The URL can be used to link to this page

1996-06-11 AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 1996, 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PAGE 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 28, 1996 REGULAR MEETING ................................... 1951-1960 PUBLIC HEARING: STREET VACATION - CHURCHILL LANE, MICHAEL & CARRIE MCDONALD, 3018 CHURCHILL LANE PID 24-117-24 44 0146, P&Z//96-18 .......................... 1961-1965 PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED TRANSFER/MERGER OF TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. AND D.D. CABLE PARTNERS, L.P ...................................... 1966-1980 NOTE: TOM CREIGHTON, BERNICK AND LIFSON AND ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE CITY OF MOUND AND THE LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THAT WE OPEN THE HEARING, TAKE ANY COMMENTS AND THEN CONTINUE THE HEARING TO JULY 23, 1996, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS INFORMATION THAT HE IS WAITING FOR FROM TRIAX MIDWEST AND D.D. CABLE PARTNERS THAT IS NECESSARY BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TAKES ACTION ON THIS REQUEST. THE HEARING MUST BE HELD NOW TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS. PRESENTATION BY DAHRAM BOBRA, P.E., SENIOR DESIGN ENGINEER, HENNEPIN COUNTY RE: PROPOSED STOPLIGHT ON THREE POINTS BLVD. AND CSAH 110 ..................... 1981-1983 REQUEST TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE: KILDARE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PETITION REQUEST - TRACY INGRAM AND BRIAN SCHULTZ ..................................... 1984-2001 RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF DECK WITHIN FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 1708 AVOCET LANE ................................. 2002-2006 1950 e 10. 11. 12. REQUEST FROM BRIAN AND MARIA JOHNSON RE: EXTENSION OF ONE YEAR BUILDING PERMIT, 4945 GLEN ELYN RD ........... 2007=2015 APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR LOCAL PERFORMANCE AID PAYABLE IN1997. ............................................ 2016-2018 LICENSE RENEWALS: ON-SALE BEER, OFF-SALE BEER, CLUB- ON-SALE, ON-SALE WINE AND SUNDAY SALES ................... 2019 PAYMENT OF BILLS. .................................. 2020-2044 (NOTE: EXPLANATION OF LONGFORD ROAD SURVEY EXPENSE NOT APPROVED AT 5/28/96 MEETING WHICH WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR AT THIS MEETING. ENCLOSED ALSO NOTE LETTER DATED JUNE 5, 1996 FROM LMCD RE: LONGFORD ROAD DOCK INTERPRETATION). INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS. Ao DEPARTMENT HEADMONTHLY REPORTS FOR MAY, 1996. ..................................... 2045-2065 LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT FOR MAY 1996 ............ 2066 LMCD MAILINGS (TO BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY). MEMORANDUM FROM THE CITY OF ORONO INVITING TWO CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND A MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 10, 1996, 7 PM, AT SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TO REVIEW A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "LAKE MINNETONKA AREA COOPERATIVE POLICE SERVICES STUDY" PREPARED BY THE LAKE MINNETONKA COOPERATING CITIES (LMACC) DATED MAY 15, 1996. THE DOCUMENT WAS DEVELOPED UNDER A $5,000 GRANT FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND WAS WORKED ON BY AN INTERN FROM THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION GRADUATE PROGRAM AT HAMLINE UNIVERSITY AND ASSISTED BY A SUBCOMMITTEE OF CITY ADMINISTRATORS AND MANAGERS FROM THE LAKE AREA CITIES. REVIEW AND COMMENT WAS ALSO PROVIDED BY LAKE AREA CHIEF OF POLICE. THE STUDY OFFERS SOME "FOOD FOR THOUGHT" ON WAYS IN WHICH LAKE AREA CITIES CAN COOPERATE FURTHER IN THE AREA OF POLICE SERVICES DELIVERY AS WELL AS POSSIBLE CONSOLIDATION OPPORTUNITIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE FUTURE. THE LATTER ISSUE WOULD REQUIRE A MORE-IN-DEPTH FEASIBILITY STUDY OF CONSOLIDATION OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS. A COPY OF THE STUDY IS ENCLOSED AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU REVIEW IT AND LET ME KNOW WHICH TWO OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MOUND. .................................... 2069-2079 1951 Fo Ho MEMORANDUM FROM THE WESTONKA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RE: LOCAL FOCUS MEETING FOR MAYOR POLSTON AND MYSELF TO ATTEND ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 1995, 7:30 AM, AT THE YACHT CLUB, SPRING PARK. THE MEETING WILL FEATURE BRUCE CHAMBERLAIN AND MYSELF PRESENTING THE MOUND VISIONS PROGRAM TO OTHER LAKE AREA CITIES. ........................................... 2080 LETTER DATED MAY 29, 1996, RE: PRELIMINARY POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES FOR MOUND AS OF APRIL l, 1995 ......................... 2081-2083 LETTER DATED MAY 31, 1996, FROM NON-ABUTTING RESIDENTS OF WOODLAND POINT RE: CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON 1996 DOCK ARRANGEMENT FOR WOODLAND POINT ............................................ 2084 AT THE 5/28/96 MEETING, A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT WAS APPROVED ON A 3-2 VOTE FOR STEPHANIE COON, 4729 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE. WE NEGLECTED TO POINT OUT IN THE DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM THAT UNDER SECTION 320 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE, APPROVAL REQUIRES A 4/5 VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WE CAUGHT THIS WHILE PREPARING THE CERTIFIED RESOLUTION AFTER THE MEETING. WE APOLOGIZED TO MS. COON AND INDICATED THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN. SINCE TWO OF YOU WILL NOT BE PRESENT NEXT TUESDAY EVENING, THE ITEM WILL HAVE TO BE RETURNED TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION ON JUNE 25, 1996. WE APOLOGIZE FOR CAUSING THE INCONVENIENCE TO MS. COON AND THE CITY COUNCIL. THE WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER TASK FORCE HAD ITS FINAL MEETING ON JUNE 5, 1996. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE PARTNERSHIPS WITH LIFETIME FITNESS AND THE YMCA, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS WERE IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERCOME. THE TASK FORCE'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE SCHOOL BOARD ON WHAT TO DO WITH THE BUILDING IS NOW TO GO TO PLAN B WHICH IS TO DEMOLISH THE 1938 HIGH SCHOOL AND RETAIN THE 1965 PODS WITH REMODELING AND CODE IMPROVEMENTS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE OLD GYMNASIUM CANNOT BE SAVED DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE SUPPORTING WALLS TO HOLD IT UP. THE SCHOOL BOARD WILL HEAR THIS RECOMMENDATION AT ITS JUNE 10, 1996 BOARD MEETING. THE TASK FORCE SPENT NEARLY 2 YEARS ANALYZING THIS ISSUE AND ALTHOUGH THEY BELIEVE THAT A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER IS THE ULTIMATE ANSWER, THEY ARE REALISTS AND UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY IN ACCOMPLISHING ULTIMATE SOLUTION. THE TASK FORCE WISHES TO THANK THE ELECTED OFFICIALS FOR THE TIME THEY SPENT IN MEETINGS WITH THE TASK FORCE AND PROVIDING INPUT ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT COMMUNITY ISSUE. 1952 MALKERSON G'ILLILAND ,! I,,i II i Iii ID, G 1:23379310 PACE MARTIN Su~T~: 1500 AT&T TowEe MINNEAPOLIS. MI ~ ~ £$0'r,~ 'T£c.:~a~o~ 612.344-1111 ' ' ~'ACSt M J ~.E $12-344- lA. lA Via Telecopier and U.S. Mail Mr. Curtis Pearson Kennedy & Graven 470 Pillsbury Ce~r Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: City of Mound: Proposed Utility and Street Improvements on Kildare Road. Tom Stokes ~-~ Bren~hell Homes : Dear Mr. Pearson: As you may recall I spoke with you on April 5, 1996, C°nc~rning the desire of my client TOM Stokes to have the City allow him to build the strce~ and utilities to service 6 lots in the City of Mound along KiIdare Road or in ~ alternative to have the City order the project as a public project and then assess the appropriate amount against Mr. Stokes gna any other property benefitted from the project. As you may recall, you provided a dr~ Pet/t/on and Waiver Agre~ncnt in the evcm that ~h;~ were to bca public prbjcct, however the property owner to the west did not wish to sign the Agreement. My client has been .working out an arrangement with ~ property owner w the west that would also be serviced by the above described street and Utilities. He and ~ property owner have come to the following general agreement which will be reduced to a binding agreement once we have City approval of proc_~_ding with a private project to be paid direcr, ly by the prolYm7 owners. My understanding is that pursuant to Council directionlrny client and/or the neighbor to thc west will be presem in front of the City Council tomorrow! night at which time hopefuUy the City Council will approve of my client's proceeding to buff.' d the street and utility systems to service my client's property and the property m thc west via a private project. As I stated, if that general approval is given, we can.work our the details with City staff thereafter and finalize thc agreement between the private parties. However, ! anticipate that such an a~eement would follow these general outlines: JUN- KENNEDY Mr. Curtis Pearson June I0, 1996 Page 2 & (;RAVEN ID:G1233?9310 3/4 Each party will deed to the City the permanent easemer~ for th~ m~l de sac and any widenin~ of the roadway required by the City. i Temporary construction easemeuts will be granted by the other party to my client so that h~ contractor ~ enter upon the property as needed to complete the cous~on. My client will obtain final approval of the plans and specifications for the street and utilities from the City amd then obtain a finn! bid for tha~ work from one ,or more contractors. My client will th~n execute the contract with the contractor to ~'mish the work pursuant to previously approved plans and speci~ations by the City. We understand that there is general agreement with City sta~, as to the draft plaus and specifications at this point. ; The City a~ees to take over the sueet and utility system as a publk street and utility system with/n the fight of way upon the City's approval of the construction as having met the City approved plans ~r~ specifications. All of the costs relating to enginee~ costs incurred by my client, City fees if any that must be paid, and actual construction costs will be est'm~ated once there has been approval of the plans and specifications by th~ City ~ my clicat obtains a f'mal bid from the contractor. These will be called "approved cOSts-. At that time pursuant to an agreement between the private parties, the property owner on the west will place in escrow with the State Bank of!Long Lake or some other appropriate escrow agent 2/9 of the estimated approved costs. Upon certification by the City that the above described construction work wai done and accepted by the City then that 219 will be paid directly to the contractor and Xn.Y cheat will pay 719 of the cost. There will be a mechanism to obtain from both the propext'y owner to the west and my client any additional funds if necessary if the e~t/mated approved costs prove to be higher than had been anticipated. ~, As part of the agreemem, my clieat will construct separately any storm water improvement or in lieu thereof, pay to the Minaehaha Creek Watershed District whatever paymeat required to fulfill my client's rcspo~ibility as to his lots. The party to the west will do likewise. Of course, there wflI be some additional boilerplate as ~uy be required by the parties or by the City. Mr. Curtis Pearson .I,~n~ 10, 1~6 Page 3 I submit this information to you so that you =,~ the Cit~ Council understand that if the City Council approves thc private core,ruction of thc above described Improvements, my client and the property owner to the west will proceed immedi :alely to f~r~li?e ~ plans and specifications, execute the appropr/ate agreement, and/f there is a necessary a~eement with the City, they will execute that also. If you bare any questions, please call. Very truly yours, : Bruce D. Malkerscm cc: Tom Stokes : .~Th¢ City of~ M°Und; throug)~ AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 1996, 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PAGE 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 28, 1996 REGULAR MEETING ................................... 1951-1960 PUBLIC HEARING: STREET VACATION - CHURCHILL LANE, MICHAEL & CARRIE MCDONALD, 3018 CHURCHI~.A~.,.~/ PID 24-117-24 44 0146, P&Z ~6-18 ........ ~ ...' ............ 1961-1965 PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED TRANSFER/MERGER OF TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. AND D.D. C~BLE. ~-t9~,~,~'-~-~ 1966-1980 PARTNERS, L.P ...................................... NOTE: TOM CREIGHTON, BERNICK AND LIFSON AND ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE CITY OF MOUND AND THE LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THAT WE OPEN THE HEARING, TAKE ANY COMMENTS AND THEN CONTINUE THE HEARING TO JULY 23, 1996, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS INFORMATION THAT HE IS WAITING FOR FROM TRIAX MIDWEST AND D.D. CABLE PARTNERS THAT IS NECESSARY BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TAKES ACTION ON THIS REQUEST. THE HEARING MUST BE HELD NOW TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS. pRESENTATION BY DAHRAM BOBRA, P.E., SENIOR DESIGN ENGINEER, HENNEPIN COUNTY RE: PROPOSED STOPLIGHT ON THREE POINTS BLVD. AND CSAH 1 l0 ..................... 1981-1983 REQUEST TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE: KILDARE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PETITION REQUEST - TRACY INGRAM AND BRIAN SCHULTZ ..................................... 1984-2001 RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF DECK WITHIN FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 1708 AVOCET LANE ....................... ' 2002-2006 1950 o 10. 11. 12. REQUEST FROM BRIAN AND MARIA JOHNSON RE: EXTENSION OF ONE YEAR BUILDING PERMIT, 4945 GLEN ELYN RD ........... 2007-2015 APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR LOCAL PERFORMANCE AID PAYABLE IN 1997 ............................................. 2016-2018 LICENSE RENEWALS: ON-SALE BEER, OFF-SALE BEER, CLUB- ON-SALE, ON-SALE WINE AND SUNDAY SALES ................... 2019 PAYMENT OF BILLS ................................... 2020-2044 (NOTE: EXPLANATION OF LONGFORD ROAD SURVEY EXPENSE NOT APPROVED AT 5/28/96 MEETING WHICH WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR AT THIS MEETING. ENCLOSED ALSO NOTE LETTER DATED JUNE 5, 1996 FROM LMCD RE: LONGFORD ROAD DOCK INTERPRETATION). INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: DEPARTMENT HEAD MONTHLY REPORTS FOR MAY, 1996 ...................................... 2045-2065 B. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT FOR MAY 1996 ............ 2066 C. LMCD MAILINGS (TO BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY). ,,~L~M, AEMORANDUM FROM THE CITY OF ORONO INVITING TWO CITY COUNCIL ENTATIVES TO ATTEND A MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, J~ T SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TO REVIEW A DOCIJMizNr ENTITLED MINNETONKA AREA COOPERATIVE POLICE SERVICES STUDY" PREPARED BY THE LAKE MINNETONKA COOPERATING CITIES (LMACC) DATED MAY 15, 1996. THE DOCUMENT WAS DEVELOPED UNDER A $5,000 GRANT FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND WAS WORKED ON BY AN INTERN FROM THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION GRADUATE PROGRAM AT HAMLINE UNIVERSITY AND ASSISTED BY A SUBCOMMITTEE OF CITY ADMINISTRATORS AND MANAGERS FROM THE LAKE AREA CITIES. REVIEW AND COMMENT WAS ALSO PROVIDED BY LAKE AREA CHIEF OF POLICE. THE STUDY OFFERS SOME "FOOD FOR THOUGHT" ON WAYS IN WHICH LAKE AREA CITIES CAN COOPERATE FURTHER IN THE AREA OF POLICE SERVICES DELIVERY AS WELL AS POSSIBLE CONSOLIDATION OPPORTUNITIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE FUTURE. THE LATTER ISSUE WOULD REQUIRE A MORE-IN-DEPTH FEASIBILITY STUDY OF CONSOLIDATION OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS. A COPY OF THE STUDY IS ENCLOSED AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU REVIEW IT AND LET ME KNOW WHICH TWO OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MOUND ..................................... 2069-2079 1951 JUN- 11:12 FROM: KlvbiN£D¥ & GRAVEN ii ID,612337!1310 PAGE V ALKERSON GILLILAND MARTIN tt ' Iu~z 10. 1996 Via Telecopier and U.S. Mail Mr. Curtis Pearson K~nedy & Graven 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: City of Mound: Proposed Utility and Street Improvements on Kildale Road. Tom Stokes and Br~nsh¢ll Homes : Dear Mr. Pearson: As you may recall I spoke with you on April 5, 1996, donc~rning the desire of my clien~ Tom Stokes to have the City allow him to build the street and utilities to servic~ 6 lots in the City of Mound aloi~ Kildar¢ Road or in the alternative to have the City order the project as a public project and then assess the appropriate amount against Mx. Stokes and any other property benefitted from the project. As you may recall, you Provided a draft Petition and Waiver Agreement in the event that ~_hls were to Ix: a public prbject, however the property owner to thc west did not wish to sign the Agreement. My client has been .working out an arrangement with thc property owner to thc west that would also be serviced by the above described street and ~tilities. He and that p:operty owner have come to the following general agreement which will be reduced to a binding agreement onc~ we have City approval of proc_~ding with a private project to be paid directly by the property owners. My understanding is that pursuant tn Council direction!my client and/or the neighbor to the west will bc present in front of the City Council tomorrow! night at which time hopefully the City Council will approve of my client's proceeding to buff.' d the street and utility systems to service my client's property ~ the property to thc west via a private project. As I stated, if that general approval is ~ven, we can.work out the details with City staff thereafter and finalize the agreemem between tbe private parties. However, ! anticipam that such an agreement would follow these general outlines: JUN-11-gS 11:11 FROH:KENNED¥ & GRAVEN ID:G1233?9310 3/4 Mr. Curtis Pearson ~une 10, 1996 Page 2 Each party will deed w the City the l~rmancnt easeme~r_s for the cul de sac and any widening of the roadway requked by the City. : Temporary com'm~ction easements will be granted by the othcr party to my client so that his contractor can enter upon thc property as needed to complete the construction. My client will obtain final approval of thc plans and Sl~Cifications for thc street and utilities from the City and then obtain a t~na! bid for tha~ work from one ,or more contractors. My client will tl~n execute the contract with the contractor to finish the work pursuant to prcviously approved pl~ and specifilations by thc City. We understand that there is general agreement with City sta~f, as to the draft pl~n~ and specifications at this point. Thc City a~ees to take over the street and utility system as a public street and utility system with/n the right of way upon the City's approval of the construction as having met the City approved plans ,_.ti specifications. All of the costs relating to engineering costs incurred by my client, City fees if any that must be paid, and actual construction costs will be est' .m~ated once there has been approval of the plan~ and specifications by the City and.'.' my client obtains a fmaI bid from the contractor. These will be called "approved costs". At that time pursuant to an a~mcnt betweea the private parties, the property owner on the west will place in escrow with the State Bank of!Long Lake or some other appropriate escrow agent 2/9 of thc estimated approvca costs. Upon certification by the City that the above described construction work wa~ done and accepted by the City then that 2/9 will be paid directly to the contractor and ~ny client will pay 7/9 of thc cost. There will be a mechanism to obtain from both thc' propex~y owner to thc west and my client any additional ftlndS if necessal'y if the e~t~P-a~ approved costs prove to be higher than had been anticipated. As part of the agree~_ ~nt, my client will construct separately any storm water improvement or in lieu thereof, pay to the Mianehaha Creek Watershed District whatever payracat required to fulfill my client's rcspoaS., ibility as to his lots. The party to the west will do likewise. Of course, there will be some additional boilerplate as may be required by the parties or by the City. Mr. Curds Pearson lun~ 10, I~6 Pa~e 3 I submi~ this information to you so that you and th~ CitT.. Council uuderstand that if the City Council approves the private consu'uction of thc above described Improvements, my client and the property own~ to the we. st will proceed immedia~ly to t~,~i?~ the plans and specifications, execute thc appropriate agreement, and if there is a ~ a~eement with tI~ City, they will execute that also. If you have any questious, piece call. Very truly yours, ' Bruce D. Malkerson ~:: Tom Stokes Fo Ge Ho MEMORANDUM FROM THE WESTONKA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RE: LOCAL FOCUS MEETING FOR MAYOR POLSTON AND MYSELF TO ATI?END ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 1995, 7:30 AM, AT THE YACHT CLUB, SPRING PARK. THE MEETING WILL FEATURE BRUCE CHAMBERLAIN AND MYSELF PRESENTING THE MOUND VISIONS PROGRAM TO OTHER LAKE AREA CITIES. ........................................... 2080 LETTER DATED MAY 29, 1996, RE: PRELIMINARY POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES FOR MOUND AS OF APRIL l, 1995. ........................ 2081-2083 LETTER DATED MAY 31, 1996, FROM NON-ABUTTING RESIDENTS OF WOODLAND POINT RE: CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON 1996 DOCK ARRANGEMENT FOR WOODLAND POINT ............................................ 2084 AT THE 5/28/96 MEETING, A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT WAS APPROVED ON A 3-2 VOTE FOR STEPHANIE COON, 4729 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE. WE NEGLECTED TO POINT OUT IN THE DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM THAT UNDER SECTION 320 OF THE MOUND CITY CODE, APPROVAL REQUIRES A 4/5 VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WE CAUGHT THIS WHILE PREPARING THE CERTIFIED RESOLUTION AFTER THE MEETING. WE APOLOGIZED TO MS. COON AND INDICATED THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN. SINCE TWO OF YOU WILL NOT BE PRESENT NEXT TUESDAY EVENING, THE ITEM WILL HAVE TO BE RETURNED TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION ON JUNE 25, 1996. WE APOLOGIZE FOR CAUSING THE INCONVENIENCE TO MS. COON AND THE CITY COUNCIL. THE WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER TASK FORCE HAD ITS FINAL MEETING ON JUNE 5, 1996. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE PARTNERSHIPS WITH LIFETIME FITNESS AND THE YMCA, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS WERE IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERCOME. THE TASK FORCE'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE SCHOOL BOARD ON WHAT TO DO WITH THE BUILDING IS NOW TO GO TO PLAN B WHICH IS TO DEMOLISH THE 1938 HIGH SCHOOL AND RETAIN THE 1965 PODS WITH REMODELING AND CODE IMPROVEMENTS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE OLD GYMNASIUM CANNOT BE SAVED DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE SUPPORTING WALLS TO HOLD IT UP. THE SCHOOL BOARD WILL HEAR THIS RECOMMENDATION AT ITS JUNE 10, 1996 BOARD MEETING. THE TASK FORCE SPENT NEARLY 2 YEARS ANALYZING THIS ISSUE AND ALTHOUGH THEY BELIEVE THAT A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER IS THE ULTIMATE ANSWER, THEY ARE REALISTS AND UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY IN ACCOMPLISHING ULTIMATE SOLUTION. THE TASK FORCE WISHES TO THANK THE ELECTED OFFICIALS FOR THE TIME THEY SPENT IN MEETINGS WITH THE TASK FORCE AND PROVIDING INPUT ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT COMMUNITY ISSUE. 1952 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MAY 28, 1996 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, May 28, 1996 at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz Jensen and Phyllis Jessen. Also in attendance: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Attorney John Dean, City Engineer John Cameron, City Planner Mark Koegler and Acting City Clerk Linda Strong. The following interested citizens were also present: Carol Doyle, Steven Madson, Kevin Donahoe, John Holloway, Bill Darling, Kari Berg, Paul Doyle, Ted and Jeanette Metz, Many and Marie Johnson, Lyn Hexum, Dave Kunz, Don Pedersen, Leah Weycker, Karl Weisenhorn, Robert Lien, Cathy Bailey, Dennis Flack, Mike Gardner, Dennis Halleron, Earl Allen. The Mayor opened the meeting. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 1.1 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 14, 1996 REGULAR MEETING. The Acting City Clerk stated there was an amended page 4 of the Minutes handed out. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus, and carried unanimously to approve the Minutes of the May 14, 1996 Regular Meeting as amended. 1.2 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 21, 1996 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Jessen, and carried unanimously to approve the Minutes of the May 21, 1996 Committee of the Whole Meeting. CONSENT AGENDA By Consent Vote the next four * items as proposed were passed unanimously: '1.3 MORON- JENSEN, SECOND - AHRENS, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY CASE//96-19: JOHN HOLLOWAY, 4943 MONMOUTH ROAD, LOTS 8, 9, & W. 1/2 OF LOT 7, BLOCK 30 WYCHWOOD, VARIANCE FOR A DECK. RESOLUTION//96-53 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING SHED AND FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DECK AT 4943 MONMOUTH ROAD, PID 24-117-24-41 0106, PZ//96-19. Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 '1.4 CASE//96-23: MARK HENDERSON, 3207 ROXBURY LANE, LOTS 1, 2, 14, & 15, BLOCK 28, DEVON, MINOR SUBDIVISION. RESOLUTION//96-56 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION AND STREET FRONTAGE VARIANCES AND A REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR 3207 ROXBURY LANE, PID #25- 117-24 12 0219, P&Z g96-23. *1.5 CASE//96-24: KEVIN DONAHOE, 1801 SHOREWOOD LANE, LOT 1-2, BLOCK ,6, SHADYWOOD POINT, VARIANCE FOR GARAGE. RESOLUTION #96-57 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING FRONT YARD SETBACK TO THE DWELLING TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE AT 1801 SHOREWOOD LANE, PID #13-11%24 14 0005, P&Z//96-24. *1.6 CASE//96-25: KARI& MICHAEL BERG, 1754 RESTHAVEN LANE, LOTS 21- 22, BLOCK 5, SHADYWOOD POINT, VARIANCE FOR DECK. RESOLUTION #96-58 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE RECOGNIZING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DECK AT 1754 RESTHAVEN LANE, PID#13-117-24 11 0032, P&Z//96-25. 1.7 CASE #96-20: WILLIAM & JANICE DARLING 2600 GROVE LANE, LOT 5~ BLOCK 1, LANGDON'S LANDING, VARIANCE FOR PORCH. City Planner Mark Koegler stated the owners have applied for a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming dwelling in order to allow construction of a new nonconforming 12' x 14' three season porch. The proposed porch will follow the existing line of the deck and would encroach no further than the exisitng situation that is setback approximately 40 feet from the shoreline. The proposed construction causes a minimal amount of encroachment into the bluff. Councilmember Hanus questioned the setback request, whether it is 38' or 36'. Mr. Darling explained the drawing in the packet was incorrect. Mr. Koegler stated the Planning Commission recommended approval. Hanus stated the proposed porch is in the bluff zone, not 2 Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 encroaching into the setback, and closer to the lake than what is allowed. It is a substantial structure, more so than a deck. Mr. Darling stated the deck will be 2' smaller than it is now. Also, there will be no increase in the impervious cover. The area under the proposed porch will be open. Mayor Polston moved and Councilmember Jessen seconded the proposed resolution: RESOLUTION#96-54 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LAKE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A PORCH AT 2600 GROVE LANE, PID #23-117-24 13 0061, P&Z//96-20. The resolution passed with a vote of 3-2, Hanus and Ahrens voting nay. 1.8 CASE #96-21: SALLY SWANSON, 1708 AVOCET LANE, LOT 26 AND NELY 10' OF 25, BLOCK 9, DREAMWOOD, VARIANCE FOR DECK. City Planner Mark Koegler stated the applicant is seeking a variance to construct a nonconforming 8' x 18' deck on the front of the dwelling that is conforming to all required setbacks. The required front yard setback is 20', the applicant is proposing an 8' deck, resulting in an 8' variance. A variance of 1,720 square feet is needed. This variance request is not consistent with the zoning code. Staff and Planning Commission recommend denial. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus, and carried unanimously to direct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution of denial regarding P&Z Case #96- 21. 1.9 CASE #96-22: SALITERMAN LTD./NORWEST BANK, 5211 SHORELINE DRIVE, LOTS 7-20 & 26-35, SHIRLEY HILLS, UNIT F, VARIANCE FOR NORWEST BANK SIGN. City Planner Mark Koegler stated Norwest Bank has applied for a variance to install a new free standing sign that is 20 feet in height and 70 square feet in area. The free standing signs in this B-1 District are restricted to 48 square feet in size. The Planning Commission recommended approval. Councilmember Hanus stated this was against the sign ordinance and wanted a condition added to the resolution that the sign ordinance would be reviewed and amended as it did not allow this type of sign. City Attorney John Dean suggested this did not belong in the resolution itself, but that a separate action by the Council directing the sign ordinance to be reviewed would be better. The lack of a hardship was discussed. Council concurred to add a "Whereas" to the resolution stating..."Whereas, the building is set back a distance from the street thus creating a visibility hardship." Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 Councilmember Jensen moved and Councilmember Jessen seconded the following resolution as amended: RESOLUTION #96-55 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SIGN SIZE VARIANCE FOR A FREE STANDING SIGN FOR NORWEST B NK/SALITERMAN LTD. AT 5211 SHORELINE DRIVE, PID #13-117-24 34 0072. The resolution passed 5-0. Motion carried. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens, and carried unanimously to direct the staff and Planning Commission to review the Sign Ordinance to make it more definitive and more adaptable to current situations. 1.10 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT There were none at this time. There were some later. 1.11 APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A SIGN PERMIT, QUASI-PUBLIC .FUNCTION, WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS. City Manager Ed Shukle stated the School District had placed a school bus on their property next to Commerce Blvd., with a 5' x 20' banner attached to it. No permit had been obtained. The banner/sign will be removed June 1, 1996. MOTION by Jessen, seconded by Ahrens, and carried unanimously to approve the Quasi-public sign by the Westonka School District on school property until June 1, 1996. 1.12 RESOLUTION APPROVING A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR 4729 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, STEPHANIE COON//42314 City Manager Ed Shukle stated Ms. Coon has applied for a special permit to allow for private structures on public land, known as Devon Common, for a stairway, retaining wall, plantings, electric outlet and lights, flag pole and playhouse. Jessen stated she could not approve this activity on the commons as it is public land and private structures do not belong there. Jensen stated private buildings do not belong on public lands, nor is she in favor of lights on public lands. Discussion related to the Commons Task force and pulling this permit off until they make their recommendations regarding private structures on public land. Ahrens stated the applicant wanted to repair the stairs and if the total item were pulled from the agenda, they could not repair them. Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 Councilmember Ahrens moved and Councilmember Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//96- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SPECIAL PERMIT TO ON PUBLIC LAND FOR STEPHANIE COON, INCLUDING A STAIRWAY, RETAINING WALL, ELECTRIC OUTLET & LIGHTS, FLAG POLE, PLANTINGS AND A PLAYHOUSE, LOCATED ON DEVON COMMON ABUTTING 4729 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, DOCK SITE $42314. The vote was called resulting a 3-2 pass. Jessen and Jensen voted nay. See Note: In checking the City Code, a 4/5 vote is required to approve constn~on on public right-of-way. Therefore, the item did not pass, it failed. The applicant will be notified and the item will return to the Council at a future date. 1.13 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT //9514, TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM INSTALLATION AT INTERSECTION OF THREE POINTS AND COUNTY ROAD 110. City Manager Ed Shukle stated Hennepin County had done research and had received petitions to install a traffic light system at the intersection of Three Points Boulevard and County Road 110. There had been numerous accidents there over the years. The County has decided there was a need for one. The City had been planning this for two years and funds have been set aside in the budget to pay the City's portion of the cost to install this system. Pre-plans had been prepared by the County and reviewed by City Engineer John Cameron. The City Engineer stated he had reviewed and approved the plans. The Council needed to pass the proposed resolution before the County could begin the project in late summer or early fall. Mayor Polston asked if there had been a public hearing. One was not required. He wanted to wait on the resolution and hold a public meeting (not hearing) so the public can provide input. Also, this would give the Council the ability to actually see the plans and for them to decide if the plans are appropriate for the intersection. Objection was raised by Council as to this causing a construction delay. The City Engineer believed two weeks would not hurt the construction schedule. He also stated that he had only reviewed, not prepared, the plans; and the county was getting state aid for the project and that the county would not receive approval from the state until the City approved the project. MOTION by Polston, seconded by Ahrens, and carried unanimously to hold the approval of resolution until the June 11, 1996 regular Council meeting where the public could give input regarding the installation of a traffic control system at the intersection of Three Points Boulevard and County Road 110. Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 1.14 RENEWAL OF MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE LEASE. City Manager Ed Shukle stated the lease for the Municipal Liquor store had expired on 12-31- 95. Before the Council was a Lease Renewal Agreement dated 12-31-95 through 12-31-99 at the same rate as the current expired lease. MOTION by Jessen, seconded by Ahrens, and carried unanimously to approve the new Lease Renewal Agreement for the Mound Liquor Store. 1.15 SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP FROM TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. TO DD CABLE PARTNERS, L.P. SUGGESTED DATE: JUNE 11, 1996. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus and carried unanimously to set June 11, 1996 for a Public Hearing to consider the transfer of ownership of Triax Midwest Associates to DD Cable Partners, L.P. 1.16 REQUEST TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE THE CONSIDERATION OF THE KILDARE LANE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - TRACY INGRAM AND BRIAN SCHULTZ. At the request of Mr. Ingram and Mr. Schultz, the item was pulled from the agenda, to return on June 11, 1996. 1.17 PROPOSED AREAS OF STUDY - METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GRANT/LOAN PROGRAMS FOR INFLITRATION/INFLOW ISSUES RELATED TO SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM City Engineer John Cameron reviewed the information he had handed out. The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) is offering a matching loan and grant program for Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) control. He stated the grant portion is for studies to identify, locate, quantify and develop an action plan to eliminate excessive I/I sources from the sanitary sewer system. Mound has been identified with potentially excessive I/I, especially during wet weather peaks. John Cameron stated that the Public Works director has studied the lines, done televising, and has not found ground seepage to be a problem. John Cameron stated that Mr. Skinner, Public Works Superintendent, believes that many residents may have their sump pumps flowing into their sanitary sewer system. This would cause a high rate of usage in the sewer system, resulting in the high charges the City pays the MCES. The loan program would be a way to educate the public regarding sump pumps in sanitary systems. He stated there is an ordinance in effect now, but it is not enforced. Through discussion, the Council decided not to apply for the grant for research only, but to direct staff to prepare the loan application to be 6 ..ares - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 submitted to MCES. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen, and carried unanimously to direct staff to prepare a loan application to be submitted to MCES for funding to target the sump pump situation that affects the Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) control. At this point in the meeting, a resident approached the council, requesting to return to Item #11, Comments and Suggestions from residents. 1.18 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS. Denis Halleron, 3179 Devon Lane, stated he has lived in Mound since 1979. He stated that homes in his area appear to have junk accumulating. He stated there are nine homes near him with debris and junk in their yards. He had the addresses if the Council wanted them. Earl Allen, 4812 Lanark, quoted the Mission Statement at the top of the City Council Agenda. He stated he had called four times with complaints about neighboring properties being a mess and nothing had been done. He stated he was worried about the property values if no one kept up their properties. What was the City doing about this? City Manager Ed Shukle asked these persons to give him the list and he would follow up. At this time, 9:15 PM, the Mayor called for a short break. 1.19 CONTINUED DISCUSSION: WOODLAND POINT COM3~ONS. Mayor Polston recapped the Woodland Point issue. Chuck Champine, spokesperson for the mediation group, stated there had been another meeting of the residents of Woodland Point. Of the attendees at this meeting, one-half of them expressed an interest in a homeowners association. City Manager Ed Shukle stated he had sent a memorandum to the ten non-litigant abutters asking them if they opposed or approved of having a non-abutters dock in front of their homes. He had responses from four and all four opposed. City Attorney John Dean stated that the need for a homeowners association is not as important as working out some type of dock program for the Woodland Point people. Carol Doyle, 1567 Bluebird, an abutting resident, stated that Marie and Marty Johnson, non- abutters, were welcome to continue putting their dock on the commons in front of her residence along Wawonaissa Common. City Manager said a proposal had been presented to the Council by Dave Kunz, 1546 Bluebird 7 /q57 Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 Lane. He asked Mr. Kunz to describe his proposal to those in attendance. He stated there had been discussion of a multiple dock at the end of Bluebird Lane. Bluebird Lane has a very fragile shoreline, with a bank held together by ground cover and most of the cover was poison ivy. He proposed to use Canary Beach as an area for docks. The concept included two docks, one on each side of the beach, in an "F" configuration pointing outward from the beach. Each dock could have 3-4 slips. His proposal included cleaning up Canary Beach, making it easy and appealing to use for the non-abutters. Storage of the docks could be at the beach over the winter. He also suggested a task force be organized of the people in that immediate area and those who would use this dock, to get input. Leah Weycker asked to have a break to discuss this with the group of non-abutters that were in attendance. The Mayor called a five minute break at 10:20. The meeting resumed at 10:25. Leah Weycker stated the non-abutters were in favor of multiple docks at Canary Beach. She was concerned about Wawonaissa Common and non-abutters not being on these commons. She proposed a dock at the end of Woodland Road, with a stairs. Ted Metz lives next to Woodland Road and stated he supported one dock at the end of Woodland Road. Mike Gardner also lives next to Woodland Road and approved a dock but no stairs. Don Pedersen, 1586 Dove, stated the area is slippery when it is wet, and stairs would be safer than the bank. City Attorney John Dean stated the City should not build stairs on the end of Woodland Road. MOTION, by Polston, seconded by Hanus, and carried unanimously to accept the proposed two multiple docks concept at the edges of Canary Beach and direct staff to assist in the configuration, installation and use of this dock arrangement for the 1996 boating season and also to work with Jim Fackler, Parks Director to upgrade the beach and to add amenities such as picnic tables, etc. Mike Gardner asked the Council to make arrangements to have the dock parts that were left over the winter removed from the Commons by his property. The Mayor stated it would be determined who these dock parts belonged to and get them to remove it. Mayor Polston thanked all of the people involved in this delicate situation on Woodland Point and he applauded them for their efforts to make things work out. 1.20 EXECUTIVE SESSION City Attorney John Dean stated there was information received by the Council from an abutting property owner on Woodland Point of a potential lawsuit. He wanted to discuss this with the Council in an Executive Session. Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 At 10:47 PM, the Council went into Executive Session. At 11:02 PM, the Council returned from Executive Session. City Attorney, John Dean, stated his office will respond regarding the abutting resident issue on Wawonaissa Commons by letter. The response will circulate to the Council prior to it being mailed. 1.21 PAYMENT OF BILLS. Councilmember Hanus wanted an invoice for $605.00 from McCombs Frank Roos removed from the list, that was being paid by from the dock fund. It was Councilmember Hanus' opinion that the cost should be charged to the developer, not the dock fund, as the developer would benefit from this area having dock access. MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Hanus to authorize the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list, excluding the invoice for $605. to McCombs Frank Roos for a survey for commons docks and charge the developer for this invoice, in the amount of $ 160,464.39 minus $605.00, resulting in $159,859.39, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.22 ADD-ON RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A ONE DAY OFF-SITE LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE AMERICAN LEGION POST//398 FOR MOUND CITY DAYS, JUNE 16, 1996. Councilmember Polston moved and Councilmember Jessen seconded the following: RESOLUTION #96-60 RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE DAY OFF-SITE LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AMERICAN LEGION POST #398 FOR JUNE 16, 1996. The vote was 5-0, motion carded. 1.23 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. FINANCIAL REPORT FOR APRIL BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR. 1996 AS PREPARED BY GINO Minutes - Mound City Council May 28, 1996 C. D. E. F. Ge LMCD MAILINGS. PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 9, 1996. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 16, 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 13, 1996. REMINDER: PICTURES OF CITY COUNCIL ARE SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, MAY 28, 1996, AT 6:30 PM IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. LINDA'S PHOTOGRAPHY, DELANO, WILL BE TAKING PICTURES. PLEASE DRESS ACCORDINGLY! CiTY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED ON MONDAY, MAY 27, 1996 IN OBSERVANCE OF MEMORIAL DAY. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen, and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:13 PM. City Manager Attest: Acting City Clerk 10 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 7, 1996 Mound City Council Jon Sutherland, Building Official ".i4-~-;-~/~ · Street Vacation Application - Churchill Lane, Case//96-18, Michael & Carrie McDonald, 3018 Churchill Lane, Lots 19, 20, 21, block 12, Arden, PID 24-117- 24 44 0146. The request to vacate a portion of Churchill Lane was tabled by the Planning Commission on May 13, 1996. A public hearing was set for the City Council on June 11, 1996. There are still some issues that need to be addressed before this request will be brought back to the Planning Commission on June 24, 1996. In addition, the Park Commission will be reviewing this application on June 13. Staff recommends the City Council open the hearing and continue~_..~t to the Ju_ne 2~5, 1996 City Council meeting date. pr~nted on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 5341 MAYINOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 CASE NO. 96-18 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A 30 FOOT WIDE PLATTEr~ RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED BETWEEN BLOCK 12, LOTS 19-26, 5, 6, & 7, AND BLOCK 14, LOTS 4-17, ARDEN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 11, 1996 to consider the vacation of a 30 foot wide platted right-of-way located between Block 12, Lots 19 - 26, 5, 6, and 7, and Block 14, Lots 4 - 17, all in Arden, as shown below: All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting P~ggy 3'afi{eS~/ Pla~ing Secretary Mailed to affected property owners by May 31, 1996. Published in The Laker May 25, 1996. Posted by May 31, 1996. printed on recycled paper MINIY~S OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMI~qSION MAY 13, 1996 CASE 96-18: S'[KEET VACATION CHURCHILL LANE (PUBLIC HEARING), MICHAEL & CARRIE MCDONALD, 3018 CHU-RCHILL LANE, LOTS 19, 20, 21, BLOCK 12, ARDEN, PID 2~-117-24 ~A 0146 Building Official, Jori Sutherland, reviewed the City Planners report. The applicants are requesting vacation of a portion of Churchill Lane that abuts their property as well as several other properties in the immediate vicinity. Churchill Lane is unimproved. At the present time, the existing home on the applicant's lot encroaches .45 feet into the public right-of-way. The existing right-of-way provides access to their parcel. Fill and a loose rock retaining wall have been placed in the public right-of-way which would require a grading permit. The material that was placed in the right-of-way, including a chain link fence, precludes access along the fight-of way by the general public. All properties along the section now proposed for vacation have frontage on another public street with the exception of Parcel 147 which lies immediately south of the McDonald's parcel. Parcel 147 is a separate piece of property owned by the owner of Parcel 141. Unless Parcels 147 and 141 can be combined, Parcel 147 would become land-locked if the request is approved. Approval of the street vacation also needs to include two variances. The property currently does not front on an improved public street. If the vacation is approved, the parcel will have only 15 feet of frontage on an unimproved public street. Also, if the request is approved, the north side of the property will become the front yard and the existing home currently has an 8.1 foot setback from the northern property line resulting in a 11.9 foot setback variance. Planning Commission Minutes May 13, 1996 Churchill Lane will never be improved as a through street since the southern end was vacated previously. There does not appear to' be any public purpose served by the retention of Churchill Lane as a right-of-way except to provide access to Parcel 147 (Lot 22). Staff recommended approval of the request to vacate Churchill Lane as well as the front yard setback and street frontage variances for Parcel 146 subject to the following conditions: Lots 12 and 22, Block 12, Arden shall be combined into one tax parcel prior to the time that the City releases a copy of the final resolution on the vacation of Churchill Lane. The applicants shall submit the $50.00 variance fee for the required variances as noted herein prior to the time that this item is scheduled for review by the City Council. Weiland is concerned that Lots 12 and 22 will not get combined. Hanus stated that it is written as a clear condition that the parcels would need to be combined before the resolution is released for filing. Weiland is concerned that the parcel would be sold before it is combined. Clapsaddle agreed that it is clear that no vacation will occur unless it is combined. Hanus asked how the recording expenses are dealt with for those adjacent land owners who are not applicants and did not request this vacation, and what is the status of the property if the adjacent property owners do not claim it? It was determed the city attorney would be able to report on this issue at the city council meeting. Mueller expressed a concern that after the street vacation, the subject property will still not have frontage on an improved public right-of-way. Applicant, Michael McDonald, informed the Commission that the owner of parcel (147) could not attend the meeting because he is out of town, however, stated that his neighbor's only concern was if there would be any future costs involved as a result of the vacation. Staff noted that there may be minimal recording fees at the County. We[land asked how the remaining portion of Churchill could get improved so they can have a proper driveway. The Building Official commented that improvements can be made on the ~ht-of-way, subject to a permit and approval from public works. A petition for slxeet improvement could also be submitted. Chair Michael opened the public hearing. Applicant, Michael McDonald, 3018 Churchill Lane, stated that he currently maintains Churchill Road, he plows and takes care of maintenance because it is unimproved and the City has no responsibility to take care of it. He would like to put Class 5 rock on this area of right-of-way that he uses for his driveway. Chair Michael closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes May 13, I996 Mueller stated that he would like to see Churchill improved in order to provide this property with proper street frontage. Reifschneider asked of the other adjacent owners want to attach half of the vacated road onto their property, and what happens if they don't want it. He emphasized that this property is a very steep slope and people may not want the responsibility of taking care of it. Burma agreed with Mueller and his concerns with the improvement of the right-of-way. He commented that even though the driveway is not a concern now, it could become a concern to the owners of Lots 17 and 18 if there were a new owner who did not maintain the road as well. Clapsaddle suggested they table the application. The issues they want clarified were reviewed. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Weiland, to table the request for vacation of Churchill Lane until the following issues can be clarified. The parcel will still have frontage on an unimproved right-of- way. What would be involved in requiring the access be brought up to minimum standards, as required by the City. Are the adjacent property owners required to attached the vacated strip of right-of-way to their property? Are they in favor of doing this? What ramifications are there? what are the costs involved? How is the right-of-way separated? They would like verification that the owner of Parcel 147 is willing to combine his parcels, and to notify him of the required process and fees. The owner of Parcel 147 should also be notified of the fact that once he combines these parcels he will not be able to separate them again without going through the subdivision process. How will this vacation affect access to utilities? Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that on Tuesday, June 11, 1996, at 7:30 PM, the City Council of Mound will meet in Council Chambers at Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364, for a public hearing to receive input regarding the proposed transfer of ownership of Triax Midwest Associates. Individuals wishing to present information should attend. Publish in The Laker May 25, 1996 Linda Strong, Acting City Clerk CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOO ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 May 17, 1996 Mr. Thomas D. Creighton Mr. Robert J.V. Vose Bernick & Lifson, P.A. Suite 1200 The Colonnade 5500 Wayzata Blvd. Minneapolis, MN 55416-1270 RE: Triax / DD Cable Merger Approval Process Dear Tom and Bob: Thank you for your letter of May 16, 1996, regarding the above process. The Mound City Council will schedule a public hearing on this matter for Tuesday, June 11,1996, at 7:30 p.m. at Mound City Hall. We will set the hearing date at the next meeting and have it published accordingly in the local newspaper. Is there any information that I should have with regard to this matter so that it can be presented to the City Council for the public hearing? I would appreciate any information you might have; or, if you feel it is necessary for one or both of you to attend the Council meeting, we could certainly arrange that as well. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, City Manager ES:kb printed on recycled paper ROSS A. SUSSMAN NE:AL J. SHAPIRO SAUL A. EIERNICK' THOMAS D. CREIGHTON SCOTT A. L~FSON DAVID K. NI(~HTINGALE:t PAUL J, QUAST' BERNICK AND LIFSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE I:~00, THE COLONNADE 5500 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416-12:70 TE:LE:PHONE: (~12) 546-1200 FACSIMILE: (6i:3) 546-~005 May 16, 1996 ~ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN eALSO CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT LEGALASSISTANTS JO BROWN JOAN M. SCHULKE:RS KATHRYN G, MASTE:RMAN Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1687 RECEIVED RE: Triax/DD Cable Merger Approval Process Dear Mr. Shukle: As you know, we have taken the position that the procedural timelines of state law relating to your review of the requested transfer of ownership are preempted by the 120-day maximum timeline requirement of federal law. Unfortunately, legal counsel for the cable companies has taken a contrary position and refused to cooperate in an acknowledgment of federal preemption or a waiver of the state timelines (as has been done by other companies). While we could have sought clarification in a court of law, we have chosen not to recommend that you incur such expense. Instead, we recommend that you comply with both state and federal timelines. Compliance requires: 1. The enclosed letter sent May 14, 1996. 2. You opening a public hearing on this matter within 30 days of the company's receipt of this letter (sometime on or before June 17). Please see the recommended enclosed Notice of Public Hearing. 3. Do not close this public hearing, but continue it until further notice of this office. 4. Forward to this office notice of the date of your public hearing. May 16, 1996 Page Two We are still negotiating the reimbursement of your expenses in this matter and will not hold you responsible for expenses incurred until a commitment from the cable company is received. Should they refuse reimbursement, we will forward to you a Resolution denying the request for approval since you will be unable to fund your fiduciary responsibility for review. If I can answer any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, BERNICK AND LIFSON, P.A. Thomas D. Creighton Robert J. V. Vose Enclb~ure BEIKNICK. AND LIFSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW MINNEAPOLIS~ MINNESOTA 5e:;416-t270 May 14, 1996 [. EGAI. ~$ ISTANT$ JO B~OWN _Via Certified Mail: Return Receipt Request¢c[ Mr. Robert Langley Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. 1504 Second Street S.E. P.O. Box 110 Waseca, Minnesota 56093 Mr. Joseph Shanks DD Cable Parmers, L.P. P.O. Box 375 Savage, Minnesota 55378 Re: Request for Approval of Transfer/Merger: Cities of Brooten, Hutchinson, Grand Rapids, Maple Plain, Waconia, Mound, Morris, Prior Lake, and Cloquet, Hancock and the Lake Minnetonka Telecommunications Commission (consisting of the Cities of Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Long Lake, Medina, Minnetonka Beach, Minnestrista, Orono, St. Bonifacius, Shorewood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Victoria, and Woodland) Dear Messrs. Langley and Shanks: We have received correspondence from your legal counsel, Jane Bremer, indicating that she does not concur with our prior opinion that the Federal Cable Act, which guarantees that municipalities have 120 days to approve or deny transfer requests, preempts the significantly shorter and therefore inconsistent procedural timelines created by Minn. Stat. § 238.083 Subds. ' While we believe this interpretation to be incorrect and an unnecessary f'mancial and administrative burden on both the municipalities and companies, we believe that compliance with the preempted state law will be less burdensome on our clients than formal adjudication of the preemptory effect of federal law on state law. Mr. Joseph Shanks Mr. Robert Langley May 14, 1996 Page 2 Accordingly, on behalf of the above-referenced municipalities and municipal consortia, you are hereby notified in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 238.083, Subd. 2, the requested merger of Triax Midwest Associates, L.P., and DD Cable Partners, L.P., DD Cable Holdings, Inc., and its various subsidiaries d/b/a Northland Cablevision or Midwest Cablevision, may adversely affect subscribers of either or both of the companies, and a public hearing is necessary with respect to each of the above-referenced municipalities or municipal consortia. Each of the above-referenced municipalities or municipal consortia will open a public hearing on the requested transfer within 30 days of your receipt of this le~er. An official from both of the merging companies should attend to respond to specific questions which may arise. Please do not hesitate to contact me or my associate, Robert Vose, with any questions. Sincerely, BERNICK AND L .I~SON, P.A., Thomas D. Creighton TDC/rs cc: Jane E. Bremer, Esq. Clients RECEIVED, 3 0 BEIKNICK AND LIF$ON ATTORNEYS AT LAW MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416-1270 May 29, 1996 tAL$O ADMITTED IN WIc'CON~IN eALSO CERTIFIED I~UBLIC ACCOUNTANT Via Telecopier and U.S. Mail Ms. Jane E. Bremer Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Norwest Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Dear Jane: I appreciated the meeting we had regarding some very difficult issues affecting both our clients. I wanted to reiterate my understanding regarding the tasks ahead, some of which are very imminent. First and foremost, many of my clients' public hearings commence very soon. My clients must receive notification that your client will be responsible for expenses incurred in the transfer analysis in an amount not to exceed $25,000 before those hearings, or, as we discussed, we will have to begin the process of denial of the request for approval. Please send such verification to my attention. Silence is not helpful. If the final answer is not to reimburse, we need that in writing also before the hearings referred to above commence. Second, you were going to reduce to writing your concerns with the Standstill Agreement for both Apple Valley and Lake Minnetonka. I would appreciate that matter resolved before June 7. You were also going to communicate directly with Theresa Kowalski of this office regarding the documents she needed to continue her review of the Triax transaction. She informs me that you have not contacted her as of yet. Since you have a written copy of her requests, I will not reduce them to a formal request for additional information. I am instead attaching a copy hereto for your further information. Ms. Jane E. Bremer May 29, 1996 Page 2 Thank you for your cooperation in these matters. Sincerely, BERNICK AND LIFSON, P.A. TDC/rs Enclosure cc: Theresa M. Kowalski, Esq. Ms. Jane E. Bremer May 29, 1996 Page 3 bcc: Cliems TRIAX - DD CABLE MERGER Documents Requested All supplementary documents to the Contribution Agreement, including Exhibits, Schedules, and Attachments. Redemption Agreement for Midwest's redeeming partners. Programming Management Agreement between InterMedia Capital Management IV, LP, InterMedia Capital Management II, LP, Triax Midwest Associates, LP and Tfiax Communications Corporation. (Reflected at Tab 3 as forwarded to the franchise authofity's attorney for review.) Current Partnership Agreements for Tfiax Midwest Associates, LP and Tfiax Midwest General Partner, LP. Incorporation documents for and documentation of the ownership of Triax Communications Corporation and its existing affiliation to Triax Midwest Associates, LP. Certificates of Authority and Organizational Documents of Tfiax Midwest LLC and Triax Telecommunications LLC including all member control agreements and other documents reflecting the member interests in the organizations. Partnership Agreements and Certificates of Authority for DD Cable Partners, LP, InterMedia Partners II, LP, and InterMedia Capital Management II, LP. C :\CLIENT~TRIA3x'~K)CUMENT.REQ BEP,.NICK AND LIFSON A P~OF£S$1ONA~ ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416-1=='70 RECEIVED ,',~,- 2 9 19~ May 28, 1996 tALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN Meredith Jones, Esq. Chief, Cable Services Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2033 M Street, N.W., Room 810E Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: In the Matter of: Triax Midwest Associates. L.P.'s Application For Small System Rate Relief Dear Ms. Jones: Enclosed for filing with the Federal Communications Commission, please find the original and three copies of Lake Minnetonka Cable Communication Commission's Supplemental Opposition to Petition for Special Relief submitted by Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. Very truly yours, BERNICK AND LIFSON, P.A. Thomas D. Creighton Robe~ J. V. Vose TDC/rs Enclosures cc: See Certificate of Service JiLl FEDERAL COM34UNICA TIONS COMTfflSSION WASHINGTON, D.C. In the Matter Of: TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. Application For Small System Rate Relief To: Chief, Cable Services Bureau ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FCC File No. SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF The Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission ("LMCCC"), a municipal consortium consisting of 14 cities, hereby files, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, which requires that the LMCCC ensure the continuing accuracy and completeness of its Opposition, its Supplemental Opposition to the Petition for Special Relief filed by Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. ("Triax"). Eligibility for special rate treatment in accordance with the small system cost-of-service methodology is available to small systems owned by small cable companies/ A small system is defined as a cable television system that serves 15,000 or fewer subscribers.2 A small cable company is defined as a cable television operator that se~es a total of 400,000 or fewer subscribers over one or more cable systems.3 Small System Order, 10 FCC Rcd at 7406. 47 C.F.R. § 76.901(c). 47 C.F.R. § 76.901(e). On September 25, 1995, Triax and its parent entity, Triax Communications Corporation ("TCC"), filed FCC Form 1230 with the LMCCC to permit Tfiax to establish regulated cable rates in accordance with the small system cost-of-service methodology adopted in the Sixth Report and Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, in MM Docket Nos. 92-266 and 93-215, FCC 95-196, 10 FCC Rcd 7393 (1995) ("Small System Order"). On October 10, 1995, Tfiax and TCC filed an amended Form 1230 on behalf of Tfiax. In both filings, Tfiax alleged that it had 14,949 subscribers in the Lake Minnetonka system. Based on Tfiax's computation of Form 1230, the company would be permitted to more than double its existing basic and programming service tier rates pursuant to the Small System Order. Subsequently, Tfiax filed with the Commission its Petition for Special Relief ("Petition").~ In its Petition, Tfiax admits that its purported August 31, 1995 subscriber total of 14,949 was false or incorrect and Tfiax admits that at all times relevant hereto the Lake Minnetonka system has exceeded the Small System Order 15,000 subscriber threshold. However, Tfiax asserted in the Petition that it had under 400,000 subscribers nationwide. Accordingly, absent special relief, Tfiax is not entitled to the significant rate relief afforded by the Small System Order. The LMCCC fled its Opposition arguing that because Tfiax exceeds the 15,000 subscriber threshold and does not share other characteristics with other small cable operators the Petition should be denied. Important new information has developed and supports dismissal of Tfiax's Petition. 4 In the Matter of Triax Midwest Associates, L.P.; Application for Small System Rate Relief; Petition for Spedal Relief, dated December 7, 1995. See Petition, Exhibit A (listing the municipalities served by the Lake Minnetonka system). On or about April 15, 1996, Tfiax sent the LMCCC FCC Form 394 and supporting documentation regarding a proposed merger with DD Cable Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Midwest Cablevision, DD Cable Partners, L.P. d/b/a Northland Cablevision and various subsidiaries thereof ("DD Cable"). As a result of this merger with DD Cable, fi-om which Triax alleges it will emerge as the surviving entity, Triax indicates that it will serve 487,135 subscribers in 17 states, making it one of the nation's 25 largest MSOs. Application of Triax Midwest Associates, L.P., et al. for Consent to Transfer Cable Television Franchise, Tab 5, Section 1, Summary of the Transaction. Accordingly, by the terms of its Petition and Application for Transfer, Triax will serve in excess of the 15,000 subscriber limit in the LMCCC headend, and in excess of 400,000 subscribers nationally. Triax exceeds both thresholds for a small cable company and the LMCCC requests that Triax's Petition be dismissed. BERNICK AND LIFSON, P.A. Thomas D. Creighton, #1980X/ Robert J. V. Vose, #0251872 Attorneys for Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission Suite 1200 The Colonnade 5500 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 (612) 546-1200 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Rose K. Speidel of Bernick and Lifson, P.A., hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Supplemental Opposition to Petition for Special Relief and Affidavit of James M. Daniels was sent via United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, this 28th day of May, 1996. Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. c/o J. Christopher Redding Christopher T. McGowan Dow Lohnes & Albertson 1255 Twenty-Third Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Town of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 5317 Town of Loretto City Hall P.O. Box 207 Loretto, Minnesota 55357 Town of Maple Plain 1620 Maple Avenue Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 Town of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Town of Waconia 109 South Elm Waconia, Minnesota 55387 Town of Wayzata City Hall 600 E. Rice Street Wayzata, Minnesota 55391-1799 Thomas C. Power, Esq. Cable Services Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2033 M Street, N.W., Suite 406C Washington, D.C. 20554 Ms. Margo Domon Cable Serv. Bureau/Policy & Rules Division Federal Communications Commission 2033 M Street N.W., Suite 406 Washington, D.C. 20554 Subscribed and swom to before me this 28th day of May, 1996. Rose K. Speidel 12 RESOLUTION//96- RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS OF FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT NO. 9514 RELATING TO THE INSTALLATION OF A TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM AT THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY ROAD 110 AND THREE POINTS BLVD. WHEREAS, plans for Hennepin County Project No. 9514 showing proposed traffic control system installation at the intersection of County State Aid Highway 110 and Three Points Boulevard within the limits of the City of Mound, as a State Aid Project, have been prepared and presented to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said plans be in all things approved and the City of Mound agrees to provide the enforcement for the prohibition of on- street parking on those portions of said Project No. 9514 within its corporate limits. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: and seconded by The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: Acting City Clerk Resolution adopted: McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. 15050 23n:1 Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4739 Telephone &1~/47&.&010 612/476-853~ FAX Engineem Planners Surveyor~ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Edward I. Shukle Cameron, City Engineer $ohn May 24, 1996 City of Mound Signal Light County Road 110 and Three Points Boulevard MFRA #8903 We have reviewed the plans submitted by Hennepin County for the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Three Points Boulevard with C.S.A.H. No. 110 (commerce Boulevard) and ar~ recommending approval. The projec! does not include any work to the traffic lanes except for the addition of detection loops to operate the signals; therefore, the majority of the construction will take place behind the existing curb. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. c;~'nnin:xahukS.24 Sa~033~ EYgO'8 966I '~g'l~ Hennepin County An Equal Opportunity Employer Ray 10, 1996 RECEIVED ,',AY 1 6 1996 Mound City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM CSAH 110 AT THREE POINTS BOULEVARD COUNTY PROJECT 9514 Submitted herewith for city council approval are a set of plans and a sample copy of a resolution approving the plans for the above referenced project for which arrangements are being made to call for bids. If the plans are satisfactory, please present them to the city council for approval. A resolution approving plans must be passed by your city council prior to receipt of bids. Please return two certified copies of the council resolution to the County. If you have any questions, please call me at 930-2537. Sincerely, Senior Design Engineer DCB:mak Encl osure Department of Public Works 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8496 (612)930-2500 FAX:(612)930-2513 TDD:(612)930-2696 Recycled Paper Tracy T. Ingram Executive Sales Associate May 24, 1996 Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 RE: XXX KILDARE ROAD, MOUND, MINNESOTA Honorable Mayor and Council Members: The Sellers ofXXX Kildare Road, (legally described as Lots 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, Block 11, Seaton) Mound, Minnesota, are asking the City Council of Mound to please vote on the petition to have the City of Mound build the road extension on Kildare Road. We would appreciate it if you would inform us of the date and time of said vote. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Professionally Yours, Tracy T. Ingrain Realtor representing the partnership of Mr. Briggs, Mr. Hawley and Mr. Schultz TTI:sdi cc. Mr. Briggs, Mr. Hawley and Mr. Schultz Lake Minnetonka 2477 Shadywood Road Orono, Minnesota 55331 Office: (612) 471-0722, Voice Mail: 472-9406 Each Office Independently Owned and Operated M~aums - Mound City Council 1.3 CONT~iI_TED PUBLIC HEARE~G: February 27, 1996 KILDARE ROAD 1/VIPROVEMENTS. City Manager Ed Shukle stated a Petition and Waiver Agreement for the Kildare Lane Improvements had been sent to Mr. Ingrarn, representative for the property owners to the west on the proposed improvement and to Mr. Stokes, the purchaser of t. he propert'y from Mr. Berg!und. This document was intended for ail of the interested parties to sign agreeing to pay 100% of the cost of the improvements and wa/ving any defic;~encies or further hearings. Th/s has not been done. Tracy Ingrarn stated that his owners could not sign this waiver. Tom Stokes, Fine Line Design, developer of seve,"~ of ',he parcels, had comments regarding the size of the building pad for the cul-de-sac. He requested the street improvement be done as the City had proposed. He did not want to pay assessments for the other property affected. City A,"torney Curt Pearson stated the City could not order the improvement without the right-of-way donated by all of the interested owners. Mayor Polston directed the parties involved to develop an agreeable plan by all the par'des, and then the Council would r~onsider taldng action. MOTION by Polston, seconded by Hanus, and carried unanimously to table the consideration of the Kildare Lane Improvement Project until all of the interested parties agree to a workable plan and to pay for the improvements 100%. Mound City Council Minutes November 14, 1995 -- 1.9 PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT XXXX KILDARE ROAD, LOTS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26, BLOCK 11, SETON, PID NOS. 19-117-23-22-0036 THRU 0041. (STREET WITH CURB, GUTTER, WATER AND SEWER) City Engineer John Cameron stated this improvement was applied for the first time in 1978. The owners of the abutting properties refused to grant public right-of-way for the -street;,.so-theproject on that portion of Kildare Lane was dropped. Tracy Ingram, representative of the sellers, was present. Cameron passed out aerial photo/maps to the Council. He stated Kildare Lane is an unimproved street going west off Kerry Lane. Improvements petitioned for are a street with curb, gutter, water and sewer and creating a cul-de-sac at the west end of Kildare Lane. The petition came from the property owners at this west end of the unimproved Kildare Lane. The owner to the east of these properties has no interest in improvements to the street and the cost involved. Mr. Ingrain stated that the property east of his clients is for sale also. If this improvement were to happen, all property owners abutting the improved portion of Kildare Lane would be assessed a portion of the cost. Cameron stated the street needs a 30' right-of-way and an easement would be needed. Cameron stated a feasibility study could be prepared at an estimated cost of $500 - $600. This cost normally is absorbed into the overall project cost when the improvement is done. However, if the project did not go through, Council suggested Ingram talk with his sellers to have them pay for the feasibility study, so the City is not expending funds for a private property owner. Consensus of the Council and the city engineer was to have Mr. Ingram talk with his clients to see if they would be responsible for the cost of the feasibility study should the project not go forward. The Council continued the petition until the 11-28-95 meeting, so Mr. Ingrain could talk with the petition/property owners. 1.10 PAYMENT OF BILLS. MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Jensen to authorize the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $261,660.46, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.11 ADD-ON ITEMS LIONS RENEWAL OF A "PREMISES PERMIT" FOR MOUND LANE~ City Manager Ed Shukle stated the Lions have requested a renewal of a permit to have pull tabs at Mound Lanes. Councilmember Ahrens moved and Councilmember Hanus seconded the following resolution: 539 City Council Minutes November 28, 1995 CONTINUED DISCUSSION: PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT XXXX KILDARE ROAD, LOTS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26, BLOCK 11, SETON, PID'$ 19- 117-23-22-0036 THRU 0041. (STREET WITH CURB, GUTTER, WATER AND SEWER). Mayor Polston introduced Tracy Ingram, realtor for the owners of property along the unimproved Kildare Road. Ingram stated his client had questions regarding the results of a feasibility study and what would happen after it was completed. Mayor Polston restated the fact that there are two property owners, one with 6 lots and one with two lots along the unimproved road and the owner with the 6 lots does not want the improvement or the costs and that owner did not sign the petition. The owner not wanting the improvement would have the largest assessment. This was the reason this road was not improved in 1978. Mayor Polston suggested they work it out with the non interested owner. City Attorney Curt Pearson listed the process regarding what would take place: 2. 3. 4. Se The Council would direct a feasibility study to be done. If the Council accepts the feasibility study, they order a public hearing. The public hearing date is published in The Laker. Notices are mailed to all of the affected property owners informing them of the proposed improvement and inviting them to the public hearing. The public hearing is held. The City Council makes their determination. If the petition represents less than 35% in frontage of the real property abutting on the street, a 4/5 vote of the council is required. If more than 35% in frontage of the real property abutting on the street has petitioned for the improvement, it requires 3/5 vote. However, without the proper right-of-way, the City would have to consider condemnation if the non approving property owner would not grant an easement or negotiate the sale of an easement. If all this worked out positively, and the street improvement happened with water, sewer and curb, there would be a second public hearing for the assessments, costs and how they should be paid. The non approving property owner could then appeal the tax assessment. 568 The council would like to avoid possible confrontations. John Cameron stated the 35% meant the amount of property frontage and the applicants do not have 35%. Ingrain stated that the other frontage property owners to the south have no desire to improve this road. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus to continue this item until 12-12-95 should the applicants desire to request and pay for a feasibility study. The vote was carried unanimously. RESOLUTION g96- RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROV~T AND PREPARATION OF PLANS FOR SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON KILDARE ROAD BETWEEN KERRY LANE ON THE EAST AND UNIMPROVED KINGS LANE ON THE WEST. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound has received a petition requesting the improvement of Kildare Road between Kerry Lane on the east and unimproved Kings Lane on the west, was duly presented to this Council on November 14, 1995; and, WHEREAS, the Council adopted a Feasibility Report prepared by McCombs, Frank Roos Associates, Inc., with reference to this improvement on December 19, 1995; and, WHEREAS, the City Council on January 9, 1996 set February 13, 1996 for a Public Heating on the proposed improvement; and, WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the heating was held on February 13, 1996, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound finds and determines that said petitions were signed by the owners of not less than 35 % of real property abutting upon the unimproved Kildare Road named as the location of the improvement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in this resolution and that the City Engineer is hereby designated to prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Attest: City Manager Adopted: Mayor CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA KILDARE ROAD IMPROVEMENT NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE MAKING OF SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN AND STREET IMPROVEMENT ON KILDARE ROAD BETWEEN KERRY LANE AND KINGS LANE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 PM, on Tuesday, February 13, 1996 to consider the making of sanitary sewer, watermain and street improvement on Kildare Road between Kerry Lane on the east and the unimproved Kings Lane on the west, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429. The estimated cost of the improvement is $67,680.000. The properties affected in this improvement are described as follows: PID # 19-117-23 22 0036 - 0041, Lots 21-26, Block 11, Seton; PID # 19-117-23-22 0054, Lots 15-20, & 27-32, Block 11, Seton; PID # 19-117-23 23 0004, Lots 5-12 & 1/2 13, Block 13, Seton; PID # 19-117-23 23 0153, Lots 3-4, 14-16 & 1/2 13, Block 13, Seton; PID # 19-117-23 24 0091, Lots 1-2, Block 13, Seton All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. t z.-~'"~'~"C ~ ~' ,~'.. Linda Strong, Acting City Clerk Mailed to affected property owners by February 1,1996, and published in The Laker on January 27, 1996 and February 3, 1996. printed on recycled paper TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FEB 2 3 City of Mound and Real Estate Agent Mr. Westlund representing Mr. Stokes The pannership of Mr. Bfiggs, Mr. Hawley and Mr. Schultz February 23, 1996 Improvement of Kildare Road Ladies and Gentlemen: We are in receipt of a legal document prepared by City of Mound attorney Curtis Pearson and also in receipt of a certified letter fi-om agent Westlund representing Mr. Stokes. It is our intention with this letter to state our past and present position. When we petitioned the City of Mound to prepare a feasibility study for road improvement it was for only one reason. The intent was to create a possible liability to the abutting land owner that would incur a substantial assessment. With negotiation failing to bring the sale of the abutting property, we felt taking this action would further the negotiations and sale of this property. 2. It was never our intention to have the City of Mound build the road according to the engineered plans. The cul-de-sac as proposed completely eliminated our building site. We can understand the assumption made by Mr. Stokes of our willingness to participate financially in the building of the road. This was not an accurate assumption as stated in the previous two paragraphs. In conclusion, if the City of Mound is petitioned by Mr. Stokes to build the road we will not grant an easement for any part of the cul-de-sac to be placed on our property. Reason: In order to recoup the cost of the assessment we need the maximum building pad for resale. Further, we are not in agreement with the assessment ratio of 1:4 and certainly not the 1:3 ratio as in the legal documents proposed by the City Attorney. If Mr. Stokes wishes to build the road and assumes the cost of the new road we will entertain the possibility of having a portion of the cul-de-sac to remain our property. Reason: Without the assessment we can assume some devaluation on our property due to the infringement of the cul-de-sac. [ q qc9 I trust our position is dearly stated to all parties in this project. Let it be known that this position is based solely upon sound business practices and is no way projects any personal feelings from our partnership against Mr. Stokes and the City of Mound. //'Brian Schultz Representing the [ p of Mr. Briggs, Mr. Hawley and Mr. Schultz CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 February 20, 1996 Tracy Ingram ReMax Realty 2477 Shadywood Road Orono, MN 55331 RE: Kildare Road Improvements Dear Mr. Ingram: Enclosed is a Petition and Waiver Agreement for the Kildare Lane Improvements. This document was prepared by Curt Pearson, City Attorney, upon direction of the City Council at its meeting of February 13, 1996. Please review this with the people you are representing who are the true fee owners of the properties. I have forwarded a copy of this Petition and Waiver to Mr. Tom Stokes, Fine Line Design, who is the person purchasing the properties from Mr. Norm Bergland. Once the documents have been reviewed, they need to be signed and notarized by all owners and encumbrancers. Please forward this document to the people you represent and advise me as to whether they will sign the Petition and Waiver Agreement. The City Council will be continuing the public hearing at its meeting of February 27, 1996, at 7:30 PM. The Council will want to know if the parties involved are all in agreement with the Petition and Waiver Agreement. If you have any questions, please contact me. ~,~~incerely, ward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager Enc. ES:Is printecl on r~cycled paper ,Ii, ,il ,J. ]~ENNED¥, & GRAVEN Mr. Ed Shukle City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound MN 55364 Facsimile (6'12) wRrl'F.~ DIJ~.CT DIAL February 16, 1996 Re: Kildare Road Improvements Dear Ed: In accordance with the direction of the City Council and upon the request of the property owners, we have prepared a petition and waiver agreement for the Kildare Lane improvements. I believe this is serf-explanatory in that ALL the owners or persons with interest need to sign the a~eement, agreeing to pay 100% of the cost of the improvements and waiving any deficiencies or farther hearings. It is imperative t_h~t the applicants obtain the notarized signatures and agreement of ALL owners and encumbrancers. We were informed the other night that one party is buying from someone else and if this is under a contract, both the contract vendee andthe contract vendor must sign this agreement. The realtor representing the people who own the lots at the west end of the Lane axe not the proper people to sign thi.~ petition, but it has to be signed by the a'ae fee owners of the properties. I am Faxing you a copy of this material on Friday afternoon and will put a clean copy in the mail today. At the end of the agreement I have left blanks for the proper people to designate who they are and their interests and to have it nomrizeA. City Attorney CAP:Ih Enclosure g~i,~LlO0563 PETITION AND WAIVER AGREEMENT TI-HS AGREEMENT made this day of ,1996, by and between the City of Mound, a br_innesota municipal corporation (the "City") and a corporation (the "Owner"); W1TNES$ WI-IEREAS, the Owners ar~ the fee owners of certain real property (the *Subject Property') located in the City and legally described as follows: Parcel 1 Lots 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, Block 11, Seton Parcel 2 Lots 15, 16, 17, 15, 19, 20, 27, 2g, 29, 30, 31 and 32, Block 11, Seton and WHEREAS, the Owners desire to combine various lot configurations to meet City zoning requirements and to develop the Subject Properties, and WHEREAS, the development of the Subject Properties will require the construction of certain public improvements, including municipal water, sani~ sewer, curb and gutxer and street improvements in accordance with the general layout set forth in a Preliminary Engineering Report for improvements on Kildare Road as prepared by M¢Combs Frznlr ..Rnos-A-~oc.i~srInc. wahe City Engineer, dartA December 13, 1995, and ~b, DI,~100465 WHEREAS, the orderly development of the Subject Properties requires the construction of the Improvement Projects during 1996, and WHEREAS, the Owners wish the City to construct the Improvement Project without further notice of hearing or hearing on the Improvement Project, and without notice of hearing or heating on the special assessments levied to £mance the Improvement Project and to levy 100 percent of the cost of the Improvement Project against the Subject Properties, and WHEREAS, the City is willing tO construct the Improvement Project i~ accordance with the request by the Owners and without such further notices or hearings, provided the assurances and covenants hereinafter stated are made by the Owners to ensure that the City will have valid and collectable special assessments as they relate to the Subject Properties to finance the cost of the Improvement Projects, and WttEREAS, were it not for the assurances and covenants hereinafter provided, the City would not construct the Improvement Projects without such notices and hearings and without the owners dedicating public easements for the improvements and the City is doing so solely at the behest, and for the benefit of, the Owners, NOW, TI-IERI~ORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS HEREINAFTER PROVIDED, IT IS HER~.BY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS: 1. The undersigned Owners owning 100% of the lancI to be assessed for these improvements hereby petition the City for construction of the Improvement Projects consisting of water, sanitary sewer, and street improvements as set our in the aforementioned feam'b~ty report dated December 13, 1995. HADLEL100466 e o o q The Owners represent and warrant that they are the owners of 100 percent of the Subje~-t Properties; that they have full legal power and authority to encumber the Subject Properties as herein provided; and that as of the date hereof, they have fee simple absolute title to the Subject Properties, which are not subject to any liens, interests or encumbrances, except as listed on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. The Owners request that I00 percent of the cost of the Improvement Projects be assessed against the Subject Properties. The Owners understand and agree that thc cost of the Improvement Projects will be determined in accor~ with Minn_ S_~.~.,~L Chapter 429 and s~dard city practices and that such cost may exceed the estimate of $38,800. Special assessments shall be spread on the properties in accordance with standard city assessment practices and on the basis of a 1/3 shar~ to be paid by Parcel 1 and a 2/3 share to be paid by this owners of Parc~I 2 and all costs incurred by the City will be spur between the separate properties on this 1/3 - 2/3 basis. The Owners also pledge to convey to thc City additional right of way by dedicath!g a street and utility easement along the north side of thc street improvements and to provide for a cuI de sac at the west end of thc Kildare street improvement. The Owners waive notice of hearing and hearing pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 429.031, on the Improvement Projects and notice of he.~-in~g and h~ring on the special assessments levied to finance the Improvement Project pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 429.061 and specifically request that the Improvement Projects b~ cons~ucted and special assessrr~nts levied against the Subject Properties therefor without additional hea~gs and based on a 1/3 - 2/3 split The Owners waive the right to appeal the levy of special assessments in accordance with this Agreement pursuant to __Minn Stat. Section 429.081, or reapportionr~ut thereof upon land division pursuant to Min~. Stat. Section 429.071, Subcl. 3, or otherwise, and further stx~ifically agree with respect to such special assessments against the Subject Property or reapportionment tha~: ' ' be Any re4uirements of ~ Stat._, Chapter 429 with which the City does not comply are hereby waived by the Owners; The in~rease in fair market value to the Subject Property resulting from construction of the Improvement Projects will be in an amount at least equal to the total cost specified in paragraph 3 above, and 3 cL that such increase ia fair market value is a special benefit to the Subject Pxopea-tics; Assessment of 100 percent of the cost of the Improvement Projects against the Subject Properties is reasonable, fair and equitable and there are no other properties against which such cost should l~ assessed; and If at some time in the futura these improvements are utiliT~cl by some other property, nothing herein precludes the City from cha~ng for said connection or use based on current or amended ordinances or regulations and the Owners in dedicating said easements and ~ing the improvements over to the City waive any and all claims for any reimbursement. The Owners further specifically waive notice and fight to appeal reapportionment of such specikl assessments npon land division pursuant to Minn. Stat Section 429.071, Sub& 3. The Owners understand and agree that the City may provide for the payment of such special assessments ia installments bearing such interest as may be determined by the city council. However, the decision regarding thc period of time over which the special assessments may be paid and the interest rate to be applied is in the absolute and sole discretion of the city council, subject only to limitations imposed by law. The covenants, waivers and agreements contained in this Agreement shall bind the successors and assigns of the Owners and shall nm with the Subject Properties and bind aH successors in interest thereof. It is the intent of the parties hereto that this Agreement .be in a form which is recordable upon the land ri:cords of Hennepin County, Minnesota, and they agree to make any changes in this Agreement which may be necessary to effect the .recording and filing of this Agreement against the rifle of the Subject Properties. This Agreement shall terminate upon the final payment of all special assessments levied against the Subject Properties regarding the Improvement Project, and the City shall execute and deliver such documents, in re~ordable form, as are necessary to extinguish its rights herenn&a'. ITADb~Z. lO0465 4 /qq7 IN WITNESS 'WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands the day and year first above writ~n. CITY OF MOUND By Its_ By. Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Thc foregoing in._~munent was acknowledged before me this day of _, 1996, by Robert PoIston and Edward J. Shuide, the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Mound, Minnesota, a mm~icipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss COUNTY OF ) Thc foregoing in.~trument was acknowledged .1996, by_ before me this' day of Notary Public ~,Dt~/,100466 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF ) Thc foregoing instrument was acknowledged befor~ mc this _, 1996, by . day of Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged ,1996, by_ before me mis day of Notary Public 8/8 ~l~l.~I, lO0466 !~200-45 6 81/38/1996 13:04 9414359686 G PAGE 02 PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT TO ~E CZTY COU~IL OF TH~ CITY ~ ~U~, HINNESOTA: We, ~ undersigned, owners of not less than property described as ..~,/~ R~ ~,~?~_ and aOutting on hereby petition that improvements be made by the construction ot' ~0,d ~4 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter SIGNATURE OF OWNER~/'-~0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 2. Examined, checkeO, and ?ound to be in proper form and to be signed by the required number o? owners o? property ar?ecteO by the making of the improvement petitione~ ?or 81/38/1995 13:84 9414359GBG P~GE 81 JOHN B. DEAN Attomey at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9207 RF..CEIVEEI j JN 3 lgg KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, MInn~ota $$402 Telephone (612) 337-9300 Facsimile (612) 337-9310 May 31, 1996 Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1687 RE: Variance Denial - 1708 Avocet Lane Dear Ed: BY FAX AND MAIL Enclosed please find my suggested resolution of denial of the front yard setback variance request for the referenced property. Please let me know whether any changes are needed. JBD:ds Enclosure Ve. ly yours, B. Dean JBD105441 MU200-1 RESOLUTION #96- ¢ ~ RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK WITHIN FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 1708 AVOCET LANE, PZ//96-21 WHEREAS, the owner of the property located at 1708 Avocet Lane, and legally described as Lot 26 and the Northeasterly 10 feet of Lot 25, Block 9, D reamwood, PID 13-117- 24 21 0033, has made application for a front yard setback variance to permit the construction of a deck which is proposed to be located at the front of the existing dwelling on the property; and, WHEREAS, the property is located in an R-IA Single Family Residential district of the City which requires a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet (which is the setback of the existing dwelling on the property; and, WltEREAS, the application for a variance was transmitted to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation; and, WHEREAS, said Planning Commission did meet on May 13, 1996 and at such time did consider the application and did unanimously recommend that it be denied; and, WHEREAS, the matter came on for consideration by the City Council at is regular meeting of May 28, 1996, there was no appearance by the applicant; and, WHEREAS, at its May 28th meeting, the City Council received the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission and of the City Staff, reviewed such material and the application and supporting documentation, and was fully informed concerning the matter, and following discussions on the application directed the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution of Denial. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the city of Mound that application for a variance to the front yard setback requirements of the Mound City Code to permit the construction of a deck at 1708 Avocet Lane is hereby in all respects DENIED for the following reasons: A. No hardship has been shown on the owner of the property which would interfere with the continued use of the property in a manner consistent with the zoning ordinance and building regulations applicable to all other properties in the area. B. The property is nonconforming in terms of lot area; and allowing the variance would tend to lengthen the period of nonconformity. June 11, 1996 Page 2 C. The granting of the variance would be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the general public and of the owners of abutting properties and would affect the property rights of current and future residents of the community who are to be protected by a uniform set of standards. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: Acting City Clerk OF A MEETING OF MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMI qSION MAY 13, 1996 CASE 96.21: VARIANCE FOR DECK, SALLY SWANSON, 1708 AVOCET LANE, LOT 26.&_NELY 10' OF 25, BLOCK 9, DRE~MWOOD, PID 13-117-2a ~1 0033 ~x~ //'/~e applicant is seeking a variance to construct a nonconforming 8' x 18 deck on the front of . ~ /the dwelling that is conforming to all required setbacks. The required front yard setback is 20 ~ feet, the applicant is proposing an 8 foot wide deck, resulting in an 8 foot variance. .~ X~l other issues with this site are conforming other than the lot area. The required lotC,xr~' is 6,~Jt3~Uare feet, 4,280 square feet is existing, resulting in recognition of a variance of 1,720 square feet. Allowing the variance would create a nonconforming setback and is not consistent with the zoning code or the other houses in the area. A maximum 32 square foot entry landing is reasonable in this case and may be constructed without a variance. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend denial of the variance request as it is inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance and would have a negative effect on the adjacent properties. Hanus stated that he agrees with staff's opinion and feels there are other options available. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Glister, to recommend approval of denial as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously. This case will be heard by the City Council on May 28, 1996. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472~600 FAX (612) 472~620 .STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: CASE NO. LOCATION: ZONING: Planning Commission Agenda of May 13 1996 Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Officia~3~'~ Variance Request Sally A. 96-21 1708 Avocet lane, Lot 26 & the Nely 10' of 25, & Wly 7' of 3, Block 9, Dreamwood, PID 13-117-24 21 0033 R- 1A Single Family Residential _BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to construct a nonconforming 8' x 18' deck on the front of the existing dwelling that is conforming to all required setbacks. The required front yard setback is 20 feet, the applicant is proposing an 8 foot wide deck, resulting in an 8 foot variance. All other issues with this site are conforming other than the lot area. The required lot area is 6,000 square feet, 4,280 square feet is existing, resulting in recognition of a variance of 1,720 square feet. COMMENTS: Allowing the variance would create a nonconforming setback and is not consistent with the zoning code or the other houses in the area. A maximum 32 square foot entry landing is reasonable in this case and may be constructed without a variance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION- Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend denial of the variance request as it is inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance and would have a negative effect on the adjacent properties. The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on May 28, 1996. ~ prlnted on recycled paper June 6, 1996 To: Mound City Council and Planning Commission c/o Mr. John Sutherland, Building Inspector Mound, MN 55364 From: Mr. and Mrs. Brian R. Johnson 4945 Glen Elyn Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Building Permit No. 10835 RECEIVED MOUND PLANNING & INSR Dear Sirs... This letter is our written request for an extension to the 1 Year Time Limit on Exterior Completion of our Home Remodeling (In Process) at 4945 Glen Elyn Rd in Mound. This project has been in continuous construction since last summer but is being completed by myself and a relative at a slower pace than would be typical for a contractor built home. The exterior siding cannot be completed until the lower level (Approximately 1/3 of the house) has been partly demolished and reframed per original plans. The lower portion cannot be demolished until the upper section is complete enough for our family to move into while the lower portion is being completed. We anticipate that move and demo/reconstruction during the month of July/August and hope to begin final siding of the entire house upon completion of that lower section. Presently, we are paying cash for all materials including doors and windows and have been able to maintain reasonable progress on the project. The exterior of the house is intended to be a combination of T/G Cedar with Redwood banding on each third course and will be more time consuming than paint or masonite. I am intending to have the siding program complete if possible by late fall so it can be Olympic Oil/Stain Finished. I would like to get a 12 Month Extension in case trim areas on the exterior cannot be completed due to weather or other unforeseen circumstance. Please call me at 376-2165 (Days) or 472-6105 (Eves) to inform of any required fees and scheduling for the agenda. Thank You... Sincerely, Brian R. Johnson Mound City Code Section 300:10, Subd. 3. required to determine the location and relative elevation of a proposed building or structure, and such other information as the Building Inspector or City Council may require. The locations of wells, sewer and water lines, cesspools, septic tanks, and such other appurtenances proposed to"be placed on the premises shall be subject to the approval of the Building Inspector. The City Council may by resolution waive the requirement of a survey if there are special circumstances or conditions so that the strict application of the provisions of this subsection are not necessary to preserve the public health, safety and general welfare. The Council shall make a finding that the waiver of the survey requirements will not be detrimental to the public welfare. The application for the variance shall be in writing and may be processed by the City Council without processing said variance in accordance with the terms of Section 325:00 of this Code. Subd. 3. Minimum Floor Area - Residential Properlies. Minimum floor area requirements for residential and commercial properties shall be a set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Subd. 4. Plat Plan to Show Location of Garage. Every application for a building permit in the residential or multiple dwelling district shall show on the accompanying plat plat or survey the location of any existing garage or the location of the garage proposed to be constructed by the subject application. If no garage exists and no garage is proposed in the subject application, or if the existing garage is proposed to be removed or demolished and is not to be replaced in the subject application, then the plat plan shall show the location reserved for the construction of any future garage for which subsequent application for a building permit may be made. When locating the future garage site on the plat plan, the Building Inspector and the applicant shall ascertain that the site is accessible to a public street or alley and shall make provisions so that the future garage will comply with the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Code. Subd. 5. Time Limits on Building Completion. All work to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained for new construction, repairs, remodeling, and alterations to the exterior of any building or structure in any zoning district shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit issuance. The person obtaining the permit and the owner of the property shall be responsible for completion. A violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor offense. The City Council may extend the time for completion upon written request of the permittee, establishing to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council that circumstances beyond the control of the permittee prevented completion of the work for which the permit was granted. The extension shall be requested not less than thirty (30) business days prior to the end of the one-year period. (ORD. #68-1994, 8-8-94) It) oo a% 8-8-94 APR ~ 0 ~995 J ,J. % il, ,ii J BUILDING PERMIT CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 · Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 Subject Address 4945 GLEN ELYN ROAD SITE Business Name/Tennant The applicant is: ~' owner contractor tennant LEGAL Lot P/17 ~ 1~ Block 24 Plat# ;5!99Q DESCRIPTION Subdivision SHADYWOOD POINT PID# ~7-24 ii 0!39 Name BRI AN JOHNB0~] OWNER Address Pho. e(.I 472-5105 0Aa 376-'!155 (M) Name CONTRACTOR Address Phone (H) (W) (M) 10835 DESCRIPTION OF WORK &DDITION PER VARIA,.!C~ ~'~'~"' ,,v ~ ~:,~ ~r_ou~_~..IO~!S ~'5(}-68 ~ ~.~ ~. _, INCLUDES DECK lO' X ;!~' A~D ] Fi~ ~c~ ~,~. ~ ~:. ~ CONDITIONS/COMMENTS ZONING DISTRICT ZONING COMMENTS R-i PERMIT APPROVAL SUBJECT TO RESOLUTION #~4~ APPROVED BY COUNC,.ON l(1-?.Z-q I ESTIMATED VALUE $ 109, uO0 PERMIT FEE (BASE) ................................... $ PLAN CHECK FEE ...................................... $ LESS PAID PLAN CHECK ........................... $ ( Receipt ~. NOTICE: Separate permits are required for etec~cal, plumbincj, heating, ventila~on or air condrdoning. This permit becomes null and void if work or constru~on authorized is not commenced within 180 days, or if construc- tion or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days at any time after work is commenced. All exterior work must be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit Issuance, according to City Code Section 300:10, Subd. 5. I hereby cer~ that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be tn~e and correct. Ail provisions of laws and city ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not The gran'dng of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating cons~uction or ttm performance of construction. ~RMITAPPROVEDB~,~, ~--~~~~ ~ APPUCANT'S SIGNATURE L~, .~',~ ( ,~.,-----.-~. SURCHARGE .............................................. $ ESCROW DEPOSIT .................................... $ DRAINTILE ................................................... $ S.A.C. (MWCC) ............................................ $ (78-2304= 99%, 78-3774 = 1%) CiTY SEWER CONNECTION ..................... $ CITY WATER CONNECTION ...................... $ WATER METER ........................................... $ STATIONARY ROD ...................................... $ OTHER ......................................................... $ ,.,' ~ ~ 01-3251 t,[ 15,98 01-3253 ) 01-3253 50, O0 01-2222 01-2300 01-3254 78-2304 78-3158 73-3155 73-3744 73-3842 TOTAL .......................................................... $ !, 105,40 BUILDING PERMIT CITY OF MOUND 5341.Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 472-1155 7710 STREET ADDRESS 4945 GLEN ELYi'~' KO.AD ESTIMATED VALUE $6,500 LOT. PARTS OF 17 SHADYWOOD POINT & 18 BLOCK. PLAT 61980 ZONING DISTRICT 13'117-24 11 0139 R-1 OWNER BRIA2,I R. JOiiNSON ADDRESS ~T '~ CONTRACTOR S .... PHONE NO. 472-6105 F, Zi PHONE NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION OF WORK BEING DONE: ST-~-B & FOL~,~DATIO.N Oi~Y FOR FUTURE ~,'n~,,'~,~'r,~:~ fi,~1-i49 SMOKE O~C~ORo ~_~iUo~ BE UPDATED. 01-3251 $ 90.00 Permit Fee 01-3253 $ ( 01-3253 $ 55.50 01-2222 $ 3.25 Less Paid Plan Check (receipt #. Plan Check Fee Surcharge 78-2304 $ SAC (99%) 78-3774 $ 78-3158 $ SAC (01% ) Sewer Connection Fee FINAL INSPECTION DATE 73-3155 $ Water Connection Fee 73-3744 $ 73-3842 $ $ Tapping Fee Stationary Rod Fee Other OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE DATE $ 151.75 TOTAL ADDITIONAL PERMITS NEEDED: ELECTRICAL PLUMBING HEATING When permit is granted, I hereby agree to do the proposed work in accordance with description above set forth and according to the provisions of ordinances of the City of Mound and of all statute§'~f~'a~aat~e~linnesot~a in such cases made and provided. All building permits expire one yea[ after date of issuance. DATE ''~ -[ _O~ r'~. APPLICANT; -'-<~",~. 9710 2S9 289 October 22, 1991 RESOLUTION %91-149 TO APPROVE ~ VARIANCE RECOGNIZING AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING FRONT YARD SETBACK AND UNDERSIZED PARCEL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ADDITION FOR PART OF LOTS 17 AND 18, BLOCK 24v SHADYWOOD POINT; PID %13-117-24 11 0139 (4945 GLEN ELYN ROAD) P&Z CASE NO. 91-047 WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of a variance recognizing an existing nonconforming 6 foot front yard setback to Glen Elyn Road to allow construction of a conforming addition, and; WHEREAS, a variance was granted in 1987 in Resolution #87-179 for a similar proposal, and one extension was granted in Resolution #90-68, however, due to the extent of the modified proposal and the time span from the original variance approval, a new revised application was submitted, and; WHEREAS, the existing principal structure has approximately 610 square feet of floor area, and therefore, is undersized, and; WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1 Single Family Zoning District which according to =he City Code requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, a 30 foot front yard setback to Glen Elyn, a 20 foot front yard setback to Paradise Lane, a 10 foot side yard setback and a 15 foot rear yard setback; and, WHEREAS, the proposed driveway access width is 24 feet, and currently the Zoning Code allows a maximum of 22 feet, however proposed Zoning Code amendments are to allow an access width of 24 feet, and; WHEREAS, two decorative "fin walls" are proposed to extend approximately 12 inches from the wall line towards Glen Elyn, and the Zoning Code does not allow encroachments into the setback which will impede vision of vehicular operators, and the Building official's opinion is that the fin wall at the northeast corner does will not impede vision, however, the one at the northwest corner will, and; WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 23.408(2)a. states, in part, that ornamental features shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements provided they do not extend more than two feet into a yard, and; 290 October-22~--199I ........... WHEREA~, Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) provides that alterations may be made to a building containing a lawful, nonconforming residential property when the alterations will improve the livability thereof, but the alteration may not increase the number of units, and; WHEREAS, on October 14, 1991 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance by a 6 to 3 vote. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby approve a lot area variance of 813 square feet, recognize an existing nonconforming 6 foot front yard setback to Glen Elyn Road, and approve a 2 foot variance to allow a 24 foot wide curb cut, to allow construction of a conforming one and two story addition with a workshop area, an attached garage, and two conforming decks onto an existing nonconforming dwelling upon the following conditions: ae The existing 4.6' x 6.2' entryway in the front yard is to be removed. be The cesspool is to be properly abandoned as required by the Building Official and Sewer and Water Superintendent. The Existing dwelling is to be brought into compliance with current building codes as required by the Building Official. de The total square footage of accessory building area is not to exceed 920 square feet, with a maximum of 840 square feet in any one area. ee The final grading shall be as approved by the City Engineer or Building Official. There be no additional encroachment of any kind at the north end of the existing structure that will further impede vision of vehicular traffic around Glen Elyn Road and Paradise Lane. It has been determined by the Building Official has determined that the proposed fin wall at the northwest corner will further impede vision. ge The proposed future decks shall comply to all requirements of the Zoning Code. 291 October 22, 1991 The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 23.404, Subdivision (8) with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 23.404. It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the authorization of the following alterations to a nonconforming use of the property to afford the owners reasonable use of their land: Construction a conforming one and two story addition including living space, a workshop, a garage, and two decks as shown on the attached floor plan identified as Exhibit 'A'. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: Those parts of Lot 17 and 18, Shadywood Point, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying westerly and northwesterly of the following described line; Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 18 distant 6.82 feet east of the northwest corner of said Lot 18; thence southerly parallel to the west line of said Lot 18 a distance of 138.32 feet; thence southwesterly to a point on the south line of said Lot 17 distant 21.50 feet westerly of the southeast corner of said Lot 17 and said line there terminating. This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1). This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying all costs for such recording. The building permit shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Jensen and seconded by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Johnson and Smith. 292 292 October 22, 1991 Attest: City Clerk The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Jessen. /Mayor ~//~- ( nil II, CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PAUL LARSON Prepared for: / / 4O Ld 17 EXISTING LEC;AL DESCRIPTIONS: Lot 17, SIIADYWOOD POINT, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ilennepln County, M.Lnnesota. Lots 18 and 19, SIIADYWOOD POINT, accoL'ding to tile recorded plat thereuf, Ilennepin County, Minnesota. · ' . - GENERAL NOTES: Proposed top of foundation elev. o Denotes iron monuntent . ~., "x" Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Proposed basement floor elev. x951.~ Denotes existing spot elevation Proposed garage floor elev. ~ Denotes proposed spot elevatio,% BENCUMARK: ~ , Denotes surface drainage . Dashed contour lines denote proposed features Solid contour lines denote existing features II hereby oertify that this survey, plan or report was ALL-N[E~RO LAND prepared by me or under my d~roct superv£~ion and tl~al~ ' SUI'LVE¥ORS ,',,e s~,,t:~-o~-a~',,1-~s,,:~. ,~ .,.~ ,, . Long Luke, Minlle$olo f.l,: ~7~-~,~a OAT,.'- ,g"a.v It 1~7 l~,G..UMr, a~ 1707-~ ice 87 ~o& -B CITY OoF. N D 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 JUNE 7, 1996 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES "In the beginning, the Legislature created LGA and HACA. And they saw that they were good. Starting in 1997, cities and counties will also have LPA," states Gary Carlson, League of Minnesota Cities. The 1996 version of the omnibus tax bill includes a provision referred to by its author as Local Performance Aid. Championed by Representative Andy Dawkins, St. Paul, LPA is an attempt to associate general purpose homestead and agricultural credit aid with performance outcomes. According to Representative Dawkins, local performance aid is intended to assure that state revenue sharing with cities and counties will be based on a defensible formula and therefore, be continued into the future. In order to qualify for this new aid, your city must have a system of performance measures for services provided by the city, and must regularly compile and present these measures to the City Council at least once per year. If there is currently no system of performance measures in place, the city may still qualify for this aid if it is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. However, eligibility based upon being in the process of development may not be used for more than two consecutive years. The new aid will be determined as follows for calendar year 1997: "The total amount of aid available for cities is $441,735 plus $1 times the most recent population of each qualifying city. A per capita aid amount is then determined by dividing the total aid available by the total population of all cities that qualify for the aid. Each qualifying city would then receive an aid amount based on its population times the per capita aid amount. It should be noted that the $441,735 is appropriated from the general fund, and the additional amount ($1 times the most recent population of each city) is a permanent reduction in each city's homestead and agricultural credit aid (HACA). The HACA reduction applies whether or not the city is eligible to receive LPA." printed on recycled paper ~,], II1 JI II .... i Il ,~ J ',, Mayor and City Counc-'iI''~ June 7, 1996 Page 2 What are performance measurements? According to Representative Dawkins, performance measurement include simple measures of workloads for the services provided by the governmental unit. Workloads can include number of employee hours worked on certain projects, tons of garbage hauled, number of police calls, or any other measures of workloads that my be compiled by the city. Sounds like another so-called "creative" invention by our State Legislature to further complicate the Local Government Aid and HACA programs and micro-manage local government. Right? However, in order to qualify and take advantage of the revenue that we would otherwise lose from having the reduction in HACA, I am recommending that the City Council approve the responses indicated on the attached form and authorize the Mayor and another City Councilmember to sign the certification form to be sent to the Department of Revenue. The LPA to received in 1997 for the City of Mound is $10,764. With regard to future years, the City of Mound will work on developing performance measures to comply with the LPA program. We can put together the information necessary to meet the requirements of the legislation so that our HACA aid does not get reduced because of failure not to supply performance measurements. If you have any questions, please contact me. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 June 5, 1996 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: LINDA STRONG, ACTING CITY CLERK SUBJECT: LICENSE RENEWALS The following licenses are due to expire on June 30, 1996 and are being presented for renewal with the new term dates of 7-1-96 to 6-30-97. Approval is contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc., being submitted. On-Sale Beer A1 & Alma's Supper Club House of Moy Off-Sale Beer Brickley's Market PDQ Food Store SuperAmerica Club - On-Sale American Legion Post//398 VFW Post #5113 On-Sale Wine A1 & Alma's Supper Club House of Moy Sunday Sales VFW Post//5113 printed on recycled paper m£ns June 11, 1996 BATCH 6052A BATCH 6053 BATCH 6054 Total Bills $ 47,238.77 101,340.34 90,995.24 $239,574.35 Ii! Z 8 JJ Ii, Z ZZZZ >- ~ >->- ~ Z go° Z ,,l, Z II Il I uJ~ ,-4 o o ~ oo o ~ ~ JJ ' '' J '' 4 '' ~r ! ! i~.D I ZZ ! g z Z o Oo ! z ,.q 0 II I m ,i I ,I~ I ti, Z Z ,"', t-- _.J,< OI-- r-~ ~,'~. '~Z J J II i ~Z tli I CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 Memorandum DATE: May 31, 1996 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle, City Manager · Jim Fackler, Parks DirectorQ/~?"./~ Survey of Longford Road At the May 28, 1996 City Council meeting, a question was raised about a survey done by McCombs Frank Roos Assoc. (MFRA) in relation to Longford Road and property under development by Brenshel Homes/Tom Stokes. When the developer submitted surveys for proposed homes that abut unimproved Longford Road they denoted that a portion of the road was above the Department of Natural Resources Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation of 929.4. So, if docks were to be installed, they would have to originate from lands controlled by the City. To allow this, staff must apply Mound City code as outlined in Section 437:00, Subd. 2., as follows: "License Required. No person shall erect, keep, or maintain a dock on or abutting upon any public street, road, park or commons without first securing a license therefor from the City in accordance with the provision of this Section 437." To apply the ordinance consistently, all docks that currently or probably utilize Longford Road must be determined. The proposed dock sites that would abut the new Brenshel Homes were recognized from surveys done by the developer. What needed to be established were the location of two existing docks that held a high likelihood of being on Longford Road and other portions of Longford Road that do not have a current survey. The costs that were incurred by the City from the survey were not for the location of Longford Road abutting the Brenshel Homes, it was for location of the remainder of the street. In fact, the Brenshel Home survey reduced the cost to the City for the balance of Longford Road because the developer had already flagged the comer irons which showed the beginning of Longford Road and allowed for less time to be spent by MFRA to perform the work needed. JF:~ printed on recycled paper An Equal Opportunity Employer McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. TERMS: Due on receipt, Past due accounts subject to finance charge of 1% per month (12% APR), 55447-4739 Telephone Engineers 612/476-6010 Planners 612/476-8532 FAX Surveyors Invoice # 22815 May 01, 1996 Page 1 City of Hound 5341Haywood Road Hound HN 55364 RECEW .g Client ID: HOUND Project #: 11321 Longford Road: Kings Lane to Black Lake Lane.Location Survey w/929.4 Contour(OHW Professional Services for the period: April 30, 1996 Professional Services Rate Hours Charge Reg Land Surveyor Senior Technician 3-Man Survey Crew Survey Crew Chief 80.00 1.OO 80.00 80.00 1.50 120.OO 125.OO 3.00 375.00 60.00 0.50 30.~O 6.00 605.00 Total Professional Services $ 605.00 ** Invoice Total ** $ 605.00 06-0S-1996 12:22 612 47~ ?033 LMCD P.02 LAKE MINNETONKA'.CONSERVATIO. N DIsTRIcT 900 EAST WAYZATA BoULI~VARD, SUITE 160 WAYZATA, MINN£$OTA ~391 TELEPHON~. 812/473.'7033 Douglu E. Babceck Chair, Tonka Bay Tgm Reeee Vice Chair, Idound Jolaph Zwak Becrataty, Greenwood Robert R a.sc, op Treasurer, Shoreward Kent Dahien Mlnnetonka Beach Bo~ Foster Doephaven Gretchen MagIIch Mlnnetonk~ Duane Markus Wayzata Craig Moiler VIclorla Craig Nelson Spring Perk Eugene Parlyka Minnelrlata Paul Stark Excelsler Herb J. Suerlh Woo~lsncl Orono ~r. ~im Yaik~er City o£ Houn~ 5341 Ha~ood..Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Jim: Per conversation, 'I have drafted a memo outlining' code. LMCD Code Section 2.02, Subd. i "ali0w~ for'the fei= of continuous ihoreline.' In the of shoreline ~or ~CD .cities wi~h a .multi, la' license,' ~CD Code allows ~heIe oitiel aco~ulate't°tal ihoreline despi[e ~e Ihore~ine may no= be oon=inuoue. The Co~e alee allovl ci~tes ~o place Boat storage. Uni=l (BSU'i).in a specific location"with a density greece= ~han provided the lots1 numar of BSU~s for ~e. city mul[iple dock license 'doel not exceed, one' restricted water°raft for every 50 .flit .of '. shoreline. With raga=ds [o'. [he docks, to be 'placed 'on' Lo~gford' Road, this would be allowed provided ~a~ aspects of ~CD .Code are compli, ed wi=h. In 1997' when your renewal applica=ion for your mul[iple ' will need [o properly note .~e inoreale .on Longford Road. Feel free to call ~e if you need further clarification on this ~ter. ~E MI~~ CONS'~VATION DIS~I~ Gre~Nybeck ' ' A~inie=rative Techni=ian cot TO~. Rases7 ~CD Board (Mou~d) June 6, 1996 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL GREG SKINNER, PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT MAY, 1996 REPORT STREET DEPARTMENT We have been finishing the sweeping of the streets. The crew has been working 4 ten hour days. The Street Department has repaired and replaced a few street signs that were damaged. We took fill from the stock pile to other areas. WATER DEPARTMENT The crew has been working on the meters: new installs, lowering standpipes, locating and tying out curb box measurements. We have been working with Schlumberger, on a little bug that is still giving us a "dash" in the registers. Schlumberger will be compensating the City $10 credit for every meter with a "dash" that needs replacement. The credits will be used for future purchase of upcoming new meters. The system is getting better, we are reading the meters in 4 to 4 and 1/2 days. SEWER DEPARTMENT They have been helping out the Street Department, driving truck for sweeping. Gasoline in the City sewers created quite a mess. There was a potential for a real disaster. We located where the gas was coming from, contained it and flushed the system out. Metropolitan Sewer was here. We used some emulsion, a soap like substance, in the lines to remove the gas fumes. We flushed the lines. There was quite a crew of people. The Pollution Control Agency (PCA) was out. I haven't heard from them yet regarding the bills, what is going to happen, the police are still investigating the port of entry. I haven't heard from the PCA either since the incident. Everything worked very well with working with all the various agencies. This was something that we are trained in, but we do not want to do it in real life. However, it worked out real well. GS:ls printed on recycled paper TO: MAYOR, CITY COUNCILAND CITY MANAGER FROM' GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR RE: MAY FINANCE DEPARTMENTREPORT Investment Activity Balance: MaY 1, 1996 (AdjuSted m Audit) $:3,443,538 Bought: Money Market 4M 50,000 Money Market First Bank 187,831 Money Market Smith Barney 7 CP Smith Barney 5.32% 200,249 Matured: Money Market First Bank (35,000) CP Sm ith Barney 5.24% (197,422) CP First Bank 5.18% (271,644) Balance: May 31, 1996 $3,377,559 Financial Report After the completion of the 1995 audit and the official release of the ComprehensiveAnnual Financial Report, Finance was required to: - prepare data to be published in the local newspaper. - compile forms to be sent to the Government Finance Officers Association for their review as part of the program of Excellence in Financial Reporting. - Complete an extensive report to be used by the State Auditor Office and other state agencies. 1997 LGA and HACA Estimates It is estimated that the City of Mound will receive State Aids as Follows: - $332,900 in Local GovernmentAid (LGA), an increase of $20,815. - $490,954 in Homestead AgriculturalCredit Aid (HACA), an increase of $5,859. - $10,764 in Local Performance Aid (LPA), as a new State Aid for 1997. City of Mound Monthly Report Utilities Month of: May 1996 No. of Customers: Water Sewer Water Used: (in 1,000 gallons) Billing: Water Sewer Recycle Total Payments: Water Sewer Recycle Total Residential 1,142 1,140 15,472 $25,204 $48,627 $5,219 $79,050 $26,027 $50,288 $5,O97 $81,412 Commercial 123 123 3,318 $4,744 $12,665 $53 $17,462 $4,928 $12,35O $44 $17,322 06/06/96 Utility- 96 Total 1,265 1,263 18,790 $29,948 $61,292 $5,272 $96,512 $30,955 $62,638 $5,141 $98,734 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 June 5, 1996 To: From: Re: Mayor, City Council and City Manager Joel Krumm, Liquor Store Manager ~,~,'/~--~, May 1996 Monthly Report What a difference one month can make. In April, when the weather was cold and rainy, sales were $114,275.00. In May when we had some decent weather sales were $144,807.00. That compares to last year in May when we did $131,443.00. Thus after the first five months of the year we are $41,746.00 ahead of last year's pace. May was an exciting month. As you know on May 21st there was a gas leak, or what ever you want to call it, in our vicinity which virtually caused much of the Mound business district to resemble a ghost town for approximately five hours. Placing a conservative estimate on the shut down in operations we probably lost $1,000.00 in potential sales. So May could have been even better! On a more positive note, things are shaping up around here. I purchased a two door free standing refrigeration unit which now houses all our previously warm Micro Beers. It is also handling many more items such as Quarts and 22 ounce bottles of beer, pop and more. The Micro beers, which sold only okay before because they were warm, are now obviously doing much better. By moving my quarts of beer out of the main beer cooler I was able to readjust our imported beer section to increase the product line and allow for a larger selection. To get the new cold beverage cooler in we had to make some drastic changes and moves as far as our mixes and sodas were concerned. This move seems to be working well also. The mixes are now positioned close to the spirits shelves which makes it more convenient for the customer plus it encourages extra mix sales. All around the change is working and the appearance of the store has improved. JK:jb printed on recycled paper LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle Chief Len Harrell Monthly Report for May 1996 The police department responded to 848 calls for service during the month of May. There were 26 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 criminal sexual conduct, 2 burglaries, 1 aggravated assault, and 22 larcenies. There were 61 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 child abuse/neglect, 2 weapons, 1 narcotic, 11 damage to property, 5 DUrs, 6 simple assaults, 8 domestics (4 with an assaults), 7 harassment, 3 juvenile status offenses, and 17 other offenses. The patrol division issued 140 adult citations and 4 juvenile citations. Parking violations accounted for an additional 37 tickets. Warnings were issued to 89 individuals for a variety of violations. There were 3 adults and 3 juveniles arrested for felonies. There were 21 adults and 7 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 5 warrant arrests. The department assisted in 9 vehicle accidents, 1 with injuries. There were 41 medical emergencies and 29 animal complaints. Mound assisted other agencies on 25 occasions in May and requested assistance 17 times. Property valued at $9,811 was stolen. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - MAY 1996 II. INVESTIGATIONS The investigators worked on 1 criminal sexual conduct and 4 child protection issues, accounting for 39 hours of investigation time. Other cases included the dumping of hazardous material in the local sanitary sewer, robbery, arson, burglary, adult protection, assault, theft, fleeing a police officer, damage to property, disorderly conduct, stalking, harassment, possession of stolen property, and thefL Formal complaints were issued for felony possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine), 5th degree assault, criminal damage to property, disorderly conduct, false information to police/obstructing legal process, and fishing without a license. III. Personnel/Staffing The department used approximately 41 hours of overtime during the month of May. Officers used 35 hours of comp-time, 66 hours of sick time, and 9 holidays. Officers earned 86 hours of comp-time. Officers attended courses on interviewing and interrogation, drug intervention, defensive tactics, tactical driving technique, crisis management in an emergency, and mandatory training on use of force and OSHA issues. Community Service Officers Officer Paschke resigned in May to take a position as a peace officer in Hutchinson, Minnesota. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY 1996 OFFENSES ~ EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED i~EPOR~TED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT JUV Homicide Criminal Sexual Conduct Robbery Aggravated Assault Burglary Larceny Vehicle Theft Arson 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PART II CRIMES Child Abuse/Neglect Forgery/NSF Checks Criminal Damage to Property Weapons Narcotic Laws Liquor Laws DWI Simple Assault Domestic Assault Domestic (No Assault) Harassment Juvenile Status Offenses Public Peace Trespassing All Other Offenses 26 0 2 3 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 5 0 6 0 1 3 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 0 9 12 1 TOTAL 61 3 4 21 21 7 PART II & PART IV Property Damage Accidents Personal Injury Accidents Fatal Accidents Medicals A~imal Complaints Mutual Aid Other General Investigations TOTAL 8 1 0 41 29 25 649 832 HCCP Inspections TOTAL 848 24 24 10 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT FiAY 1996 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 Misdemeanor Arrests Juvenile Felony Arrests Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests Part I Offenses Part II Offenses Medicals Animal Complaints Ordinance Violations Other Public Contacts THIS YEA/~ TO LAST YEAR MONTH DATE TO DATE 72 299 405 62 229 341 12 100 94 45 267 246 86 337 274 37 352 198 5 17 16 5 13 13 8 31 37 1 8 13 0 0 0 4 20 6 23 119 127 4 31 30 8 72 43 26 117 105 61 283 280 41 166 150 29 159 252 0 86 141 649 3,312 2,745 TOT/iL Assists Follow-Ups HCCP Mutual Aid Given Mutal Aid Requested 1,178 6,018 5,516 72 356 336 30 169 161 6 24 14 25 78 69 17 61 60 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY 1996 DWI More Than .10% BAC Careless/Reckless Driving Driving After Susp. or Rev. Open Bottle Speeding No DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired or No Plates Stop Arm Violations Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield Equipment Violations H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance Illegal or Unsafe Turn Over the Centerline Parking Violations Crosswalk Dog Ordinances Code Enforcement Seat Belt MV/ATV Miscellaneous Tags TOTAL 5 5 0 4 0 52 6 0 27 1 9 0 3 0 14 0 0 37 0 1 2 4 0 7 177 JUVENI~ 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY 1996 Insurance Traffic Equipment Crosswalk Animals Trash/Derelict Autos Seat Belt Trespassing Window Tint Miscellaneous TOTAL WARRANT ARRESTS Felony Misdemeanor Adul~ 30 14 22 1 0 1 0 0 0 13 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 Run: 30-Nay-96 13:10 Primary ISN's on[y: Date Reported range: j~TVity cod~s: ~u~rty Sta:us: All Property Types: All Property Descs: Att Brands: All Models: Att Officers/BadGes: All PRO03 0~/26/96 - 05/25/96 Att Prop Prop Inc no ISN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Tp Desc S# Stat Stolen Value B Prop type Totals: D Prop type Totals: H Prop type Totals: J Prop type Totals: 0 Prop type Totals: R Prop type Totals: S Prop type Totals: T ~l! Prop type Totals: Y Prop type Totals: **** Report Totals: MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Property Report STOLEN/RECC~/ERED nY DATE REPORTED Date Recov'd Quantity Act Recov'd Value Code 560 0 2.000 50 50 1.000 300 0 1.000 600 600 1.000 870 50 3.000 409 0 3.000 610 0 2.000 209 70 4.000 6,203 113 12.000 9,811 ~3 29.000 Brand ModeL Page Off-1 Off-2 Assnd Assnd Run: 30-May-96 10:45 CFS08 Primary ISH~s only: No Date Reported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Hou Received: Att Activity Resulted: AIl Dispositions: ALL Officers/Badges: At[ Grids: AIl Parrot Areas: At[ Days of the ~-~ek: ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION 9000 SPEEDING 9001 J-SPEEDING 9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 9014 STOP SIGN 9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 9034 STOP ARM VIOLATION 9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 9040 NO SEATBELT 9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 9150 NO TRAILER PARKING 9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 9221 J-NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 9300 LOST ARTICLES/OTHER 9301 LOST PERSONS 9309 FOUND/RUNAWAY 9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 9313 FOUNO PROPERTY 9315 UNCLAIME OESTROYED ANIMALS 9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Ca[Is For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 52 3 6 9 3 1 35 4 27 1 3 1 1 10 1 1 Page Run: 30-May-96 10:45 CFS08 Primary ISNms onty: No Date~ported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Tin~lJlli ~ge eachI.,,t,l rday: 00:00 - Z~:59 I~P~ow Received: ALt Activity Resulted: AIl Dispositions: Att Officers/Badges: Att Grids: Alt Patro[ Areas: At[ Days of the week: Alt MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Carts For Service iNCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 7 9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC. 1 9561 DOG BITE 2 9562 CAT BITES 1 9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 1 9710 MEDICAL/ASU 1 9~EDICALS 36 9731 MEDICALS/DX 2 9735 lO0 INJURY 1 9740 MENTAL CASES 1 9750 FIRES 1 9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 4 9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 4 9802 PUBLIC ASSIST 2 9900 ALL HCCP CASES 6 9904 OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 2 9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 2 9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 5 9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 2 I~ARRANTS 5 9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 2 9991 d'MISC. VIOLATIONS 4 Page 2 Run: 30-Nay-96 10:45 CFS08 Primary ISN's onty: No Date Reported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: Att Activity ResuLted: At[ Dispositions: Att Officers/Badges: Att Grids: Att Parrot Areas: Att Days of the week: Att ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Carts For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS Page 9992 9993 9994 9996 A2331 A5351 A5352 A5355 A5505 A5552 B3364 B3864 13060 J2500 J2EO0 J3500 J3EO0 L7052 M3005 M5350 M5531 M6202 MUTUAL AID/8100 MUTUAL AID/6500 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER MUTUAL AID/NARCOTICS ASLT 2-1NFLICTS BOOILY HARM-KNIFE ETC-ADLT-FAM ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-AOLT-FAM ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANOS-ASLT-AC ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BO HRM-HANDS-CHLO-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BOOILY HARM-NO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BOO1LY HARM-HANDS ETC-ADLT-ACQ BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COH THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COH THEFT CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILO TRAFFIC-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJURY-UNK VEH TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQLIOR TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH CSC 4-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-UNDER 13-M JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO JUVENILE-RUNAWAY HEALTH-SAFETY-HAZ WASTE-FAIL TO REPORT RELEASE CONSERVATION-FISH 10 4 1 4 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 Run: 30-May-96 10:45 CFS08 Pr{mary IS~'s on(y: No Date~orted range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Tim~l)rli )e each day: 00:00 - l~'~w Received: Att Activity Resulted: AL[ Dispositions: AIl Officers/Badges: Grids: ALt Patrol Areas: Days of the week: AIl ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION M6501 N3190 N3230 P3110 P3120 01220 DRUG PARAPHERNALIA-POSSESSION DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARASS-ABUSE-THRT-MAIL-DELIV PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT PROP DAMAGE-HS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT STLN PROP-FE-POSSESS-VEHICLE-UNK VAL TCO~HEFT-501-2500- FE-UNKNOWN-OTH PROP TC021 THEFT-501-2500- FE-BUI LD I NG-MONEY TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TF029 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-BUILDING-OTH PROP TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TF169 THEFT'201-5OO-GM-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP TGO02 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-UNKNOWN-SERVICES TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY TG031 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-COl# MACH-MONEY TG069 THEFT'LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP TG159 THEFT'LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH'OTHER U1493 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-HO MOTOR-501-2500 U1497 THEFT'FE'BICYCLE'NO MOTOR-201'500 U3~HEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS U3497 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NOMOTOR-201-500 U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Servfce INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 1 6 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 Page 4 Run: 30-May-96 10:45 CFS08 Primary lSN's only: No Date Reported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: ALl Officers/Badges: All Grids: ALL Patrol Areas: ALL Days of the week: All ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIOENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY COOE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS Page W3190 W3340 X2200 X3200 X3250 WEAPONS-MS-USES-OTHER TYPE-NO CHAR WEAPONS-MS-POINTS-FIREARM-NO CHAR CRIM AGNST ADH JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-GIVE FLSE NAM POL CRIH AGHST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION **** Report Totals: 380 Run: 30-May-96 11:47 OFF01 Primary ISN's on[y: No Date Reported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Tinge each day: 00:00 - 23:59 %l~ispositions: ALL Activity codes: ALL Officers/Badges: ALt Grids: ALL MO(JND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS Page 1 ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL COOE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING A2331 A5351 A5352 A5355 A5505 A5552 83364 B3~URG I$O~RIM J2500 J2EO0 J3500 J3EO0 L?052 M3005 M5350 M5531 M6202 M6501 N3190 ..... OFFENSES CLEAREO .... ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPT[ON TOTAL CLEARED ASLT E-INFLICTS BODILY HARM-KNIFE ETC-ADLT-FAM 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM 4 1 3 1 1 0 1 2 66.6 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRN-HANDS-ASLT-AC 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ 3 0 3 1 0 1 1 2 66.6 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-HO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-HANDS ETC-ADLT-ACQ 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-N-UNK WEAP-CC~4 THEFT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 TRAFF]C-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJURY-UNK VEH 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0 TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 2 0 E 0 2 0 0 E 100.0 TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH E 0 2 0 2 0 0 E 100.0 CSC 4-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-UNOER 13-M 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 dUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 2 0 E 1 0 0 1 1 50.0 HEALTH-SAFETY-HAZ WASTE-FAIL TO REPORT RELEASE 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 CONSERVAT]ON-FISH 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 DRUG PARAPHERNALIA-POSSESSION 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 5 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0.0 N3~ISTURB PEACE-MS-HARASS-ABUSE-THRT-MAIL-DELIV P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT P3120 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 10 1 9 8 0 1 0 1 11.1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 Run: 30-May-,96 11:47 OFF01 Primary ISN's on[y: No Date Reported range: 04/26/96 - 05/25/96 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Dispositions: At[ Activity codes:~ Officers/Badges: Grids: Ali ACT ACTIVITY COOE DESCRIPTION 01220 STLN PROP-FE-POSSESS-VEHICLE-UNK VAL TCO09 THEFT-501-2500-FE-UNKNOUN-OTH PROP TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TF029 THEFT-201-5OO-GH-BUILDING-OTH PROP TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GN-MOTO~ VEH-OTH PROP TF169 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP TGO02 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-UNKNO~N-SERVICES TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY TG031 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-COIN MACH-MONEY TG069 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-HAILS-OTHER PROP TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER U1493 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-501-2500 U1497 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS U3497 THEFT-MS-BiCYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 U~498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS 143190 WEAPONS-MS-USES-OTHER TYPE-NO CHAR W3340 WEAPONS-MS-POiNTS-FiREARM-NO CHAR X2200 CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL X$200 CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-GiVE FLSE NAM POL X$250 CRIM AGNST Al)MN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION **** Report Toters: MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 4 3 1 0 I 1 2 0 2 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 2 2 1 0 I 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 I 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 76 3 73 43 Page ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 I 0 0 1 10 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1 25.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 1 0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 0 1 100.0 0 1 0 1 10, I 0 0 I 100.0 17 7 6 30 41.0 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0i~00 FAX (612) 472-0620 Parks Department Monthly Report May 1996 Parks The month of May always brings a rush to prepare for the summer and keep up with the mowing. The cold weather has helped to limit the need to cut grass so that other repairs could be done. All the play structures have been inspected and repaired as needed. The tennis courts at Swenson and Three Points Park have been resurfaced along with new net posts. Currently, the summer crew is all back with the exception of one of the mowing crew members. He will begin working the first part of June. Docks The cold weather has slowed down the installation of docks. There was a high demand for new applicants for dock sites and the Dock Inspector has been busy with helping accommodate these residents. Still a number will not be able to have use of the dock program. The new multiple slip dock was installed at Devon Common, it looks great, but there are issues still to be resolved which the Task Force will address. Cemetery Repairs were made to the grounds from winter burials in time for Memorial Day. A large, old maple tree has died in the old "A" Section and will need removal in June. Tree Removal Three trees were removed from City property and one notice was sent for a hazardous tree on private property. JF:pj printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 7, 1996 City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff Jon Sutherland, Building Official J~cr~ MAY 1996 MONTHLY REPORT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY There were 37 building permits issued in May for a construction value of $432,135. This included two new dwellings, and one more demolition of a single family dwelling. This trend of demolition and rebuilding continues to improve our housing stock, it also results in improving the location of the structures on the lots with regards to setbacks. We issued 37 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellanous permits for a total of 74 this month, and 255 year-to-date. PLANNING & ZONING The Planning Commission reviewed eight zoning cases in May including six variances, one minor subdivision, and one street vacation request. There were nine zoning cases reviewed by the City Council. There was no Planning Commission Workshop meeting due to a conflict with the Memorial Day holiday. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER (CSO) ACTIVITY We still do not have any CSO's on staff, however, two people with excellent qualifications are in the hiring process and should be starting on the 10th of June. We hope to have them up to speed as soon as possible, and with the ordinance enforcement problems that are typical of this time of year, they will be a welcome addition to our staff. printed on recycled paper lit ~ ,iii I 1~, II City o£ Month: i'~¥ Year: 1996 THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE NEW C O N--'~"~-~{ U CTI O N SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 2 2 189, 937 11 1,090,726 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOSI 4 [ , 155 , 516 TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX MULTIPLE FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITS) TRANSIENT HSG. {HOTELS / MOTELS) SUBTOTAL 2 2 189,937 15 2,246,242 COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 2 310,000 OFFICE I PROFESSIONAL INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC / SCHOOLS SUBTOTAL 2 310,000 ADDIIION S/AL T/RATIONS ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING 2 53, 000 6 132,860 DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 3 17,862 7 50, 573 DECKS 5 8, 520 10 26,424 SWIMMING POOLS REMODEL- MISC RESIDENTIAL 20 54, 176 61 239, 272 REMODEL- MULTIPLE DWELLINGS 1 78,640 I 78,640 SUBTOTAL 31 212,198 85 527,769 COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 2 30,000 2 30,000 OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL i 8, 700 INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC / SCHOOLS DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS SUBTOTAL 2 30,000 3 38,700 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS I i 3 NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS i 4 TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 2 1 7 # PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION # UNITS VALUATION # PERMITS 15 TOTAL 37 2 432,135 ~_12 3,122,711 PERMIT COUNT I THIS MONTH I YEAR-TO-DATE · BUILDING 36 112 FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 7 10 S,GNS 1 4 PLUMBING 12 58 MECHANICAL 14 46 GRADING 0 2 S&W, STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 4 23 TOTAL I 74 I 255 06/06/19% 14:36 6i2--472~43S TBH REESE PAGE 0i LAKE MINNETONKA .CONSERVATIO. N DISTRICT 900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA S5391 TELEPHONE $12/473.7033 ' ' (3. &lin Wllloutl, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BOARD MEMBERS Douglas E. Babcock Chair. Tonk~ Bay Tom Reese Vice Chair. Mouncl Joseph Zwak Secretary, Greenwood RObert Rascop Treasurer, Shorewood Kent Dahlen Minnetonka Beach Bert Foster Oeel3haven Gretchen Meglich Mlnnatonka Duane Markus Wayzata Craig Moiler Victoria Craig Nelson Spring Park Eugene Partyka MinnetrlSta Paul Stark Excelsior Herb J, Suerth Woodland Orono TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL DATE: JUNE 4, I996 l~OM: TOM REESE, LMCD REPRESENTATIVE SUBJECT: MAY REPORT- LMCD l.O General Items, 1.1 The District has hired Laura Smith as a summer intern to work on Public Relations items. It was felt that this is a need now because of all the high visibility projects that the District is working on. 1.2 The District is implementing a Purchase Order system that should simplify the obtaining of supplies for the various operations that are underway, 1.3 The draft budget reflecting a 5% growth over 1996 has been prepared and was discussed with the city administrators on Tuesday, June 4. 8 cities were represented. There were no significant exceptions taken. 2.0 Exotic Species Task Force. 2.1 The boat washing program thus far has not been a success. Contest organizers who originally seemed to support the program either cannot or will not deliver their at-risk registrants to the wash site. More stringent rules may have to be developed if pure voluntary does not work. 2.2 Duc to the very poor growing conditions, there is serious question on what should be the scope of the milfoil program for 1996. At present, there is little growth activity in the areas of the lake where in the past serious surface matting has taken place, ie. Phelps Bay, Spray Island. Preliminary grab samples in these areas disclose principally pond weed, rather than milfoil. 3.0 Water Structures 3.1 A High Water condition has been dcclexcd for thc lake. This requires closed throttle operation within 600 feet of shore. 4.0 Lake Use. 4.1 No significant activity. $.0 Mound Specific Items /ckc 5. I Mound will be invited to an upcoming meeting to explain the c timing and scope of work, ,. lc. Al Willcutt. Doug Babcock. CITY OF ORONO 6124730510 06/06/96 15:11 ~ :02/02 N0:959 TO: FROM: DATE: $~CT: Lake Area City Managers/Administrators Run Moorse, Co-Chair, Cooperative Police Services Study Subcommittee June 6, 1996 Cooperative Police Services Study Final Report and Joint Meeting to Present the Report to City Officials Thc final report of thc Lake Minnetonka Area Cooperating Cities concerning cooperative police services is attached. The cooperative police services study, and the preparation of thc report, were coordinated by a subcommittee made up of thc city administrators of Long Lake, Mound and Orono. The report reflects the f'mdings and conclusions of a study that analyzed police services in the lake area, with the goal of identifying options for maximizing thc cfficiency and effectiveness of police service delivery. The report recommends two action steps: Lake area city administrators and police chiefs work together to select a set of cooperative arrangements to be implemented within a short time frame. Conduct an in-depth feasibility study of consolidation of police departments in the lake area to obtain the range and depth of information needed to enable' cities to make informed decisions regarding consolidation. It is the hopc of the LMACC that the report will spark discussion in individual cities and police deparunents, and among cities and police departments, regarding opportunities for enhanced cooperation and opportunities for consolidation to improve the delivery of police services. A mecting to present thc report to officials of each of the lake area cities is being planned for 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 10 at thc Shorcwood City Council Chambers. Cities are invited to send at least two city councilmembcrs to the meeting. Thc meeting will include a presentation of the report, including a discussion of the recommended action steps. Because one of the action steps involves the lake area police chiefs working on enhancing cooperation among police departments, the meeting is planned to include a presentation by the police chiefs regarding potential new cooperative arrangements. "~ ~' .' ?'",~._' i .~ II May 23, 1996 CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: Mailing Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Chuck Ballentine Director of the Office of Local Assistance Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1634 Dear Mr. Ballentine: The final report of the Lake Minnetonka Area Cooperating Cities (LMACC) concerning cooperative police services is attached. The report reflects the findings and conclusions of a study that analyzed police services in the lake area, with the goal of identifying options for maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of police service delivery. The report recommends two action steps: 1. Lake area City Administrators and Police Chiefs work together to select a set of cooperative arrangements to be implemented within a short timeframe. 2. Conduct an in-depth feasibility study of consolidation of police departments in the lake area to obtain the range and depth of information needed to enable cities to make informed decisions regarding consolidation. It is the hope of the LMACC that the report will spark discussion in individual cities and police departments, and among cities and police departments, regarding opportunities for enhanced cooperation and opportunities for consolidation to improve the delivery of police services. On behalf of the LMACC, and as co-chair of the Police Services Study Committee, I want to express my appreciation for the grant provided by the Metropolitan Council to fund the Cooperative Police Services Study. The grant was an important element in both the initiation and completion of the study. Sincerely, /'...7' "~ Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator RJM/lsv Telephone (612) 473-7357 * FAX 4730510 LAKE MINNETONKA AREA COOPERATIVE POLICE SERVICES STUDY Prepared by the Lake Minnetonka Cooperating Cities (LMACC) May 15, 1996 Introduction The lake area is made up of a large number of relatively small communities, each with its own unique identity--each striving to preserve both its unique identity and its economic viability. In the midst of a trend toward consolidation of local units of government (in the interest of efficiency and cost effectiveness, and in some cases basic financial viability), the lake area cities have been in the forefront of efforts to create cooperative arrangements to provide services at lower costs while maintaining the independence of local government units. Increased demands for more services and lower taxes has meant continuing efforts to find ways to do more with less. Background of Cooperative Service Study The Lake Minnetonka Area Cooperating Cities group (LMACC), which is made up of the city managers and administrators of the lake area cities, has initiated a process to identify and develop new cooperative arrangements among cities to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery in all areas of municipal services. This process grew out of discussions regarding "Right Sizing" for the most efficient and effective delivery of municipal services. Right Sizing is an effort to ensure service delivery units are organized, structured and staffed for the most cost-effective delivery of services. Because of the small size of most cities around the lake, if a city was to provide all services independently, the service delivery would be very inefficient. "Right Sizing" requires cooperative arrangements across cities to gain the advantage of economies of scale. Out of these discussions the various municipal service areas were grouped into five categories for more in-depth study. These categories are as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. Public safety (Police and Fire) Public works and Engineering Parks and recreation Finance and administration Planning, zoning and building inspection As in all cities, a large amount of resources are dedicated to police services in the lake area. Although each of the police departments has a substantial budget, the magnitude of resources becomes clearer when the financial and staff resources dedicated to police services in the lake area are combined. For example, even when the resources used to provide police services to the cities of Minnetonka, Chanhassen and Victoria are excluded, the remaining lake area cities spend a combined $5 million per year, and have a combined 64 sworn police staff. This magnitude of resources makes the argument for additional efforts to enhance the cost- effectiveness of police service delivery a compelling one. In 1995, the LMACC applied for and received a $5,000 grant from the Metropolitan Council to study police services in the lake area. The study, in its final form, is to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council and to the city councils of the lake area. Purpose of Study. The overall purpose of the study was to analyze the current delivery of police services in the lake area and provide options for maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of police service delivery. More specifically, the study was to identify opportunities for enhancing cooperation among departments, and to preliminarily assess the feasibility of consolidating police departments in the lake area as a method of improving the delivery of police services. Study Area The LMACC communities include: Chanhassen, Deephaven, Greenwood, Woodland, Excelsior, Long Lake, Minnetonka, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, Orono, Shorewood,, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Victoria and Wayzata. The study area includes seventeen communities (one of which is not a member of the LMACC) served by seven local police departments and the Carver County Sheriff's Department. The police chiefs of each of the departments were very cooperative in providing the requested information, and in making themselves available for questions. The following is a breakdown of communities and their corresponding law enforcement department: Carver County Sheriff's Department: Cities of Victoria and Chanhassen. Mound Police Department: City of Mound Wayzata Police Department: City of Wayzata South Lake Public Safety Department: Cities of Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay St. Bonifacius & Minnetrista Public Safety Department: Cities of St. Bonifacius and Minnetrista. Minnetonka Police Department: City of Minnetonka. Deephaven Police Department: Cities of Deephaven and Woodland Orono Police Department: Cities of Orono, Spring Park, Long Lake and Minnetonka Beach. Purpose of Report The purpose of this report is to encourage and facilitate discussion about improving police service delivery among the cities of the lake area. The report explores two approaches to improving police service delivery--enhancing cooperation among departments, and changing the current system of police service delivery through consolidation of departments. It is hoped the report will spark discussion in individual cities and police departments, and among cities and police departments, regarding opportunities for enhanced cooperation and opportunities for consolidation that would improve the delivery of police services. Substantial Cooperative Arrangements Are Currently In Place The police departments in the Lake Minnetonka area have, over the years, developed a broad range of cooperative relationships that have allowed them to provide police service more cost effectively. Examples of these cooperative arrangements include the following: Provision of dispatching to the majority of the lake area cities by Hennepin County. Provision of animal control services to several lake area cities by the City of Chanhassen. Mutual aid agreements to enable assistance across jurisdictions. 2 Specialized activities such as a SWAT unit, which require specialized training and equipment, are available through the County. Hennepin County PTAC provides police training on a joint basis. Southwest Metro Drug Task Force Although these relationships have provided significant economies in the provision of police services, it is advantageous to continue efforts to identify additional opportunities for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of police service delivery. The goal is to increase the level of police service while reducing costs. En_hancine. Cooperative Arrangements The police service study.confirmed many examples of cooperation among police agencies. The study also determined that many opportunities for increasing services and reducing costs still remain. A listing of these opportunities is as follows: Ao Cooperative arrangement for the temporary holding of suspects for transportation to the County Jail. The lake area police departments often must send an officer, CSO, or a Reserve Officer to transport suspects to the Hennepin County Jail. It would be beneficial to develop a cooperative arrangement with a city with 24 hour staffing and holding cells to hold suspects until the Hennepin County transport or another joint transport is arranged, rather than dedicating substantial staff time to transporting suspects to the County Jail. B. Joint maintenance of police vehicles. C. Joint access to police records across jurisdictions. D. Shared human resource administration, i.e. recruitment, selection etc. E. Joint animal control service/impound facility. F. Contracted investigative services. Creation of a pool of part-time officers to fill temporary sworn officer staffing needs i.e. during a long term leave for an illness or injury. H. Joint juvenile diversion program. I. Cooperative arrangement for administrative investigations. J. Sharing of staff for DARE and school liaison officer activities. Sharing a staff person to coordinate and promote police/community relations i.e. crime prevention, neighborhood watch, community policing. The lake area Police Chiefs have suggested and committed to implementation of those 3 cooperative arrangements with the greatest potential for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of police service delivery. Consolidation of Departments A second approach to increasing services and lowering costs is consolidation of police departments. The lake area has substantial experience with this approach. The South Lake Public Safety Department is a consolidated department that serves four cities through a joint powers agreement. The Orono Police Department provides police service to four cities through a contractual arrangement. The St. Bonifacius/Minnetrista Police Department serves two cities through a joint powers agreement. The cities of Chanhassen and Victoria receive police services from Carver County. The lake area currently has eight police agencies serving seventeen communities (this includes Carver County serving the City of Victoria). Six of the eight departments have less than 20 sworn officers. Half of these have less than 12 sworn officers. This is substantially less than general standards for ideal organizational size. In 1973 the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals recommended consolidation of police departments with less than 10 full-time sworn officers. In 1975 a report by the Michigan Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice suggested that the minimum acceptable size of law enforcement agencies is 20 full-time sworn officers. The results of a study published in the November 1976 issue of Public Administration Review suggested that departments with 12 to 76 officers were able to provide police services most effectively. Based on these standards, it appears that several combinations of existing departments could provide increases in efficiency and effectiveness. Please see Appendix A for a staffing chart of each of the lake area police organizations. Advantages and Disadvantages of Cooperative Arrangements and Consolidation Doing more with less can be accomplished by both enhancing cooperation among existing police departments and by consolidating smaller departments into larger units. The lake area cities have followed both approaches, since the two are not mutually exclusive. The two approaches each have an important role to play in increasing services and reducing costs. The two approaches each provide economies of scale which enable increased service levels and reduced costs. Each of the approaches has specific benefits. There are also obstacles to implementing each approach. Benefits of Cooperative Arrangements 1. Enhanced cooperation does not significantly disturb current organizations. Cities retain the overall method of service delivery with which they are currently comfortable. Cooperative arrangements promote stronger relationships between police departments and between cities. 4 Obstacles to Cooperative Arrangements 1. Requires sustained efforts by multiple departments to identify and implement cooperative arrangements. 2. Fears that cooperative arrangements may reduce local independence. Benefits of Consolidation 1. A preliminary analysis of the organizational structures and staffing levels of the lake area police departments suggests that consolidation of departments could significantly reduce the amount of top and mid-management positions and would enable significant efficiencies in the office support activities and staffing. This would free up resources which would enable putting more sworn personnel on the street and/or would enable additional specialized staffing. This staffing could include School Liaison/DARE Officers or a community Building Specialist to assist in building relationships between the police department and community organizations that are necessary for successful community policing efforts. Consolidation bringS a large number of potential cooperative arrangements within the purview of a single department. Rather than developing cooperative arrangements across cities and departments, cooperative arrangements can be accomplished internally. Consolidation provides an opportunity to create a new organization, and encourages new perspectives and new ways of doing things. Consolidation can enable a greater level of economies of scale than can cooperative arrangements. a.) Reduced administrative and support staff. b.) More efficient and effective patrol supervision. c.) Potential reduction in the number of police facilities. d.) Centralization of police records. Obstacles to Consolidation 1. Fears of loss of local control and loss of local identity. a.) Responsiveness to community needs and desires. b.) Quality of service. c.) Quantity of service. Fears of loss of "high touch" provided by a small department and close relationships between the police officers and citizens and businesses. Merging of the departments requires dealing with union issues such as seniority, different pay and benefit levels, etc. 4. Consolidation requires developing new governance and cost allocation arrangements. Conclusion The study has identified significant opportunities for increased services and reduced costs through enhanced cooperative efforts among departments. The lake area Police Chiefs have suggested and comrnitted to immediate and sustained efforts to study and implement additional cooperative arrangements. The informal assessment of the feasibility of police department consolidation, in terms of enabling improved services and/or reduced costs, suggested there are significant economies of scale possible through consolidation. However, the preliminary assessment did not provide sufficient in-depth analysis to provide a clear picture of the benefits versus costs of consolidation. A more formal feasibility study would be required to provide sufficient information for decision making regarding consolidation. Recommended Action Steps Based on the results of the study the following action steps are recommended: Lake area city administrators and police chiefs work together to select a set of cooperative arrangements to be implemented within a short time frame. Conduct an in-depth feasibility study of consolidation of police departments in the lake area to obtain the range and depth of information needed to enable cities to make informed decisions regarding consolidation. A preliminary listing of the components to be included in a consolidation feasibility study is attached as Appendix B. This information is taken from a report titled Small Police Agency Consolidation: Suggested Approaches, prepared by the Office of Development, Testing and Dissemination; National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice; authored by Terry W. Koepsel and Charles M. Girard in July of 1979. APPENDIX A ~~, APPENDIX B o 10. COMPONENTS OF A CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY Demographic information related to each of the potential participating jurisdictions. A profile of the level of police activity in each jurisdiction. a.) Reported criminal activity b.) Calls for service (this requires a common definition of "calls for service") Organizational structure and general operating procedures of each of the existing agencies; including the range and depth of services/programs provided, i.e. DARE, School Liaison, Crime Prevention, etc. Staffing information for each of the existing agencies. Analysis of the management and administration of each of the existing agencies. a.) Personnel policies 1.) Pay scales and benefits 2.) Trailing policies b.) Evidence and property control procedures Inventory of major equipment and facilities in each of the agencies. Police a.) b.) c.) d.) e.) service cost information. Salaries and wages Benefits General operating expenditures Capital costs Miscellaneous expenses Public a.) b.) opinion survey (optional) Citizen attitudes regarding the current system of police service delivery 1.) Quality of service 2.) Costs Any problems or short comings perceived with the current system Attitudes regarding the development of a merged or consolidated agency Assessment of the existing delivery system using the information provided in Items 1 through 8 above. Development of alternative approaches to organizing for the delivery of police services. RECEIVED .,.-,, 3 0 Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce 4165 Shoreline Dr., Suite 40 At The Yacht Club, Spring Park, MN 55384 · (612) 471-0768 DATE: May 28, 1996 TO: Ail City Managers, Mayors, City Clerks and Administrators in the Cities of Minnetonka Beach, Navarre/Orono, Spring Park, Mound, Minnetrista, St. Bonifacius FROM: Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce RE: Local Focus Meeting RSVP: TO 471-0768 BY WEDNESDAY,JUNE 5,1996 The Local Focus Meeting has been changed from the Mound City Hall to the Yacht Club Conference Room on Wednesday,June 12,1996,at 7:30 a.m.. Minnetonka Beach Navarre/Orono Spring Park Mound Minnetrista St. Boni RSVP PLEASE - Mayor Nancy D. Check City Clerk/Administrator Sara Case - Mayor Edward Callahan City Administrator Ronald Moorse - Mayor Jerry Rockvam City Administrator Patricia Higus - Mayor Bob Polston City Manager Ed Shukle - Mayor Paul Pond City Clerk/Administrator Charlotte Erickston - Mayor Dave Orn City Clerk Brenda Fisk "Working Togelher'~ Serving the communities of Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, Orono (Navarre), Spring Park, and St. Bonifacius. Metropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future May 29, 1996 31 Mr. Edward Shukle Jr Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364-1687 Dear Mr. Shukle Jr: The Metropolitan Council staff'has prepared a preliminary population and household estimate (April 1, 1995) for your community. Enclosed for your review is a 1995 worksheet which includes 1990 Census background data. O The estimates are used by the Council to monitor population and household change in the region. We strive to provide estimates that are accurate and to treat each municipality consistently. If you have questions or comments about the estimates, please contact Kathy Johnson at 291-6332 or by e-mail at kathy.johnson.~metc, state.mn.us. If you prefer to submit written comments, please direct these to Ms. Johnson as well. We need to submit finalized estimates to the State Department of Revenue by July 1, 1996, for use in their local aids formulas. To do so, we must receive your comments by June 15, 1996. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, James Solem Regional Administrator JS/kj Enclosure 230 East Fifth Stree! SI. Paul, Minnesota 55101 - 1634 {6121 291-6359 Fax 291-6550 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD/TrY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 229-3780 Metropolitan Council Provisional Population Estimate April 1, 1995 MOUND 1995 Housing Units Single-family 3,067 3,152 3,021 Multifamily (incl. tom homes) 884 886 732 Mobile Home 14 13 12 Total 3,965 4,051 3,765 1990 Census Households I 3'71011 1995 Household Estimate I 3,765 I[ II 1990 Census Total Population 9,634 II 1990 Group Quarters Population 0 II 1990 Population in Households 9,634[I 1995 Population Estimate 9,582]I 1995 Group Quarters Population 1995 Population in Households 9 1990 Census Persons per Household 2.60 II II 1995 Persons per Household 2.55 All numbers are as of April 1 of each year. *This total includes 11 units listed in "other" housing in the 1990 Census data. The Census defines these units as those not fitting the defined housing categories, such as houseboats, railroad cars, campers and vans. Since no information on "other" units is available between censuses, for purposes of 1995 population and household estimation, these units have been allocated to the single and multiple family categories. This was done based on persons per "other" household and the ratio of single-family to multifamily housing in the jurisdiction. Mound City Coundl City of Mou.ud 5341 Maywood l~oad Mound, MN 55364 RECEIVED May 31.1996 Dear Mayor Polston and Council Members, At the May 28th city council meeting, the nonabutting dock holders agreed to the following on a temporary basis for the 1996 boating season: One dock with two boat slips at the end of Weodland Road. · The remainder of the nonabutting residents docks from Wawonaissa Common ']] v~,, "group" on both sides of Canary Beach area. · ~ agreement between neighbors: Mart3' and Marie Johnson's dock will remain on Wawonaissa Common across from Carol Doyle's property. This is not a solution to the problems caused by the lawsuit. It allows people to use the lakeshore this season but x~51l not be acceptable as a permanent solution. In reference to the proposal submitted by the litigants dated May 18th, 1996, there are several areas of dispute. The litigants site consensus during the recently completed mediation. "During the recently completed mediation process there was consensus that on Wawonaissa Common there should be one private dock for each lakeshore home and no other private docks." We do not agree with their interpretation of private docks only in front of abutters homes. In fact, the consensus was every dock holder would retain their private docks with the nonabutters private docks clastered at the street ends. The exact number of boats or docks was not agreed upon. Multiple boat docks were never agreed to except by encouraging shared docks. The mediation was done in good faith. We had consensus and continued mediation on the understanding that the City of Mound would continue to regulate and license docks on the Wawonaissa Commons. (We did not know what the six litigants would do until late in mediation.) In the proposal, the litigants exclude all the abutting property owners from the city's regulation. 'i'nis changes L'~ medi,,ti~n agreement and potc=tial!y req~ffes the LMCD t,~ reg~!.~.+e t. bJ.q .area. The entire proposal has the tone of one authoritative body proposing what it will accept this year and possibly next. Due ~ the outcome of the lawsuit, the City of Mound may need that permission. In fact, we feel we have equal rights and, thereibre, equal say in any proposed dock plan. We urge ~:~nt[nued help from the City of Mound in coming to an agreement. We too would like to "get on with lif~' and try to get along with our neighbors. We look forward to negotiating some closure to tiffs problem. Until legally notified of ~. change~ we will assume our rights and usage of the cornmon~ remains the same as it has been in the past and will agree to the previously stated ~mI.,orary solntion for the 1996 boating season. Sincere_y: CC: Ed Shulde Curt Pearson John Dean //~athy B?il~ . 'ff. John Eccles Mike Aspelin