressed before a final permit decision
is made:
As I indicated when we initially discussed your
application, you will need to provide sounding
information so that we can evaluate the current water
depths in the proposed docking area. We are concerned
that there not be a recurrent need for excavation.
We are aware that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District is reviewing issues in regard to the number of
dock slips requested and is considering amendment of
their codes.
The environmental review process, i.e., for. the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet, must be complete
before the Department of Natural Resources can issue a
permit.
We understand items #2 and #3 are in progress. The water depth
information requested in item #1 should be forwarded to this office
once it is available.
Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ceil Strauss
Area Hydrologist
CCS/MM/cs
~-" c: Gene Strommen, LMCD .
Mark Koegler, City of Mound
JUL 2 7 1994
Aid I=~IIAI OPPC)I::JTIINITY I:::MPlC)YI:::I::I
i
OUTLOT C
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
~OYER BUILDING CORPOR&TION
7033
LMCD
P.O1
We~nelday,
Sa~rday,
(change)
Monday
Monday
Monday,
We~jn elda~,
5
8
10
17
19
21
24
26
LM~D MEETING SCHEDULE
(corrected ~chedule)
OCTGBER, 1994
Hennep~n Count~ Sheriff' I Water
Patrol Operational and Annual
Contract Agreement Review, 7;
American Legion 9Ol~ 9118, 949
Wayzata Blvd. E., Wayzata
Water Structures Co~ittee
8:15am, %135 Norwelt BiA~Bldg.
(s~art time changed from
Legal Holiday - Office el#led
La~e Use & Recreation ComnU. ttee
5:45pm, #135 Norwel~ Ban~Bldg.
(Itart C/.n)e c~a.nged from ~:&Spm
5:30pm)
~ebra]~Bse~ ~d Szo~icl Action
Plan Su~com~tttee
8:30am, 9160 Norwelt BA--k Bldg.
EurallanWa~er Mill#il Talk
B:30am, 0135 Norwes~ Bn~k Bldg.
Save the La~e Subcon~ttee
4:30pm, 0160 Norwelt Ba~cBldg.
Adminimtrative Comn~ttee
6:30pm, Ton]ca ]~¥ Ci~ Ball
Board of Di=ectorl Regulam
7:30pm, Tonka Ba¥ Ci~ Hall
;O
RECEIVED OCT '-3
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
SPECIAL EVENT CALENDAR
OCTOBER 1994
SAT, lST
SUN, 2ND
SAT, 8TH
SUN, 9TH
SAT, 15TH
SAT, 23RD
10:00 AM
7:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
10:00 AM
WYC Sailboat Race, Commodore Cup Course
Viking Bassmasters, Park Tavern
WYC Sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC Sailboat Race, Commodore Cup Course
WYC Sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
WYC Sailboat Race, Commodore Cup Course
WYC Sailboat Race, Main Lower Lake
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SHORELINE
REQUIREMENTS AND CALCULATION OF BOAT STORAGE
DENSITY ON LAKE MINNETONKA; AMENDING LMCD
CODE SECTION 2.02 BY ADDING SUBDIVISION 5
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION
DISTRICT (LMCD) ORDAINS that the LMCD Code of Ordinances, Section 2.02 is
amended by adding new subdivision 5 as follows:
Subd. 5. Special Rule for Non-Continuous Shoreline of Dock Use
Areas in Close Proximity. The Board may authorize shoreline from one or
more sites (the "transferor sites") to be counted as part of another site (the
"transferee site") for the purpose of computing permissible boat storage
density. Applications for permission to transfer boat storage density shall be
made in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 2.03 and shall be
processed as a part of the applicant's multiple or commercial dock license
application. Criteria to be considered by the Board in evaluating whether to
approve such application shall include all criteria set forth in Section 2.03,
subd. 3a). No such permission to transfer boat storage density shall be
granted by the Board unless the following additional conditions are met:
a)
The dock use areas of each transferor site and the transferee
site may be no more than 150 feet apart.
b)
The credit for boat storage density transferred from any
transferor site may not exceed one restricted watercraft for each
100 feet of shoreline of the transferor site (with fractional
watercraft counted in accordance with subdivision 1).
c)
The total boat storage at the transferee site may not exceed one
restricted watercraft for each 35 feet of shoreline of the
transferee site (with fractional watercraft counted in accordance
with subdivision 1).
d)
No variances, other than temporary low water variances, may be
granted for construction of docks at the transferee site.
e)
Neither transferor site nor transferee site may have shoreline
comprised in whole or in part of wetlands.
f)
As long as the transferee site is used for the storage of more
restricted watercraft than this Code would allow without the
transfer of boat storage density under this subdivision:
i)
the transferor sites and the transferee site must be in
common ownership; and
CLL76705
LKl10-13
iff)
no docks or boat storage is permitted on the transferor
sites; and
the transferor sites must be maintained in essentially a
natural state and may not be used for residential dwelling
units or commercial uses.
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 day of
, 1994.
William Johnstone, Chair
ATTEST:
Douglas E. Babcock, Secretary
CLL76705
LKl10-13
REPORT OF THE 1992
LAKE MINNE TONKA
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
To The
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
July 27, 1994
1992 LIvICD Lake ~ Access Task Force Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Surmnary and Conclusions
History and Back~ound ........................................................................................ 3
Introduction
Task Force Goals
Existing Access
Goal of' 700 Car/Trailer Parking Spaces .................................................................
Elimination of' Street Car/Trailer Parldng ............................................................... 7
Parking Standards for Car/Trailer Parking ............................................................. 7
Parking Inventory .................................................................................................. 8
Parking Agreements and DNR Cost Sharing ..........................................................
New Access Sites
Equitable Distribution
Marina Potential for Lake Access ' lO
Proceedings Summary .......................................................................................... 11
Acknowledgments ...............
Appendix:
1 Roster of Members .........................................................................
2 Map of Access Sites, Commercial Marinas ..................................... 13
3 Parking Standards
4 Current and Potential car/trailer parking inventory ......................... i' 16
$ Lake access model parking agreement ............................................ 17
6 Minnesota DNR Landowners Bill of Rights .................................... 20
7 Lake Minnetonka DNR Acquisition Process ................................... 23
$ Access site evaluation criteria ......................................................... 25
9 Lake Zone Map ............. : ................................................................ 26
10 Proceedings Stmunary ................................................................... 27
1992 LMCD Lake lv~innemnka Access Task Force Report
Il ,i I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Access to Lake Minnetonka via riparian homeowners, commercial marinas, yacht clubs, out lot
docks, and municipal docks primarily for non-riparian property owners is signi6cant in quantity
and percent of overall access and generally of high quality.
There is a lack of quality, free, reliable ear/trailer parking/'or boats wanting to access Lake
Minnetonka via boat launch ramps. There is not a lack of poor quality free ear/trailer parking.
Currently, there are over 700 spaces used on the busiest days.
Poor quality parking results in residents complaining about boateffs intrusive behavior and
excessive traffic congestion. It results in extreme frustration by boaters over the lack of a decent
place to park to go boating on Lake E~mnetonka This generates tension between the local
community interest and the ear/trailer boater interest.
I/the ear/trailers currently parked near the lake could be put in well organized places with
adequate, safe parking conditions with car/trailer turnarounds, the local communities would
benefit from reduced congestion and less intrusion on their neighborhoods.
The task force reaffirmed the conclusions of two prior studies that 700 high quality, free,
reliable car/trailer parking spaces are fair and reasonable for Lake l~finneto~ and are
achievable.
The Task Force concluded that when quality .free reliable car/trailer parking spaces are provided
in a zone, all other street car/trailer parking ought to be closed in that zone with enforced "no
car trailer parking signs"
Because over 700 car/trailer spots are used today, providing 700 quality free, reliable, car/trailer
spaces will not increase the number of boats on the lake but actually create a modest
reduction.
Every other year, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) is to certify Coy
count) and publish on a map showing the locations and the number of free, reliable, car/trailer
parking spaces that meet the standards established by this task force.
Car/trailer parking meeting the physical standards noted elsewhere in this report will be certifiable
by the LMCD as counting toward the 700 goal on the following basis.
a. 100% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if: · There is a parking agreement OR
· The street or remote parking is posted "car/trailer only"
b. 80% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if: · There are signs at the launch ramp showing where to park.
· There are street signs pointing out the direction to the launch ramp
· The ramp and parking location can be put on an access map.
c. 60% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if:
· none of the above conditions are met
Page 1
1992 LMCD Lake Minnetanka Access Task Force Report
d. The LMCD will work cooperatively with the cities, Hennepin County, and the Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) to replace spaces should they be lost for car tra/ler parking.
10. E~isting ramps without tumarounds that require backing car/trailers offbusy county roads or
city streets should be closed only after a quality facility meeting the standards has been completed
to replace it.
l l. To achieve the goal of ?00 car/trailer parking spaces cooperation is needed
a. Additional parking agreements are needed for as many existing sites as possible. This may
include payments by the DNR under cooperative agreements.
b. Some street and remote lots need "car/trailer only" signs.
c. Signs need to be placed at launch ramps showing where to park.
d. Street signs need to be installed showing direction to the ramps.
e. The LMCD and the DNR need to negotiate with some commercial marinas to provide free
car/trailer parking for the public that can be certified. Negotiations may include payments
by the DNR and/or other incentives by the LMCD.
f. Make ready docks need to be installed at ramps where remote car/trailer parking is used.
g. New access sites (launch ramps) need to be developed with the cooperation of the local
cities, the LMCD, the DNR, and with other agencies of government. The majority of
funding ought to come from regional and/or state sources. Cities are not usually expected
to pay a significant portion of improved car/trailer parking even though their local
community may benefit
The 1993 LMCD Car/Trailer Parking Inventory
Total In Use
that Meet Total
1992 Total in the Additional Total In
Current and Total in Use that Reliability Future Use =nd_
Potential Use or Meet the Stalldard & plnnn~d plnnn~4
Parking Space Car/Trailer Av~ilnhl¢iPhysical LMCD to be LMCD
Categories Inventory Today Standard Certified
In Access Lots 36o 259 239 239 124: 363
In Remote lots 93 93 70 43 2'/ 70
On the Street 282 21/i 114 97 17 (1) 83
GRAND TOTAL 735 567 423 379 168 516
(I) ~,"udkr ~a~o~ will I~ ,limimmd in fla~ vicim~ of No~th Ann ~d Maxw~ Bay u pm of ~n a~r~mmt wi~h O~mo,
wt~m fl~ DNR ~ac~ ~ IVa.x~ Bay i~ in op~r~io~
13. For the new public access at Maxwell Bay successful cooperation with Orono and additional
regional or state funding will be required.
14. Car/trailer access must be distributed equitably around the lake. When a community can not
provide access, that community needs to help fund accesses in neighboring communities.
Communities without access may be asked to pay an equitable share for maintenance to
communities with car/trailer parking.
Page 2
~0/10/1994 10:21 612--4724435 TO P/~GE 81
LAKE MINNETONKA .CONSERVATIO. N DISTRICT
900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 612/473-7033
EUGENE R. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BOARD MEMBERB
William A. Johnstone
Chair, Mlnnetonka
Tom Penn
Vice Chair, Tonka Bay
Douglas E. Bal~o~k
Secretary, ,~:~'ing Park
Treasurer, Shorew~
Mike Bloom
MIn~ton~ Beth
Al~e~ (Be~) Fosler
James N. ~rG~wol
Excelsior
Ronald Kline
Min~et~sta
Dua~e Magus
Wayzata
Cra~ ~liel
V~torie
~omas W. R~se
Mound
He~ J. Sue~
Wetland
Jos~h Zwak
Gree~wo~
TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL
DA,Ti: OCtlgBB3~ 10,199~
PROM: TOM l~E-q~, LMCD li~3q~A~
2.0 [-,b M,,------o~ pi.,.,
2.1 TIm flMl Lalm N:m~ mpo~ vas tssmd Ibis moMIt.
:3.0
3.1 LMCD~fm'IggSm: Jm~,clmir;DoujBeh:uck,
vim CIJ~, Bob ibemp, TmmJr, --~ .be Zvuk, b:mm~..
3.20qx:d tuum'
3.3
00'4, Recycl,e~ C~flte~t
b~t rout .lbvun. llayer, b dev~ elm dM nat pmvMe ~ lhe
~cumsamtt~ mqumrUd. Unft~nntmly I vu out of urn vben tim commtJe
nmltnj om ~is ibm vas bold. I viii be vmktnj this vuek m me vIBI mm lm
C,/ Tomb ~c. OeJ~,BmJohMmm
1992 LMCD Lake l~inneton~ Access Tas~ Force Report
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
Launch ramps and car-trailer parking at Lake ]V[innctonica have been under discussion for many years.
The Minnesota State Constitution states that the waters of the state will be free and open to the public.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in response to the Outdoor Recreation Act 1975
(Minnesota Statue 86A_01-1 l) established a policy to "provide free and adequate public access to all of
Minnesota's lakes consistent with demand and resource capabilities". This policy has been carried out
throughout the state, usually with the cooperation of the local community which usually sees a launch
ramp with free car/trailer parking as a benefit. To obtain this flee access, the DN'R set policies for what
constitutes reliable, free car/trailer parking. The DNR attempts to u~e the following guidelines:
1. One car/trailer parking space for every 20 acres of lake surface Lake lVfinneto~'s 14,000 acres
requires a minimum of 700 spaces.
2. Ramps with remote lots must have signs showing where to park the ear/trailer.
3. There must be street si~e,n.~ on major roads near the ramp showing the direction to the ramp.
4. Car/trailer parking spaces must be in sight and less than 1500 feet from the launch ramp.
5. Street or remote lot parking doesn~ count.
6. Car/trailer parking spaces must be available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
7. Car only spots for ear-top boats don~ count.
8. Parking must be free except in parks where the same fee is charged all park users.
Because the DNR did not recognize existing car/trailer parking spaces that did not meet their standards
they determined that there were only 143 car/trailer parldng spaces on Lake lVfmnetonka. They published
information and testified before various bodies that there were only 143 car/trailer parking spaces for
Lake Minnetonka when there should be 700 minimum according to their standard of one per twenty
acres. People outside the lake area communities got the impression that the Lake area was trying to keep
people off "their lake" so they could keep it for themselves. The DNR continued to pursue a policy of
trying to obtain launch ramps and car/trailer parking on Lake lVfinneto~.
On the other hand, the local lake area communities believed counts showing 1,000 to 1,200 empty trailers
attached to cars parked around the lake on the busiest days. They claimed there were substantially more
than the 700 car/trailer parking spaces and the lake didn't need any more car/trailer parking. In fact, they
claimed that the boats offthe trailers were the major cause of the increased crowding on the lake. What
followed was more than a decade of struggles between the DNR and the local Lake l~metonka
communities over launch ramps and free car/trailer parking.
In 1982, the DNR announced plans to purchase property at King's Point to develop a launch ramp with
free car/trailer parking that met their standards. The local communities claimed 1,200 car/trailer spaces
existed and vigorously objected to the DNR plan. In 1983, an appeal to the governor resulted in the
launch ramp project being canceled and a Governors Access Study Commission being appointed to study
access on Lake lVfmnetonka. (The King's Point launch ramp was built in 1987).
The commission issued a report that: 1. Public parking availability is a crucial component of adequate boat launch facilities.
2. 700 car/trailer parking spaces is fair and reasonable for Lake lVfinnetonka.
3. Equitable distribution of car/trailer parking around the lake is desirable.
4. Parking standards for Lake Minnetonka may need to be adjusted.
Page 3
1992 LMCD !-~1~ Minneumka Access Task Force Report
After the report was issued, there was no rush to build the 700 car/uailer parking places by any body or
agency. The lake area commllnities believed there were more than the 700 car/trailer parking spaces
called for in the report and the lake didn~ need another 700. They questioned why the local communities
should pay to build car/trailer paridng for people outside their area, even though commtlrlity residents
were also users.
Because of the lack of action in providing for the needed car/tra~er parking, the Metropolitan Council did
another lake access study in 1986. It confirmed the 700 car/trailer parking space amount as being a fair
and reasonable number.
In 1987, as a result of no action in providing car/trailer parking spaces and no plans to build them, the
Metropolitan Council told the LMCD that they would seek state legislative action for a regional or state
agency to take over governing of Lake 1Winnetonka to be assured the car/trailer parking was provided,
unless the LMCD prepared a formal plan showing how the car/trailer parking would be accomplished.
The LMCD believed the car/trailer parking could not-be considered without developing an overall long
range management plan for the lake that would include adequate free car/trailer parking. The LMCD
Management Plan was published at the end of 1990 and approved in December 1991.
The LMCD Management Plan which the DNK, the Metropolitan Council, the cities and many others
helped develop, reaffirmed the 700 car/trailer parking space goal as being fair and reasonable. Three
additional fundamental points were discussed:
1. For Lake 1Wmnetonka 700 parking spaces would be both the minimum and the maximum.
2. Once the 700 car/trailer spaces are established, other street ear/trailer parking ought to be
eliminated. The dries and the county will be encouraged to erect and enforce "no car/trailer
parking" signs as long as the 700 goal continues to be met.
3. The LMCD, with assistance from the DNR, should review the existing parking quality standards
to determine if some adjustments could be made for the special situation on Lake Minnetonka.
In the fall of 1991, the DNR took an option on property on Maxwell Bay with the intent of developing a
launcli ramp with free car/trailer parking. Objections surfaced in the city ofOrono. Orono tried to
persuade the DNR not to exercise its option on the property until a plan for the entire lake was developed
according to the LMCD management plan. At this time, the LMCD was just beginning to ortpmize its
Access Committee. When the DNR purchased the Maxwell Bay property, the DNR commissioner wrote
a letter to both the LMCD and the city of Orono. The letter stated thst the DNR would postpone
development of the Maxwell Bay property until a task force appointed by the LMCD developed a
detailed plan for car/trailer parking for all of Lake lVrmnetonka.
Page 4
1992 LMCD Lake lV{inneltllka Acc. e~ Task Force Report
INTRODUCTION
The Lake Access Task Force was recommended by the commissioner of the DNR. and convened by a
LMCD resolution in January, 1992. The purpose of this task force was to develop a detailed plan to
meet the lake access objectives in the LMCD Management Plan for Lake lVfmnetonka. The LMCD
invited representatives fi.om 1. Its member dries
2. Government agencies sharing responsibility for the management of Lake Minnetonka, including;
the DNR, Metropolitan Council, Hennepin County, Hennepin Parks, the lVfinnehaha Creek
Watershed District 0VlCWD), and others.
3. Interested citizen's groups such as the Minnesota Sportfishing Congress (MSC), Fisherman
Advocating Intelligent Regulation (FAIR), the Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners Association
(LMLOA), and others
For a roster, see APPENDIX 1, page 12.
Subcommittees of this group conducted detailed studies and submitted their reports to the task force.
Meetings began in March of 1992 and continued through May of 1993. Statffi.om the LMCD and the
DNR assisted. Participants gave generously of their time and support. The LMCD Lake Access
Committee drafted this final report.
Appendices to this report contain information to document:
1. Task Force spokespersons (ORIGINAL DESIGNEES)
2. Existing public access sites and commercial marinas (map 1)
3. Standards for car/trailer parking;
4. 1992 Current and Potential Car/Trailer Parking Inventory
5. Model Parking Agreement
6. DNR Landowners Bill of Rights
7. DNR Acquisition Procedure
8. Access site criteria for evaluation
9. Lake Zone Map 2
10. Proceedings summary
TASK FORCE GOALS
The goals adopted by the 1992 Task Force were to: 1. Review all types of existing boater access to Lake lVlinneto~.*
2. Affirm the prior goal of 700 certifiable car/trailer parking spaces for reliable flee public access to
Lake Minnetonka.
3. Affirm the Management Plan goal of closing street parking to car/trailers as the 700 car/trailer
parking goal is reached.
4. Establish standards for certifying car/trailer parking that meet the special needs of Lake
Minnetonka and the boating public.
5. Conduct a reliable, detailed inventory of existing car/trailer parking spaces. Count potential
car/trailer parking spaces.
6. Develop a model car/trailer parking agreement and obtain agreements where possible.
7. Explore prospective access sites and develop a list of sites for potential development.
8. Review the principle and define equitable distribution.
9. Examine the possibility for commercial marinas to provide some free public car/trailer parking.
Page 5
1992 LMCD !-~ Minneton~ Access Task Force Repart
* The focus of this Task Force was on the free public access to the lake via car/trailer parking at boat
launch ramps. In the process ofthi~ study, a review was made of many other kinds of access, see
APPENDIX 2, page 13.
EXISTING ACCESS
The Task Force reviewed the studies done by the LMCD, DNR, earlier task forces, 1991 and 1992
I. aMCD boat count, the 1992 LMLOA car/trailer count study, and the 1993 Jabbour aerial car/trailer
survey. The following table categorizes access to Lake Minn~'~onka.
Boat Storage Count and Nice Weekend In Use Boat Count by Origination
1992 Max Ave Percent
Boats Percent of Boats Peak Peak of
Stored Stored that are Count Use Boats
at docks Active on the Water Count On the
& Racks Water
Where Boats Originate (4)
(1) MaxPeakAvgPe. ak (2)(5) (3)(5) (5)
Riparian Residents & Out Lots 5,973 9% 6% 530 379 29 %
Comm'l Marinas & Yacht Clubs 1,862 29% 21% 549 392 30 %
Municipal docks 1,012 33% 23% 329 235 18 %
Car/trailer launch ramp 421 300 23 %
TOTAL 8,847 1,829 1,306 100 %
1. From 1992 LMCD Boat Count adjusted by estimating empty racks & unrented slips at
Commercial Marinas, Yacht Clubs, and Municipal docks
2. Single Weekend Day Peak Use Study: 1984=1836, 1986=2142, 1987=2252, 1992=1829
3. Average Weekend Peak Use Study: 1984=1318, 1986=1453, 1987=1370, 1992=1306
4. Active maximum peak use count uses estimate assuming the average peak use proportions remain
constant for the maximum peak use.
5. 1992 LMCD/DNR aerial count of boats in use on nice Saturday and Sunday afternoons.
GOAL OF 700 CAR/TRAILER PARKING SPACES
The task force confirmed the goal of 700 reliable free car/trailer parking spaces (meeting the standards of
appendix 3) and agreed with the goal of closing street parking to car/wailers as the 700 car/trailer parking
goal becomes established. This agrees with the 1991 LMCD Management Plan. It is compatible with the
policy of one parking place for every 20 acres of water surface. It is the minimum number of spaces
required under the DNR public water access program in the metropolitan area.
The goal of 700 was first established by the task forces of 1983 and confirmed in the study of 1986. It is
conservative, considering that the demand for boating recreation exceeds 1 parking space per 20 acres of
water on most of the metropolitan area lakes. Compared to standards in other paces of the cotmtry, it is
also conservative. Some states provide 1 parking space per 10 acres of water surface.
Page 6
1992 LMCD Lake Mi,~,~¢lonim Access Ta~k Force
The Task Force considered lowering the goal. The Lake/VEtma~o~ Lake Shore Owners Association
(LMLOA) believes that 700 parking spaces would increase boat density and reduce the enjoyment of the
lake by lakeshore users. Taking into consideration that there are over 700 car/wailer spaces used to
access the lake now, and street parking will be eliminated when the 700 goal is reached, the net effect will
be fewer boats on the lake and no increases in density. Thus, the 700 goal was reaffirmed.
ELIMINATION OF STREET CAR/TRAILER PARKING
There was consideration in the 1.2vlCD Management Plan whereby other street car/trailer parking would
be eliminated as the goal of 700 was being established, and when the 700 goal was complete, all other
street parking ought to be removed as a way of limiting crowding on the lake. Task Force data made
clear that currently, on a good day many more than 700 car/trailers are parked around the lake.
Therefore, when the 700 goal is met and other street parking is abolished there will be a net decrease in
boats on the lake fi.om car/trailers.
PARKING STANDARDS FOR CAR/TRAILER PARKING
Earlier task force parking standards for quality, reliable fi'ce car/trailer parking for Lake Mirmetonka were
reviewed. Access design, location of parking, security of personal property, and safety of boaters
maneuvering their car/trailers, were among considerations discussed in reaching agreement on the
physical standards. After much discussion the Task Force adopted the following physical standards: see
APPENDIX 3, pages 14 and 15:
1. 700 is a fair and reasonable number without increases in the future.
2. Car/trailer parking must be within 2000 feet of the ramp.
3. Street or remote lot car/trailer parking over 1500 feet fi.om a ramp must have a make ready dock..
4. 350 of the 700 spaces must be available 7 days per week, 24 hours per day. 700 must be available
on weekends, of which 350 may have limited hours.
5. Up to 10% of the spaces at any one ramp may be spaces for ears only (assumes cartop boats).
6. Parking must be free except in parks where the same fee is charged all park users.
7. Ramps off busy highways or streets must have a turnaround to prevent car/trailers from backing
down fi.om busy roads.
The Task Force agreed that every other year the LMCD should take a physical inventory of the actual
car/trailer parking around the lake and certify the number that meet the above physical standards as well
as reliability standards listed below..
Car/trailer parking space meeting the physical standards listed in APPENDIX 3 will be certifiable by the
LMCD as counting toward the 700 goal on the following basis:
a. 100% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if: · There is a parking agreement OR
· The street or remote parking is signed "car/trailer only"
b. 80% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will' count if.'
· There are signs at the launch ramp showing where to park.
· There are street signs pointing out the direction to the launch ramp.
· The ramp and parking locations can be put on an access map
c. 60% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if none of the above are met.
Reliable parking meets the standards of appendix 3. The Task Force recommends upgrading all parki~
to reduce undesirable parking. The changes fi.om prior standards allow the Task Force greater flexibility
Page 7
1992 LMCD Lake Minn~to~l~, Access Task Force Report
in cerfif3ring more car/trailer parking spaces. As can be seen in this report, the number increased from
143 to 516.
PARKING INVENTORY
To determine the number of existing and potential car/trailer parking spaces capable ofbeing certified to
the neWly adopted standards, data was gathered from a variety of sources and in a number of ways. Site
lists were provided by LMCD member cities. Site visits were made and aerial photographs were used.
Spaces inventoried included:
1. Parking in on-site lots at existing lake access points
2. Available on-street parking within 2,000 feet
3. Off-site lots, public and private
4. Future additional committed spaces
5. Car/trailer parking spaces potentially available
The total potential car/trailer parking spaces certifiable to the new physical standards was 73 5. The
original inventory is in APPENDIX 4, page 16. Substantially higher numbers of car/trailers are being
parked free at peak times in good weather than the inventory has identified.
The 1993 LMCD Car/Trailer Parking
1992 Total In Use Total
Current and Total in that Meet the Additional Total in
Potential Total Use that Reliability Future Use and
Parking Space Car/Trailer In Use or Meet the Standard & pL~nn~l plnnn~!
Categories Inventory Available Physical LMCD to be LMCD
(1) Today Standard Ce~fi_,~t Certifi~q Ce~fi~
In Access Lots
No~h Arm 65 80 80 80 0 80
Grays Bay Cswa¥ 37 37 17 17 0 17
Grays Bay Dam 20 20 20 20 0 20
Spring Park 148 86 86 86 0: · - 86
Kings Point 0 32 32 32 0 32
Phelps Bay 10 4 4 4 0 4:
Henn. Reg. Park 80 0 0 0~ 48 48
Maxwell Bay N/A 0 .0: 0 76 76
SUBTOTAL 360 259 239 239 124 363
ha Remote lots
Carsons Bay 93 93 70 43 27 70
On the Street
North Arm 31 31 31 31 0 (2) 0
W'tlliams St. 40 40 40 40 0 40
Cooks Bay 110 43 43 26 17 43
Wayzata Bay 101 101 0 0! 0 0
SUBTOTAL 282 215 114 97 17 83;
GRAND IOIAL 735 567 423i 379 168 516
Page 8
1992 LMCD Lake IV~innetonka Access Task Force Report
(1) Includes credit for spaces reserved in lots for car top carried watercraft, 7 at North Arm Access, and
3 at Grays Bay Dam.
(2) 31 car/trailer spaces will be eliminated in the vicinity of North Arm and Maxwell Bay as part of an
agreement with Orono when the DNR access at Maxwell Bay is in operation.
The Task Force recognizes there is additional car/trailer parking beyond 2000 feet that is available today
and not part of the above count. It, also, recognizes there are additional small launch ramps in usc and
available today that are not in the above count.
This report adopts a new and lower inventory in an effort to be very conservative alter consultation with
Hermepin County and the cities. The revised total inventory of 516 car trailer spaces represents parking
that is available now, or that can reasonably be made available on a stable long-term basis. There are
approximately 379 car/trailer parking spaces currently available and that are being certified by the LMCD.
Of these, approximately 282 spaces are in public access lots. An additional 97 spaces are in on-street
parking sites. Approximately 168 future spaces are either committed or negotiable. Note that when
Maxwell Bay is completed, 31 on street spaces will be eliminated. This results in a total of 516 potential
car/trailer parking spaces that are now believed to be available or planned and which meet the new
parking standards and that can be certified by the LMCD. Parking agreements need to be reached with
communities, counties, agencies and private commercial marinas to convert some existing parking from
uncertified to certified.
PARKING AGREEMENTS AND DNR COST SHARING
One result of the 1986 task force was the improvement in the process that secures parking spaces at or
near existing public access sites that can be considered to be "reliable". To make new or existing parking
reliable over the years a parking agreement can be secured with the property owner that requires the
car/trailer parking to remain available in place unless canceled under the agreement. If the parking spaces
are lost, a good faith effort will be made to replace them with other parking spaces somewhere else. The
LMCD and the DNR will assist communities to relocate them. The Task Force continued this
recommendation and developed a current model agreement. The Lake Access Parking Agreement form
for evaluating public access parking agreements are provided in APPENDIX 5, pages 17-19.
These agreements should be between the LMCD and the local unit of government or property owner.
The DNR will assist with these agreements by providing funding where appropriate. The DNR can share
cost with cities and/or agencies on access and parking facilities improvement, including land acquisition.
The DNR by cooperative agreement can reimburse cities for dedicated free ear/trailer parking.
The DNR Landowners Bill of Rights describes the procedure used by the DNR in the purchase of
potential access sites. The Lake 1Wmnetonka acquisition process is the DNR commitment to work
cooperatively in this area. see APPENDIX 6 and 7 pages 20-24.
The first agreement was signed in May of 1993 with the City of Minnetrista. The agreement with that
city was for a total of 44 parking spaces at the following sites:
1. Williams Street in Halsteds Bay: 40 car/trailer parking spaces
2. Tuxedo Boulevard in Phelps Bay: 4 car/trailer parking spaces
Page 9
1992 LlVlCD Lake Mi,~,~etonka ~r~'es___~ Task Force Report
Other sites also have a high potential for adding to reliable parking by agreement, namely:
1. Orono:
a. Hennepin County North Arm ramp and on-site lot (80 spaces)
b. County Road 51, serving Heunepin County North Arm ramp (31 spaces)
2. Spring Park, Spring Park Bay, with accompanying county maintenance yard nearby in Orono (86
spaces)
3. Deephaven:
a. Carsons Bay, 1Vfmnetonka Blvd. ramp with city maintenance lot (30 spaces)
b. Carsons Bay, Minnetonka Blvd. ramp with school lot on V'mehill Road (40 spaces)
4. Wayzata: Wayzata Bay County Road 16 ramp, County Road 16 (40 spaces)
5. Mound: Mound Park Bay ramp, Cooks Bay (43 spaces)
NEW ACCESS SITES
The Task Force recommends the following sites as having the potential for becoming lake access sites.
The Site Evaluation Criteria are provided in APPENDIX 8, page 25.
Potential Sites
1. Tonka Bay City Dock, channel to Gideons Bay
2. Timber Lane, Gideons Bay, Shorewood
3. lVlal-Tai Restaurant Site, Excelsior Bay, Excelsior (property was sold) .
4. 456 Arlington Ave., Wayzata Bay (private residence), Wayzata
5. Pelican Point, Spring Park Bay, Mound
6. Lost Lake, Cooks Bay, Mound
7. Advance Machine, West Arm, Spring Park
Grays Bay Causeway
The unimproved substandard public access on Trunk Highway 101 will not be redeveloped as planned.
This represents a setback for public access development. The 32 spaces planned for the causeway had
been considered committed. The 1Wmnesota Department of Transportation has abandoned plans to
improve the site. However, Wayzata and Minnetonka are continuing discussions about improvements at
the site.
Max,,ell Bay
Up to 76 additional car/wailer parking spaces may be provided when the launch ramp is in place at
Maxwell Bay, Orono. This site continues to be examined. DN-R Trails & Waterways and the City of
Orono are negotiating to purchase alternate properties.
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION
Subcommittees discussed equitable distribution of car/trailer parking at Lake 1Vi]nnetonka. The principle
adopted in earlier task force reports of dividing the lake into zones with equitable distribution was
endorsed, see APPENDIX 9, page 25. Each city is encouraged to contribute to the overall goal. [fit
cannot contribute it may be asked to make voluntary payments for maintenance to those cities who do
provide car/trailer access.
Page 10
1992 LMCD Lake ~ Access Task Force Report
MARINA POTENTIAL FOR LAKE ACCESS
During the summer months most marinas have relatively empty boat storage lots that have the potential
for parking car/trailers if the marina has a launch ramp. Many now provide some fee based boat
launching service. These marinas could possibly provide some free car/trailer parking and ramp use to
the public. The operators or owners might expect some type of reimbursement. The DNR could possibly
provide funding and the LMCD will cooperate.
The Task Force identified six conditions and issues to be considered in determining the potential free
public access use of marinas:
1. Ability to extend existing capacity.
2. Extent to which a mnrina already serves the public through fee paid access. (Fee paid public
access does not meet the definition of fi'ce and open public access.)
3. Attitude of nearby homeowners toward public access use.
4. Duration of public use, considered for a trial basis only until proven feasible.
5. Management issues, such as reserving parking for public use, and compensation to the marina
owner consistent with public access operations and public policy.
6. Possible DNR funding constraints from annual operations budgets and overall cost effectiveness.
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY
The Lake Access Task Force study is documented in a proceedings summary. This chronology highlights
the various subcommittee, committee, and Task Force meetings which took place among city, agency,
and community organizations. These groups participated in the research, deliberations and consensus
findings. See APPENDIX 10, pages 27-35.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study depended upon collaboration of community representatives, municipal, regional" and state
officials. Task Force meetings provided a public platform for full discussion of access to Lake
Minnetonka. Subcommittee members invested extensive volunteer hours. All participants deserve
recognition. The Task force thanks every individual and organization for their contributions.
Page l l
NAME
1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
DESIGNATED SPOKESPERSON
(Original Appointees by Organizations)
POSITION/TITLE
Appendix 1
ORGANIZATION
James N. Grathwol
(Task Force Chair)
Richard Engebretson
Lucille Crow
Alan M. Albrecht
Ann Perry
Tom Markle
Wally Clevenger
Skip Johnson
Gabriel Jabbour
Kfisty Stover
Jerry Rockvam
Vern Haug
Jerry Schmieg
Barry Petit
Nick Duff
Tad Jude
Douglas Bryant
Don Germanson
Thomas S. Maple
Gary Larson
John F. Schneider
Beverly Blomberg
Board Member
Mayor
Mayor
Mayor
Planning Director
City Council
Mayor
Mayor
City Council
City Council
Mayor
Mayor
Mayor
City Council
Mayor
Commissioner
Superintendent
President
Manager
Co-Char
President
Orono Resident
LMCD, City of Excelsior
City of Deephaven
City of Excelsior
City of Greenwood
City of Minnetonka
City of Minnetonka Beach
City of Minnetrista
City of Mound
City of Orono
City of Shorewood
City of Spring Park
City of Tonka Bay
City of Victoria
City of Wayzata
City of Woodland
Hennepin County
Hermepin Parks
Lake Minnetonka
Lakeshore Owners Association
Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District
Fisherman Advocating
Intelligent Regulation
MN Sportfishing Congress
Maxwell Bay Residents
Dennis Asmussen
Mike Markell
Gordon Kimball
Martha Reger
Larry Killien
Donald W. Buckhout
Eugene R. Strommen
Rachel Thibault
AGENCY STAFF
Director
Water Recreation
Supervisor
Regional Supervisor
Area Supervisor
Regional Supervisor
ADR Coordinator
Executive Director
Adminis. Technician
Page 12
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
MN DN-R Trails & Waterways
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
State Office of Planning
LMCD
LMCD
UJ
IJJ
Z
Z
<1:
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Existing Public Access Sites and Commercial Marinas
1
2
2A
3
4
5
6
6A
7
8
9
10
11
12
12A
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20A
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Beans Greenwood Marina*
Causeway - Hwy. 101
Chapman Place Marina
Cochrane Boat Yards*
Crystal Bay Service*
Curlys Minnetonka Marina
Deephaven, City of
Dennis Boats*
Gayle Marina
Grays Bay Access (by Dam)
Grays Bay Resort & Marina
Halsted Drive Access
Hendrickson Bridge Access
Howards Point Marina
Kreslins*
Kings Point Access - DNR
Lakeside Marina
Minnetonka Boat Rental*
Minnetonka Boat Works (W) & (O)*
Mound, City of
North Shore Drive Marina
Rockvam Boatyards
Sailors World Marina
Schmitts Marina*
Shorewood Yacht Club & Marina*
Spring Park Access
Excel Marina
Tonka Bay Marina
Wayzata, City of
Windward Marine*
Tuxedo Road Access
St Albans Bay
Grays Bay
Cooks Bay
St Albans & Excelsior
Crystal Bay
Lower Lake South
Carsons Bay
Lower Lake South
Maxwell Bay
Grays Bay
Grays Bay
Halsted Bay
North Arm
South Upper Lake
St Albans Bay
Halsted Bay
Maxwell Bay
Harrisons Bay
Wayzata,Tanager,Browns Bay
Cooks Bay
Maxwell Bay
Coffee Cove
Smiths Bay
Excelsior Bay
Gideons Bay
Spring Park Bay
St Albans Bay
Lower Lake South
Wayzata Bay
Browns Bay
Phelps Bay
*No launching facilities
11/17/93
Page 13 A
PARKING STANDARDS
LAKE M1NNETONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES
Appendix 3
The 1992 Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Force has adopted the goal of 700 long-term reliable spaces
for car/trailer parking in the vicinity of present and future access sites at Lake Minnctonka. The Task Force
further agrees that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) implcnaent these standards for
identifying and counting of car/trailer parking spaces and monitor progress toward the 700 goal on a
continuing basis.
The following set of standards has been adopted by thc Task Force for application to Lake Minnctonka:
All spaces must be w/thin 2,000' of a public access point. For car/trailers parked between 1,500' and
2,000', a temporary boat mooring facility at the ramp site for a number of boats equal to 10% of the
parking spaces must be provided.
All parking locations away from the access site should be provided w/th a long-term agreement, three
year minimum, w/th five years more desirable, on file w/th the LMCD. Within that time availability,
if any designated spaces need to be removed, they must be replaced w/th comparable spaces.
The location of parking spaces, either off-street or on-street away from the access site, must be
identified by clear, aesthetically attractive, consolidated, capable of being inexpensively updated,
signage.
Ail off-street spaces must be illustrated on a plan on file with the LMCD. The plan shall clearly
indicate each car/trailer space and adequate ingress, egress and maneuvering space. Parking space
minimum size standards (in feet):
Vehicle only
9 X 19 (Handicapped 12 x 19)
Car/trailer 10 X 40
Off-street designated trailer parking on grass is acceptable if vehicle is parked on graded/paved
surface. '
All spaces must be available on an unrestricted, first-come-first-served basis, 700 reliable spaces will
be available from Memorial Day to Labor Day from 5 pm on Fridays until midnight Sundays, and on
holidays. Fifty per cent of reliable spaces will be available weekdays. Hours of availability will be
determined by LMCD in cooperation with the DNR.
Vehicle-only spaces (no trailer) on public access parking lots can be counted toward the total goal of
700 car/trailer spaces provided that the number of such spaces counted for any given lot does not
exceed 10% of the total number of spaces on that lot. (Example: Out of 50 total parking spaces on
a lot, seven arc for vehicle only. Only five of thc seven may bc counted toward thc goal of 700 [i.e.,
10% of 50=5].)
Page 14
LMCD PARKING STANDARDS FOR LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES
o
All on-sweet spaces should meet the following additional standards:
6.1 Minimum length of 50 feet per space.
6.2 Adequate shoulder width to preclude door opening into a traffic lane and to provide a safe
route to the access point.
6.3 Of the total non-designated (non-signed) on-street parking spaces, only 80% are considered to
be reliable in order to account for non-access related public parking.
Designated and signed on-street ear/trailer parking spaces will be counted 100% for car/trailer
On-street car/trailer parking spaces must be illustrated on a plan by street name on file with
the LMCD.
6.4
6.5
Page 15
LAKE M]NNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Lake Access Model Parking Agreement
Appendix 5
This Agreement is made between the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
(LMCD) and the ( ) both public corporations organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
WITNES SETH:
WHEREAS the LMCD and ( ) are jointly concerned with
providing public boating access to Lake Minnetonka, meeting the Parking Standards for
Lake Minnetonka, and
WHEREAS the LMCD and ( ) recognize that a goal of 700
car/trailer spaces will be provided in the viciniVj of present and future access sites
around the lake on as equitable a basis as possible,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by the LMCD and (
) that the conditions for car/trailer parking for the public access
identified on the checklist identified as Exhibit "A" and Parking Site Plan identified as
Exhibit
"B" meet Parking Standards on the checklist as indicated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the LMCD and (
agreement to be duly executed this ~ day of
) have caused this
,19__.
LAKE MINNETONKA
CONSERVATION DISTRICT:
AGENCY/CITY:
By By,
Page 17
EXHIBrr A
Checklist for Evaluating Lake Minnetonka
Public Access Car/Trailer Parking Agreements
1. Access Name
2. Access City Lake Zone No.
3. Car/Trailer (C/T) Parking by Location:
a. Off-street, on access site .................
(On-site designated trailer parking on
grass is acceptable if vehicle is parked on
graded or paved surface.)
b. Off-street, remote from access site
* Distance in feet from access site ..
c. On-street, less than 1,500 feet:
* Designated signed C/T only, count 100% of
C/T parking spaces available ............
* Not signed, count 75% of spaces available
d. On-street, 1,501 feet to 2,000 feet:
* Designated signed C/T only, count 100% of
C/T parking spaces available ............
* Not signed, count 75% of spaces available
# of spaces
Vehicle Only Parking Spaces - these count up to
10% of total number of C/T spaces on lot:
# of standard vehicles spaces 9' x 19'
# of handicapped vehicle spaces 12' x 19'
Total # of vehicle only spaces
Count total vehicle only spaces or 10% of
total C/T parking spaces in lots whichever is less
5. Total, car/trailer parking spaces at site ............
COOPERATING PROVISIONS:
1. Access site plan illustrating each C/T space
with adequate ingress, egress, and maneuvering
space is kept on file and current with LMCD.
Initial as accepted:
Signage provided at access site is clear, aesthetically
attractive, consolidated for easy updating.
o
All spaces are available on unrestricted, first-
come, first-served basis, from Memorial Day to
Labor Day, 5:00 pm Friday until midnight Sunday.
Fifty percent (50%) of spaces meeting Parking
Standards are available weekdays.
Page 18
EXHIBIT A
Checklist for Evaluating Lake Mirmetonka
Public Access Car/Trailer Parking Agreement
All on-street parking spaces meet the following
standards:
a. Minimum length of 50 feet per space.
b. Adequate shoulder width to preclude door
opening into traffic lane.
c. Safe pedestrian route to access point
provided.
d. On-street car/trailer parking spaces are
illustrated and kept current on a plan by
street name on file with the LMCD.
A temporary boat mooring facility is provided
at the ramp site for a number of boats equal to
10% of the C/T parking spaces at the site for
C/T parking spaces between 1,501 feet and
2,000 feet. New facilities must meet Federal
A.D.A. requirements for handicapped persons.
6. Agency/city reserves the right to make changes
in access site plan off-street parking or on-street
designated or non-designated parking as public
policy priorities may require, with a
good faith effort to replace lost C/T spaces
at the earliest possible date, notifying the
LMCD of anticipated changes. LMCD and MN
DNR agree to cooperate with city/agency in
relocation of lost slips, including locations
elsewhere in the lake, and at other access.
City retains approval privilege on any actions
of an agency regulating parking allowances or
restrictions on county or state highways affecting
C/T parking in the vicinity of an access site.
8. Agency/city agrees to enter into this agreement
for a period of~ years (five years desired)
in recognition of the valuable recreational
opportunities offered on Lake Minnetonka.
Page 19
Appendix 6
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
LANDOWNER'S BILL OF RIGHTS
State parks, water access sites, wildlife management areas, state forest, fisheries projects,
recreational trails, canoe and boating routes, wild and scenic rivers, scientific and natural areas
and the State water bank program all provide recreational opportunities for the general public
or protection of the State' natural resources. Each of these programs authorizes either the
purchase of the fee title to land or the purchase of a lesser interest in land, such as an
easement.
Selling land to the Department of Natural Resources is in many ways similar to selling it to a
private party, but in other ways is different from standard real estate transactions. Because of
the many Federal and State laws that govern land acquisition, it often takes eight months to a
year and a half to sell land to the Department of Natural Resources. These laws were
designed both to protect private landowners' rights and to assure that public money is well
spent to serve the public interest. This letter describes the Department of Natural Resources'
land acquisition procedure. Please keep it for future reference.
Land Identification
The management programs select the tracts of land which they feel would most help'them to
carry out their programs. Once your land has been identified for purchase, you will be
contacted by a Department of Natural Resources representative who will explain what your
land would be used for if it is purchased and will also explain the land acquisition to you.
You are free to decide whether or not to sell your land to the State. If you are willing to
consider selling it, the State will have your land appraised and you will then decide if you
want to sell it at the appraised value. If you do not want to sell your land to the State, you
are under no obligation to do so. However, you may be contacted again in the future to see if
you might have changed your mind.
Appraisal Process
The State will hire a qualified appraiser to determine the fair market value of your property.
You will be invited to accompany the appraiser during his or her inspection of the property, if
you so desire.
You also have the right to hire and appraiser to provide an independent opinion of value for
your property. You will be notified of the deadline for your appraisal to be submitted if you
would like it to be reviewed along with the State's appraisal. After the appraisals are
reviewed, a fair market value will be established as just compensation for your property. If
your land is purchased by the State, you may be reimbursed up to $500 for the cost of your
appraisal providing you submit a copy of that report and a paid receipt for it. It is not
necessary for you to submit your appraisal for review in order to be reimbursed for it.
Page 20
Landowners Bill of Rights
Negotiation Proccs~
The State is not allowed to discuss the price until after the appraisal is completed and will not
discuss the price with anyone but the landowner or his agent. Documents regarding the
purchase of your property will be public records once the purchase is completed. At the
beginning of the negotiation period, you will be given a snmmary of the approved appraisal.
This summary will include the final conclusion of value, the total number of acres and types
of land appraised, the valuation of all buildings and improvements being purchased, and any
special elements of value. The same person who appraised your property for the State will
not act as a negotiator for its purchase.
Purchase Procedure
The Department of Natural Resources will acquire your property by means of an option,
which is an offer from the landowner to sell. The option, including all special provisions,
legal descriptions and elements of execution, must be reviewed by the State as to its legality
and acceptability. The State shall have 15 days after receiving an option to notify the
landowner in writing if the option is not approved and the reasons therefore. If you are not
notified of an option's disapproval, you should assume it is approved.
Unless you request otherwise in writing, the option period shall be no more than two months
if no survey is required. If a survey is required, the option period shall be no more than nine
months. These time limits do not apply to wildlife management areas that require county
board approval. The option period begins on the last date on which the option is signed by a
landowner. Before the end of the option period, the State shall decide whether or not to
purchase the land and shall notify the landowner of its decision by either a Notice of Election
to Purchase or a letter explaining the reasons for not purchasing the property. If the State
does not elect to purchase property on which it has approved and accepted an option, it will
pay the landowner $500.00 after the option period expires.
After signing the option, you have one month to mail or deliver an Abstract of Title to the
Depa~went of Natural Resources. If your land title is registered, you should submit your
Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title plus a Registered Property Abstract instead of an
Abstract of Title. The State will have the abstract brought up to date at its own expense.
Within one month from the Notice of Election to Purchase or delivery of the
Abstract,whichever is later, the Attorney General will provide a title opinion which will
identify any defects in your title to be cleared up before the purchase can be completed. You
will then have 120 days to make your title marketable.
The landowner is required to pay all taxes that are due in the year in which the deed or
easement is signed, including Green Acres deferred taxes. Once the taxes are paid and all
title defects are cured, the Attorney General will send you a Warranty Deed or other
conveyance document to sign and return.
Page 21
Landowners Bill of Rights
I 41
The State pays the abstracting and recording fees related to the sale. If your property is held
as security for a loan or advance of credit that requires or permits the imposifon of a pre-
payment p~nalty, this penalty shall also be reimbursed by the State. The costs of clearing title
defects, payment of taxes and related attorney's fees are not reimbursable.
Method of Payrnent
Payment for the land is mailed to the landowner after the signed deed or other conveyance
document has been recorded and the abstract brought up to date. Depending on the County
Recorder's workload, this may take anywhere from two to four weeks. Assuming your title is
marketable and you act expeditiously to complete the transaction, payment must be made no
later than 90 days after the Notice of Election to Purchase.
You may choose to be paid in either a lump sum or in up to four separate payments. The
State does not pay interest on monies held during an installment agreement.
Vacating Your Property_
You have the fight to continue occupancy of your property until 90 days after the date of the
deed. You may stay an addition 90 days by paying a fair market rent to the State, with the
prior written approval of the management program for which your property is being
purchased. If you do not vacate your property within 180 days of the date of the deed, you
will automatically waive your right to any relocation benefits to which you may otherwise be
entitled.
Relocation Benefits
The State is obligated to pay relocation expense any time they displace owners or tenants
from their residences, displace a business or cause a business to cease operating. Moving
expenses are the most common relocation benefit. A relocation advisor is assigned to work
with anyone who might be displaced by State land acquisition to guide them in locating a new
home or business.
You have the right to accept or reject the State's offer for your property. If you accept the
offer, you may receive or waive any relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits.
You also have the right to accept the State's offer for the property and to contest the
relocation benefits.
You have the fight to seek the advice of any attorney regarding any aspect of your land sale.
You also have the fight to have the State acquire your land by condemnation at your written
request and with the agreement of the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources.
The primary laws governing Department of Natural Resources land acquisition procedures
are, Public Law 91-646 and Minnesota Statutes Section 84.0274.
For further information, contact: Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Land Acquisition and Exchange Section
500 Lafayette Road, Box 30
St. Paul, Minnesota 551554030
(612) 2964097
Page 22
Appendix 7
LAKE MINNETONKA ACQUISITION PROCESS
This document will describe the process the DNR will use to acquire land on Lake
Minnetonka.
BACKGROUND
A Process to provide Public Water Access (PWA) in the metropolitan area was developed by
the Metropolitan Council, The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), and
the State Planning Agency under the direction of the Legislative Commission on Minnesota
Resources (LCMR).
These agencies produced a document that outlined a Site Selection Criteria, a Lake Ranking
system and an Access Priority List. The MNDNR and other public agencies use these
procedures to develop accesses in the metropolitan area. This document is available from the
Metropolitan Council.
PROCESS
On a priority bay or lake area, public property is investigated for access suitability. If none is
available or useable, a search for suitable sites is begun. Often on heavily developed lakes or
bays, the actual acquisition process begins with a parcel of land becoming available that meets
the criteria. The MNDNR purchases only from willing sellers and the owner must be willing
to sell the parcel for a public water access.
When the 1.andowner indicates a willingness to sell, the acquisition process and timeline are
explained. If the landowner agrees to proceed, the Landowner Bill of Rights Letter is signed.
This letter verifies that the landowner understands the process and has agreed to work with
the MNDNR.
If the site meets the criteria and the landowner agrees to' proceed, the MNDNR will have the
property appraised to determine its fair market value. After the appraisal has been approved,
an offer to purchase can be made.
If the landowner agrees with the value, then the MNDNR may take an option on thc property.
The option will indentify such things as, the land to be purchased, the price, the length of
time required to complete the negotiations.
After the optiOn is signed by the landowner, the MNDNR, within 5 working days, will notify
the city and the LMCD, in writing, of its actions. Notification can not be made prior to the
signing of the option due to confidentiality requirements.
Page 23
Lake Minnetonka Acquisition Process
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The proposal will be discussed with the city, (citizens, council members, etc) and other
interested members of the public. Assuming there are no valid reasons for rejecting the
property or the project, the MNDNR will work and cooperate with the city and the LMCD to
complete the acquisition and development..
The MNDNR will use various methods to inform and involve the public. The processes used
will include: Formal Public Meetings, Informal Public Meetings, Open Houses, Question and
Answer Sessions at City Council Meetings and Meetings with neighbors and concerned
individuals.
The MNDNR will continue to keep the city and the LMCD informed and involved in the
design of the acces from the initial concept stage through final design. Examples of items
that will be discussed are: traffic flow, parking lot layout, drainage and runoff, landscaping,
signage.
This cooperative process does not end with the construction of the access. After the access is
developed the MNDNR will continue to work with the city and the residents on access
maintenance and operations procedures.
Page 24
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
ACCESS SITE EVALUATION CRITE~A
Appendix 8
These evaluation criteria should be used in selecting potential new access sites for fishing craft and
small recreation boats. The standard are not expected to be perfectly achieved. Each should be
seriously considered and graded. Other evaluation criteria may be considered on a site-specific basis.
Relationship to residential areas -- Positive and negative impacts of the site on adjacent
residential areas, such as distance between a site and nearby homes, screening the site from
homes, noise, traffic, etc.
Accessibility to primary highways - Potential sites near major highways (State Highways 7 and
101, County Roads 19 and 15 are examples) to reduce traffic impact on residential streets.
Safety on site, on water and egress to both.
Public use precedent -- Sites which are already in public ownership or in commercial or
industrial use, or isolated from other residential areas, and where public facilities or services
have been provided and accepted, have the least ncighborhood impact.
Intensity of boating use near a potential access site -- Sections of the lake where there is intense
boating, or crowding in channels, should be downgraded.
Cost -- Property acquisition, development and maintenance costs.
Physical development constraints -- positive and negative features on land and in the water and
changes possible to make the potential site usable.
Visual impacts -- Positive and negative visual impressions as seen from land and water.
Multiple use opportunities for the site -- Sites that provide shore fishing, pier fishing, picnic
areas, toilets, etc., along with boat access are preferred.
9. Site size -- Larger sites with off-street parking are prefe~ed.
10. Environmental considerations -- dredging, fill, run-off control, wetlands preservation, etc.
Footnotes:
1. Sites shall not be excluded because there is limited access for large boats.
2. Sites will be preferred that provide equitable distribution.
3. Sellers must be willing, city must cooperate and other agencies must approve.
Adopted: March 18, 1993
Page 25
~ .... lJ J ,,J Ill, II ,11
LL!
·
o ~
.,-4
ee
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
0
0
N
Apendix 10
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY
1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
FOR LAKE MINNETONKA
TASK FORCE CHRONOLOGY
The initial Task Force meeting was held 3/1F92. Its purpose goal and objectives were
introduced as follows:
PURPOSE -- to establish a plan to meet the Management Plan lake access policies
developed in the 1983 and 1986 Lake Minnetonka Task Force studies.
GOAL - coordination of an immediate inter-agency inventory, study and assessment
of the car/trailer (c/t) parking spaces at public access ramps to meet the 700 reliable c/t
objective.
OBJECTIVES:
Establish criteria in the LMCD Code for acceptable year-round lake access, including
access ramps, lakeside and remote c/t parking, handicapped access and signage.
b. Conduct a joint study of all access ramps and associated e/t parking, identifying all
existing ramps and associated lake parking.
c. Develop a plan for and provide LMCD-approved boat access ramps with 700 reliable
e/t parking spaces.
d. Widen or otherwise improve efficiency of existing ramps for use by more than one c/t
at a time. ..
Resolve DNR's Maxwell Bay access proposal in accord with Management Plan
policies and objectives and in accord with the 1983 and 1986 Task Force Study
recommendations by:
1) Activating the Lake Access Task Force, appointing
representatives of affected communities, DNR, LMLOA and citizens to
implement the public access siting process.
2) Facilitate a cooperative effort to address land use issues that are the basis for
objections raised by the City of Orono.
3) Conduct a feasibility study of land purchase between Gayle's Marina and the
DNR property.
4) City of Orono, LMCD and DN-R cooperate in securing funding for the Maxwell
Bay access properties.
NOTE:After cooperation on obtaining funding through the Legislative Commission
on Minnesota Resources (LCMR), the Task Force and LMCD were asked by Orono
officials to not further participate in Maxwell Bay negotiations between the DN'R and
the City of Orono.
Page 27
' ' JJ, IJ J ,J, JlJi, I
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
The Task Force formed three subcorr,nittees, namely:
Data Gathering
Standards
Steering
DATA GATHERING SUBCOMMITTEE cfr PARKING INVENTORY
DEVELOPMENT
A 4f15/92 inventory of existing or planned e/t parking spaces was conducted by LMCD and
DNR staff from contacts made among city and county staff.
That inventory was compared to the 1983 Task Force inventory for the five zones of the lake.
The comparison of e/t parking spaces by zones was as follows:
Zone Goal 1983 Total 1992 Total
1 North Arm 139 60 63
2
Grays Bay Hwy 101
Grays Bay Dam
Wayzata Bay Hwy 16
Sub Total
144
24 37
19 19
46 81
3 Carsons Bay
155 0 40
4
Spring Park Bay
Phelps Bay
Sub Total
126
79 93
..0. 4
79 97
Halsted, Wms. St.
Halsted, Kings Point
Henri. Regional Park
Cooks Bay, Mount Park
Sub Total
136
0 30
0 32
0 100
0 an
0 192
Grand Total 700 185 473
These counts were later revised based upon a more detailed inventory conducted in June by
LMCD staff of c/t street parking potentially available to 2,000' from the access, identified
later in this report.
Criteria were needed to identify reliable c/t parking spaces. The Standards Committee was
asked to develop such criteria.
Page 28
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
FACILITATOR ENGAGED. The LMCD engaged a state facilitator to meet the diverse
interests involved in the proceedings:
1. Decisions would result from a consensus.
2. Persons participating would only be those holding designated membership in
the Task Force.
3. The Task Force would work in good faith.
TASK
ASSIGNMENTS:
1. MN DNR staff examined c/t parking spaces in public access ramp lots.
2. LMCD staff counted street parking utilizing 1985 e/t parking criteria, adjusting
criteria by extending distance from access site from 1,500' to 2,000'.
3. Aerial photographs of public access sites taken.
4. DNR/LMCD staff drafted parking space standards from the 1986 standards
previously considered.
TASK ASSIGNMENT RESULTS:
C/T PARKING INVENTORY OF 7/15/93. A street inventory of actual and potential c/t
parking spaces up to 2,000' from accesses was conducted. Potential spaces included future
public access sites, one private lot, public lots in other agency jurisdictions (school districts)
and street locations subject to city/county approval.
A surveyor wheel measurement device was used to calculate an accurate 50' c/t parking space
and for determining accurate distance from the launch ramp. Results of the inventory count
of 7/15/92 were:
C/T Parking Spaces at present or planned access ramps:
North Arm
Grays Bay 101 Causeway
Grays Bay Dam
Kings Point, DNR
Spring Park Ramp
Spring Park/Orono County Lot
Hennepin Regional Park
Sub Total
63
37
19
32
19
70
340
Potential C/T Parking Space Additions:
Streets, city & county
Off street, private & city
Sub Total
82
168
Existing Street Availability:
City/county
(99 of the 337 at Williams
Street, Halsted Bay access)
337
GRAND TOTAL
Page 29
845
?ROCI:-EDINGS S~¥, 1992 LAJ~ ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
DNR ANALYSIS OF cfr PARKINg SPACES AT ACCESS LOTS:
The c/t parking space count at access on-site lots diffcn' only slightly from 1983 and 1986
counts. Some car-only parking spaces could be converted to c/t parking spaces.
AERIAL SURVEY OF PUBLIC ACCESS SITES
Aerial photos of c/t parking conditions at public access sites on a high-use day illustrated
crowded conditions. Opportunities for improvements or expansion of parking capacity either
on or off-site were noted.
RELIABLE C/T PARKING SPACE STANDARDS
Seven criteria and three supplemental recommendations applying to Parking Standards were
prepared 7/15/92 for Task Force approval.
GRANT RECOM2MENDATION FOR MAXWELL BAY LAND ACQUISITION
A Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) grant recommendation for
$944,000 for land acquisition to develop a public access site on Maxwell bay, subject to
Legislative approval, was announced.
JOINT DATA GATHERING/STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
C/T PARKING INVENTORY REVIEW
Subcommittee action of 802/92 amended the 7/15/92 c/t Parking Inventory from 845 to 755 c/t
parking spaces. A reduction of 59 spaces from 99 to a net of 40 spaces at the Williams St.
Halsted Bay access, and a reduction of 32 spaces from 100 to 68 spaces at the Hennepin
Regional Park resulted in a 755 adjusted count.
PARKING STANDARDS RECOMMENDATION:
Starting with the seven criteria and three supplemental recommendations of 7/15/92, the joint
subcommittee review recommended Parking Standards for Task Force consideration and
adoption.
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF ACCESS SITES:
Equitable distribution of parking sites throughout the five lake zones was identified as a
priority.
PARKING INVENTORY:
With minor footnote adjustments, the Parking Inventory of 755 current and potential c/t
parking spaces was finalized and recommended for presentation to the Task Force.
Page 30
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
STEERING CO~E RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations of the Data Gathering and Standards Subcommittee meeting of 9/9/92
was confirmed. Additional issues were recommended for Task Force consideration: 1. Coordinate site acquisition for Maxwell Bay
2. Coordinate access development of Grays Bay Hwy. 101 Causeway and
subsequent closing of Grays Bay Dam access
3. Coordinate access development of Hennepin Regional Park
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken 10/21/93:
1. Parking Standards were adopted.
The Lake Mirmetonka Lakeshore Owners Assn. (LMLOA)
presented their board position calling for a r~uetion of the 700 e/t parking
spaces goal.
DN1L LMCD and sport fishing representatives supported the 700 e/t parking
spaces goal. This goal originated in the 1983 Task Force Study. It is based
upon Lake Minnetonka's 14,000 acre capacity to accommodate one boat per 20
acres of water surface. No consensus was reached on changing the goal.
Consensus required substantially unanimous agreement.
Thc LMCD Lake Access Commktee, appointed January,
to:
1992, was activated
Coordinate related lake access objectives and policies with the Task
Force.
Carry out lake access objectives and policies in the Management Plan
which will not be addressed by the Task Force.
LMCD BOARD ACTION ON TASK FORCE POSITIONS
Upon recommendation by the LMCD Lake Access Committee, the LMCD board on 10/28/92
approved Task Force positions on:
1. Parking Standards for Lake Mirmetonka Public Accesses
2. Parking Inventory of 755 current and potential e/t parking spaces
3. A draft model Parking Agreement for cities or agencies identifying e/t parking
spaces which meet the Parking Standards.
4. Parking Agreements to be secured by LMCD with cities or agencies.
Page 31
,. , .... I1 J ,Il , IIi~, j ~iI
PROCEEDINGS SUMMAKY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken on 12/9/92:
1. Approved Current and Potential C/T Parking Inventory total adjusted to 735 c/t
parking spaces, subject to meeting adopted Parking Standards, and subject to
agreements with cities or agencies within which the existing public accesses are
located. (The 8/12/92 Parking Inventory was adjusted from 755 to 735 as a result
of the Hennepin Regional Park planned access count being adjusted to 80 upon
agreement with the City of Minnetrista and Suburban Hennepin Regional Park
District.)
Goal of 700 cdt parking spaces on which Task Force consensus was not reached
was referred to the LMCD board for a final decision.
Ail cities encouraged to make a concerted effort to provide their share of lake
access cdt parking spaces. Cities were further encouraged to coordinate and
cooperate to meet zone goals.
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COMMITTEE REPORT
The Lake Access Committee actions taken on 3/16/93:
Committee chair outlined a policy to persuade cities or agencies to make decisions
on public accesses in the best interest of the most public use of the lake.
Existing public access sites proposed for evaluation against a grading scale as to
safety, quality, size.
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force Actions taken 3/18/93:
Model Public Access C/T Parking Agreement approved incorporating adopted
Parking Standards.
Access Site Evaluation Criteria ten point outline approved with recommended
footnotes approved.
Aerial slide photo documentation of existing and potential access sites presented.
Sites suggested from this aerial survey are to serve as a future guide for access
site inquiries and proposals.
Page 32
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
ACCESS SITING SUBCOMMITYEE ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee Actions taken 4/6/93:
1. MN DNR Landowner Bill of Rights was reviewed. The Bill of Rights was
accepted for recommendafon to the Task Force. The procedures detailed in the
Bill of Rights would remain in effect after the Task Force completes this study.
Public review of a future access site negotiation brought forward by the DNR was
concluded to be the affected city's responsibility.
2. A list of some 40 potential access sites taken from the March aerial survey and a
list developed by the 1983 Task Force Study was edited to review properties no
longer available due to development or other current uses making the property
unavailable.
STEERING COMMITTEE ACTIONS
Steering Committee actions taken 4/6/93:
MN DOT position on its reduced Hwy. 101 causeway bridge and road rebuilding,
excluding the causeway public access upgrading, was received.
ACCESS SITING SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee actions taken 4/14/93:
1. Potential public access sites were presented for review against the 1993 ten point
Access Site Evaluation Criteria. All marina sites were removed for separate
consideration. Eight other sites were removed as no longer available.
ACCESS SITING SUBCOMM1TYEE ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee actions taken 5/4/93:
I. Potential access sites reviewed per Access Site Evaluation Criteria, with added
conditions: "
a. All sites must have willing sellers.
b. City cooperation must be secured in advancing the access site.
c. ' Agency cooperation must be secured in advance of a site being selected.
Potential access sites remaining on the list as a result of comparison to the review
criteria were:
* Tonka Bay City Dock, channel to Gideons Bay
* Timber Lane, Gideons Bay, Shorewood
* Mai Tai, Excelsior Bay
* 456 Arlington Ave, Wayzata Bay (private residence)
* Pelican Point, Spring Park Bay, Mound
* Lost Lake, Cooks Bay, Mound
* Advance Machine, West Ann, Spring Park
Page 33
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
Marinas as potential access sites were recommended to be examined for public
access use under the following conditions:
a. Potential use of extending existing capacity.
b. Extent to which the marina already serves the public for tee paid access.
c. Attitude of nearby homeowners for public access use.
d. Considering any public access use as a temporary trial.
e. Management issues to be addressed such as how public parking/launch
space would be reserved and accounted for in a mix of fee paid launch
service
£. MN DNR budget constraints in funding leased space
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COMMI'VFEE ACI~ON
Lake Access Committee action taken 5/7/93:
1. The Lake Access Parking Agreement with the City of Minnetrista was accepted
and recommended to the LMCD board for acceptance.
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE MEETING ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken 5/12/93:
1. The seven potential access sites were accepted as identified by the Access
Siting Subcommittee 5/4/93.
Marina sites having potential to accommodate public access through agreement
with the DNR will be considered separately from the seven potential access
sites accepted 5/4/93. The six conditions under which marina sites would be
evaluated for public access as detailed by the Access Siting Committee 5/4/93
were also accepted.
The Maxwell Bay access site is recognized as in negotiations between the City
of Orono and MN DN'R.
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COMMITTEE ACTIONS
Lake Access Committee action of 6/15/93 approved tasks which the LMCD committee intends
to .continue processing:
I. Determine the equitable distribution of public access among existing and
potential new access sites.
2. Evaluate and negotiate with commercial marinas for their potential in providing
c/t parking and launch service:
a. Apply equitable distribution criteria.
b. DNR to negotiate agreements for space/service provided.
Page 34
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
Assess means by which existing public accesses may be upgraded for safety and
greater user satisfaction.
Board members to work with LMCD and DNR staff in finalizing c/t parking
agreements with cities and agencies having existing public accesses.
Access signage to be developed per agreement provisions, cities and agencies
asked to assist.
Page 35