1997-05-13..................................................................................................................................... ~ ............ ~ ...... ..
==================================================================================================== ~::~ :,:::::~:: ii~iiiii~iii~ .....
Ii ...........................................:
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 1997, 7:30 PM
MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
*Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items
unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the
Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
1. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PAGE
PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 18, 1997 AS HAROLD MEEKER DAY IN
STATE OF MINNESOTA AND THE CITY OF MOUND ............. 1513-1514
PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF MAY 1997 AS WESTONKA
SENIOR CENTER MONTH
................................ 1515-1516
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that
are not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda
and voted upon after the Consent Agenda has been approved.
*CONSENT AGENDA:
*A.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 22, 1997 BOARD
OF REVIEW AND THE APRIL 22, 1997 REGULAR MEETING .... 1517-1527
*B.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1997 BOARD OF
REVIEW AND MAY 6, 1997 SPECIAL MEETING ............
1528-1531
*C.
RESOLUTION 97- RESOLUTION APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) RE: ALLOCATION OF
FUNDS FROM WESTONKA INTERVENTION TO
SOJOURNER LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MINNETONKA .......... 1532
*D.
RESOLUTION 97- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
1997 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
......... 1533-1542
*E. APPROVAL OF VARIOUS PERMITS ..................... 1543-1544
1511
10.
11.
12.
13.
APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 235:27, SUBD. 1 OF THE CITY CODE
RELATING TO RECREATIONAL FIRES
...................... 1545
*G.
PA YMENT OF BILLS
............................... 1546-1569
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE #96-6,~ - REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT/
PDA/VARIANCES SETON BLUFF, FINE LINE DESIGN GROUP, INC.,
LOTS 15-32, BLOCK 11, SETON, 19-117-23 22 0036-41 & 54 .......... 1570-1631
PRESENTATION OF 1996 AUDIT - GINO BUSINARO,
FINANCE DIRECTOR & STEVE MC DONALD, ABDO, ABDO AND EICK
CASE 9%16: GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD,
LOTS 6 & 7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS,
PID#23-117-24 34 0088
REQUEST: VARIANCE FOR GARAGE ADDITION
(THIS ITEM WILL BE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
5-12-97) ............................................ 1632-1663
REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - JOE ZYLMAN,
MAPLE MANORS
...................................... 1664-1706
APPROVAL OF MULTIPLE DOCK SLIPS -
AMHURST LANE ACCESS (DEVON COMMON) &
FAIRVIEW LANE ACCESS
........................... 1707-1716
(Resolution to be handed out Tuesday evening)
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
DISCUSSION: MEMBERSHIP IN THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
(SRA) .............................................. 1717-1745
.INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
Ao
DEPARTMENT HEAD MONTHLY REPORTS FOR APRIL, 1997 .... 1746-1771
B. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S MONTHLY REPORT FOR APRIL, 1997 .... 1772
Co
D.
E.
F.
G.
LETTER FROM GENE PETERSON, 6017 RIDGEWOOD ROAD ........ 1773
LETTER FROM PATRICIA MIKULSKI, 3015 DRURY LANE ......... 1774
LETTER FROM PERRY HANSON, 2459 LOST LAKE ROAD ...... 1776-1776
LETTER FROM DORENE HANSON, 2459 LOST LAKE ROAD ..... 177%1778
MEMORANDUM WITH ATTACHMENTS FROM JIM STROMMEN,
KENNEDY & GRAVEN AND SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY RE:
612 AREA CODE PROPOSED CHANGES ................... 1779-1806
1512
REMINDER: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING,
TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1997, 7:30 P.M.
REMINDER: CITY OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED
ON MONDAY, MAY 26, 1997 IN OBSERVANCE
OF MEMORIAL DAY.
REMINDER: HRA MEETING, 7:00 P.M.,
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 1997, CITY HALL
PRIOR TO REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
1512~
Steve Smith
State Representative
District 34A
Hennepin and Wright Counties
Minnesota
House of
Representatives
Committees: Judiciary; Capital Investment; Civil and Family Law Division - Judiciary
Representing: Mound, Minnetrista, St. Bonifacius, Spring Park, Independence, Greenfield,
Hanover, Rockford, Delano, Rockford Township, Franklin Township
April29,1997
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
Ci~Manager
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Ed:
RECEIVEB ,-,PR 3 0 1997
Please find enclosed a copy of the original Proclamation for the Harold Meeker Day. I am
planning to attend on May 13. Please provide a frame for this document on that day.
If you have any suggestions or recommendations, please feel free to call me at my capitol office,
296-9188 or at my home in Mound, 472-7664.
Sincerely,
Steve Smith
State Representative
2710 Clare Lane, Mound, Minnesota 55364
State Office Building, 100 Constitution Ave., St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1298
(612) 472-7664
(612) 296-9188
FAX (612) 296-8803 ~'; =
WI IEREAS: Harold Meeker has served tle City of Mound, our state, and nation with honor; and
WItEREAS:
Harold Meeker has been a volunteer with Hennepin County's Social Services Volunteer
Programs for nearly twenty ?ears providing transportation, offering friendship and recruiting
other volunteers to help wit[ the needs of the senior citizens in the western suburbau area; and
WItEREAS:
l larold Meeker has been inxolved in the development of the "Friends Program" in Mound wlficb
helps Iow income families ia a varieiy of ways including providing clothing and food shelves,
holiday meals, transportation and occasional financial assistance; and
WIIEREAS:
?tarold Meeker was in charge of the first Mound's City Days/City Picnic which resulted in
Mound's first "City Day"; and
WI IERF~AS: llarold Meeker was cbairpe;son of Mound's City Day 75th Anniversary; and
WI IEREAS:
1 larold Meeker has enriched the lives of countless people in the City of Mound through his
generous spirit and wonderful volunteer efforts;
NOW, THEREFORE 1, AP, NE }1. CARLSON, Governor of the State of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim
May 18, 1997 to be
Harold Meeker Day
in Minnesota.
S ARY OF STATE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
hand and caused the Great Seal of the State of
Minnesota to be affixed at the State Capitol this
eighteenth day of May in the year of our Lord one
thousand nine hundred and ninety-seven, and of the
State the one hundred thirty-ninth.
GOVERNOR
MI I,
HOME OF THE WESTONKA SENIOR CITIZENS, INC. · 5600 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 491-8084
RECEIVe-L;
,,,'~', 2 4 1997
April 23, 1997
Mayor Bob Polston
Council Members
City of Mound
Dear Mayor Polston and Council Members,
As one of our supporting cities, we hope you feel pride in the work we
do to keep the older members of our community healthy mentally and
physically and independant in their own homes or apartments. We are
coming to you again this year to ask that you declare the month of
May as Westonka Senior Center Month in celebration of the national
Older Americans Month.
We want you to know how appreciative we are for all that you have
done for our Center throughout the many years that your city has
supported and encouraged us.
Respectfully,
Westonka Senior Center Friends
A Non-profit Organization Serving The Communities Of Mound · Orono · Spdng Park · Minnetrista
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING
WESTONKA SENIOR CENTER MONTH
MAY 1997
WHEREAS, we need to realize now, more than ever, what a resource
our older Americans are, and that the abilities of older Americans to
invest our country with their knowledge, creativity and experience
cannot be denied; and
WHEREAS, senior centers offer valuable service to the community in
providing our senior citizens the benefits of good fellowship,
encouragement and support, the opportunity to help themselves and
each other, and offering service of access to community services as
needed; and
WHEREAS, the month of May has been proclaimed Older
Americans Month, and the communities across the country are giving
special recognition to the role of senior centers;
THEREFORE, the City of Mound hereby proclaims the month of
May, 1997 as
WESTONKA SENIOR CENTER MONTH
in our community to honor our senior citizens, and to commend those
who staff our senior center and who have been so successful in their
efforts to assist our senior citizens to continue their involvement with
and contribution to the community.
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - BOARD OF REVIEW
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Board of Review convened in the Council Chambers
of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City on
April 22, 1997, at 7:00 PM.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen and Leah Weycker. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, Hennepin County Assessor Larry Miller, and Hennepin County Appraiser Stephanie
Nyhus.
Mayor Polston opened the Board of Review and explained that this meeting is to give property
owners a chance to question the value placed on their property by the County Assessor as of
January 2, 1997. He explained that each person would be heard and the Board of Review will
reconvene Tuesday, May 6, 1997, at 7:00 PM and bring back their final decision on each
property.
Larry Miller, from the Hennepin County Assessor's Office was present. The Council accepted
complaints on taxable market value from residents. The Assessor will then review these
properties and bring back recommendations at the May 6, 1997, Reconvened Board of Review.
The Council will take action on the total assessment at the May 6, 1997, Meeting.
The following persons responded to the call to be heard either in person, by calling and asking
to have their name submitted, or by submitting their concerns in writing. They all asked to have
the value of their property rechecked because they felt it was too high.
1. PID #19-117-23 32 0160 - JOHN EYERS, 4713 WILSHIRE BLVD.
2. PID #19-117-23 32 0188 - M.D. ANDERSON, 2873 ESSEX ROAD
3. PID #19-117-23 33 0005 - LORRAINE SULLIVAN, 3145 TUXEDO BLVD.
4. PID #13-117-24 22 0088 - R. R. HEDIN, 5420 THREE POINTS BLVD.
5. PID # 13-117-24 22 0064 - RAYMOND ANDERSEN, 5430 THREE POINTS BLVD.
6. PID #24-117-24 44 0021 - MELODY OLSEN, 4873 CUMBERLAND ROAD
7. PID #13-117-24 31 0014 - BUCHI NJAKA, 2186 CEDAR LANE
8. PID #18-117-23 23 0011 - RAY DEMONT, 1936 SHOREWOOD LANE
9. PID #24-117-24 12 0056 - FI YIN MOY, 2458 FAIRVIEW LANE
10. PID #13-117-24 32 0154 - YOUN PING NG, 2208 FERN LANE
1.0
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to reconvene the Local Board of
Review on Tuesday, May 6, 1997, at 7:00 PM, in the City Council chambers at 5341
Maywood Road. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
/377
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
MINUTES REGULAR MOUND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 1997.
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, April 22, 1997, at 7:35 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in
said City.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City
Attorney John Dean, Park Director Jim Fackler, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and City
Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Peter Larson, Vickie & Gregory
Pederson, Duane Norberg, Shirley Andersen, Sarah Pederson, Paul Brown, Charles Chapman,
Walter Neske, Adie & Jan Meuwissen, Gary Nachreiner, Darrell Shore, Thomas & Brenda
Berent, Mark Mulvey, John Beauchamp, Julie Andersen, David Andersen, Laura Andersen,
Melody Olsen, Rita Pederson, Kent Musser, Celine Watters, Bill Vit, Peter Meyer, Perry
Hanson, Katie & Greg Howard, Frank & Betty Weiland, C.J. & Debby Heitz, Ruth
Schmudlach, Pam Meyer and Mary Mc Kinley.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited.
*Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by
the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
1.0
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are not listed
and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon after the Consent
Agenda has been approved.
The City Manager asked that a letter from Hennepin County regarding (TANF) Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families be added to the regular agenda for discussion. The Council
agreed.
MOTION made by Weycker, seconded by Jensen to approve the items on the
Consent Agenda as presented and approve the Regular Agenda as amended above.
A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
*CONSENT AGENDA:
*1.1 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1997, REGULAR MEETING.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
'1.2 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 15, 1997, COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE MEETING.
MOTION
*1.3
'1.4
*1.5
'1.6
,J iJ,~ , JJ,,,,
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
CASE//97-15: MARK MULVEY, 5900 CHESTNUT ROAD, LOT 24, KOEHLER'S
2ND ADDITION, PID//14-117-24 43 0006, VARIANCE FOR NEW DWELLING,
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
RESOLUTION//97-37
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A STREET FRONTAGE
VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
NEW DWELLING AT 5900 CHESTNUT ROAD, LOT
24, KOEHLER'S 2ND ADDITION, PID//14-117-24 43
0006, P & Z CASE//97-15
RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSHIP OF
STATE GRAND-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUNDS.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
RESOLUTION//97-38
RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AUTHORIZING CITY
SPONSORSHIP OF STATE GRANT-IN-AID
SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUNDS
BID AWARD: 1997 SEALCOAT PROJECT.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
RESOLUTION//97-39
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE 1997
SEALCOAT PROJECT TO ALLIED BLACKTOP IN
THE AMOUNT OF 29,072.00
PAYMENT OF BILLS.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.7
CASE g97-16: GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD, LOTS 6 &
7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, PID //23-117-24 34 0088, VARIANCE FOR
GARAGE ADDITION.
3
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
The applicant, Gary Nachreiner, was present and explained his request. He further stated that
8 to 10 of the houses on Idlewood and Oaklawn that have been built in the last two years are
30 to 37 feet away from the road. He requested an 8 foot variance and the Planning
Commission recommended a 4 foot variance. He showed pictures of the property. He
explained that the topography of the lot is the cause of this hardship. He is now requesting a
6 foot variance for a 26 foot deep garage instead of the 24 foot that was recommended by the
Planning Commission.
The Council explained that the Planning Commission is trying to protect the integrity of the
Zoning Ordinance by granting the minimum variance.
The applicant explained that he cannot step the garage back in, as the Planning Commission
suggested, because he has all his utilities coming in on one side of the house and the walk-out
is on the other side. The Council asked if the Planning Commission was aware of the location
of all the utilities. The applicant stated no.
The Building Official arrived. He explained that the Planning Commission had asked that the
applicant work with the Building Official and try to reconfigure the proposed garage. He further
stated that if the Council was leaning toward granting the 26 foot depth for the garage, the fact
that there is additional boulevard between the property line and the curb has been used in other
variance cases, which reduces the impact to the road. The Planning Commission recommended
denial of the request for a 28' deep garage and did not agree with the compromise that the
applicant proposed at 26' deep. Staff recommended a 24' deep garage.
The Council suggested that this go back to the Planning Commission to determine if there is
sufficient practical difficulty based on the new information about the utilities and the questions
about the setbacks of some other properties.
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Hanus to refer this item back to the
Planning Commission, at no further charge to the applicant based upon the new
information that has been presented tonight, ie. location of the utilities; additional
parcels that are not 35 feet; and what impact it would have based upon the distance
the applicant is from the curb. This will go to the Planning Commission on May
12th and could come before the City Council on May 13. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
1.8
DISCUSSION: IMPROVEMENTS TO PHILBROOK PARK BY BABE RUTH
BASEBAIflJ ASSOCIATION.
The City Manager explained that last Summer the Babe Ruth Baseball Association made a
request to the City to make some improvements to Philbrook Park to be able to use it for
additional baseball games. The request went to the Park & Open Space Commission who
recommended approval. The City Council then approved the proposed improvement. Now
Spring is here and the baseball group is ready to make the improvements. The neighborhood
is now raising some objections to the improvements. 46 residents signed and submitted a
petition which reads as follows: "We the undersigned residents of the Brookton Addition have
some serious reservation about plans being made to modify the nature of Philbrook Park to
accommodate Babe Ruth baseball. Since there has been no dialog with residents about these
modifications, by our signatures we request that any proposed or planned changes be placed on
hold until a more open agreement has been negotiated between all interested parties. Mound,
15t~ 4
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
MN. 4/16/97."
The Park Director stated that the Babe Ruth Baseball Association is proposing to enlarge the
infield an extra 15 to 20 feet; installing protective fencing for the player area ( about 20 to 30
feet on the first and third base line; move the player bench back out of the fence area; sometime
putting an overhang on the backstop; and a secured locker behind the backstop to store bases,
etc.) There will not be a pitching mound. They want to keep it open for general use, i.e.
softball or any other play. He reassured the residents that the playground equipment that is there
will not be removed. There will also not be any concession stand. The Babe Ruth Baseball
Association is looking at 3 games a week on this field.
The Council asked that in the future any time the Park & Open Space Commission gets a request
to change or alter a neighborhood park, they involve the neighborhood where the changes are
proposed. The Mayor stated that the people who have called him regarding this change at
Philbrook Park did not know anything about this until the agri-lime was delivered and people
showed up to do the work.
Lorraine Painter, Pres. of the Babe Ruth Baseball League and Bill Vit, Vice President of the
League were present and gave the history of this request. This would be a transitional field to
accommodate the 13 year olds. They have looked at all the different fields. This park is the
only large park that can accommodate this type of field. The 14 and 15 year olds would not be
using this field because their baselines are 90 feet. They have donations from several service
clubs to cover the costs to improve this field and donated labor to complete the project. They
are now ready to continue working on the project and were quite surprised that there was
opposition.
Ms. Painter gave the following details:
o
7.
8.
9.
Expanding the size of the infield by 15 feet.
The agri-lime was dumped on the field before the road restrictions went on.
The fencing that has been talked about is limited. It would be a 5 foot high fence
extending from the backstop about 1/2 way down the first base side and 1/2 way
down the third base side. They have a choice of a heavy weight fence or a
lighter weight fence, which ever would be agreeable.
They would chalk the outfield.
The rules are that the games can't go beyond 2 and one-half hours. They are
estimating 6:00 P.M. to 8:30 P.M. This would be less use than when the softball
people use the field 2 night a week, some for 2 games in one evening.
They would use the field 2 or 3 times a week from May to July.
This site is the only area that has the depth to house this type of field,
There will not be any tournaments played at this site.
The first game is scheduled for the beginning of May.
The following persons spoke against the proposed ballfield improvement for the following
reasons:
2.
3.
4.
Charles Chapman, 2017 Clover Circle
Ade Meeuwissen, 6170 Red Oak Road
Greg Howard, 6061 Aspen Rd.
Kent Musser, 6150 Clover Circle
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
o
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Tom Berent, 6000 Lynwood Blvd.
Mary McKinley, 5948 Hillcrest Rd.
Walt Neske, 6225 Red Oak Road
Sara Pederson, 6087 Aspen Road
Terry Sincheff, 6077 Aspen Road
Frank Weiland, 6045 Aspen Road
Ruth Schmudlach, 6248 Red Oak Road
Brenda Berent, 6000 Lynwood Blvd.
Katie Howard, 6061 Aspen Road
Duane Norberg, 6015 Aspen Road
Peter Larson, 2080 Clover Circle
Vicki Pederson, 6087 Aspen Road
REASONS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Multi purpose park;
Family oriented park;
It's a park not a ballfield;
Parking problems;
Too close to the playground area;
Would cause too much noise;
The park is well used by all ages;
Safety hazard to others using the park during games;
This is a neighborhood park, not suitable for a baseball field;
This would attract strangers to the area;
The time that they want to use the park is when families use it;
Not in a residential neighborhood;
This is just the beginning, then other groups will use the field all the other days
of the week;
The playground equipment would be misused and vandalized;
There has to be a better area to have this field.
Emergency vehicles would not be able to get in with parking on both sides of the
street.
The people were not notified of this impending improvement so that they could
give their input.
This will have a negative impact on the area.
Fencing and scoreboard will block view of the park.
Increased traffic.
This started out as 2 games per week and now it's 3 games per week.
Once this gets established here, there will be all kinds of teams playing on this
field.
Added trash in the park that will need to be cleaned up.
This is not a compatible use for the park.
Where are the Little League teams going to go to play?
PETER MEYER, 5748 Sunset Road, resident and member of the POSC, stated that the
POSC voted unanimously to recommend that the Council allow the ballfield
improvements at Clover Circle (Philbrook Park). He apologized for not notifying the
residents of the upcoming improvement, but they did not feel this improvement would
have a negative impact on the park or the neighborhood. This would be a supervised
6
Mi.u~¢s - Mo.)~l Cig/¢o~n¢il - ApH! ~, l~X~2
activity for 13 yom' old boys ia ~e community.
SUGGESTION FROM THE PEOPLE AGAINST THE IMPROVEMENT.
Find a more suitable park or school district property for this ballfield
improvement.
The Mayor brought the item back to the Council for discussion.
The Council asked about how many cars would be coming to a game? They also asked if there
would be more than one game a night'?. They asked if tournaments would be played on this
field?
Ms. Painter stated that she could foresee maybe 12 cars. They would not be playing more than
one game per night during the week. They will not be using the field any weekends in June.
There will not be any tournaments played here.
The Council expressed the following concerns:
2.
3.
4.
The scheduling of the games played there.
Conflicts with other teams using this field.
Limiting the use to 13 year old boys.
The neighbors were not notified when this was brought up and approved a year
ago.
The Council asked that, in the future, when an improvement is contemplated for a park, the
POSC contact the neighbors for their comments and input.
Councilmember Hanus suggested that we should look at the Comp Plan and see if it deals with
this type of sport.
The Council discussed the fact that a year ago the mens and womens softball teams played at
this park and have since moved to the WRA park, but there didn't seem to be problems with the
neighbors at that time. There is no change in the use of the park with this field improvement.
Since permission was given to the Babe Ruth League to improve the park, maybe there is a way
to work with them in finding a suitable place for this facility.
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Hanus to reverse the Council decision that
was made last July to allow the Babe Ruth Baseball League to improve the ball field
at Philbrook Park, but that we, as a City, actively get involved in helping the Babe
Ruth Baseball League promote and find a place for this activity to take place. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Ms. Painter expressed great disappointment in what has happened tonight.
The City Council took a break for 15 minutes.
1.9
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CASE//9%08: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR WESTONKA SCHOOLS SHIRLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,
PUBLIC SCHOOL & ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AND LICENSED DAY CARE
& PRESCHOOL, 2450 WILSHIRE BLVD., PID#24-117-24 12 0059.
The City Manager stated that the School District has submitted a letter asking the City Council
to continue this public hearing until the "90 day" task force reaches its conclusions of the July
8, 1997, City Council meeting, whichever occurs first. The Manager asked the City Attorney
if this letter would serve as a request for a 60 day extension of the application for a CUP. The
Attorney stated no. He suggested that the Council continue the hearing until the first Council
Meeting, at least two weeks following the date, the 90 day task force reaches its conclusions or
July 8, 1997, whichever occurs first.
The School District will still have to submit a letter requesting an extension for the CUP
application.
MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Jensen to continue this public hearing to the first
City Council meeting in June or June 10th. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
1.10 REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF SPRING PARK AND OTHER LOCAL
SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS TO PURCHASE AN IRIS CAMERA FOR THE
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT.
The City Manager explained that a request has been received from the City of Spring Park
asking us to consider contributing some money toward the purchase of an Iris Camera for the
Mound Fire Dept. The ultra-violet iris camera which allows a firefighter vision in a smoke
filled room to recover a person who may have been overcome by smoke. The cost of this
camera is $25,000. Through local donations and other area city contributions the amount raised
is currently $18,000 and Mound is being asked to consider a contribution of $7,000.
The City Manager further explained that when something like this is requested it usually goes
through the Budget process. The Council agreed that normally this should have gone through
the budget process. Mayor Polston and Councilmember Hanus stated they have had the chance
to try this camera out on a demonstration and it is amazing.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus to authorize providing the additional
$7,000 needed to purchase the Iris Camera for the Mound Fire Dept., but this
$7,000 will be paid back to the General Fund from the Area Fire Service Fund in
1998. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE-SLIP
DOCK SYSTEMS AT THE AMHURST LANE ACCESS ON DEVON COMMON
AND AT THE FAIRVIEW LANE ACCESS ON LAKE BLVD.
The Mayor reported that the Dock & Commons Advisory Commission is recommending
approval of these multiple dock systems at Amhurst Lane Access on Devon Commons, the
Devon Access on Devon Common, and at the Fairview Lane Access on Lake Blvd. This was
a budgeted item. The Mayor assured the Council that the Commission will be meeting with the
neighborhood groups to go over the multiple dock system. They will be sending notices to all
8
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
those involved. What the Dock Commission wants is authorization to proceed with holding the
public hearing and if the consensus is that the neighborhood wants a multiple dock system, then
they would like to go ahead and get bids or quotations for the purchase and installation of the
docks.
The Council asked that number 2 in the proposed resolution be changed to read as follows:
A meeting with affected abutter and non-abutter dockholders will take place. All
affected parties will be notified in writing of the meeting.
Councilmember Weycker asked that the first Whereas be changed to read as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council has conceptual~_ approved on January 28, 1997, the
'Multiple-slip Dock Program' as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the
section entitled Multiple Docks; and
The Council did not object to this change.
Councilmember Jensen voiced concern about putting docks at the ends of the streets. This could
be a problem in the Woodland Point area on Wawonassa Common. She does not want to give
the impression somewhere down the road that the City has abandoned the public interest in the
Commons.
The Mayor stated that what the Dock & Commons Commission is asking for is the authority
to hold a public hearing and to expend up to that amount of money and to get bids or quotations
for the multiple docks and installation.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus to authorize the Dock & Commons
Commission to hold public hearings on the proposed multiple dock slips at Amhurst
Lane Access, Devon Lane Access and Fairview Access. If it is determined that the
public wants these multiple docks, the City Council will obtain bids or quotations
for the purchase and installation of the docks not to exceed the budgeted amount of
$22,500.
1.12 ADD-ON: APPOINTMENT TO HENNEPIN COUNTY POLICY OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE
The City Manager explained that Hennepin County is setting up a committee to deal with the
welfare system in Hennepin County. The Federal government passed legislation entitled the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996. This legislation eliminates AFDC
and replaces it with TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families). The State Legislature
is designing some kind of plan for welfare reform. The County has identified several cities in
Hennepin County that have a mix of welfare type situations and Mound is one of those. The
County is trying to set up a committee called the Policy Oversight Committee for the
development and implementation of the TANF program. They are asking that an elected
official, if possible, from each of the cities serve on this committee.
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Jensen to appoint Councilmember Mark
Hanus to the Policy Oversight Committee of Hennepin County and appointing Leah
Weycker as the alternate if Hanus has a conflict with the meetings. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.13 WAWONASSA COMMON
Mike Gardner, 1599 Bluebird Lane, stated that he is here to go on record because his letters
have never been acknowledged; concerning a dock on the end of Woodland Road. He stated
he has written several letters and gone to meetings and made statements, but for some reason
or another people believe "I don't know what I'm talking about." The issue is that a dock
permit was issued for the end of Woodland Point which is not actually a road. It is Wawonassa
Common and based on court's decision, the City cannot issue dock permits on Wawanossa
Common. I have plat maps from 1906 to 1976 and 1992 to the current Hennepin County map
that clearly shows that this is Wawanossa Commons. If a dock shows up there, I will call
Hennepin County immediately and say that a dock permit has been issued there, and the City
will be in contempt of the courts decision. My letters and phone calls have been ignored by the
City Staff and I am very frustrated.
The Council asked the City Attorney to issue a legal opinion on this matter of Wawanossa
Commons and the court's decision.
The City Attorney stated that he received a voice mail today from an attorney representing a
number of the people in that area, indicating that litigation will be commenced fairly soon on
some of the other issues as well. The City Attorney will prepare a legal opinion for the City
Council.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:.
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR MARCH 1997 AS PREPARED BY GINO BUSINARO,
FINANCE DIRECTOR.
REMINDER: BOARD OF REVIEW IS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 22, 1997, AT 7:00
P.M. SEE ENCLOSED SALES RATIO BOOKLET DEVELOPED BY HENNEPIN
COUNTY.
Co
PEGGY JAMES, PLANNING & INSPECTIONS SECRETARY HAS RESIGNED HER
POSITION AND HER LAST DAY IS FRIDAY, APRIL 25, 1997. WE WILL BE
HAVING CAKE AND COFFEE FOR HER AT 2:30 P.M. ON THAT DAY. YOU
ARE INVITED TO ATTEND THIS RECEPTION FOR HER ON THAT DAY.
ENCLOSED IS A COPY OF THE BRAUN/INTERTEC'S REPORT ON ITS PCB
TESTING THAT THEY WERE REQUESTED TO DO PURSUANT TO THE PERMIT
APPROVED BY THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT (MCWD).
AFTER YOU READ THE REPORT, YOU WILL BE EXTREMELY PLEASED WITH
THE RESULTS. THERE ARE NO PCB'S IN LOST LAKE AND THE LEAD
LEVELS ARE LOW! BRUCE CHAMBERLAIN WILL BE ATTENDING THE APRIL
24TH MEETING OF THE MWCD TO PRESENT THE REPORT TO THE BOARD
OF MANAGERS. THE DNR IS WRITING THE PERMIT FOR APPROVAL ON THE
LOST LAKE PROJECT AT THIS TIME AND SHOULD BE READY WITHIN THE
10
Eo
NEXT WEEK. THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS IS REVIEWING OUR
PERMIT APPLICATION AND WE WILL KNOW MORE ON THIS PERMIT BY THE
END OF APRIL.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 14, 1997.
PARK & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 10, 1997.
REMINDER: ANNUAL RECYCLING DAY/CLEANUP IS SCHEDULED FOR
SATURDAY, APRIL 26, 1997, AT LOST LAKE.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Weycker to adjourn at 11:05 P.M. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES - 5/6/97
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 6, 1997
CONTINUED FROM APRIL 22, 1997
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Board of Review re. convened in the Council
Chambers of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at 5341 Maywood Road, in said
City on May 6, 1997, at 7:00 PM.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen, and Leah Weycker. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, Hennepin County Assessor Larry Miller, and Stephanie Nyhus Hennepin County
Appraiser.
1.0 Mayor Polston opened the re. convened Board of Review and introduced l_arry Miller,
Assessor for Hennepin County and Stephanie Nyhus, Appraiser for Hennepin County. Mr.
Miller stated that they had spoken with the persons who had appeared before the Council or
wrote letters for the April 22, 1997 meeting and he was presenting the County's decisions as to
the value of the properties questioned. It was stated that the property owner could appeal the
City's decision at the Hennepin County Board of Review which begins June 16, 1997. The
county must be notified prior to appearing at phone number 348-5076.
PID//19-117-23 32 0160 - JOHN EYERS, 4713 WILSHIRE BLVD.
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $96,500.
PID//19-117-23 32 0188 - M.D. ANDERSON, 2873 ESSEX ROAD
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $116,000.
o
PID//19-117-23 33 0005 - LORRAINE SULLIVAN, 3145 TUXEDO BLVD.
The Assessor recommended reducing the EMV of this property from $62,000 to
$58,000.
PID//13-117-24 22 0088 - R. R. HEDIN, 5420 THREE POINTS BLVD.
The Assessor recommended reducing the EMV of this property from $84,200 to
$82,700.
PID//13-117-24 22 0064 - RAYMOND ANDERSEN, 5430 THREE POINTS BLVD.
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $84,400.
PID//24-117-24 44 0021 - MELODY OLSEN, 4873 CUMBERLAND ROAD
The Assessor recommended reducing the EMV of this property from $84,000 to
$79,000.
PID//13-117-24 31 0014 - BUCHI NJAKA, 2186 CEDAR LANE
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $113.000.
PID//18-117-23 23 0011 - RAY DEMONT, 1936 SHOREWOOD LANE
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $129.000.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTF~
SPECIAL MEETING
MINL~FF_~ - ~/~/97
10.
PID #24-117-24 12 0056 - FI YIN MOY, 2458 FAIRVIEW LANE
The Assessor recommended reducing the EMV of this property from $100,000 to
$94,000.
PID #13-117-24 32 0154 - YOUN PING NG, 2208 FERN LANE
The Assessor recommended no change in the EMV of $59.000.
Councilmember Ahrens moved and Councilmember Weycker seconded the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION #97-40
RESOLUTION
ASSESSMENT
CORRECTED
ADOPTING THE ENTIRE
ROLL AS PRESENTED AND
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Jensen and carried unanimously to adjourn the
reconvened Board of Review at 7:15 PM. Motion carried.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES - 5/6/97
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MAY 6, 1997
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday,
May 6, 1997, following the Reconvened Board of Review, in the Council Chambers at 5341
Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen, and l_eah Weycker. Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk
Fran Clark, Bert Haglund from TSP/EOS, and the following interested citizen: Bill Hawks.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
1.1 DISCUSSION RE: EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR AN ANALYSIS OF THE
EXISTING WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER IN RELATION TO THE
POSSIBLE RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CENTER.
DISCUSSION RE: ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL FROM TSP/EOS AND E & V
CONSTRUCTION TO PERFORM THE ABOVE ANALYSIS OR SEEK REQUEST
FOR PROPOSALS (RFP'S) FROM ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS TO PERFORM
THE ANALYSIS.
The City Manager reported that at the Community Center Task Force Meeting last week with
Minnetrista and the School Board, proposals were reviewed from TSP/EOS and E & V
Construction. That discussion focused on doing an analysis of the 1938 building along with
other property that is there. This would involve having TSP/EOS meet with the various users
of the property to determine space needs and an evaluation of what the facility needs in order
to make it more useable. E & V Construction's basic purpose was to follow-up that work with
a cost estimate. Putting those two things together would provide the information needed for the
renovation of the property. The consensus was that since the City of Mound is driving this
renovation, it should be responsible for the expenditure of funds for the analysis. The costs
proposed by the two firms is just over $10,000 which would be recovered in the issuance of
bonds, if the project proceeds.
The City Manager then asked if the Council wants to pay for the analysis and, if so, should the
study be accepted as proposed here or would the Council like to seek alternative proposals
through the RFP process? After discussion the Council decided Mound would put up the funds
for the analysis.
Mayor Polston reported that at the meeting last week, the members of the Task Force that were
there identified the uses that this community center would house and the list in TSP/EOS'
proposal is the result of what the committee felt would be housed in the community center.
The analysis is to determine the following:
1. If the whole complex can be renovated and what it would cost and is there a point where
it would not be economically feasible to salvage parts of it or to try to renovate it.
They are two separate proposals with not to exceed prices. There would be continuity because
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES - ~/6/97
both of these firms have been working with the school district for the last several years. They
were both asked to present a proposa/for their respective pans.
The Council discussed the current uses as well as future uses and the square footage needed for
those uses.
Mr. Bert Haglund, from TSP/EOS, was present.
They also discussed the following, with Mr. Haglund:
the mechanical systems
air quality issues
roofing problems
square footage
The School District's concern is timing. Being able to complete an analysis within a reasonable
period of time. With an RFP, it would take putting the RFP together, soliciting the proposals,
interviewing the candidates and then selecting a firm. The estimate for an analysis would then
be 60 to 90 days down the road from there, which would put it end of summer or early fall.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Ahrens that the City of Mound enter into
a contract with TSP/EOS to conduct an analysis of the Conununity Center under the
direction of the Task Force, as proposed in the proposal from TSP/EOS, dated April
29, 1997, not to exceed $7,500. The cost for this to be recovered by the City of
Mound if the project proceeds. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
The Council did not act on the cost estimate proposal, at this time. They will wait until the
analysis is performed.
Councilmember Ahrens asked to be excused at 8:10 P.M.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at 8:15 P.M.
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The vote
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) PROGRAM REGARDING THE MERGER OF WESTONKA INTERVENTION
WITH SOJOURNER LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MINNETONKA
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has been a contributor to the Westonka Intervention program for
about ten years under its allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
monies; and
WHEREAS, Westonka Intervention has recently been merged with Sojourner, a domestic abuse
program located in the City of Minnetonka; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound's current CDBG allocation of $1,747 for 1997 needs to be
reassigned to Sojourner in place of Westonka Intervention.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota
hereby authorizes the reassignment of $1,747 from the Westonka Intervention program
for 1997 to Sojourner of Minnetonka.
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE THE 1997 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING
GRANT AGREEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,
hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to execute the 1997 Municipal Recycling Grant
Agreement between Hennepin County and the City of Mound (Contract gA11347).
Hennepin County
An Equa/Opportunity Employer
April 22, 1997
Ms. Joyce Nelson
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Ms. Nelson:
Enclosed are two copies of the Municipal Recycling Grant Agreement for 1997 between
Hermepin County and the City of Mound. Please have both copies signed by the appropriate
City officials and returned to me as soon as possible. We will forward an executed copy to
you for your records when all signatures are obtained.
Your first payment will be sent when the contracts are signed by all parties. If you have any
questions, please call me at 348-3837.
Sincerely,
J. Skalbeck
Recycling Unit
Environmental Management Division
Enclosure
Department of Public Works
417 North Fifth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397
(612) 348-6509 FAX:(612) 348-8532
Environmental Info Line:(612) 348-6500
Recycled Pape~
Contract No Al1347
AA Code
Vendor No. *000048893
MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF
MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as the "County", through its Environmental Management
Division, 417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401, and the CITY OF MOUND,
hereinafter referred to as the "City", 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364.
WlTNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the County Board, by Resolution No. 97-4-200, on the 15th day of April
1997, authorized funding for Municipal Recycling Programs from January 1, 1997, through
December 31, 1997, and
WHEREAS, said Recycling Program is consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Section
115A.02 and 115A.03, as amended by the Laws of Minnesota 1992, Chapter 685, and
Minnesota Statutes 473.8011; the Office of Environmental Assistance Solid Waste
Management Development Guide/Policy Plan; Hennepin County's Solid Waste Master Plan;
and Hennepin County's Residential Recycling Funding Policy.
NOW THEREFORE, the County and the City agree as follows:
I. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
The City will operate its recycling program as more fully described in the Grant
Application, Attachment A, which is incorporated and made part of this Agreement.
2. In addition to the services as referred to above, the City agrees:
The City must recycle 18 percent of its residential waste stream. If the City fails to
achieve this percentage goal, it will be required to submit a plan for County approval
to increase abatement within 90 days of the submittal of the municipal year-end
report.
b. At a minimum, the City shall collect the following materials at curbside:
1. Newspaper and advertising supplements;
2. Corrugated cardboard;
3. Clear, brown, and green glass food and beverage containers;
4. Metal food and beverage cans;
5. All plastic bottles with a neck except bottles that previously contained hazardous
materials or motor oil; and
6. Magazines and catalogs
Co
do
eo
jo
The City shall submit on forms provided by the County, a Semi-Annual Report and a
Final Report which summarizes the major outcomes of its recycling program. The
Semi-Annual Report will cover the first six months of the calendar year and shall be
submitted by August 15, 1997. The Final Report covers the entire year and shall be
submitted by February 15, 1998.
All SCORE funds accepted from the County shall be used for waste reduction and
recycling capital and operating expenses in the year granted; the City shall not retain
any SCORE funds in excess of actual program expenses; and any unused funds shall
be returned to the County.
The City may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees or any other
method for that portion of the costs of its recycling program which is funded by
County SCORE funds.
The City shall establish a separate accounting mechanism, such as a project
number, activity number, cost center or fund that will separate recycling revenues
and expenditures from all other municipal activities, including solid waste and yard
waste activities.
All recycling and waste reduction activities, revenues and expenditures
are subject to audit by the County.
The City must measure the set-out participation rate of its residents in curbside
recycling during the month of October. The method used for measuring
participation must be as submitted on the Grant Application.
If the City does not contract for curbside services, the City will receive SCORE
funds provided that at least 90% of the SCORE funds are credited back to
residents and the City meet all minimum program requirements. The additional
10% of SCORE funds may be used for City administrative and promotional
expenses.
The City's municipal solid waste programs must be consistent with Minnesota
Statutes, the County's Solid Waste Management Master Plan and all County
ordinances.
II. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 1997, and terminate on December 31, 1997.
III. METHOD OF COMPENSATION
1. The County will distribute SCORE funds to the Cities only to the extent the County has
received such funds from the State of Minnesota. The City will receive SCORE funds per
the the formula below:
153/,,
# of Households
Served Curbside
by City
Total # of
Households
Serviced Curbside
in County
Total SCORE
Revenue
x Received by =
County
from State of
Minnesota
SCORE funds
Distributed
tO City
The County shall pay the City an annual amount not-to-exceed $30,802. This amount is
based upon previous SCORE fund amounts received by the County. Under no circumstances
will the County's obligation of SCORE monies distribution exceed the City's proportion of
SCORE revenues received by the County.
The County receives SCORE funds twice a year from the State of Minnesota. The County
intends to distribute to the City its share of SCORE funds twice a year. The first distribution
of SCORE funds will be made to the City following the receipt and approval of the City's Final
Report for 1996. The second distribution will be made following the receipt and approval of
the City's Semi-Annual Report for 1997.
IV. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
Consistent with the specific limits, exclusions, and conditions expressed in Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 466, the City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the
COUNTY, its elected officials, officers, agents, volunteers, and employees from any liability,
claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including
reasonable attorney fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of the City,
its subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose
acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the performance of the services required by this
contract, and against all loss by reason of the failure of the City to perform fully, in any
respect, all obligations under this contract.
V. INSURANCE
In order to protect the City and those listed above under the indemnification provisions,
the City agrees at all times during the term of this Agreement and beyond such term
when so required, to have and keep in force insurance, either under a self-insurance
program or insurance policies as follows:
3
Commercial General Liability with the following coverages. Contractual Liability
coverage must be included.
General Aggregate
Products-Completed Operations Aggregate
Personal and Advertising Injury
Each Occurrence- Combined Bodily Injury and
Property Damage
Fire Damage - Any One Fire
Limits
$6OO,OOO
6OO,OO0
600,000
600,000
100,000
bo
Automobile Liability covering owned, non-owned,
and hired automobiles or "Any Auto":
Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage -
Each Occurrence
600,000
c. Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability
1) Workers' Compensation.
2) Employers' Liability.
Bodily Injury by:
Statutory
Accident- Each Accident
Disease - Policy Limit
Disease- Each Employee
100,000
500,000
100,000
An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability coverages is an acceptable method
to provide the required insurance limits.
The above establishes minimum insurance requirements. It is the sole responsibility of
the City to determine the need for and to procure additional coverage which may be
needed in connection with this Agreement. If the City does not have a self-insurance
program, the City shall not commence work until the City has obtained the required
insurance and filed with the County an acceptable certificate of insurance. The
certificate shall:
Name Hennepin County as certificate holder and as an additional insured for all liability
coverages (except Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability).
List any exceptions to the insurance requirements
Be amended to (1) show that Hennepin County will receive 30 days written notice in
the event of cancellation, non-renewal, or material change in any described policies,
and (2) delete the wording: "endeavor to" and "but failure to provide such written
notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents
or representatives."
4
3. The City shall require that each of its subcontractors, while performing services in the
operation of t/~e city's recycling program, have and keep in force insurance as follows:
a. Commercial General Liability to include the following coverage and limits of insurance.
Contractual Liability coverage must be included.
General Aggregate
Products-Completed Operations Aggregate
Personal and Advertising Injury
Each Occurrence- Combined Bodily Injury and
Property Damage
Fire Damage - Any One Fire
Limits
,000,000
,000,000
,000,000
1,000,000
100,000
bo
Automobile Liability covering owned,
non-owned, and hired automobiles or "Any Auto":
Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage -
Each Occurrence
1,000,000
c. Workers' Compensation including Employers' Liability.
1) Workers' Compensation.
If the Contractor is based outside the State
of Minnesota, coverage must apply to Minnesota
laws.
Statutory
2) Employers' Liability. Bodily Injury by:
Accident- Each Accident
Disease - Policy Limit
Disease- Each Employee
100,000
500,000
100,000
An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability coverages is an acceptable method to
provide the required insurance limits.
A certificate of insurance naming the City as certificate holder and as an additional insured
shall be filed with the City prior to commencement of operations.
VI. NON-ASSIGNMENT OF SERVICES
It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended, or should be construed in any manner
as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto, or as
constituting the City as the agent, representative, or employee of the County for any purpose
in any manner whatsoever. The parties are to be and shall remain independent with respect
to all services performed under this Agreement. The City represents that it has, or will
secure at its own expense, all personnel required for performing services under this
Agreement. Any and all personnel of the City, or other persons, while engaged in the
performance of any work or services required by the City, under this Agreement, shall have
no contractual relationship with the County, and shall not be considered employees of the
5
County, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act
of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and
any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of
employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination
against the City, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees, shall in no way be the
responsibility of the County; and the City shall defend, indemnify, and hold the County, its
elected officials, officers, agents, and employees harmless from any and all such claims
regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or
court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require, nor be entitled to any compensation
rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the County, including, without limitation,
tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation,
Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay, and PERA.
VII. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The City agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal statutes, regulations, and
ordinances pertaining to solid waste management and recycling including, but not limited to,
the applicable provisions in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 115A and 473.801 et.al.
VIII. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
The City and its contractors shall follow the City's Affirmative Action policy against
discrimination.
Hennepin County shall follow its Affirmative Action policy against discrimination.
IX. DATA PRIVACY
The City agrees to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act
and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules and regulations relating to data privacy
or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended. The City agrees to defend and
hold the County, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any claims resulting from
the City's unlawful disclosure and/or use of such protected data.
X. RECORD AVAILABILITY
The City agrees that the County, the State Auditor or any of their duly-authorized
representatives, at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may
reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt and
transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent and involve
transactions relating to this Agreement. Such material must be retained for five (5) years by
the City. The City's accounting practices and procedures relevant to this Agreement shall
also be subject to examination by any or all of the aforesaid persons as often as and during
such times as aforesaid.
Xl. MERGER AND MODIFICATION
It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein
and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated
or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. Any material alteration or
modification of this Agreement shall only be valid when reduced to writing as an Amendment
to this Agreement and signed by both parties.
Xll. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN
The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning
the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the herein
parties and performance under it. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation
hereunder will be those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.
Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the herein parties will be in the appropriate
federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid,
illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected.
XIII. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by either party by written notice to the other party at
least thirty (30) days prior to the specified effective date of termination. In addition, the
County shall have the right to terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days' written notice if
the City's performance is not timely or is substantially unsatisfactory or if the City has
violated any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations in this Agreement.
Notwithstanding the above, the City shall not be relieved of liability to the County for
damages sustained by the County by virtue of any breach of the Agreement by the City. The
County may withhold any payment to the City for the purposes set forth until such time as
the exact amount of damages due the County from the City is determined. In the event the
County does not receive any SCORE funds, this Agreement will be terminated upon written
notice by the County.
XlV. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
In order to coordinate the service of the City with the activities of the Environmental
Management Division so as to accomplish the purposes of this contract, Bob Thomas,
Problem Materials & Recycling Program Manager, will manage this contract on behalf of the
County and will serve as liaison between the County and the City.
XV. CONTINUATION OF OBLIGATION
The obligations and/or warranties of the City and the County shall survive the performance
and cancellation or termination of this Agreement.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized representatives as to this __ day of ,1997.
Approved as to form:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Assistant County Attorney By:
Date:
Randy Johnson
Chair of Its County Board
Approved as to execution:
And:
County Administrator
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
ATTEST:
Deputy/Clerk of the County Board
Approved as to execution:
CITY OF
STATE OF MINNESOTA
City Attorney
Date:
By:
Title:
And:
Title:
And:
CHECK ONE: Charter
Option A __
(Title)
Option B
8
CITY OF MOUND
FOR THE MAY 13, 1997 COUNCIL MEETING
April 16, 1997
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS
The following permits are being requested. Please waive the fee on them as indicated.
Approval contingent upon all required forms, insurance etc. being turned in. All fees may be
waived except the Beer Permit.
Mound Volunteer Fire Dept. requests the following permits for the June 7, 1997, Fish
Fry.
Temporary On-Sale 3.2 Beer Permit
Public Dance Permit
Set-Up Permit
2. Mound City Days - June 14, 15 & 16, 1997.
Temporary On-Sale 3.2 Beer Permit - Mound Bay Park
Carnival
Concessions
Craft Show
Entertainment
Fireworks
Merchant Sales
Public Dance Permit
Public Gathering
Set-Up Permit
American Legion/VFW
Parade Permit -
May 26, 1997 - 10:45 A.M. to 11:30 A.M. - Memorial Day
Parade
pr~nted on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
FOR THE MAY 13, 1997 COUNCIL MEETING
May 5, 1997
5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM:
RE:
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT
1. VFW AUXILLIARY - June 7, 1997 - Annual Pillow Puff
PLEASE WAIVE FEE.
printed on recycled paper
ORDINANCE NO. -1997
AND ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 235:27, SUBD. 1
OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO RECREATIONAL FIRES
The City of Mound Does Ordain:
Section 235:27, Subd. 1 of the City Code is amended to read as follows:
Section 235:27. Burning Restrictions - Burning Permit Required.
Subd. 1. Open Burning Prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person to start
or allow to burn any open fire on any property within the City of Mound without a
permit, except for supervised recreational or
by Minnesota Uniform Fire-
Exception: Recreational fires as defined _ CodY.
(recreational fire is the burning of material other than rubbish where fuel bein~
burned tsar*contained in an incinerator, outdoor fireplace or barbecue pit and witl~
a total area of 3' or less in diameter and 3' or less in height for pleasure, religious
ceremonial cooking or similar purposes). Recreational fires are to be from 12:01
p.m. until 11:59 p.m. only unless written permission for exception is received fro_q_~__.,
the Fire Chief or Fire Inspecto~or clean, dry
used'-----~' ~burm---~g-Tfib-~s, leaves, yard waste or other ~:ombustibl~s))
Recreat,ona{ fires shall be at least 25 from any bu,ld~s-h~ be superwsed at
all times. The owner of any property upon which a recreational fire is started or
originally ignited, in violation of the Provisions of this division shall be responsible
therefor and shall be subject to penalties provided in this code, unless such owne~'
can adduce proof that such fire was started by a..stranger or trespasser.
o permit shall be required for any official fire set by any public official as provided in
LSection 490:20. ·
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council -
Publish in The Laker -
BILLS
.May 13; 1997
BATCH 7043
BATCH 7044
Total Bills
$197,384.69
184,409.51
$381,794.20
u
bJU
'l
S S
! ! !
'0
III I {,, ,J, i,IJ,
Z
t
z
o~
i? :' ~
,d ,o ,o m
I .i
LU CZ'Q:
J_J
~ oooo~
-- . .
jjj 'j
,
,j
<~
-J
I ! [ I
-¥
I
Z
:3..I
h Z
~ o
I
-/rZ 7
'~'
12..i
IZ
Z
*-~ ,,..,j
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1667
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-062O
CASE g96-64
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT,
A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
AND RELATED VARIANCES
FOR THE "SETON BLUFF" RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
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, May 13, 1997 to
consider the approval of a preliminary plat, a planned development area by conditional use permit, and
related variances for the residential development called Seton Bluff. This proposal involves the
improvement of Kildare Road and the creation of seven (7) single family residential building sites.
The existing legal description of the subject property is Lots 15 through 32, Block 11, Seton,
PID's 19-117-23 22 0036 to 0041 and 0054, as shown on the plat map below:
i..~ ~,.~-
Ali persons appearing at said he~ing with reference to the above will be given the oppo~nity
to be heard at this meeting.
~g~-J~(~ Pla~g Secrem~
~bhshed m "~e ~er" on April 26, 1997, ~d mailed to prope~ omers wi~in 350 feet of ~e subject prope~ by May 2,
1997.
printed on recycled paper
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 14, 1997
CASE 96-64: PUBLIC HEARING: REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT/PDA/VARIANCES
"SETON BLUFF", FINE LINE DESIGN GROUP, INC.
LOTS 15 - 32, BLOCK 11, SETON, 19-117-23 22 0036-41 8,: 54
City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed the Planning Report. Fine Line Design Group is seeking
approvals for a Planned Development Area (PDA) on a 1.47 acre tract of land along a currently
unimproved portion of Kildare Lane. Approval of the plan will require action by the City to issue a
conditional use permit for the PDA, grant variances as part of the PDA and approve the proposed
preliminary plat. This application is similar to the proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission on
February 10, 1997. Major changes to the plan include the deletion of one unit, all lots now conform
to minimum size criteria and the total number of variances has been significantly reduced.
PDA. The developer is seeking PDA approval in order to establish the common access drive. The
Zoning Code requires a minimum of 2 acres of land area for Planned Development Areas. The net site
area of Seton Bluff is 1.35 acres necessitating a variance of .65 acres in order to process the request
as a PDA. Because of the physical conditions of the site, processing this request as a PDA gives the
City the ability to add appropriate conditions to the approval. For this reason, staff supports the PDA
site area variance.
Variances. Koegler displayed an overhead showing a list of the variances being requested. The street
construction variances are the types of variances that the Planning Commission sees on a pretty routine
basis due to the topography in Mound. There are bluff setback variances being requested for each lot.
Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997
Koegler stated that the setbacks are ten feet or more from the required bluff line, and suggested that
the developer may provide the commission with more information on exactly what those setbacks are.
The actual requested bluff setback could be used as the basis for the variance request in lieu of a 20 foot
blanket setback variance.
Impervious coverage has been reduced further from what was originally proposed, however a variance
is being requested for Impervious cover of 32.8 % resulting in a variance of 2.8 %.
A side yard setback variance of 4 feet is being requested for Lots 1 through 6 resulting in a 6 foot
setback to one side yard. Six foot side yard setbacks are permitted for lots of record, however, because
this property is being replatted it no longer qualifies for lot of record setbacks and therefore requires
side yard setbacks of 10 feet. A front yard setback of 15 feet is being requested for Lots 5 and 6
resulting in a 5 foot setback variance.
Density. There are different density provisions in the code which apply to developments. By applying
the non-shoreland PDA density provisions, this site area will accommodate 9 units. However, this site
is in the shoreland area, and based on the location of the 929.4 contour, this property is considered to
be in the first tier. The shoreland ordinance does allow density bonuses and the proposed site plan does
qualify because the setbacks from the ordinary high water contour equal or exceed a minimum of 125 %
of the required 50 foot setback. The proposed density with the applicable bonus is consistent with the
maximum density allowed under the shoreland ordinance. Application of the shoreland standards results
in a maximum of 7 units.
The issues of tree preservation, landscaping, traffic, and wetlands were briefly reviewed.
Recommendation. The developers of Seton Bluff have designed a project that complies with density
provisions of the Zoning Code and meets the lot of record setback provisions. The project, however,
does not meet the non-lot of record provisions which apply in this case since 12 of the lots were
combined in the past. In any PDA project, trade-offs are involved. In this case, the major trade-off
appears to be impervious cover and setback variances for a plan that to be answered by the Planning
Commission and City Council is whether or not this trade-off is equitable. Staff feels that the proposed
plan with one less unit satisfies most of the concerns that were raised in previous reviews. After its
deliberations, if the Planning Commission feels that it is equitable, the development could be approved
with appropriate conditions. Alternatives to that approach include approval with modifications or
denial.
Staff suggested conditions as outlined in the Planning Report and City Engineer's Memorandum if the
Planning Commission feels that the plan is appropriate and consistent with the Mound's provisions for
PDA's.
Voss questioned how many residences could be built on this property without any variances. Koegler
responded that is a difficult question to answer because variances result from a specific site plan. Voss
recalled a statement made at a Council meeting that the only way they could development this property
is if there were no variances. Koegler could not recall that comment.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
April 14, 1997
Density bonuses were discussed. Mueller asked how the City will police tree trimming. Koegler
clarified on the overhead the location of the conservation easement which is measured from the bluff
line to the lot line. Mueller is concerned about people cutting/removing trees on the bluff and how they
could get permission to do this. Koegler stated that they would have to come before the council and
amend the resolution to do tree trimming other than diseased and dead tree removal. It was discussed
that Lot 7 will need to install some type of path or stairway on the bluff in order to access his dock.
Weiland raised a concern regarding the curb radii at Kerry and Kildare and feels the developer should
be working with the owner of the property on that corner to get an easement so the radii can be larger.
Koegler noted that the City Engineer commented in his report that "a more desirable drainage pattern
will need to be designed for the City cul-de-sac than the sheet drainage as shown." Koegler suggested
that the Commission could include in their recommendation that alternatives for the curb radii be further
investigated as well.
Mueller asked about the amount of water flow down Kildare due to the 13 % slope. He recalled that
options had been discussed, such as installing a larger catch basin. Koegler did not know if Cameron
had reviewed that issue further, but maybe he can expound upon that more.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing
Steve Grand, resident at 2620 Kerry Lane, expressed a concern about the ability for people to tow large
boats around the corner and up the hill. Grand is concerned that the private drive area will be used for
storage of snowmobiles on trailers and boats with tarps, he does not want to be looking at a storage
depot. He is afraid the developers won't save the trees as they propose since the other lots they have
built on in the area were stripped of trees. He also has a large concern about drainage and the
accumulation of sand and dirt in the roads and lake.
Weiland referred to condition #8 in the Planning Report, it states, "The common driveway area
exclusive of the guest parking area shall be posted as "no parking" area. Koegler noted there will be
no parking on Kildare Road due to the narrow width, and he noted that the covenants precludes parking
of recreational vehicles on the site. Mueller asked if homeowners covenants are enforceable by the
City. Koegler stated that since the covenants are part of the PDA approval, the City can enforce
compliance with the PDA and the covenants cannot be changed without city approval of a modified
PDA, however, the City does not enforce covenants.
Tim Wilkensen, resident of 4628 Carlow Road stated that his property is on the corner of Carlow and
Kerry and feels that drainage is a big issue. The water that drains down Kerry runs through his lot into
Black Lake and they already have too much sand. He also expressed a concern about child safety and
stated there are a number of kids under the age of five in the neighborhood and he is concerned about
the increase in traffic as a result of this development.
Developer, Steve Behnke addressed issues raised in the Planning Report:
All houses except the end lot are all part of the association and will have similar features, but
all seven houses will have a consistent theme to them.
Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997
Relating to the "blanket 20 foot bluff setback variance," only Lot 2 would have conceivably less
than the 20 foot variance, it would have a 15 foot variance.
Referring to the Impervious Cover variance of 2.8 %, Behnke noted that if traditional driveways
were developed, impervious coverage would differ by only 2 %, and the drainage situation would
be worse.
With density bonuses, seven units are allowed.
Tree loss is equivalent without the private drive.
There will be no grading changes from the back of the houses to the rear lot line except for
required storm sewer construction.
Under-story trees and shrubs were planned for the five foot wide utility easement in case they
have to be removed for utility repairs. Normally trees are not allowed in utility easements.
The retaining wall will consist of two six foot high boulder walls with plantings between.
The size of parking stalls requested by the Engineer is fine.
The construction of the private drives, individual drives, and turn-arounds all match the
Engineer's comments from previous meetings. His comments on elevations are acceptable.
Referring to the Engineer's memo, //3.e. and f., he explained, from the back of the houses
forward, the drainage will flow towards the driveway.
Behnke responded to comments made by the Planning Commission:
The number of houses that could be built on this property under lot of record status is eight.
The intent for Lot 7 is to have a meandering path or stairway to the lake that would be built by
the homeowner. The conservation easement restricts tree removal. The two stairways proposed
will handle the other six lots.
It was never the intent of the project to disturb tree removal, except for the storm sewer
construction.
The street design, as proposed, is the same that the Engineer recommended back in 1985. The
radii of the corner at Kildare and Kerry is larger than the southeast corner.
The covenants do not allow storage of recreational vehicles and fish houses on the driveway.
The parallel parking is being treated for guest parking, nothing else.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 14, 1997
Behnke showed on the overhead that 40 % of the site as it exists today which drains down Kerry,
and then showed that after the property is developed, only 8 % will drain into Kerry, so the
amount of run-ff will be reduced by 32 %.
All the residences east on Kildare sit on 40 foot wide lots with only 12 feet between each house.
They are proposing houses on wider lots with 16 feet between the houses.
Clapsaddle noted an error on the preliminary grading plan, an elevation noted on a contour line by the
driveways into Lots 2 and 3 should read 956, not 960.
Chair Michael closed the public hearing.
Mueller questioned if Lot 7 should be included as part of the association and subject to the covenants
and restrictions since his property is affected by the conservation easement. Mueller asked how this
Lot owner will now that they need to provide their own walkway to the lake and the restrictions of
disturbing the vegetation. Tom Stokes with Fine Line Design stated that Lot 7 has been pre-sold and
the owner is aware of the stairway requirements. Stokes confirmed that Lot 7 could be included in the
association. It was noted that Lots 6 and 7 have private lakeshore, and the reason Lot 7 was not
included in the association is because it is not involved in the common drive.
Clapsaddle suggested that condition //8 specifically include a statement that no recreational vehicle
storage or no other vehicular storage be permitted in the common drive to ensure that it can be enforced
by the City.
Mueller stated that the Planning Commission should be given opportunity to comment on final plats and
be given the opportunity to review the covenants. Staff commented that this issue can be addressed at
a discussion meeting.
Relating to the over-story trees in the utility easement, Koegler stated that they would like to look at
the utility plans and work with the developer, but there is enough space in the 5 foot boulevard to
support an over-story tree if it can be kept away from the utility lines and staff would like flexibility
in the resolution until they can determine where trees can be added.
MOTION made by Mueller to recommend approval of the PDA as recommended by
staff, with the conditions I - 10 listed in the Planning Report and in the Engineer's
Memorandum, with the following additions and modifications:
#4
Covenants and association bylaws shall be submitted for review and
approval by the City Attorney and reviewed by the Council prior to
approval of the preliminary plat.
//8
The common driveway area exclusive of the guest parking area shall
be posted as a "no parking/no exterior storage" area. The Guest
parking area shall not allow the parking of recreational vehicles for
more than 48 hours continuous exclusive of the covenants and
restrictions.
Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997
The developer shah submit detailed
identifying materials and a tiered
approval by the City Engineer.
plans for the retaining wall
ti fo .... : ......'~
construe on r ..........
#10
Move gl0 in the report to gll, the new gl0 should read as follows:
Lot seven shall be included in the covenants and restrictions and
verbiage allowing individual costs of snow removal.
gll
The recommendations and conditions found in the Engineer's Report
are incorporated herein.
g3.h.
Modification of the radius from the new Kildare Road
to Kerry Lane, to increase the distance between the
southwest corner to more easily accommodate turning
on the road.
g3.i.
That a larger availability for absorption of water at the
intersection of Kerry Lane and new Kildare Road be
presented to the Council by the Engineering staff.
Clapsaddle seconded the motion.
Voss stated that he will vote against the motion due to the steep grade of the road, the narrow street,
and the child safety issue due to increased traffic. Reifschneider agreed with Voss and stated he has
a hard time with 23 variances, this kind of hardcover on this kind of slope, and the fact that there are
too many outstanding issues.
Hanus asked who will determine what the radius will be at the corner of Kerry and Kildare. Weiland
suggested that Cameron and Steve Grand get together to discuss how much property can be taken to
improve the radii. Koegler summarized that two issues have been raised, the street radius being one,
and this drainage on the new portion of Kildare Road being another. He suggested the Commission ask
the City Engineer to use his professional judgement, are there means and methods by which the radius
can be improved and by which the impact of storm water can be lessened coming off the cul-de-sac and
to report what those means and methods might be to the City Council.
Mueller moved to amend the motion to incorporate the language suggested by the
City Planner into "g3.h. and i", with the exception that the storm water be lessened
coming of the "street", not the "cul-de-sac," as follows:
g3.h.
The City Engineer is to report to the Council possible means and
methods to improve the turning radii at Kerry and Kildare and means
and methods to lessen the impact of storm water run-off from Kildare
Road.
Clapsaddle seconded the amendment.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 14, 1997
Burma stated that there will never be a PDA that won't have issues to deal with, and the developer has
addressed problems raised by staff and the Planning Commission. Burma stated that he will vote in
favor of the motion.
Hanus asked what a finding of fact may be for permitting the setback variances. Clapsaddle commented
that one finding may be the way the City was originally platted with small streets and small lots.
Mueller suggested that the technical expense of making it accessible and the fact that a conservation
easement is being given to keep the shoreland pristine could be findings.
Koegler clarified that the variances the Commission should be acting on are the 20' foot bluff setbacks,
all except for Lot 2 which should be 15'.
Motion carried 7 to 2. Those Burma, Clapsaddle, Glister, Michael, Muller,
Weiland, and Hanus. Those opposed were: Reifschneider and Voss.
This case will be heard by the City Council on May 13, 1997.
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
[lllrt
I!!H
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: April 9, 1997
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit (PDA), Variances and Preliminary Plat - Seton Bluff
APPLICANT: Fine Line Design Group, Inc. (Steve Behnke)
CASE NUMBER: 96-64
HKG FILE NUMBER: 96-5s
LOCATION: Lots 15 through 32, Block 11, Seton - Kildare Road
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-IA)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: Fine Line Design Group is seeking approvals for a Planned Development Area
(PDA) on a 1.47 acre tract of land along a currently unimproved portion of Kildare Lane. Approval
of the plan will require action by the City to issue a conditional use permit for the PDA, grant
variances as part of the PDA and approve the proposed preliminary plat. The current application is
similar to the proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission on February 10, 1997. Major changes
to the plan include the deletion of one unit, all lots now conform to minimum size criteria and the
total number of variances has been significantly reduced.
The Seton Bluff site lies along the north side of Kildare Road (right-of-way). Historically, the area
was platted into a series of 18 individual lots. At some point in the past, some of the lots were
combined which resulted in one parcel containing the 12 easternmost lots. The actual platted
ownership involved in this case also includes lots that lie below the OHW for Lake Minnetonka.
The center of the site contains a knoll with an elevation of 962 and the site drops off on all sides with
the western and northern boundaries of the property bordering Lake Minnetonka. Scattered tree
cover exists throughout the property and slopes along the western and northern portions of the site
qualify as bluffs under the Mound Zoning Code. The bluff line is delineated on the survey.
The physical conditions of the site and this area of Mound complicate development of the property.
In lieu of a traditional platted lot approach which would result in driveway cuts and retaining walls
for all of the lots in order to provide access to Kildare Road,,the developers are proposing the project
as a Planned Development Area (PDA) which facilitates the establishment of a common access drive
serving all of the proposed homes. The common access drive also allows much more control of
storm water runoff.
7300 Metro Boulevard, Suite 525, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439
(612) 835-9960 Fax (612) 835-3160
J I i, ,L iii, ,~,, J , I
Seton Bluff Planning Report
April 9, 1997
Page 2
The development plan calls for the extension of Kildare Road from its present terminus at Kerry
Lane westward a total distance of approximately 250 feet. Construction of six homes will occur on
the eastern portion of the site with 5 of them served by a common driveway. These homes will all
have common elements such as building materials, roof pitch and other characteristics which will
make them a cohesive development without having the exact same facade treatment. The remaining
lot will not necessarily "match" the structures on the eastern six lots. The two westernmost lots have
direct access to the bubble of the proposed cul-de-sac. Homeowner's association bylaws and
covenants will apply to the eastern six lots. In addition to the two garage stalls in each unit and the
two driveway parking spaces, five additional guest parking spaces are located in a parallel
configuration along the common driveway area.
COMMENTS: Implementation of the project will require approval of a conditional use permit,
variances and a preliminary plat. Additional approvals are being requested from the Park and Open
Space Commission pertaining to a multiple dock license and a Public Lands Permit for a proposed
stairway. A recommendation on these items will be forwarded to the City Council from the Park and
Open Space Commission. Items requiting Planning Commission action are addressed as follows:
Planned Development Area
The Mound Zoning Code allows the establishment of a Planned Development Area (PDA) by
conditional use permit as "a method by which parcels of land in the Residential Use Districts having
unusual building characteristics due to subsoil conditions, topographic conditions, elevation of water
table, unique environmental considerations, or because of the parcel's unusual shape or location in
relationship to lakes, trees or other natural resources requires more unique and controlled platting
techniques to protect and promote the quality of life in the City." The developer is seeking PDA
approval in order to establish the common access drive. The Zoning Code requires a minimum of
2 acres of land area for Planned Development Areas. The net site area of Seton Bluff is 1.35 acres
necessitating a variance of .65 acres in order to process the request as a PDA. Because of the
physical conditions of the site, processing this request as a PDA gives the City the ability to add
appropriate conditions to the approval. For this reason, staff supports the PDA site area variance.
Variances
The provisions of the Mound Zoning Code require that variances associated with the PDA be listed
and approved as part of the plan. The proposed site plan includes the following variances:
Right-of-way width
Cul-de-sac tight-of-way radius
Improved cul-de-sac radius
Improved street width
Street grade
Required Proposed .Variance
50' 35' 15'
50'r 40'r 10'r
40'r 35'r 5'r
28' 24' 4'
8% max 13% 5%
PDA Site Area (discussed above)
2 acres 1.35 acres .65 acres
Seton Bluff Planning Report
April 9, 1997
Page 3
Lots:
Lot 1 - Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setback (west)
Required
30'
10'
Proposed
10'
6'
Variance
20'
4'
Lot 2 - Bluff Setback 30' ,30"Iff 249' 1 cq
Side Yard Setback (west) 10' 6' 4'
Lot 3 - Bluff Setback 30' 10' 20'
Side Yard Setback (west) 10' 6' 4'
Lot 4 - Bluff Setback 30' 10' 20'
Side Yard Setback (west) 10' 6' 4'
Lot 5 -
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setback (west)
Front Yard Setback
30' 20' 10'
10' 6' 4'
20' 15' 5'
Lot 6 -
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setback (west)
Front Yard Setback
30' 20' 10'
10' 6' 4'
20' 15' 5'
Lot 7 - Bluff Setback (rear) 30' 10' 20'
Bluff Setback (side) 30' 10' 20'
Impervious Cover
30% 32.8% 2.8%
In the case of Lots 1 - 6, the developer has requested a blanket 20 foot variance from the required
bluff setback. In reality, some of the units can be setback a distance greater than 10 feet from the
bluff line because of the location of the bluff contour. Accordingly, the Planning Commission may
want to consider a lesser bluff setback variance which would truly represent a minimum situation
under the Zoning Ordinance criteria. At the meeting, the developer should be able to provide
additional information on the actual bluff setbacks for each of the lots. The actual requested bluff
setback could be used as the basis for the variance request in lieu of a 20' blanket setback variance.
Five variances pertain to the public street that will serve the property. In addition to the right-of-way
that totals 35 feet in width, the plan calls for the creation of an additional 5 foot wide street easement
bringing the total public land width to 40 feet. Specific details about the street related variances can
be found in the City Engineer's report.
According to calculations submitted by the applicant, impervious cover for the project totals 32.8%.
The additional impervious cover is largely due to the expansive common driveway and guest parking
area. Developing the property with traditional driveways would reduce the amount of impervious
cover, however, it would complicate storm water drainage problems in the area.
Seton Bluff Planning Report
April 9, 1997
Page 4
Side yard setback variances are being requested for Lots 1 - 6. For the R-IA zone, 10 foot side yard
setbacks are required and for lots of record, one side yard setback can be 6 feet. The west side
setback for the six lots is 6 feet which conforms to the lot of record requirement but does not
conform to the non-lot of record requirement.
Preliminary Plitt
The preliminary plat shows an additional 5 feet of right-of-way along Kildare Road and land area
to accommodate the cul-de-sac bubble. All lots exceed the minimum lot size requirement of 6,000
square feet as required in the R-lA zoning district. The setbacks identified in this report were taken
from the Preliminary Plat which is the legal instrument establishing the lot areas.
Density
PDA projects in Mound are required to comply with the density restrictions found in Section
350:460 of the Code of Ordinances. Since Seton Bluff is in the shoreland area, the density
limitations for shoreland PDA's also apply. Density in a PDA is established by the underlying lot
size for the applicable residential district. The PDA provisions specifically delete land used for
streets and utilities from the gross density calculation. In the case of Seton Bluff, the amount of land
above the flood plain elevation totals 56,357 square feet. This site area will accommodate 9 units
under the non-shoreland PDA density provisions.
Since Seton Bluff is in the shoreland area, it needs to be evaluated consistent with the shoreland
density regulations found in Section 350:1200 of the Code of Ordinances. Shoreland standards
establish a series of tiers within which units are allowed based on a standard of 10,000 square feet.
The tiers are established based on the location of the 929.4 contour. In the case of Seton Bluff, all
of the property is in the first tier. The shoreland ordinance does allow density bonuses and the
proposed site plan does qualify because the setbacks from the ordinary high water contour equal or
exceed a minimum of 125% of the required 50 foot setback. The proposed density with the
applicable bonus is consistent with the maximum density allowed under the shoreland ordinance.
Application of the shoreland standards results in a maximum of 7 units.
Tree Preservation
Section 350:725 of the Mound Zoning Code contains standards regarding tree preservation. The
code states, "It is the intent of the City of Mound to preserve wooded areas throughout the City and
with respect to future site development, to retain, as far as practicable, substantial existing tree
cover." Seton Bluff contains scattered tree cover. Construction of the access drive and units will
necessitate removal of most of the vegetation in the front portion of the site. Trees located within
the bluff area will remain undisturbed. The amount of tree loss due to the Seton Bluff development
proposal is, in all likelihood, probably equal to the amount of tree removal that would be necessary
to construct homes with individual driveways on to Kildare Road.
Seton Bluff Planning Report
April 9, 1997
Page 5
A landscaping plan was included as part of the site development plans. The landscaping plan calls
for the installation of trees and shrubs along the Kildare Road frontage and in front of the units in
between the driveway areas. Because of the amount of tree cover being removed on the front portion
of the site to accommodate the housing units and driveway areas, it would be appropriate to include
additional overstory tree plantings between the curb of the private parking area and the curb of
Kildare Road.
The grading plan shows a retaining wall near the common driveway along the southeastern portion
of the site. At it tallest point, the wall is approximately 14 feet in height. There is enough room
along the southern exposure of the wall to create a tiered retaining wall with additional plantings
being placed in the tier to break up the expanse of wall surfacing. Materials for the wall are
unspecified and should be subject to staff review and approval.
Traffic resulting from the proposed development will be generated at the same rate as the existing
households in the vicinity since the proposed development and all of the development in the area
consists of detached single family homes. The seven new residences will each generate
approximately 10 trips per day based on standards published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers and the Urban Land Institute.
Wetlands
According to the City's wetlands map, the wetland elevation for the property in question is 929.5
feet. The development plan does not identify any construction in the wetland area and all of the units
comply with the Watershed District's 35 foot setback requirement.
RECOMMENDATION: The developers of Seton Bluff have designed a project that complies with
density provisions of the Zoning Code and meets the lot of record setback provisions. The project,
however, does not meet the non-lot of record provisions which apply in this case since 12 of the lots
were combined in the past. In any Planned Development Area project, trade-offs are involved. In
this case, the major trade-off appears to be impervious cover and setback variances for a plan that
handles storm drainage from the site in a more beneficial manner. The policy question that needs
to be answered by the Planning Commission and City Council is whether or not this trade-off is
equitable. Staff feels that the proposed plan with one less unit satisfies most of the concerns that
were raised in previous reviews. After its deliberations, if the Planning Commission feels that it is
equitable, the development could be approved with appropriate conditions. Alternatives to that
approach include approval with modifications or denial.
If the Planning Commission feels that the plan is appropriate and consistent with the Mound's
provisions for Planned Development Areas, the following conditions are suggested:
Seton Bluff Planning Report
April 9, 1997
Page 6
o
o
o
o
Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
The applicant shall be responsible for park dedication requirements consistent with Section
330:120 of the Mound Code of Ordinances.
The landscaping plan shall be modified to add deciduous overstory trees in the turf area between
the curb of Kildare Road and the curb defining the edge of the guest parking spaces and plantings
in the retaining wall tier. The landscaping plan modification shall be subject to a review and
approval by the City Planner.
Covenants and association bylaws shall be submitted for review and approval by the City
Attorney.
Escrow accounts shall be established as required by City Code and shall at all times, maintain
a positive fund balance.
Issues pertaining to proposed docks shall be addressed by the Mound Park and Open Space
Commission and City Council.
The conservation, drainage and utility easement that is proposed for the rear portion of the lots
shall contain a provision which allows tree removal only for trees that are dead or diseased.
Trees shall be defined in the agreement as all species exceeding 3 inches in caliper. The
easement document shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
The common driveway area exclusive of the guest parking area shall be posted as a "no parking"
area.
°
10.
The developer shall submit detailed plans for the retaining wall identifying materials and a tiered
construction for review and approval by the City Engineer.
The recommendations and conditions found in the Engineers Report are incorporated herein.
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4739
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning
John Cameron, City Engineer
April 8, 1997
City of Mound
Preliminary Plat - Seton Bluff, Case #96-64
Engineering Review
MFRA # 11542
We have reviewed the revised plans submitted for preliminary plat approval of S~ton Bluff
which has one less lot than the previous submittal. Most of the concerns we expressed in our
review letter dated February 5, 1997 have been addressed except for the following items:
1. The previously identified variances remain necessary for this revised plan.
ao
Right-of-way width- 15' variance.
Cul-de-sac right-of-way - 10' variance.
Improved street -width 4' variance.
Improved cul-de-sac radius - 5' variance.
Street grade - variance from 8% to 13% slope.
2. Site Plan
The 3 center guest parking stalls need to be 23 feet long and the 2 end stalls 22
feet long, for an overall length of 113 feet, curb to curb. The plan §cales 110'.
The private driveway, individual drives and mm around are not dimensioned, but
in scaling the drawing, they appear to be sufficient.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Jon Sutherland
April 8, 1997
eo
Grading limits must be restricted to applicant's property and City right-of-way.
Plans must be approved by MCWD.
Proposed slopes cannot exceed 2-1/2:1. Prefer 3:1.
Proposed elevation at front of unit on Lot 5 needs to be raised a minimum of 12"
and the unit on Lot 4, a minimum of 6".
A flatter area (5 feet minimum) behind the curb on Kildare at Lots 2, 3 and 4
needs to be provided for snow storage.
The drainage arrows indicate that the entire building envelope drains south to the
private drive and/or cul-de-sac. The rear portion of these units will have to drain
north.
A more desirable drainage pattern will need to be designed for the City cul-de-sac
than the sheet drainage as shown.
a. Add surge basin at storm sewer outlet and relocate to the toe of the slope.
b. Provide sump with baffle in CBMH.
c. Public improvements to meet all City standards.
e:~nain:\l 1542\suther48
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-o620
Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
March 21, 1997
John Cameron, City Engineer
Mark Koegler, City Planner
Ceil Strauss, DNR
Greg Skinner, Public Works Dept.
Fire Department
Jim Fackler, Parks Department
Peggy James, Planning Secretary ~
Seton Bluff
Attached are revised drawings for the proposed Seton Bluff PDA. This case will be heard by
the Planning Commission on April 14th and by the City Council on May 13th. The Park
Commission will be reviewing the Park Dedication fee issue on April 10th. Please submit your
comments/reports to Peggy by April 9th.
Thank you.
cc: Jon Sutherland, Building Official
Enclosures
printed on recycled paper
Planning Commission Minutes
................................. February 10, 1997
easement.
Snow removal was discussed. Behnke noted that the association will handle the plowing and
snow will be stored at the end of the cul-de-sac.
The setbacks were reviewed. Behnke confirmed that decks will be within the footprint shown.
Mueller expressed a concern about setting a precedent by approving the bluff setbacks. Koegler
commented that you can argue all variances on a case by case basis, and noted that this is a
difficult site due to the road and bluff, and analyzing the merits of this development, if the same
conditions were present elsewhere, then maybe variances would need to be considered.
Mueller questioned the ability to develop this property utilizing existing lot lines. Staff
confirmed that these lots could not be developed until the street is improved and utilities are
extended.
Mueller questioned if there are any other developments that have been approved that have no
direct access from a public road. Koegler noted that there are townhouses by the bridge on
Bartlett that may be similar, but this may be the first, and explained that this configuration was
the product of a lot of discussion in order to control the grade.
Mueller asked if the City is required to allow people to build on lots just because they're platted.
Koegler noted that there would be cases where the property could not be developed.
Clapsaddle commented that it is bad to assume that the structures will not be built closer than
3 feet to the property line and suggested that the plat just show 6 feet.
Clapsaddle expressed a concern about outside storage of recreational vehicles. Behnke noted
that the association rules will require they be parked inside the garages and that no outside
storage will be allowed. Behnke would not object if this were a requirement of the PDA.
Hanus asked Koegler to explain the confusion with the DNR relating to the delineation of a
bluff. Koegler explained, and noted the end result is that the drawing does conform to the
definition.
The density variance was reviewed. Koegler noted that this development does meet the overall
density require~ments and it does comply with the underlying 6,000 square foot lot area
requirement.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing.
Steve Grand expressed concerns with the development and drainage in the area. At the end of
his driveway on Kerry Lane there is a dip in the road and this is were most of the sand and silt
from Kildare Road settles. His neighbor's property across the street also gets silt in front of her
house. Also, the corner of her lot was destroyed by during construction of the new houses on
Kildare. Grand is concerned about loss of view towards the lake, he will not be able to see
between the houses because they will be so close together. He has great concerns about drainage
and aesthetics. Grand explained that when they built the existing houses on Kildare they
Addendum to Seton Bluff Narrative March 19, 1997
The existing site is now under one ownership, and one applicant.
The net site is now defined as 1.35 acres.
being requested.
Pro_ieet Overview
MAR 2 0 1997
A variance for a PDA less than 2 acres is
The project now comprises of the platting of 6 - 44' wide lots and a 7th comprising the
balance of the land. All lots comply with the 62.5' setback from the 929.4' OHW
allowing the site to benefit from a density bonus from 6 lots to 9 lots.
The guest parking is now 5 spaces.
The private drive is now 19' wide.
Side yard variances of 4' are being requested on one side of each lot.
A front yard variance from 20' to 15' is being requested for lots 5 and 6.
A Bluff setback variance from 30' to a minimum of 10' is being requested for all 7
lots.
A coverage variance of 32.8% is being requested to allow the construction of the
private drive.
Landscape Plan
Trees have been added to the 'islands' between the homes.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
March 12, 1997
Mr. Steven Behnke
Fine Line DESIGN group, inc.
P.O. Box 1611
Burnsville, MN 55337
RE: REVIEW OF SETON BLUFF
Dear Mr. Behnke:
On January 31, 1997, you submitted a completed application for a preliminary plat, variances
and a conditional use permit for the Seton Bluff development in the City of Mound. After the
Planning Commission meeting on February 10, 1997, you stated that you intend to modify the
existing site plan and resubmit another plan for Planning Commission approval prior to the time
that the request is acted upon by the City Council.
Minnesota Statute § 15.99 gives cities 60 days to make certain types of land use decisions. In
accordance with your desire to prepare a new plan and the statutory review process, this letter
is to inform you that the City is terminating the review time for this project. When you
complete your new plan, it will be considered as a new application for the purposes of § 15.99,
however, you will not be required to pay any additional application fees to the City of Mound,
but additional costs relating to staff review may be assessed to your escrow account.
If you have any questions on this matter, please contact our City Planner, Mark Koegler at
835-9960.
Building Official
JS:pj
cc: Mark Koegler, City Planner
printed on recycled paper
Rev. 3-6-96
Application for
CONDITIONAL USE PERM]T
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 5536,
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
CiTY OF'i OUND
Planning Commission Date:~J
City Council Date: -~~-~
g i st ribut ion:
City Planner:
City Engineer:
Public Works:
Other: '~J~--~:
Conditional Use Permit Fee~
Please type or print the following information:
PROPERTY Subject Address ~---'~[ ( C~ ~F--" --]~¢~;~
INFORMATION
Name of Business
LEGAL Lots I ~-- % ~ ~ Block
DESCRIPTION Q~ ~19
Subdivision PID~
APPLICANT The applican~ is: __owner ,X other:
Name ~ ~P~I~ ~~. J~.
/
Jif other than
applicant)
ARCHITECT, '
ENGINEER Ph°ne(H) a0--~ ~~--7~
ZONIN~ ~i~ol~: ~-I ~ ~-~ ~-3 B-I B-2 B-3
CHANGEOF FROM: ~--~
USE
Conditional Use Permit Application
Page 2
Description of Proposed Use:
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in
the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking,
and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts.
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing
reasonable guarantees for the compl/tion of t~e, pro~o~ed development:. Estimated
Development Cost of the Project: $ ~%~ ~~ ~ ~F-~~ (~
Has an application ever been made for zoning/ variance, conditional use permit, or
other zoning procedure for this property? ~) yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of
application, action taken, resolution numb~r(~) and/p~ovide copies of resolutions.
Property Owner's Signature ~a,~ ~ ~'~-~iltl~'~ Date
o~3 ~~ ~~ '
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 10, 1997
CASE 96-64: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT/PDA/VARIANCES
"SETON BLUFF", FINE LINE DESIGN GROUP, INC.
LOTS 15 - 32, BLOCK 11, SETON, 19-117-23 22 0036-41 & 54
Chair Michael explained the public hearing procedures. City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed
the Planning Report. Fine Line Design Group is seeking approvals for a Planned Development
Area (PDA) on a 2.04 acre tract of land along a currently unimproved portion of Kildare Road.
The physical conditions of the site and this area of Mound complicate development of the
property. In lieu of a traditional platted lot approach which would result in driveway cuts and
retaining walls for all of the lots in order to provide access to Kildare Road, the developers are
proposing the project as a PDA which facilities the establishment of common areas including a
common access drive serving all of the proposed homes. The common access drive also allows
more control of storm water.
The plan calls for the development of Kildare Road westward from Kerry Lane about 250 feet.
Six of the proposed homes will be served by a common driveway, and two homes will have
direct access to the cul-de-sac. Homeowner's association bylaws and covenants will apply to
only the eastern six lots.
Planning Commission Minutes ................................. February 10, 1997 ' -
Items requiring Planning Commission action include approval of a PDA by Conditional Use
Permit, Variances, and the Preliminary Plat. The PDA is being sought in order to establish the
commons access drive and the commons green space areas that will be maintained by a
homeowner's association.
Koegler briefly reviewed the variances requested associated with the PDA. The street variances
are as follows:
Required Proposed
Right-of-way width 50' 35'
Cul-de-sac right-of-way (radius) 50' 40'
Street paved width 28' 24'
Variance
15'
10'
4'
Koegler noted that there are various variances requested for lots 1-6, 8 & 9, including lot size,
bluff setback, and side and front yard setbacks. The lot size variances relate to the type of
development proposed because a significant amount of the site will be platted as an outlot. The
total land area of the project lying above the flood elevation of 931.0 is 60,364 square feet. If
the common areas were removed and the proposed lots were evenly split among the total site
area, lot sizes would be 7,545 square feet.
Impervious Surface coverage for the entire property is proposed to be 36.7% resulting in a
variance request of 6.7 %. The additional coverage is largely due to the expansive common
driveway and guest parking area.
The setback variances do not represent the true structural setback situation. The Uniform
Building Code requires that buildings be placed 3 feet from the side and rear lot lines unless the
construction is fire rated. The developer has stated that it is his intent to observe the additional
3 foot setback from the side and front property lines resulting in 12 feet of separation between
the actual housing units. A 6 foot setback (12 feet total) conforms to the lot of record setback
for the R-iA zone but not the 10 foot setback required by the non-lot of record provisions.
Koegler reviewed the density requirements in Section 350:460 of the City Code. This site area
will accommodate 10 units under the PDA density provisions. However, since Seton Bluff is
in the shoreland area, it also needs to be evaluated consistent with the shoreland density
regulations in Section 350:1200 of the Code. The proposed density of 8 units exceeds the
maximum of 6 units allowed by the ordinance. The shoreland ordinance does allow density
bonuses, however, the proposed site plan does not qualify because the setbacks from the
ordinary high water contour do not equal a minimum of 125 % of the required 50 foot setback.
Therefore, a variance for the two units that exceed the density standard will need to be granted
if the project is to proceed as planned.
Koegler further reviewed tree preservation, landscaping, traffic, and wetland issues.
RECOMMENDATION: The developers of Seton Bluff have designed the project that complies
with most of the lot of record setback provisions of the Mound Zoning Code. The project,
however, does not meet the non-lot of record provisions which apply in this case since 12 of the
lots were combined in the past. In any PDA, trade-offs are involved. In this case, the major
Planning Commission Minutes
................................. February 10, 1997
trade-off appears to be higher density than what is allowed by the shore/and ordinance and
setback variances for a plan that handles storm drainage from the site in a more beneficial
manner. The policy question that needs to be answered by the Planning Commission and City
Council is whether or not this trade-off is equitable. After its deliberations, if the Planning
Commission feels that it is equitable, the development could be approved with appropriate
conditions. Alternatives to that approach include approval with modifications or denial. Koegler
noted the suggested conditions for approval listed in his report.
Koegler referred to the Engineer's report and noted that it contains further comments and
recommendations. The Engineer recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to a
number of conditions as outlined in the report.
Applicant, Steve Behnke introduced himself as President of Fine Line Design Group, and
addressed the planning report. Behnke noted that the street is proposed to developed as
originally designed by the City Engineer in his street report which was done in December of
1995. Behnke emphasized the following:
The average lot size is well over the 6,000 square foot minimum at 7,500 square feet
when you take the common land and spread it out.
Lot 8 is the smallest due to the cul-de-sac.
Lots 8 and 9 are still lots of record and therefore are entitled up to 40 % hardcover.
31 percent of this site is under water.
64 % of the site is green space.
The impervious coverage that is planned is designed to keep water out of the Kildare
Road and Kerry Lane intersection.
The arrangement of the proposed dwellings maintain the lines as originally platted.
The private drive increases impervious cover, but also performs the function of
decreasing run off onto Kildare.
Current impervious surface calculations are with the driveways three car wide. If the
driveways are reduced in size to two cars wide, the impervious coverage drops by 1%.
If this property was developed with standard driveways extended from Kildare,
impervious coverage would drop by only another 1%.
The houses have been situated to create a detached townhome feeling with the grounds
being maintained by an association.
This is the same number of houses that would be allowed by the original plat and is 4/5
of what the density requirements would allow now.
Planning Commission Minutes ................................. February 10, 1997 '-
Only lot 8 is not at 125 % of the lake side setback.
They have no problem installing over-story trees in certain locations, between lots 2 &
3, 4&5, and 6&8. The other islands contain services and over-story trees are not
recommended over services.
Behnke proceeded to address the conditions outlined in the Engineer's Memorandum, and made
the following comments:
All association land is held in common and is available for drainage and utility
easements. The association also would control any construction within the common area.
Lots 8 and 9 will have the drainage and utility easements added around the boundaries.
The "no parking on the private drive" is acceptable to them.
The parking area is not intended to be used for everyday parking, and therefore, would
like to maintain the 16 foot wide width of the private drive. He also noted that 18 feet
is the recommended maximum width for hardcover drives according to design standards.
He does not feel it would be wise to shift the houses closer to the bluff as this would
decrease the bluff setback and also add impervious surface by increasing the length of
the driveways.
He does not feel curb and gutter have a value at this point since the private drive will
drain through the middle.
During construction they will install silt fences and intend to control all run-off from the
site.
Watershed approval is being sought, but they will not review until there is preliminary
approval from the City. Behnke explained the "rip rap basin" proposed at the bottom of
the slope, and the catch basin manhole at the top.
Visual aids were used to indicate that 40 % of the site currently drains down Kerry Lane,
and after development only 10% will drain down Kerry. The 30% balance will go into
the proposed catch basin.
Visual aids were provided to show the types of homes to be constructed.
The Commission discussed the steep grade of the proposed road and the steep grade of the
existing Kildare Road extending to the east. Voss expressed a concerned with the silt/sand on
Kerry Lane that washes down from Kildare, and noted that the amount of silt should be reduced
with the development of this plan.
Mueller questioned if the retaining wall proposed at the southeast comer of the development will
be 16 feet tall. Behnke confirmed that the wall will be 15 to 16 feet tall and will have plantings
on the top and bottom. Mueller noted that there will only be 3 feet between the wall and the
Planning Commission Minutes
................................. February 10, 1997
easement.
Snow removal was discussed. Behnke noted that the association will handle the plowing and
snow will be stored at the end of the cul-de-sac.
The setbacks were reviewed. Behnke confirmed that decks will be within the footprint shown.
Mueller expressed a concern about setting a precedent by approving the bluff setbacks. Koegler
commented that you can argue all variances on a case by case basis, and noted that this is a
difficult site due to the road and bluff, and analyzing the merits of this development, if the same
conditions were present elsewhere, then maybe variances would need to be considered.
Mueller questioned the ability to develop this property utilizing existing lot lines. Staff
confirmed that these lots could not be developed until the street is improved and utilities are
extended.
Mueller questioned if there are any other developments that have been approved that have no
direct access from a public road. Koegler noted that there are townhouses by the bridge on
Bartlett that may be similar, but this may be the first, and explained that this configuration was
the product of a lot of discussion in order to control the grade.
Mueller asked if the City is required to allow people to build on lots just because they're platted.
Koegler noted that there would be cases where the property could not be developed.
Clapsaddle commented that it is bad to assume that the structures will not be built closer than
3 feet to the property line and suggested that the plat just show 6 feet.
Clapsaddle expressed a concern about outside storage of recreational vehicles. Behnke noted
that the association rules will require they be parked inside the garages and that no outside
storage will be allowed. Behnke would not object if this were a requirement of the PDA.
Hanus asked Koegler to explain the confusion with the DNR relating to the delineation of a
bluff. Koegler explained, and noted the end result is that the drawing does conform to the
definition.
The density variance was reviewed. Koegler noted that this development does meet the overall
density requirements and it does comply with the underlying 6,000 square foot lot area
requirement.
Chair Michael opened the public hearing.
Steve Grand expressed concerns with the development and drainage in the area. At the end of
his driveway on Kerry Lane there is a dip in the road and this is were most of the sand and silt
from Kildare Road settles. His neighbor's property across the street also gets silt in front of her
house. Also, the corner of her lot was destroyed by during construction of the new houses on
Kildare. Grand is concerned about loss of view towards the lake, he will not be able to see
between the houses because they will be so close together. He has great concerns about drainage
and aesthetics. Grand explained that when they built the existing houses on Kildare they
Planning Commission Minutes ................................. February 10, 1997 ' -
removed all the trees on the lot and everything was a muddy mess. All the erosion eventually
goes into Black Lake.
At the request of the Chair, City Engineer, John Cameron explained that less drainage will go
towards Kerry Lane with the proposed plan.
Voss questioned how many houses could be constructed on this property if it were not replatted.
Koegler stated that the way the property is currently platted, the one parcel would need to be
divided and there are three lots at the end, but street access would need to be provided, so he
would estimate about 5 or 6 units with driveway access directly of Kildare could be constructed.
Behnke commented that utilizing the property as lots-of-record, he believes 9 units could be
constructed.
Grand stated that he does not want a worse problem, and there is no drainage problem from that
property now, but when the road is developed there will be.
Vicki Hockert, owner of the house across the street from Steve Grand stated that during the
construction of the two new homes across the street from her, the corner of her lot was
destroyed by trucks and construction equipment. There was a tremendous amount of dirt and
erosion rurming onto her property. She expressed a concern about increased traffic as a result
of this development. She feels the proposal is for too many homes in too little of an area.
Vicki asked who is responsible for damage done to her property.
Behnke confirmed that until the Kildare Road improvements are done, there will be construction
equipment in the intersection of Kerry and Kildare.
Sutherland commented that he had a problem with Brenshel Homes in controlling the erosion
during construction the houses on Kildare, but with a new development such as what is proposed
the City will have a development contract and a financial guarantee to better control these types
of issues.
The radius of the corners from Kerry to Kildare was reviewed. Grand agreed that he would
rather see a rounder corner rather than seeing people bounce over the curb and ruining his yard.
Chair Michael closed the public hearing.
Clapsaddle asked staff how this project will affect the intersection and asked what is the solution.
Cameron explained that the radius of the corner on Kerry and Kildare is currently 5 feet which
is the result of improving a 28' wide street in a 30' wide platted right-of-way. When these
streets were improved they had to get easements from owners for the corners of their properties.
Vicki's property corner is in the street.
Behnke stated that no parking will be allowed on Kildare Road due to the narrow width, which
is why guest parking was proposed in the private drive. Behnke stated that with the additional
4 feet of right-of-way on the south side, they could have a 9 foot radius, and if Grand donated
an easement the radius could be even bigger.
Planning Commission Minutes
................................. February I0, I997
Erosion control during the project was further discussed. Behnke noted that the excavator who
worked with Brenshel during the construction of the existing homes is no longer working with
Brenshel.
The width of the driveway and parking stalls was reviewed. Cameron noted that the reason he
is recommending curbing on the south side of the common driveway is to protect the easement
area from cars parking on it and to assist with drainage.
The requirement for a guardrail at the top of the 16 foot high retaining wall was discussed.
Sutherland, noted that the building code does not require a guardrail. Behnke stated that he
would accept a condition requiring a hedge on the top of the wall.
MOTION by Voss to recommend denial of the Seton Bluff PDA. Seconded
by Mueller. Reasons for denial is that the project is too dense, there are
topographical problems, drainage issues, and too many houses are proposed
for this property.
Mueller commented that they are pushing the envelope in every perspective. There are setback
variances, bluff setback variances, and hardcover variances and this is because they are pushing
the envelope. The DNR allows six houses in the first tier, and if only six houses were proposed
the variances would go away and the houses would not be so narrow. Mueller feels they have
to look out for the good of the community and for the future residents of this development.
Clapsaddle feels that the parking and private drive does not work. He does not totally agree
with Mueller, but does agree that the project is too dense.
Motion to deny carried 7 to 1. Those in favor of denial were:
Burma, Reifschneider, Wetland, Hanus, Voss and Mueller.
opposed.
Clapsaddle,
Michael was
This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on March 4, 1997.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
February 7, 1997
Park and Open Space Commission//
Jim Faclder, Parks Director .f'~'r0
Seton Bluff- Park Dedication & Docks
On Tuesday, March 4, 1997, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the Seton Bluff
PDA/Preliminary Plat. The following items are being brought to the Park Commission for their
recommendations:
PARK DEDICATION
The developer, Fine Line Design group, inc. (Steve Behnke) has not reserved land on the
proposed plat for dedication. City Code Section 330:120 states, "At the City's option .... the
subdivider shall contribute an equivalent amount of cash, in lieu of all or a portion of the land
which the City may require.., cash contribution shall be a minimum of ten percent (10%) of
the total fair market value of the land being divided. In no case shall the dedication in cash be
less than $500 for each new lot being created."
According to the Hennepin County tax records, the market value of the subject properties are
as follows:
19-117-23 22 0036 $ 300
19-117-23 22 0037 300
19-117-23 22 0038 300
19-117-23 22 0039 300
19-117-23 22 0040 1,800
19-117-23 22 0041 1,800
19-117-23 22 0054 6,000
TOTAL $10,800
Calculating $10,800, at 10% would result in a total contribution of $1,080. Therefore, it is
recommended that a dedication in cash of $500 per lot be collected in lieu of land dedication.
The total dedication would be $4,500.
printe~ff on recycled paper
Seton Bluff- P&OSC
February 7, 1997
Page 2
A multiple dock with eight (8) slips is being proposed as part of the plat. More information will
need to be submitted in order for a complete review by the Commission, such as a scaled
drawing of the proposed dock, and an application for a public lands permit. In reviewing the
preliminary plat, staff has made the following observations:
Only six homes sites, those numbered 1 thru 6, would qualify as abutting owners under
City Code Section 437:05, SuM. 7, a. "First Priority. An abutting owner...".
Building sites 8 and 9 would have private lakeshore and would be addressed under City
Code Section 437:05, Sub& 7, aa. "Residents owning private lakeshore..."
A Public Lands Permit will be required for the proposed stairways to be located between
home sites 4 and 5 and between 2 and 3 which extend onto the City controlled
unimproved street right-of-way, Longford Road.
Longford Road will need to be recognized on the Dock Location Map and assigned a
"Shoreline Type".
An application must be made to the DNR for this proposed dock site because it exceeds four
slips and extends through protected waters.
The lineal footage of this shoreline will also need to be added to the Dock Location Map for
purposes of calculating the number of boat storage units BSU's allowed by the LMCD for our
Multiple Dock License.
February 5, 1997
Mr. Jon Suthefland
5341 Maywood Road.
Mound, MN 55364
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
FEB - 7 1997
.... 7': i' :~ ,',;~,
Seton Bluff Planned Development Area, Preliminary Plat, Lake ~V'unnet°nka - Black Lake
(27-133-12), City of Mound, Hennepin County
Dear Mr. Suthefland:
We have reviewed the site plans and supporting materials for the above-referenced proposal
(received January 28, 1997) located in NWl/4, Section 19, T117N-R23W) and have the
following comments to offer:
Lake Minnetonka - Black Lake (27-133-12), is on the proposed site. Any activity below
the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross-section
of protected waters or wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of DNR and may require a DNR
protected waters permit. The OHW for the lake is 929.4' (1929 NGVD). All plans
should be labeled with the OHW noted.
I have concerns regarding the BluffLine identified on the plans. Apparently there is some
confusion regarding interpretation of the city's shoreland ordinance regarding the
definition of a bluff. The city should consider amending its shoreland ordinance to avoid
any furore misinterpretation of the definition. At this point in time, the DNR will not
object to the city's interpretation. However, regardless of the interpretation, the existing
bluff lines appear to be located below the top of the bluff.
Impervious surface should be looked at closely. It appears that impervious surface limits
are exceeded on several lots. We object to maximum impervious surface being exceeded,
especially in an area with such steep topography.
Apparently the building density was calculated using the underlying density requirement of
6,000 square feet per unit. The City of Mound shoreland overlay district requires a
density not to exceed 10,000 square feet per unit. The DNR would object to granting of a
building density based on the use of the less restrictive underlying density requirements.
DNR Information: 612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 · TTY: 612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunit) Emploser ~, Printed on Rec?cled Paper Containing a
Who Value~, Divcrsll? ~ll~l~ Minimum o! [0c,} Post-Consumer Waste
Mr. Son Suthedand
February 5, 1997
Page 2
It is unclear how many slips will be requested by the homeowners' association for the
docking facility. The docking facility will require a permit from the DNR and/or from the
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). The LMCD is the agent for DNR
General Permit #97-6098 for permanent and/or multiple docks on Lake Minnetonka.
Please contact Greg Nybeck at 471-9588 for guidelines and additional permit information.
It appears that the stormwater is proposed to be routed directly to Black Lake (27-133-
12). Stormwater sedimentation/treatment ponds, or other appropriate stormwater
treatment features, should be included in the plan. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
should be contacted to discuss stormwater management and any permitting requirements.
There should be some type of dedicated easement, covenant or deed restriction for the
properties adjacent to the bluff and/or wetland areas. This would help to ensure that
property owners are aware that the DNR, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the City of
Mound, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District may have jurisdiction over the areas and that bluffs and or wetlands may not be
altered without appropriate permits.
There may be wetlands on the site that are not under DNR jurisdiction. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers should be consulted regarding pertinent federal regulations for
activities in wetlands. In addition, impacts to these wetlands should be evaluated by the
city in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991.
The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments:
Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction
period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning
Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan and
Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be
followed.
If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or one
million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is needed. You are advised
that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application.
If construction activities disturb five acres of land, or more, contractors are
required to apply for a stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (Scott Thompson ~ 296-7203).
Mr. Jon Sutherland
February 5, 1997
Page 3
do
The commems in this letter address DNR - Division of Waters jurisdictional
matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support
or lack thereof for a particular project.
Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have questions.
Acting Area Hydrologist
PAML/cds
C~
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, Greg Nybeck
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Jim Hafner
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Joe Yanta
Hennepin Conservation District
Fine Line Design Group, Steve Behnke, P.O. Box 1611, Bumsville 55337
JJ L &, ,L iii,,
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4739
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jon Sutherland, Planning & Zoning
John Cameron, City Engineer
February 5, 1997
City of Mound
Preliminary Plat - Seton Bluff Case #96-64
Engineering Review
MFRA # 11542
As requested, we have reviewed the plans submitted for preliminary plat approval of Seton Bluff
and have the following comments and recommendations:
Preliminary Plat
There are no proposed drainage or utility easements shown on the preliminary plat. At
the very minimum, 5-foot wide drainage and utility easements should be required along
the exterior boundary of Lots 7, 8, and 9. In addition, any land area below elevation
931.5 needs to be covered by a drainage easement. The proposed street right-of-way does
not meet the City's minimum standards; thus, variances will be required for the
following:
1. Right-of-way width - 50' required, 35' proposed - 15' variance required.
2. Cul-de-sac right-of-way - 50' radius required, 40' proposed - 10' variance required.
3. Improved street - 28' wide back-to-back of curb required, 24' wide proposed - 4'
variance required.
4. Improved cul-de-sac - 40' radius to back of curb required, 35' proposed - 5' variance
required.
If the narrower street and cul-de-sac are approved with the appropriate variance, parking on the
City street would need to be prohibited.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Jon Sutherland, Planning & Zoning
February 5, 1997
Page 2
Site Plan
The private driveway and parallel parking which serve lots 1 through 6 needs some modification
which in mm, may affect the location of the platted lots. The 6 parallel parking stalls are not
dimensioned, but in scaling the total length they appear to be approximately 4 feet short. The
two end stalls can be 22' long and the remaining 4 should be 23' long, resulting in an overall
length of 136 feet. The most westerly stall cannot be located within the proposed right-of-way
for Kildare; thus they need to be shifted easterly and the additional footage added to the east end.
The width of the private drive as shown at 16' is of concern. We would consider 18' to be the
absolute minimum; with 20' wide preferred. We would recommend that lots 3, 4, and 5 be set
back 50' from the proposed right-of-way line of Kildare Road. This would allow for the 5' wide
easement, 10' wide parallel parking stalls, 19' wide drive and 16' between the edge of the drive
and the proposed lot line. This will allow ample space for cars to park in front of the garages and
still provide for two way traffic on the private drive. The drawing shows a dimension of 48' on
lot 5; whereas it scales 46'; thus the front lot lines for lots 3, 4, and 5 will need to be moved north
4'.
The width of the private drive across lot 2 is not dimensioned, but it scales approximately 15'.
We are recommending that this section could be narrowed to 14' wide but the distance between
the edge of the private drive and the front of lot 2, as measured along the east edge of the parking
area must be increased to 16'. This will require either shifting the private drive south or moving
the proposed lot northerly.
The proposed plan does not indicate any proposed curb and gutter except for the public portion
of Kildare Road. We would recommend that at a minimum, concrete curb and gutter be required
along the south edge of the private drive and parking stalls. This would include lots 1 and 2.
Grading Plan
The grading limits must be restricted to the applicant's property and/or existing platted right-of-
way, unless easements are obtained from the adjacent property owners. The southerly edge of
the project is of particular concern. The amount of silt fence must be increased to encompass all
grading activity to protect all the bluff areas and adjacent property. The easterly end of the guest
parking must be redesigned to drain towards the proposed catch basin. This may require
additional retaining wall in this area. The slope from the parking area, drive and retaining walls
towards Kildare Road is too steep. This should not be greater than 2-1/2 to 1 slope.
The proposed street grade for Kildare Road is not identified, but it appears to be approximately
13%, whereas City code limits this grade to 8%. The desired street grade will need to be
identified and a variance granted for that grade. This street cannot be constructed without
exceeding the City's maximum slope allowed by code. The most westerly edge of the proposed
cul-de-sac shows grading taking place within the identified bluff area. The City's Shoreland
Jon Sutherland, Planning & Zoning
February 5, 1997
Page 3
Management Ordinance requires that roads meet the same setbacks as structures "when other
reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist." If no alternatives exist, then they may be
placed within the bluff and shore impact zone, but must be designed to minimize adverse
impacts, which has been done in this case.
The grading and erosion control plan must be approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD). The MCWD in the past, has not processed permits applications until the City
has granted preliminary approval at the Planning Commission level; thus any City approval
should be contingent upon MCWD approval.
The proposed grading and drainage for this project is based on the goals of eliminating long
individual driveways, with retaining walls, connecting directly to Kildare Road and diverting as
much runoff away from Kildare Road as possible. This has been accomplished with the private
driveway and private storm sewer system.
Utility_ Plan
Again; the storm sewer must be approved by the MCWD. The outlet of the storm sewer at the
toe of the bluff, will need something to dissipate the discharge such as a surge basin. In addition,
the proposed catch basin adjacent to the private drive should be designed to include a sump and
baffle system to remove sediment and floating debris. The size of the proposed sanitary sewer
and watermain are not indicated. They must be 8" P.V.C. for the sanitary and 6" DIP for the
water. All improvements located within Kildare Lane which will become public, must be
constructed to City standards. This includes the street construction.
Conclusions and Recommendations
We would recommend approval of the preliminary plat of Seton Bluff subject to the following
conditions:
Granting of variances to right-of-way width, improved street width and street grades as
follows:
a.) Right-of-way width- 15' variance.
b.) Cul-de-sac right-of-way - 10' variance.
c.) Improved street - 4' variance.
d.) Improved cul-de-sac radius - 5' variance.
e.) Street grade - variance from 8% to 13% slope.
Resubmit Preliminary Plat and Site Plan that match each other with the following revisions:
a.) Addition of proposed easements.
b.) Revised lot configuration to accommodate requirements for guest parking, private
driveway widths and parking in front of garages.
Jon Sutherland, Planning & Zoning
February 5, 1997
Page 4
o
c.) Concrete curb and gutter along south edge of parking and private drive.
Grading Plan:
a.) Increase amount of silt fence to encompass entire construction area.
b.) Approval of plans by MCWD.
c.) Revise proposed grades to drain private drive and parking to private storm sewer.
d.) Revise proposed grades to limit slopes to 2-1/2:1.
Utility Plan:
a.) Add surge basin at storm sewer outlet.
b.) Provide sump manhole with baffle.
c.) Public improvements to meet all City standards.
eSmain:\l 1542\suth24
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: February 4, 1997
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit (PDA), Variances and Preliminary Plat - Seton Bluff
APPLICANT: Fine Line Design Group, Inc. (Steve Behnke)
CASE NUMBER: 96-64
HKG FILE NUMBER: 96-5s
LOCATION: Lots 15 through 32, Block 11, Seton - Kildare Road
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R-lA)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: Fine Line Design Group is seeking approvals for a Planned Development Area
(PDA) on a 2.04 acre tract of land along a currently unimproved portion of Kildare Lane. Approval
of the plan will require action by the City to issue a conditional use permit for the PDA, grant a
number of variances as part of the PDA and approve the proposed preliminary plat.
The Seton Bluff site lies along the north side of Kildare Road (right-of-way). Historically, the area
was platted into a series of 18 individual lots. At some point in the past, some of the lots were
combined which resulted in one parcel containing the 12 easternmost lots. The six remaining lots
on the west are still separately platted parcels. The actual platted ownership involved in this case
also includes lots that lie below the OHW for Lake Minnetonka.
The center of the site contains a knoll with an elevation of 962 and the site drops off on all sides with
the western and northern boundaries of the property bordering Lake Minnetonka. Scattered tree
cover exists throughout the property and slopes along the western and northern portions of the
property qualify as bluffs under the Mound Zoning Code. The bluff line is delineated on the survey.
The physical conditions of the site and this area of Mound complicate development of the property.
In lieu of a traditional platted lot approach which would result in driveway cuts and retaining walls
for all of the lots in order to provide access to Kildare Road, the developers are proposing the project
as a Planned Development Area (PDA) which facilitates the establishment of common areas
including a common access drive serving all of the proposed homes. The common access drive also
allows much more control of storm water which is an issue detailed in both the developers narrative
and the City Engineer's report.
7300 Metro Boulevard, Suite 525, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439
(612) 835-9960 Fax (612) 835-3160
Seton Bluff Planning Report
February 4, 1997
Page 2
The development plan calls for the extension of Kildare Road from its present terminus at Kerry
Lane westward a total distance of approximately 250 feet. Construction of six homes will occur on
the eastern portion of the site, all served by a common driveway. The homes in this portion of the
site are on property owned by and to be built upon by Fine Line Design. The eastern six homes will
all have common elements such as building materials, roof pitch and other characteristics which will
make them a cohesive development without having the exact same facade treatment. The remaining
lots are owned by a second party and may or may not be built in conformance with the structures on
the eastern six lots. The two westernmost lots have direct access to the bubble of the proposed cul-
de-sac. Homeowner's association bylaws and covenants will apply to the eastern six lots.
COMMENTS: Implementation of the project will require approval of a conditional use permit,
variances and a prelim/nary plat. Additional approvals are being requested from the Park and Open
Space Commission pertaining to a multiple dock license and a Public Lands Permit for a proposed
stairway. A recommendation on these items will be forwarded to the City Council from the Park and
Open Space Commission. Items requiring Planning Commission action are addressed separately as
follows:
Planned Development Area
The Mound Zoning Code allows the establishment of a Planned Development Area by conditional
use permit as "a method by which parcels of land in the Residential Use Districts having unusual
building characteristics due to subsoil conditions, topographic conditions, elevation of water table,
unique environmental considerations, or because of the parcel's unusual shape or location in
relationship to lakes, trees or other natural resources requires more unique and controlled platting
techniques to protect and promote the quality of life in the City." The developer is seeking PDA
approval in order to establish the common access drive and the common green space areas that will
be maintained by a homeowner's association.
Variances
The provisions of the Mound Zoning Code require that variances associated with the PDA be listed
and approved as part of the plan. The proposed site plan includes the following variances:
Right-of-way width
Cul-de-sac right-of-way (radius)
Street paved width
Lots:
Lot 1 - Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
Required Proposed yariance
50' 35' 15'
50' 40' 10'
28' 24' 4'
6,000 sf 2,210 sf 3,790 sf
30' 10' 20'
3' 10' 7'
Lot 2 - Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
6,000 sf 2,312 sf 3,688
22' 30' 8'
3' 10' 7'
sf
Seton Bluff Planning Report
February 4, 1997
Page 3
Lots:
Lot 3 -
Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
Required
6,000 sf
30'
10'
Proposed
2,312 sf
22'
3'
Variance
3,688 sf
8'
7'
Lot 4 -
Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
6,000
30'
10'
sf
2,312
10'
3'
sf
3,688
20'
7'
sf
Lot 5 -
Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
6,000
30'
10'
sf
2,210
11'
3'
sf
3,790
19'
7'
sf
Lot 6 -
Area
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setbacks
6,000
30'
10'
sf
2,040
11'
3'
sf
3,960
19'
7'
sf
Lot 7 - Association Common Property
Lot 8 -
Area 6,000 sf 4,620 sf 1,380
Bluff Setback 30' 10' 20'
Side Yard Setbacks 10' 6' 4'
Front Yard Setback 20' 14' 6'
sf
Lot 9 -
Bluff Setback
Side Yard Setback (east)
Front Yard Setback
30' 10' 20'
10' 6' 14'
20' 16' 4'
Impervious Cover
30% 36.7% 6.7%
Three variances pertain to the public street that will serve the property. In addition to the right-of-
way that totals 35 feet in width, the plan calls for the creation of an additional 5 foot wide street
easement bringing the total public land width to 40 feet. Specific details about the street related
variances can be found in the City Engineer's report.
The lot size variances that are required relate to the type of development proposed. Because a
significant amount of the site will be platted as an outlot to be maintained by the homeowner's
association, actual platted lot sizes are under the minimum standard for traditional R-lA single
family detached development. The total land area of the project lying above the flood elevation of
931.0 is 60,364 square feet. If the common areas were removed and the proposed lots were evenly
split among the total site area, lot sizes would be 7,545 square feet.
I{ II
Seton Bluff Planning Report
February 4, 1997
Page 4
According to calculations submitted by the applicant, impervious cover for the project totals 36.7%.
The additional impervious cover is largely due to the expansive common driveway and guest parking
area. Developing the property with traditional driveways would reduce the amount of impervious
cover, however, it would likely complicate storm water drainage problems in the area.
The setback variances that are shown in the chart reflect the distance between lot lines. This
situation does not represent the true structural setback situation. The Uniform Building Code (UBC)
requires that buildings be placed 3 feet from the side and rear lot lines unless the construction is fire
rated. The developer has stated that it is his intent to observe the additional 3 foot setback from the
side and front property lines resulting in 12 feet of separation between the actual housing units. A
6 foot setback (12 feet total) conforms to the lot of record setback for the R-lA zone but not the 10
foot setback required by the non-lot of record provisions.
Preliminary Plat
The preliminary plat shows an additional 5 feet of right-of-way along Kildare Road and land area
to accommodate the cul-de-sac bubble. Lots 1 through 6 are of a reduced size as has been noted
herein. Lot 9 conforms to the minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet. The dimensions
of the preliminary plat and site plan do not precisely match. The setbacks identified in this report
were measured from the Preliminary Plat which is the legal instrument establishing the lot areas.
Density
PDA projects in Mound are required to comply with the density restrictions found in Section
350:460 of the Code of Ordinances. Since Seton Bluff is in the shoreland area, the density
limitations for shoreland PDA's also apply. Density in a PDA is established by the underlying lot
size for the applicable residential district. The PDA provisions specifically delete land used for
streets and utilities from the gross density calculation. In the case of Seton Bluff, the amount of land
above the flood plain elevation totals 60,364 square feet. This site area will accommodate 10 units
under the PDA density provisions.
Since Seton Bluff is in the shoreland area, it needs to be evaluated consistent with the shoreland
density regulations found in Section 350:1200 of the Code of Ordinances. Shoreland standards
establish a series of tiers within which units are allowed based on a standard of 10,000 square feet.
The tiers are established based on the location of the 929.4 contour. In the case of Seton Bluff, all
of the property is in the first tier. The shoreland ordinance does allow density bonuses, however, the
proposed site plan does not qualify because the setbacks from the ordinary high water contour do not
equal a minimum of 125% of the required 50 foot setback.
The proposed density exceeds the maximum density allowed under the shoreland ordinance.
Application of the shoreland standards results in a maximum of 6 units in lieu of the 8 units that are
proposed. Therefore, a variance for the two units that exceed the density standard will need to be
granted if the project is to proceed as planned.
Seton Bluff Planning Report
February 4, 1997
Page 5
Tree Preservation
Section 350:725 of the Mound Zoning Code contains standards regarding tree preservation. The
code states, "It is the intent of the City of Mound to preserve wooded areas throughout the City and
with respect to future site development, to retain, as far as practicable, substantial existing tree
cover." Seton Bluff contains scattered tree cover. Construction of the access drive and units will
necessitate removal of most of the vegetation in the front portion of the site. Trees located within
the bluff area will remain undisturbed. The amount of tree loss due to the Seton Bluff development
proposal is, in all likelihood, probably equal to the amount of tree removal that would be necessary
to construct homes with individual driveways on to Kildare Road.
Landscaping
A landscaping plan was included as part of the site development plans. The landscaping plan calls
for the installation of trees and shrubs along the Kildare Road frontage. The plan, however, only
calls for four overstory, hardwood trees which is insufficient considering the total amount of tree loss
that will occur due to construction. As a minimum, additional trees could be planted in the lawn
areas north of the access drive on Lot 7, outside of the lots accommodating the individual units.
Traffic
Traffic generated by the proposed development will be generated at the same rate as the existing
households in the vicinity since the proposed development and all of the development in the area
consists of detached single family homes. The eight new residences will each generate
approximately 10 trips per day based on standards published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers and the Urban Land Institute.
Wetlands
According to the City's wetlands map, the wetland elevation for the property in question is 929.5
feet. The development plan does not identify any construction in the wetland area and all of the units
comply with the Watershed District's 35 foot setback requirement.
RECOMMENDATION: The developers of Seton Bluff have designed a project that complies with
most of the lot of record setback provisions of the Mound Zoning Code. The project, however, does
not meet the non-lot of record provisions which apply in this case since 12 of the lots were combined
in the past. In any Planned Development Area project (or Planned Unit Development (PUD) as it
is known in most cities), trade-offs are involved. In this case, the major trade-off appears to be
higher density than what is allowed by the shoreland ordinance and setback variances for a plan that
handles storm drainage from the site in a more beneficial manner. The policy question that needs
to be answered by the Planning Commission and City Council is whether or not this trade-off is
equitable. After its deliberations, if the Planning Commission feels that it is equitable, the
development could be approved with appropriate conditions. Alternatives to that approach include
approval with modifications or denial.
Seton Bluff Planning Report
February 4, 1997
Page 5
If the Planning Commission feels that the plan is appropriate and consistent with the Mound's
provisions for Planned Development Areas, the following conditions are suggested:
1. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Watershed District.
2. The applicant shall be responsible for park dedication requirements consistent with Section
330:120 of the Mound Code of Ordinances.
3. The landscaping plan shall be modified to add deciduous overstory trees in the lawn islands
along the north side of the access drive. Tree and shrub sizes shall be as shown on the Landscape
Plan dated 12/23/96.
4. Covenants and association bylaws shall be submitted for review and approval by the City
Attorney.
5. Escrow accounts shall be established as required by City Code and shall at all times, maintain
a positive fund balance.
6. Units on Lots 1 through 6 shall observe a 3 foot setback from the front and side yard lot lines for
all construction.
7. Issues pertaining to proposed docks shall be addressed by the Mound Park and Open Space
Commission and City Council.
8. The recommendations and conditions found in the Engineers Report are incorporated herein.
January27, 1997
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Mr. Steven Behnke
Fine Line Design group, inc.
P.O. Box 1611
Burnsville, MN 55337
SUBJECT: SETON BLUFF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION
Dear Mr. Behnke:
On January 23, 1997 we received from you a preliminary plat drawing for the proposed Seton
Bluff development. Your application is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission on
February 10, 1997 and by the City Council on March 11, 1997. In reviewing your application,
I have found a few items which yet need to be addressed.
1. An 8-1/2" x 11" copy of the preliminary plat must be submitted.
2. The Conditional Use Permit application fee of $200.00 must be paid.
The Conditional Use Permit application and Preliminary Plat application forms must be
signed by all owners.
Your drawings are being forwarded to our Planner and Engineer for further review. This letter
has been written as I have been unsuccessful reaching you by phone. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
]ke~spectf~lly,
Pei~gy James
Planning & Inspections Secretary
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
Mark Koegler, City Planner
John Cameron, City Engineer
Brenshell Homes, 4839 Cumberland Road, Mound, MN 55364
printed on recycled paper
Faxed to Koegler
CITY OF MOUND
10-21-96
5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 21, 1996
Park and Open Space Comm}ssion-h (meeting of
Jim Fackler, Parks D~rector x~
Seton Bluff - Docks and ParkHJ-edication
11-14-96)
From reviewing the site plan for the proposed planned development area (PDA) named Seton Bluff, I
have the following observations:
DOCKS
Only six homes sites, those numbers 1 thru 6, would be given first priority for dock license,
issuance, see City Code Section 437:05, Subd. 7, a. "First Priority. An abutting owner...
The two sites denoted as 'A' and 'B' would be recognized as residents owning private lakeshore
and would be addressed under City Code Section 437:05, Subd. 7, aa. "Residents owning private
lakeshore..."
3. A Public Lands Permit will be required for the portion of the proposed stairway located between
home sites//4 and //5 which extend onto the City controlled unimproved street right-of-way,
Longford Road.
4. The dock location running along the unimproved street right-of-way, Long Ford Road, has to
be recognized on the Dock Location Map and assigned a Shoreline Type.
An application must be made to the DNR for the location of this proposed dock site because it exceeds
four slips and extends through protected waters.
The lineal footage of this shoreline will also need to be added to the Dock Location Map for purposes
of calculating the number of boat storage units BSU's allowed by the LMCD for our Multiple Dock
License.
PARK DEDICATION
As there is no land proposed to be dedicated to the City for park purposes, a cash contribution of not
less than ten percent (10%) of the total fair market value of the land being divided will need to be
collected prior to filing the final plat, according to City Code Section 330:120.
JF:pj
prmted o. tocycled paper
Application for
M&IOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND:
PRELIMINARY PLAT,FINAL~~A
or PLANNED DEVELOPM'FNT
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 64
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
I~T I ~, tgi~
-~1.;/SO, oD
City Council Date: ~ ~ }~tch Pla. Review: ~
~ ~ l~inary Plat: $150.00
3~ Final Plat: $100. O0
~Escrow Deposit: $1,000.00
dity Planner ~ ~% ~ C~ ~ ~g Deficient Unit Charges?
Public Works ,~ ~ ~ ~elin~ent Taxes?
City Engineer ~t ] ~ ~ ~
........... ~ ...... 'l.. ~ ................................................. i ............
Please type or print the following info~ation:
INFORMATION
LEGAL
ZONING
DISTRICT Circle: R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
APPLICANT The applican, is: __owner ~other:l,.~~[O
1i' other than Address ~0~
· ,,,,~.n., VWVZ~,~n ~~ ~u~ ~ ~53C~ '
Phone(H) (W~
, rev, 12/8/94
Major Subdivision Application
Page 2
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in
the vicinity, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking,
and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts.
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing
reasonable guarantees for the completion of the. propps~d_deyelo, pment~ Estimated
Development Cost of the Project: $ ~,~OO ~.~t~ ~~r~Z~
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS:
Number of Structures: ~
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit:
Number of Dwelling Units Per Structure: I
sq. ft. Total Lot Area: ~/ 87D sq- ft.
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or
other zoning procedure for this property? ~yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of
application, action taken, resolution numbe~(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
This applicatio_q~n ~b~signed by all owners of the subject property,
o~r an expl.~na~io~ g~e~why this is not the case.
~plicant' s Signature Date
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
September 17, 1996
Mr. Steven Behnke
Fine Line Design Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 1611
Burnsville, MN 55337
Dear Mr. Behnke:
On July 30, 1996, you submitted an application for approval of variances for the
construction of Kildare Road in the City of Mound. The variances requested included
the following:
2.
3.
4.
Street grade - 15 % in lieu of the maximum 8 %
Cul-de-sac right-of-way size - 40' radius in lieu of required 50' radius
Cul-de-sac paved area - 35' radius in lieu of 45' radius
Street width - 24' in lieu of 28'
When this case was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting on August 12, 1996,
it was tabled pending resolution of a number of matters which relate to the development
of the adjacent lots that the street will serve. It is my understanding at this time that you
are considering various development options for the property including application of a
subdivision waiver and possible processing under Mound's Planned Development
Ordinance (PDA).
Under Minnesota Statutes, the City of Mound has 60 days to act on all variance requests.
The statutes also allow for an extension of the review time when warranted by
extenuating circumstances. This letter is to inform you that Mound is hereby extending
the review time for these variances for an additional 60 days to allow for additional
review by both the City and yourself of the complex issues that surround this case.
Those issues generally include ownership of the land necessary for the roadway (cul-de-
sac) easement, property variances, and platting/subdivision requirements.
printed on recycled paper
Fine Line Design Group, Inc.
September 17, 1996
Page 2
In order for the City to act on the requested street variances no later than November 30,
1996, you will need to determine how you intend to proceed with the project and file the
appropriate applications. We will be glad to provide any further assistance that you may
need in answering any questions pertaining to this project.
~Jon Suthe~land,
Building Official
JS:pj
Enclosures
Gray Freshwater Center
Hwys. 15 & 19, Navarre
Mail:
2500 Shadywood Road
Excelsior, MN 55331-9578
Phone: (612) 471-0590
Fax: (612) 471-0682
Emaii:
admin@mnwatershed.org
Web Site:
www.mnwatershed,org
Board of Managers:
~ E. Thomas
President
Pamela G. Blixt
Vice President
Monica Gross
Secretary
Thomas W. LaBounty
Treasurer
C Woodrow Love
Thomas Maple Jr.
Malcolm Reid
District Office:
Eugene R. Strommen
District Director
Suzanne M. Weedman
Asst District Director
Pnnted on recycled 0aper containing
a' ,eas! 30% post consumer waste
Minnehaha Creek
Watershed
District
RECEIVED
SEP O 5 1.99
MOUND PLANNING & INS '
September 3, 1996
Dear Resident,
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has received permit application 96-180
from Brenshell Homes for the following project:
PROJECT:
The project is for a stormwater management
plan, including a pond and storm sewer
outfalls for six single family homes.
PROJECT LOCATION:
Mound- Kildare Road
Lots 14 - 20, 27 - 32 Block I1
PERMIT APPLIED FOR:
S[ormwater Management
Notice of this project has been [nailed to residents who reside within 600' of the
proposed project. Preliminary approval must be obtained from the City of Mound
prior to approval by the watershed district board of managers. This permit
application is tentatively scheduled for the September 12, 1996, Board Meeting.
If you plan to attend this meeting, please contact the MCWD at 471-0590 to
verily that the permit application is on the agenda fo[' the scheduled meeting date.
Thank you.
COPIED ON 9-5-96:
MARK KOEGLER
JOHN CAMERON
JON SUTHERLAND
Cq¢.t t
155 ',
165
82
66 /
401 ,50 I 50
(~8)
SFOR
RD
'2
RD ~
'-s":" CAP, LOW
/
(62} "t'."
2O4.9
~ I~o. 55 (35)
s z (36)
~ s (57)
13 t. 86
4 ('38)
107.5
,.,c, VAC 5-4-64 AI.i[:
(47) s%.~ ,,~<.,
Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Mound Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planner
DATE: August 5, 1996
SUBJECT: Variance Request
APPLICANT: Fine Line Design (Norm Berglund - Owner)
CASE NUMBER: 96-46
HKG FILE NUMBER: 96-5s
LOCATION: Kildare Road (Lots 15 - 32, Seton)
EXISTING ZONING: Single Family Residential (R- IA)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking variance approval to construct a street to serve a series
of existing lots of record. The construction of the street and the development of these lots is an issue
that has appeared before the Planning Commission and City Council on a number of occasions.
Although the development of the lots is not the issue in this case, it may be helpful to present a brief
overview of the project.
Fine Line Design has been working for a number of months to develop 7 lots of record along an
unimproved portion of Kildare Road. The project also involves the development of an additional lot
that is owned by another party. The project will be built in a somewhat unconventional manner
because of topography and drainage concerns. The housing units, all of which are detached single
family homes, will be served by a common driveway that will parallel Kildare Road. The reason for
this unique access is twofold, first, it will allow the collection and treatment of storm water drainage
on the site rather than allowing the water to flow into Kildare Road. This portion of Kildare Road
does not have storm sewers and drainage from the development could cause problems to the east.
The second reason that the lots will not be accessed from Kildare Road is because of the developer's
desire to preserve existing tree cover. Driveways accessing Kildare Road would require more grading
and tree removal than the proposed access.
7300 Metro Boulevard, Suite 525, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439
(612) 835-9960 Fax (612) 835-3160
Planning Report - Fine Line Design - Kildare Road Variances
August 5, 1996
Page 2
As a part of the review that this project has already undergone, staff including the City Attorney and
City Engineer has looked closely at a variety of issues. There are still a number of minor issues that
need to be addressed by the developer in order to ensure that the access drive is unobstructed and it
has provisions for a vehicle to turn around on the eastern end. These issues can and will be addressed
by staff as part of the review of the homeowners association and easement documents. The Planning
Commission and City Council do, however, need to take formal action on a number of variances that
are necessary in order for the project to proceed.
Variances
Based on the proposed plan, the following variances need to be approved:
· Lot 19 - Impervious cover variance of approximately 84 square feet
· Lot 21 - Impervious cover variance of approximately 244 square feet
· Kildare Road right-of-way - 30 feet in lieu of required 50 feet
· Kildare Road paved surface - 24 feet in lieu of required 28 feet
· Kildare Road cul-de-sac bubble right-of-way - 80 feet in lieu of required 100 feet
· Kildare Road cul-de-sac bubble paved surface - 70 feet in lieu of required 80 feet
All of the requested variances are attributable to existing topography in the area coupled with the
existing development pattern. Therefore, staff feels that all of the variances are justified and that the
request meets the City's criteria for granting variances.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
the variances noted above to allow development of the property subject to the following conditions:
Information including but not necessarily limited to the following shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for review and approval:
- Final grading, drainage, and erosion control plan
- Final street plan (plan and profile)
- Final utility plan (plan and profile)
- All required project details
- Project specifications
Copies of all agency approvals such as Health Department, PCA, etc.
2. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans shall be approved by the Watershed District.
Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits for the housing units, the developer shall
submit a copy of all homeowner's association and easement documents to staff for review and
approval.
Planning Report - Fine Line Design - Kildare Road Variances
August 5, 1996
Page 3
4. The site plan shall be modified to accommodate a turn-around at the eastern end of the private
driveway.
5. Prior to consideration of this request by the City Council, the developer shall submit copies of
impervious cover calculation for all lots in the development.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
January 27, 1997
Mr. Steven Behnke
Fine Line Design group, inc.
P.O. Box 1611
Burnsville, MN 55337
SUBJECT: SETON BLUFF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION
Dear Mr. Behnke:
On January 23, 1997 we received from you a preliminary plat drawing for the proposed Seton
Bluff development. Your application is scheduled to be ,1Fard by the Planning Commission on
February 10, 1997 and by the City Council on MarchJA'?1997. In reviewing your application,
I have found a few items which yet need to be addressed.
1. An 8-1/2" x 11" copy of the preliminary plat must be submitted.
The Conditional Use Permit application fee of $200.00 must be paid.
The Conditional Use Permit application and Preliminary Plat application forms must be
signed by all owners.
Your drawings are being forwarded to our Planner and Engineer for further review. This letter
has been written as I have been unsuccessful reaching you by phone. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
/R~/pectfully,
~y James
Planning & Inspections Secretary
CC:
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
Mark Koegler, City Planner
John Cameron, City Engineer
Brenshell Homes, 4839 Cumberland Road, Mound, MN 55364
prmted on recycled paper
(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY)
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
, JUL 3 0 ,_-
i..AplSliC,~tion Fee: _~$50.00//
Planning Commission Date:
City Council Date:
Distribution:
t-/-,2~_--r:::/(o City Planner ,,
" City Engineer ~,
'/ Public Works
Case No. q~-4¢
DNR
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
LEGAL
DESC.
PROPERTY
OWNER
APPLICANT
(IF OTHER
THAN
OWNER)
Address
Subdivision
PID#
ZONING DISTRICT R-1 ~-IA)
Address
Phone (H) ~r-"'/
Plat #
R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
Address
Phone (H)
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning
procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ( ) no. ff yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution
number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.):
Variance Application, P. 2 Case No.
o
Do the existing structures comply .w)th all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning
district in which it is located? Yes j~No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason
for variance request, i.e. setback, 'lot area, etc.):
SETBACKS:
Front Yard: (NSEW)
Side Yard: ( N S E W )
Side Yard: ( N S E W )
Rear Yard: ( N S E W )
Lakeside: ( N S E W )
: (NSEW)
Street Frontage:
Lot Size:
Hardcover:
Does the prese~n,~
located? Yes ~
REQUIRED
REQUESTED
(or existing)
VARIANCE
ft. ff. ff.
ff. ff. ft.
ft. ff. ft.
ft. ff. ft.
ff. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
sq ft sq ft sq ft
sq ft sq ft sq ft
use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is
No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use:
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the
uses permitted in that zoning district?
Please describe:
) too narrow ~..topography
) too small '( ) drainage
) too shallow ( ) shape
( ) soil
( ) existing situation
( ) other: specify
(Rev. 12/8/95)
Variance Application, P. 3
Case No.
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land
after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No]~(~. If yes, explain:
Wasx. ~ hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (),
No/~2 If yes, explain:
8. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described
in this petition? Yes ~, No (). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
9. Comments:
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be
submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this
application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting,
maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law.
Owner's Signature .~"~
12/8/95)
Pllnnin~ end D~.~n
14maegemoat
55337-~ (612)890-4267 - Office/Fax (612)670-7912 - Mobile
July 30, 1996
Addendum to Variance Application
1.)
This Parcel has been seen at Parks Commission, Planning Commission and City
Council for other many issues including: Docks (this issue is pending)
Design and Layout of Kildare Road. (This application is an extension of this action)
2.)
This proposal include the extension and construction of Kildare Road west of Kerry Lane.
The Project includes constructing a 24' Bituminous Street with Curb and Gutter, a 70'
Cul-de-sac ending Kildare Road and Site preparation for the construction of 6 Residences
along the new road frontage.
3.) See Application
4.) See Application
5.)
See also Application,
The site presented, has a dominant ridge running the length of the property. This ridge
undulates from 935.3' to 962+'. On the Lake side the grade returns to the 929.4
OHWL of Lake Minnetonka.
6.) See Application
7.) See Application
8.) See Application
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
CASE NO.
LOCATION:
ZONING:
Planning Commission Agenda of May 12, 1997
Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~/~/7 '
Variance Request Update
Gary Nachreiner
97-16
6056 Cherrywood Road
Part of Lots 6 & 7, Block 9, The Highlands, PID 23-117-24 34 0088
R-1 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND: This case was refurred back to the planning commission by the Council at their
meeting on April 22, 1997. The applicant has identified two other homes in the area that he feels are
similar to his situation. The information contained in the city files is included in your packet and staff
comments are listed below.
1) 5952 Idlewood This property received a variance by resolution//94-75 that allows a reduced front
yard setback in order to allow construction of a new home. Special conditions were found with this
property including a limited buildable footprint due to topography and the wetlands. Also, there is a
12 foot wide boulevard that resulted in a 39 foot setback to the dwelling from the street. The applicant
had also gone through more than one house design in order to create one that would work and minimize
the encroachment.
2) 2940 Oaklawn When this property was developed in 1996, the builder placed the home in a
conforming location and utilized the line up provision in our zoning code section 350:440 Subd. 6.
Please note the survey shows a proposed house and the new house was set back more that what is shown
on the survey.
printed on recycled paper
Staff Report
Nachreiner
May 12, 1997
Page 2
COMMENT: The comparisons made by the applicant had specific circumstances that were reasonable
and in the case of the variance it was the minimum in order to alleviate the hardship. Although the
comparisons are interesting, each case for a variance must be based on its own merits, be a minimum
situation, and one that will allow reasonable use of the property. The applicant's proposal does not
represent the minimum sized garage. If the depth were reduced somewhat, the situation would be closer
to meeting the minimum situation as outlined in the ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation remains the same, consistant with the
Planning Commissions recommendation for denial of the applicants request for a 28' garage, which he
then modified to a 26', and recommend approval of a variance to allow a 24 foot deep garage addition.
There appears to be some practical difficulty and limiting topography in this case, a 24' deep garage
would be more representative of the proposal does not represent the minimal situation in order to
alleviate the hardship.
JS :Is
The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on Tuesday,
May 13, 1997.
Minutes - Mou~l City Council - April 22, 1997
MINUTES REGULAR MOUND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 1997.
1.7
CASE g97-16: GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD, LOTS 6 &
7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, PID #23-117-24 34 0088, VARIANCE FOR
GARAGE ADDITION.
The applicant, Gary Nachreiner, was present and explained his request. He further stated that
8 to 10 of the houses on Idlewood and Oaklawn that have been built in the last two years are
30 to 37 feet away from the road. He requested an 8 foot variance and the Planning
Commission recommended a 4 foot variance. He showed pictures of the property. He
explained that the topography of the lot is the cause of this hardship. He is now requesting a
6 foot variance for a 26 foot deep garage instead of the 24 foot that was recommended by the
Planning Commission.
The Council explained that the Planning Commission is trying to protect the integrity of the
Zoning Ordinance by granting the minimum variance.
The applicant explained that he cannot step the garage back in, as the Planning Commission
suggested, because he has all his utilities coming in on one side of the house and the walk-out
is on the other side. The Council asked if the Planning Commission was aware of the location
of all the utilities. The applicant stated no.
The Building Official arrived. He explained that the Planning Commission had asked that the
applicant work with the Building Official and try to reconfigure the proposed garage. He further
stated that if the Council was leaning toward granting the 26 foot depth for the garage, the fact
that there is additional boulevard between the property line and the curb has been used in other
variance cases, which reduces the impact to the road. The Planning Commission recommended
denial of the request for a 28' deep garage and did not agree with the compromise that the
applicant proposed at 26' deep. Staff recommended a 24' deep garage.
The Council suggested that this go back to the Planning Commission to determine if there is
sufficient practical difficulty based on the new information about the utilities and the questions
about the setbacks of some other properties.
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Hanus to refer this item back to the
Planning Conmfission, at no further charge to the applicant based upon the new
information that has been presented tonight, ie. location of the utilities; additional
parcels that are not 35 feet; and what impact it would have based upon the distance
the applicant is from the curb. This will go to the Planning Commission on May
12th and could come before the City Council on May 13. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
May 24, 1994
RESOLUTION//94-75
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A 3 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DWELLING AT
5952 IDLEWOOD ROAD
LOTS 22, 23, 24, AND E. 10' OF 25, BLOCK 1,
THE HIGHLANDS, PID//23-117-24 42 0105
P&Z CASE//94-29
WHEREAS, the owner, Donald H. Fulton, has applied for a 3 foot front yard
setback variance in order to construct a new dwelling, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1 Single Family
Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a lot area of 10,000 square
feet, a 30 foot front yard setback, I0 foot side yard setbacks, and a 15 foot rear yard setback,
and;
WHEREAS, the buildable footprint on this parcel is limited by the wetlands at
the rear. Causing greater difficulty is the topography that slopes dramatically towards the
wetland. The applicant has modified their house plans to some extent and is making an effort
to reduce the impact to the wetland by maintaining the 15 foot plus setback to the ordinary high
water, and;
WHEREAS, the a minimum encroachment to the front is reasonable and balanced
by the improved setback and impact to the wetland, and;
WHEREAS, there is a boulevard that is approximately 12 feet in width between
the front property line and the curb, reducing the visual impact, with a 39' setback to the street,
and;
WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and lot coverage are conforming, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously
recommended approval, with the following findings:
Special conditions exist with this property due to topography and the wetlands that limit
the buildable footprint.
e
The applicant's proposal is sensitive to the wetlands with a 15 foot setback, and this
causes a minor encroachment in the front yard.
The minor encroachment into the front yard is minimized by the approximate 12 foot
wide boulevard between the property line and the curb, this results in a total distance of
39 feet from the front line of the house to the curb.
148
May 24, 1994
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby grant a 3 foot front yard setback variance to allow construction of
a new dwelling with a 15 foot setback to the wetland, ordinary high water, and
conforming side yard setbacks.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420,
Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the
use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and
restrictions of Section 350:420.
It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the
authorization of the following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to afford
the owners reasonable use of their land:
Construction of a new dwelling as shown on the survey with a
revision date of 4-21-94.
4. This variance is granted for the following legally described property:
Lots 22, 23, 24 and the east 10.00 feet of Lot 25, Block 1, "The
Highlands"
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in
Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin
County and paying all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City
Clerk.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Ahrens, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith.
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none.
Attest: City Clerk
149
I ~9. 00
GI'~NEILAI. ZONING INI"(H<.~I:VI'ION SIII£ET
Existing Lot Width I~O ! ~/"
SETBACKS REQUIRED:
FRONT: N S E W
N S~W IO '
, Oepth~
EXISTING i~/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS:
FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
PRINCIPAL BUILDING~
R£AR: N 5 E W
L, AIL~SHOR~:
FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
REAR: N S E W
LAX~SNORE:
ACCESSORY BUILDING
4' 9[ 6'
~' 9~ §'
50' (meaeured from O.H.W.)
FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W
REAR: N S E W
LAKESHOKE:
0
0
0
27, s ---.;
CITY OF MOUND - ZONING INFORMATION SHEET
SURVEY ON FILE?/~S~ NO
LOT OF RECORD? YES / NO
ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH:
'Rx ~o~s~ ~,soo/o
-'R'Yx----'~,ooo/40 B2 20,000/60
R2 6,000/40 B~ ~o,ooo/6o
R2 ~4,000/80
R3 SEE ORD. I1 30,000/100
EXISTING LOT SIZE: ·
LOT WIDTI-h
EXISTING/PROPOSED
LOT DEPTH:
REQUIRED VARIANCE
YARD ] DIRECTION
itOUSE .........
FRONT
FRONT
SIDE N S E W
SIDE N S E W
?.EAR N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
15'
LAKE N S E W 50'
TOP OF BLUFF 10' OR 30'
GARAGE, SilED ..... DETACHED BUILDINGS
FRONT
N S E W
FRONT N S E W
SIDE N S E W 4' OR6'
SIDE N S E W 4'OR6'
REAR N S E W 4'
LAKE N S E W 50'
TOP OF BLUFF
10' OR 30'
IIARDCOVER
CONFORMING? YES / NO
30% OR 40%
IBy: ]DATED:
This Zoning Information Shcct only sumlnarizes a portion of thc rcquiremcnl$ outlincd in thc City of Mound Zoning Ordinance. For further information, contact Ibc City of Mound
Planning Department at 472-0600.
-' ' ;-,, '21 ~'
',, ?, ~ ',. , ,~,~ ,,.,
~,.
IiATi:-L;':OOD LA ~ %',
"~ o
Frl
DRAFT--
MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 12, 1997
EASE 97-16: VARIANCE FOR GARAGE ADDITION
GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD
P/LOT 6 & 7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, 23-117-24 34 0088
Building Official Jon Sutherland stated the case had been referred back to the Planning
Commission by the Council at their April 22, 1997 meeting. The applicant has identified two
other homes in the area that he thought were similar to his situation.
The first property is 5952 Idlewood, where a variance was received to allow a reduced front
yard setback in order to allow construction of a new home. Special conditions were found for
this case which included a limited buildable footprint due to topography, wetlands and a 12 foot
wide boulevard that resulted in a 39 foot setback to the dwelling.
The second comparison is 2940 Oaklawn that was developed in 1996. The builder utilized the
line up provision in our zoning code (Section 350:440, Subd. 6) and placed the home in a
conforming location. The Building Official commented that the applicant had specific
circumstances that were reasonable in this case and the variance is the minimum in order to
alleviate the hardship.
The applicant's proposal for a 26-28' garage does not represent the minimum sized garage. If
the depth were reduced to 24', it would be closer to meeting the minimum situation as outlined
in the ordinance.
Staff recommendation remains the same which is consistent with the Planning Commission's
recommendation for denial of the applicants request for a 28' garage (which he has verbally
modified to 26'). Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow a 24' deep garage addition
as there appears to be some practical difficulty and limiting topography.
Location of the utilities was discussed. It was asked of the applicant what would be gained by
moving the meters back four feet. The applicant stated he would not gain much, due to the need
for so much insulation in both the old and new portion. Commissioner Mueller stated he
understood the applicant wanted the depth of the garage as deep as possible to store boat on a
trailer. The applicant stated that the purpose was for resale.
Discussion included locating the garage so that it is further back and relocation of utilities. The
Commission consensus was to deny the applicant's request and recommend a 24' deep garage
resulting in only a 4' variance.
MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Weiland, to recommend denial of the 28'
x 36' garage, and recommend a 24' x 36' garage resulting in only a 4'
variance. This is the same recommendation they gave previously. The
information provided regarding other cases, no garage had a greater than 24'
depth, each individual property is looked at to see the hardship requirements
with regards to the minimum sized variance. Giving a variance for a 24'
garage is the minimum and is very standard.
Commissioner Michael stated he did not agree, as it is not what the applicant requested. It was
also stated that the existing structure is non-conforming. Commissioner Michael suggested he
bring his information with him to the Council meeting on Tuesday, May 13, 1997.
MOTION carried 6-1, Michael voting nay.
Commissioner Mueller stated findings of facts. Whatever the applicant has stated at the Council
meeting where there were 10-12 properties that were given variances for construction in the
same neighborhood and there were two the applicant brought forward. There is a boulevard in
front of the street which minimizes the 4' variance request. Otherwise, a 22' garage is typically
what we have done in the past. A 24' garage is also one that we have done in the past. We
have never gone over that for an existing structure as he can remember. It appears the applicant
is not willing to spend the extra monies involved in relocating utility services to facilitate a
deeper garage in a portion of the lot that would be in a conforming location.
Proposed Nachreiner Resolution
May 13, 1997
RESOLUTION//97-
RESOLUTION TO DENY A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ADDITION
AT 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD
PART OF LOTS 6 & 7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, 23-117-24 34 0088
P&Z CASE #97-16
WHEREAS, the owner, Gary Nachreiner, has applied for a front yard setback variance
of 8 feet in order to construct a nonconforming 36' x 28' two story garage addition, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has verbally agreed to a 36' x 26' two story garage, with a
6 foot setback, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1 Single Family Residential
Zoning District which according to City Code requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square
feet, a 30 foot front yard setback, 10 foot side yard setbacks, and a 15 foot rear yard setback,
and;
WHEREAS, currently the property is conforming in all aspects and there is no garage
on the site. The proposed 28 foot depth garage addition is setback 22 feet from the front
property line where a 30 foot setback is required, resulting in a variance request of 8 (or 6 feet,
for a 26' garage) and;
WHEREAS, there is a fairly steep hill on the west side and the general topography of
the site favors the location as proposed. Due to the topography of this site it would be difficult
to place a detached garage that would be conforming to setbacks, and;
WHEREAS, the City has, in past variance cases, supported the construction of garages
to provide for storage and eliminate clutter, however, any variance or encroachment must be
minimal and meet the criteria set forth in Zoning Code Section 350:530. The proposed garage
is rather large in this case, and if the depth were reduced to 24' resulting in a 4' variance, the
situation would be closer to meeting the minimum situation as outlined in the ordinance, and;
WHEREAS, there is approximately 13 feet of boulevard between the curb and the
property line, so with a 28 foot deep garage, the addition would still be about 35' from the curb,
and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request twice and determined
that although there appears to be some practical difficulty and limiting topography in this case,
the applicant's proposal of a 28 foot deep garager~does not represent the minimal situation in
order to alleviate the hardship. T-~ ~~j ~- /
Proposed Nachreiner Resolution
May 13, 1997
W~~ Planning Commission has rec~.ommemteff ap royal of a 4
in order to allow constm~im~oLa~24 f~'_'""~"' P foot variance
~~,~aeep garage addition, with
a 24 fo~e~,g~ ~t~u_m!!o.n: v the findings that although
a minimal situation and would afford
the owner r.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby deny the applicant's original request for an 8 foot front yard
setback variance in order to allow construction of a nonconforming 36' x 28' two story
garage addition located 22 feet from the front property line, and also, the modified
request for a 26' depth garage.
The City Council denys this request with the following findings of fact as recommenced
by the Planning Commission:
A. Since the City Council meeting of April 22, 1997, the applicant identified two
other homes in the area that he thought were similar to his situation. Staff reviewed these cases
and special conditions were found for each case that were reasonable and consistent with the
City's approval.
B. There is a boulevard between the property line and the street which does
minimize the variance request.
C. Variances to allow a 22' to 24' garages have been issued in the past with specific
findings of hardship or practical difficulty, and this size has been determined to be consistent
with a minimally sized garage.
D. It appears the applicant is not willing to spend the extra monies involved in
relocating utility services to facilitate a deeper garage in a portion of the lot that would be in a
conforming location.
This variance is denied for the following legally described property:
The Southeasterly 112.5 feet of Lot 7; The Southeasterly 112.5
feet of Lot 6, except that part of the Northeasterly 10 feet of said
Lot lying Northwesterly of a line drawn at fight angles to the
Northeasterly line at a point distant 120 feet Southeasterly from the
Northeasterly corner of said Lot 6; all in Block 9, "The
Highlands", according to the recorded plat thereof.
RESOLUTION//97-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE
TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ADDITION
AT 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD
PART OF LOTS 6 & 7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, 23-117-24 34 0088
P&Z CASE/~97-16
WHEREAS, the owner, Gary Nachreiner, has applied for a front yard setback variance
of 8 feet in order to construct a nonconforming 36' x 28' two story garage addition, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1 Single Family Residential
Zoning District which according to City Code requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square
feet, a 30 foot front yard setback, 10 foot side yard setbacks, and a 15 foot rear yard setback,
and;
WHEREAS, Currently the property is conforming in all aspects and there is no garage
on the site. The proposed addition is setback 22 feet from the front property line where a 30
foot setback is required, resulting in a variance request of 8 feet, and;
WHEREAS, there is a fairly steep hill on the west side and the general topography of
the site favors the location as proposed. Due to the topography of this site it would be difficult
to place a detached garage that would be conforming to setbacks, and;
WHEREAS, the City has, in past variance cases, supported the construction of garages
to provide for storage and eliminate clutter, however, any variance or encroachment must be
minimal and meet the criteria set forth in Zoning Code Section 350:530. The proposed garage
is rather large in this case, and if the depth were reduced somewhat the situation would be closer
to meeting the minimum situation as outlined in the ordinance, and;
WHEREAS, there is approximately 13 to 15 feet of boulevard between the curb and the
property line, so with a 28 foot deep garage the addition would still be about 35' from the curb,
and;
WHEREAS, all other setbacks, lot area, and impervious surface coverage are
conforming, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended
approval of a 4 foot variance in order to allow construction of a 24 foot deep garage addition,
with the finding that although there appears to be some practical difficulty and limiting
topography in this case, the applicant's proposal of a 28 foot deep garage does not represent the
minimal situation in order to alleviate the hardship. A 24 foot deep garage addition is more
representative of a minimal situation and would afford the owner reasonable use of the property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, as follows:
Proposed Resolution
Nachreiner. April 22, 1997
P. 2
o
The City does hereby grant a 4 foot front yard setback variance in order to allow
construction of a nonconforming 36' x 24' two story garage addition located 26 feet from
the front property line.
The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420,
Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the
structures described in paragraph number one above remain as lawful, nonconforming
structures subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 350:420.
It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the
authorization of the following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to afford
the owners reasonable use of their land:
36' x 24' two story garage addition.
This variance is granted for the following legally described property:
The Southeasterly 112.5 feet of Lot 7; The Southeasterly 112.5
feet of Lot 6, except that part of the Northeasterly 10 feet of said
Lot lying Northwesterly of a line drawn at right angles to the
Northeasterly line at a point distant 120 feet Southeasterly from the
Northeasterly comer of said Lot 6; all in Block 9, "The
Highlands", according to the recorded plat thereof.
This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of TRies in
Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (1).
This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used.
The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin
County and paying all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject
construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City
Clerk.
MINITrES OF A MEETENG OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 14, 1997
CASE 97-16: VARIANCE FOR GARAGE ADDITION
GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD
P/LOTS 6 & 7, BLOCK 9, THE HIGHLANDS, 23-117-24 34 0088
Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the Staff Report. The applicant is seeking a variance to
recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling in order to allow construction of a nonconforming 36'
x 28' two story garage addition as noted on the attached survey. Currently the property is conforming
in all aspects and there is no garage on the site. The proposed addition is setback 22 feet from the front
property, line where a 30 foot setback is required, resulting in a variance request of 8 feet.
There is a fairly steep hill on the west side and the general topography of the site favors the location
as proposed. Due to the topography of this site it would be difficult to place a detached garage that
would be conforming to setbacks. It is the applicants intent to add square footage onto the dwelling,
and the attached garage with the addition above makes sense from the prospective of how it all fits on
the site.
The City has, in past variance cases, supported the construction of garages to provide for storage and
eliminate clutter, however, any variance or encroachment must be minimal and meet the criteria set
forth in Zoning Code Section 350:530. The proposed garage is rather large in this case, and if the
depth were reduced somewhat the situation would be closer to meeting the minimum situation as
outlined in the ordinance.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request. Although there appears
to be some practical difficulty and limiting topography in this case, the proposal does not represent the
minimal situation in order to alleviate the hardship.
Staff suggested the applicant and the Planning Commission may wish to consider a garage addition that
is reduced in depth and that would be more representative of a minimal situation.
Applicant, Gary Nachreiner, presented photographs to the Planning Commission and emphasized the
need for the garage and the topographical problems of the lot due to the steep slope. He expressed a
need to use 12 inch block in order to retain the hillside behind the garage, and therefore needs a deeper
garage due to the space lost by the 12 inch block. Nachreiner also stated that construction of the
addition in this location will help correct drainage problems on the lot.
The Commission expressed a concern about the size of the garage and noted that it is not a minimal
request. The applicant stated that he needs and would be satisfied with a 26 foot deep garage.
Mueller clarified with the applicant that there is approximately 13 to 15 feet of boulevard between the
curb and the property line, so with a 28 foot deep garage addition it will still be about 35' from the
curb.
Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997
Mueller commented that a 24 foot depth would be more acceptable. Sutherland commented, from a
staff perspective, that a 24 foot deep garage would be supported and suggested a motion could be made
denying the 28 foot depth and suggesting that a 24 foot deep garage would be acceptable.
MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Voss to recommend denial of a 28 foot
deep garage addition, but would recommend approval of a 24 foot deep garage
addition as it constitutes a minimally sized three car garage.
Clapsaddle stated that he would prefer to table the request to allow the applicant time to rework his
design. Clapsaddle suggested that the garage could be designed to be constructed to the side of the
house.
Michael expressed a concern that they are making a recommendation for something that was not
presented.
The applicant emphasized again that he would be happy with a 26 foot deep garage.
MOTION carried 7 to 2. Those in favor were: Burma, Glister, Mueller,
Reifschneider, Voss, Weiland, and Hanus. Those opposed were: Clapsaddle and
Michael.
This case will be heard by the City Council on April 22, 1997.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
CASE NO.
LOCATION:
ZONING:
Planning Commission Agenda of April 14, 1997
Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
Variance Request
Gary Nachreiner
97-16
6056 Cherrywood Road
Part of Lots 6 & 7, Block 9, The Highlands, PID 23-117-24 34 0088
R- 1 Single Family Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming dwelling
in order to allow construction of a nonconforming 36' x 28' two story garage addition as noted on the
attached survey. Currently the property is conforming in all aspects and there is no garage on the site.
The proposed addition is setback 22 feet from the front property line where a 30 foot setback is
required, resulting in a variance request of 8 feet.
COMMENT: There is a fairly steep hill on the west side and the general topography of the site favors
the location as proposed. Due to the topography of this site it would be difficult to place a detached
garage that would be conforming to setbacks. It is the applicants intent to add square footage onto the
dwelling, and the attached garage with the addition above makes sense from the prospective of how it
all fits on the site.
The City has, in past variance cases, supported the construction of garages to provide for storage and
eliminate clutter, however, any variance or encroachment must be minimal and meet the criteria set
forth in Zoning Code Section 350:530. The proposed garage is rather large in this case, and if the
depth were reduced somewhat the situation would be closer to meeting the minimum situation as
outlined in the ordinance.
printe~ on recycled paper
Staff Report
Nachreiner
April 14, 1997, P. 2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend denial of
the request. Although there appears to be some practical difficulty and limiting topography in this case,
the proposal does not represent the minimal situation in order to alleviate the hardship.
The applicant and the Planning Commission may wish to consider a garage addition that is reduced in
depth and would be more representative of a minimal situation.
JS:pj
The abutting neighbors have been notified of this request. This case is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on April 22,
1997.
Ilil I
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
MAR 21 1997
CITY OF MOUND
Application Fee: $100.00
(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY)
Planning Commission Date:
City Council Date:
Distribution:
.~ -"L.i"q'7 City Planner
t[ City Engineer
It Public Works
Case No.
DNR
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
LEGAL
DESC.
PROPERTY
OWNER
APPLICANT
(IF OTHER
THAN
OWNER)
Subdivision -T-h~_ !M (,' ~ 1,. ~'~ cq
ZONING DISTRICT ~' R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1
Block
B-2 B-3
/
Phone(H) q;,. ~,. (W) ~ - ~- (M)
Name
Address
Phone (H). (W). (M)
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning
procedure for this property? ( ) yes, {~t no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution
number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
2. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.):
Variance Application, P. 2 Case No.
Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning
district in which it is located? Yes 1~I, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason
for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.):
SETBACKS:
Front Yard:
Side Yard:
Side Yard:
Rear Yard:
Lakeside:
( N~)E W )
(NSEW)
(NSEW)
(NSEW)
(NSEW)
: (NSEW)
Street Frontage:
Lot Size:
Hardcover:
REQUIRED
REQUESTED
(or existing)
VARIANCE
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ff. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
ft. ft. ft.
sq ft sq ft sq ft
sq ft sq ft sq ft
Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is
located? Yes ~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use:
Please
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the
uses permitted in that zoning district?
( ) too narrow
( ) too small
( ) too shallow
describe: Al
topography ( ) soil
drainage ( ) existing situation
shape ( ) other: specify
(Rev. 1/14/97)
III [ il .~
· Variance Application, P. 3 Case No.
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land
after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No~. If yes, explain:
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (),
No ~. If yes, explain:
Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described
in this petition? Yes (), No (). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
9. Comments:
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be
submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this
application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting,
maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law.
Owner's Signature
Applicant's Signature
Date
~8. Z~
The
Lot ~°[]tl;
feet 7; ~
of t~ £c
s~ i d ' ~,e' Nor
~: ~ot ?.
· ".~oc% 9''~ sa
~,rdioo ~ "Tl]c
~q
J I
Certi fiente of ,qurvov
in I,t)tS fi ,'lnd '7, lllock q, "'l','ll: Iliqhl;inch;"
Ile~lnt,pin (:ount¥, M.tnnc!sota
/
Leqal Doscript {on
Tho..~outheasterly 112.5 feet of
Lot 7; The Southeasterly ] 12.5
f0(~t of J,ot 6, exc(~l)t that ~art
of tho Northeasterly l0 feet ~)f
said l;ot ]vinq Northwesterly of
a line dri~wn at right anglos to
the Northcasterly line at a
point di~;tant 120 feet South-
corn6r of said l,ot 6; all in
Block 9, "Tho' Hiqh]i~nds", ncc-
ording to thi~ recorded plat
thereof.
· : Iron marker found
o : Iron marker set
Bearings shown are to
ezistilig house in r~lation to the hound-
aries of tile above dencribed property.
It do~s not purport to show any other
I lit'il'l,}' tt'llil}' ILl,il IJll~ ~lllt t')' ',~,l~, |)rt'p.llt'd J))' lilt' tlr UlltJcl' Ill)' dilct t 511j,t,r-
vision, and Ih41 I anl a duly regi~lc;t,tJ Civil Imgineer .md I ,md 5ur%c} or undt. r
JJlc I,i~S I)J lilt' SI,lit' (If MilIIIL'n~iI,I
PROPERTY ADDRESS'
OWNER'S NAME:
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
(IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE)
LOT AREA
LOT AREA !10q
LOT AREA
SQ. FT. X 30%
SQ. FT. X 40%
SQ. FT. X 15%
= (for all lots) ..............
= (for Lots of Record*) .......
: (for detached buildings only)
*Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as
outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted
and approved by the Building Official.
LENGTH WIDTH
HOUSE ~Z./ X 4C~ :
X =
DETACHED BLDGS
(GARAGE/SHED)
DRIVEWAY, PARKING
AREAS, SIDEWALKS,
ETC.
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
SQ FT
/oo '
TOTAL HOUSE .........................
X =
X =
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS .................
x Bo :
X =
X =
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ..................
X =
X =
/oBO
/o
pervious surface under are
not counted es hardcover
OTHER
TOTAL DECK
TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
~ OVER (indicate d~ef~nce) . .~, ............................
PREPARED BY ,)~2'~ // / O--~r~,~-b DATE
J, I l~ ,L iJi, ,,lB, I . ~
d
0
Z
x
~0'~
.l=c~
r.r.u~D
0
LU
L
'r~.
0
0
· · I February 77
· Th~s Indenture~ ~nd, ta~ .................. d~ s! ........................~s .....
~tw~ Frank Nissan and ~ Nissan husband and ~fe '
- Hennepin .... H~neso~a
~ of the C~nt~ si ............................... ~ a~ta si ..................................
~' ~ .... of ...... ~rk A Ple~sch single
~ ~ ~. ~ ................ ~ ......... L--~ .............................
WrrNESSETH ~'~r~ t~ a6i[l part~_~_ .... of t~e ~r~ ~. ~ c~ o/ t~e ~m o/
~e Dollar and ~ther val~o~e conslaerat~on
............................................................................ i~O LLA RS,
~..--~b~ ...... i~ ~ ~ bM the sa~ ~.~ .... of t~ tfc~ ~, th~ rec~pt wh~of ~
A~eby ~wl~ged, do ..... A~b~ ~ant, Bargain, S~, a~ C~ u~ the a~ ~_~_ .........
o/ th~ ~ ~ .......... ~r$ a~ ~g~, F~v~, ~ th~ t~ .... or ~rcd .... o~ ~ l~ing
The Southeasterly 112.5 feet of Lot 7;
The Southeasterly llZ.§ feet of LOt 6, except that part of the Northeasterly 10
feet of said lot lying Northwesterly of a 1/ne dravn at right angles to the
Northeasterly 11ne at a ~o/~c distant 120 feet Southeasterly from the North-
easterly corner of sald Loc 6;
All /n Block 9, "The Highlands', according to the recorded plat thereof,
Subject to easement for utility purposes over the Northeasterly 10 feet of the
Southwesterly 37 feet of the Southeasterly 112.5 feet of said Lot 7.
Together with an easement for utility purposes over the Southwesterly 10 feet
of the Northeasterly 20 feet of that parc of said Lot 6 lying Northwesterly
of the Southeasterly 112.5 feet thereof.
State Deed Tax Due Hereon $ //~,~'~
TO HAFE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, TogetAer ',~i~A tgi tAs i~redit~m~nte a.d a~~
t~o b~giflg ~ in afl~e a~ining, to the ~a~ ~_Y_ .... of the ae~ ~ ............
~._~_ .... o/~. ~.~ ~. ~o~ ..... ~ ............. ~.. ,.,~ ,~ ~;;[-;~[[[[
~ ~t~ ~e sam ~-~_-_o/ tAe aec~ ~ ....... A~ra a~ ~, '~-' they are --
f~ed in [~e of the ~ ~ ~ a/~a~, and ~_Y~__go~ ~pht to ~e~ a~ c~ve~ th~ ~a~ in
mnn~ a~ f~ af~.aM, a~ t~t the ~a~ ar~ frse from ~l in~mbm~.,
And the abo~e bargained ami granted landa and ~rtmizu, in the ~ a~ ~ble posa~ oI the
sa~ ~__~ ...... o[ the atc~ ~ ........................ hdrs ~ ~d~, aaai~t ~
~wf~p ~m~ng ~ to ~im the ~ta or an~ ~ th~eoL ~bjtct to in~mbra~, i/ any,
bilge m~t~ed, the ta~ ~__y ..... of the flrtt ~ ~1 Wa~ a~ De/~.
lN TE~IMONY WHEREOF, The sa~ ~ ...... of ~ ~rat ~ ~ ve h~nto set their
~ .... the ~ a~ ~r flrtt ~ove ~. ~ '}
......... : ..........
......
.............................................
I?
I0
TH E H I G H LAN DS
9 8
W 0 0 D
12
2
2
4
/I.H. ON C_. EXTEN
t H E HI G HLAN DS
CHERRYWOOD ROAD
(HAWTHORNE DRIVE)
[..' m........ DRY' .............. ~
·-*DR*Y ......
~40..--..970'
Z.cr..,.,.=~-,,,=- .......
~,. 4 4"' 5 6 ' · 7.
RESOLUTION NO. 78-249
RESOLUTION WAIVING REQUIRE~iENTS OF CHAPTER 22
OF THE CITY CODE REGARDING THE DIVISION OF PROPERTY
Lot 7 and Part of Lot 6, Block 9, The Highlands
(Plat 61610 Parcel 3485 and 3500)
WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in
Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of
Mound, and
WHEREAS, said request for a waiver has been reviewed by the Planning Com-
mission and the City Council, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances affecting
said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; that the
waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right; and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other property owners,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND:
1. The request of Frank Niesen for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request to subdivide
property of less than five acres is hereby granted to permit divi-
sion of the following property in the following manner with the
stipulation the deficient assessment be picked up:
Parcel A: That part of Lot 7 lying Northwesterly of the South-
easterly 112.5 feet thereof; that part of Lot 6 lying Northwesterly
of the Southeasterly 112.5 feet thereof, except the Northeasterly
10 feet thereof; all in Block 9, The Highlands
Parcel B: The Southeasterly 112.5 feet of Lot 7; the Southeaste~%y
112.5 feet of Lot 6, except that part of the Northeasterly 10 feet
of said lot lying Northwesterly of a line drawn at right angles to
the Northeasterly line at a point distant 120 feet Southeasterly
from the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 6; all in Block 9, The
Highlands.
2. It is determined that the foregoing division will constitute a
desirable and stable community development and is in harmony with
adjacent properties.
3. The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this
resolution to the applicant for filing in the office of the Register
of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show com-
pliance with the subdivision regulations of this City.
Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of May, 1978.
78-2~q
5-21
INFORMATION SHEET
FRONT
FRONT
SIDE
SIDE
REAR
LAKE
/~~W
N S E W
I0f
50'
TOP OF BLUFF 10' OR 30'
GARAGE, SHED ..... OR OT]~.]~l DETACHED BUILDINGS P 0 J~ ~
N (~E W
ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH:
-~.~~81 7,soo/o
RIA 6,0~00-f'lfU-- B2 20,000/80
R2 6,000/40 B3 10,000/60
R2 14,000/80
R3 SEE ORD. X1 30,0OO/lO0
J EXISTING~ROPOSED
EXISTING LOT SIZE:
LOT WIDTH:
LOT DEPTH:
VARIANCE
FRONT
FRONT
SIDE
SIDE
REAR
LAKE
NS E W
N S E(~)
S E W
N S E W
4' OR 6'
4' OR 6'
4'
50'
TOP OF BLUFF 10' OR 30'
HARDCOVER ,/r'"-~ 30% ?/R 40%Z) ..-. r'
This Zoning Into m~e~ o~y ~mm~izes a porUon of ~e requiremen~ outlined in ~e City of Mound Zo~n~ Ordinate. For ~er information, con~et ~e City of Mound
.Planning ~p~ment at 472~.
·
?' (2
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 8, 1997
1.9 REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - JOE ZYLMAN, MAPLE MANORS.
The City Engineer gave the background of this item. He stated that there are still a couple of
things that need to be worked out. One is the Watershed District approval. There are 12
conditions in the resolution for final plat approval. The Council asked about the balance in the
escrow fund which is//6 in the conditions. The Staff did not have that information at this time.
They also questioned condition gl0 which reads as follows: "A new 100 year flood elevation
is being created for the stormwater holding pond which applies to units 7 and 8. The City
floodplain ordinance requires these units to have a two foot freeboard above the 100 year
elevation, and the lowest floor elections shall be revised to be inconformance with the floodplain
ordinance." The Watershed District's Rule B also needs to be addressed for this plat.
Councilmember Jensen asked about the City Attorney's letter dated 2-20-97, review of the Maple
8
FROM
Waters-Edge
61247231B2
85-13-97 89:49AM TO 4?28628
$326 RAMBLER LANE
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364
612-472-5759
5/13/97
Dear Members of the City Council,
~2 P.2/2
I would like to request that Maple Manors final plat approval be tabled until the 5/27/97
me~ng.
I have been unable to get any cooperation from the Watershed District regarding approval
of my permits. I hope another two weeks will bring some proiFess on this problem.
Sincerely',4~. ,"~ ~._..~.
Joe Zylman
.~=at I=_~T&TI= RRC}KIER · ~EENERALCONTRACTOR-
J I 11 ,L J
MINUTES- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - APR1L 8, 1997
Manors Homeowners Documents. She referred to item #3 of the letter as follows: "There is
a provision in the articles that allows the association to be dissolved and, upon dissolution, the
common area to be dedicated to the public. If the dedication is refused, the property is
transferred to any non-profit corporation, association, trust or organization devoted to a similar
purpose. This is noted for your information and, not by way of objection."
The City Attorney advised that the Articles of the Association could be revised so the City is
out of the loop entirely and the property would just go to a non profit or association or trust
upon dissolution. Councilmember Ahrens asked if the dissolution item has to be in the
Homeowners Agreement. The City Attorney stated that this section is required by state law and
is needed to assure that the common area, upon dissolution of the homeowners association, is
not ever sold off separately and developed and the owners of the parcels lose the common areas.
The idea is that there be some third party trustee of the common areas that would continue to
have them as common areas.
Councilmember Hanus asked if this plat will have variances to the hardcover requirements on
the lots? He asked the City Planner this earlier and the Planner thought that this was covered
in the CUP and the preliminary plat. Staff will check this out.
The Council decided that without answers to their questions, they would not be able to approve
this final plat tonight.
The City Engineer stated that what the Watershed District has done, under Rule
B, in the past, is that they will approve the permit conditioned upon, the City
entering into a cooperative agreement with the Watershed District which we are
in the midst of trying to work out now. It appears that the way it will come
down is that there will be regional ponding. The Council expressed concern that
then the City would have to pay for the construction of the ponds. The City
Engineer stated that a way to fund this would be to take the money that is donated
in lieu of building all the little ponds and put that toward construction of the
regional ponds. Then the maintenance, which is the big item, is turned over to
the City. The acquisition of the property would also be the City's responsibility.
What level of participation the Watershed District will participate is unknown at
this time. There was discussion about creating a Stormwater Utility so that the
City can charge the users and not have the taxpayers get stuck with building
treatment ponds at taxpayer expense, when user fees are what should be covering
it.
MOTION by Polston, seconded by Hanus to continue this item until the May 13,
1997, meeting so that all the issues discussed tonight can be addressed by Staff.
1. Get the balance of the escrow account.
2. The commons area and the homeowners agreement.
3. #10 of the conditions in the proposed approval resolution.
MINUTES- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 8, 1997
4. The hardcover issue.
5. The agreement with the Watershed District.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
ENGINEER'S MEMO
TO
THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL
~97-
DATE:
CASE NO:
PETITIONER:
FINAL PLAT:
LOCATION:
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
2. [] [] []
3. [] [] []
4. [] [] []
5. [] [] []
April 1, 1997
97-12
Joe Zylman - Waters Edge Investment Co.
Maple Manors
Three Points Boulevard
Watermain area assessments have been levied based on
proposed use.
Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on
proposed use.
SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building
permits are issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are
reviewed annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be
that in effect at the time of final plat approval.
Area assessments.
Other additional assessments estimated:
LEGAL / EASEMENTS / PERMITS:
6. [] [] []
7. [] [] []
Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet
(10') in width adjoining all streets and five feet (5') in width
adjoining side and rear lot lines. SEE SPECIAL
CONDITIONS.
All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
Yes
No
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION {97-
The City will require twenty feet (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines were these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been
reviewed with the final construction plans and the following
changes are necessary: SEE SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
10.
11.
Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lines below the established
100oyear high water elevation and conformance with the
City's comprehensive stormwater drainage plan. SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have
been vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-
way to facilitate the development. This is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is the
Owner's responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted
to the City with this application - If it is subsequently
determined that the subject property is abstract property_, then
this requirement does not at>ply.
It will be necessary for the property Owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate CertifiCate of Title in
order that he may file the required easements referred to
above.
All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the Developer:
[] DNR
[] Hennepin County
[] MPCA
[] State Health Department
[] Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
[] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
[] Other
The Developer must comply with the conditions within any
permit.
-2-
12.
N/A Yes No
lJ ~ill,, ii I .... i1
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to
the City grid system for street names. The following changes
will be necessary:
13. [] [] []
14. [] [] []
Conforms with the City's Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the
City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
15. [] [] []
All existing street tights-of-way are required width -
Additional tight-of-way will be required on
16. [] [] []
17. [] [] []
18. [] [] []
Conforms with City standards requiring the Developer to
construct utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the Developer shall be
responsible for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer,
water, storm sewer, and streets needed to serve this plat. A
registered professional engineer must prepare the plans and
profiles of the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain, storm
sewer facilities and streets to serve the development.
Final utility plans submitted comply with all City
requirements-
The Developer has submitted the required construction plans
for the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
facilities; and has also furnished profiles of these utilities as
well as the proposed street system (public and private). SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED.
Per the Developer's request, final plans will be prepared by the
City.
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October
-3-
N/A Yes No
19. [] [] []
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97
1st of the year preceding construction, if the Developer is
paying 100% of the cost.
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
20. [] [] []
21. [] [] []
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required: SEE SPECIAL
CONDITIONS.
It will be necessary to contact Greg Skinner, the City's Public
Works Superintendent, 24 hours in advance of making any
proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and
water systems. The Developer shall also be responsible for
contacting the Public Works Department for an excavating
permit prior to any digging within the City right-of-way.
GRADING. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROl,:
22. [] [] []
23. [] [] []
Minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the
following lots: All Lots 1 thru 10 have a minimum
basement elevation of 933.0.
Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been
submitted to the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if
it is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm
Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations shall be
incorporated in a revised plan. The Grading and Drainage Plan
shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
-4-
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION {97-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
23.
The final plat does not have any easement over the common area shown as Lot 11.
Either a blanket drainage and utility easement over the entire lot is required or
specific easements for the storm sewer, ponding, drainage, etc. The best solution is a
blanket easement over the entire Lot 11. Also, the drainage easement for the
wetlands must include everything designated as wetlands. A small area behind Lot
4 is omitted.
24.
The City has not been furnished any drainage calculations. Copies of information
submitted to the MCWD will be sufficient.
25.
The proposed lift station must conform to the City's standard requirements.
Additional information is needed such as specific requirements for the control
panel, pump, valves, ultrasonic level transmitter, etc. In addition, the control panel
must be located on a separate 4'x4' concrete pad in a location as approved by Public
Works. The exact location of proposed lift station must also be approved by Public
Works.
26. Specifications and construction details must be submitted.
27.
Approval of the preliminary grading and drainage plan required that additional
information in the form of more topography along the east side of the proposed plat
at the existing garages on the adjacent property be provided. Additional topo was
also requested south and east of Lot 10 and at the proposed street intersection with
Three Points Boulevard. None of this information is on the final grading plan. City
ordinance requires existing conditions within 100 feet, but we will accept less as long
as the information provided is sufficient.
28.
Our preliminary review also required additional information on the existing
driveway immediately west of the proposed street. This has not been furnished.
29.
The inlets to both storm sewer systems located in the yards adjacent to Lots 9 and
10 will need shallow 27" dia. catchbasin structures.
30.
The proposed grade of the new street needs to be flatten more at the intersection
with Three Points Boulevard. A slope closer to 2% is preferred. The 7% grade
could be steeper, but not over 8% which is the maximum allowed by City code.
31.
The Developer shall be responsible for the installation of private utilities, such as
telephone, electric and natural gas services. The required utilities shall not be
installed until the boulevard or utility easements have been graded. All such
utilities shall be installed underground.
32.
No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for utility and
street construction and the MPCA permit is issued and the Final Plat has been filed
and recorded at Hennepin County.
-5-
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
33.
34.
Prior to acceptance of the completed subdivision by the City Council, it will be
necessary to furnish an Engineer's Certification of Completion. Upon receipt of
said certification and recommendation by the City Engineer that the completed
work will be accepted, the City Council will be requested to accept, the completed
public improvements. Acceptance will be by formal Resolution of the City Council.
The following items shall be the responsibility of the Developer and shall be covered
by an escrow guarantee (surety bond, cash, certificate of deposit, or irrevocable
letter of credit), as specified:
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
Grading and Street Construction
ESTIMATED TOTAL
$ 56,000
$ 25,000
$ 21,000
$ 50,000
$150,000
Amount of escrow guarantee:
Estimated total ($150,000) x 125% = $187,500
Submitted by: ~
/'- ' John Cameron, City Engineer
e:main: 11417:¢ngmemo
-6-
12.
N/A
Yes
,L
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to
the City grid system for street names. The following changes
will be necessary:
13. [] [] []
14. [] [] []
Conforms with the City's Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the
City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
15. [] [] []
All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
16. [] [] []
17. [] [] []
18. [] [] []
Conforms with City standards requiring the Developer to
construct utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the Developer shall be
responsible for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer,
water, storm sewer, and streets needed to serve this plat. A
registered professional engineer must prepare the plans and
profiles of the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain, storm
sewer facilities and streets to serve the development.
Final utility plans submitted comply with all City
requirements-
The Developer has submitted the required construction plans
for the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
facilities; and has also furnished profiles of these utilities as
well as the proposed street system (public and private). SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED.
Per the Developer's request, final plans will be prepared by the
City.
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October
-3-
d
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL FOR A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) WITH VARIANCES
FOR 'MAPLE MANORS'
TWIN HOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the final plat of Maple Manors has been submitted in the manner required
for platting of land under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 330:00 and under Chapter
462 of the Minnesota State Statutes and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on January 14, 1997, held a public hearing pursuant to
Section 330:00 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances, to consider the approval of the
preliminary plat of Maple Manors located on property described as:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot
25; Also that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying
northerly of the northerly right-of-way line of Three Points Boulevard; Also that
part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of
a line drawn east at right angles to the west line of said Lot 25 from a point on
said west line distant 318.29 feet north, as measured along said west line, from
the southwest comer of said Lot 25. PID 13-117-24 22 0249.
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations
and the requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the City Code of Ordinances of
the City of Mound.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota;
A. Final plat approval is hereby granted for Maple Manors Twin Home Residential
Development under PDA requirements, as requested by Waters Edge Investment Co. and as
shown on the attached 'Exhibit A', subject to compliance with all of the conditions found in the
City Engineer's memo dated April 1, 1997, set forth and incorporated herein as part of the
document as 'Exhibit B', and all the conditions of the preliminary plat approval (Resolution #97-
1) set forth and incorporated herein as part of the document and the following conditions:
The Developer shall secure all applicable permits as defined by the City Engineer from
all entities with jurisdiction over this project.
Park dedication fees shall be collected in the amount of $5,000 prior to release of this
resolution for filing of the final plat.
Proposed Resolution
Maple Manors Final Plat
April 8, 1997
Page 2
o
10.
11.
No construction activity shall occur on the site until all applicable provisional or final
permits have been issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other
applicable agencies.
The Developer shall provide the City Attorney with Homeowner's Documents and
Declaration of Covenants for his review and approval. The Developer shall also provide
the City Attorney with information necessary to conduct a title search and make a clear
title opinion, all prior to filing of the final plat with Hennepin County.
Prior to the City releasing the final plat, the Developer shall sign a development contract
furnished by the City. The development contract shall stipulate that construction of all
items covered by said contract and shall be completed within a specified period of time
and shall require compliance with all City Codes not modified by this resolution. As part
of the development contract, the Developer shall furnish the City with a performance
bond, an irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of security approved by the City
Attorney in the amount of 125% of the cost of all applicable public improvements
necessary to be completed prior to filing the final plat.
The Developer shall provide the necessary escrow funds required in Section 330:30 of
the City Code. The existing balance of $ plus an additional, $1,000 plus any
additional sums necessary to cover engineering, planning, legal and administrative
expenses shall be deposited with the City prior to the City releasing the final plat.
The plat shall be filed with Hennepin County within 240 days of the City Council
approving the final plat (November 27, 1997).
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for homes in the subdivision until utilities
and access servicing the homes are approved by the City Engineer, Fire Chief and
Building Official.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect said
BMPs.
A new 100 year flood elevation is being created for the stormwater holding pond which
applies to units 7 and 8. The City floodplain ordinance requires these units to have a two
foot freeboard above the 100 year elevation, and the lowest floor elevations shall be
revised to be in conformance with the floodplain ordinance.
Additional revisions will be required to the grading plan relating, but not limited to, the
following issues: erosion control, lowest floor elevations, grading modifications related
to the lowest floor elevations, and retaining walls that may be needed and as required by
the City Engineer on the east side of the property.
Proposed Resolution
Maple Manors Final Plat
ApHl 8, 1997
Page 3
12.
The surveyor shall certify the final grading work is in conformance with the approved
grading plan, and the City Engineer and/or Building Official shall review and approve
of the surveyors certification.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said
plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith
by the subdivider and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith
without further formality, all in compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the City of Mound Code of
Ordinances.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember
and seconded by Councilmember
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
/t ??
z
A,'IRESOLTJ-~ION ~97-
,J 1, it ,L jIIj, , I1.,,
EXHIBIT B , RESOLUTION
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
ENGINEER '$ MEMO
TO
THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL
~97-
DATE:
CASE NO:
PETITIONER:
FINAL PLAT:
LOCATION:
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. [] [] []
2. [] [] []
3. [] [] []
4. [] [] []
5. [] [] []
April 1, 1997
97-12
Joe Zylman - Waters Edge Investment Co.
Maple Manors
Three Points Boulevard
Watermain area assessments have been levied based on
proposed use.
Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on
proposed use.
SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building
permits are issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are
reviewed annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be
that in effect at the time of final plat approval.
Area assessments.
Other additional assessments estimated:
LEGAL / EASEMENTS / PEKMITS:
6. [] [] []
7. [] [] []
Complies with standard utility/drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet
(10') in width adjoining all streets and five feet (5') in width
adjoining side and rear lot lines. SEE SPECIAL
CONDITIONS.
All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
o
10.
11.
N/A
No
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
The City will require twenty feet (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines were these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been
reviewed with the final construction plans and the following
changes are necessary: SEE SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lines below the established
100-year high water elevation and conformance with the
City's comprehensive stormwater drainage plan. SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have
been vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-
way to facilitate the development. This is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is the
Owner's responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted
to the City with this application If it is subsequenl;ly
determined that the subject property_ is abstract property_, ther~
this requirement does not apply.
It will be necessary for the property Owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate CertifiCate of Title in
order that he may file the required easements referred to
above.
All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the Developer:
[] DNR
[] Hennepin County
[] MPCA
[] State Health Department
[] Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
[] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
[] Other
The Developer must comply with the conditions within any
permit.
-2-
12.
N/A
Yes
No
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to
the City grid system for street names. The following changes
will be necessary:
13. [] [] []
Conforms with the City's Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the
City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
15. [] [] []
All existing street rights-of-way are required width -
Additional right-of-way will be required on
16. [] [] []
17. [] [] []
18. [] [] []
Conforms with City standards requiring the Developer to
construct utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the Developer shall be
responsible for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer,
water, storm sewer, and streets needed to serve this plat. A
registered professional engineer must prepare the plans and
profiles of the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain, storm
sewer facilities and streets to serve the development.
Final utility plans submitted comply with all City
requirements-
The Developer has submitted the required construction plans
for the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
facilities; and has also furnished profiles of these utilities as
well as the proposed street system (public and private). SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED.
Per the Developer's request, final plans will be prepared by the
City.
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October
-3-
N/A Yes No
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97
1st of the year preceding construction, if the Developer is
paying 100% of the cost.
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
20. [] [] []
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan o
The following revisions will be required: SEE SPECIAL
CONDITIONS.
21. [] [] []
It will be necessary to contact Greg Skinner, the City's Public
Works Superintendent, 24 hours in advance of making any
proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and
water systems. The Developer shall also be responsible for
contacting the Public Works Department for an excavating
permit prior to any digging within the City right-of-way.
GRADING. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROl,:
22. [] [] []
23. [] [] []
Minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the
following lots: All Lots 1 thru 10 have a minimum
basement elevation of 933.0.
Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been
submitted to the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if
it is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm
Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations shall be
incorporated in a revised plan. The Grading and Drainage Plan
shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: SEE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
-4-
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION {97-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
23.
The final plat does not have any easement over the common area shown as Lot 11.
Either a blanket drainage and utility easement over the entire lot is required or
specific easements for the storm sewer, ponding, drainage, etc. The best solution is a
blanket easement over the entire Lot 11. Also, the drainage easement for the
wetlands must include everything designated as wetlands. A small area behind Lot
4 is omitted.
24.
The City has not been furnished any drainage calculations. Copies of information
submitted to the MCWD will be sufficient.
25.
The proposed lift station must conform to the City's standard requirements.
Additional information is needed such as specific requirements for the control
panel, pump, valves, ultrasonic level transmitter, etc. In addition, the control panel
must be located on a separate 4'x4' concrete pad in a location as approved by Public
Works. The exact location of proposed lift station must also be approved by Public
Works.
26. Specifications and construction details must be submitted.
27.
Approval of the preliminary grading and drainage plan required that additional
information in the form of more topography along the east side of the proposed plat
at the existing garages on the adjacent property be provided. Additional topo was
also requested south and east of Lot 10 and at the proposed street intersection with
Three Points Boulevard. None of this information is on the final grading plan. City
ordinance requires existing conditions within 100 feet, but we will accept less as long
as the information provided is sufficient.
28.
Our preliminary review also required additional information on the existing
driveway immediately west of the proposed street. This has not been furnished.
29.
The inlets to both storm sewer systems located in the yards adjacent to Lots 9 and
10 will need shallow 27" dia. catchbasin structures.
30.
The proposed grade of the new street needs to be flatten more at the intersection
with Three Points Boulevard. A slope closer to 2% is preferred. The 7% grade
could be steeper, but not over 8% which is the maximum allowed by City code.
31.
The Developer shall be responsible for the installation of private utilities, such as
telephone, electric and natural gas services. The required utilities shall not be
installed until the boulevard or utility easements have been graded. All such
utilities shall be installed underground.
32.
No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for utility and
street construction and the MPCA permit is issued and the Final Plat has been filed
and recorded at Hennepin County.
-5-
EXHIBIT B, RESOLUTION ~97-
33.
34.
Prior to acceptance of the completed subdivision by the City Council, it will be
necessary to furnish an Engineer's Certification of Completion. Upon receipt of
said certification and recommendation by the City Engineer that the completed
work will be accepted, the City Council will be requested to accept, the completed
public improvements. Acceptance will be by formal Resolution of the City Council.
The following items shall be the responsibility of the Developer and shall be covered
by an escrow guarantee (surety bond, cash, certificate of deposit, or irrevocable
letter of credit), as specified:
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
Grading and Street Construction
ESTIMATED TOTAL
$ 56,000
$ 23,000
$ 21,000
$ 50.000
$150,000
Amount of escrow guarantee:
Estimated total ($150,000) x 125% = $187,500
Submitted by:
John Cameron, City Engineer
¢:main: 11417:engmemo
-fi-
,al¸
,L Iii,
Application for
MAJOR SUBDMSION
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
PAID
MAR 6 1997
CiTY OF MOUND
t
PLANNING
COMM.
DATE
/"L / c"Q. CASE ~o.
ASSESSING ESCROW DEPOSIT $ 1.000
OTHER: VARIANCE $
TOTAL Sl(c.c
Please type or print the following information:
PROPERTY Subject Address ~'~-~ fO
INFORMATION
Name of Proposed Plat
EXISTING Lot ~~
LEGAL /
DESCRIPTION Subdivision PID~
ZONING
DISTRICT Circle: R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
Name ~ r
AddressI
OWNER
applicant)
Phone (H) _~/~Z~ ~//~ / (WI ~ ~ G ~ (M)
SURVEYOR/
Phone {H) (W) ~ 7~ -- ~/y/ (M)
,..:v. 1/29/97)
Major Subdivision Application
Page 2
Description of Proposed Use:
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, includ
not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the ir.
.,. 'ti 'e -cc.,
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guarantees for the co.'
of the proposed development. Estimated Development Cost of the Project: $/.-)t9/oo ,'. O -'
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS:
Number of Structures: ._~ Number of Dwelling Units/Structure:
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit:3/./~cD sq. ft. Total Lot Area: Fo 80 0 sq. ft.
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this p
~g~ yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resoluti
This application must be signed by al__[l owners of the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the
Print Applicant's Name
Apl~icant's ~g&ature
Print Owner's Name
Owner's Signature Date
Print Owner's Name
Owner's Signature Date
(Rev. 1/29/97)
3~5/97
6326 RAMBLER LANE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
612-472-5759
This letter is in regard to the proof of title to the land for the Maple Manors Project.
Title is currently held by the Landsmen's who live in Alexandria.
We are planning to transfer ownership on 3/17/97. Title wilt then be held by Waters Edge
Investment Co.
Sincerely,
Joe Zylman
President - Waters Edge Investment Co.
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury. Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
e-mail: attys@kennedy-graven.com
CORRINE H. THOMSON
Attorney at
Dir~t Dial (612) 337-9217
February 20, 1997
Peggy James
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364-1687
RE: Maple Manors Homeowners Documents
Dear Ms. James:
This is in response to your letter to Curt Pearson dated February 12, 1997. I have reviewed the
documents enclosed with that letter and have the following comments:
There is a discrepancy between the number of lots indicated in the homeowners
documents and the number of lots shown in the approved preliminary plat. The
homeowners documents indicate that there are 15 lots, while the plat shows only 11 lots.
This discrepancy needs to be corrected.
With the exception of the discrepancy noted above, the Declaration contains the necessary
dedication of easements in favor of the City.
There is a provision in the articles that allows the association to be dissolved and, upon
dissolution, the common area to be dedicated to the public. If the dedication is refused,
the property is transferred to any non-profit corporation, association, trust or organization
devoted to a similar purpose. This is noted for your information and not by way of
objection.
Sincerely,
Corrine H. Thomson
cc: John Dean
JOEL 7. YLYat~N 2 - 21 - 9 7
I~RK KOEGLER "
eA~i~2~JOHN CAMERON "
~U200-62
January 14, 1997
RESOL~ON NO. 97.1
RESOLU~ON APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA WITH VARIANCES
FOR MAPLE MANORS
TWIN HOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPM~.NT
AT THAT PART OF LOT 25, LAFAYETTE PARK
PID 13-117-24 22 0246, CASE ~)6-69
WI:I~KEAS, the applicant, Joe Zylman of Waters Edge Investment Co., has submitted
an application for a Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit to establish "Maple Manors"
as a Planned Development Area, with variances, pursuant to Section 330 of the Mound City
Code, and;
WHEREAS, the ten housing units in the development will consist of one level twin
homes that will be owner occupied. In order for twin homes to be built on property zoned R-
IA, a Conditional Use Permit needs to be approved to establish a Planned Development Area,
and;
WHEREAS, the project results in the following variances:
R/ght--of-Way Width
Cul-de-sac Right-of-Way (radius)
Cul-de-sac Paved Street (radius)
Lot Size (all Lots except 8)
Lot Size - Lot 8
required proposed variance
50' 40' I0'
50' 40' 10'
40' 35' 5'
6,000 sf 3,440 sf 2,560 sf
6,000 sf 3,314 sf 2,686 sf
WHEREAS, the ten (10) units comply with the maximum density allowable under the
shoreland restrictions without the density bonuses that are allowed by the Code. The non-
shoreland PDA standards would allow this site to have 14 units under R-IA zoning. As
proposed, the net density equates to 8,569 square feet of land per unit, and;
WHEREAS, the granting of the variances requested will not confer upon the applicant
any special privilege that is denied owners of other lands in the same zone, and;
WHE~AS, the proposed subdivision as conditioned is consistent with the
comprehensive plan, and;
WHEREAS, the proposed design as conditioned is consistent with applicable
development plans and policies, and;
WHEREAS, the physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type and density
of development contemplated if the conditions imposed herein are met, and;
January 14, 1997 ..
WHEREAS, according to the plan, 18 of the 34 trees on the site will be preserved, and;
WHEREAS, the Mound Wetland Ordinance identifies the wetland contour in the area
of the project as 929.5. A wetland delineation was completed for the site. All of the proposed
units comply with the Watershed District's 35 foot setback requirements from the edge of the
wetland, and;
WHEREAS, this development will create nonconforming situations on the adjacent
properties that are not pan of this development. A new street frontage will be created for the
two residential lots that lie along Three Points Blvd. to the south of the site. Parcel 250 has a
garage that is located approximately 5 feet from the property line and the home is located
approximately 15 feet from the new fight-of-way line creating variances of 15 feet and 5 feet
respectively. Parcel 246 has a detached garage that is 16 feet from the new fight-of-way
resulting in a 4 foot variance from the 20 foot setback requirement. Future improvements to
these homes may require approval of a variance. The construction of the new street is certainly
grounds for approving (recognizing) variances for the existing conditions should such be
necessary in the future, and;
W}IEREAS, the City has considered traffic and other aspects of the proposed project
as it might affect public health, safety or welfare and impose conditions upon the approval
addressing those considerations. The proposed twin homes would generate traffic ranging from
59 to 65 trips per day, according to published standards, and;
WHEREAS, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities are
being provided, and;
WHEREAS, The twin home use that is proposed is an appropriate land use for the
existing site that lies between the condominium complex to the east and the business zoned
property to the west, and;
WHEREAS, the proposed project as conditioned will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously
recommended approval, with conditions, subject to the following findings of fact:
Now that the property is rezoned, it could possibly have up to 14. units, therefore,
the 10 units proposed is not a large impact.
The proposed layout of the twin homes has a minimal impact on the overall land
the roadway and cul-de-sac are typical of others that have recently been approved
by the City and have worked well.
The proposed lot sizes, including common areas, overall are beyond what is
required in the R-lA zone.
January 14, 1997
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, to hereby:
Ae
Approve the Preliminary Plat according to the attached Exhibit 'A', and approve a
Conditional Use Permit to establish Maple Manors as a Planned Development Area, with
variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Watershed District.
The applicant shall be responsible for park dedication requirements consistent
with Section 330:120 of the Mound Code of Ordinances.
The applicant shall submit for staff review and approval, detailed landscaping
plans for the site showing plantings on the association property to mitigate tree
loss due to road and unit construction and containing typical landscaping
treatments for twin home units. Landscaping plans shall identify all plant
materials by name, size (height or caliper) and root type and shall be compliant
with the minimum planting sizes referenced in the City Code.
Covenants, as submitted by the applicant shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.
Escrow accounts shall be established as required by City Code and shall at ail
times, maintain a positive fund balance.
The preliminary plat shall be revised to show a 50 foot right-of-way for the land
area between the two adjacent single family residential properties.
Locate and show on the site plan the existing driveway to the westerly residence
(Parcel 246) to determine if it needs to be relocated, and if so, the cost of
relocating shall be born by the developer.
All drainage newly created by the development, either by excavating or building
shall be maintained within the property so it does not go to the east and
negatively impact any property to the east and that the provision be made that the
engineer specifically look at that property abutting the east to determine that water
flow stay within that property.
The site plan and grading plan be incorporated in this resolution and be made a
part thereof.
January 14, 1997
B. Approve the following variances as part of the Planned Development Area:
Right-of-Way Width
Cul4e-sac Right-of-Way (radius)
Cul-de-sac Paved Street (radius)
Lot Siza (all Lots except 8)
Lot Siz~ - Lot 8
required proposed variance
50' 40' I0'
50' 40, 10'
40' 35' 5'
6,000 sf 3,440 sf 2,560 sf
6,000 sf 3,314 sf 2,686 sf
C. Approve the development of the property legally described as follows:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot 25; Also
that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying northerly of the
northerly right-of-way line of Three Points Boulev~d; Also that part of the East 100 feet
of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of a line drawn east at right angles
to the west line of said Lot 25 from a point on said west line distant 318.29 feet north,
as measured along said west line, from the southwest comer of said Lot 25. PID 13-
117-24 22 0249.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember ]'ensen and seconded by
Councilmember Hanus.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Ahrens, Hanus, Jensen and Weycker.
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Polston.
Mayoi'
Attest: City Clerk
EXHIBIT A, RESOLUTION ~97-1
MAPLE MANORS PRELIMINARY PLAT
....
:
:
t
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
!
!
ORDINANCE #83-1997
AN ORDINANCE REZONING CERTAIN LANDS AS DESCRIBED
FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMII.y RESIDENTIAL
TO R-lA SINGLE FAMII.y RESIDENTIAL
The City of Mound does ordain, The City of Mound Zoning Map is hereby amended as
follows:
Property described as follows, is hereby rezoned from R-1 Single Family Residential
(10,000 square foot minimum lot area), to R-lA Single Family Residential (6,000 square foot
minimum lot area:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot
25; Also that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying
northerly of the northerly right-of-way line of Three Points Boulevard; Also that
part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of
a line drawn east at right angles to the west line of said LOt 25 from a point on
said west line distant 318.29 feet north, as measured along said west line, from
the southwest comer of said LOt 25. PID 13-117-24 22 0249.
5510 Three Points Blvd.: That part of the West 100 feet of the South 250 feet
of said Lot 25 and of the East 50 feet of the South 250 feet of Lot 26 lying North
of Three Points Blvd. PID 13-117-24 22 0246.
5470 Three Points Blvd.: That part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of
said Lot 25 lying South of a line running East at a right angle with the West line
of said Lot 25 from a point thereon 318.29 feet North from the Southwest comer
of said Lot 25 and lying North of Three Points Blvd. PID 13-117-24 22 0250.
The Zoning Map of the City of Mound on file with the City Clerk is hereby amended
in accordance with these rezoning provisions.
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council January 14, 1997
Published in The Laker February 1, 1997
RESOLUTION NO. 97-
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PEI~MIT APPROVAL FOR A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) WITH VARIANCES
FOR 'MAPLE MANORS'
TWIN HOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the final plat of Maple Manors has been submitted in the manner required
for planing of land under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 330:00 and under Chapter
462 of the Minnesota State Statutes and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on January 14, 1997, held a public hearing pursuant to
Section 330:00 of the Mound City Code of Ordinances, to consider the approval of the
preliminary plat of Maple Manors located on property described as:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot
25; Also that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying
northerly of the northerly right-of-way line of Three Points Boulevard; Also that
part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of
a line drawn east at right angles to the west line of said Lot 25 from a point on
said west line distant 318.29 feet north, as measured along said west line, from
the southwest corner of said Lot 25. PID 13-117-24 22 0249.
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations
and the requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the City Code of Ordinances of
the City of Mound.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota;
A. Final plat approval is hereby granted for Maple Manors Twin Home Residential
Development under PDA requirements, as requested by Waters Edge Investment Co. and as
shown on the attached 'Exhibit A', subject to compliance with all of the conditions found in the
City Engineer's memo dated April 1, 1997, set forth and incorporated herein as part of the
document as 'Exhibit B', and all the conditions of the preliminary plat approval (Resolution #97-
1) set forth and incorporated herein as part of the document and the following conditions:
The Developer shall secure all applicable permits as defined by the City Engineer from
all entities with jurisdiction over this project.
Park dedication fees shall be collected in the amount of $5,000 prior to release of this
resolution for filing of the final plat.
Proposed Resolution
Maple Manors Final Plat
April 8, 1997
Page 2
o
o
o
No construction activity shall occur on the site until all applicable provisional or final
permits have been issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other
applicable agencies.
The Developer shall provide the City Attorney with Homeowner's Documents and
Declaration of Covenants for his review and approval. The Developer shall also provide
the City Attorney with information necessary to conduct a title search and make a clear
title opinion, all prior to filing of the final plat with Hennepin County.
Prior to the City releasing the f'mal plat, the Developer shall sign a development contract
furnished by the City. The development contract shall stipulate that construction of all
items covered by said contract shall be completed within a specified period of time and
shall require compliance with all City Codes not modified by this resolution. As part of
the development contract, the Developer shall furnish the City with a performance bond,
an irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of security approved by the City Attorney
in the amount of 125 % of the cost of all applicable public improvements necessary to be
completed prior to filing the final plat.
The Developer shall provide the necessary escrow funds required in Section 330:30 of
the City Code. The existing balance of $ plus an additional, $1,000 plus any
additional sums necessary to cover engineering, planning, legal and adminis'. 'e
expenses shall be deposited with the City prior to the City releasing the final plat.
The plat shall be filed with Hennepin County within 240 days of the City Council
approving the final plat (November 27, 1997).
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for homes in the subdivision until utilities
and access servicing the homes are approved by the City Engineer, Fire Chief and
Building Official.
Construction and maintenance of the site shall adhere to MPCA Best Management
Practices. Construction documents submitted to the City Engineer shall reflect said
BMPs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said
plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith
by the subdivider and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith
without further formality, all in compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the City of Mound Code of
Ordinances.
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:
Application for
MAJOR SUBDMSION
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
PAID
MAR 6 1997
CITY OF MOUND
~'150 ~5¢~
!
PLANNING
COMM.
DATE
/~ / ~ CASe NO.
CFI'Y COUNCIL DATE; ~ ..o~.~'_ q,7
DISTRIBUTION DA~ ~PE OF APP~CATION FEE
C~Y ENGINEER It P~LIMINARY PLAT $200
,,
FI~ DEPARTMENT
II CONDITIONAL USE PE~: PDA $ 250
ASSESSING ESCROW DEPOSIT $ 1.000
OTHER: VA~NCE $ 100
TOTAL
Please type or print the following information:
PROPERTY Subject Address _~'~ qO '~ ~-P~' -~ I ~/'d.
iNFORMATiON .....
.ame of Proposed Plat ~ ~l-pIy' ~qr~.~ ~J~,'~,'04
EXISTING LO, ~~/~/ Bloc'
P lat~
LEGAL ,
DESCRIPTION Subdivision PID~ /~ - //7- ~ -.~[_ O~
ZONING
DISTRICT Circle: R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
APPLICANT The applicant is: __owner ~gther: ~ ~ , .~ -~, ~ r7 m/~~ ~ r
Address ~ / 2~/~ ~, / ~O&~/ ~
Phone (H) ~--,~,~ (W) ~. ~7 ~¢ (M) ~/ - ~0
Name ~,-~L_~[~ ~. L¢,'y ~~(~
OWNER ' -
applicant) , - -
P.o~e (~) ~/~/~n ~ 4 / (W) ~4 ~ C g ~M)_,,
Name ~~ ~. ~...d ~
ENGINEER Address ¢~ ~ J ¢ , ~C~, ~ ~¢
Pho.e (H) (W) W 7~ -- ~/ Y~ (M)
(Rev. 1/29/97)
Major Subdivision Application
Page 2
Description of Proposed Use:
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE: List impacts the proposed use will have on property in the vicinity, including, but
not limited to traffic, noise, light, smoke/odor, parking, and describe the steps taken to mitigate or eliminate the impacts.
,'ll
If applicable, a development schedule shall be attached to this application providing reasonable guarantees for the completion
of the proposed development. Estimated Development Cost of the Project: $/.~}D/~o ,'. 0 a
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS:
Number of Structures:
Number of Dwelling Units/Structure:
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit:3q0D sq. ft.
Total Lot Area: 6 80,9 sq. ft.
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property?
,~ yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
¥ t
This application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the case.
Print Applicant's Name
Da'/~ /
Print Owner's Name
Owner's Signature Date
Print Owner's Name
Owner's Signature Date
(Rev. 1/29/97)
3/5/97
ater,
6326 RAMBLER LANE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
612-472-5759
This letter is in regard to the proof of title to the land for the Maple Manors Project.
Title is currently held by the Landsmen's who live in Alexandria.
We are planning to transfer ownership on 3/17/97. Title will then be held by Waters Edge
Investment Co.
Sincerely,
Joe Zylman
President - Waters Edge Investment Co.
· REAL ESTATE BROKER ° GENERAL CONTRACTOR °
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
e-mail: attys@kennedy-graven.com
CORRINE H. THOMSON
Attorney at
Direct Dial (612) 337-9217
February 20, 1997
)?o0
Peggy James
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364-1687
RE: Maple Manors Homeowners Documents
Dear Ms. James:
This is in response to your letter to Curt Pearson dated February 12, 1997. I have reviewed the
documents enclosed with that letter and have the following comments:
There is a discrepancy between the number of lots indicated in the homeowners
documents and the number of lots shown in the approved preliminary plat. The
homeowners documents indicate that there are 15 lots, while the plat shows only 11 lots.
This discrepancy needs to be corrected.
With the exception of the discrepancy noted above, the Declaration contains the necessary
dedication of easements in favor of the City.
There is a provision in the articles that allows the association to be dissolved and, upon
dissolution, the common area to be dedicated to the public. If the dedication is refused,
the property is transferred to any non-profit corporation, association, trust or organization
devoted to a similar purpose. This is noted for your information and not by way of
objection.
Sincerely,
Corrine H. Thomson
cc: John Dean
CC: JOEL ZYLMAN 2-21-97
MARK KOEGLER "
~ JOHN CAMERON "
CAHllS.i7
MU200-62
January 14, 1997
RESOLUTION NO. 9%1
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA WITH VARIANCES
FOR MAPLE MANORS
TWIN HOM~E RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
AT THAT PART OF LOT 25, LAFAYETTE PARK
PID 13-117-24 22 024~, CASE ,~--69
WHEREAS, the applicant, Joe Zylman of Waters Edge Investment Co., has submitted
an application for a Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit to establish 'Maple Manors"
as a Planned Development Area, with variances, pursuant to Section 330 of the Mound City
Code, and;
WHEREAS, the ten housing units in the development will consist of one level twin
homes that will be owner occupied. In order for twin homes to be built on property zoned R-
lA, a Conditional Use Permit needs to be approved to establish a Planned Development Area,
and;
WHEREAS, the project results in the following variances:
Right-of-Way Width
Cul-de-sac Right-of-Way (radius)
Cul-de-sac Paved Street (radius)
Lot Size (all Lots except 8)
Lot Size - Lot 8
..required proposed variance
50' 40' 10'
50' 40' I0'
40' 35' 5'
6,000 sf 3,440 sf 2,560 sf
6,000 sf 3,314 sf 2,686 sf
WHEREAS, the ten (10) units comply with the maximum density allowable under the
shoreland restrictions without the density bonuses that are allowed by the Code. The non-
shoreland PDA standards would allow this site to have 14 units under R-IA zoning. As
proposed, the net density equates to 8,569 square feet of land per unit, and;
WHEREAS, the granting of the variances requested will not confer upon the applicant
any special privilege that is denied owners of other lands in the same zone, and;
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision as conditioned is consistent with the
comprehensive plan, and;
WHEREAS, the proposed design as conditioned is consistent with applicable
development plans and policies, and;
WHEREAS, the physical characteristics of the site are suitable for the type and density
of development contemplated if the conditions imposed herein are met, and;
January 14, 1997
WHEREAS, according to the plan, 18 of the 34 trees on the site will be preserved, and;
WHEREAS, the Mound Wetland Ordinance identifies the wetland contour in the area
of the project as 929.5. A wetland delineation was completed for the site. All of the proposed
units comply with the Watershed District's 35 foot setback requirements from the edge of the
wetland, and;
WltEREAS, this development will create nonconforming situations on the adjacent
properties that are not part of this development. A new street frontage will be created for the
two residential lots that lie along Three Points Blvd. to the south of the site. Parcel 250 has a
garage that is located approximately 5 feet from the property line and the home is located
approximately 15 feet from the new right-of-way line creating variances of 15 feet and 5 feet
respectively. Parcel 246 has a detached garage that is 16 feet from the new right-of-way
resulting in a 4 foot variance from the 20 foot setback requirement. Future improvements to
these homes may require approval of a variance. The construction of the new street is certainly
grounds for approving (recognizing) variances for the existing conditions should such be
necessary in the future, and;
WHEREAS, the City has considered traffic and other aspects of the proposed project
as it might affect public health, safety or welfare and impose conditions upon the approval
addressing those considerations. The proposed twin homes would generate traffic ranging from
59 to 65 trips per day, according to published standards, and;
WHEREAS, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities are
being provided, and;
WHEREAS, The twin home use that is proposed is an appropriate land use for the
existing site that lies between the condominium complex to the east and the business zoned
property to the west, and;
WHEREAS, the proposed project as conditioned will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously
recommended approval, with conditions, subject to the following findings of fact:
Now that the property is rezoned, it could possibly have up to 14 units, therefore,
the 10 units proposed is not a large impact.
The proposed layout of the twin homes has a minimal impact on the overall land
the roadway and cul-de-sac are typical of others that have recently been approved
by the City and have worked well.
The proposed lot sizes, including common areas, overall are beyond what is
required in the R-IA zone.
January 14, 1997
NOW, ~FORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by [he City Counci! of [he City of Mound,
Mirmesom, to hereby:
Approve the Preliminary Plat according to the attached Exhibit 'A', and approve a
Conditional Use Permit to establish Maple Manors as a Planned Development Area, with
variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Watershed District.
The applicant shall be responsible for park dedication requirements consistent
with Section 330:120 of the Mound Code of Ordinances.
The applicant shall submit for staff review and approval, detailed landscaping
plans for the site showing plantings on the association property to mitigate tree
loss due to road and unit construction and containing typical landscaping
treatments for twin home units. Landscaping plans shall identify all plant
materials by name, size (height or caliper) and root type and shall be compliant
with the minimum planting sizes referenced in the City Code.
Covenants, as submitted by the applicant shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.
Escrow accounts shall be established as required by City Code and shall at all
times, maintain a positive fund balance.
The preliminary plat shall be revised to show a 50 foot right-of-way for the land
area between the two adjacent single family residential properties.
Locate and show on the site plan the existing driveway to the westerly residence
(Parcel 246) to determine if it needs to be relocated, and if so, the cost of
relocating shall be born by the developer.
o
All drainage newly created by the development, either by excavating or building
shall be maintained within the property so it does not go to the east and
negatively impact any property to the east and that the provision be made that the
engineer specifically look at that property abutting the east to determine that water
flow stay within that property.
The site plan and grading plan be incorporated in this resolution and be made a
part thereof.
January 14, 1997
B. Approve the following variances as part of the Planned Development Area:
Right-of-Way Width
Cul-de-sac Right-of-Way (radius)
Cul-de-sac Paved Street (radius)
Lot Siz~ (all Lots except 8)
Lot Siz~ - Lot 8
required proposed variance
50' 40' 10'
50' 40' 10'
40' 35' 5'
6,000 sf 3,440 sf 2,560 sf
6,000 sf 3,314 sf 2,686 sf
C. Approve the development of the property legally described as follows:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot 25; Also
that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying northerly of the
northerly right-of-way line of Three Points Boulevard; Also that part of the East 100 feet
of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of a line drawn east at right angles
to the west line of said Lot 25 from a point on said west line distant 318.29 feet north,
as measured along said west line, from the southwest comer of said Lot 25. PID 13-
117-24 22 0249.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Jensen and seconded by
Councilmember Hanus.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Ahrens, Hanus, Jensen and Weycker.
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Polston.
Mayo~'
Attest: City Clerk
o
EXHIBIT A, RESOLUTION ~97-1
MAPLE MANORS PRELIMINARY PLAT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ORDINANCE//83-1997
AN ORDINANCE REZONING CERTAIN LANDS AS DESCRIBED
FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
TO R-lA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
The City of Mound does ordain, The City of Mound Zoning Map is hereby amended as
follows:
Property described as follows, is hereby rezoned from R-1 Single Family Residential
(10,000 square foot minimum lot area), to R-IA Single Family Residential (6,000 square foot
minimum lot area:
5490 Three Points Blvd. (vacant land): That part of the West 100 feet of Lot 25,
"Lafayette Park Lake Minnetonka" lying north of the South 345 feet of said Lot
25; Also that part of the East 50 feet of the West 150 feet of said Lot 25 lying
northerly of the northerly fight-of-way line of Three Points Boulevard; Also that
part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of said Lot 25 which lies north of
a line drawn east at right angles to the west line of said Lot 25 from a point on
said west line distant 318.29 feet north, as measured along said west line, from
the southwest comer of said Lot 25. PID 13-117-24 22 0249.
5510 Three Points Blvd.: That part of the West 100 feet of the South 250 feet
of said Lot 25 and of the East 50 feet of the South 250 feet of Lot 26 lying North
cf Three Points Blvd. PID 13-117-24 22 0246.
5470 Three Points Blvd.: That part of the East 100 feet of the West 250 feet of
said LOt 25 lying South of a line running East at a fight angle with the West line
of said Lot 25 from a point thereon 318.29 feet North from the Southwest comer
of said Lot 25 and lying North of Three Points Blvd. PID 13-117-24 22 0250.
The Zoning Map of the City of Mound on file with the City Clerk is hereby amended
in accordance with these rezoning provisions.
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council January 14, 1997
Published in The Laker February 1, 1997
,I, I
PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
MINUTES
MAY 8, 1997
Present were: Peter Meyer, Bev Botko, Rita Pederson, Tom Casey, City Council Representative
Leah Weycker, Parks Director Jim Fackler, and Secretary Clare Link. Those absent and
excused were: Marilyn Byrnes.
Also in attendance were: None
MINUTES
Motion made by Meyers, seconded by Botko to approve the minutes of the April 10,
1997 Park and Open Space Commission meeting, as written. Motion carried
unanimously.
PARK TOUR, DISCUSSION, PROPOSED DATE_
Pederson noted interest has been shown in visiting Crescent Park, Bluff Park, The Depot, and
· tko su eested people be alerted we are coming. Meyer stated that would be a
Avon Park Bo g~ . ...... ,_A ,_ ~,,r. ot each hark and discuss what
· 'n Pederson stated me intent woum ut tu ~,~,~- ,~ ~-
separate meeU g. · e nei hborhoods
suggestions have been made to improve them and integrate them to what th g
want. Meyer asked if we want them to be a community park or a neighborhood park. Pederson
stated their input is important in spite of the fact they are there for use by all residents of
Mound. Meyer stated it is important to get the neighborhoods involved· Weycker stated signs
could be posted to show what is happening in the parks.
Commissioners discussed a possible date for the tour· Fackler suggested it be the same night
as a meeting, but he did not have to attend. Monday, May 19 at 6:30 p.m..was selected for the
tour date. Commissioners will meet at City Hall.
Commissioners discussed prioritizing which parks would be visited.
Commissioners discussed long range trail plans. Casey asked staff to provide a copy of
Minnetrista's current trail plan for discussion on a future agenda.
Commissioners determined Avon would be the top priority, Swenson, Crescent and Three
Points· Motion by Botko, and seconded by Casey to continue discussion of this item.
Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner continued discussion of park prioritization for the tour. They discussed another
date for an additional tour· Wednesday, June 11 was selected for the date. Mower, The Depot,
Bluffs Beach, and Centerview Beach. Meyer stated there is a possible date for a structure
City of Mound
Advisory Park and Open Space Commission
May 8, 1997
Page 3
Weycker stated many groups are interested in adopting a park. Casey stated the Adopt a Green
Space program should also include the ability to adopt a park. Botko showed an example of
parks and recreation which is distributed by the City of Savage. Commissioners discussed the
Adopt a Green Space program. Pederson suggested everyone determine creative ways to market
the program. Weycker asked if this could be added to the city newsletter. Fackler stated it
could be done. It will be going out in June.
Motion by Casey, and seconded by Botko to ask staff to include in the next
newsletter an article inviting people to volunteer to adopt green spaces. Motion
carried unanimously.
Pederson suggested an information box be attached to an existing post which would include the
Adopt a Green Space form. Weycker stated a situation where a ball diamond was upgraded
could have been less traumatic if a flyer had been posted at the park. Fackler stated it would
be helpful to have a contact person listed as well. Weycker suggested they contact the City to
find out who the park partner is. She stated there needs to be a procedure for notifying
residents of what is going on in the parks. Fackler stated it should be kept in mind how many
times something like this would be used. It shouldn't be used as a bulletin board. Weycker
stated existing posts should be used. Commissioners will look at the current signs to see if there
is space available.
DISCUSS SKATING RINK
Meyer stated there is a specific site, and there is an interest in a future joint powers agreement
with the school district. He believed the agreement could be executed even though a site hasn't
been selected. Pederson asked how soon a site would be selected. Meyer noted it is on school
property.
Motion by Meyer, and seconded by Casey to recommend the City, School district
and hockey association, and Mound arena execute the joint powers agreement
subject to a site selection.
Discussion of Motion:
Meyer discussed the joint powers agreement and who would be responsible for upkeep,
maintenance and staffing. He discussed possible site locations. He believed major items can
be agreed on. Fackler stated a fifth group might need to be involved if the determination is
made the rink will be where the Babe Ruth teams play. Commissioners discussed the site
location. Casey suggested Meyer draw up a list of the items each party has agreed on. Fackler
stated it will be part of the agreement of the joint powers and is not something the Park
Commission needs to discuss. Weycker asked when the work for preparing the site would need
to be done. Meyer stated probably in late October. Commissioners discussed the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSS JUNE AGENDA
City of Mound
Advisory Park and Open Space Commission
May 8, 1997
Page 4
Faclder stated an updated calendar will be provided.
CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT
Weycker stated she received a phone call from Pilgrim Park neighbors regarding the speed limit
in the area. The resident was also concerned about the use of the park for uses other than what
should be allowed. Commissioners discussed park uses.
Weycker discussed the importance of notifying people when changes will be made in a park.
Commissioners discussed the Seton park dedication.
Motion by Casey, and seconded by Pederson to recommend the City Council obtain
a certified appraisal to determine the fair market value to determine the park
dedication and apply the 10%.
Commissioners discussed the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
Casey suggested park acquisition be added to the June agenda.
PARK DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Fackler stated there are two seasonal full-time staff members checking all playgrounds. The
cemetery is being maintained. The Bluff Parks and Depot projects should be completed within
a week. A fence has been installed around the cemetery. Two mowers will be starting soon.
Meyer asked if the sand from Crescent Park can be moved to a clean fill area. Fackler stated
there isn't that much sand out there. Weycker asked if it would be possible to put black dirt in
Crescent Park. Fackler stated surveying would have to be done before fill can be added.
Pederson asked if the improvements for Sorbo Park have been decided. Fackler stated the
dedication will be sometime in August. He is working on estimates of costs for improvements.
Pederson asked if there is any way the pea gravel can be kept off the basketball court. The
swingset also comes loose at the apex.
Weycker suggested letting the residents in the Avon Park and Crescent Park areas know we are
coming to tour the parks. Fackler suggested viewing the parks and putting it on the agenda for
review at a future meeting with the interested residents.
Pederson stated she would like the satellites serviced right before the Fourth of July. Fackler
discussed the service scheduling.
Motion by Meyer, seconded by Botko to adjourn the Park and Open Space
City of Mound
Advisory Park and Open Space Commission
May 8, 1997
Page 5
Commission Meeting at 9:19 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
DOCK & COMMONS COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A MEETING
APRIL 3, 1997
Present were: Commissioners Frank Ahrens, Jim Funk, Mark Goldberg, Dennis Hopkins, and
Gordy Tulberg. Also present were City Manager Ed Shukle, Parks Director Jim Fackler, Dock
Inspector Tom McCaffrey, and Secretary Peggy James. Mayor Bob Polston was absent and
excused.
Citizens present: Councilmember Leah Weycker and Mike Aspelin.
INTRODUCTIONS & REVIEW OF ORDINANCE CREATING THE DOCK & COMMONS
ADVISORY COMMISSION
City Manager, Ed Shukle, welcomed the new Commission members and explained that this is
the first meeting and its purpose is to get organized and to get a calendar established.
Shulde noted that staff neglected to put the Encroachment Policy on the agenda and asked if the
Commission wanted to discuss it.
Shukle briefly reviewed the ordinance adopted by the Council that created the Dock and
Commons Commission and the terms that were designated for the members. Shukle reviewed
the procedure used when terms expire and how Commission members get reappointed.
Shukle suggested the Commission come up with one standard day per month for their meetings
so they have a consistent schedule. Ahrens commented that they need to have at least one
meeting a month, and asked if they can also establish one work session per month? Shukle
noted that they need to consider staff and meeting space, and he noted that because they are now
a formal advisory commission they need somebody to take minutes at their meetings.
They discussed the issue of having council members attending their meetings and receiving input
from them and the possibilities of violating open meeting laws. Shukle noted that if more than
two councilmembers are present, in addition to Mayor Polston who is on the Commission, it
would violate the open meeting law. He also suggested that a councilmember could attend the
meetings but that they should not participate in discussions.
ELECTION OF CHAIR & VICE CHAIR
Tulberg nominated Mark Goldberg for Chair. Ahrens nominated Gordy Tulberg as Vice Chair.
There being no further nominations, Ahrens moved to elect Goldberg as
Chair and Tulberg and Vice Chair. Funk seconded the motion. Motion
carried unanimously.
Dock & Commons Commission Minutes
April 3, 1997
ESTABLISH REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE
MOTION made by Tulberg to schedule the regular Dock and Commons
Commission meetings on the third Thursday of each month, at 7:30 p.m.
Ahrens seconded the motion. Carried unanimously.
Ahrens asked about the possibility of regularly scheduled workshops. Hopkins and Funk stated
that they both prefer to meet only once per month. Goldberg suggested that they may need a
couple of work sessions for the first couple of months to get organized.
MOTION by Funk, seconded by Hopkins, that the Dock and Commons
Commission not schedule regular work sessions. Motion carried
unanimously.
Ahrens asked staff to review the proposed agenda calendar. Jim Fackler, Parks Director,
reviewed the proposed agenda calendar on page 3 of their packet. He noted that the dates of
the Dock Application Forms and Dock Fees should reflect 1998, not 1997.
Fackler briefly reviewed the procedure for annual review of the Dock Location Map.
Fackler suggested that in May they review the procedure manual as it relates to the processing
of public land permits, then in June they will bring the first batch of permits to the Commission.
Fackler noted that there are some permits that require renewal. Fackler confirmed that the
permits that will be brought to the Commission for review will not include encroachments such
as boathouses or decks until the Encroachment Policy is reviewed by the Dock and Commons
Commission and acted on by the Council. Ahrens confirmed that the Encroachment Policy has
been referred back to them for review by the Council, and encroachments such as boathouses
and decks need to be addressed.
Goldberg asked the Commission what issues they need to review. Goldberg summarized the
projects/issues on the table:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Encroachment Policy
Woodland Point Mediation
Pembroke Multiple Dock (address problems from last year)
New Multiple Dock (location and timeline for installation)
Fishing piers
Ahrens asked if there is money budgeted for a new multiple dock in 1997. Fackler confirmed
that about $30,000 is budgeted.
Dock & Commons Commission Minutes
April 3, 1997
Ahrens noted that the implementation steps for new multiple docks as developed by the
Commons Task Force was to continue in the Devon area; he suggested they look at the Amhurst
and Devon area as potential sites.
Goldberg suggested they first review the process for implementing a new multiple dock, rather
than the location. Ahrens noted, if they want to get a dock in for this summer, they don't have
much time. Funk suggested they resolve the problems with the Pembroke Multiple Dock before
they discuss the implementation of a new multiple dock.
Goldberg suggested they discuss Woodland Point since people were present specifically for that
issue.
Fackler referred the agenda and explained that the Commission should be addressing items "5.
Review Agenda Calendar" and "6. Proposed Work Rules" prior to discussing Woodland Point
which is number 7. on the agenda.
WORK RULES
MOTION made by Tulberg, seconded by Ahrens, to adopt the Work Rules
as written. Motion carried unanimously.
WOODLAND POINT MEDIATION
Shukle noted that this item was placed on the agenda at the request of the Mayor.
Goldberg recalled that a mediation agreement was drafted, but that it did not happen, and that
they will need to review the mediation conclusion and determine if it can be put back together
and implemented before docks are put back in this Spring. Goldberg suggested that they need
someone to outline the key legal issues relating to the Woodland Point mediation.
Ahrens asked how much the Commission needs to get involved with this issue. Fackler
confirmed that the City is not in control of this area, other than two docks, one of which is
located at the end of Woodland Road.
Shukle stated that he was involved with the mediation group as a representative of the City. He
reviewed that the reason they set up mediation was because there was an argument on what the
legal determination was. In the Fall of 1995 a decision from the Examiner of Titles was
supported by a District Judge, and at the time the Council decided not to appeal the ruling and
decided to try and resolve issues without further litigation. A mediator was provided for by the
State of Minnesota at no charge. A mediation agreement was developed but did not get signed
by all, so the mediation agreement came to the Council. At that time, those who wanted docks
in Woodland Point had docks, and so it was decided to re-evaluate the agreement at the end of
the docking season. Mayor Polston suggested the issue be on the agenda, and Shukle is not sure
what he planned to do with it. Shukle offered to put a memorandum together which clarifies
the history and current status of the Woodland Point mediation.
3
Dock & Commons Commission Minutes
April 3, 1997
Mike Aspelin, resident in Woodland Point, stated that what fell apart after the mediation was
that City Attorney, John Dean determined that the City could not legally implement the
mediation agreement with what was happening with the lawsuit, and the City was afraid to
enforce laws for fear of additional lawsuits. Until more litigation actually changes, not much
can happen. He stated that it sounds like in June they may have to pull their docks.
Shukle stated that there was not 100% participation from the neighborhood and an association
never got formed.
Goldberg noted that even though the City has no jurisdiction over that commons, the City will
probably be the party that will be in the middle of the abutters and nonabutters to solve the
mediation issue, but feels that the City will need to be invited to do so.
Aspelin stated that they are having an informational meeting about the lawsuit and the City has
been invited. Aspelin reviewed that the upcoming lawsuit is actually a request for a judgment
that people have the right to have a dock and to fish from the commons.
Goldberg suggested the Commission receive an outline from staff of the judgments and
problems, and determine the key issues on the table and the next steps. Fackler handed out
copies of the mediation agreement to the Commission members.
Tulberg asked if staff can have this information ready for their next meeting on April 17.
Shukle indicated that he will try.
AGENDA CALENDAR
The following items were added to the agenda calendar for discussion on April 17.
1. Woodland Point Mediation. As discussed earlier.
Pembroke Multiple Dock. Staff is to bring reconfigurafion options to the meeting
showing ways to help alleviate the problem of the two inside slips which became
unusable last year due to low water without going too far into Rod Plaza's area. Staff
is also to provide for the Commission a list of dock applicants for the multiple dock and
the number of boats each has applied for. As suggested by the Parks Director, it was
decided that the Dock Inspector, Tom McCaffrey, should call each site holder to find out
their intentions for the number of boats they plan to have for the season. The
Commission is to also discuss how they can change the program for next year to make
it clear to the dock holders that they cannot add boats during mid-season so they will
know how many boats they need to make accommodations for at the beginning of the
season. Ahrens noted that it is their long term goal to allow only one slip per person at
the multiple docks. Hopkins feels it is important to keep multiple slip holders apprised
of any changes in the program. The option of reconfiguring the dock to go in front of
the swim area was discussed. Fackler noted that the boat launch/winter access area at
Dock & Commons Commission Minutes
April 3, 1997
Pembroke is closed from June 1 to September 15 of each year, so during that time it is
used as a swimming beach. Ahrens commented that it has been suggested that by having
the dock in front of the swimming area, it would provide safety because boats could not
enter the swimming area. Goldberg commented that this is a transitional year and a
configuration will need to be chosen for this year and they will have to work on the
program for next year.
New Multiple Dock. Ahrens agreed they need to solve issues with the Pembroke dock
before they develop a new dock. Ahrens, however, suggested the Amhurst or Devon
area as potential sites. Fackler commented that the implementation steps outlined in the
Multiple Dock Policy will need to be followed when choosing a location. Fackler also
noted that in addition to the locations suggested by Ahrens, he has received outside
requests from individuals for multiple docks to be installed at Twin Park and at the end
of Fairview Lane. Goldberg asked that staff bring ideas of areas to the next meeting.
Encroachment Policy. Ahrens noted that items have been put on hold pending the
proposed encroachment policy. It was decided that Goldberg would bring a list of items
that they need further research on for review at their next meeting. Goldberg foresees
the Commission requesting legal research on some issues relating to this policy.
Goldberg noted that this item was last discussed at a COW meeting. The secretary is to
get the Commission a copy of those minutes. The Commission agreed that they would
like to have this policy ready to be forwarded onto the Council by August.
It was determined that Fishing Piers would be discussed in July.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Ahrens, seconded by Tulberg to adjourn the Dock & Commons
Commission Meeting at 9:16 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Bock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
PEMBROKE M'U-LTIPLE DOCK SITE
April 17, 1997
Ahrens reviewed a proposed motion which was handed out to the commission that he had
prepared prior to the meeting.
The Commission discussed the fact that there are seven dock holders, and two of them were
permitted to move to this multiple slip dock with two boats because it was a pilot program at
that time. Ahrens explained that this motion will help them reduce the number of boats at this
dock to one boat per person. Ahrens emphasized that last year only seven boats were actually
moored at the dock.
Hopkins referred to the Multiple-slip Dock Program and noted that it says that they will give
up their extra boats. Goldberg noted that the program was implemented after the pilot program
was put in place so they are not bound to the program rules.
It was discussed whether it is too late to implement Ahrens' proposed motion for 1997.
The different dock configurations were reviewed. Ahrens commented that he is opposed to
expanding the dock into Rod Plaza's area.
It was noted that two of the dock holders are not within walking distance of the dock. Faclder
commented that this commons is not a dedicated commons, and you cannot regulate who gets
a dock where.
MOTION made by Ahrens to recommend to the City Council the following
changes in the multiple-slip dock system for the Devon Commons at the
Pembroke access for the 1997 boating season:
" WHEREAS, the city council has approved on January 28, 1997 the "IVlultiple-slip
Dock Program" as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the section
entitled "Multiple Docks."
WHEREAS, the city council has approved making the Pembroke multiple-slip dock
a permanent program with a suggested long-term goal to reduce the dock size to a
minimum of seven twenty-four foot dock slips.
WHEREAS, the dock configuration needs to be modified to improve the accessibility
of the three inside dock slips. The Conunission recognizes that the water depth for the
inside dock slips were too shallow latter in the 1996 boating season and maneuvering the
boat into the dock slips was difficult.
WHEREAS, the multiple-slip docks are intended to be a small neighborhood dock
system for individuaLs within walking distance of their homes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and Commons Commission recommends to the City
Council on April 17, 1997 that the multiple-slip dock at the Pembroke access on the Devon
Commons be modified for the 1997 boating season with the inside slips (F, G, and I-I) being
placed in the manner as displayed on Exhibit A.
The docks should be configured in such a manner as to minimize the impact on the butting
property owners at this access.
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be assigned one boat slip within the
multiple-slip dock system at Pembroke access. Dock holders will be assigned a boat slip for
the 1997 boating season based on the actual number of slips that were required to moor
boats for the 1996 season. No additional boats may be added during the 1997 boating
season.
Non-abutting dock holders with more than one boat will be assigned an additional dock slip
(A or J) for their second boat for 1997 boating season. The Commission's goal is to reduce
the number of boat slips to one boat slip per dock site holder. Therefore, as dock site
holders reduce the number of boats of record on their dock application to one boat, they
may not increase that number after that point. Current dock site holders with only one
boat may not increase the number of boats registered in the city dock program.
Non-abutter dock holders within the multiple-slip dock system should be within walking
distance of their homes. Dock site holders outside of the immediate neighborhood should
be moved to another commons for the 1998 boating season.
At the point that Craig Watson registers only two boats on his dock application, the
Commi~ion recommends that Mr. Watson be assigned to the multiple-slip dock at
Pembroke. This is providing that there are available dock slips within the Pembroke
multiple-slip dock. His individual dock site would no longer be used as a dock location."
MOTION seconded by Tulberg.
Funk commented that he prefers dock configuration Option #2 as suggested by staff because it
addresses the "low water" issue and still leaves 15 to 20 feet to Plaza's dock. Fackler
commented, when Watson's dock is eliminated, everything can be moved towards the beach.
Also, this proposal keeps the dock slips equal in size.
Faclder emphasized the need for input from the dock holders before changes are made. Fackler
confirmed that LMCD approval should not be required in this case, but any new multiple docks
may need to get approval.
Ahrens moved to amend the motion as follows:
"Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be
assigned one boat slip within the multiple-slip dock system at
Pembroke access. Dock holders will be assigned a boat slip for
the 199:78 boating season based on the actual number of slips
that were required to moor boats for the 19967 season. No
additional boats may be added during the 199:78 boating
season."
e
Add: "A meeting will be held with the dock site holders to
review the dock configuration options prior to May 15."
Add: "If the second boat slip goes unused for one season, then
that dock holder will relinquish the right to have that second
slip."
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
Tulberg seconded the motion to amend.
April 17, 1997
Ahrens called the question. The vote to end debate carried 5 to 1 with Hopkins opposed.
The MOTION as amended carried unanimously.
This recommendation will be reviewed by the City Council on May 13, 1997.
MOTION made by Tulberg, seconded by Ahrens to schedule a meeting with
the Pembroke Multiple-slip dock holders for Saturday, April 26, 1997 at 9:30
a.m. at City Hall. Staff is to notify the dock holders as a soon as possible.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hopkins stated that he has to work on Saturdays and will not be able to attend the meeting.
NEW MULTIPLE DOCKS
Ahrens reviewed a proposed motion which was handed out to the commission that he had
prepared prior to the meeting.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by tulberg to recommend to the city
council the implementation of multiple-slip dock systems for Devon Commons
at the Devon, Amhurst, and Roanoke accesses for the 1997 boating season,
as follows:
" WHEREAS, the City Council has approved on January 28, 1997 the "Multiple-slip
Dock Program" as outlined in Dock & Commons Commi~ion manual under the section
entitled "Multiple Docks."
WHEREAS, one of the multiple-slip dock objectives is to improve the level of
satisfaction with the conunon's dock program by reducing or eliminating the number of
dock sites in front of abutter's homes.
WHEREAS, The flu'st priority (based on dissatisfaction level as found in the
November 8, 1995 tabulation of commons surveys) in implementing multiple-slip docks is
Devon Common.
WHEREAS, the Amhurst Lane, Devon Lane and Fairview Lane accesses have non-
abutter dock sites located in front of abutter's homes.
WHEREAS, $22,500 was budgeted in calendar year 1997 in the Dock Fund for the
purchase of three multiple-slip docks for the 1997 boating season.
WHEREAS, the multiple-slip docks are intended to be a small neighborhood dock
system for individuals within walking distance of their homes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and Commons Commission recommends to the City
Council on April 17, 1997 that a multiple-slip dock be placed at the ends of fire lanes at
Devon, Amhurst, and Roanoke accesses by May 23, 1997.
The docks should be configured in such a manner as to minimize the impact on the abutting
property owners at the subject accesses.
Dock & Commons Advisor. Commission Minutes April 17, 1997
A meeting with affected abutter and non-abutter dock holders should take place by
Saturday, April 26, 1997. A// affected parties should be notified in writing of the meeting.
The following multiple docks will have a maximum number of boat slips not to exceed 24
feet in length and 12.5 feet in width:
Devon Access
Amhurst Access
Roanoke Access
7 boat slips
4 boat slips
4 boat slips
Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be assigned one boat slip within the
multiple-slip dock. The boat of record on the 1997 dock application shall be the boat
assigned to the boat slip. No additional boats may be added during boating season.
Non-abutting dock holders with more than one boat will be able to keep an individual dock
site only for 1997 boating season. They will be assigned an individual dock site at another
commons for the 1998 boating season.
Non-abutter dock holders within the multiple-slip dock system should be within walking
distance of their homes. Dock site holders outside of the immediate neighborhood should
be moved to another commons for the 1998 boating season.
On a shared docks, the dock holder of record shall be the dock holder moved to the
multiple-slip dock. We will attempt to accommodate the "share" at the multiple-slip dock,
but not to exceed the maximum number of boat slips authorized for that multiple-slip
dock."
Goldberg expressed a concern that all the multiple docks that are being proposed are on Devon
Common, and questioned if other areas should be considered.
Goldberg questioned if they need to get approval from the council before they meet with the
affected dock site holders. Ahrens commented, It was the intent that the Commission first find
out if the dock holders are in favor of the change, but suggested, due to lack of dine that the
Council could approve the motion subject to acceptance by the dock holders.
Goldberg noted that the last three paragraphs of the motion are already addressed in the rules,
and suggested that the second and third to the last paragraphs be deleted. Ahrens commented
that it was the intent to follow the rules.
What to do with shared docks was briefly discussed. Ahrens noted this is addressed in his
motion.
The Parks Director commented that he has received two requests for multiple-slip docks, one
at Fairview Lane and one at Twin Park. Faclder noted that the docks at Fairview have 20 foot
spacing, they are located in front of two abutting homes, and there is a total of 8 eight docks.
The request for the multiple dock came from one of the abutting owners.
Polston suggested they could eliminate one of the proposed Devon sites and add the Fairview
site. Ahrens commented that the abutter by the Amhurst access is very unhappy and feels this
area should be looked at. He also feels the Devon access needs to be looked at.
MOTION made by Tulberg, seconded by Ahrens, to amend the motion, as
follows:
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
1. Delete the Roanoke Access as a multiple-slip dock site, and add
the Fairview Lane Access at Lake Blvd.
April 17, 1997
2. Delete the second and third to last paragraphs.
Amend the following: "NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and
Commons Commission recommends to the City Council on
April 17, 1997 that a multiple-slip dock be placed at the ends
of the f'tre lands at the Devon, Amhurst, and Roanoke Fairview
by ~'~" ~ ~ ~ as soon as possible.
accesses
It was also recommended that this recommendation be heard by the City
Council on April 22, 1997. Motion carried unanimously.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #97-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF MULTIPLE-SLIP DOCK SYSTEMS AT
THE AMHURST LANE ACCESS ON DEVON COMMON,
THE DEVON LANE ACCES ON DEVON COMMON,
AND AT THE FAIRVIEW LANE ACCESS ON LAKE BLVD.
WHEREAS, the City Council has conceptually approved on January 28, 1997 the
"Multiple-slip Dock Program" as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the
section entitled "Multiple Docks", and;
WHEREAS, one of the multiple-slip dock objectives is to improve the level of
satisfaction with the common's dock program by reducing or eliminating the number of dock
sites in front of abutter's homes, and;
WHEREAS, the Amhurst Lane, Devon Lane and Fairview Lane accesses have non-
abutter dock sites located in front of abutter's homes, and;
WHEREAS, $22,500 was budgeted in calendar year 1997 in the Dock Fund for the
purchase and installation of three multiple-slip docks for the 1997 boating season, and;
WHEREAS, the multiple-slip docks are intended to be a small neighborhood dock
system for individuals within walking distance of their homes, and;
WHEREAS, the Dock and Commons Commission unanimously recommended approval
of this proposal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound
that a multiple-slip docks be placed at the ends of Amhurst Lane, Devon Lane and Fairview
Lane as soon as possible, subject to the following:
The docks should be configured in such a manner as to minimize the impact on the
abutting property owners at the subject accesses.
A meeting with affected abutter and non-abutter dock holders did take place. All
affected parties were notified in writing of the meeting.
o
The following multiple docks will have a maximum number of boat slips not to exceed
24 feet in length and 12.5 feet in width:
a. Amhurst Lane Access = 4 boat slips
b. Devon Lane Access = 7 boat slips
c. Fairview Lane Access = 8 boat slips
Proposed Resolution
New Multiple-slip Docks
April 22, 1997
p. 2
Each individual dock site permit holder will be assigned one boat slip within the multiple-
slip dock. The boat of record on the 1997 dock application shall be the boat assigned
to the boat slip. No additional boats may be added during boating season.
o
On a shared docks, the dock holder of record shall be the dock holder moved to the
multiple-slip dock. We will attempt to accommodate the "share" at the multiple-slip
dock, but not to exceed the maximum number of boat slips authorized for that multiple-
slip dock.
May 9, 1997
CITY OF MOUND
To:
From:
Re:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler, Parks Director
New Multiple Slip Docks //
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
On Saturday May 3, 1997 the Dock a and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) met
with abutting homeowners and non-abutting dock site holders at fi.om the Fairview access to
Lake Bulavard and Amhurst access to Devon Common. The discussion was the question of
possible implementation of city owned multiple slip docks at those sites.
Attached you will find the list of persons present at the meeting, its was noted that three
individuals that were notified could not attend but would be contacted by the Dock Inspector,
Tom McCaffery, for their output.
The consensus fi.om the meeting was that multiple docks could be installed and that this
should be done as soon as possible. There would be cooperation between abutting and
non-abutting site holders to allow temporary dockage of boats at dock sites not in the location of
the site for installation of the multiple slip dock.
I am currently working to obtain costs, installation time and the dock design. I have
provided a concept plan for each site with the desired number of slips. The Fairview site shows
six slips which would accommodate one more than originally anticipated, this due to a new share
person (located at 'F'). This new share is still in the application process and it could not be
allowed which would eliminate one site ('F') and bring the slip count to five. If this sixth site is
allowed now it could be removed at a time when a site on this dock is not renewed, then we
would only use sites 'A' through 'E'. The Amhurst access would need to have five sites to
accommodate all the non-abutting people at that site.
The DCAC realizes that this is on a fast track process but feels there is cooperation from
all those concerned that would allow this to happen yet this spring. At this time the commission
is looking for council approval to allow for expenditures within the limits of the 1997 budget to
purchase and install multiple slip docks at these locations.
CC:
Ed Schukle
Tom McCaffrey
DCAC
prtnled on recycled paper
J J, J,, ,I iii,, ~ JJJ,,
Minutes - Mound City Council - April 22, 1997
1.11
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ~MPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE-SLIi,
DOCK SYSTEMS AT THE AMHURST LANE ACCESS ON DEVON COMMON
AND AT THE FAIRVI-EW LANE ACCESS ON LAKE BLVD.
The Mayor reported that the Dock & Commons Advisory Commission is recommending
approval of these multiple dock systems at Amhurst Lane Access on Devon Commons, the
Devon Access on Devon Common, and at the Fairview Lane Access on Lake Blvd. This was
a budgeted item. The Mayor assured the Council that the Commission will be meeting with the
neighborhood groups to go over the multiple dock system. They will be sending notices to all
those involved. What the Dock Commission wants is authorization to proceed with holding the
public hearing and if the consensus is that the neighborhood wants a multiple dock system, then
they would like to go ahead and get bids or quotations for the purchase and installation of the
docks.
The Council asked that number 2 in the proposed resolution be changed to read as follows:
A meeting with affected abutter and non-abutter dockl~lders will take place. All
affected parties will be notified in writing of the meeting.
Councilmember Weycker asked that the first Whereas be changed to read as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council has conceptual~_ approved on January 28, 1997, the
'Multiple-slip Dock Program' as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the
section entitled Multiple Docks; and
The Council did not object to this change.
Councilmember Jensen voiced concern about putting docks at the ends of the streets. This could
be a problem in the Woodland Point area on Wawonassa Common. She does not want to give
the impression somewhere down the road that the City has abandoned the public interest in the
Commons.
The Mayor stated that what the Dock & Commons Commission is asking for is the authority
to hold a public hearing and to expend up to that amount of money and to get bids or quotations
for the multiple docks and installation.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus to authorize the Dock & Commons
Commission to hold public hearings on the proposed multiple dock slips at Amhurst
Lane Access, Devon Lane Access and Fairview Access. If it is determined that the
public wants these multiple docks, the City Council will obtain bids or quotations
for the purchase and installation of the docks not to exceed the budgeted amount of
$22,500.
I
1711.
32
PERSONS PRESENT AT M~,ETING
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
i!.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
NAME
ADDRESS
Multiple-slip Dock Program
Approved 2-28-97
p. 2of3
A significant percent of dock site holders interested in or willing to try a
multiple-slip dock.
5. Existence of a logical location for a multiple-slip dock in that area:
a. Convenient access.
b. No undue burden on adjacent abutting homes.
Implementation steps.
Relocate dock holders to a commons user-fee supported and maintained
multiple-slip dock. This will be accomplished by placing multiple docks at the
ends of fire lanes, street ends, and other locations that are not directly in front
of an abutter's property.
2. The City will be the trustee and manager of the multiple-slip dock system.
Being that the Pembroke mukiple dock pilot project was a successful program
in 1996, make the Pembroke multiple dock a permanent program with a
suggested long-term goal maximum of seven twenty-four foot dock slips.
When an indMdual dock site permit holder moves to a multiple-slip dock, that
individual dock site will no longer be used as a dock location.
The multiple-slip dock is to be used for ingress and egress by the dock permit
holders and their guests only. This is needed for boar security and user safety
for the permit holders.
o
Where possible, leave room for a visitor boat. Visiting would be limited to
three days.
Measure the outcome: Measure dock holder's satisfaction with dock program,
dock spacing between docks, privacy, etc.
Any time a multiple dock is pror)osed, all individuals affected will be notified
in writing, of a meetino~, and if needed a notice will also be published in the
paper, a public hearino, will be held. and all those affected will have the
ability to vote and the majority will rule.
Use Plan for Public Lands issues to review that will affect the multiple-slip dock.
what is the total number of boat storage units that the system needs to and can
support:
ao
throughout the program.
In this area?
Multiple-slip Dock Program
Conceptually Approved by the Council on 1-28-97
Reflects Changes Recommended by Park Commission on 1-9-97
Be
Ce
Review of underlying objectb'es for Commons Dock Program.
1. Maintain total number of boats participating in the commons dock program.
2. Keep nonabutter boats within wal'king distance from their homes.
3. Recognize that some commons have more problems than others due to
topography and/or tight quarters.
4. Work to improve abntter's "sense of privacy" without affecting nonabutters
use of the lakeshore commons.
Multiple-slip dock objectives.
1. To improve the level of satisfaction with the commons dock program by
reducing or eliminating the number of dock sites in front of aburter's homes.
2. Reduce nonabutter cost by providing permits for boat slips that do not require
them to have their own docks.
3. Improved shoreline appearance and reduced congestion.
The multiple-slip dock system is to be fully funded with current Dock Fund
fees.
Criteria for considering an area for a multiple-slip dock.
1.
High level of dissatisfaction with current commons program. Use November
8, 1995 tabulation of commons survey satisfaction levels as a basis for
proceeding. First priority (based on dissatisfaction level) is Devon Commons.
Shoreline dock congestion.
Topography/tight quarters: Houses close to the water and/or at eye level with
the water.
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
e-mail: attys@kennedy-graven.com
April 22, 1997
RECEIVED 2 4
Mark Hanus
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364-1687
RE: Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Dear Mark:
JAMF..S M. STROMMEN
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9233
As you may recall, the SRA offered temporary, full participation membership to Mound last
August. The City agreed to join for the nine month period ending June 30, 1997. We have
appreciated your participation and membership.
The SRA asks that the city of Mound evaluate continued membership for the balance of 1997
in an upcoming May or June meeting. Enclosed are materials to assist in that evaluation. Some
or all of the city council will have received the enclosed information previously. Some council
members, however, may need to refresh their recollection or may not have seen any information
regarding the SRA. For purposes of the council's decision on continued 1997 membership please
find the following:
Memorandum regarding the SRA and the membership issue before the council,
including a proposed resolution to continue membership.
2. 1995 and 1996 Year End Review and anticipated 1997-1998 Projects.
3. 1998 Proposed Budget and memorandum.
4. SRA accomplishments.
5. List of current SRA members - permanent and temporary.
6. Amended Joint and Cooperative Agreement.
The SRA has existed and served Twin Cities suburban cities only because members have seen
the value of a collective suburban voice in utility matters. The addition of Mound would enhance
2i4 14
)?17
April 22, 1997
Page 2
that voice in this time of great change in the utility area. Please pass on this information to your
council prior to its decision. If you have any questions, or need any additional information,
please contact me. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
KE~N~~RAVEN, CHARTERED
James M. Strommen
JMS:ckr
cc: SRA Executive Committee (w/o encl.)
JMS]21414
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
e-mail: att3.,s@kennedy-graven.com
INFORMATION ON THE SRA FOR THE CITY COUNCIL
The SRA appreciates your decision to accept its offer for temporary membership through June
30, 1997. Information about the SRA is attached to this memorandum.
The issue before the council is:
whether the council agrees to continue as an SRA member through 1997 for a
one-half year's assessment amount of $400 (cities may reevaluate membership
annually); or
2. whether the council declines continued membership, ending the temporary
membership July 1, 1997.
If the council elects to continue as an SRA member, we suggest use of the attached Resolution.
If the council decides not to continue membership, a simple letter from the city informing the
SRA of the decision will be sufficient. In the event we hear nothing prior to the July 16, 1997
meeting in the City of Maplewood, we will assume the council has not acted to terminate its
membership. Affirmative council action either way is preferable.
Thank you for your consideration. If the council has any questions, it may call Jim Strommen
at 337-9233. To assist you in your decision regarding continued membership, I would be happy
to appear before the council and answer any questions you may have.
SU1£§-2
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY; AND DESIGNATING A
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY AS ITS MEMBER ON THE
BOARD OF THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the City of is authorized by Minnesota Statutes,
on 471.59 to enter into joint and cooperative agreements with other governmental units; and
WHEREAS, the Suburban Rate Authority has been effective voice for suburban
opolitan Area cities and residents, as a regulatory body from 1962 through 1974 and as an
,'enor in gas, electric and telecommunications matters from 1975 to the present; and
WHEREAS, the city council has determined it is in the City's best interests to cooperate
other municipalities in the monitoring of utility services in the Metropolitan Area by
:ipating in the Suburban Rate Authority; and
WHEREAS, SRA membership from July 1, 1997 forward includes an annual assessment
00.00 per year per 5,000 in population, or fraction thereof, pro rated in 1997; and
WHEREAS, there are numerous important issues facing cities in gas, electric and
)mmunications matters that require joint and cooperative efforts by and among suburban
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
esota as follows:
1. The city of
:lance with the terms
of the Amended
will become a full member of the SRA in
Joint and Cooperative Agreement. The
Manager/Administrator and are authorized and directed to execute and
deliver the documents and certificates necessary to effect membership in the SRA.
2. The manager/administrator is authorized and directed to contact the SRA regarding
the City's decision to become a full member and to do all things necessary to effectuate that
membership, including the execution of the Amended Joint and Cooperative Agreement.
3. is designated as the city's first director on the Board of
Directors of the Suburban Rate Authority and
alternate.
4.
and mailing to the Suburban Rate Authority.
Passed and adopted this ~ day of
is designated as the
The City Clerk is directed to prepare a certified copy of this resolution for filing
, 1997.
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
JMS108341
SU160-3
SUBURB RATE AIYrHORITY ANNUAl. REVIF. W 199
The following is a brief summary intended for the city councils of Suburban Rate Authority CSRA") member
cities. It highlights the major activities and achievements of the SRA during 1995. The SPA is a joint
powers association of 32 Twin Cities suburban municipalities that monitors rates and rate design issues of
electric, gas and telecommunications utilities. 1995 and 1996 have been extremely active and successful years
for the SRA.
Model Telecommunications Permit Ordinance
The ~RA drafted a model telecommunications permit ordinance in conjunction with the League of Minnesota
Cities to establish uniform requirements regarding important issues to cities in the new competitive
telecommunications environment: permit procedure and fees, location and relocation requirements, repair
requirements, performance bonds, indemnity and other provisions. The recently-enacted Federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996 includes important and debated language regarding cities' right to manage
and receive compensation for use of the right-of-way. The SRA/League Model Ordinance pre-dates the Act
but establishes many of the vital protection cities need when telecommunications carriers seek to expand
within the City and expressly preserves rights to franchising or leasing.
Minnegasco 1995 Rate Case
The SRA actively intervened on behalf of ratepayers in Minnegasco's 1995 petition for a $24.3 million rate
increase and a 7.7% requested increase for residential customers. The SPA, thruugh its expert witness,
Robert Towers of Chesapeake Regulatory Consultants, has challenged a $1 million annual claimed ratepayer
expense resulting fi'om Minnegasco's purchase of the Midwest Gas system. The SPA also argues that
Minnegasco exaggerates the revenue deficiency created by the residential customer class rates and has not
shown a justification for an increase in the fixed monthly residential customer charge. The ALI adopted the
SRA arguments challenging the $1 million Midwest Gas acquisition adjustment that, if accepted by the PUC,
will save SRA residents and businesses approximately $215,000 annually. The PUC will decide on the
petition during the summer of 1996.
Model Gas and Electric Franchise Ordinances
Again in partnership with the League of Minnesota Cities, the SRA updated its uniform gas and electric utility
franchises to assist its member cities in negotiating new franchises. Of particular interest to cities in today's
changing fiscal environment is the right to charge franchise fees. In addition, electric utilities are likely to
be deregulated within the next decade. Terms and conditions of franchises become increasingly important
to those utilities when they perceive that franchise terms may affect competition.
Electric Industry Deregulation
The SRA intervened in a long-term investigation and review by the PUC of the electric utility industry. The
PUC will be making a r~commendation r*~;m'dln$ if and when electric service should be deregulated for retail
customers. The SRA has opposed utility company suggestions that eminent domain rights be equalized
between cities and investor-owned utilities and that franchise fights be diminished. The SRA will continue
to monitor the proceedings.
Customer Service Task Force
The SRA was invited to participate on a task force for the PUC on customer liability and service issues. The
task force addressed issues on notice to customers, liability of innocent residential customers for past unpaid
debts of prior customers living at the new residence and dispute resolution procedures.
JMS103351
$U160-3
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13. 1997
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - MAY 13, 1997
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, May 13, 1997, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in
said City.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, Liz
Jensen and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City
Attorney John Dean, City Planner Mark Koegler, City Engineer John Cameron, Building
Official Jori Sutherland, Finance Director Gino Businaro, City Auditor Steve McDonald, Abdo,
Abdo & Eick, Police Chief Len Harrell, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested
citizens: State Representative Steve Smith, Harold Meeker, Nancy Clough,
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited.
*Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by
the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
1.0 PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 18, 1997 AS HAROI,D MEEKER DAY IN
STATE OF MINNESOTA AND THE CITY OF MOUND 1513-1514
1.1 PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF MAY 1997 AS WESTONKA
SENIOR CENTER MONTH
1515-1516
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that
are not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda
and voted upon after the Consent Agenda has been approved.
*CONSENT AGENDA:
*A.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIl. 22, 1997 BOARD OF REVIEW AND
THE APRIl. 22, 1997 REGULAR MEETING 1517-1527
2
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
*B.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1997 BOARD OF REVIEW AND
MAY 6, 1997 SPECIAL MEETING 1528-1531
*C. RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) RE: ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
FROM WESTONKA INTERVENTION TO SOJOURNER LOCATED IN THE
CITY OF MINNETONKA 1532
3
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
*D. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE 1997 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
1533-1542
*E. APPROVAL OF VARIOUS PERMITS
1543-1544
*F. APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 235:27, SUBD. 1 OF
*G.
THE CITY CODE RELATING TO RECREATIONAL FIRES 1545
PAYMENT OF BILLS 1546-1569
4
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
e
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE //96-64 - REVISED PRELIMINARY
PLAT/PDA/VARIANCES SETON BLUFF, FINE LINE DESIGN GROUP, INC.,
LOTS 15-32, BLOCK 11, SETON, 19-117-23 22 0036-41 & 54 1570-1631
-~:~-:~..~- V ,C...'~
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
7. PRESENTATION OF 1996 AUDIT - GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR &
STEVE MC DONALD, ABDO, ABDO AND EICK
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
Se
CASE 97-16: GARY NACHREINER, 6056 CHERRYWOOD ROAD, LOTS 6 & 7,
BLOCK 9, THE HIGHI.ANDS, PID#23-117-24 34 0088, VARIANCE FOR
GARAGE ADDITION
(THIS ITEM WILL BE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-12-97)
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
9. REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - JOE ZYLMAN, MAPLE MANORS
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
1664-1706
10. APPROVAL OF MULTIPLE DOCK SLIPS - AMHURST LANE ACCESS (DEVON
COMMON) & FAIRVIEW LANE ACCESS 1707-1716
(Resolution to be han~ning)
11. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
12. DISCUSSION: ME.MBERS. HIP~IN THE S~BURBAN RATE AUTHORITY (SRA)
13.
A.
B.
C.
D.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
Department Head monthly reports for April, 1997.
LMCD Representative's monthly report for April, 1997
Letter from Gene Peterson, 6017 Ridgewood Road
Letter from Patricia Mikulski, 3015 Drury Lane 1774
1746-1771
1772
1773
10
J, J IL ,L iii, , IIJ,,
Ho
Jo
Minutes - Mound City Council - May 13, 1997
Letter from Perry Hanson, 2459 Lost Lake Road 1776-1776
Letter from Dorene Hanson, 2459 Lost Lake Road 1777-1778
Memorandum with Attachments from Jim Strommen, Kennedy & Graven and Suburban
Rate Authority Re: 612 Area Code Proposed Changes 177:91836
REMINDER: Committee of the Whole Meeting, Tuesday, May 20, 1997, 7:30 P.M.
REMINDER: City Offices will be closed on Monday, May 26, 1997 in Observance of
Memorial Day.
REMINDER: HRA Meeting, 7:00 P.m., Tuesday, May 13, 1997, City Hall prior to
Regular City Council Meeting.
MOTION made by, seconded b to adjourn at P.M. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
11
C¥tARTERED
470 ?i~bury Center
200 Sou& Si~h S~rc:t
Mimlcapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9~00 tdcphonc
(612) 337-9~10 faa
c-m~: ~r~kcnn~y~mv~n-com
FI o o - ,AJ
JOI~N B. DE.~N
Anomcy ~. Law
Direct ~ (612) ~$7-92~
May 13, 1.997
Mayor and Councilmembers
Mound City Council
At the April 21, 1997 city council meeting, Michael Gardner appeared before the council
and requested that the city daermine what its legal authority is to regulate the placement of
docks on Wawonaissa Common at the end of Woodland Road. Mr. Oardner is the owner of
property which abuts on the Common 'and is immediately north of Woodland Road. As a result
of that request, the city council directed this office to provide it with our 'legal option on the
question of whether, by virtue of the City's interest in Woodland Road, it has any special right,
title or interest in the portion of Wawonaissa Conmaon located at the end of the road.
The primary decision in the FI.ack case was that Wawonaissa Common (at least the areas
in front of the PlaintifFs properties) was no_._~t dedicated to the public; and consequently, the city'
had no authority to re,late that common as public property.
Ia~ the referee's memorandum in the Flack case, the following observation was made:
"While it is true that the suggested conclusions of law would confm'n that the plaintiffs
are the fee owners of their segments of Wawonaissa Common, these segments would
continue to be subject to the interests of the owners or all of the other lots in Woodland
Pohat which were created by the dedication of the common to them in the plat The
nature of this interest, almost assuredly that of an easement-..."
In order to conclude that the ~,4ty had a special interest in the area of Wawonaissa
Common at the end of the Woodland Road, one would need to assume that the city's ownership
interest in the road is similar to the ownership interest w. hich the abutting property owners have
in their individual lots. This is not the case. The abutters own their lots in fee while the city's
interest in the roadway is, at best, an 'easement, with the underlying fee probably held by the
owners of the lot* abutting the road.
Based upon our review of the Flack case, and the applicable law, we conclude that the
city's interest in the street does not create any special interest in the city over that portion of the
common lying at the end of the street.
~U200-1
May 13, 1997
Page Two
Consequendy, absent the consent of the other owners of land in the plat on Woodland
Point, the city has no more authorky over the placement of docks at the end of Woodland Road
or at any othe~ location on Wawonaissa Common than does any other owne~ of land in the
subdivision.
This opinion does not seek to resolve the further question concerning the various fights
of the owners of la~d in Woodlake Point to the Common. Those issues will probably require
judicial determination-
IBD:ds
SinceI% ~
M1~200-1
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY ANNUAL REVIEW 1996
The following is a brief summary intended for the city councils of Suburban Rate Authority CSRA") member
cities. It highlights the major activities and achievements of the SRA during 1996. The SPA is a joint
powers association consisting of 47 Twin Cities suburban municipalities (15 new members) that monitors
rates and rate design issues of electric, gas and telecommunications utilities. 1996 was a very active and
successful year for the SRA both in the traditional rate regulation (Minnegasco) and in the newly developing
wired and wireless telecommunications issues.
Minnegasco Rate Case
In 1995-1996, Minnegasco petitioned the PUC for an increase in its rates for gas service of 24.3 million
dollars annually, and a 7.7% increase for residential customers. The SRA, through its expert witness, Robert
Towers of Chesapeake Regulatory Consultants, actively opposed a one million dollar annual claimed ratepayer
e~ense resulting from Minnegasco's purchase of the Midwest Gas system. The SRA also argued that the
revenue deficiency from the residential customer class alleged by Minnegasco was exaggerated and that
Minnegasco's requested increase in the fixed monthly residential customer charge from $5 to $6.75 was
unwarranted. The SRA had successfully challenged the customer charge in the 1993 Minnegasco case.
The SRA's arguments were successful in each of the areas challenged, either alone or with complementary
arguments from the Department of Public Service or the Office of the Attorney General. The PUC rejected
the one million dollar annual expense item, allowed a revenue increase of under twelve million dollars a year
(2.3% for residential customers), and maintained the customer charge at the current level. As a result of these
decisions, we estimate that SRA residents and businesses will save a total of approximately $215.000 per
year.
Telecommunications
The SPA actively assisted the League of Minnesota Cities and other municipal groups in opposing attempts
by US West to seek court and PUC orders reducing or eliminating much of the right-of-way authority, cities
believe they have and need over telephone companies. The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 has
ushered in a new paradigm of telecommunication competition and resulting demands on right-of-way use.
Municipal efforts were successful before the PUC and district court, but were reversed by the Minnesota court
of appeals. Throughout 1996 and into 1997 the SPA, and other municipal groups will seek to establish laws
that will allow cities to protect their rights-of-way, public safety and avoid a taxpayer's subsidy of
telecommunications carriers.
The SPA also contributed substantially to the preparation of the League of Cities Model Wireless
Telecommunication Water Tower Antenna Site Lease Agreement. This agreement has been used as a basis
for many water tower leases between cities and wireless service providers.
Model Gas and Electric Franchise Ordinances
The SRA provided its model to the League of Cities resulting in an updated model gas and electric franchise.
With the advent of electric deregulation and existing partial gas deregulation, the terms and conditions of
franchises between cities and the utility providers becomes an even more important issue. Franchise rights
of cities regarding gas and electric may be as significant an issue in coming years, as it currently is regarding
telecommunications.
Electric Industry Deregulation
The SPA has monitored the developments in deregulation of the electric industry in Minnesota. Though not
actively involved in the investigation undertaken by the PUC, the SRA has positioned itself to inform SRA
cities of new issues, including benefits available to them when deregulation is instituted. The PUC and the
legislature has decided to move deliberately on deregulation in part because of the many important issues
facing regulators (and cities) in the event of deregulation, including: universal service, franchise issues, equal
competition, stranded investment and continued assurance of reliable service.
1997-98 SRA PROJECTS & ANTICIPATED PROJECTS
To assist in the 1998 SRA Budget review process, the following information describes issues the
SRA is currently addressing and those in which we believe the SRA will be involved to protect SRA
residential, business, and city government ratepayers. Given the many important issues, it is possible the
SRA will be required to focus on two or three of these issues to stay within its budget constraints.
1. CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT. One of the significant issues of the 1997
legislative session is the issue of city right-of-way management and telecommunication carriers. There
are three bills presently before the relevant committees in the House and Senate. The SRA has assisted
ila the formulation of policy and legislation. The SRA has also participated in meetings between and
among municipal groups, industry representatives and state regulators regarding the right-of-way issues
of management cost recovery and franchise rights. It is likely legislation will be passed in this session,
perhaps to be followed by study and revisions in 1998.
2. GEOGRAPHIC DEAVERAGING OF TELEPHONE RATES. A very important post-
Telecommunication Act cost proceeding has recently been commenced and will mn through 1997. It
involves a cost determination of rates to be paid by competitors to US West (and other local telephone
providers) for its facilities, includine costs as they vary bv eeographic location. This implicates the issue
the SRA successfully fought through the 1980s - the elimination of a tiered system of rates in the Twin
Cities Metro area causing suburban ratepayers to pay higher rates than urban ratepayers. The
Telecommunications Act requires interconnection between incumbent local exchange carriers (like US
West) and competitors (like AT&T, Sprint, MCI). It also recognizes that costs may vary depending on
the location of the customer. Urban customers generally cost less to serve than rural customers. Under
monopoly regulation, costs of serving urban and rural customers has been "averaged" to keep rural (and
less developed suburban area) rates Iow. This cost proceeding will run through December 1997 and is
perhaps the most important rate proceeding for Twin Cities suburban customers, particularly in the US
West service area, for many years.
3. CITY TOWER CITING ORDINANCES AND LEASES. The SRA continues to take
an active role in reviewing the development of leases for water tower antenna and sites for wireless
telecommunications providers. It is also assisting in the preparation of model zoning ordinances for cities.
4. ELECTRIC INDUSTRY DEREGULATION. The SRA continues to monitor
developments in electric industry deregulation. As large customers, cities stand in a unique position to
benefit from deregulation, while at the same time needing to ensure that their residents are protected from
being excluded from the benefits of competition.
5. BUSINESS-RESIDENTIALTELEPHONE RATE "REBALANCING". It is possible
that US West will petition in 1997 for a reduction in the business rate ratio, increasing residential rates.
The PUC has required that telephone rates for business bear a 3 to 1 ratio to residential rates. US West
and other local exchange carriers, have indicated that they intend to seek a "rebalance" of this ratio.
1998 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY PROPOSED BUDGET
1997
Assets:
Cash and Investments (12/31/96)
Membership Assessments~
TOTAL
Anticipated 1997 Expenses:
US West Cost Investigation
Right-of-way Legislation
PUC Right-of-way Construction Standards Proceeding
Wireless Communication Lease and Zoning Issues
Electric-Gas Issues
General (fees and disbursements)
TOTAL
Reserve at December 31, 1997:
1998
Assets:
Carryover from 1997
Membership Assessment"
TOTAL
Anticipated 1998 Expenses:
Right-of-way Issues
(Legislation-Construction Standards proceeding)
US West Cost Investigation
Universal Service Proceeding (Retail phone rates)
Wireless Communication Lease and Zoning
Electric-Gas Issues
General Matters (fees and disbursements)
Reserve at December 31, 1998:
$ 9,638
75,200
$40,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
2,000
17.000
$10,838
85,200
$15,000
10,000
30,000
2,000
6,000
17,000
$84.838
($74.00Q)
$10.838
$96.038
($80,000)
$16.038
~This is calculated at $400 per vote established in 1995 (for every 5,000 in population or
fraction thereof, see attached). This calculation is based on full year assessments from SRA
ongoing members (33, totalling 163 votes) and a one-half year assessment from the new members
(14, totalling 50 votes). The 1997 and 1998 assessments may be lower depending on the number
of new members who choose to remain in the SRA.
2This number is based on full assessment of 47 members.
JM8120180
SU160-3
..NEW MEMBER VOTES/ASSESSMENT~
City of Spring Lake Park
City of Mound
City of Rosemount
City of Lakeland
City of Maple Grove
City of Medina
City of Apple Valley
City of Birchwood
City of Blaine
City of Champlin
City of Golden Valley
City of Hilltop
City of Jordan
City of Lake Elmo
2
2
3
1
9
1
9
1
9
4
5
1
1
2
50 votes
x $400 (per vote)
$20,000
.. .5 (one-half year)
$10,000 (total one-half year assessments)
EXISTING MEMBER VOTES
163
x $400
$65,20O
votes
(per vote)
(total year assessment)
,7MS120226
MEMORANDUM
MEMO # 3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
SRA Directors and Alternates
James M. Strommen, Kennedy & Graven
April 4, 1997
1998 PROPOSED BUDGET
PROPOSED BUDGET
Attached is the proposed budget for 1998. For the benefit of the
new members, this is a process that is undertaken annually
beginning with the April meeting. The procedure is as follows:
The proposed 1998 budget is discussed by the board and
recommended as is or as modified for approval by each
member prior to the July meeting.
2. At the July meeting, a final budget for 1998 is adopted.
Between the April and July meetings, the SPcA delegates are
requested to present this budget to their respective cities for
review. Formal action by each SPA member city council is not
necessary, however, to approve the budget in July. If concerns are
to be expressed regarding the allocation of resources, the process
between the April and July meetings affords that opportunity.
NEW ME~ERS
The new members are not obligated to remain SRA members past June
30, 1997. If the new members choose to remain, they will stay as
assessed members (second half of 1997). The proposed budget
includes full participation by the new members as well as existing
members. To the extent new members withdraw, the budget amount
would be reduced.
We believe that the variety of issues in right-of-way use,
telephone cost by suburban location and electric-gas deregulation
create issues of high interest to individual cities. The SRA can
provide valuable assistance to individual cities on all of these
issues and others.
UPCOMING ISSUES
The dollar estimates across from each item in the proposed budget
is a best estimate regarding anticipated projects. The following
is a brief summary of each item and estimate.
JMS120370
$U160-3
U.S. West Cost Investiqation. As described in the
previous memorandum, this proceeding will establish costs
that will be used as a basis for the future retail
telephone rates of residents and businesses throughout
the SRA membership area. We have received two boxes of
testimony and computer software to date. Even monitoring
these issues, with expert consultation, will be a costly
proceeding. Without monitoring and expert analysis, the
SRA will not have a meaningful role in the subsequent
Universal Service Proceeding, expected to begin in late
1997 or early 1998.
o
Riqht of Way Leqislation. The SRA has monitored
developed of the legislation and assisted the League in
legal and policy issues underlying the League's bill. As
a result of this direct involvement, the SRA cities will
be a better position to understand the legislation and
avoid litigation over ordinances they adopt.
o
PUC Riqht of Way Construction Standards Proceeding. This
is a proceeding that will be commenced this year
regarding construction standards that will be adopted
statewide. The extent of SRA participation is yet to be
determined. This proceeding will arise out of the ROW
legislation and directly affect each SRA city.
..
Wireless Communication Lease and Zoninq Issues. The SRA
is in a position to address lease and zoning issues as
they arise. This is a more speculative cost that may not
result, however.
Electric-Gas Issues. The SRA is only monitoring matters
relating to electric and gas deregulation at this point.
We will advise the SRA if the need for any action becomes
necessary.
o
General. This has been a constant amount throughout
recent years. We are attempting to reduce copying costs,
particularly with the increased membership.
1998 MATTERS
Note the continuation of the same issues described for 1997. The
notable addition is a Universal Service Proceeding that will be
commenced by the PUC sometime in late 1997 or early 1998. This
will be a very important proceeding because it will address issues
of geographic deaveraging in retail rates.
JMS:ckr
JMS120370
$u~60-3 2
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South S'ixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
e-mail: arrys@kennedy-graven.com
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
INTRODUCTION
This summary is intended to describe the history, purposes and accomplishments of the
Sdburban Rate Authority ("SRA").
The SRA is a joint powers organization consisting of 47 suburban cities (list of cities
attached) that actively intervenes in matters affecting gas, electric, and telephone rates charged
to suburban residents and businesses. The material below attempts to demonstrate the tangible
savings achieved by the SRA. Though actual dollar savings are often difficult to calculate, the
SRA has saved residents and businesses of Twin City suburban communities millions of dollars
over the last 20 years. A conservative calculation reflects a $200,000 per SRA member vote
savings since 1975.
HISTORY AND PURPOSES
The SRA was organized in 1963, for the purpose of providing collective strength in
negotiating franchises' with the Minneapolis Gas Company, which served the original SRA
members. In 1974, the legislature adopted the Public Utilities Act to provide for state regulation
of gas and electric utilities, except for cooperative electric associations and municipal utilities.
SRA assisted the state in setting up regulation and intervened in the early gas and electric cases
with the hope of providing leadership and direction in utility regulation. Since that time, it has
been active in matters concerning gas, electric and telephone rate regulation and in legislation
concerning the Public Utilities Commission ("PUC").
1996
1996
1996
RECENT INVOLVEMENT
Model Wireless Communication Lease Agreement. The SRA provided primary drafting
contributions to a League of Minnesota Cities Model Site Lease Agreement for
PCS/cellular communication antennas. This Model has been distributed to Minnesota
cities for use in negotiation on site lease agreements.
US West Right-of-Way Challenge. A significant legal challenge to municipal authority
over rights-of-way was brought by US West to the PUC and the district court. The SRA
took an active position in support of the League and the other cities involved directly in
the challenge. This issue will be the subject of legislation in the 1997 Minnesota
legislative session.
Minnegasco Case. The SRA and the Department Public Service successfully argued
against a $1 million annual acquisition adjustment (23 years of recovery requested) ._
1995
1995
1995
1993
1992
1992
Minnegasco sought to recover from ratepayers for its acquisition of Midwest Gas. In
addition, the SRA criticized the allocation of Minnegasco to residential customers and the
Commission ultimately denied Minnegasco's proposed change, saving residential
customers money. The residential basic service charge also remained at the same level
($5 per month) as supported by the SRA.
Updated Model Gas and Electric Utility Franchises. The SRA and the League drafted
model utility franchise ordinances. The increasing deregulation in both the electric and
gas utility industries necessitated revisions to the previous model franchise ordinances
approved by the SRA.
Minnegasco Fixed Residential Customer Charge. The PUC denied Minnegasco's request
for an increase in the residential customer fixed monthly gas charge from $5 to $6 per
month. The SRA was the sole party to argue that Minnegasco must make a greater
showing to justify requested and intended increases in the fixed, non-usage based monthly
charge. The requested increase was made without a showing that statutorily required
conservation policies would not be inhibited.
Model Telecommunications Permit Ordinance. The SRA prepared and shared its Model
Telecommunications Permit Ordinance with the League of Minnesota Cities. In
collaboration, the SRA and the League distributed the ordinance to all Minnesota cities.
The purpose of the ordinance is to provide orderly police power regulations over
telecommunications companies in the city. This ordinance will be reviewed in light of
the 1996 Telecommunications Act and legal developments resulting from it.
Minnegasco and NSP Rate Cases-FAS 106. The SRA played a substantial role in one of
the major issues to be raised before the Minnesota PUC in several years--FAS 106. A
post retirement medical health care benefits "transition obligation" was sought by
Minnegasco and NSP as a result of the accounting standard known as FAS 106 which
required a change from cash basis to accrual accounting for such benefits. This change
involves millions of dollars (Minnegasco $24 million: NSP $160 million) to be borne
currently either by the utility shareholders or utility ratepayers. The PUC originally voted
in May 1993 to disallow one-half of Minnegasco's transition obligation, but ultimately
reversed its decision and allowed those expenses. These expenses will be spread out over
a twenty year period in rates. This issue is an example of the millions of dollars at stake
in utility rates the SPA fights to limit for ratepayers.
US West Telephone Rate Savings. As of November 1, 1992, residential and business
telephone rates for US West Twin City local calling area became equal by class of service
throughout the metropolitan area. This PUC action eliminated the tiered telephone rates
that was in existence since 1980. The US West Tier System charged higher rates for
residential and business customers living in the suburban areas. In 1984 the SPA
achieved a reduction of one half of the tier ratios. This elimination of the Tier System
is a direct result of SRA's intervention and arguments against differentiating telephone
rates by geographic location.
Municipal Pumping Rate Savings. Together with the City of St. Paul and the Municipal
Pumpers Association, SPA efforts have consistently maintained pumping class rates at 2-
1991
1940
1987
1986
1985
1985
3% below general service class and have continued the municipal pumping exemption
from the eleven-month demand ratchet rate imposed on commercial-industrial users. The
SRA's expert consultant has estimated that avoiding the eleven-month demand ratchet
charge alone saves 7.5-10% in annual municipal pumping charges paid to NSP.
NSP General Rate Filing. The SRA actively intervened in this NSP filing, wherein the
PUC rejected NSP's $120,000,000 rate increase request. The SRA focused on the
municipal pumpers' rate and street lighting. The SRA is traditionally the only intervenor
seeking reduced increases in the municipal pumping rate and has seen consistent success
in that effort.
US West Incentive Regulation Plan. We actively intervened in the case involving US
West's request to be partially deregulated in its local service to residential and business
customers. The final order established stable rates for Twin City local telephone
customers of US West through August of 1994. US West will share 50% of its revenues
above a 13.5% return on equity.
Northwestern Bell Extended Area Service Docket. The SRA made significant progress
in demonstrating cost in equities in the Twin City Metropolitan Area Northwestern Bell
service area. SRA participation in this case helped lay the ground work for the order
abandoning the Tier System.
Redeliberation on Northwestern Bell Cases. The SRA obtained very substantial
reductions in the Tier System ratios. These changes resulted in very significant savings
in telephone rates for most SRA business and residential users prior to the elimination of
this rate design in 1992.
Rate Structure Task Force. The SRA was active in the formulation of funding proposals
for the Combined Sewer Overflow ("CSO") projects in the Cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul
and South St. Paul. SRA involvement may have limited the pass-through of these costs
to member communities.
Northern States Power General Rate Case. The SRA "pioneered" an issue as to fossil fuel
inventory. The SRA also helped maintain the municipal pumping rate, and defended prior
SPA accomplishments as to accounting practices. Very substantial savings were realized
through SRA intervention. This case was appealed to the Court of Appeals and the State
Supreme Court and the SRA (alone) participated with MPUC in successfully defending
MPUC's action.
ESTIMATED DOLLAR SAVINGS FROM SRA EFFORTS
These are rough calculations made with the assistance of legal counsel and SRA expert
consultants. In an effort to be able to contrast savings with assessments, the calculations are
made on a per SRA member vote basis (5,000 of population). They attempt to distinguish
savings resulting primarily from SRA efforts and savings that likely would have resulted anyway
due to positions taken by state agencies.
1975 NSP. SRA's retained expert estimated $18 to $20 per household. Using 3.4
persons per household, this would be approximately $26,500 per vote. The figure does
not include business savings.
1977 NSP. There is no estimate of dollar savings in the file. The 1975 principles were
defended successfully. It is thus reasonable to state that the $26,500 per vote continued
from 1975 and onward. To be conservative, use five years of $132,000 per vote for NSP
electric through 1980.
1982 Northwestern Bell. The SRA commenced its attack on the Tier System. In 1984,
the SRA won a significant victory reducing by 50% the tier ratios imposed by Bell.
Northwesterfl Bell has estimated a shift away from suburban communities of about $2
million to $3 million per year as a result of SRA intervention in the three Bell rate cases
through the 1980's. Using $2 million per year and the assumption that SRA represents
approximately half of the suburban businesses and households (this has not been
calculated, it is just an estimate), the savings is about $6500 per x'ote per year. Over the
seven years, since this change became effective, this is $45,500 per vote.
1985 NSP. Our consultant estimated savings due solely to SRA intervention at about $8
per household per year. Over the two years the rate was in effect, this is a savings of
about $23,500 per vote.
1987 NSP. Estimated savings from the fuel issue is $1,600 per vote per year.
Uniform Franchises. The gas and electric uniform franchises were negotiated in the
1980's at a cost of approximately $40 per vote. Attorney and staff costs for doing it
individually might easily have been ten times that, a savings of $1260 per member or
$360 per vote.
1992 NSP. As mentioned above, the savings per SRA member is about 2-3% per year
for municipal pumping rates and 7.5-10ck in avoiding ratchet demand.
1992 US West. The savings from elimination of the Tier System to tier 2 and 3 SRA
residents and businesses is approximately $I million per year and counting.
1996 Minnegasco. Collective savings to SRA residents from SRA efforts in the 1996
Minnegasco case is approximately $300,000 per year.
Summary. A conservative estimate of dollar savings to SRA members because of SPA
activities, directly and indirectly, over the years since 1975 is well over $200,000 per vote
and counting. A case could be made for multiples of this figure.
J J ii, ,I, ili~ ,llJ,, I . l
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
MEMBER CITIES
Apple Valley
Birchwood Village
Blaine
Bloomington
Brooklyn Park
Bumsville
Chfimplin
Circle Pines
Columbia Heights
Deephaven
Eden Prairie
Edina
Fridley
Golden Valley
Greenwood
Hastings
Hilltop
Hopkins
Jordan
Lake Elmo
Lakeland
Lauderdale
Long Lake
Maple Grove
Maple Plain
Maplewood
Medina
Minnetonka
Minnetrista
Mound
New Brighton
North St. Paul
Orono
Osseo
Plymouth
Robbinsdale
Rosemount
Roseville
St. Louis Park
Savage
Shakopee
Shoreview
Spring Lake Park
Spring Park
Wayzata
West St. Paul
Woodbury
/733, ,
Permanent Members:
Bloomington
Brooklyn Park
Burnsville
Circle Pines
Columbia Heights
Deephaven
Eden Prairie
Edina
Fridley
Greenwoc~d
Hastings
Hopkins
Lauderdale
Long Lake
Maple Plain
Maplewood
Minnetonka
Minnetrista
New Brighton
North St. Paul
Orono
Osseo
Plymouth
Robbinsdale
Roseville
St. Louis Park
Savage
Shakopee
Shoreview
Spring Park
Wayzata
West St. Paul
Woodbury
Temporary Members:
Apple Valley
Birchwood Village
Blaine
Champlin
Golden Valley
Hilltop
Jordan
Lake Elmo
Lakeland
Maple Grove
Medina
Mound
Rosemount
Spring Lake Park
AMENDED
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
I. PARTIES
The parties to this agreement are governmental units of the State of Minnesota.
agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, as amended.
II. GENERAL PURPOSE
This
The general purpose of this agreement is to establish and continue an organization to
monitor the operation and activities of public utilities in the metropolitan area; to conduct
research and investigation of the activities of such utilities; and to conduct such other activities
authorized herein as may be necessary to insure equitable and reasonable public utility rates and
service levels for the citizens of the members of the organization and for the members
themselves.
III. NAME
The name of the organization is the SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY. The name may be
changed in accordance with Article XII.
IV. DEFINITIONS
Section 1. For purposes of this agreement, the terms defined in this article have the
meaning given them.
Section 2. "Authority" means the joint and cooperative organization created by this
agreement.
Section 3. "Board" or "Board of Directors" means the Board of Directors of the Authority
established by Article VI.
Section 4. "Council" means the governing body of a governmental unit.
Section 5. "Governmental unit" means a city or town in the metropolitan area.
DJK109900 1
$Ut60-3
Section 6. "Metropolitan area" means the metropolitan area defined and described by
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 473, as amended.
Section 7. "Member' means a governmental unit which has entered into and become a
party to this agreement.
Section 8. "Public utility" or"utility" means an investor-owned utility supplying
telecommunication services to member residents or gas or electricity under franchise within one
or more governmental units; the term may include other utilities as provided in Article XII. The
term does not include municipally owned utilities; the term does include a governmental agency
supplying sanitary sewer or other utility services to governmental units in the metropolitan area.
Section 9. "Statutory cities" means cities organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 412.
V. MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Any governmental unit in the metropolitan area is eligible to be a member of
the Authority.
Section 2. A governmental unit desiring to become a member must execute a copy of this
agreement and conform to the membership provisions of this Article V.
Section 3. A governmental unit wishing to become a member after the effective date of
this agreement may be admitted only upon the favorable vote of two-thirds of the votes of the
members of the Board of Directors present and voting at any regular or special meeting. The
Board may, in its by-laws, impose conditions upon the admission of additional members.
Section 4. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish procedures for temporary membership
for governmental units for specified periods of time not exceeding one year with or without the
payment of contributions or with the payment of reduced contributions as determined under
Article X. If such memberships are authorized, the cumulative votes of all temporary members
may not exceed 25% of the total votes of the directors of permanent members.
DJK109900
SU160-3 2
Section 5. A change in the governmental boundaries, structure, classification or
organization of a governmental unit does not affect the eligibility of a unit to become or remain
a member of the Authority.
VI. GOVERNING BODY: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. The governing body of the Authority is its Board of Directors. Each member
is entitled to one director on the Board. Each director is entitled to one vote for each 5,000 of
population or fraction thereof, as determined by the official U.S. Census each decade, of the
governmental unit represented by the director; provided, however, that each director must have
at least one vote and no director may have more than 20 votes. Prior to December 31 of each
year following the decennial census, the SecretaD'-Treasurer of the Authority must determine the
population of each member in accordance with this section and certify the results to the chairman.
Section 2. A director is appointed by resolution of the council of the members for a term
of one calendar year. A director serves until a successor is appointed and qualifies. Directors
serve without compensation from the Authority, but nothing in this section is to be construed to
prevent a governmental unit from compensating its director for service on the Board if such
compensation is otherwise authorized by law.
Section 3. The Board, in its by-laws, may provide for the appointment of alternate
directors and prescribe the extent of their powers and duties.
Section 4. Vacancies in the office of director will exist for any of the reasons set forth in
Minnesota Statutes, section 351.02, or upon a revocation of a director's appointment by a member
duly filed with the Authority. Vacancies are filled by appointment for the unexpired portion of
the term of director by the council of the member whose position on the Board is vacant.
Section 5. A majority of the votes of the Board of Directors constitutes a quorum, but a
smaller number may adjourn from time to time. The votes of temporary members authorized by
DJK109900
Article V, Section 4 are not to be considered in determining the presence or absence of a quorum
of the Board.
VII. MEETINGS: ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Section 1. A governmental unit may enter into this agreement by resolution of its council
and the duly authorized execution of a copy of this agreement by its proper officers. Thereupon,
the, clerk or other appropriate officer of the governmental unit must file an executed copy of the
agreement and a certified copy of the authorizing resolution with the finance director of the City
of Columbia Heights, Minnesota. The resolution authorizing the execution of the agreement must
also designate the first director for the governmental unit on the Board.
Section 2. This agreement is effective on the date when executed agreements and
authorizing resolutions of the governmental units presently members of the existing Suburban
Rate Authority have been filed as provided in Section 1 of this Article.
Section 3. Within 30 days after the effective date of this agreement, the mayor of the
member having the largest population must call the first meeting of the Board of Directors which
must be held no later than the date of the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting of the
Authority.
Section 4. The first meeting of the Board will be the organizational meeting of the
Authority. At the organizational meeting, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the Board must
select from among the directors a chairman, a vice-chairman, and a secretary-treasurer.
Section 5. At the organizational meeting, or as soon thereafter as it may reasonably be
done, the Board must adopt by-laws governing its procedures, including the time, place, notice
for and frequency of its regular meetings, procedure for calling special meetings, and such other
matters as are required by this agreement. The Board may amend the by-laws from time to time.
The Board must meet at least once each year and on such other dates as may be provided in its
DJK109900
SU160- 3 4
specifically authorized by the Board and shall be subject to such reasonable conditions as to cost
of service and other matters as may be imposed by the Board.
Section 5. The Board may obtain from any utility and from any other source such
information relating to utility rates, costs and service levels as any of its members is entitled to
obtain from such utilities.
Section 6. The Board may receive and hold moneys from any utility to the extent and in
the manner as may be provided by this agreement or any franchise granted to a utility by a
member; and it may accept voluntary contributions from its members or other sources as provided
in Article X. The Authority has no taxing power. It may accumulate reserve funds and may
invest and re-invest its funds not needed for current expenses in the manner and subject to the
limitations applicable by law to statutory, cities. The Board may not incur obligations in excess
of funds then available to the Authority.
Section 7. The Board must make a financial accounting and report to the members at least
once each year. The books and records of the Authority will be open and available for inspection
by members at all reasonable times.
Section 8. The Board may accept gifts, apply for and use grants of money or other
property from members or other governmental units or organizations, and may enter into
agreements required in connection therewith, and may hold, use, and dispose of suck moneys or
property in accordance with the terms of the grant, gift or agreement relating thereto.
Section 9. The Board must establish the annual budget for the Authority as provided in
Article X.
Section 10. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish an executive committee and may
delegate duties and authority to the executive committee between Board meetings.
DJK109900 6
SUi60-3
by-laws.
by-laws.
The annual meeting is held in the month of January unless otherwise provided in the
VIII. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. The powers and duties of the Board of Directors of the Authority are set forth
in this article.
Section 2. The Board may make such contracts and enter into such agreements as it deems
necessary to make effective any power granted to the Authority by this agreement. It may
contract with any of its member governmental units or others to provide space, services or
materials on behalf of the Authority.
Section 3. The Board may provide for the prosecution, defense, or other participation in
actions or proceedings at law in which it may have an interest, and may employ counsel for that
purpose. It may employ such other persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its powers and
duties. Such employees may be on a full-time or pan-time, or consulting basis as the Board
determines, and the Board may make any required employer contributions that local government
units are authorized or required to make by law.
Section 4. The Board may conduct such research and investigation and take such action
as it deems necessary, including participation and appearance in proceedings of state and federal
regulatory, legislative or administrative bodies, on any matter related to or affecting utility costs,
levels of service, rates or franchises, and advise members concerning such matters with a view
toward obtaining compliance with franchises granted to utilities and insuring reasonable rates and
service levels for the members and their residents. The Board may conduct the activities
authorized by this section on behalf of any governmental unit located outside the metropolitan
area at the request of such a unit, embodied in a resolution of its governing body; provided
however, that the conduct of such activities on behalf of any such governmental unit must be
DJKI09900
l? t
Section I 1. The Board may purchase public liability insurance and such other security
bonds and insurance as it may deem necessary.
Section 12. The Board may, on behalf of the Authority or on behalf of a number of
member governmental units or nonmember governmental units, or both, enter into contracts, at
the request of such units, with public utilities within or without the state for the purchase and
delivery of utility, products and services for those governmental units.
¢
Section 13. The Board may exercise any other power necessary and convenient to the
implementation of the powers and duties given to it by this agreement.
IX. OFFICERS
Section 1. The officers of the Board are a chair, a vice-chair, and a secretary-treasurer
elected by the Board for a term of one year and until their respective successors are elected and
qualify, at the annual meeting. New officers take office at the adjournment of the annual meeting
at which they were elected. An officer must be a duly qualified and appointed director. A
director from a temporary member may not be an officer.
Section 2. A vacancy in the office of chair, vice-chair, or secretary-treasurer occurs for
any of the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director occurs. Vacancies in these
offices and filled by the Board for the unexpired portion of the term.
Section 3. The chair presides at meetings of the Board. The vice-chair acts as chairman
in the absence, disqualification or disability of the chairman.
Section 4. The secretary-treasurer is responsible for keeping a record of the proceedings
of the Board, for custody of funds, for keeping of financial records of the Authority and for such
other duties as may be assigned to the Secretary-Treasurer by the Board. Persons may be
employed to perform such services under the supervision and direction of the secretary-treasurer
as may be authorized by the Board. The secretary-treasurer must post a fidelity bond or other
SU160-3
insurance against loss of Authority funds in the account specified by the Board. The cost of such
bond or insurance to be paid by the Board. The Board may provide for compensation of the
secretary-treasurer for services to the Board.
X. FINANCIAL MATTERS
Section 1. The fiscal year of the Authority is the calendar year.
Section 2. Authority funds may be expended in accordance with the procedures established
¢
by law for statutory cities. Orders, checks and drafts must be signed by the chairman and
countersigned by the secretary-treasurer or such other person as may be designated by the Board
in its by-laws. Other legal instruments must be executed on behalf of the Authority by the
chairman and the secretary-treasurer. Contracts must be let and purchases made in accordance
with the procedures established by law for statutory cities.
Section 3. The activities of the Authority may be financed by funds available to it under
Article VIII, from voluntary contributions from its members or from other sources, and by
contributions from members of the Authority if it is determined by the Board by a two-thirds
vote, by written action or at a regular or special meeting, of all votes of then existing members,
that such contributions are necessary. This determination must be made by the Board not later
than August 1 of each year in order to obligate members to make contributions during the
ensuing calendar year. The total annual contribution by members for the ensuing year is
established by the Board on the basis of anticipated expenditures and only if the anticipated
expenditures are in excess of the anticipated funds otherwise available to the Authority. The
contribution in any year by a member must be in direct proportion to the number of votes to
which the director representing the member on the Board is entitled. Contributions must be made
by the member to the Authority as follows: one-half on or before April 1 of each year and
one-half on or before September 1 of each year.
DJK109900
SU160-3
Section 4. An annual budget must be adopted by the Board at the regular meeting in July
of each year. If a quorum is not present at the regular meeting in July, the budget may be
adopted by unanimous vote of the executive committee. Copies of the budget must be mailed
promptly to the chief administrative office of each member. The budget is deemed approved by
the members except one who, at any time prior to the annual meeting gives notice in writing to
the secretary-treasurer that it is withdrawing from the Authority.
XI. DURATION AND DISSOLUTION
Section 1. The Authority will exist, and this agreement is in effect, for an indefinite term
until dissolved in accordance with Section 3 of this article.
Section 2. A member may withdraw from the Authority by filing a written notice with
the secretary-treasurer by June 15 of any year giving notice of withdrawal at the end of that
calendar year; and membership shall continue until the effective date of the withdrawal. A notice
of withdrawal may be rescinded at any time by a member. If a member withdraws before
dissolution of the Authority, the member will have no claim on the assets of the Authority.
Section 3. The Authority must be dissolved whenever the withdrawal of a member reduces
total membership in the Authority to less than seven. The Authority may be dissolved at any time
by unanimous vote of all the members of the Board of Directors.
Section 4. In the event of dissolution, the Board must determine the measures necessary
to effect the dissolution and provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances
permit, subject to the provisions of this agreement. Upon dissolution of the Authority all
remaining assets of the Authority, after payment of obligations, must be distributed among the
then existing members in proportion to the number of their votes on the Board and in accordance
with procedures established by the Board. The Authority will continue to exist after dissolution
DJK109900 9
SU160-3
1713
for the period, no longer than six months, necessary to wind up its affairs but for no other
purpose.
XII. TRANSITIONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
Section 1. The activities of the Authority are to be confined to telecommunications,
sewage disposal, gas and electric utilities, provided however, that the Authority may extend and
broaden its activities to any other public utility as defined in this agreement by a 75% majority
¢
vote of all the votes of the Board of Directors, taken at a regular meeting of the Board. In the
event the activities of the Authority are so extended and broadened, the Authority and its Board
of Directors have all of the powers and duties with reference to any other public utility that they
have with reference to gas, telecommunications, sewage disposal and electric utilities under this
agreement.
Section 2. The name of the organization created by this agreement may be changed when
deemed appropriate by the Board, but only upon a 75% majority vote of all the votes of the
Board of Directors taken at a regular meeting of the Board or by written action. If the name of
the organization is so changed, the Board must provide in its by-laws for necessary measures to
effect the change in official and unofficial documents, papers, and other essential respects.
Section 3. It is the intention of the parties to this agreement that the organization created
hereby is the successor to the Suburban Rate Authority in existence on the day prior to the
effective date of this agreement. It is further the intention of the parties that any funds made
available to the organization created by this agreement from assets of the prior Suburban Rate
Authority must be used exclusively for the purposes of this agreement. The adopted budget of
the prior Suburban Rate Authority remains in effect until revised and until the new annual budget
is adopted. The adoption of this agreement does not affect or modify the obligation of members
DJK109900
su~6o-3 l0
of the prior Suburban Rate Authority to make contributions authorized by the prior Suburban
Rate Authority.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental unit has caused this agreement
to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf.
(Governmental unit)
By Its
,Minnesota
Mayor
By Its
Manager
Dated: , 199
of
Filed in the office of the finance director of the City of Columbia Heights this
, 199
day
DJK109900
SU160-3
11
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
.~,O.~r'~.' OF _ APRIL 1997 MONT}{ MON/~ TO DATE TO DATE_
NO. OF
_______ 62 55 214 274
.~U.~D FIRE ~_ 10 51 69
--------- E~fERGE/qCy 22 ~ 20 53 91
MiNNETONKA BEACH FIRE 0
------___ 4___i_~ 5 3
EMERGENCY 0 0
~:XXZZR:STA ~RE 4 6 ~5 2O
8__L_~ 2____~ 20 8
o?,o.xo FIRE
---------- EMERGEN~ 0 2 5
£?.'OR EWOOD FIRE 1 O~ 1 0
--------- IM~GENCy 0 0 1 3
£?IZNG PARK FIRE 2 0 3 10
----------- IP-___~GE~L"Y 4 8~ 24 27
: ,,~ -- ~ ~.- AiD FIRE 0 0 2 2
?OTAL FiRE CALLS -----------
28.__~ 23 90 132
'fO%AL EMERGENCY CALLS 34 32 124
C-3'. -~_ Cl ~L -------------- ------------- 142
-- ! 0
-----------____ _~
~ ?--%~L:~L ------------ 1 6
4
6
----------.--.___ ~
-~.~'~J~-~. ~'~L -----------_ 18 16
0 0 0 1
~$ & .~CSC"~--~IA.NEOUS 15 3 28
AL'.'FO ----_ 42
2 1 3 7
?JL2E ;2-kP.M / FIRE ALARMS 6 13 37
---------- ----------__ 59
hC. OF EOL,?J FIRE , 431 263 1229 1383
?.OUND '~MERGENCY 442 427 1&59 1877
---------'-- ~ 873 690 2688 3260
LI~ 0 59 82 55
- MTKA BEACH ~ 0 0 0 100
------- lP~ 0 59 82 155
FIRE 74 98 461 402
- !". ~ %l I STA F~.~ERGENCY 186 47 ~47 178
----------- TOTAL 260 145 908 580
- 0!0N0 ]~ERGENCY ~ 22 70 141
------ ~ 21~__k___ ss__!___ 53~ 748
FIRE 21
---_______ 0____p_~ 21 0
SHOREW00D m~iRGEN~ ~ ~ 21 68
--------- TOT. AL 21 0 42
------------ ----------- 68
FIRE 40 0 53
'----------- ----------- 167
- £P. PARK EMERGENCY~ 83___~____ 135 422 601
---------- ~_._____ 123 135 475 768
FIRE 0 0 60 61~
- LJ,.-U~.~ AID EMERG~INCY 0
0 20 27
-
-------____ TOTAL 0
80 88
_ - ......... HOURS 167.5 172.5 687.5 685
'~^--'~ --r~r HOURS 781 486 2367 2675
'C,-~'T EMERGENCY HOURS 7II 631 2439 2992
.... --r~r & E~ERGENCY }{OURS 1492 1117 4806 . 5667
'UTUAL AID RECEIVED ] O ,~ O -
^.D GIVEN O
DOCK & COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A MEETING
APRIL 17, 1997
Present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Commissioners Frank Ahrens, Jim Funk, Mark Goldberg,
Dennis Hopkins, and Gordy Tulberg, Parks Director Jim Fackler, Dock Inspector Tom
McCaffrey, and Secretary Peggy James.
Also in attendance were: Rita Pederson, Mike Gardner, Andrea Ahrens, Don Pedersen, Leah
Weycker, Cathy Bailey and Mike Aspelin.
M1NUT~
Motion made by Goldberg, seconded by Ahrens to approve the minutes of the
April 3, 1997 Dock & Commons Advisory Commission meeting, as written.
Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
WOODLAND POINT MEDIATION
Chair, Mark Goldberg, explained that the Dock and Commons Commission is trying to find out
if they should get involved in helping the residents of Woodland Point in their mediation efforts,
but first the Commission needs to get up-to-speed on the issue. Goldberg announced that Mike
Aspelin a nonabutting resident in Woodland Point, and Mike Gardner an abutting resident in
Woodland Point have been asked to explain their views on the mediation.
Mike Aspelin thanked the Chair for the opportunity to speak. Aspelin explained that if you look
at the recommendations within the mediation agreement, it pretty much sums up the stance of
the nonabutters. Aspelin noted that this is a private commons, both Wawonaissa and Waurika
Commons are dedicated to the residents in Woodland Point. The Commons have not always
been used that way, and is not totally being used that way today. Aspelin highlighted the
following points from the mediation agreement:
"Recommend that a brochure be developed and distributed to the residents of Woodland
Point only." Aspelin explained that this idea was to help teach people where the
boundaries are, where the access points are, places to stay away from without having to
post signs and keep it more attractive to the general public and to get more use out of
the commons.
"Unobstructed access should be a continued right to Woodland Point residents." Aspelin
explained, it was decided during mediation that the south end of Bluebird Lane was not
an appropriate access point because most years it was too wet. The best access points
are at the end of Woodland Road and at the north end of Bluebird Lane.
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
Regarding "Encroaching Structures" and the City's involvement, the abutters felt over-
regulated. A list was developed of those items that City staff should have the authority
to grant permits without council approval, such as "trimming of tree limbs above a height
of 8 feet."
"Maintain the number of existing dock sites currently on the two Commons - 54 dock
sites..." There was concern about how to maintain the 54 dock sites, not everyone in
Woodland Point can get a dock, but they would like to try to accommodate as best they
can with the space available.
"Allow one dock site in front of each abutter's house and continue to give the abutters
priority for permits on those docks. Allow non-abutters to cluster their individual docks
at ends of streets, other than Canary Lane, on both Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons.
Clustered docks can be placed closer together than 20-30 feet." This allows abutting
owners to maintain the space in front of their houses, and the nonabutters to have
individual cluster docks. Aspelin emphasized that the idea of a cluster dock was not a
multiple-slip dock, but individual docks placed at the end of roads and spaced closer than
30 feet. Wawonaissa has already been removed from the Dock Location Map, and they
already have docks with 20 foot spacing, so there is not much room left for the cluster
dock idea.
Aspelin summarized that they have a good satisfaction level on Waurika even with close dock
spacing, and most abutting owners are very supportive of the program.
Mike Gardner referred to Aspelin's comment that Woodland Point is private and he does not
agree with that, nor does he think the City believes that. Gardner noted that due to the amount
work that the City has done on Waurika Commons, the attorney's feel Waurika is really City
property. He understands there is a pending lawsuit, and stated that the people of Wawonaissa
don't understand why the people on Waurika are joining this party and fighting this litigation.
From what he understands and has seen, Waurika is considered a City property based on all the
work the City has done there. Wawonaissa was treated differently by the court.
Gardner noted that the neighbors have talked about using Canary Beach for a multiple-slip dock.
He has drafted a dock configuration and believes the area could accommodate 11 slips and still
maintain the swimming area. Photocopies of the draft were distributed to the Commission. He
feels the multiple slip dock would increase the number of docks available in Woodland Point,
and also provide docking for people who are unable to build their own docks. Gardner
emphasized that it was nice not having other docks in front of his house last summer. They feel
the alternative of having a multiple dock would be an asset to the City and an asset to the
community.
Goldberg asked Gardner if he had any comments relating specifically to the mediation
agreement. Gardner stated that he was not part of the mediation group, but he went to most of
the meetings, and they talked about having docks at the end of streets. Gardner does not know
what the settlement was, and does not think people know what the mediation agreement is all
about.
2
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
Polston asked Gardner if he thinks the agreement would be a help or hinderance to the
neighborhood. Gardner responded, it would depend upon what the agreement is, and from what
he knows most of the abutters do not have a clue what the agreement is about.
Polston asked Aspelin if he thinks the agreement would be a help or hinderance to the
neighborhood. Aspelin feels that most of the agreement was forced to be put in place due to the
standings of what is going on with Wawonaissa commons.
Aspelin noted that the mediation agreements states that a consensus was not reached on the
building of a multiple dock, but that it could be a future consideration for people who do not
want the responsibility of maintaining a dock. In order to install a multiple dock at Canary
Beach there would need to be some landscaping and tree removal, and the cost would be great.
He also has a concern with having docks and boats so close to a swimming area.
Goldberg asked Aspelin how they would feel about forming an association and giving the City
the authority to manage things. Aspelin is not opposed to an association, and informed the
Commission that they had a neighborhood meeting at Canary Beach, and out of 60 people
present, 51 people agreed they should form an association, and out of 27 abutters, nine were in
favor of an association. One of the abutters not in favor of the association has private lakeshore
and is not on commons. Polston stressed the need to have 100% participation in order to form
an association.
Aspelin stated that he appreciated the opportunity to have this issue on the agenda, however,
does not feel this is the time to be discussing this due to the pending lawsuit, which is scheduled
for June or July. He asked that the Commission hold off on any action until they know what
the roles of everyone in Woodland Point will be. Polston clarified that he did not know talking
about implementing the mediation process was directly related to talking about whether or not
there should be a multiple dock. Polston noted that last year the City Council made a
commitment to work with the people in the area prior to the next boating season (this Spring)
to see if anything could be done to make things run smoother and raise the comfort level, even
though the City has no authority to run a dock program there. His thought for putting this issue
on the agenda was to live up to the Council's commitment.
Aspelin noted that the Council did implement some of their ideas, such as encouraging the
sharing of docks.
Polston commented that it is not the intent of the Council or the Dock Commission to force the
implementation of the mediation process, but would like it known that we are here to assist
them. Gardner and Aspelin agreed that they should wait to find out what the court is going to
decide regarding the easement.
Goldberg confirmed with Aspelin that the nonabutters have adequate space for their docks and
boats for this season. Goldberg asked Gardner if their are any nonabutting docks that are
causing problems for the abutters. Gardner noted there is one dock located at the end of
Woodland Road which he does not feel should be there because it is not actually Woodland
Road, but is Wawonaissa Common.
3
I
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
MOTION made by Goldberg that the Dock Commission sit tight on this issue
and wait for further clarification on the easement or for a request from the
Woodland Point group to do something. Ahrens seconded the motion.
Cathy Bailey further explained the pending lawsuit. The Declaratory Judgement that is going
to be entered into the court, is asking the court to explain and tell exactly what the easement
rights are to the 99 property owners in Woodland Point. Bailey stated that she wanted to remind
the City that they also own 17 of those lots and they went through the neighborhood and 44 of
the 99 households have signed on as plaintiffs. She explained that with a Declaratory Judgement
you have to declare what side you are on, and if you don't, you are automatically put on the
other side. They are hopeful that this process will clear up a lot of issues. They are also a little
disappointed that the City is not helping with the Declaratory Judgement as owner of 17 lots.
Polston commented that the City Attorney has advised the City to keep a low profile on this
issue. The City Manager stated that they were also advised, that as a property owner, that we
do have an interest and not a lot of research has gone into that.
Aspelin stated that they did have an informational meeting trying to get everyone involved and
to educate them on what is going on, and the City was invited, but did not come. In the future,
he hopes a representative from the City will attend their meetings.
MOTION carried unanimously.
Polston commented that it was not the intent of the Council or the Task Force to force multiple
docks into neighborhoods, but to do it at the request of neighborhoods.
PEMBROKE MULTIPLE DOCK SITE
Ahrens reviewed a proposed motion which was handed out to the commission that he had
prepared prior to the meeting.
The Commission discussed the fact that there are seven dock holders, and two of them were
permitted to move to this multiple slip dock with two boats because it was a pilot program at
that time. Ahrens explained that this motion will help them reduce the number of boats at this
dock to one boat per person. Ahrens emphasized that last year only seven boats were actually
moored at the dock.
Hopkins referred to the Multiple-slip Dock Program and noted that it says that they will give
up their extra boats. Goldberg noted that the program was implemented after the pilot program
was put in place so they are not bound to the program rules.
It was discussed whether it is too late to implement Ahrens' proposed motion for 1997.
The different dock configurations were reviewed. Ahrens commented that he is opposed to
expanding the dock into Rod Plaza's area.
4
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
It was noted that two of the dock holders are not within walking distance of the dock. Faclder
commented that this commons is not a dedicated commons, and you cannot regulate who gets
a dock where.
MOTION made by Ahrens to recommend to the City Council the following
changes in the multiple-slip dock system for the Devon Commons at the
Pembroke access for the 1997 boating season:
" WHEREAS, the city council has approved on January 28, 1997 the "Multiple-slip
Dock Program" as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the section
entitled "Multiple Docks."
WHEREAS, the city council has approved making the Pembroke multiple-slip dock
a permanent program with a suggested long-term goal to reduce the dock size to a
minimum of seven twenty-four foot dock slips.
WHEREAS, the dock configuration needs to be modified to improve the accessibility
of the three inside dock slips. The Commission recognizes that the water depth for the
inside dock slips were too shallow latter in the 1996 boating season and maneuvering the
boat into the dock slips was difficult.
WHEREAS, the multiple-slip docks are intended to be a small neighborhood dock
system for individuals within walking distance of their homes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and Commons Commission recommends to the City
Council on April 17, 1997 that the multiple-slip dock at the Pembroke access on the Devon
Commons be modified for the 1997 boating season with the inside slips (F, G, and H) being
placed in the manner as displayed on Exhibit A.
The docks should be configured in such a manner as to minimize the impact on the butting
property owners at this access.
Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be assigned one boat slip within the
multiple-slip dock system at Pembroke access. Dock holders will be assigned a boat slip for
the 1997 boating season based on the actual number of slips that were required to moor
boats for the 1996 season. No additional boats may be added during the 1997 boating
season.
Non-abutting dock holders with more than one boat will be assigned an additional dock slip
(A or J) for their second boat for 1997 boating season. The Commission's goal is to reduce
the number of boat slips to one boat slip per dock site holder. Therefore, as dock site
holders reduce the number of boats of record on their dock application to one boat, they
may not increase that number after that point. Current dock site holders with only one
boat may not increase the number of boats registered in the city dock program.
5
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
Non-abutter dock holders within the multiple-slip dock system should be within walking
distance of their homes. Dock site holders outside of the immediate neighborhood should
be moved to another commons for the 1998 boating season.
At the point that Craig Watson registers only two boats on his dock application, the
Commission recommends that Mr. Watson be assigned to the multiple-slip dock at
Pembroke. This is providing that there are available dock slips within the Pembroke
multiple-slip dock. His individual dock site would no longer be used as a dock location."
MOTION seconded by Tulberg.
Funk commented that he prefers dock configuration Option #2 as suggested by staff because it
addresses the "low water" issue and still leaves 15 to 20 feet to Plaza's dock. Fackler
commented, when Watson's dock is eliminated, everything can be moved towards the beach.
Also, this proposal keeps the dock slips equal in size.
Fackler emphasized the need for input from the dock holders before changes are made. Fackler
confirmed that LMCD approval should not be required in this case, but any new multiple docks
may need to get approval.
Ahrens moved to amend the motion as follows:
"Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be
assigned one boat slip within the multiple-slip dock system at
Pembroke access. Dock holders will be assigned a boat slip for
the 19978 boating season based on the actual number of slips
that were required to moor boats for the 19967 season. No
additional boats may be added during the 19978 boating
season."
Add: "A meeting will be held with the dock site holders to
review the dock configuration options prior to May 15."
Add: "If the second boat slip goes unused for one season, then
that dock holder will relinquish the right to. have that second
slip."
Tulberg seconded the motion to amend.
Ahrens called the question. The vote to end debate carried 5 to 1 with Hopkins opposed.
The MOTION as amended carried unanimously.
This recommendation will be reviewed by the City Council on May 13, 1997.
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
MOTION made by Tulberg, seconded by Ahrens to schedule a meeting with
the Pembroke Multiple-slip dock holders for Saturday, April 26, 1997 at 9:30
a.m. at City Hall. Staff is to notify the dock holders as a soon as possible.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hopkins stated that he has to work on Saturdays and will not be able to attend the meeting.
NEW MULTIPLE DOCK~q
Ahrens reviewed a proposed motion which was handed out to the commission that he had
prepared prior to the meeting.
MOTION made by Ahrens, seconded by tulberg to recommend to the city
council the implementation of multiple-slip dock systems for Devon Commons
at the Devon, Amhurst, and Roanoke accesses for the 1997 boating season,
as follows:
" WHEREAS, the City Council has approved on January 28, 1997 the "Multiple-slip
Dock Program" as outlined in Dock & Commons Commission manual under the section
entitled "Multiple Docks."
WHEREAS, one of the multiple-slip dock objectives is to improve the level of
satisfaction with the common's dock program by reducing or eliminating the number of
dock sites in front of abutter's homes.
WHEREAS, The first priority (based on dissatisfaction level as found in the
November 8, 1995 tabulation of commons surveys) in implementing multiple-slip docks is
Devon Common.
WHEREAS, the Amhurst Lane, Devon Lane and Fairview Lane accesses have non-
abutter dock sites located in front of abutter's homes.
WHEREAS, $22,500 was budgeted in calendar year 1997 in the Dock Fund for the
purchase of three multiple-slip docks for the 1997 boating season.
WHEREAS, the multiple-slip docks are intended to be a small neighborhood dock
system for individuals within walking distance of their homes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and Commons Commission recommends to the City
Council on April 17, 1997 that a multiple-slip dock be placed at the ends of fire lanes at
Devon, Amhurst, and Roanoke accesses by May 23, 1997.
7
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
The docks should be configured in such a manner as to minimize the impact on the abutting
property owners at the subject accesses.
A meeting with affected abutter and non-abutter dock holders should take place by
Saturday, April 26, 1997. All affected parties should be notified in writing of the meeting.
The following multiple docks will have a maximum number of boat slips not to exceed 24
feet in length and 12.5 feet in width:
Devon Access 7 boat slips
Amhurst Access 4 boat slips
Roanoke Access 4 boat slips
Therefore, each individual dock site permit holder will be assigned one boat slip within the
multiple-slip dock. The boat of record on the 1997 dock application shall be the boat
assigned to the boat slip. No additional boats may be added during boating season.
Non-abutting dock holders with more than one boat will be able to keep an individual dock
site only for 1997 boating season. They will be assigned an individual dock site at another
commons for the 1998 boating season.
Non-abutter dock holders within the multiple-slip dock system should be within walking
distance of their homes. Dock site holders outside of the immediate neighborhood should
be moved to another commons for the 1998 boating season.
On a shared docks, the dock holder of record shall be the dock holder moved to the
multiple-slip dock. We will attempt to accommodate the "share" at the multiple-slip dock,
but not to exceed the maximum number of boat slips authorized for that multiple-slip
dock."
Goldberg expressed a concern that all the multiple docks that are being proposed are on Devon
Common, and questioned if other areas should be considered.
Goldberg questioned if they need to get approval from the council before they meet with the
affected dock site holders. Ahrens commented, It was the intent that the Commission first find
out if the dock holders are in favor of the change, but suggested, due to lack of time that the
Council could approve the motion subject to acceptance by the dock holders.
Goldberg noted that the last three paragraphs of the motion are already addressed in the rules,
and suggested that the second and third to the last paragraphs be deleted. Ahrens commented
that it was the intent to follow the rules.
What to do with shared docks was briefly discussed. Ahrens noted this is addressed in his
motion.
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
The Parks Director commented that he has received two requests for multiple-slip docks, one
at Fairview Lane and one at Twin Park. Faclder noted that the docks at Fairview have 20 foot
spacing, they are located in front of two abutting homes, and there is a total of 8 eight docks.
The request for the multiple dock came from one of the abutting owners.
Polston suggested they could eliminate one of the proposed Devon sites and add the Fairview
site. Ahrens commented that the abutter by the Amhurst access is very unhappy and feels this
area should be looked at. He also feels the Devon access needs to be looked at.
MOTION made by Tulberg, seconded by Ahrens, to amend the motion, as
follows:
Delete the Roanoke Access as a multiple-slip dock site, and add
the Fairview Lane Access at Lake Blvd.
2. Delete the second and third to last paragraphs.
Amend the following: "NOW, THEREFORE, the Dock and
Commons Commission recommends to the City Council on
April 17, 1997 that a multiple-slip dock be placed at the ends
of the fire lands at the Devon, Amhurst, and Roanokc Fairview
by ~" ~ ~"'~ as soon as possible.
accesses
It was also recommended that this recommendation be heard by the City
Council on April 22, 1997. Motion carried unanimously.
REVIEW PROCEDURE MANUAL AS IT RELATES TO PUBLIC LAND PERMITS
This item was moved to the May 15th agenda.
ENCROACHMENT POLICY: REVIEW STATUS
This item was moved to the May 15th agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Goldberg, that the Dock
Commission recommend to the City Council that they recognize the hard
work and efficiency that Peggy has put into serving the Commissions and
City Council over the years. Motion carried unanimously.
Dock & Commons Advisory Commission Minutes
April 17, 1997
Motion by Polston, seconded by Ahrens to adjourn the Dock & Commons
Commission Meeting at 10:07 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Chair, Mark Goldberg
Attest:
10
CRAIG M. MERTZ LAW OFFICE
Chanhassen Office: 600 W. 79th St., Suite 210
Phone: (612) 934-0419 [FAX: 975-9963]
Minneapolis Office: 120 S. 6th St., Suite 1900
Phone: (612) 333-1511 [FAX: 333-1523]
REPLY TO: Post Office Box 652
Chanhassen, Minnesota $5317
May 1, 1997
CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION
Ed Shukle
Mound City Manager
Mound City Hall
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Re: Tree Cutting on Wiota Common
Dear Mr. Shukle:
Officer Sam Nelson has completed his investigation of the
tree cutting on Wiota Common near 1737 Canary Lane. Based on
Officer Nelson's investigation, it appears that there is enough
evidence to go forward with a prosecution against Thomas Allen
Stueve, who is the current resident of the home at 1737 Canary
Lane. Officer Nelson located what appeared to be at least some
of the missing trees stored behind the garage at that address.
Mr. Stueve was interviewed by Officer Nelson and he admitted to
cutting the trees. Other residents of that immediate vicinity
may also have cut some of the trees but Officer Nelson was unable
to develop sufficient evidence to tie those persons to the
cutting.
The location in question is part of Wiota Common, which is
in the plat of Dreamwood. The dedication language on the plat of
Dreamwood reads:
"... we hereby dedicate to the owners of the lots as
shown on the annexed plat all of the streets or avenues
thereon shown...".
Even though Wiota Common is not labeled as either a street
or as an avenue on the plat, arguably Wiota Common is a street or
avenue and has been dedicated to the owners of the platted lots
rather than being dedicated to the public. Thus the facts are
becoming similar to the facts in the recent controversy
concerning Wawonaissa Common and Waurika Common.
Prior to issuing a criminal charge against Mr. Stueve, I
would like confirmation that the City claims authority under City
Code Section 320 (and/or under the provisions of Section 350, the
~d Shukle
May 1, 1997
Page 2
shore land management restrictions) to restrict land alteration
on Wiota Common.
I spoke to City Attorney, John Dean, briefly on April 30,
1997, and he suggested that I send this status report to you
prior to issuing any criminal charges against Mr. Stueve.
I am prepared to issue charges against Mr. Stueve if so
instructed, but this could well lead again to court action
concerning the legal status of what may be a privately dedicated
commons.
Very truly yours,
Craig'M. Mertz
CMM: cg
cc: John Dean
FiRE FIGHTERS
iai ,EJ. I ,~
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF April 1997
DRILLS & MAINTENANCE
-- Y_-T27
~ ~ SF_E,S PEDEP~ON
52 111}2! SAVAGE
21 }lEi'iX S!PPR~L
l,i ROi;
2~ =:~?r SVOBODA
FIRE & RESCUE
42 6.50 273. OO
48 6.50 312.00
279.50
43 6.50
35 6.50
45 6.50
227.50
292.50
6.50
6.50
56 6.50
6.50
221.00
260.00
364.00
182.00
7.00 294.00
6.50 279.50
37 ~,50
22 ~,50
57
~1 6.5~
50 6.50
36
32
253.50
260.00
240.50
143.00
370.50
266.50
325.00
234.00
208.00
43
6.50
6.50
279.50
221.00
312.00
6.50 305.50
6.50 266.50
6.75 297.00
6.50 325.00
6.50 117.00
6.50 286.00
6.50 299.00
6.50 91.00
6.50 266.50
6.50 279.50
46
6.50 247.00
6.50 299.00
6.50 253.50
6.50 299.00
1492
167.5
151
~hq 636.50
YA~ 1,167.00
/DIAL 11,533.50
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMO1La2~UM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
May 8, 1997
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
APRIL 1997 MONTHLY REPORT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
There were 43 building permits issued in April for a construction value of $460,626. 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 36 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellanous
permits for a total of 79 this month, and 198 year-to-date.
PLANNING & ZONING
The Planning Commission reviewed four zoning cases in April including three variances, one preliminary
plat/PDA for the Seton Bluff Development. The assistant city planner Bruce Chamberlain reviewed the
proposed downtown redevelopment concept plan at the workshop meeting. There were eight zoning cases
reviewed by the City Council.
STAFFING CHANGES
As you are aware Peggy James has resigned her position with the city officially as of April 25th. Peggy
was an asset to the Planning Department and to the Planning Commission. She has our best wishes for
her success in the future.
Linda Strong is our new Planning and Zoning Secretary. She has a long history (12 years) with the city.
She is proving herself very capable to handle the position, and I am very pleased she has been offered
the promotion!
JS:ls
prtnted on recycled paper
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: APRIL Year: 1997
THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENIIAL IJ ,f PERMITS J #UNITS J VALUATION JJ //UNITS VALUATION
NEW CONS II1UCTION
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 2 2 247,451 5 648,241
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOS) 2 558,458
TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX
MULTIPLE FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITSJ
TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS I MOTELS)
SUBTOTAL 2 7 [, 206, 699
COMMERCIAL {RETAIL/RESTAURANT}
OFFICE I PROFESSIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
P[Htt lC I $CIIOOLS
SUBTOTAL
A--~ 'r~o~ ~-7-A L T E R A T ION S
ADDmONS TO PmNOPAL eU~LD~NG 5 79,266 6 139,266
DETAC~Ee ACCESSORY BUiLDiNgS 1 12, 311 3 34, 983
DECKS 5 8, 180 5 8, 180
SWIMMING POOLS
REMODEL - MISC RESIDENTIAL 28 ]. 12,632 65 36~, 227
REMODEL - MULTIPLE DWELLINGS
SUBTOTAL 39 212, 387 79 54i,,, 654
COMMERCIAL IRETAIL/RESTAURANT) ]. ]- 00
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL 4 86, 365
~NDUSTmAL iL [, 000
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS 2, 402,000
DE~^CHED ACCESSORY BUiLDiNGS
SUBTOT^L 9 489. 465
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 2 3
NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 2 3
# PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION # UNITS VALUATION
// PERMITS
TOTAL 43 2 460,626 7 2,260,818
98
PERMIT COUNT J THIS MONTH J YEAR-TO-DATE
'BUILDING 43 98
FENCES & RETAINING WALLS .5 V
S~GNS 1 8
PLUMBING 1. 8 4 3
MECN^N~CAL 11 35
GRADING - - 00
S&W. STREET EXCAV., FIRE. ETC. ]- 7
TOTAL J 79 J 198
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 April 1997
The police department responded to 1,020 calls for service during the
month of April. There were 17 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses
included 2 robberies, 5 burglaries, 9 larcenies, and 1 arson.
There were 70 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 3 child
abuse/neglect, 1 forgery/NSF checks, 2 weapons, 6 narcotics, 9 damage to
property, 2 liquor law violations, 7 DUI's, 5 simple assault, 9 domestics (2
with assaults), 4 harassment's, 4 juvenile status offenses, and 18 other
offenses.
The patrol division issued 180 adult citations and 4 juvenile citations.
Parking violations accounted for an additional 21 tickets. Warnings were
issued to 107 individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 4 adults arrested and 3 juveniles arrested for felonies. There
were 38 adults and 13 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an
additional 17 warrant arrests.
The department assisted in 11 vehicle accidents, 6 with injuries. There
were 30 medical emergencies and 56 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 12 occasions in April and requested assistance 21 times.
Property valued at $5,783 was stolen and $3,725 was recovered in April.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - APRIL 1997
II.
III.
INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 2 criminal sexual conduct cases and 2 child
protection issues, accounting for 24 hours of investigative time.
Additional investigations included robbery, assault, tax evasion, burglary,
theft, damage to property, controlled substance/narcotics, adult protection,
absenting, sex offender verification, and a missing child.
Formal complaints were issued for stalking, possession of a controlled
substance, disorderly conduct, failure to yield to pedestrian, resisting
arrest, driving after suspension, and false identification to police.
Personnel/Staffing
The department used approximately 49 hours of overtime during the
month of April. Officers used 56 hours of comp-time, 119 hours of
vacation, 51 hours of sick time, and 1 holiday. Officers earned 41 hours of
comp-time.
Officer Huggett resigned in April to take a position with the Hennepin
County Sheriff's Department. Wendy Lewin resigned to take a secretarial
position with the Minnetonka Police. CSO Patrick Clark resigned to take
a position with Minneapolis Parks.
Officers attended EMT training and attended Use of Force and Hazardous
Materials training during the month of April.
IV.
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS
Officer Packard addressed 36 animal complaints, 54 ordinance violations,
and 132 miscellaneous calls for services.
The reserves donated 131 hours during the month of April.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1997
OFFENSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED
R~PORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT J%TV
PART I CRIME~
Homicide
Criminal Sexual Conduct
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny
Vehicle Theft
Arson
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 2 i 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
$ 0 0 i 0 2
9 0 i i 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
i 0 0 I I 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
17 0 i 5 4 3
3 I 0 2 i 0
I 0 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 3 i 1
2 0 0 i 0 1
6 0 0 6 5 1
2 0 0 2 4 3
7 0 0 7 7 0
5 0 2 2 3 0
2 0 0 2 i 0
7 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 1 i I 0
4 0 1 3 0 7
I 0 0 I I 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 13 14 0
TOTAL
70 I 4 43 38 13
PART II & PART IV
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Mutual Aid
Other General Investigations
TOTAL
5
6
0
3O
56
12
791
900
HCCP
Inspect ions
5
28
TOTAL
1,020
48
42 16
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT
APRIL 1996
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
Hazardous Citations
Non-Hazardous Citations
Hazardous Warnings
Non-Hazardous Warnings
Verbal Warnings
Parking Citations
DWI
Over .10
Propety 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
MONTH
89
81
24
59
64
21
7
7
5
6
0
7
5O
3
15
17
70
29
56
28
791
YEAR TO
DATE
391
306
103
307
271
327
35
28
32
14
0
13
157
7
36
66
254
100
216
92
2,622
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
227
167
88
222
251
315
12
8
23
7
0
16
96
27
64
91
222
125
130
86
2,663
TOTAL
Assists
Follow-Ups
HCCP
Mutual Aid Given
Mural Aid Requested
1,429
56
56
5
12
21
5,377
252
166
12
41
34
4,840
284
139
23
53
44
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1997
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
Overweight Vehicles
Miscellaneous Tags
TOTAL
7
7
1
10
2
61
4
1
17
2
6
2
9
0
20
0
0
21
1
0
8
1
12
10
201
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1997
Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony
Misdemeanor
Adult
43
20
16
0
2
11
0
0
0
7
99
3
12
2
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Run: 8~May-97 13:39 PRO03
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Activity codes: All
Property Status: All
Property Types: All
Property Descs: All
Brands: All
Models: All
Officers/Badges: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Property Report
STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED
Page
Prop Prop Inc no ISN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Date Recov'd
Tp Desc SN Stat Stolen Value Recov'd Value
Quantity Act Brand Model Off-1 Off-2
Code Assnd Assnd
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals: 400
Prop type Totals:
290
Prop type Totals: 900
Prop type Totals: 200
Prop type Totals: 200
Prop type Totals: 125
Prop type Totals: 167
Prop type Totals:
50
Prop type Totals:
5O
Prop type Totals: 3,400
Report Totals: 5,783
0 1.000
0 2.000
0 2.000
0 2.000
0 1.000
200 1.000
125 2.000
0 1.000
0 1.000
0 1.000
3,400 1.000
3,725 15.000
,J I ~,
Run: 7-May-97 8:50 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
" How Received: All
zvity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: Ail
, iii.
MOUND POLXC~ DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING 61
9001 J-SPEEDING 1
9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 4
9004 RESTRICTED D/L 1
9012 OPEN BOTTLE 1
9014 STOP SIGN
6
9016 FAILURE TO YIELD 2
EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 8
9020 CARELESS/RECKLESS 1
9027 J-OVER THE CENTER LINE
1
9030 CROSSWALK VIOLATION 1
9034 STOP AP34 VIOLATION 2
9036 OBSTRUCTED VISION 1
9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 3
9040 NO SEATBELT
1
9041 J-NO SEATBELT
1
9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 9
9140 NO PARKING/WINTER BOURS 10
9150 NO TRAILER PARKING 2
9200 DAS/D;tR/DAC
~-.d PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 17
9212
10
Page
Run: 7-May-97 8:50 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 o 04/25/97
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
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 20
9221 J-NO INSUPJ%NCE/PROOF OF 1
9222 OVERWEIGh"r VEHICLE 2
9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 6
9250 B CARD VIOLATIONS 1
9309 FOUND/RUNAWAY 1
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUiTDS 2
9313 FOUND PROPERTY 4
9420 DERELICT AUTO 1
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 6
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 2
9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC. 3
9561 DOG BITE 2
9567 DANGEROUS DOG 2
9710 MEDICAL/ASU 4
9730 MEDIC/tLS 23
9731 MEDICALS/DX 1
9732 MEDICALS/CI 1
9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 8
9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT 7
9802 PUBLIC ASSIST 1
9900 ALL HCCP CASES 5
Page
Run: 7-May-9? 8:50 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
civity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: Ail
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: Ail
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9904
9920
9930
9950
9951
9980
9990
OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 8
INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 7
HANDGUN APPLICATION 5
INFO/INT 3
SEX OFFENDERS 3
WARR~S 17
MISC. VIOLATIONS 1
MUTUAL AID/8100 9
ML~I73ALAID/6500 1
MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 2
ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC 2
ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD KRM-~L%/gDS-CHLD-ACQ 1
ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HAP. M-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 2
ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HA~DS-CHLD-ACQ 1
ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-THRT BODLY-HRM-HNDS-ADLT-ACQ
BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 1
BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-N-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 1
BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK WEAP-UN~ ACT
BURG 4-UNOCC N'RES FRC~U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 1
FORGERY-FE-UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON 1
DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSESSION 2
9993
9994
A5352
A5355
A5502
AL355
AL552
B3334
B4060
~4330
B4390
~4730
D8540
Page
Run: 7-May-97 8:50 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Tlme range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Mow Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-M~%RIJ-U~rK 1
DA548 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEM~POSS-MARIJ-NOT APP 1
DE558 CON SUB 2-POSSESS-COCAINE-NOT APPLICABLE 1
DH440 CON SUB 5-POSS INT-MARIJUANA-UNK
FT00C NEGLIGENT FIRE~MS-OT PROP-S299 LESS 1
13060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 2
!3070 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-MALIC PUNISMMENT CHILD 1
J2501 TP. AFF-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UI~K INJ-UNK %;EM 1
J2701 TRAFFIC-GM-AGG DUI~UNK INJ-MV 1
J2E01 TRAP-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 2
J3501 TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLI/ENCE 5
J3E01 TRAP-ACC-MS~AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 5
M4140 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 2
M5313 JLS;ENILE-CURFEW 2
M5350 JLS;ENILE-RUNAWAY 2
Ni310 DISTURBING PEACE-FE~STALKING-LTN]~NOWN 2
N2190 DIS"I/IRB PEACE-GM-H~SS COMI~ICATIONS-UNK 1
N3070 DIS///RB PEACE-MS-PUBLIC NUISANCE 1
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-H/~{RASSING COMMUNICATIONS 3
POllO PROP DAMAGE-UNK LVL-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1
P0120 PROP DAMAGE-UNK LVL-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT 1
Pll12 PROP DAMAGE-FE~PRIVATE-RISK BODILY I~-DEA~ 1
Page
Run: 7-May-97 8:50 CFS08
Priory ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
.ivity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE N-~ER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
P2120
P3110
R2525
R3156
TB031
TC021
TF159
TO059
TG!59
U1497
U3498
W3190
>[2080
>[2200
X3080
X3360
PROP DAMAGE-GM-Pb-BLIC-bqgK IN'TEN'T 2
PROP D;tW~kGE-MS-PRIVATE-b74K INTEN~f 4
ROBB-AGG-N0 BH-RESIDEN-FIREAP~4-CHILD-ACQ 1
ROBB-SIMPLE-HIGHWAY-STRONGARM-CHILD-STR 1
THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-COIN MACH-MONEY 1
THEFT-501-250O-FE-BUILDING-MONEY
THEFT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 1
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY 1
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YAR/)S-OTHR PROP 1
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER 2
THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 1
THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS 1
WEAPONS-MS-USES-OTHER TYPE-NO C~ 2
CRIM AGNST ADMN J~3ST-GM-OBST LEGAL PROCESS 1
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL 1
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEG;%L PROCESS 2
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-VIOL HA~R3%SS REST ORDER 1
CRIM AGNST GO%N-MS-ESCAPE TAX-MT'R VEH 2
Report Totals: 391
Page
Run: 7-May-97 9:03 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dsspositions: Ail
Activity codes: Ail
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page
ACT ACTIVITY ..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
CODE DESCRIPTION ADULT JUVENILE BY EX-~ PERCENT
.................................... REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT.AC 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
A5355 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HA/~S-CHLD-ACQ i 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY H~-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 100.0
AL355 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HA~DS-CHLD-ACQ 1 0 I 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
AL552 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-THRT BODLY-HRR-KNDS-ADLT-ACQ 1 0 1 0 I 0 0 1 100 . 0
-~3334 BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 1 0 i 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
B4060 BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-N-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
B4330 BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC~D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 10C
B4390 BURG 4-UNOCC RES FRC-U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
B4790 BURG 4-UNOCC NRES FRC-U-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
Ti21i FORGERY-FE~UTT POSSESS PLACE-CHECK-PERSON 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
D8540 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT M~IJUANA-POSESSiON 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 100.0
DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK 1 0 i 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
DA548 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-NOT APP 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
DE558 CON SUB 2'POSSESS-COCAINE-NOT APPLICABLE 1 0 ! 0 1 0 0 I 100.0
DH440 CON SUB 5-POSS INT-MARIJUANA-UNK
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 lOO.O
F?00C NEGLIGENT FIRE~MS-OT PROP-S299 LESS
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 !00.0
13060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
13070 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-MALIC PUNISHMENT CHILD 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
J2501 TRAFF-GM~DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
J2701 TRAFFIC-GM-AGG DUI-UNq( INJ~MV
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100..
J2E01 TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 2 0 2 0 2 '0 0 2 100.0
J3501 TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE 5 0 5 0 5 0
o oo.o
Run: 7-May- 97 9;03 OFF01
Primary ZSN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Tame range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 2
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JT~NILE BY EX-'~ PERCENT
CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING AP. REST AP. REST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
J3E01 TP. AF~ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-LTNK INJ-M~J
M4140 LIQUOR-b'NqDERJIGE ~NSUMPTION 18-21
M5313 JUVENILE-CURFEW
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
Ni310 DISTLTRBING PEACE-FE-STALKING-UN"KNOWN
:~2190 DISTURB PEACE-GM-HAJ~RASS COMMITNICATIONS-UNK
N3C70 DIS/TY~B PEACE-MS-PUBLIC NUISA14CE
~2!90 DISTLTRB PEACE-MS-PL~RP~SSING CO~3NICATIONS
PROP DAF~IGE~UNK LVL-PRIVATE-UN-K INTENT
PZi2C PROP DAMAGE-U~TK LVL-PD-BLIC-b'NK INTENT
?]i12 PROP DAF~GE-FE-PRiVATE-RISK BODILY H~-DEATH
P[12C PROP DAF~ISE-GM-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT
P3110 PROP D~AGE-MS-PRIVATE-UN~ INTEN~
R2525 ROBB-AGG-NO BH-RESiDEN-FiRF~Td~M_CHiLD.ACQ
53156 ROBB-SIMPLE-HIGHWAY-STRONGAP. M-CMILD-STR
TBC31 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-COIN ~CH-MONEY
TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MO~TEy
TF159 THEFT-201-500-GM-MO/~R VEM-O/~ PROP
TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP
Tc-~ THEFT-LESS 200-MS~MOTOR VEH-O/~ER
U1497 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500
U3498 T~EFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR T.~.SS
5 0 5 0 5 0 0 5 100.0
2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 100.0
2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
2 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 100.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 lOO.O
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
3 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 3~.3
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 C.O
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 I lOC.O
2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 100.0
4 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 ! 100.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 O.O
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
Run: 7-May-97 9:03 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/97 - 04/25/97
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: Ail
MOUND ~OLIC~ DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUA~
CODE DESCRIPTION
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION
W3190
X2080
X2200
X3080
X3360
Y3230
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUIrENiLE BY EX- ~ PERCENT
TOTAL CLEARED
WEAPONS-MS-USES-OTHER TYPE~NO C~ 2 0 2 1 0 I 0
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-GM-OBST LEGA~ PROCESS I 0 1 0 1 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL 1 0 1 0 1 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-OBST LEGAL PROCESS 2 0 2 0 2 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-VIOL HARRASS REST ORDER I 0 1 0 1 0 0
CRIM AGNST GOVN-MS-ESCAPE TAX-MTR VEH I 0 I 0 i 0 0
1 50.0
1 100.0
1 100.0
2 100.0
1 100.0
1 I00.0
Report Totals:
78 1 77 24 39 9
5 53 68.8
,J I
CITY OF MOUND
Play ~, 1997
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
April Activity Report for Public Works
Street Department
This month we did most of our watermain break repair.
Ali that is left will be the final lifts and that will take 2
days to do. ~de started sweeping %he 9 ton street at the
beginning of the month. We waited until most of the frost was
out before we started the side streets. We should be
completed with the sweeping on l'flay 15. 7he PD received the
scales for weighing vehicles during road restrictions.
Restriction were posted on March 15 and will be removed on
May 15. '
Nater Department
Ne had one main break for the month. We have completed
some gatevaive and
~andpipe repairs. Nater meters were read
and the is system working fine. He will be repairing some-
Gatevalves that we found to be bad over the winter.
hewer Department.
Damon and Scott completed %he cleaning and flushing of
the i ft ~ "-'
~ta,_~on. 7Bey will start cleaning sewer line in May.
N i s c .
Most of u~ were lucky to participate in the annual
recycling day. It was very bus>. ar, d 'fun was had by all.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYINOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
May 5, 1997
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CITY MANAGER
CITY CLERK
APRIL MONTHLY REPORT
The Council had 2 regular meetings and the Local Board of Review with Minutes, and 6
resolutions along with the follow-up items from these meetings.
The bids were opened on the following project:
* 1997 Sealcoating Project - awarded to Allied Blacktop
All renewal forms for the following licenses were sent:
On-Sale Beer
Set-Ups
On-Sale Wine
Off-Sale Beer
Club On-Sale
All Licenses were prepared and sent for the following:
Restaurant
Juke Box
Bowling
Pool
Games of S 'kill
An ordinance book update was prepared and has been given out.
There were the usual calls and questions from residents.
printed on recycled oaper
IL, JI, iii, ,JJ,, J . ~
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
May 1, 1997
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
APRIL 1997 MONTHLY REPORT
Considering the inclement weather, April was a very good month. Gross sales were
$117,322. Last year for April sales were $114,274. That's a welcome sign. Hopefully the rest
of spring and this summer will bring us more exciting totals.
After talking with Gino Businaro, he has indicated that the audit is complete. I believe you
should be receiving this information at your next council meeting. The bottom line for th e liquor
store in 1996 looks great! You will see the comparisons between 96 and 95. You will notice that
we continued our growth and are recording record breaking profits year after year. Rather than
me going into detail here I encourage you to look into the report at your leisure. I have always
been very blessed that you and Ed have allowed me to manage the liquor operation in my style.
I have never been bothered with any unnecessary meddling and have always enjoyed all the
support you have given me.
JK:tf
prmted on recycled pal~er
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
PARKS DEPARTMENT APRIL MONTHLY REPORT
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
GENERAL COMMENT,
In April the Parks Department had two of the seasonal
fulltime employees begin work. This time is used to prepare
for summer by checking all playground equipmet for wear or
vandelism and making all repairs.
Work had begun on the Depot building to replace the
siding, windows, doors, soffets, facia and exterior
electrical. This improvement is to be completed by the
second week in May and will provide a great astehtic
appearance to the park.
We had advertised for summer help in the Parks Department
mowing crew along with Street Department for general
laborers. The ad ran about one month and we recieved only
three applications. It seems that there is not a large
number of individuals seeking work. I recieved two phone
calls from other cities asking for our pay scale and
informed me that they had advertivsed summer positions for
$7.00 per hour and did not get one applicant. We were able
to fill two of the three positions and will be offering the
thired to the last applicant this week.
The new stairway at the Bluffs Beach was started in April
and will be completed by the second week in May. This will
provide easy access and a nice sitting area near the beach.
TREE REMOVAL,
Four hazardous trees were removed from city property and
no trees were marked on private property.
CEMETERY,
The clean up from the winter season was completed and all
the winter burials have had leveling and seeding. There are
two headstones that were disrupted from burials that need to
be reset but that is the responsibility of the funeral home
that handled the internment. We do not touch these stones
becauce of possible damage could be very expensive to repair
or replace. A new fence was installed along the northerly
unimproved area to deter people from dumping refuse or
removing city supplies.
DOCKS,
The Dock Inspector was very busy assigning the docks for
1997, we had more demand by new applicants then in the past
years. We will be providing a more in depth count of sites
and boats in June.
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CiTY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
APRIL FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment Activity
Balance: April 1, 1997 $3,687,274
Bought:
Money Market 4M Plus 2,640
Money Market 4M 101,146
Money Market First Bank 332
Money Market Norwest Bank 200,053
CP Norwest Bank 252,011
Matured:
Money Market 4M Plus (100,000)
Money Market 4M (101,500)
Money Market Norwest Bank (200,000)
CP Norwest Bank (519,807)
Balance:
April 30, 1997
$3,322,149
.1997 Safety and Loss Control Workshop
On April 23, 1997 1 attended the Safety and Loss Control Workshops, sponsored by
the League of Minnesota Cities. It was well attended and Carl Bennetsen, our insurance
agent, was in attendance also.
The sessions that I attended covered the following topics:
Insurance coverage issues to be aware of and suggested solutions
Overview of liability rating and assistance from agent
How much and what kind of retained risk best fit the city's needs
The city insurance agent's role in Loss Control - a visual tour of city work environment
Practical and legal implications of employee misconduct, handling investigations
in a fair manner, and carrying out required procedures in order to minimize liability.
Recvclin_~
A special thanks to the many people who helped to make Mound Spring
Cleaning Day on April 26th such a successful event. Again, Joyce Nelson
and Greg Skinner did a great job in coordinating the whole affair.
Thanks, Joyce. Thanks, Greg.
City of Mound
05/07/{J~
Monthly Report
Utilities
Month of: April 1997
Utility-97 !
Residential
Commercial
_Total
No. of Customers:
Water
Sewer
Water Used:
(in 1,000 gallons)
Billing:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Total
1,108
1,112
15,310
$25,544
$56,065
~5,180
~86,789
125
125
2,803
$4,611
$13,848
$1o6
18,565
1,233
1,237
18,113
$30,155
$69,913
$5,286
$105,354
Payments:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Total
$27,156
$57,722
$4,904
$89,782
$4,105
$12,430
$86
$16,621
$31,261
$70,152
$4,990
$106,403
05/07/1997 13:57 B12--4724435 T0H REESE PAGE
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 160 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 612/473-7033
BOAAD MEMBERS
William A. Johnstone
C~air. Minnetonka
Deuglas E, Bal:x:ock
V~ce Chair, Spring Park
Joseph Zwak
SecreTary, Greenwood
Rober~ Rascop
Treasurer, Shorewood
Mike B~oom
M~nnetonka Beach
Albert (Bert) Foster
Deephaven
JamQ$ N, (~ralhwol
Excelsior
Doane Marku$
Wayzata
Ross Mc'Glasson
Tonka Bay
Craig Moiler
Victoria
Eugene Pa n'yka
M~nneTri$~
Torn Reese
Mound
Herb J, Suer~h
Woodland
Ororto
TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL DATE: May 7, 1997
FROM: TOM REESE, LMCD REPRESENTATIVE
SUBJECT: APRIL REPORT- LMCD
1.0 General Item~
1.1 Nancy Randall has been hired in thc Technician spot to replace
Greg Nybeck. who has been promoted to Executive Director. Nancy comes
to us, very well recommended from the City of Oakdale, where she was a
Community Dovelopment Intern. She has a BS from Iowa State in
Community and Regional Planning.
1.2 .loc Zwak, the Greenwood representative, District Secretar~ has
resigned. No one has yet been appointed to r~place him. No one has been
identified as yet to fill the vacant Victoria slot.
2.0 Exotic Species Task Force.
2. i Gene Stmmmcn, recently retired Executive Director of thc
Minnehaha Watershed District, and former Executive Director of the LMCD
has been retained to manage the Harvesting Program this year, replacing the
deceased Norm Paurus.
2.2 Greg Nybeck and Gabriel Jabbour, jointly with lake marina
owners are planning an informational program brochure on zebra mussels.
Trailered boats and thc large boats going back and forth commercially
between the river and Lake Minnetonka are potential sources of exotic
contamination.
3.0 Water Structures
3.1 Minnetonka Beach has settled with John Goodman for what
amounts to the compromise that was offered in November. Them are still
some other lesser issues outstanding.
3.2 RDP Partner~ in Spring Park have sought permission to have
the Minnehaha dock there three times this summer. At present the Yacht
Club is not configured for such activity.
4.0 Lake Use,
4. i No significant items.
$.4~ Mound Specific Items
_/~ 5.1 Mound might want to consider place for the
/~~, .a to dock. developing a
,~o'~ Ree'se
~ o~.n,.,,d~R~pre~enta6 ve - LMCD
lc. Greg Nybeck, Doug Babcock
Gene L. Peterson
6017 Ridgewood Road
Mound, MN 55364
May 5, 1997
Mr. Robert Richards
6023 Cherrywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Richards:
Sent via Certified Mail
On Sunday, May 4, 1997 a couple was viewing my residence for the intent of buying.
They were frightened away when you began shouting across the road describing your
fundamentalist opposition to any future construction or modifications to my home. They
lef~ stating they were uncertain they wished to live near someone displaying such irrational
behavior.
I suggest a more proper forum for your verbal tirades on construction would be our
community planning commission meetings, should a building permit ever be requested.
In the future please refrain from addressing any of my potential buyers unless they
specifically seek your counsel.
Yours truly,
Gene L. Peterson
cc: Mayor Bob Polston, Chairman Planing Commission
Mound Planning Commission
Chief, Len Harrell
RECEIVED . iAY 6 19§?
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
5-5-97
I am writing in response to your decision to rescind your
permission for improving the ballpark for the Little League.
Frankly, I am embarrassed as a citizen for my city council.
How can you pull the rug out from under our city's youth like
you have? It is unfathomable to think that the citizens of
Mound would rank parking as a higher priority than youth
activities.
Since when does improving a park correlate to an increase in
crime? It doesn't. In fact, it is the other way around.
Just last week there was a summit on volunteerism to keep
our youth in school and out of detention centers. Increasing
youth involvement in athletic activities is one of the goals. Are
you that out of sync with the rest of the nation?
Any adult who takes the time to organize, coach and play with
our youth in this community and others should be rewarded,
not penalized. Especially when you already gave your word.
Shame on you, City Council, for buckling under the pressure
to assure a pleasant spring for the few, and a lousy spring for
the many.
Fellow neighbors should be willing to be inconvenienced for a
few hours, two nights a week for just two months so that our
young people can learn, grow and enjoy themselves. We are
all better off as a community when we forgo our needs for the
needs of our future citizens, neighbors and voters.
121 say it again...shame on you.
Fellow Baseball Enthusiast,
Patricia Mikulski
I??¥
RECEI'¢E3 2 4 lgg?_
Perry Hanson
2459 Lost Lake Road
Mound, MN 55364
April 24, 1997
Mr. Bob Polston, Mayor
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Polston:
As a Mound resident for the past 17 years, I have watched, on many occasions, the
volunteer efforts of a few citizens working to help improve the quality of life in this town
continually get shut down by some of the same people whose lives and areas the3' are
trying to help.
I was unfortunate enough to witness another such spectacle at the April 22, council
meeting when volunteers from the Babe Ruth Association were called upon to explain
the improvements they were planning to make to Philbook Park. The improvements
being done would allow a 13 year old league to play 3 games per week at this site under a
joint effort with the Orono Babe Ruth Association.
This plan had already been submitted to the Council one year earlier and since the city
viewed the improvements to a city park at no cost to them and as a benefit to all, the
proposed plans were approved unanimously. The improvements to the park were to be as
follows:
1.
2.
Cut back the infield to accommodate 75 feet base lines.
Install a safety fence along the first and third base lines to guard
players from foul balls.
Supply the aglime for the infield.
Install a locker behind the current backstop to store bases,
a line chalker, rake and shovel.
After listening to a number of people from the neighborhood objecting to improving this
city park, which on more than one occasion was referred to by these people as "their"
neighborhood park, and that due to the lack of parking shouldn't be used for an organized
youth activity, I wondered how the roads of this town were ever paved. It never ceases to
amaze me that ever), little thing people try to improve upon in this town is met with such
narrow-mindedness.
We have here an organization, who on the Council's approval last year, made
commitments to the Orono Babe Ruth Association (which already supplies two fields for
this 13 year old league). These volunteers also collected money, donations, lined up
other volunteers, spent money on equipment and has a scheduled game May 5. Now
these people are told that the Council screwed up by approving this project a year ago
and that all of this work by these volunteers is all for naught.
The Council's admission to it's part in this and wanting to help find a solution is
admirable, but I have seen this town try to help before and by the time this gets the
attention it deserves, I am afraid these 13 year olds will be the ones voting for city
council members.
Sincerely,
/..' ~...
Perry~on
12 4
~J I ii, ,J~ ii'ii, , ~Ji,[ ~J , i,
Dorene Hanson
2459 Lost Lake Road
Mound, MN 55364
April 24, 1997
Mr. Bob Polston, Mayor
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 44364
Dear Mr. Polston:
I was in attendance at the council meeting of April 22, wherein there ,,vas a discussion of
the Philbrook Park incurring minor improvements so that 13 year olds Babe Ruth players
could use that city park for games. I have a few thoughts I would like to
pass on to you regarding that discussion.
I was shocked that the City of Mound made the decision to approve the improvements
without ever including the local homeowners and even more shocked that the original
motion could so easily be voided. The lesson being taught to these 13 vear olds about
government commitment and their own importance and place in their community isn't
impressive. It is apparent that the City created an unhappy situation for both sides by
their actions and should take finding a resolution seriously.
As I am sure you understand, the Babe Ruth Association complied with all of the City's
requests and upon given the approval to proceed they entered into a commitment with the
Orono Babe Ruth Association to supply their own field in order to host approximately
one third of the games in Mound. The first game is scheduled for May 5. With the
Council's decision of last night, this puts the Mound Babe Ruth Association in a very
unfavorable situation with their commitments to Orono. I appreciate the Council's
attempt to rectify the situation by forming a partnership to help the Babe Ruth
Association find a solution, however, due to the lack ora time frame being indicated by
the Council, and I am skeptical you will be able to resolve this situation by May 5 so that
these young boys can play their first game.
I have lived in Mound for 17 years. I have seen the actions of the Cib' and have not been
overly impressed with it's vision of the future and it's focus on the youth. They are our
future citizens and deserve a place to play baseball. I am sure you could gather by
listening to the people speak last night that many of those people were raised themselves
in Mound and have stayed to raise their own children. Many used that public park as
children. What I cannot understand is they enjoyed it themselves as children yet are not
willing to let the park be used today by today's youth. I can appreciate their concerns
regarding traffic, however, this is only a potential enforcement problem. If the parents do
not comply with the ordinances that already exist, it is the City's responsibility to enforce
those ordinances.
After listening to the Association, the improvements are very minimal. There are no
large fences or buildings only improvements to the soil, two short fences to protect the
benches and a small box for equipment. I am, again, confused why these improvements
are offensive to the homeowners. In regards to safety, my husband has played softball at
that park in past years and my son practiced baseball there several times last year. I
'know of only one time an adult player hit the ball and came close to the street. The field
it large enough to play softball or baseball on it.
I understand that the homeowners are also concerned that the park will be taken over by
ball players and they themselves will not be able to use it. The Association plans on
using the field for approximately 2 months, 2 hours per day, three days per week. This
would be approximately 48 hours of use by the Babe Ruth Association. The other 1000
hours of time during those 2 months could be used by any resident of Mound. My point
is, this is a rather short amount of time being requested to use the city park with very
minimal improvements taking place on it. in fact, the homeowners will be left with a
very nice field to used after the Association pays approximately $2,000 for the
improvements.
I would like to see the City stand by it's original decision and support the requests of the
Babe Ruth Association under the following conditions. Improvements are to remain as
requested and no other improvements will be considered for future growth, the field is to
be used by the Association for the months of May, June and part of July for
approximately 2 hours, 3 days a week. These perimeters I am sure are not quite accurate,
but feel that if the homeowners realize how minimal the improvements and time
restraints will be, both sides can work out better perimeters.
Since the City owns responsibility in creating this situation, I am asking that you meet
with both sides to speedily resolve this situation.
Sincerely,
Dorene Hanson
cC
Ed Shukle, City Manager
James Fackler, Parks Director
Lorraine Painter, Babe Ruth Association
Bill Vit, Babe Ruth Association
RECEIVED 5 BO3'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
SRA City Managers/Board Members/Alternates
Jim Strommen, Kennedy & Graven
May 2, 1997
612 Area Code Proposed Changes
Enclosed is material I have received that relates to an issue that may be of importance to
telephone users in your city, particularly businesses. It is information submitted to the PUC
regarding a pending change in 612 area code numbering that has resulted from the explosion in
wireless communication and fax machines.
At least two primary, options for change are being seriously considered by the Public Utilities
Commission:
1. Area code split, either "doughnut" or "river" splits.
2. Area code overlay.
(see attached diagrams)
This would appear to be a matter of high interest to SRA cities because of the implications to
changes in phone numbers and real or perceived separation from certain areas of the Twin Cities.
I will be asking the SRA executive committee for authority to participate in this proceeding. A
decision will be made by the PUC during 1997 because of the apparent need to make a change
to accommodate the explosion in telephone numbers.
INPUT FROM SRA CITIES
I would like a response, if possible, from the appropriate SRA, representative of your city
regarding a preference between the "split" (either doughnut or river - see attached) or overlay.
It is my information that this pending change will not result in a change in phone rates or local
calling area. Rather it relates to potential changes in phone numbers, causing businesses to
change cards - stationery, and the need for 10-digit local dialing.
If you have any responses or questions, please contact me at 337-9233 or fax a response or
request for additional information to 337-9310.
JMS:ckr
JMS122080
SU160-31
C]
Z
Z
n;
I--
Z
UJ
Z
I-
Z
UJ
UJ
-i-
X
uJ
Z
n;
UJ
I-
_J
Z
UJ
UJ
0
t~
ILl
0
0
0
0
Z
0
$:lOOg ~NI),iBOM 7~10£
LU
Z
0
Z
LU
::::)
Z
-t-
O
LLJ
Z
n~
UJ
UJ
· · · · · ·
Z
8
NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATION CENTER
700 West Mineral Avenue, MN D20.24 .... ~.~;.~.._
Littlcton, Colorado 80120
March 21, 1997 '
TO: Telecommunications Service Providers in the 612 .~a'ea Code
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
Minnesota Department of Public Services
Other Interested Parties
An Industry meeting will be held in St. Paul, .~ on April 14, 1997 to begin the planning
process for relief of the 612 Numbering Plan Area (NPA) code. The NPA is projected to
exhaust during the second half of 1998. The meeting will begin at l:00p.m, on Monday,
the 14th, and will last approximately three hours. It will be held in the Public Utilities
Commission's Large Hearing Room on the third floor of the Metro Square Building, 121
7th Place East in St. Paul.
The primary objective of this meeting will be to examine the alternative relief methods
which will be available, especially from the perspective of customer impacts, and then to
determine whether or not Ithe Industry, will be able to reach consensus on an alternative.
The attached Initial Planning Document provides information on the alternatives. It is
hoped that attendees review this document in advance and come to the meeting with a
preliminary company position on the best alternative.
If you have any questions, including those pertaining to overnight accommodations for
attendees from outside of the Twin Cities area. please call me at 303-707-7005.
,'~/ JACK O'IT
Numbering Plan Adrn/nistrator
STATE OF Minnesota
INITIAL PLANNING DOCUMENT
for the
SECOND
612 AREA CODE RELIEF PROJECT
prepared by
the
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS
NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATION CENTER
March 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. LNTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
B. TIKE EXISTING SITUATION
C. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
D. DESCRIPTION OF RELIEF ALTERNATIVES
3
E. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
7
ATTACHMENTS:
A. MAP OF THE EXISTING 612 N'PA
B. HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED GROWTH IN THE 612 NPA
612 NUMBERENG PLAN AREA (NPA) CODE RELEEF
I~TI"LA.L PLANNING DOCUMENT
A. I2~CTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
In 1995, during the initial planning phase for Minnesota's 612/320 area code split, it was
anticipated that the new area code would provide four to six years of relief. Since that time, a
new telecommunications marketplace has evolved with_the introduction.of, many .new services
and service providers, each with legitimate but unforeseen demands for numbering resources.
In the first half of the 1990's, average central offce (C.O.) code growth for the entire 612
area code (N'PA) averaged 16 new codes per year. In 1996, there will 87 new codes added in
reduced 612 N-PA alone. We now have a clearer picture of the impacts of local exchange
competition and the introduction of narrow-band and wide-band personal communications
services (PCS) lic~asees into the marketplace, as well as an idea of the future impacts of
telephone number portability. It appears likely that the second exhaust of the 612 lq'PA will
occur in the third quarter of 1998. To reduce the potential of a "Jeopardy" situation similar to
that which took place during the first relief period, it is recommended that subsequent relief
be completed in early 1995.
The purpose of this document is to provide telecommunications service providers with
information needed '~o reach consensus on a Relief Plan. The unique characteristics of the 612
area code, combined with changes which are taking place within the telephone industry at
large, present new issues which will require a fresh approach to the selection of a relief
method.
A major consideration which the Industry must address is the effect of the large metropolitan
local calling area which comprises most of the reduced 612 area code. If this local calling
area is retained, and there is no reason to expect thai it would not be, it will become
necessary to introduce 1 O-digit dialing of local calls regardless of the relief method which is
chosen. Consideration must be given to the issues surrounding local exchange competition and
the impacts that the introduction of telephone number portability may have on the relief
effort. More than previously, it is important that a view of future growth and the need for
subsequent relief be included in the Relief Plan. Finally, it should be kept in mind that the
responsibility for Numbering Plan Administration and Plarming may be transferred to a new
Numbering Plan Administrator during the implementation phase of the Plan. =
B. THE EXISTI2~IG SITUATION
At the end of the first permissive dialing period on September 15, 1996, there were
"working" (assigned and in use) central office (C.O.) codes in the reduced 612 NPA. On
January 1, 1997, there will be 61g, leaving l?a codes for growth.
In the area which today comprises the 612 area code, annual C.O. code growth in this decade
has been variable but, on the whole, has increased at an exponential rate. A~xachment B
demonstrates the historical and projected growth for the 612 area code. The projected
figures utilize updated mathematical techniques that take into account the exponential growth
pattern (rather than Msrraight-line" growth) which the industry has experienced during the last
three years. Traditionally, "plain old telephone service" (POTS) growth has followed a linear
or straight line growth pattern. The rapid growth of new services such as cellular (30 to 50
percent growth per year) and paging, combined with new pressures from local exchange
competition and the introductions of wireless Personal Communications Services(PCS), have
made the previous forecasting techniques obsolete.
The attachments demonstrate that C.O. code growth.through 19.93_was.fairly.stable and linear.
In 1994 he phenomenal and unforeseen growth rate of cellular and paging services, combined
with increasing demands for "second lines" and fax machines, caused the growth line to curve
upward rather than continuing straight as it had before. In Minnesota, the introduction-of local
exchange competition and PCS in 1996 resulted' in even higher demands on numbering
resources. It is now projected that the 612 area code will again exhaust in the third quarter of
1998. It is recommended that area code relief be provided by early 1998 to ensure that
additional unforeseen demands do not result in total exhaust before relief is available.
C. SPECIAL CONSIDEIL4~TIONS
1. Consolidation of Toll Rate Centers
At the present time U S W-EST Communications is implementing a consolidation of its
numerous toll rate centers in the metropolitan local calling area into just one rate cemer. It is
expected that this effort will greatly reduce the demand for C.O. codes and thereby delay the
exhaust of the 612 area code by several months. With fewer rate centers, incumbent service
providers will be able to more efficiently utilize their existing codes, and new entrants to the
marketplace will need far fewer codes to provide competitive service throughout the
metropolitan area.
2. Multiple Area Codes Within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Calling Area/Ten-digit
Local Dialing
Regardless of the relief method selected by the Indusn'y, subscribers will be faced with a
situation in which multiple area codes serve the single local calling area. As a result, at least
some local ca~: will require that the proper area code be dialed before the seven-digit
telephone num~. This is referred to as "ten-digit local dialing', and should not be confused
with "long-distance dialing" which requires that the prefix digit "1" be inclucl~d before the
ten-digit telephone number.
3. Telephone Number Portability
At the present time, the capability to provide telephone number portabili~' is technically
limited to conventional methods such as (remote) call forwarding and route indexing, a
tandeming arrangement similar in principle to that used for completing calls to business PBX
systems. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and FCC Order in Docket 96-333 require that
-2-
"Full Telephone Number (TN) Portability" utilizing database functionality be implemented in
designated metropolitan areas across the United States during 1997 and 1998. The Act
specifies that the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Statistical Area ~ISA) is to be ready by
the end of the fourth quarter of 1997.
Full TN Portability, at least initially, will be limited primarily to situations in which
subscribers change telephone service providers but not their actual physical locations. It is
thought that some "location portability" may also be available initially, but only between
points within the same toll rate center. Existing billing systems and toll tariffs will require
significant and costly changes since today they associate a specific C.O. code with just a
single, specific toll rate center. "Location portability" outside of the original toll rate center
would result in incorrect toll rating and billing. In this respect, the proposed rate center
consolidation discussed above will provide greater flexibility in that there will be just one or a
few large rate centers in the Twin Cities area rather than numerous smaller ones.
In either case, the introduction of full number potability will eventually have a positive
impact on delaying the need for area code relief since it will no longer be necessary to utilize
two telephone numbers for subscribers who change service providers or make local moves. In
the specific case of the 612 area code, the magnitude of this impact will be not be great
because most of the projected growth will take place before portability becomes available.
4. Change of Administration
The FCC recently ruled that the Administration of the Numbering Plan, including C.O. code
administration, is to be transferred to a "neutral third party". It recenfly established the "North
American Numbering Council" which has been tasked m select the new Administrator by
April 1997. The schedule also calls for the assumption of central office code administration
responsibilities by the new Administrator prior to January 1, 1999. It is not known at this
time who the new Administrator will be, but one prerequisite is that the new Administrator
will not be a "user" of numbenng resources.
This issue is an important consideration in that any solution which the Minnesota
telecommunications industry may agree on should not include special method~ or procedures
which the new Administrator would not be able to carry out.
5. Recent FCC Rulings on Relief Methods
Recent FCC Orders have validated the use of the "Overlay NPA" method of ~roviding area
code relief, subject to certain limitations. The limitations will be discussed in detail in
Section D.2, below.
D. AVAELABLE RELIEF ALTER.NAT~S
The relief alternatives which are available to the Industry, are the sa.me basic altemauves
which were studied 1994; namely the traditional area code "split", the "Overlay N'PA"
method, and the realignment of the existing area code boundaries. The various advantages and
-3-
disadvantages of each method are well known and w/Il only be bhefly discussed here. The
special implications of each method in the 612 NPA situation will be the focus of this
discussion. Attachment D illustrates two of these alternatives; the "split" (Figure 1) and the
"overlay" (Figure 2). The boundary, realignment method is not included sin~ in this case its
impacts on customers in Minnesota would be so significant that it is not really a Vaable
alternative.
1 The Area Code "Split"
The traditional method for providing area code relief is the area code 'split", .the.method used
to introduce Minnesota's new 320 area code and provide the first relief for the 612 N'PA. This
relief method retains the geographic significance of area codes by dividing the original area
code into two or more distinct area codes. Those customers in that area which retains the
original area code are least agtected since no portion of their ten-digit telephone numbers
change. Subscribers in the second area retain the last seven-digits of their numbers but change
their area code designation. For example, if a customer with the number 612-221-1234 is
located in the area transferring to the new area code, the number would change to NNN-630-
1234, where 'NNN" is the new area code. This change can seriously impact business
customers because it requires changes to advertising, stationery, business cards, etc.
In the above example, the "221" C.O. code would eventually be again assigned in the 612.
N'PA to serve a different set of customers, while "NNN-221" would continue to serve the
original customers. This illustrates the "duplication" which is discussed below.
A major reason for the selection of this method for the first 612 area code relief project was
that it permitted the retention of seven-digit dialing of local calls. Care was taken to ensure
that no "local calling area" was served by more than a single area code. The situation which
customers now face in the reduced 612 N-PA is different. In this case, a major portion of the
612 N-PA is the large metropolitan local calling area. Because of this, an area code split will
introduce a second N'PA to the local calling area, and by necessity seven-digit telephone
numbers will eventually be duplicated elsewhere within the metropolitan area because of
continued growth. It would therefore become necessary for customers pIacing local calls to
numbers in the other area code to dial ten-digits, i.e. the "other" area code plus the seven-digit
telephone number. If the area code is not included when dialing the call, it will be
incorrectly sem. m the duplicated seven-digit number within the same area code as the caller,
a very undesirable situation. It is not technically necessary to require ten-digit dialing for local
calls within the caller's own area code. If this relief method is selected by the_Industry, it is
recommended that local calls originating and terminating within the same N'P3~ would
continue to be dialed using only seven-di~ts but, if the area code is included when dialing
(for whatever reason) the call would still be completed.
Note that the ten-digit dialing method described above does not include the prefix di~ts "1"
or "0", which would continue to be needed for toll (long distance) or other charged calls. It
may be decided to allow local calls to also use "l?ten-digit" dialing on a smcfly "permissive"
basis, but this increases the switching complexities and therefore the costs associated with an
area code split.
If this relief method is selected by the Industry in Mirmesota, a secondary decision will be
required as to wh. ~r~ the new boundary between the two area codes would be drawn. Ideally,
a boundary should be selected which maximizes the relief period for both area codes and
delays the need for subsequent relief as long as possible. A simple east-west or north-south
split along an easily recognizable feature such as the Mississippi River would be a logical
approach. For the most pan, existing wire center and rate center boundaries coincide with this
natural boundary.
An alternate arrangement, often referred to as the "doughnut" approach, selects a core area to
retain the existing area code while the outlying area becomes the new. area code. Since
businesses are the .most severely impacted customers in an area code split, the core area
would be where the highest concentration of business occurs. Based on the distribution of
C.O. codes in the 612 NPA, one possible boundary for an area code split using this approach
is around the Minneapolis/St. Paul core business area plus the first ring of suburban offices.
This core area had 244 (approximately 40%) of the total of 618 existing C.O. codes in the
612 NPA and also has )he highest growth rate.
The area code split alternative requires that a "permissive" dialing period be included in the
conversion which allows customers inside and outside of the 612 N-PA to make the necessary
changes to dialing methods, advertising, telephone systems, stationery, etc. A minimum of six
monks is recommended for this period, and the Industry may choose a longer period. It
should be kept in mind, however, that the objective is to complete this permissive period well
in advance of the projected exhaust of the 612 N'PA.
Cellular telephone customers with telephone numbers which would be transferring to the new
area code would be required to have their equipment reprogrammed by their service providers
during the permissive dialing period. This is considered to be a significant expense and effort
to the cellular careers.
2. The Overlay N-PA Method (Figure 2, Attachment D)
The alternative method for providing relief is to utilize the "Overlay NPA" method in which a
new area code is introduced over pans or all of the existing area code whi~ is facing
exhaust. With this method, customers which have already been assi~maed telephone numbers
from the 612 N'PA would retain their numbers as 612, while growth and additional numbers
would evenumll~, come from the new area code. The presence of two area codes within a
single local calling area mulls in the need to implement ten-digit dialing of local calls as
described in the section above. However, the overlay approach has special requirements.
In its Report and Order for Docket 96-333, the FCC approved the use of the overlay as a
valid area code relief method under the following conditions:
Ten-digit local dialing of all local calls by all service providers' customers whether
the calls are destined for the same area code or to the other area code in the local
calling area;
-5-
Availability of at least one C.O. code from the existing NPA to any and all service
providers who have been authorized to provide telecommunications serv/ces as of
90 days prior to the introduction of the new area code.
From a strictly technical perspective, the Overlay NPA method of providing relief would be
easier to implement, and many of the problems which were encountered in the previous area
code split would be eliminated since existing customers would not be required to undergo
partial number changes to a new area code. Additionally, future area code relief activities
would be greatly simplified through the introduction of a second "overlay" area code as the
need arises.
A "permissive" dialing pehod is not an absolute requirement when implementing an overlay
N'PA, although it would be recommended. The period would provide customers with a period
of time to update the dialing pattern of their telephone equipment and familiarize them with.
1 O-digit local dialing. It would also provide alarm companies and users of other automatic
dialing devices time to modify dialing patterns in their equipment.
3. The N'PA Boundary Realignment Method
This method, which was discussed briefly during the planning cycle for the first relief effort,
would move some of the exchanges currently in the 612 N'PA to the 320 N'PA. If this method
were selected it would become necessary to force some customers to undergo total telephone
number changes due to the existence today of duplicated codes in the 612 and 320 NrpA's.
This method would provide only limited relief for 612 and would also shorten the life of the
new 320 area code. For these reasons this is not considered to be a realistic alternative but is
mentioned here to demonstrate that this method was considered and will be discussed.
4. Customer Input to the Decision-making Process
Customer surveys which have been conducted in other parts of the country have indicated a
strong customer preference for the area code split relief method. Customers have generally
expressed their opinions that the geographic significance of area codes should be retained and
that having two area codes serving the same area would be confusing. Others would argue
that to introduce a second area code within a geographically small and predominately
metropolitan area such as the current 612 NPA by doing an area code split would also be
confusing. With either method, ten-digit dialing of local calls will become necessary which is
a change that few customers would like to see..
The Minnesota Telecommunications Industry and/or the Public Utilities Commission may
elect to conduct a survey of customers in the 612 N'PA. It is recommended that an outside
market research firm be contracted to do this. Similar surveys which were done in
Washin~on and Oregon cost approximately $40,000. The costs were prorated across all
service providers based on the number of C.O. codes assi~kmed to each as of a specified date.
-6-
E. RECOMMENDED SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
As a first step, the Industry in conjunction with the PUC Staff will meet to examine the relief
alternatives and hopefully reach consensus on a Keller Plan. A part of this process will be an
examination of possible methods for delaying exhaust of the 612 N'PA. If the Industry does
reach consensus, a Report will be filed with the PUC describing the Plan and seeking the
Commission's approval. In the event consensus cannot be reached within the Industry, the
PUC will be notified and asked for resolution. In the case of the latter and if the Commission
so desires, the Administrator will draft a Recommended Plan for the Commission's
consideration. In either case, every effort will be made to .ensure that relief becomes available
prior to area code exhaust.
Immediately after receiving Commission approval of the Plan, the Administrator will convene
the first Industry implementation meeting to-commence the coordination of relief activities.
We are recommending that relief implementation be completed prior to the end of the first
quarter of 1998. A permissive dialing period of a minimum of six-months is recommended if
the area code split method is selected and somewhat shorter if the overlay is chosen. If the
area code exhaust is delayed, this period could be extended. If the overlay method is selected,
new C.O. code assignments will continue to me made from 612 until that area code exhausts
unless the Industry or the PUC decides otherwise.
%oo
-7-
ATTACHMENT B
HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED CO CODE GROWTH
A. WORKING CODES BY CATEGORY IN THE 612 NPA
CATEGORY
1/90
RESERVED CODES 4 19 13 I 6 7 14 14
PROTECTED CODES 19 19 5 5 5 0 1 3
PLANT TEST CODES 16 15 15 28 19 5 7 5
SPECIAL USE CODES 7 10 11 11 11 10 9 8
REGULAR (USW) 521 541 552 558 575 593 373 404
CENTREX/DID (USW) 10 16 19 24 33 33 47 47
PAGING CODES 6 8 9 13 20 27 30 41
CELLULAR CODES 15 21 31 39 44 75 50 71
ALT EXCH CAP/tIER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
PEPS COMM S~S (PCS) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
TOTAL WORKING
598 649 655 679 713 750 531 618
AVAIL. FOR ASSNMNT
194 143 137 113 79 42 261c~174
NOTE 1:1/96 FIGURES SHOWN ARE FOR REDUCIED 612 AREA ONLY
GROWTH PROJECTIONS TO EXHAUST (1997 COCUS)
CATEGORY 1/98 1/99
RESERVED CODES 14 14
PROTECTED CODES 3 3
PLANT TEST CODES 5 5
SPECIAL USE CODES 8 8
REGULAR (POTS) 421 440
CENTREX/DID 47 47
PAGING CODES 55 64
CELLULAR CODES 95 109
ALT EXCH CARRIER 39 58
PERS COMM S~S (PCS) 48 62
TOTAL WORKING
735 (810)
AVAIL. FOR ASSNMNT 57 (0)
5/1/97 ACTUALS
15
3
5
9
414
46
47
8O
42
3
662
130
ii .L
ILl
0
0
z
0
$=100:3 ~)NI)i~ION~ 'I~.LOJ.
MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC SERVICE
April 10, 1997
Burl W. Haar
Executive Secretary
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
350 Metro Square Building
121 7th Place East
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2147
Area Code Exhaust
Docket No. P999/M-97-506
Dear Mr. Haar:
On April 14, 1997, interested parties will be meeting in the Commission's
large hearing room to discuss the exhaust of the (612) area code. The
focus of the meeting appears to be to determine if a consensus can be
reached on the method of area code relief. The methods of proposed
relief include splitting the existing (612) area code and an overlay of a
new area code on the existing (612) area code. With either of these
alternatives, ten-digit dialing will be necessary to place local calls within
the Twin Cities metropolitan calling area.
The Department believes that there is another possibility that would help
conserve existing central off codes (NXXs) within the (612) area code and
that this proposal should also be discussed. Currently, there is a
tremendous waste of telephone numbers when a local service provider is
assigned an NXX with 10,000 numbers and uses only a small fraction of
the available numbers. It is the Department's understanding that sharing
NXX codes is technically feasible. However, the industry's Central
Office Code Assignment Guidelines reflect the general agreement that
code sharing between service providers is recommended only in extreme
situations where codes are in short supply. Further, local number
portability will be implemented in the next year and there will be no
"industry" restrictions on code sharing at that time.
Suite 200 · 121 7th Place East. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2145 · ~B12} 29B 7107 · tB12J 297 1959 tax · http://www.dpsv.state.mn.u..
An equal .pportumty employer
Burl W. Haar
April 10, 1997
Page Two
In addition to the use of code sharing to avoid area code exhaust, the
imposition of a fee on numbers should be explored by the Commission.
Telephone numbers are a scarce resource with economic value. To
encourage efficient use of a scarce resource, a fee could be assessed on
telephone numbers. The size of the fee should be established at a level
that promotes efficient use without threatening financial harm to
carriers. Thus, local service providers would have an economic incentive
to be assigned an amount of numbers that minimizes their cost and
maximizes profit. Those entities currently with unused blocks of
numbers could either relinquish them for reassignment or pay the
established rate. The fee would apply to all local service providers,
incumbents and new entrants. Local service providers have no economic
incentive to efficiently use numbers in today's environment. The use of
the funds generated would also need to be explored.
With the upcoming meeting on area code exhaust, the Department
recommends that all methods to avoid area code exhaust be included in
the agenda. Such methods include code sharing and the assessment of a
fee on numbers to promote efficient use of a scarce economic resource.
Failure to fully analyze all alternatives will result in a record that is
incomplete and may unnecessarily delay this process.
I will be happy to discuss this matter i.n greater detail or answer any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
..~NELSOi~ J. UPDAW
MANAGER, TELECOMMUNICATIONS UNIT
NJU/GJD/jd
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 14, 1997
Tonka Bay City Hall
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:00 1) Aahhz of Excelsior Park, Consideration of new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
application for charter boat Excellebella;
2) Aahhz of Excelsior Park, Consideration of new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
application for the charter boat Blueline;
3) Wayzata Bay Charters, Consideration of new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
application for the charter boat Triple Crown;
4) Holiday Fair, Inc., Consideration of new beer and wine license applications for the
charter boat Holiday Fair;
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
- Schedule Lake Inspection Tour
READING OF MINUTES- 4/23197 Regular Board Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS- Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
CONSENT AGENDA- Consent Agenda items identified by "*" will be approved in one motion
unless a Board member requests a discussion of any item, in which case the item will be
removed from the consent agenda.
1. LAKE USE & RECREATION
*A. Staff recommending $50 refund to MN Transportation Museum for overpayment of
1997 registration for the charter boat Minnehaha;
B. Discussion and consideration of new on-sale liquor license public hearing for the
Aahhhz of Excelsior Park and the charter boat Excellebella;
C. Discussion and consideration of new on-sale liquor license public hearing for Aahhhz
of Excelsior Park and the charter boat Blueline;
Discussion and consideration of new on-sale liquor license public hearing for Wayzata
Bay Charters and the charter boat Triple Crown;
Discussion and consideration of new beer and wine licenses public hearing for
Holiday Fair, Inc. and the charter boat Holiday Fair;
Pelican Point HOA, request for LMCD to place two slow-wake buoys at the
approaches to the channel which separates Pelican Point from Pelican Point Island at
the south end of Spring Park Bay;
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District, request for LMCD to place slow-wake
buoys 300' out from the shoreline at the Lake Minnetonka Regional Park;
H. Additional Business;
FINANCIAL
A. Review of 1996 Draft Audit and Management letter prepared by Abdo, Abdo, & Eick;
B. Audit of vouchers for payment;
5/1/97 - 5/15/97
C. Schedule Officer and Board review of Draft 1998 Budget;
D. Additional Business;
WATER STRUCTURES
A. Woodend Shores Beach Assoc., minor change application to realign non-conforming
dock structure to extend perpendicular from the shoreline;
B. Ordinance Amendment, 1st reading of an ordinance relating to special density
licenses; amending LMCD Code 2.05, Subd. 5;
C. Ordinance Amendment, 1st reading of an ordinance relating to side setbacks of slip
structures with canopies; amending LMCD Code Section 2.01, Subd. 2 b) 2);
D. Ordinance Amendment, 1,t reading of an ordinance relating to boat lifts and
canopies; amending LMCD Code Section 2.12, Subd. 3;
*E.
1997 Multiple Dock Licenses, approval of 1997 multiple dock license applications as
outlined in 5/8/97 staff memo;
F. Additional Business;
4. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
*A. Minutes of the 5/9/97 meeting (handout);
B. 5/9/97 meeting report;
*C. Evaluation of Truck Hauling Bids for the 1997 EWM Harvesting Program, Staff
recommendation to award bid to Minnetonka Portable Dredging Co.;
*D. RFP for chemical control of Eurasian water milfoil on six public accesses, staff
recommending Board approval to award contract to Lake Management, Inc. for the
amount of $3,316.25;
E. Additional Business;
5. ADMINISTRATION
A. Staff update on health insurance premiums for the next year starting 6/1/97;
B. Appointment of new Secretary on Board of Officers;
C. Additional Business;
6. SAVE THE LAKE
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
8. OLD BUSINESS
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. ADJOURNMENT
CONS VA'nON DIST CT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
7:00 P.M., Wednesday, April 23, 1997
Tonka Bay City Hall
DRAFT
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Babcock called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Bert Foster, Deephaven; Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Joe Zwak, Greenwood;
Gretchen Maglich, Minnetonka; Kent Darien, Minnetonka Beach; Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Bob
Rascop, Shorewood; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Bob Ambrose,
Wayzata. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Gregory Nybeck, Executive
Director.
Members absent: Tom Reese, Mound; Herb Suerth, Woodland. Orono and Victoria have no
appointed member
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS
LeFevere issued the Oath of Office to new Board member, BOb Ambrose.
representative of Wayzata.
He was seated as
READING OF MINUTF3
Nelson moved, Partyka seconded to approve the minutes of the March 26, 1997 regular Board
meeting as submitted. Ayes (6), Abstained (4, Zwak, Dahlen, Gilman, and Ambrose); Motion
PUBLIC COIVEVIENTS
There were no comments from persons not on the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
Partyka moved, Zwak seconded to approve the consent agenda identified by an ,,., on the agenda.
Motion carried unanimously (Approved consent agenda items include: lB, 4/11/97 EWM/Exotics
Task Force meeting has been canceled; 2G, 1997 Multiple Dock Licenses, approval of 1997
multiple dock license applications as outlined in 4/3/97 staff memo; and 2H, De-icing License
Deposit Refunds, refund of 1996 de-icing license deposits as outlined in 4/2/96 staff memo.
EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
A. 1997 Milfoil Harvest Plans
-review of season
-proposed budget
-emplo)anent of project manager
Nvbeck reviewed EWM harvest plans for the 1997 season. He recommended the
hiring Gene Strommen, retiring director of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, as the project manager under an independent contract at $25 per hour. He
reviewed the proposed budget.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Zwak seconded to approve the hiring of Gene
Strommen as project manager of the 1997 EWM harvest crew,
subject to review of the draft independent contract agreement by
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
P~e2
e
LeFevere.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Additional Business
Nybeck stated he had talked to Gabriel Jabbour about the idea of creating an
informational brochure regarding zebra mussels and state rules prohibiting the
transportation of exotics in Minnesota. He noted Jabbour stated he would'check
into this with the Lake Minnnetonka Marina owners to see if this is a project they
may want to consider for partial funding. These brochures would be distributed to
marina owners, transporters, and other sectors of the public.
WATER STRUCTURES
A. Claycliffe HOA, minor change application to change the numbering of slips # 4
and 5 and to reduce the size of slip #1 from 16' x 48' to 12' x 32'.
Nybeck stated the applicant proposes to change the order of slips 4 and 5, with same
slip dimensions, and to reduce the length of slip 1 from 16' x 48' to 12' x 32'.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Gilman seconded to approve the minor change
application from Clay Cliffe HOA for 1997.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Big Island, Inc., minor change application to install a 32' roll-away
handicapped dock for the off-loading of senior citizens and supplies.
Mark Schoelle, representing the applicant, addressed a potential concern pointed out
by staff. It was noted there is an approximated 300' side setback to the west and
1200' to the east. A map detailing this was presented to staff.
Babcock questioned whether there is a need to designate a BSU at this dock. He
stated he believed if the dock will serve as a transient off-loading dock, and no
storage of boats will not be allowed, he is inclined to approve the application as
submitted.
Schoelle stated the make ready dock would be used only tbr off-loading purposes
and that boat storage would not be allowed.
MOTION:
Gilman moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the new, with minor
change, multiple dock license for Big Island, Inc. /'or 1997.
VOTE: Motion camed unanimously.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
Page 3
Cg
De
Lord Fietchers of the Lake, review of draft Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW), staff recommends rescinding 3/26/96 Board action to
approve new multiple dock and special density license applications to increase
BSU's from 58 to 72.
Babcock stated staff has asked for a motion to rescind the prior Board action for
approval of the new multiple dock license at the 3/26/97 meeting for approval of a
new multiple dock license. He added the reason that staff has made this request is
that an EAW needs to be conducted for this proposed project. He questioned
whether an approval should be made pending a negative declaration on an ElS.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Nelson seconded to rescind previous Board action at
the 3/26/96 Board meeting to approve a new multiple dock license
application to increase BSU's from 58 to 72.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Party ~ka recommended holding off on approval of the application until the EAW
comment period has expired and a decision has been made regarding an EIS has
been made.
LeFevere recommended the Board not make a decision on the proposed application
because the comments received during the comment period should be considered in
the decision.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Nelson seconded to table this agenda item until the
comment period for the EAW has expired.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Harrison Harbor Twinhome Association, minor change application to move
slip #1 from a tie-on to the main walkway to adjacent to slip/fl.
Rascop asked where the normal high water mark is located on the proposed site
plan.
Partyka stated the proposed site plan should be updated to identify the location of
the 929.4' lake elevation, where the property lines meet the 929.4' lake elevation,
and where the docks are located from these lines.
Babcock asked the applicant to work with staff to identify the normal high water
mark on the proposed site plan.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Partyka seconded to approve the minor change
application to move slip #1 from a tie-on to the main walkway to
adjacent to slip #7, subject to identification of the normal high water
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
P~e4
mark on the approved site plan.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
City of;'Deephaven, consideration of new multiple dock license application for
the reconstruction of Carson Bay public launch.
Babcock stated a letter from Tom and Pat McGoldrick, adjacent neighbors to the
public launch, have prepared a letter that staff included as a handout. He noted they
believe this site does not need a second make-ready dock on the north side.
Nybeck reviewed the request from the City of Deephaven. He noted they have
proposed to; 1) install concrete pads in the water, 2) re-construct an existing make-
ready pipe dock on the south side, 3) construct a new make-ready dock on the north
side, 4) pave the turnaround at the access, and 5) general landscaping.
Ray Williams, Public Works Director for Deephaven, spoke on behalf for the
applicant. He reviewed the request similar to Nybeck.
Babcock asked how far from the extended property line the dock would be on the
north side?
Williams stated there should be sufficient setback because the city owns the outlot to
the north of the public launch facility.
Babcock asked whether a multiple dock license would be required for this proposed
project?
LeFevere stated a launching ramp facility license is required rather than a multiple
dock license.
Foster stated the city may want to consider a fence or signage stating "No parking of
boats" on the north side of the north dock.
Babcock stated another option may be to put a longer make-ready dock on the south
side of the public launch along the bridge.
Rascop asked if proposed 17' wide launching ramp is wide enough for two boats to
launch at the same time?
Williams stated he believed two small fishing boats could launch at the same time.
Pat McGoldrick stated she does not have problems with the proposed side setbacks;
however she expressed concerns with the second make-ready dock. She noted the
dock will only be able to handle a couple of boats at a time and that other boats
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
P~e5
Fe
would continue to park along the shoreline.
Babcock asked if the inability to pull up to shore would help?
McGoldrick stated rip rapping along this shoreline be appropriate.
William stated the city would like to do some rip rapping because of an erosion
problem in the area.
Zwak stated he believed an additional dock would alleviate a number of problems.
Nybeck stated he had received comments from the MCWD requiting a plan be
submitted to them for review.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the new multiple dock
license application for the reconstruction of Carson Bay public
launch, subject to submission of a plan to the MCWD to verify if
permits need to be secured and no further comments be received
from issuing the DNR General Permit.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
City of the Village of Minuetonka Beach, discussion on public hearing for new
multiple dock license and to reconfigure a non-confornfing structure on Lake
Minnetonka.
Babcock reviewed the changes discussed by the applicant in the public hearing. He
stated the applicant has proposed the reduction in BSU's from 92 to 86, they have
requested credit for 12' x 32' slips on dock sites 12, 13, and 14 in 1984, and they
have agreed to reduce the number of BSU's at dock site 11 from three to two.
Nybeck reviewed the staff memo included in the Board packet. He stated permits
for 1982-1984 were provided tbr dock sites 13 and 14 which identified boat sizes
ranging from 24-31' in length. He stated he made a judgment call for providing
credit of 28' in length for dock site 12, 13, and 14 in 1984. He stated the issues
ahat need to be addressed by the Board are: 1) what slips length to credit at dock
sites 12, 13, and 14 in 1984, 2) to clarify what the definition of a canopy is, 3) to
amend the proposed dock site plan at site #11, and 4) to amend the dock length
variance approved on the Lake Road firelane to include six BSU~s rather than the
four approved
Mayor Palmer stated they were mistaken about the nmnber of boats that had
historically been allowed there. He asked lbr the six boats, because it does meet the
setback requirements.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
Page 6
Babcock asked LeFevere for his recommendation on how to amend the dock length
variance at dock site 2 and 2A?
LeFevere stated he believed Minnetonka Beach should make a second application
for variance at this dock site to allow the public an opportunity to comment at a
public hearing. He noted the dock length variance previously approved for tour
BSU's still holds up while the applicant to goes through the variance process and
add the two additional boats.
It was the consensus of the Board that the city be provided credit tbr 12' x 32' slips
at dock sites 12, 12, and 14 in 1984.
The Board discussed the definition of canopies. The consensus of the Board was to
not consider a canopy which is an integral part of a boat lift as a canopy and to not
require double side setbacks for canopies associated with multiple dock licenses
The Board directed LeFevere to prepare a code amendment for future Board
consideration.
LeFevere discussed his concerns about how the "Envelope Concept" ordinance is
being applied in this case. He stated the Board needs to decide whether the transfer
of BSU's or slip square footage from one site to another will be allowed in the
future.
Mayor Palmer asked for Board direction on whether the city would need to come
back before them for every change made in the future or if this could be worked out
at the staff level.
The Board stated that is difficult to answer depending upon the requested change.
They noted staff would be able to provide direction on what Board approvals are
necessary based on the request.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the new multiple dock
license application for 1997 for the City of the Village of
Minnetonka Beach, allowing them to reconfigure a non-conforming
structure on Lake Minnetonka through LMCD Code Section 2.015,
subject to variance approval at dock sites 2 and 2A.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Additional Business
There was no additional business.
3. SAVE THE LAKE
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
Page 7
e
There was no discussion.
LAKE USE AND RECREATIONS
A. Seanote Cruises, Inc., staff recommends the refund of $3,400, $3,000 for
preliminary investigation of intoxicating liquor license and $400 for renewal of
beer and wine license applications, $400.
MOTION: Foster moved, Dahlen seconded to refund $3,400 to Seanote
Cruises, Inc. as recommended by staff.
VOTE:
Ayes (9), Nayes (1, Rascop); Motion carried.
Be
Additional Business
RDP Panners/Upper Lake Mtka Yacht Club
Theresa Fogarty, Director of the Westonka Chamber of Commerce, stated she had
contacted LMCD staff regarding parking the Minnehaha at this facility three
different times during the summer. She noted staff had expressed concern in that
the request does not comply with LMCD Code and that staff did not have the
authority to grant or permit the request. She asked for Board direct/on or
permission to park the Minnehaha at this dock.
Nybeck stated the concern that staff has is that the boat would be parking in a
location not authorized as a BSU. He noted the boat would be parked along the
west end of the dock structure and would encroach on the side setback requirement
defined by Code.
Babcock stated he believed the main issue is whether the boat should be allowed to
dock in any setback area.
LeFevere stated boats at a multiple dock license need to be stored at a designated
BSU. He added staff does not have the authority to grant this request.
The consensus of the Board was the Minnehaha can be parked at this location
provided it is parked in a designated BSU. If one cannot be located in this facility,
the Board encouraged Ms. Fogarty to contact Hennepin County to see if one of the
nearby transient docks could be used.
ADMINISTRATION
A. Staff update on filling the vacant Adnfinistrative Technician position.
Nybeck stated he had conducted second interviews of three candidates with
Babcock, Reese, and Nelson on 4/22/97. He noted it was the unmfimous consensus
of the committee that Nancy Randall was the best fit for the Administrative
Technician position. He highlighted her educational and work background noting
she has a B.A. in Planning from Iowa State University and Community
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
Page 8
Development Intern experience for the past 18 months at the City of Oakdale. He
noted the committee recommended offering the position to Ms. Randall at a salary
to not exceed $26,500 anm~ally, with a six month performance review, and benefits
as outlined in the personnel policy.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Partyka seconded to authorize Nybeck to offer
employment of the Administrative Technician position to Nancy
Randall at a rote of up to $26,500, with a six month performance
review, and benefits per personnel policy.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Additional Business
There was no additional business.
A. Audit of vouchers for payment
-4/1/97 - 4/15/97
-4/16/97 - 4/30/97
Nelson reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment. He reviewed on-going bills
which were paid after the 4/9/97 despite the lack of a quorum.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the audit of vouchers for
payment for April.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
B. March Financial Summary and Balance Sheet
Nelson reviewed the March financial summary and balance sheet.
MOTION:
Gilman moved, Partyka seconded to accept the March financial
summary and balance sheet.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
C. Review of 3/31/97 meeting with Abdo, Abdo & Eick regarding 1996 audit.
Nybeck reviewed the meeting held to discuss the draft 1996 audit. He noted the
auditor recommended separating the equipment acquisition fund into two separate
funds. Those were depreciation and the balance of contributions donated to
purchase capital equipment for EWM program.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
P~e9
e
De
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Babcock seconded to establish two funds as
recommended by the auditor.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Additional Business
Nelson and Board members discussed whether there is non-prOfit status with "Save
the Lake" donations. The Board directed staff to answer this question prior to
sending the next solicitation letter out.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Nybeck reported on the following:
1. Letters from Steve Tallen and George Hoff have been included in the hand out
folders regarding the Bill Hawks case. An update will be provided at the 5/28/97
Board meeting in executive session.
Lake elevation level is 929.78' on 4/23/97. Partyka noted the dam has been opened
and the level has been holding for the last several days.
Record retention plans need be approved by the State Office of Administration
before files can be disposed of and the record archival process can begin. He
recommended all files in off-site storage in Wayzata need to be moved to the current
office. He reviewed quotes to move the files.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Partyka seconded to authorize the moving of the off-
site storage from Wayzata to the Gray's Freshwater Center at $75
per hour, with a maximum of three hours.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Nybeck stated to accomplish this, shelving would need to be put in the storage
room at the Gray's Freshwater Center. He recommended Board approval for this
expenditure of up to $500 with Viking Business Interiors.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Partyka seconded to authorize the expenditure of up
to $500 with Viking Business Interiors for shelving in the storage
room.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION:
Gilman moved, Ambrose seconded to authorize disposal of the
"Save the Lake" t-shirts.
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board of Directors Meeting
April 23, 1997
Page 10
10.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS
Zwak announced his resignation from the LMCD effective immediately.
Greenwood would appoint a replacement for the next Board meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Babcock adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
He noted
Douglas Babcock, Chair
Joe Zwak, Secretary
,J, J II, ,IL,
Comprehensive ImprOvement Assistance Program (CLAP)
Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 1997 Application Submission
and Processing Information
Notice PI]=I 97-21 (HA), ClAP Processing Notice, was issued May 6th, 1997, and was sent to all
Public Housing Agencies. If you do not receive a copy of the Processing Notice by Friday, May 30th,
1997, you may request a copy and a package of forms by calling Debbie Kravik at (612) 370-3204. If you
have access to the Internet, you can download a copy of the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
along with all the required forms at http://www.hud.gov/pih/97nofa, html under document FR 4186,
Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program.
Application Preparation
Planning - Assess all physical and lnanagement improvement needs.
Resident Involvement Requirements - The ClAP regulations require the HA to establish a
Partnership Process for rental developments which ensures full resident participation in the
planning, implementation and monitoring of modernization programs with the residents. This
includes:
ao
Consulting with residents and resident organizations and resident management
corporations.
Giving opportunity for residents to present their views.
Providing written response to residents indicating acceptance or rejection of
resident recommendations.
Local Official Consultation Requirements - Consultation with local officials is required to
address how the proposed modernization may be coordinated with any local plans for
neighborhood revitalization, econo~nic development, drug eli~nination and expenditure of local
funds.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Contents of the CIAP Application
ClAP Application Form HUD.52822
Narrative Statement that addresses each of the technical review factors
Form HUD-50071, Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and Cooperative Agreements
SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
Form HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Update/Disclosure Report
Optional: Photographs or video cassettes showing the physical condition of the developments
APPLICATIONS ARE DUE
IN THE MINNESOTA STATE OFFICE
BY JUNE 30th, 1997
NO LAiR THAN 3:00 P.M.
MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Indian Knoll Manor- S or - Senior Housing
Vendor/Merchant Current Over 30 Da.
Monthly Bill Totals - Dates Below
Over 60 Da.
Comments
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Sterne Electric 687.11
Glenwood Inglewood 13.42
Westonka Sanitation 155.93
N S P 1044.37
Sta Safe 644.96
Target 79.86
BFI 79.30
Coast to Coast 454.39
MN Dept of Econ 880.48
Electro Watchman 190.00
City of Mound 820.89
Minnegasco 1385.00
MEI 138.00
GTE 214.99
Paul Kronholm 2.92
Kopsa, Sylvester 81.00
NAHRO 120.00
Tony Shanley 160.00
Alan Bosshart 74.48
Karol Charon 17.44
Verified Credentials 60.00
IRS 550.00
Paul Kronholm 1348.31
Betty Kronholm 287.68
Karol Charon 974.02
Lisa Olson 346.50
COLUMN TOTALS
TOTAL ACC. PAYABLE
Begining Bank Bal.
Deposits MTD
Total Bank Funds
ENDING BK. BALANCE
INVESTED FUNDS
TOTAL LIQUID ASSETS
Repair outside lights
door locks
New vacuum
unemployment
fire alarm
water/sewer
commissioner training
snow shoveling
sec. dep refund
seminar
background checks
contracted labor, lawn and painting
$10,811.05 $0.00 $0.00
$10,811.05
$15,355.33
$8,342.8O
$23,698.13
$12,887.08
$12,887.08
Signature: Month/Yr. May 12, 1997