1998-05-12AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1998, 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·
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·
3. *CONSENT AGENDA
PAGE
*A.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28, 1998,
REGULAR MEETING .................................. 1503-1509
*B & *C WERE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS
TOGETHER
*B.
BUT WITH TWO RESOLUTIONS.
CASE 9%45: MINOR SUBDIVISION, CHUCK DOWNEY,
2051 ARBOR LANE, LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP 7 LINDQUISTS
RAVENSWOOD, PID#13-117-24 41 0005.0 .................... 1510-1538
*C.
CASE 9%41: VARIANCE, FRONT YARD SETBACK, SIDE YARD
SETBACK, CHUCK DOWNEY, 2051 ARBOR LANE,
LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP & LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD,
PID# 13-117-24 41 0005. VARIANCE RESOLUTION
·. 1539-1541
*D. BID AWARD:
1998 SEALCOATING PROGRAM ............. 1542-1543
*E.
APPROVAL OF RELEASE OF $168,750.00 FROM THE LETTER OF
CREDIT FOR MAPLE MANORS ..........................
1544-1545
*F. PAYMENT OF BILLS ................................ 1546-151562
4. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
1501
J
ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING), _ .
-
B IYE. IAMF-.$ .tOI. INSOlV/DA VE MOORE, 1563-1~75
LOT 6, BLOCK 3, ~ol-Ix~x~'i x~xx~x~ x~x.xx~ ~.. ~tB1(13-117-24 44 0032 .......
.......................... 1576-1584
FISHIlqG AP,~A ON W lLOnxx~-, '
INF RMATI N/1ViI$CELLANEOUS: 1585-1616
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for April 1998 .................
B. Rule B Stormwater Management Recommendations of the Stormwat~r
Task Force and announcement regarding next Task Force meeting ....... 1617-1634
C. REMINDER: Committee of the Whole meeting, Tuesday, May 19, 1998, 7:30 p.m.
D. REMINDER: HRA meeting, Tuesday, May 12, 1998, 7:00 p.m.
E. REMINDER: wCCB meeting Thursday, May 21, 1998, 7:00 p.m., City Hall.
F. Joyce Nelson, Recycling Coordinator, has indicated that a private firm has made
arrangements to establish a compost site near Watertown at the former Ecklund Tree Se~ice
property. It is approximately 12 miles from Mound. The proposal is subject to various
permit approvals but it could be available sometime next Spring. In addition, Hennepin
County, at its Lake Minnetonka Regional Park site, has indicated that they would be willing,
starting in the fall of this year, to take leaves. Leaves would have to be hauled by the City.
Residents could not use this for a drop off site.
1502
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 28, 1998
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, April 28, 1998, 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, Insurance Attorney Karen Cole, City Clerk Fran Clark, Building Official
Jon Sutherland and the following interested citizens: Rollie Herbst, Greg Knutson, Becky
Cherne, Jori Ayaz, Gene & Gretchen Smith, Barb Casey, Gina Anderson, Kyle Cosky, and
Craig Rose.
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.
APPROVE AGENDA. ,It this time items can be added to the ,Igenda that are
not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent ,Igenda and voted upon
after the Consent Agenda has been approved.
Councilmember Ahrens asked to have P & Z Case//98-16 removed.
Councilmember Hanus asked to have P & Z Case//98-18 removed.
The City Clerk asked that the following be added to the Consent Agenda:
1) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT.
RECYCLING GRANT
2)
SET PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING)
CASE//98-06 - 4901 SHORELINE DRIVE - May 12, 1998.
b. MAJOR SUBDIVISION
CASE g98-05 - 4901 SHORELINE DRIVE - May 26, 1998.
c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW TWIN HOMES
CASE//98-28 - 4901 SHORELINE DRIV.E - May 26, 1998.
d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOTOR FUEL STATION
LOCATED WITHIN THE B-2 ZONING DISTRICT
CASE//98-26 - 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. - May 26, 1998
3)
Staff is asking that item 4. regarding the Wilshire Blvd. fishing area be removed from
the Agenda because the costs have not come in yet.
Mound City Council Minutes - April 28, 1998
The City Manager stated there will be an Executive Session tonight following the Agenda items to
discuss pending litigation on Woodland Point.
1.0
.*CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION made by Weycker, seconded by Jensen to approve the Consent Agenda as
amended above. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
*1.01
APPROVE THE MINUTF~q OF THE APRH. 14, 1998, REGULAR MEETING.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.02
CASE 98-15: VARIANCE, FRONT YARD SETBACK, HARDCOVER. JOR,! AYAZ~
4844 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 15, DEVON, PID,C.
//25-117-24 11 0046 & 25-117-24 11 0047
RESOLUTION//98-43
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK
AND REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCES IN ORDER TO
ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION TO CONVERT A 1 aA
STORY DWELLING INTO A 2 STORY AND ADD AN
ADDITION WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE, AT 4844
ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOT 1 & 2, BLOCK 5, DEVON,
PIDS 25-117-24 11 0047 & 25-117-24 11 0046, P & Z CASE
//98-15
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.03
CASE 98-04: MINOR SUBDIVISION, MARK & VAL STONE, 6380 BAYRIDG~
ROAD, PART OF GOVT LOT 5 AND PART OF ROLLING SHORF~$~
pID#23-117-24 ~32' 0037.
RESOLUTION//98-44 I~ESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION
~ AT 6380 BAY RIDGE ROAD, THAT PART OF
..... GOVERNMENT LOT 5, SECTION 23, PID 23-117-24 32
'~ 0037,~P & Z CASE//98-04
Weycker, Jensen, unamrnons!~~
Mound City Council Minutes - ~4pril 28, 1998
'1.04 PROCLAMATION ' MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK - MAY 3 - MAY 9~ 1998.
RESOLUTION //98-45 PROCLAMATION - MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK - MAY
3 - MAY 9, 1998.
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
· 1.05 PUBLIC GATHERING PERMIT - USE OF MOUND BAY PARK- MINNETONKA
CLASSIC BASS CLUB, 11:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M., WEIGH-IN ONLY. JUNE 6, 1998.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
· 1.06 MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS: 1395
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT - JUNE 6, 1998, FISH FRY
MOUND CITY DAYS -JUNE 19-21, 1998,
AMERICAN LEGION/VFW - PARADE PERMIT - MAY 25, 1998.
ONE DAY OFF SITE GAMBLING PERMIT - AMERICAN LEGION FOR
MOUND CITY DAYS BINGO,.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE DAY OFF SITE GAMBLING PERMIT
AMERICAN LEGION FOR MOUND CITY. DAYS BINGO.
RESOLUTION//98 -46
RESOLUTION APPROVING A
LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT
AMERICAN LEGION POST//398
ONE DAY OFF-SITE
APPLICATION FOR
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
· 1.07 RESOLUTION 98 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-47 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION
PROGRAM
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
Mound City Council Minutes - April 28, 1998
*1.08 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THE 1998 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN
.COUNTY.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-48 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE 1998 MUNICIPAL
RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
'1.09 SET PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Ae
Bo
Do
REZONING - P & Z CASE g98-06, JAMES JOHNSON/DAVE MOORE, 4901
SHORELINE DRIVE, PID #13-117-24 44 0032 - SUGGESTED DATE - MAY 12,
1998.
MAJOR SUBDIVISION - CASE #98-05 - 4901 SHORELINE DRIVE - May 26, 1998.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW TWIN HOMES CASE g98-28 - 4901
SHORELINE DRIVE - May 26, 1998.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOTOR FUEL STATION LOCATED WITHIN
THE B-2 ZONING DISTRICT CASE//98-26 - 1730 COMMERCE BLVD. - May 26,
1998.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.10
PAYMENT OF BILLq.
MOTION
Weycker, Jensen, unanimously.
*1.11
CASE 98-16: VARIANCE, LAKESIDE SETBACK, KYLE COSKY, 1932 sHoREwooI3
Councilmember Ahrens explained that the reason she asked to have this item removed from the
Consent Agenda is that the Planning Commission has recommended that the Council deny a minimally
encroaching lakeside deck to this property which was built prior to the Zoning Code being adopted.
She stated that in many cases the Council has granted variances for a 10 foot maximum lakeside deck.
Councilmember Hanus agreed.
The Building Official proposed the following language be added to #3 in the Now, Therefore, Be it
Resolved: "Construct an addition to the existing dwelling and a maximum 10 foot width deck on
the lakeside as shown on the atmlicant's survey (Exhibit A)."'
Mound City Council Minutes - April 28, 1998
Councilmember Jensen stated that the previous resolution required that the boathouse be removed and
it never did happen. She suggested that Building Permits not be issued until the agreement on the
boathouse is signed. The Council agreed.
Ahrens moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution with the amendments as stated above:
RESOLUTION g98-49 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LAKESIDE AND FRONT
YARD SETBACK VARIANCES IN ORDER TO ALLOW
FOR CONSTRUCTION TO ADD A BREEZE WAY
BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND GARAGE, AT 1932
SHOREWOOD LANE, LOT 9 AND PART OF LOT 8,
BLOCK 2, SHADYWOOD POINT, PID 18-117-23 23 0069,
P & Z CASE//98-16
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carded.
· 1.12 CASE 98-18: VARIANCE, FRONT YARD SETBACK, SIDE YARD SETBACK, CRAIG
A. ROSE, 5100 EDGEWATER DRIVE, LOT 6, BLOCK 1, LP CREVIERb.'.
SUB LOT 36 LAFAYETTE PARK, PID # 13-117-24 42 0006.
Councilmember Hanus stated he believes there are some errors in the numbers in the proposed
resolution that need to be corrected. He explained that this is a through lakeshore lot which have
different sideyard requirements, or abilities for the detached garage in the front yard than the regular
code allows.
The survey shows the garage is 2.6 feet away from the sideyard, but the code, for this type of lot,
allows that structure to be 4 feet from the sideyard making it actually a 1.4 foot variance, rather than
the 3.4 that is in the proposed resolution.
The 2nd Whereas would read as follows: "WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the
R-IA Single Family Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a minimum
lot area of 6,000 square feet, 40 feet of lot frontage, front yard setback of 20 feet, and side yard
setbacks are 6 feet for lot of record, and 4 feet sideyard for accessory structures on throm,h and
lakeshore lots and 10 feet to the street sidel and,.
The next Whereas would read as follows: "WHEREAS, the existing dwelling is setback 3.9 feet
from unimproved Chateau Lane requiring a 2.1 6.!. foot side yard setback variance. The existing
garage is 4.5 feet from the front yard setback and 2.6 feet from the side yard setback requiring a 3.5
foot front yard setback and-3,4 1.4 feet side yard setback variances, and;"
The same changes to be made under #1 of the Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved:
"1. The City does hereby grant a 3.5 foot front yard setback, ~4 1.4 foot side yard setback
variance for the Garage and a 2.1 6.1 foot side yard setback variance for the existing dwelling
as recommended by the Planning Commission."
Hanus moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution with the above changes:
RESOLUTION #98-50
Mound City Council Minutes - April 28, 1998
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD AND TWO
SIDE YARD VAR/ANCES IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR
CONSTRUCTION TO ADD A SECOND STORY TO THE
EXISTING NON CONFORMING DWELLING, AT 5100
EDGEWATER DRIVE, LOT 6, BLOCK 1, L P CREVIERS
SUB LOT 36 LAFAYETTE PARK, PID 13-117-24 42 0006,
P & Z CASE//98-18
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.13
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRFSENT
There were none.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council adjourned into Executive Session to consider pending litigation on the Woodland Point
issue at 7:50 P.M. Councilmember Weycker removed herself for the Executive Session.
The Council returned at 8:40 P.M. stating that the session was to gather input from the City Council
regarding the court ordered mediation on the Woodland Point issue.
1.14
A.
B.
C.
INFORMATION/MISCEI J.ANEOUS
Financial Report for March 1998, as prepared by Gino Businaro.
Planning Commission Minutes - April 13, 1998.
Notice of Annual League of Minnesota Cities Conference - June 16-19, 1998, Duluth, MN.
Please let Jodi know if you plan to attend, ASAP.
Notice from Hennepin County of a Public Hearing on Amendments to Ordinance Number
Seven - Hazardous Waste Management Ordinance for Hennepin County. This will be held on
May 19, 1998.
Minutes of the Quarterly Meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority.
LMCD mailings.
The results of the Open Book Meeting that was held on April 20, 1998, and a handout done
by the Hennepin County Assessor's Office
Park & Open Space Commission Minutes - April 9, 1998.
Mound City Council Minutes - April 28, 1998
Invitation from the Lake Minnetonka Environmental School to participate in the March for
Park's event - April 26, 1998.
Thank you letter from John Gabos.
Reply from Westonka Schools regarding a leaf compost site. Looks like we are back to
looking for another spot.
MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Weycker to adjourn at 8:45 P.M. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
May 12, 1998
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION
AT 2051 ARBOR LANE,
LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP & LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD
PID 13-117-24 41 0005,
P & Z CASE #97-45
WHEREAS, the applicant, Chuck Downey, has applied for a lot split which
would create one developable parcel (8) and one developed parcel (A) from an existing
parcel that is 17,938 square feet in area located at 2051 Arbor Lane, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA Single Family
Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a minimum lot area of
6,000 square feet, and 40 feet of lot frontage, and;
WHEREAS, the property is located adjacent to the unimproved Wakefield
Avenue, and;
WHEREAS, the two parcels would meet the R-lA district requirements for lot
area and width, and;
WHEREAS, parcel A and B are afforded via private access drives located on
the unimproved Wakefield Avenue, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
recommended approval of the lot split as recommended by staff, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby grant a minor subdivision of the property with the following
conditions:
ao
The applicant be responsible for all driveway improvements as reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer.
The applicant be responsible for providing water and sewer utilities to the
property line or providing escrow money their installation at a later time.
The City Engineer review and approve a drainage plan for the property before
building permit issuance.
The brick wall crossing the parcel lines be removed.
May 12, 1998
Downey - 2051 Arbor Lane
Page 2 e. Park dedication fees be paid as stated in Section 330:1 20 of the City Code.
f. Each parcel retain its lot of record status.
3. This Minor Subdivision is granted for the following legally described property:
Existing Legal Description:
LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
PROPOSED PARCEL A:
LOT 6, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT
THEREOF, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA TOGETHER WITH; THE NORTHEASTERLY 3.20 FEET
OF LOT 7, SAID SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT
ANGLES TO AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 7.
PROPOSED PARCEL B:
LOT 7, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT
THEREOF, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA EXCEPT: THE NORTHEASTERLY 3.20 FEET OF SAID
LOT 7, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF
SAID LOT 7.
4. This Minor Subdivision 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.
5. 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:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
- IS'Il
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
April 27, 1998
MINUTES
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1998
Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Orv Burma, Frank Weiland, Becky Glister, Bill Voss, Cklair
Hasse, Michael Mueller, Council Liaison Mark Hanus. Staff Present: Assistant Planner Loren
Gordon, and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Jerry Clapsaddle, Building Official
Jon Sutherland.
Public Present: Robert Wroda, Dave Moore, James Johnson, Joel Reinitz, Muriel Reinitz
Meeting was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael
Chair Michael introduced and welcomed new Planning Commissioner Cklair Hasse.
MINUTES -APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 13, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
There were no corrections to the Minutes
MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Burma to approve the Minutes of the April 13,
1998 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 8-0.
Chair Michael explained how a Public Hearing is addressed.
BOARD OF APPEALS:
CASE # 97-41' VARIANCE, FRONT YARD SETBACK, SIDE YARD SETBACK, CHUCK
DOWNEY, 2051 ARBOR LANE, LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP & LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, PID #
13-117-24 41 0005
CASE # 97-45: MINOR SUBDIVISION, CHUCK DOWNEY, 2051 ARBOR LANE, LOTS 6 & 7,
SKARP & LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, PID # 13-117-24 41 0005
Loren Gordon presented the case. This case was tabled at the April 13, 1998 Planning
Commission Meeting. It was determined that more commissioners were needed to be present
to make a decision on these cases.
The applicant, Chuck Downey, has submitted two requests to complete a lot split. The first
request is a minor subdivision which would create parcels A and B as shown on the survey. The
second request is for associated variances on Parcel A. The variance requests are listed below.
Mound Plannin9 Commission Minutes
Apr/I 27, 1998
Parcel A:
Existin.q/Proposed Reauired Variance
Side yard 6' 10' 4'
Garage (FY& SY) 0.1' and 1.8' 20' and 6' 19.9' and 4.2'
Lot frontage on an unimproved street.
Parcel B:
Lot frontage on an unimproved street.
The property is located at the intersection of Arbor Land and Edgewater Drive. The current
property contains 17,938 sf. As shown on the survey both parcels would meet the 6000 sf lot
area requirement. There are currently no plans for the development of Parcel B.
Both parcels are located adjacent to the City right-of-way although it is not improved (Wakefield
Avenue). At present there are no plans to improve this section of road. The grade is excessively
steep and would require expensive improvements for it to be built. Parcel A gains its access
from a driveway that cuts across the unimproved right-of-way to Edgewater Drive. A portion of
the driveway also cuts through a corner of dedicated city park. This park is the vacant area
created by Edgewater Drive, Arbor Lane, and the Wakefield Avenue. The park is vacant and
gets most of its use from neighbors that park cars along its edge.
The Code requirements for road frontage are that buildable lots must be located on an
improved city street. The current property does not fit this requirement. The applicant is
proposing that rather than build a City street in front of the two parcels, a driveway located on
the right-of-way serve as access for the new parcel. The driveway would only serve the parcel B
and parcel A would gain access as it currently does. Allowing the property owner to build a
private driveway on the right-of-way would not afford the owner any protection if utilities needed
to be accessed. The property owner would be responsible for any repairs.
Within the unimproved right-of-way is a city sanitary sewer main that is stubbed. Water service
would be extended from Edgewater Drive.
In order for the development to move forward, Parcel B needs access of some type to
Edgewater Drive. There have been similar past cases where nonconforming street frontage
variances have been granted. A case similar to this one on Glenwood Road was granted a
variance to allow development. In the case at hand, staff has dismissed the possibilities of
vacating right-of-way because of utilities located within it. Also it is unclear how the street could
be vacated. A private driveway appears to be the most feasible alternative in gaining access for
the property.
The Planning Commission has two options at this point in regards to acting on the application.
The first is to accept the applicants proposal granting a variance for nonconforming road
frontage. This would allow the lot split to occur. The second option would be to deny the request
based on the lack of road frontage. With this option the applicant could choose to install a
standard city road or decide to not split the parcel. Staff would recommend the Planning
Commission grant the variance for the private drive.
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
April 27, 1998
The lot split also has existing nonconforming house issues that need to be addressed. The
house would have a 6 feet side yard setback with the proposed lot split. This was proposed in
order to afford the undeveloped lot enough buildable space. Staff discussed a 10 feet setback
with the applicant but was decided that this setback would really restrict any desirable lakeside
home. If the Planning Commission chooses to approve the side yard variance it could do so by
weighing the setback of the house had the two lots not been combined. In this case, the side
yard setback based on original platted lot lines would be 2.3 feet. The proposed 6 feet setback
appears to be an improvement.
The existing front entry garage is also nonconforming. The Planning Commission could cite the
number of garages close to Arbor Lane as reason for granting the variance. If the Planning
Commission chooses not to approve the variance the garage would need to conform to code
requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council
approve the minor subdivision request and variances as requested with the following conditions.
1. The applicant be responsible for all driveway improvements as reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer.
2. The applicant be responsible for providing water and sewer utilities to the property line or
providing escrow money their installation at a later time.
3. The City Engineer review and approve a drainage plan for the property before building
permit issuance.
4. The brick wall cross the parcel lines be removed.
5. Park dedication fees be paid as stated in Section 330:120 of the City Code.
DISCUSSION:
Questions from the April 13, 1998 Meeting:
Michael questioned the lot of record status. Gordon stated that it currently is a lot of record and
if the subdivision were approved both lots would not be entitled lot of record status.
Weiland questioned how old the garage is. Gordon stated that it is probably the same age as
the house.
Voss questioned why not have the applicant build a city street instead of having a driveway.
Sutherland stated that by having the applicant build a driveway, the city would not have to care
of the road.
Questions from the April 27, 1998 Meeting:
Voss asked why the lots would lose its lot of record status. It is just a minor adjustment to the
lot line. Gordon stated that it was not addressed in the Planners Report. Hanus stated that he
feels that this fits the criteria for a minor adjustment the lots should remain a lot of record
status.
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
April 27, 1998
¥oss commented that he feels that the applicant should put in public street to elevate the non
conforming issue of non abutting a public right of way. This would eliminate all the variances
except for the existing garage on parcel A and it would eventually be removed.
Mueller questioned who requested the lot line be moved. Gordon stated that staff requested
Downey move the lot line,
Hanus questioned the access to the driveways. Gordon pointed out the direction of the
driveways.
Mueller questioned the retaining wall removal on parcel B.
For both cases 97-41 & 97-45:
MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Voss to recommend staff approval
with one addtional condition. Condition #6 to state: Each lot retain
its lot of record status. Motion carried 8-0.
This case will go to City Council on May 12, 1998
/5'/5'
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Kocgler Group Inc.
TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP
DATE: April 13, 1998
SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision and Variance Request
OWNER: Chuck Downey - 2051 Arbor Lane
CASE NUMBER: 97-41 and 97-45
HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5q
LOCATION: 2051 Arbor Lane
ZONING: Residential District R- 1A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted two requests to complete a lot split. The first
request is a minor subdivision which would create parcels A and B as shown on the survey. The
second request is for associated variances on Parcel A. The variance requests are listed below.
Parcel A:
Existing/Proposed
Side yard 6'
Garage (FY & SY) 0.1' and 1.8'
Required Variance
10' 4'
20' and 6' 19.9' and 4.2'
Non-conforming lot frontage on an improved street.
Parcel B:
Non-conforming lot frontage on an improved street.
The property is located at the intersection of Arbor Land and Edgewater Drive. The current
property contains 17,938 sf. As shown on the survey both parcels would meet the 6000 sflot area
requirement. There are currently no plans for the developmen, t of Parcel B.
Both parcels are located adjacent to the City right-of-way although it is not improved (Wakefield
Avenue). At present there are no plans to improve this section of road. The grade is excessively
steep and would require expensive improvements for it to be built. Parcel A gains its access from
a driveway that cuts across the unimproved right-of-way to Edgewater Drive. A portion of the
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
1).2
Downey Minor Subdivision and Variance Request
April 13, 1998
driveway also cuts through a comer of dedicated city park. This park is the vacant area created by
Edgewater Drive, Arbor Lane, and the Wakefield Avenue. The park is vacant and gets most of its
use from neighbors that park cars along its edge.
The Code requirements for road frontage are that buildable lots must be located on an improved
city street. The current property does not fit this requirement. The applicant is proposing that
rather than build a City street in front of the two parcels, a driveway located on the right-of-way
serve as access for the new parcel. The driveway would only serve the parcel B and parcel A
would gain access as it currently does. Allowing the property owner to build a private driveway
on the right-of-way would not afford the owner any protection if utilities needed to be accessed.
The property owner would be responsible for any repairs.
Within the unimproved right-of-way is a city sanitary sewer main that is stubbed. Water service
would be extended from Edgewater Drive.
COMMENTS: A variance can be granted in Mound only on the basis of a finding of hardship or
practical difficulty. Under the Mound Code, variances may be granted only in the event that the
following circumstances exist (Section 350:530):
A. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply
generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or
shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property since
enactment of the ordinance have no control.
B. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant
of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of
this Ordinance.
C. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
D. That granting of the variance request will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by this Ordinance to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the
same district.
E. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship.
F. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Ordinance or to
property in the same zone.
In order for the development to move forward, Parcel B needs access of some type to Edgewater
Drive. There have been similar past cases where nonconforming street frontage variances have
been granted. A case similar to this one on Glenwood Road was granted a variance to allow
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (-612) 338-6838
15'17
p. 3
Downey Minor Subdivision and Variance Request
April 13, 1998
development. In the case at hand, staff has dismissed the possibilities of vacating right-of-way
because of utilities located within it. Also it is unclear how the street could be vacated. A private
driveway appears to be the most feasible alternative in gaining access for the property.
The Planning Commission has two options at this point in regards to acting on the application.
The first is to accept the applicants proposal granting a variance for nonconforming road
frontage. This would allow the lot split to occur. The second option would be to deny the request
based on the lack of road frontage. With this option the applicant could choose to install a
standard city road or decide to not split the parcel. Staff would recommend the Planning
Commission grant the variance for the private drive.
The lot split also has existing nonconforming house issues that need to be addressed. The house
would have a 6 feet side yard setback with the proposed lot split. This was proposed in order to
afford the undeveloped lot enough buildable space. Staff discussed a 10 feet setback with the
applicant but was decided that this setback would really restrict any desirable lakeside home. If
the Planning Commission chooses to approve the side yard variance it could do so by weighing
the setback of the house had the two lots not been combined. In this case, the side yard setback
based on original platted lot lines would be 2.3 feet. The proposed 6 feet setback appears to be an
improvement.
The existing front entry garage is also nonconforming. The Planning Commission could cite the
number of garages close to Arbor Lane as reason for granting the variance. If the Planning
Commission chooses not to approve the variance the garage would need to conform to code
requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council
approve the minor subdivision request and variances as requested with the following conditions.
1. The applicant be responsible for all driveway improvements as reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer.
2. The applicant be responsible for providing water and sewer utilities to the property line or
providing escrow money their installation at a later time.
3. The City Engineer review and approve a drainage plan for the property before building
permit issuance.
4. The brick wall cross the parcel lines be removed.
5. Park dedication fees be paid as stated in Section 330:120 of the City Code.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (-612) 338-6838
VARIANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF MOUND
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
RECEIVED
Application Fee: $100.00
NIO!]ND PLANN!NG &
(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY)
.iPlanning CommissiOn Date:
City Council Date:
Distribution:
~'~¢.¢"q Tt ~'City Planner
,' l/(Tity Engineer
,/ t/Public Works
,!
Case No.
'~DNR
Other
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
LEGAL
DESC.
PROPERTY
OWNER
APPLICAN'r
(IF OTHER
THAN
OWNER)
Address
Lot ].~OT5 (~ ¢ 'P Block
PID# S'~ 1['7 gq &// F)OOS' Plat#
ZONING DISTRICT R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2
B-3
Phone (H) (W) ~ ?(0 -O L//00 (M)
Name
Address
Phone (H) (W). (M)
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning
procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ,~ no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution
number(s) and provide copies of resolutions.
2. Detailed descripton of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.):
t,,ev. 1/14/97)
Variance Application, P. 2
Case No.
Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning
district in which it is located? Yes (), No ~. If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason
for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.):
t-ho u,_ ~ L 7-0- (-.Lo £ o ,5 t b ~ b__l /U L.
SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE
ctS~ (or existing) (~at~,q3 g/$
Front Yard: (NS~W) ~O ff. O,I ~. lq,? ~. fig' g~
Side Yard: (~S E W) '
Side ( W) (H)$
Rear Yard~,(NS E~) o fl' - ff[,~'3 fl. 0 fl.
Lakeside:/ ( N S E W ) fl. - fl. fl.
' (NSEW) fl. fl. fl.
Street Frontage: ff 0 fl. ~ 7 ft. O fl.
Lot Size: ~ ~q fl ~,(~ sq ~ _ O _sq fl
Hardcover: ~ ~6 sq fl _ 2 3 ?,3_sq fl O sq fl
Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is
located? Yes ~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use:
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the
uses permitted in that zoning district?
( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil
( ) too small ( ) drainage Q0 existing situation
( ) too shallow ( ) shape (,,~ other: specify
Please describe: 0 -~- ~ r- --. ..
' r - o ~r}g.g.~ /T o'- 2,4 ' To ~ ~Loc
(Rev. 1/14/97)
Variance Application, P. 3
Case No.
o
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 ~X~. If no, list some other properties which are similarly affected?
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any req'aired 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.
twner's Signature
Applicant's Signature
(Rev. 1/14/97)
Date
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
(IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE)
~' 6077¢ /.-OT5 "
OWNER'S NAME:
LOTAREAI?~ ~35 SQ. FT.X 30% = (for all lots) .............. I ~"; 3I~1 I
LOT AREA /2' ~ 3~ SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record*) ....... I. '~) I ~,.~'_l
LOT AREA.. 1"~,~,'~ SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only) . I ~; (¢~! ~
*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.
HOUSE
LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT
~_~,qx 2. o =
? x.., ~ =
X =
TOTAL HOUSE .........................
X
DETACHED BLDGS
(GARAGE/SHED)
DRIVEWAY, PARKING
AREAS, SIDEWALKS,
ETC.
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS .................
~ x ~ = 117
(._ ?.ox 4_)/~. = qo
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
pervious surface under are
not counted as hardcover
OTHER C..~AJ C~ ~.~-~
X
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC
X
X
X
TOTAL DECK
10
TOTAL OTHER
x_~s' =
x lO .- /OO
TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE I :::).L I,,,~-6
UNDER/OVER (indicate difference) ...................... .L:L..~..~. l
PREPARED BY
- DATE
2-3 7'~
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
(IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE)
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
OWNER'S NAME:
LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 30%
~T 7--
LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40%
I...oT ~ =
LOT AREA 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.
HOUSE
DETACHED BLDGS
(GARAGE/SHED)
LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT
q x 7 :
X
TOTAL HOUSE .........................
2,3-. x 9-0 :
X =
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS .................
x :
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ..................
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
pervious surface under are
not counted as hardcover
OTHER
TOTAL DECK ..........................
X =
X E
TOTAL OTHER .........................
TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) .................
72.0
2-1 ~
PREPARED BY
DATE
SENT BY; DNR METROj 9- 8-97 9;57i 0127727573
#2/2
September 8, 1997
Ms. Kris l.inqui.qt
City o£ Momtd
$.';41M,,),v, ood Ro~d
Mound, MN $$364
Minnesota Depa]'tmcrl! of Natural
Metro Waters- 1200 Wa~n~r Road. St. Paul. MN 55
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
RE: September 8, 1997 Mound Plann,ng Commie,ion Meeting, Cib, of Mound, H~.~mepin County
D~:ar Ms. Linquist:
Wc have reviewed thc agenda item.q slal~t thr review at the September R, 1997 advisory plam~ing
c..ollm]iSSiO~l IJig~t~l~g mid have r,;omillell~ on two agellda itcmfl:
I. Ca.qe ~97.39. Thc property owner (Steele family) proposes to split eric of thc four lots they awn for
thc development ora .~mgle fhmily home.. The I~ound City Ordinance $p~cifically states (Section
350.415) that Lots of Record may be used for sinsle famd¥
proposal meets all setback tu~d mhdmtaa ~cea <quirementg. Wc would obj<t to ~is proposal fl'~y
v~i~ce ig reqM~ ~at would md{e ~y rcma~zg lot nonc~fom~:g. Coatiguou~ lu~ re:der th<
stone owncmhip cm~ only he ~plit if each ~ep=at~ lot mee~ all ~e $t~dard= m~d requi~mcnt$ for
individu~ lot ~c. ICme proposed lot split d~ not meet ~t~dardR and mqnirement~ for individual
lot dcv~lopmcnt, flm~ d~c DNR will object to Otis
2. C=¢ a~'/-41 ~d ff97-45 (Chuck ~x~%, property). Thc g~ne comaent$ for Case 1t97-] 9 apply.
but ~ ia not being propos~ ~ bc developed ~ fids t~e. However, what i~ the long.term plan for
~ lot? Would it bc b~Idablc without
Thc conm~enkq in ~is Icl.2r addm.q, DNR. Division of Wa~r~ juh$dicfional matter~ m~d concerns. Thcac
cmmnen~ sho~d not be mns~ed as DNR auppo~ or lack ~crcof tbr a pa~icul~ project.
Please contact mc at 772. 7910 should you haw questions.
Hydrologist
PAML/cd~
Mi,m~:huhu Creek Watershed District. Jim l-ta~¢r '
U.S. Anuy Corps of Enginecr~, Joc Yama
lqennepin Coneervation District, Ali Durguno~:lu
l.}Ng Inhum:~hun: h 2-2'~h-hl ~;, I-.~(}{1-1h6-6{)1~1 · TTY' ill7 ~ 16.54R4. 1-8i. J-tO',' !M2U
Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design
February 3, 1998
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
Chuck Downey
4163 Shoreline Drive
Spring Park, MN 55384
RE: Arbor Lane Lot Split
Dear Mr. Downey:
We have received and reviewed your application for the lot split of your property at 2051 Arbor
Lane. During the last discussion in early December, the City Engineer and myself had a number
of issues that needed to be addressed before the application could be forwarded to the Planning
Commission. There are two items absent in the current plan preventing the application from
going to the Commission.
· How will water and sanitary sewer service to Parcel B be addressed. The utility locations
need to be identified on the plans. Also, will services be stubbed to the parcel or will money
be escrowed.
· Access to Parcel B is not addressed. All property in Mound must be located on an improved
public street. This would mean building a street stub to current city standards that are
approved by the City Engineer. An alternative approach would be to provide a driveway that
is more residential in design. With either approach parking along the access will need to be
addressed. This may have implications for Parcel A as well.
I understand you have been out of the office so when it is convenient you can contact Jori
Cameron, City Engineer at 476-6010 or myself with any questions.
Sincerely,
Loren Gordon, AICP
Assistant City Planner
cc: Jon Sutherland, City of Mound
RECEIVED
FEB - 6 1998
MOUND PLANNING & INSP.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659
Ph (612) 338-0800 - Fx (612) 338-6838
ADDRESS:
LOTOF RECORD? YPJ I NO
YARD I
llOUSE; .........
FRONT
CITY OF MOUND - ZON1N(
INFORMATION SHEET
DIREC'TION I
ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH:
R1 10,000/60 B1 7,500/0
C nz--~6.~oo/4~'",n2 2o,ooo/eo
.2 e."~-'-'-""~oo--~.~ ~o.ooo/e~
R2 14,000/80
R3 B~B ORD. 51 30,000/100
REQUiI~D I EXISTING/PROPOSED
FRONT
SIDE
SIDE
REAR
LAKE
TOP OF BLUFF
OARAOII:, 811ED .....
N S E W
N S E W
N S B W
N $ E W
N $ E W
N S E W
DETACltED BUILDINGS
15'
10' OR 30'
FRONT
FRONT
$1DI!
SIDE
REAR
L,~E
N $ E W
N $ E W
N $ E W
N $ E W
N $ E W
4' OR 6'
4'
N S E W
EXISTING LOT SIZE: ,. - 1
LoT WIDrI'H:
LoT DI~I'i'H:
VARIANCE
--------- 1 ,o' o. ---------
~N~IN~ y~ i NO I ? '--" 1 BY:.- ~ "
rmMl~ ~nt Il 472~. ~, -~ ~ut~ m ~ City ~ M~ ~ng QdJ~me. For ~t~er Info'lion, ~n~ct
lira City of Mound
AD~. 8, 1998 i'00PM ~{CCOMBS PRANK ROOS
No, 8740
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc,
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55447
'telephone
612/476-6010
612J476-853z FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City of Mound Plarming Commission and Staff
John Cameron, City Engineer
ApfilS, 1995
City of Mound
Minor Subdivision
2051 Arbor Lane
Downey Property
CASE NO.: 9%45
MFRA FILE: #11793
As requested, we have reviewed the information furnished for the above referenced minor
subdivision and have the following comments and recommendations:
Sanitary Sewer and Water
Parcels A and B are both presently served by separate sewer services; however Parcel B does not
have an existing water service. The City watermain is located in the improved portion of Arbor
Lane. A new water service will need to be installed as proposed on the survey submitted with the
application. We would suggest that the proposed location for the curb box be moved to the
property line (ROW) so it does not end up in the bituminous driveway.
EQual 0pporiunity Employer
Apr, 8, 1998 i'00PM MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS
City of Mound Planning Commission and Staff
April 8, 1998
Page 2
No. 8740 P, 3/7
Access
The applicant is proposing to construct a private driveway within the platted right-of-way of
Arbor Lane. It appears this may be the most feasible solution. The g-fade difference between the
improved portion of Arbor Lane and the curved section of Edgewater Drive prohibits extending
Arbor Lane through as a City street. With the limited right-of-way (SO-feet), there is not room to
construct any sort of cul-de-sac or tam around if A.rbor Lane were extended to provide access for
Parcel B.
The platted right-of-way could be vacated, but that brings up the question as to where the
vacated portion goes, to the owner of Lots 6 and 7, the Park or half to each. Also the City would
need to retain the utility easements, since the City sewer main is located in the right-of-way.
We would recommend that the private drivev~-~y be allowed with some type of agreement that
protects the City and puts the burden of maintenance on the property owner. It appears that a
retaining wall may be required to allow for construction of the driveway, which would also be
the property owner's responsibility.
Conclusions
1. Allow private driveway with appropriate agreements.
2. Applicant to install a separate water service for Parcel B or provide some form of
financial guarantee.
3. A complete grading and erosion control plan for the proposed home and driveway be
provided at time of building permit application.
e:Xmain:\l 1793Xmound4-$
Rev. 1/9,'97 Application for
MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND
City of Mound, 5341 May~vood Road, Mound, MN
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
g Commission Date:
City Council Date: 5 ~ P~'
Distribution:
~_/:"2'~]q '? v' Public Works
~ ',/' City Engineer
S£PT K
' Other
55364 RECEIVED
4¢4/$"
~Application Fee: 275.00
Escrow Deposit: $1.000
Deficient Unit Ch~ges?
Delinquent T~es?
Ple~e type or print the following information:
PROPERTY Subject Address "~OS / R~O~ Lfi/~.)S
iNFORMATION
EXISTING Lot ~:)T$ 6 * 7 ~ t *,ook P'~, ~
LEGAL
ZONING ~
DISTRICT Circle: R-1 R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3
APPLICANT The applicant is: ~owner ~other:
Phone (H) (W) ~ 7b --0 ~dO {M)
OWNER Name
(if other than
applicant) Address
Phone (H) (W) {M)
SURVEYOR/
ENGINEER Address ~~ ~A~P~[5~ ~[d~ ~~4 H~I~ ,~ ~0
Phone(H) (W} ¢~- ~ g (M)
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.
15 J~tS7- 6~P~g.~r/~e -l~S .7_ ¢.0T5 .pP~sv/oust-~' .~#~b.
This application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the case.
er s Signature ~ Date
Owner's Signature
Date
ISZ?
LOTAREA 17, ~5~
LOT AREA 1'72 ~'~
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCO. yER CALCULATIONR
(~MPERV~OUS SURFACE C0VERA~E)
SQ. FT. X 30% = (for all lots)
SQ. FT. X 40%
SQ. FT. X 15%
= (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.
HOUSE
LENGTH WIDTH SQFT
q~_,,-/ x_..:2.~ =
7 x_. ,-/=
X =
TOTAL HOUSE
x ;;zo= q¥o
X =
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS .................
r..~/v ¢ ~f., 7'~
DETACHED BLDGS
(GARAGE/SHED)
DRIVEWAY, PARKING ~/~'P'! ~
AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ~)~11)£¢~
ETC.
~3 x. ~ = 117
C ?.ox ~)/~. = ~/o
X =
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ..................
TOTAL DECK
/<9
TOTAL OTHER
x :Z.¢ =
x I0 ~ /00
~lqo
I
3 2.;15' -I
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
pervious surface under are
not counted as hardcover
OTHER
TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UNDER/OVER (indicate difference) .......................L:L..~1..~.~..
PREPARED BY
.... DATE
CiTY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
(IMPERVIOU~ SURFACE COVERAGE)
PROPERTY ADORESS:
OWNER'S NAME:
SQ. FT. X 30% = (for all ~ots) ..............
SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record*) .......
SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only)
LOT AREA
/,~T' 7--
LOT AREA
LOT AREA
*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.
HOUSE
DETACHED BLDGS
~(GARAGE/SHED)
LENGTH W1DTH SQ FT
X =
TOTAL HOUSE .........................
x %0 =
X =
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS .................
DRIVEWAY, PARKING /'2,t~/'l'rili'" 13 X
A, AS. X
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ..................
7 .o
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
pervious surface under are
not counted as hardcover
OTHER X -
TOTAL OTHER .........................
TOTAL HARDCOV£R / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE I
/OVER (indicate difference) ........................ · .L~..~.~'. -~ I
2-I ~b I
7Fo I
PREPARED BY
DATE
Rev. 1/9/97
Application for
Planning Comrrfission Date:
City Council Date: 5 ~L.
Distribution:
~blic Wor~
MINOR SUBDMSION OF LAND
City of Mound, 5341-Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 RECEIVED
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
Case No. MOUND PLANNING & INSP~
Application Fee: $75.00
Escrow Deposit: $1.000
Deficient Unit Charges?
City Engineer~Lo 7
Z-C5 '7 I~S 5e.o.'e~ 5 Tu ~ ~ ~' Delinquent T~es?
~'~ 7 ~d/~ ~ ~ ~ ~q( ~ '~ T~ ) VARIANCE REQUIRED?
Ple~e ty~ or prMt the fo~owMg ~ormation: .......................................................
PROPERTY Subjec, Address
LEGAL
ZONING ~ -
DISTRICT Circte: R-1 R-2 R-3 8-1 B-2 B-3
APPLICANT The applicant is: ~owner o~her:
Address
Phone (H), (W) q 7~ --0 ~¢0 {M)
OWNER Name
{if other than
applicant} Address
Phone {H}., {W)
SURVEYOR/
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional usa permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( } yes, ( ) no. If yes,
list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and proviCe copies of resolutions.
This application must be signed by all owners of the 7 p operw, or an explanation given wny this is not the case.
.9 ¢,..__,, _ ,
Owner s Signature
Date
O;w_~e r' s Signature
153R.
Date
Application 'f(~r
planning Commission Date: ~PT' ~
City Council Date: 5 ~ P T ~'~ '~
MINOR SUBDMSION OF LAND
City of Mound, 5341 Ma?'ood Road, Mound, MN 55364 RECEIVED
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
4q-4/,r
c~e No. MOUND PLANNING & tNSP.
Application Fee: $75.00
Distribution: . Escrow Deposit: $1.000
~ i/¢,~'Deficient U~'tLCh, srge,s? / ~, ~
-~7]~ .?" ¢ ~blic Works ....... ~ ~. ~ Delinquent Tzxes?~
~¢ City Engineer ~~~' VARIANCE REQUIRED? 2¢~
Plebe ty~ or prat the fo~ow~g ~ormation:
PROPERTY Subject Address '~"~O.~ h~{3~x. LA/~)S
INFORMATION
EXISTING Lot J'~T5 ~ * 7 ~ ~ Block P,at ~
LEGAL
ZONING ~
DISTRICT Circle: R-I R-2 R-3 B-i 8-2 B-3
APPLICANT The applicant is: ~owner other:
OWNER Name
(if other than
applicantl Address
Phone (H) (W) .(M)
8URVEYORI
Phone(H) (W) ~l -- l~i ~ (M)
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use;ermit, or other zoning procedure for this property? () yes, ()no. If yes,
list daters) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provice copies of resolutions.
T~/s a~p//cat/o~ must be s/gned bV a/~ owners or rne sub/ecrpro~erry, or a~ ~xp/a~ar/o~ ~/ve~ wny rn/s ts ~or r3e case.
Owner s Signa~re ~ Date
Owner's Signature
Date
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
September 8, 1997
Ms. Kris Linqulst
City of Mound
5341maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364 .
RE: September 8, 1997 Mound Planning Commission Meeting, City of Mound, Hennepin County
Dear Ms. Linquist:
We have reviewed the agenda items slated for review at the September 8, 1997 advisory planning
commission meeting and have conunents on two agenda items:
Case/t97-39. The property owner (Steele family) proposes to split one of the four lots they own for
the development of a single family home. The Mound City Ordinance specifically states (Section
350.415) that Lots of Record may be used for single family detached dwelling purposes provided the
proposal meets all setback and minimum area requirements. We would object to this proposal if any
variance is required that would make any remaining lot nonconforming. Contiguous lots under the
same ownership can only be split if each separated lot meets all the standards and requirements for
individual lot use. If the proposed lot split does not meet standards and requirements for individual
lot development, then the DNR will object to this proposal.
Case #97-41 and #97-45 (Chuck Downey property). The same comments for Case #97-39 apply.
Lot 7 is not being proposed to be developed at this time. However, what is the long-term plan for
this lot? Would it be buildable without variances?
The comments 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.
Hydrologist
PAML/cds
C:
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Jim Hafner
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Joe Yanta
Hennepin Conservation District, Ali Durguno~;lu
DNR lnforma!ion: 612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 · TTY: 612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929
Au Equal Opporlunily Employer ~ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
Who Values Diversity Minimum ol 109~ Post-Consumer Waste
~.,~.~ RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A
~c~..,,~'/~,xa ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING DETA~H~L~ GARAGE
~) AT 2901 MEADOW LANE, LOT 1 & 9, BLOCK 5,
~OTA BAPTIST SUMMER ASSEMBLY,
PID//23-117-24 42 0104, P&Z CASE f94-34
WHEREAS, the owner, Dustin Frantsen, has applied for a variance to recognize
existing nonconforming setbacks and lot frontage in order to construct a detached garage that
is conforming to setbacks and impervious surface requirements, and;
WHEREAS, this property is located in the R-2 zone which requires a minimum
lot area of 6,000 square feet, lot frontage of 40 feet, a 20 foot front yard setback to Meadow
Lane, a 10 foot front yard setback to the unimproved Glenwood Drive, a 6 foot side yard, and
a 15 foot rear yard setback, and;
WHEREAS, the existing dwelling is nonconforming by 7.5 feet to the required
10 foot setback to Glenwood Road, and lot frontage is nonconforming by 1.4 feet, and;
WHEREAS, the parcel is an odd shaped comer lot further complicated by the
unimproved Glenwood Road. A Construction on Public Lands Permit, as required by City Code
Section 320 will need to be issued as part of this request for the proposed driveway, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant originally applied for a street vacation of Glenwood
Road, however, due to the City utilities located in the right-of-way and the adjacent undeveloped
Lots 13 17, staff suggested to the applicant that a vacation would receive a negative
recommendation from staff, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously
recommended approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City does hereby grant a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming front yard
setback to Glenwood Road of 2.9', and nonconforming street frontage of 38.4' to allow
construction of a conforming 26' x 30' detached garage, subject to the following:
a. The City shall not be responsible for reimbursement for any improvements made
by the applicant to the unimproved fight-of-way, in any case.
b. In the event the tight-of-way is disturbed at any time by the City, the City will
not be responsible for restoration, other than that as approved by the Public
Works Superintendent.
176
e
e
w
e
o
June 28, 1994
c. If an when an additional building site is created on the north side of Glenwood
Road, the street should be improved to City standards and the cost assessed to the
abutting, benefited properties, which would include this parcel.
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 26' x 30' detached ga_rage.
This variance is granted for the following legally described property:
Lots 1 and 9, Block 5, Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly.
The applicant will remove the existing rock driveway on Lot 1, Block 5, Minnesota
Baptist Summer Assembly.
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 Ahrens and seconded by
Councilmember Jensen.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Ahrens, Jensen, lessen, and Johnson.
The following Councilmembers voted in the n~gative:
none.
Councilmember Smith was absent and excu~,. /1/~
st: City Clerk . ~y ~/t_ fi/ '
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
1',l)50 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
MEMORANDUM
JUN I 0
TO:
FROM:
Jon Sutherland - Planning
John Cameron - City Engineer
DATE:
SUBJECT:
June 8, 1994
Variance Request - Case #94-34
MFRA #8487
RE_~Q_UEST
The applicant has requested a building permit for a detached garage
facing the unimproved portion of Glenwood Road. This will require a 120
foot long driveway to be constructed and maintained on the City right-
of-way. Section 320:00 of the Mound City Code requires a special permit
to be approved by a four-fifths vote of all the Council members to do
construction on or alteration of public land.
BACKGROUND
This portion of Glenwood Road has a long history dating back to
1980 whem the other streets in this area were improved with curb and
gutter and bituminous paving. This portion was omitted from the project
because tt was unused and the property on the north side, Lots 13
through ]7, Block 4, were combined into one tax parcel with access at
the corner of Glenwood Road and Meadow Lane. Over the years a number of
people have proposed subdividing these lots into 2 or 3 building sites.
One format application was made in 1987 by Mrs. Maas, the original owner
when the other street improvements were made in the area.
Since then, the five lots were purchased and a home constructed on
the easterlY portion of the parcel. This still leaves the possibility
that the parcel could be subdivided to create another buildable site.
This sit¢~ however would not have access to an improved street or have
City wat,~r available. The closest City watermain is also at the
intersection of Glenwood Road and Meadow Lane. There is an existing
sewer sezvice on Lot 16.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I would not have any objection to allowing this private driveway in
City right-of-way, if that is the only option and it is acceptable with
Public w,)rks. We would recommend that if and when an additional
building site is created on the north side that the street be improved
to City standards and the cost assessed to abutting, benefited
propertiss, which would include the parcel now owned by the applicant
for this variance.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
FRANK R. CARDARELLE
(612) 941-3031 Land Surveyor
~ Eden PraJde, MN 55344
Certificate of SurVey
Survey For Dustin Frantsen '
Book ~44- Page..4 5" File
2901 Meadow Lane Noun~, Nh..
t~.~ J . ~ ,¢ ~ ~_~_ ....... 7: a_ 4~_~ il. s ~
Scale= 1" = 30'
O Denotes Iron Hon.
Found
iL"~k R. Carda'feji~
'State Reg. No. 6508
CITY OF MOUND - ZONING INFORMATION SHEET
SURVEY ON FILE(YE~I NO
LOT OF RECORD? YE3 / NO
ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH:
Ri iO,O00__~_~B1
~i~ '-C:0oo/4o-'~B: 20,000/80
:~--~.'~B3 ~o,ooo/s~
R2 14,000/80
R~ ~g ORDo I1 30,000/100
REQUIRED [ EXi~i'iNG/PROPOSED
EXISTING LOT SIZE:
LOT WIDTH:
LOT DEPTH:
VARIANCE
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
LAKE
OF BLUFF
N S E W
15'
10' OR 30'
GARAGE, SilED .....
FRONT
FRONT
SIDE
SIDE
REAR
LAKE
TOP OF BLUFF
DETACttED BUILDINGS
N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
4' OR 6'
4' OR 6'
N S E W 50'
10' OR 30'
This Zoning Information Sheet only summarizes a portion of ~~ outlir~d in file City of Mound Zoning Or ! or fur ct the City of Mound
Planning Department at 472-060(}.
ARBOR LA
0
r~
r-~
May 12, 1998
PROPOSED RESOLUTION #98-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD AND IMPROVED STREET
FRONTAGE VARIANCES, TO ALLOW FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY
AT 2051 ARBOR LANE,
LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD,
PID 13-117-24 41 0005
P & Z CASE #97-41
WHEREAS, the applicant, Chuck Downey, has applied for a front yard, side
yard, and street frontage variance on parcel A and a street frontage variance on parcel B to
allow for a minor subdivision of the land located at 2051 Arbor Lane, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA Single Family
Residential Zoning District which according to City Code requires a minimum lot area of
6,000 square feet, and 40 feet of lot frontage on an improved city street, and;
WHEREAS, the existing accessory building on parcel A is O. 1' from the front
yard and 1.8' from the side yard requiring variances of 19.9' and 4.2' respectively, and;
WHEREAS, the property is located adjacent to the unimproved Wakefield
Avenue, and;
WHEREAS, the possibilities of a future street extension have been reviewed
by staff and determined that cost and feasibility factors would severely limit any extension
possibilities, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has proposed a private driveway as an alternative
to a fully improved public street to afford access to both parcels and would be located on
the right-of-way, and;
WHEREAS, the City assumes no responsibility for maintenance or
reconstruction of the private driveways in the event utility access is needed, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
recommended approval of the variance recommend by staff, and;
Downey o 2051 Arbor Lane
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby grant a 19.9 foot front yard setback, 4.2 foot side yard
setback variance for the accessory building and a non conforming lot frontage on an
improved street variances for parcel A and a non conforming lot frontage on an
improved street variance for parcel B to allow a minor subdivision of the property as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
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 improvements:
Allowing a minor subdivision of the property.
This variance is granted for the following legally described property as stated in the
Hennepin County Property Information System:
LOTS 6 & 7, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, HENNEPIN COUNTY,
MINNESOTA.
o
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.
6. 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:
The following Councilmembers voted in the'negative:
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55447
Telephone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineers
Planners
Surveyors
RECEIVED ,,.,, 5 1998
May 4, 1998
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound
1998 Seal Coat Program
MFRA #6173
Dear Mayor and Concilmembers:
Enclosed is a tabulation of the bids received on Thursday, April 30, 1998, for the 1998 Seal Coat
Program. Bids ranges from a low of $28,767.50, submitted by Asphalt Surface Technologies (Astech
Corp.) to a high of $35,000.00. The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $29,225.00
We have worked with Astech Corp. on seal coat projects in other municipalities and have been
satisfied with their performance. Therefore, we are recommending that Astech Corp. be awarded a
contract in the amount of $28,767.50.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:pry
enclosure
e:~nain:\6173\astech5-1
An Equal Opportunity Employer
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUEgDAY, MAY 12, 19 g, 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.
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.
*A. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28, 1998, REGULAR MEETING.
1503-1509
*B & *C WERE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS
TOGETHER BUT WITH TWO RESOLUTIONS.
1501
*B. CASE 9%45: MINOR SUBDIVISION, CHUCK DOWNEY, 2051 ARBOR LANE, LOTS 6 & 7,
SKARP 7 LINDQUISTS RAVENSWOOD, PID#13-117-24 41 0005.
1510-1538
*C. CASE 97-41: VARIANCE, FRONT YARD SETBACK,
DOWNEY, 2051 ARBOR LANE, LOTS 6
RAVENSWOOD, PID# 13-117-24 41 0005.
1539-1541
SIDE YARD SETBACK, CHUCK
& 7, SKARP & LINDQUISTS
*D. BID AWARD:
1542-1543
1998 SEALCOATING PROGRAM.
*E. APPROVAL OF RELEASE OF $168,750.00 FROM THE LETTER OF CREDIT FOR MAPLE
MANORS.
1544-1545
*F. PAYMENT OF BILLS.
1546-1562
1502
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
PUBLIC HEARING: CASE 98-06: ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING), 4901
SHORELINE DRIVE, JAMES JOHNSON/DAVE MOORE, LOT 6, BLOCK 3, SHIRLEY HILLS
1563-15U75NIT A, P ID#13-117-24 4~..1(~2.
1512
o
AREA ON WILSHIRE BLVD.
1576-1584
CONTINUED DISCUSSION: COST OF SEDIMENT REMOVAL FROM PROPOSED FISHING
1513
7. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Department Head Monthly Reports for April 1998.
1585-1616
B. Rule B Stormwater Management Recommendations
announcement regarding next Task Force meeting.
1617-1634
of the Stormwater Task Force
and
Committee of the Whole meeting, Tuesday, May 19, 1998, 7:30 p.m.
D. REMINDER:
HRA meeting, Tuesday, May 12, 1998, 7:00 p.m.
E. REMINDER:
WCCB meeting Thursday, May 21, 1998, 7:00 p.m., City Hall.
Joyce Nelson, Recycling Coordinator, has indicated that a private firm has made arrangements to
establish a compost site near Watertown at the former Ecklund Tree Service property. It is
approximately 12 miles from Mound. The proposal is subject to various permit approvals but it
could be available sometime next Spring. In addition, Hennepin County, at its I_ake Minnetonka
Regional Park site, has indicated that they would be willing, starting in the fall of this year, to take
leaves. Leaves would have to be hauled by the City. Residents could not use this for a drop off
site.
1514
n~
0
n
ZZ
~7
t_z
I--
do d d
O0 0 0
01~ ~0 CO
o 0 0
C~
0 I~ 0
0 0 0 0
0 t~ 0
~ 0 0
~ Iz) 0
I",,- ~ 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
t~ 0 0
I:0 I.~ 0
<z z
0 0 0
0 tl~ ~0
0 o4
May, 7, 1998 9'06AM 1,~CCOI~BS [RANK ROOS No, 2262 P, 2/3
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc,
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55~.47
Telel~hone
612/476-6010
612/476-8532 FAX
Engineel.
Planners
Surveyors
May 7, 1998
Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood RoM
Mound, Minnesota 55364
SUBJECT:
City of Mound
Maple Manors
Letter of Credit
MFRA #1 la17
Dear Ed:
Enclosed is a copy of a letter from Coffin and Crronberg, the engineer for Waters Edge Development
requesting a partial release of funds from the letter of credit for work completed to date on said
project. They have not requested an mount, only listed the remaining work. We have reviewed the
project and put dollar mounts to the incomplete items and have concluded there is approximately
$15,000.00 of work left on the project. The original letter of credit was for $187,500.00; therefore,
we are recommending that 90% or $168,750.00 can be released at this time. The remaining 10%
($18,750.00) should be retained umil this project is totally complete. We have also reviewed this
project with G'reg Skinner and he agrees with our findings.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC.
John Cameron
JC:pry
Enclosure
cc: Joel Zylman, Waters Edge Development
Mark Oronberg, Coffin and Oronberg
Jori Sutherland, City of Mound
¢;'a'nain:\11417~shukleS-?
An Equal Ol~nunlty Employer
COFFIN & 0WON~J~G. INC.
47J-4 t4!
Ap'n] 28, 1998
Dear Johr~
The only kctm r~maining for MAPLE MANORS ~ thc ~o~ t~k ~g ~ ~ ~t~us
~ co~. I al~ know t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ou k~ w~ ~y ~ ou~~.
PI~ r~ tM letter nf credit to
COFFIN 8: GRON-BERG. INC.
Mark $. Grunt~'r8, P.i-.'. & [.$.
MSG/cr
Bills
· May 12, 1998
Batch 8043
Batch 8044
Total Bills
$ 96,424.67
116,802.38
$213,227.05
o~
o
.J
o~
00000~
oo~oo6
oob-~,obo
IS~O
z
'2
i ~1, II,
o,o
/
Z
0
o
?
8
go og oo oo
L~I t~ LU cc.I uJ
May 12 1998
RESOLUTION TO ALLOW A ZONING AMENDMENT,
FROM A R-lA TO A R-2 ZONING DISTRICT
FOR THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS,
LOT 6, BLOCK 3, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT A
PID 13-117-24 44 0032,
P & Z CASE #98-06
WHEREAS, the applicant, James Johnson, has applied for a rezoning
amendment from an R-lA to a R-2 Zoning District at 4901 Shoreline Drive, and;
WHEREAS, the subject property has been vacant for a number of years, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant also owns the adjacent lots 1 through 5 which are
zoned R-2 Two Family Residential, and;
WHEREAS, the zoning amendment would be keep the zoning consistent with
the current property ownership, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a hearing on the proposed rezoning
and has determined the amendment would be consistent with the surrounding properties,
and;
WHEREAS, previous zoning code revisions were made to adjacent parcels,
changing zoning district names and boundaries and it appears that this parcel was intended
to be included in those revisions, and;
WHEREAS, the rezoning would clarify the intent of previous zoning actions to
rezone this parcel, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and
recommended approval of the zoning amendment recommend by staff, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby grant a rezoning from R-lA to a R-2 as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
The City Council authorizes the Zoning Amendment set forth below, pursuant to
Section 350:520 of the Zoning Ordinance.
May 12, 1998
Johnson/Moore - 4901 Shoreline Dr
Page 2
This Zoning Amendment is granted for the following legally described property as
stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System:
LOT 1, EXCEPT THE EAST 3.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 1 AND EXCEPT THAT PART OF SAID LOT 1
WHICH LIES NORTHEASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT
1 , DISTANT 10.00 FEET SOUTH FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 , TO A POINT
ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1, DISTANT 15.00 FEET WEST FROM SAID NORTHEAST
CORNER AND LOTS 2 TO 6 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 3, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT A, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF ON FILE OR OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES IN AND FOR
SAID COUNTY, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
This Zoning-Arnen..d_me___~nt sha I be recorded with the Countv Rc.e. nrder _.~-the Registrar
of Titles in Hennepin (~u~ State Statute, Section 462.36,
Subdivision (~considered a re~~o~ how this property may be
used. -
The property owner _ _ e the res --' ng t ~s resolutio~ with
Hennepin Count~ c_o~111~,-~~building permit for the
subj~hall not be issued until proof of record~n-h'g-he~been filed with
the ' Clerk.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by
Councilmember.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Attest: City Clerk
Mayor
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
April 27, 1998
MINUTES
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1998
Those present: Chair Geoff Michael, Orv Burma, Frank Weiland, Becky Glister, Bill Voss, Cklair
Hasse, Michael Mueller, Council Liaison Mark Hanus. Staff Present: Assistant Planner Loren
Gordon, and Secretary Kris Linquist. Absent and Excused: Jerry Clapsaddle, Building Official
Jon Sutherland.
Public Present: Robed Wroda, Dave Moore, James Johnson, Joel Reinitz, Muriel Reinitz
Meeting was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Chair Geoff Michael
Chair Michael introduced and welcomed new Planning Commissioner Cklair Hasse.
MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 13, 1998 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
There were no corrections to the Minutes
MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Burma to approve the Minutes of the April 13,
1998 Planning Commission Meeting, Motion carried 8-0,
Chair Michael explained how a Public Hearing is addressed.
BOARD OF APPEALS:
CASE # 98-06: PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING AMENDMENT, JAMES JOHNSON/DAVE
MOORE, 4901 SHORELINE DRIVE, LOT 6, BLOCK 3,SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT A, PID # 13-
117-24 44 0032
Loren Gordon presented the case.
The applicant is proposing to build a 6 unit twinhome development on the vacant parcel at the
corner of Shoreline and Norwood Avenue. The twinhomes share a common attached wall with
each home on its own lot. The developer believes the market for these homes is for senior
residents and has designed the units to accommodate this lifestyle. Each unit would be
comprised of approximately 1600 feet of living space on one"level.
To accommodate the development the applicant has filed requests for a Rezoning, preliminary
plat, and lot size and hardcover variances. After the notices were published for the Rezoning
and preliminary plat hearings, it was discovered that the conditional use permit had been
overlooked both by the applicant and staff. Because the notices had been published it was
determined that this meeting should proceed as planned and the CUP hearing could follow at
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
Apdl 27, 1998
the 1s' meeting in May. Because the plat, CUP, and variance are tied to the site plan, ideally
they need to be addressed simultaneously. So, there are two approaches the Planning
Commission could take. The first would be hear the issues as scheduled and put a continuance
on them for the next meeting when the CUP would be held. Staff recommends this approach.
The second approach would be table the preliminary plat and variances until the next meeting,
but hear the Rezoning. Rezoning is not a site plan issue and could move through the process
independently.
The requests are being addressed comprehensively in this report for discussion purposes.
Rezoning Request
The request is to rezone the existing lot 6 of Shirley Hills Unit A Block 3 from R-lA to R-2. Lots
1 - 5 are currently zoned R-2. The lot measures 50 feet by 145.7 feet and encompasses 7,285
sf which conforms with the current R-lA district zoning regulations. The property has been
vacant for a number of years with the last use of the property being a staging area during the
County Road 15 reconstruction project.
The surrounding neighborhood is primarily single-family homes with the exception of the
apartment complexes north and west of the site along Shoreline Drive. Adjacent zoning is R-2
generally along the Shoreline Drive frontage and R-lA south of the property to Bartlett Blvd.
The zoning map shows this property as being on the division line between single family and two
family zoning districts.
In weighing the merits of the rezoning request a number of issues should be considered. These
include but are not limited to the following:
Comprehensive Plan - This parcel is shown as a single family residential.
Utilities - The parcel is currently vacant and has no immediate impact on utility systems. Future
water and sewer usage as proposed would be similar to typical single family residential
development. Storm water runoff would be higher than normal for the property as proposed
with hardcover percentages approaching 46 percent.
Transportation - The parcel places no immediate impact on the street system. Norwood Drive
is currently unimproved and will need improvement to city standards. The proposed
development would produce traffic volumes similar to the surrounding neighborhood.
Neighborhood Character - The rezoning of the lot would add the potential for an additional two
unit dwelling. The zoning map shows the this parcel is north of the dividing line that runs
east/west through the neighborhood.
The parcel appears to have been left out of the process when changes to the R-lA district were
made. This rezoning would clarify the intent of the last rezoning and even out the R-lA/R-2
boundary.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to Council the
following:
The rezoning request be approved.
15/,/,,
Mound Planning Commission Minutes
April 27, 1998
DISCUSSION:
REZONING:
Mueller questioned if anyone knew why lot 6 was left R-lA. Weiland commented that he had
no recollection why this took place.
Weiland commented by changing the zoning it would even the zoning district out.
Chair Michael opened the Public Hearing.
Joel Reinitz (son of Mr Reinitz - 2308 Fernside Lane)- 2610 Halstead Lane, questioned when
lots 1-5 were zoned R-2.
Chair Michael closed the Public Hearing.
Mueller commented that it would be a good idea to change lot 6 to 1:{-2 zoning.
MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Voss to approve the rezoning
amendment. Motion carried 8-0.
This Public Hearing will go to City Council on May 12, 1998
1,5¥2
612-]3~6838 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 53~ P02 APR 24 '98 14:07
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
imm
mn
TO: Mound Council, Planning Commi-~sion and Staff
FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP
DATE: April 27, 1998
SUBJECT: Rezoning, Preliminary Pht, and Variance Requests
OWNER: Jim Johnson- 4901 Shoreline Drive
CASE NUMBER: 95-05, 95-06, and 9g-07
HKC FILE NUMBER: 95-5c, e, and f
LOCATION: 4901 Shoreline Drive
ZONING: R-1A Single Family and R-2 Two Family Residential District
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing to build a 6 unit twinhon~
development on the vacant parcel at the corner of Shoreline and Norwood Avenue. The
twinhomes share a common attached wall with each home on its own lot. The developer believes
the market for these homes is for senior residents and has designed the units to accommodate this
lifestyle. Each unk would be comprised of approximately 1600 feet of living space on one level.
To accommodate the development thc applicant has filed requests for a rezoning, preliminary plat,
and lot size and hardcover variances. After thc notices were published for the rezoning and
pmlknh~ary plat hearings, k was discovered that the conditional use permit had been overlooked
both by the applicant and staff. Because the notices had been published it was determin~-d that this
meeth~g should proceed as planned and the CUP hearing could follow at the 1'~ meeting in May.
Because the plat, CUP, and variance are tied to the site plan, ideally they need to be addressed
simultameously. So, there are two approaches the Plauning Commission could take. The fa-st
would be hear the issues as scheduled and put a continuance on them for the next meeting when
the CUP would be held. Staff recommends this approach. The second approach would be table
the preliminary plat and variances until the next meeting, but ~hear the rezoning. Rezoning is not a
ske plan issue and could move through the process independently.
The requests are being addressed comprehensively in th~ report for discussion purposes.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Miuue~ota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fm(-612) 338-6838
61~-35~685~ HOISINGTON KOEGLER
5]~ ~0~ ~PR ~ '98 14:08
p. 2
4902 Shoreline Drive - Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance Requests
April 27, 1998
Preliminary Plat
The first item of this request is approval of a preliminary plat. Essentially, the proposed
subdivision adjusts the existing lot lines to gain to the appropriate amouat of yard space needed
for build/ag setbacks. Lots 2 - 6 are platted to the 40 feet m/rdmum R-2 district standard. Lot 1 is
platted at 57* feet to compensate for its irregular shape. The existing platted lots vary in width
ranging from 50+ feet for lot 6 down to 40 feet and less for lots 1 and 2. Lot areas al.xo vary
ranging from 5,828 sffor lots 2 - 5 to 8,137 sftbr lot 6.
The proposed improvements to go ',dong wi~ ~he development are conceptual at this point due to
the necessary road improvements. This is the largest issue with tiffs project and will ultimately
determine its fate. Norrn~lly when land is subdivided with street improvements, the property on
each side of the road is par[ of the development. In tt~ case only one side of the street is
proposed for development leaving the developer to address a ~11 street improvement w/th ha.If the
normal number of lots. Tkis sam: situation has kept other development proposals for this property
from being implemented. Because of ~e requirements for access and other irdrastructure
improvements, the remaining unimproved street must be installed. The total unimproved street
section is approximately 275 feet long. The proposed development would be required to pay for
half of its cost. The developer is not willing to install the full length of Norwood with out
assistance. The developer has discussed this with ~e neighboring property owners to find their
interest in participating in the street improvements. None of the owners were willing to pay
upfront for the necessary improvements, but may be willing to accept a deI~rred assessment which
would be paid at the point in time their properties developed.
At this time, the developer has requested to continue moving forward with the proposal asking
the City's assistance to pay ~br the balance of the roadway costs. The City's costs could in turn be
placed back on each property along the unknproved street as a deferred assessment. This would
be placed on the property to be carried until the point in time that development occurs whom the
property would repay the City for that portion of the construction costs plus any accrued interest
charges. In all likel/hood, ff the City does not choose to enter into this agreement, the
development as proposed will probably not happen. The situation places the risk in the City's
hands up front by pa55ng for knprovements that may not be realized for some time. The up side is
the improvements may act as a stimulus to development of these parcels that have been vacant for
a number of years thereby generating additional revenue for the City.
The street improvements that are involved in the development include Norwood Avenue which is
currently unimproved for that portion fronting on the site. T~hem is a gravel and soil base exBts
M'rich defines an approximate improved street location. Currently, the street is used as a cut
through to Bartlett Boulevard during dry weather. The southern 150 feet of Norwood is improved
as it connects to Bartlett Blvd.
Other improvements the developer would be required to install include sardtary sewer and water
mains along the unimproved road section. Existing infrastructure improvements in Norwood
include storm sewer. Sidewalk is not shown on the preliminary plat but would also need to be
123 North Third StreeL'Suit¢ 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax(612)335-6838 L~
612-~$68S8 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 5~ P04 APR 24 '98 14:08
p.$
4901 Shoreline Drive - Rezoning, Preliminar}' Plat, and Variance Requests
April 27. I998
installed. Street improvements along Shoreline Drive are complete with full street, sidewalk, curb
and gutter. No additional improvements are proposed to this street with the proposal.
Variance Requests
The th/rd request i.~ for variances to lot area and hardcover. The variances are listed below.
R. equired Yariance
Lot area
Lot 2 5828 sf 7000 sf 1172 sf
Lot 3 5828 sf 7000 sf 1172 sf
Lot 4 5828 sf 7000 sf 1172 sf
Lot 5 5828 sf 7000 sf 1172 sf
Lot 6 5853 sf 7000 sf 1147 sf
Hardcover
Lot 2 2672 sf 1748 sf 924 sf
Lot 3 2672 sf 1748 sf 924 sf
Lot 4 2672 sf 1748 sf 924 sf
Lot 5 2672 sf 1748 sf 924 sf
Lot 6 2672 sf 1755 sf 917 sf
Twinhomes are regulated under a conditional use permit requiring a 7,000 sf lot area. The request
would create 5 newly subdivided lots with a nonconforming status. The variances to the lot area
are 17 percent dev/ation from the standard size. The requested hardcover variances also reflect
that there ~s too much building and pavement for these undersized lots.
Rezoning Request
The request ks to rezone the existing lot 6 of S~'ley Iqilk Unit A Block 3 from R-lA to R-2: Lots
1 - 5 are currently zoned R-2. The lot measures 50 feet by 145.7 feet and encompasses 7,285 sf
wh/ch conforms with the current R-iA district zordng regulations. The property ha_q been vacant
for a number of years with the last use of the property being a staging area during the County
Road 15 reconstruction project.
The surrounding neighborhood is primarily single-family homes with the exception of the
apartment complexes north and west of the site along Shoreline Drive. Adjacent zoning is R-2
generally along the Shoreline Drive frontage and R-I A south of the property to Bartlett Blvd. The
zoning map shows this property as being on the division line ?tween single family and two family
zmfing dkstricts.
tn weighing the merits of the rezoning request a number of issues should be considered. These
include but are not limited to the following:
1. Comprehensive Plan - This parcel is shown as a single family residential.
I23 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 33g-0800 Fax-(612) 338-6838
6!2-S5868S8 HOISINGTON KOEGLER 55-~ P05 RPR 24 '98 14:09
'4901 Shoreline Drive - Rezoning, Prelimina~ Plat, and Variance Requests
April 27, 1998
2. Utilities - The parcel is currently vacaat and has no immediate impact on utility systems.
Future water and sewer usage as proposed would be similar to typical $iagle family residential
development. Storm water runoff would be higher than normal for the property ~ proposed
with hardcover percentages approaching 46 percent.
3. Transportation - The parcel places ~o immediate impact on the street system. Norwood Drive
is currently unimproved and w~l need ~provement to city staadards. The proposed
development would produce traffic volumes s~ilar to the surrounding neighborhood.
4. Neighborhood Character - The rezomg of the lot would add the potential for aa additional
two unit dwelling. The zoning map shows the this parcel is north of the dividiag 13ac that runs
east/west through the neighborhood.
The parcel appears to have been lef~ out of the process when changes to the R-IA district were
made. This rezoning would clarify the iatent of the last rezoniag and even out the R-lA/R-2
boundary.
RECOMMENI)ATION: Staff recommends the PlanEmg Commission recommend to Council
the foUowing:
1. The Prelbn~ary Plat as submitted be denied based on the small lot sizes.
2. The Lot Area and Hardcover Vafi~ces as requested be denied.
3. The rezoning request be approved.
123 Nm-th Third Streq_ t, Suit~ 100, MinneapoE~, Minnr.,sota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
ZONING AMENDMENT APPLICATION
City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472~0620
FEB i 3 1998
Planning Commission Date: ~'fl"q~(~,
City Council Date: b-~- I q"qb
Zoning Amendment Fee: $250.00
Distribution: ..-~-/~-gf City Planner ar,~-,/CT-~)y Public Works
d~-/q- 9~ City Engineer ,~.'-/q-?~ DNR
Applicant
Name _.7-~,^,'I ~ 3 :~,
Address .~.T~t (~, ,~c,~ ~.
Phone (H)
(W) ~ .....
I AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
__1
It is requested that Section 350: of the Mound Zoning Ordinance be amended as
follows:
Reason for amendment:
I
~.,~1 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP / ZONING DISTRICT
It is requested that the_prop_erty described below and shown on the attached site plan be rezoned from
Address & Address
Legal of Lot ~> Block
Subject Addition .c~j~,'r-t~_t~ ]-~.";~'q tr.z~o,'7t ~.
Prope~y PI Dg/.?-//7- ~4 ~- ~- OO ,.~ Plat
Owner of Name ~Tt/'~P/~ ~
Subject Site Address ~7~ /D T~ ~ ~. ~/~O~k~ ~, ~i
Phone (H) (W) ~- ~ (M)
Present Use of
Property ~O ~
Reason for
Amendment /~ ~'/' j., /~'" .~ /o~
A~p~p~..ant's_ Signature.'~~/J Date ~,'"-
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR
DAVE MOORE
IN LOTS 1-6, BLOCK 5,
SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT A
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
.............
· -5~- ,'~ i --T- ~
~ ',;~l .... :/- ---i~- .............
............
LEGAL DESCRPTBN OF PR~S:
Lot 1, except t~ E~t 5.00 feet of aeid Lot t ~ except t~t ~t of se~d Lot 1 which lles N~eest~ly of o llne
fr~ o point on the Eest line of auld Lot 1, dlst~t 10.00 feet South from ~e Non.est corner of seid Lot 1, to ~ point on
~e ~th li~ of auld Lot 1, diat~t 15.O0 feet West fr~ sold ~rtheest corner ~
Lots 2 tc 6 in.ire.
~ck 5, ~i~ey H~s, ~it A, ~c~ding to the ~ thereof on file or of record in ~ office of the Registr~ of Titles
f~ aoid C~ty.
This s~vey int~s to ~ow t~ bo~ies of ~ ebove descried prop~ty, ~d ~e ~ceti~
of ~ existi~ ~, if ~y, thereo~ It does ~t p~p~t to ~o* ~y oth~ i~ove~nts or ~c~oec~ents.
F
FE
MOUND
ECEIVED
B 1 9 1998
PLANNING & INSP.
j,s?3
ROSEDALE RD
.2
~ ,'-,% o EOGEW'ATFR
?o
2O
4,s
i5
(6,;~ i
( 65)
J
~::~'~sm 4 i(43)~,
:' eo F q0 16o
~2¢.95 ~ I~O 53
6 '~ 'x ~ ~
(~4)1, (62) (~.) i, 6~.2 !.=_:~_
NORTHERN
52,.
16
(43) "' 1' 144
~ ]44
135 ~.~ !44
? ~!~i~ (,)',''
135 . ~ i 144
~[ ,5
RD
(88)
-0_8 -% -____.~
SURVEY LTNE
'/'-
~7')
SURVEY ON FILE?
REQUIRED STREET FRONTAGEANIDTH: ~(~ /
EXISTING LOT WIDTH:
LOT OF RECORD? YES / NO /
EXIST. LOT AREA:
REQUIRED SETBACKS
PRINCIPAL BUILDING/ HOUS,F?~.~ /
FRONT: N S E W '
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W /~_,J(_ ~i0?q-f(~'-01~-' ~
SIDE: N S S W ~CCF~
R~R: N S E W 15'
~KESHORE: 50' (measured from O.H.W.)
TOP OF BLUFF:
ACCESSORY BUILDING/GARAGE/SHED
FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W 4' or 6'
SIDE: N S E W 4,' or 6'
REAR: N S E W 4'
LAKESHORE:
TOP OF BLUFF:
50' (measured from O.H.W.)
EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED SETBACKS:
PRINCIPAL BUILDING/HOUSE
ACCESSORY BUILDING/GARAGE/SHED
FRONT: N S E W FRONT: N S E W
FRONT: N S E W FRONT: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W SIDE: N S E W
SIDE: N S E W SIDE: N S E W
REAR: N S E W REAR: N S E W
LAKESHORE: LAKESHORE:
TOP OF BLUFF: TOP OF BLUFF:
HAR~D'~O_V~R CONFORMING? YES / NO / ? IS THIS PROPERTY CONFORMING? YES / NO I 7
this Ge~er~ Zoning Information Sheet only summanzes a portion of the requirements outlined in the City of Mound Zoning
Ordinance. For further information, contact the City of Mound Planning Department at 472-0600.
~'3° 2~3.3
il
"o l-lq CD
CZ) ~
(92) 11'
. l&~.J ~_ _
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAY1NOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
APRIL 27, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SEDIMENT REMOVAL FROM PROPOSED FISHING AREA ON
WILSHIRE BOULEVARD.
The day after the City Council meeting on April 14, 1998 I
made contact with Minnetonka Portable Dredge for a update
for the 1997 estimate for the storm drain sediment removal
on Wilshire Boulevard.
At this time they have not been able to re-evaluate their
1997 estimate due to the early ice out on Lake Minnetonka
causing their work schedule to be full.
I did talk briefly with the owner, Bill Niccum, today and he
said that there would only be a small increase from the 1997
estimate as long as Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
(MCWD) does not require that a floating barrier be
installed.
At this time I can not respond to the actual cost until Mr.
Niccum has the time to look at the 1997 figures and has
gotten a response from MCWD on the barrier.
I will submit this information as soon as it is received.
printed on recycled paper
MI ETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING Co.
Bill & Tom Niccum
500 West Lake Street
Exc~elsior, Minnesota 55331
Bus. 474-9454 Fax 474-6712 Home 472-3457
City of Mound
% Jim Fackler
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Mn. 55364
April 30, 1998
Dear Sir,
This is a proposal to remove some silt and sand washed into the lake in front of the storm
sewer drain at the southwest comer of the horse shoe channel in Black Lake. This drains
from Wilshire Blvd.
This proposal is to dig the area to a depth of 925.6 with a proper slope. This will blend
into the existing bottom..
Depth soundings were taken on 4/28/94 and the lake level was 929.64.
This channel is very narrow with docks and boats moored along one side, if some of
these docks and boats have to be moved, it will be the Cities responsibiti~-.
Total cost of the project is $2,200.00
Any questions please call.
Thank you
Bill Niccfim
1.13
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- APRIL 24, 1998
RECOMMENDATION FROM DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY
COMMISSION REGARDING A PROPOSED FISHING SITE OFF WILSHIRE
BLVD.
The Park Director explained that a member of the DCAC proposed that a fishing area be
established for the neighborhood residents who would like to utilize it.
The motion passed by the DCAC was as follows: "MOTION by Goldberg, seconded by
Hopkins to consider this on a 1-year test basis limiting it to dredging of the sediment in front
of the storm drain (funding by the street fund), with removal by barge and treatment of milfoil.
If no funds are available from the street fund, the dock fund would be used. Motion carried,
3-1."
The Mayor asked if there was anyone present who would like to discuss this item.
The following persons stated they are opposed to this:
Jonathan Paul, 4679 Wi[shire Blvd., submitted the following petition signed by 15
people:
"Petition Against Proposed Fishing Site on Back-Waters/Channel Area on Black
Lake.
We the neighborhood residents adjacent to and across from the proposed public
fishing site respectfully submit our concerns and request the discontinuation of
this proposed action, for the reasons following:
1. The proposed area is only 3-4 feet deep and the water stays quite warm,
thus inhibiting game fish from inhabiting the said area.
2. The proposed fishing site would impose upon a very peaceful area, the
reason we inhabit the area.
3. Any Mound resident has adequate canoe and row boat access to the main
lake areas as well as many bridge areas where all species of game fish are
more abundant.
4. A public fishing area would draw the "out-side the area" people that
currently fish the Black Lake bridge, etc., and not draw from the general
population of Mound.
5. The proposed site would increase traffic/parking congestion and produce
litter and refuse problems as evident from viewing other "public fishing
sites".
6. While other reasons exist why the proposed site will ill-effect the
immediate area, these are some of. the initial concerns that make
themselves evident."
Ken Ryan, resident of Hopkins, owner of Lots 26, 27 & 28, of which 2 and 3/4 of the
lots are in the lake.
Alan Coley, 4626 Denbigh Road.
Daryl Nehring, 4590 Denbigh Road.
MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- APRIL 24, 1998
The following persons spoke in favor of the proposed fishing area:
Dennis Hopkins, 4609 Wilshire Blvd., stated this area has always been used for fishing
by the neighborhood.
The Council discussed the cost of cleaning up the sediment at the end of the storm sewer,
remove the weeds from the area for fishing and whether it should come from the Street Fund
or the Dock fund. There was also discussion about parking in the area. Councilmember Hanus
stated he does not want the Dock Fund to pay for this. The Council generally agreed that we
should clean up the delta that has built up from the storm sewer but they also wanted to make
sure that $2,000 would cover the cleanup. The Park Director stated that he was going to try
and schedule this when there was another project that someone else might be doing to keep the
cost lower.
MOTION made by Jensen seconded by Weycker directing Staff to get actual costs
on what it will cost to clean up this site by removing the sediment at the outlet of the
storm sewer in the lake and bring this cost back to the Council in two weeks for
review. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
March 31, 1998
TO: City Of Mound Resident / Property Owner
FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Director
SUBJECT: Fishing Site off Wilshire Blvd.
Dear Resident / Owner,
The Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) on March 19,
1998, discussed the creation of a location near your
residence or property for the purpose of providing shore
fishing for neighborhood residents. A notice was sent to
you with all related information en February 10,1998. Please
refer back to that mailing and review the enclosed action
that was taken by the DCAC.
The proposal is to be heard at the City Council level on
April 14, 1998. The location is the Council Chambers at,
Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road. The meeting will begin
at 7:30 pm and will be an agenda item to be discussed that
evening.
This is your opportunity to discuss with the Council
concerns you may have. If you cannot attend please feel free
to write a response and it will be presented at the meeting.
Please address your correspondence to: Jim Fackler, Park
Director, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota
55364. All correspondence must be received no later that
April 8, 1998 in order to be placed in the council packet.
~'~r e 1 y /
cc: DCAC
enclosure
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
DOCK & COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 1998
FISHING AREA PROPOSED ON BLACK LAKE CHANNEL
Hopkins discussed the proposal for a fishing area on Black Lake Channel. He noted areas
on an overhead which would be cleared out in order to have more available shoreline. He
noted it is deep enough for fishing. A resident noted there are only three good weeks of
fishing in the area because of milfoil, and a fishing area would be a waste of money.
Hopkins stated the milfoil would be treated. He noted the area is well used for fishing.
Ken Ryan, owns three lots abuttine this area stated he owns three lots adjacent to this
property. A majority of the lots are under water. He submitted a letter questioning the
ownership of the property, whose idea it was, and funding for the project. He stated he
is opposed to this proposal. He believed it is intended to accommodate only a few
residents. Hopkins stated the purpose is to keep it for the use of the local residents.
Jonathan Paul, 4679 Wilshire stated no parking is permitted on any of the streets in this
area. He discussed discrepancies on the overhead. He explained why he is opposed to the
fishing pier (sic). He stated he didn't believe this is a good fishing area. He was
concerned about after hour activities, need for additional policing, garbage, sanitation
facilities, illegal parking, and trespassing. He believed the money should be used to
improve an already existing area. He submitted a petition of signatures in opposition to
the proposal.
Cary Engelbrightsen, 4626 Bedford Road didn't believe that many more people would
use the area if it were upgraded. He supported the project.
Alan Colev, Denbigh Road believed there is room to fish in the area right now.
suggested only a couple smaller areas be cleared out rather than the entire 100 feet.
He
DOCK & COi~I~ONS CO~24ISSION MEETING - MARCH 19, 1998
Ahrens was concerned about the proposal and the number of people in opposition.
Kathleen Ree, Wilshire Blvd. stated she is opposed to the proposal. She suggested
putting a dock in Black Lake instead.
Darrin Lee, Denbigh Road said he is also opposed to the proposal.
Gene Bagland stated he is opposed to the removal of the brush.
Daryl Nehring. Denbigh stated there is already a fishing area there and was not in favor
of the area being overused.
Hopkins stated he would withdraw the entire idea if space is provided along Stratford.
Funk stated the area would be more usable if the sand washed into the lake is removed in
addition to some milfoil treatment.
Ahrens stated he would be opposed to the proposal.
Goldberg asked if the sand removal and milfoil treatment would be met with the approval
of the residents. Fackler noted the sand would be removed by a barge. He explained how
much of the sand would be removed.
Motion by Goldberg, seconded by Funk to consider this on a 1-year test basis
limiting it to dredging of the sediment and treatment of milfoil.
Ahrens believed the sediment should be funded by the street fund.
Motion by Goldberg, seconded by Hopkins to amend the motion to consider
this on a 1-year test basis limiting it to dredging of the sediment in front of the
storm drain (funding by the street fund) with removal by barge and treatment
of milfoil. If no funds are available in the street fund, the dock fund would be
used. Motion carried 3-1.
Faclder stated this will be going to the City Council on the 14th of April for their final
approval.
0
CLARE LA ~,o
SHANNON LA I
,'~ 60..~./40 40 40 40 4OI40__1L~
~!40 '~O 40 ~0:40
YAC R.~LN
,,.,, EXCELSIOR LA
- - F~o- ..................... '~) ~4
CLARE LA ~.
/\
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MAY 7, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL C-'k/~~/'-
FROM: JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: APRIL 1998 MONTHLY REPORT
PARKS;
With the warm spring weather we have been able to make good
progress on the installation of the new park equipment at
Avon Park. I expect the installation to be complete by the
first two weeks in May.
We are beginning to have our summer staff back which will
help in catching up with th~ needed work. Although the
weather has been warm we did not get much rain so the mowing
has been at a normal pace.
CEMETERY;
The cemetery had no burials but we are already beginning to
prepare it for Memorial Day.
DOCKS;
The dock inspector has been busy with the 1998 renewals and
the staking out of dock locations. At this time there are
over forty individuals on the waiting list for a dock site.
We will only have had only three ten sites open up so we
will not come close to meeting the demand. Also with the
home sales been up we have been receiving a number of calls
checking on dock availability.
The two new multiple slip docks at Avalon and Devon accesses
are not in yet, but will be installed by the middle of May.
TREE REMOVAL;
There was one tree marked for removal on city property.
prmted on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CONSTRUCTION
May 5, 1998
City Manager, Members of the City Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
APRIL 1998 MONTHLY REPORT
ACTIVITY
There were 44 building permits issued in April for a construction value of
$ 498,196. We issued 30 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous permits
for a total of 74 permits this month, and 187 permits year-to-date. Total
valuation now stands at $1,099,648.
The Building Department had one (1) Streamline Permit.
PLANNING & ZONING
The Planning Commission reviewed ten (10) cases and sent five (5) variance
cases and two (2) Minor Subdivision cases to the City Council. The Planning
Commission continued three (3) cases.
kl
prinled on recycled paper
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: APRIL Year: 1998
THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIALNEw CONSTRUCTION II # PERMITS I # UNITS I VALUATION II #UNITS I VALUATION
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED i 1 142,835 2 288,684
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED {CONDOS}
TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX
MULTIPLE FAMILY {3 OR MORE UNITSI
TRANSIENT HSG, (HOTELS / MOTELS}
SUBTOTAL 1 1 142,835 2 288,684
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT}
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS
SUBTOTAL 0 0
~LTERATIONS # PERMITS
ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING 3 9 8,5 0 0 7 2 4 4,5 6 7
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 5 55,943 6 71, 093
DECKS 5 14, 648 9 23, 930
SWIMMING POOLS
REMODEL- MISC RESIDENTIAL 27 132,277 64 374,081
REMODEL- MULTIPLE DWELLINGS I 23,323 t 23,323
SUBTOTAL 41 324 t 691 87 736 t 994
NON-RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT} 1 30,170 2 50,170
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL
INDUSTRIAL 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 0
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
SUBTOTAL 2 30,670 4 73 r 970
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 0 0
# PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION # UNITS VALUATION
# PERMITS
2
TOTAL .
44 1 498,196 93 lr0~,648
PERM,T COU.T I ~H,S MONT..I YEAR-TO DATE
'BUILDING 44 93
FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 8 10
SIGNS 0 2
PLUMBING 14 4 6
MECHANICAL 7 30
GRADING 0 0
S&W, STREET EXCAV.. FIRE, ETC. 1 6
· O,A, I 7q I
GENERAL PERMIT REPORT FOR MONTH OF APRIL 1998
MONTH YEAR DAY PERMIT# ADDRESS
APR 98 1 3957
APR 98 3 3958
APR 98 6 3959
APR 98 6 3960
APR 98 6 3961
APR 98 8 3962
APR 98 7 3963
APR 98 8 3964
APR 98 10 3965
AP R 98 10 3966
APR 98 9 3967
APR 98 14 3968
APR 98 20 3969
APR 98 20 3970
APR 98 21 3971
APR 98 24 3972
APR 98 23 3973
APR 98 23 3974
APR 98 27 3976
APR 98 29 3977
APR 98 29 3985
CONTRACTOR
PERMIT TYPE
5341 FRANKLIN ROAD
1744 AVOCET LN
2208 FAIRVIEW LANE
1933 LAKESIDE LANE
3134 ISLAND VIEW DR
4945 GLEN ELYN ROAD
4617 HANOVER RD
4549 WILSHIRE BLVD
2125 CEDAR LANE
6221 LYNWOOD BLVD
1603 MAPLE MANORS CT
1680 DOVE LANE
5300 LYNWOOD BLVD
1742 RESTHAVEN LANE
4608 MANCHESTER RD
1933 LAKESIDE LANE
6009 RIDGEWOOD RD
1754 RESTHAVEN LANE
2984 PELICAN POINT CIR
2231 SOUTHVIEW LANE
5621 BARTLETT BLVD
CLEARWATER PLUMBING
MN WATER TREATMENT
BREDAHL PLUMBING
GENERAL P & H
CULLIGAN WATER
DITTER INC
JON MEYER
PAUL PAINE
NSP
A TRUST A AARONS
GENERAL P & H
CUSTOM PLUMBING
FRANK NIESEN
BARRY RETTKE
NORBLOM PLUMBING
GAYLE PERSON
PLUMB
PLUMB
PLUMB
PLUMB
PLUMB
MECH
PLUMB
PLUMB & MECH
ST EXCAV
MECH
PLUMB
PLUMB
MECH
MECH
PLUMB
MECH
HEATING & COOLING TWO MECH
AL'S MASTER PLUMBING PLUMB
SURGE WATER COND PLUMB
PAUL ANDERSON PLUMB
PLUMBING SYSTEMS PLUMB
n
Z
0
z
Z ~
Z~
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, 1998
The police department responded to 998 calls for service during the month
of April. There were 42 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included
5 burglaries, 4 vehicle thefts, and 33 larcenies.
There were 69 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 8 child
abuse/neglect, 2 forgery/NSF checks, 7 narcotics, 3 damage to property, 6
liquor law violation, 3 DUI's, 7 simple assaults, 6 domestics (3 with
assaults), 3 harassment's, 12 juvenile status, and 12 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 99 adult citations and 3 juvenile citations.
Parking violations accounted for an additional 54 tickets. Warnings were
issued to 51 individuals for a variety of violations.
There were 7 juveniles arrested for a felonies. There were 20 adults and
20 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 2
felony warrants and 5 misdemeanor warrant arrests.
The department assisted in 4 vehicle accidents, 2 with injuries. There
were 28 medical emergencies and 52 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 16 occasions and requested assistance twice in April.
Property valued at $39,406 was stolen in April.
/5?o
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - April, 1998
II.
HI.
INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 7 child protection issues accounting for 39
hours of investigative time. Other cases included adult protection, false
imprisonment, witness tampering, assault, burglary, disorderly conduct,
child endangerment, terroristic threats, damage to property, forgery, NSF
checks, narcotics, theft, harassment, tampering with a motor vehicle, and
absenting.
Formal complaints were issued for gross misdemeanor DWI, assault,
violation of an order for protection, underage consumption, marijuana in a
motor vehicle, criminal damage to property, reckless driving, harassing
phone calls, disorderly conduct, public nuisance, and DWI.
Personnel/Staffing
The department used approximately 99 hours of overtime during the
month of April. Officers used 1 hours of comp-time, 16 hours of vacation,
18 hours of sick time, and 1 holiday. Officers earned 47 hours of comp
time.
Four officers were sent to assist in St. Peter in response to a mutual aid
request.
IV.
TRAININO
Officers attended training in firearms during the month of April. All
officers received training in the use of the automatic emergency
defibrillators and defensive tactics. Several officers attended a Covey
leadership seminar and two officers attended field training officer
schooling. Other courses included juvenile legal updates, interviewing
skills, sexual assault symposium, intoxilyzer certification, emergency
preparedness, and the Minnesota Chiefs Executive Training Institute.
COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICERS
Officer Piper addressed 12 animal complaints, 17 ordinance violations,
and 103 miscellaneous calls for services.
The Mound Police Reserves donated 215.9 hours to the community in the
month of April. There are currently nine reserve officers working with
the department.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1998
OFFENSES CLEARF. D EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED
REPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARF/) ARREST ADULT JUV
PART I CRIMES
Homicide
Criminal Sexual Conduct
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny
Vehicle Theft
Arson
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
33 0 2 3 0 5
4 0 0 1 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL
PART II CRIMES
Child Abuse/Neglect
Forgery/NSF Checks
Criminal Damage to Property
Weapons
Narcotic Laws
Liquor Laws
DWI
Simple Assault
Domestic Assault
Domestic (No Assault)
Harassment
Juvenile Status Offenses
Public Peace
Trespassing
All Other Offenses
42 0 2 4 0 7
8 0 0 1 1 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 1 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 7 5 2
6 0 0 6 4 2
3 0 0 3 3 0
7 0 1 2 0 1
3 0 1 1 2 0
3 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 1 0 0 0
12 0 0 11 0 13
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 5 5 0
TOTAL
69 0 3 37 20 20
PART II & PART IV
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Mutual Aid
Other General Investigations
TOTAL
2
2
0
28
52
16
752
852
HCCP
Inspections
TOTAL
8
17
998
41
2O
27
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT APRIL 1998
GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY
Hazardous Citations
Non-Hazardous Citations
Hazardous Warnings
Non-Hazardous Warnings
Verbal Warnings
Parking Citations
DWI
Over .10
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Adult Felony Arrests
Adult Misdemeanor Arrests
Juvenile Felony Arrests
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests
Part I Offenses
Part II Offenses
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Ordinance Violations
Other Public Contacts
THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR
MONTH DATE TO DATE
50 224 391
47 218 306
13 74 103
38 195 307
73 339 271
54 184 327
3 19 35
2 11 28
2 29 32
2 10 14
0 0 0
2 7 13
25 133 157
7 17 7
20 68 36
42 109 66
69 241 254
28 113 100
52 178 216
17 98 92
752 3,379 2,622
TOTAL
1,298 5,646 5,377
Assists 37 208 252
Follow-Ups 149 253 166
HCCP 8 23 12
Mutual Aid Given 16 67 41
Mutal Aid Requested 2 10 34
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1998
CITATIONS
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
ADU~
3
2
0
2
0
43
5
0
9
1
1
0
9
0
6
1
0
54
0
1
0
1
10
153
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
APRIL 1998
WARNING~
Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony
Misdemeanor
Adult
15
13
12
0
1
2
0
0
0
4
47
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Kun: 29-Apr-98 12:11 PRO03
Primary ISN's only: No
3a~e Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
Activity codes: All
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:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals
Prop type Totals
Prop type Totals
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Prop type Totals:
Report Totals:
17,400 0 1.000
830 180 3.000
43 0 4.000
83 83 1.000
623 0 2.000
640 0 3.000
182 20 6.000
100 0 1.000
2,555 0 6.000
13,500 0 3.000
2,221 0 11.000
50 0 1.000
1,179 20 10.000
39,406 303 52.000
/,.,'""; 2
Run: 29-Apr-98 10:54 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
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 N-~MBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING 43
9001 J-SPEEDING 2
9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 5
9014 STOP SIGN 1
9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 9
9024 ILLEGAL/UNSAFE TURNS 1
9027 J-OVER THE CENTER LINE 1
9034 STOP A/~ VIOLATION 1
9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 1
9040 NO SEATBELT 1
9100 PARKING/ALL OT~ER 9
9140 NO PARKING/WINTER HOURS 45
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 2
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 9
9220 NO INS%rR3~CE/PROOF OF 6
9222 OVERWEIGHT VEHICLE 10
9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 3
9300 LOST ARTICLES/OTHER 3
9301 LOST PERSONS 1
9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 2
9313 FOUND PROPERTY 14
9314 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED 2
Page
Run: 29-Apr-98 10:54 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
HOW Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
ACTIVITY CODE
DESCRIPTION
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS
9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS
9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC.
9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS
9710 MEDICAL/ASU
9730 MEDIC ALS
MEDICALS/DX
9732 MEDICALS/CI
9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED
9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT
9810 LOITERING/LURKING
9811 J-LOITERING/LURKING
9900 ALL HCCP CASES
9904 OPEN DOOR/AI~RMS
9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
9930 HANqDGUN APPLICATION
9932 OFP VIO. CRIME CONlT{OL & LAW ENF ACT OF '94
9945 SUSPICIOUS PERSON
9951 SEX OFFENDERS
WARRANTS
9992 MUq73AL AID/8100
9993 34trriA~L AID/6500
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS
2
1
1
1
2
22
3
1
14
3
2
2
8
5
3
3
5
1
1
7
7
7
Page 2
I5'PP
Run~ 29-Apr-98 10:54 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
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
9994 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER 2
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC
A5403 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HR/q-NO WPN-ADLT-STR 1
A5503 ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-NO WEAP-ADLT-STR 2
A5505 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ 2
A5508 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-pLrB OFFIC 1
AL351 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY ~L~RM-HANDS-AD-FAM 1
~L352 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HNDS-ADLT-AC 2
AL354 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-CH-FAM 3
Bl164 BURG 1-OCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 1
¥1294 BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-U-UN WEAP-COM THEFT 2
:~2334 BURG 2-UNOCC RES FRC-D-b-N-K WEAP-COM THEFT 1
~3694 BURG 3-OCC NRES NO FRC-U-UN-K WEAP-COM THE 1
?llB1 FORGERY-FE-MAKE-;%LT-DEST-CHK-OV 2500-PER 1
~22C1 FORGERY-GM-UTT-POSS-PLACE-CHK-201-2500-PER 1
>8540 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSESSION 2
~C500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 4
~H530 CON SUB 5-POSSESS-SYN NARC-UNK 1
12149 CRM AGST FM-GM-CRIM ABUSE VULN ADLT-OTHER 1
~3060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD 2
~]070 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-MALIC PUNISHMENT CHILD 2
~3109 _CRM_AGNST FAM-MS-ENDANGER CHLD-OTHER I
;
Page
Run: 29-Apr-98 10:54 CFS08
Primary ISN's only:
Sate ReporTed range:
range each day:
How Received:
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Patrol Areas:
Days of the week:
NO
03/26/98 - 04/25/98
00':00 - 23:59
All
All
All
All
All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
J2501
32E01
32R01
.13501
~3E01
M3001
M4140
M5313
~,15350
~{3030
!43190
33882
~2110
~2190
~3110
52208
?B229
i'C159
TRAFF-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
TRAF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-U~ INJ-MV
TRAFF-GM-FAIL TO SUBMIT TO TEST-UNK INJ-MV
TRAFF~ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV
JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER
JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO
LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21
JUVENILE-CURFEW
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DIS~JRB PEACE-MS-H~SSING COM~ICATIONS
OBSENITY-MS-OBSCENE PHONE CALL-ADULT
PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
PROP DAMAGE-GM-OTHER P-UNK INTENT
PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
STLN PROP-GM-POSSESS UNK PROP-201-500
THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-STREET-PK LT-OTH PROP
THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-MONEY
THEFT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
?F159
I'O009 --THEgT-LESS 200 MS-UNKNOWN-OTH PROP
Page 4
Run: 29-Apr-98 10:54 CFS08 Page 5
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
?]me 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 Sex-vice
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
?G021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY
?G029 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-OTH PROP
7G059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-UNKNOWN
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MON~EY
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER
THEFT-FE-THFT BY SWINDLE TRICK-2501-19999
THEFT-FE-BY SWINDLE-TRICK-501-2500
THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS
VEH-200 OR LESS-MS-THEFT-BICYCLE-MTRI
VEH-200 OR LESS-MS-TAMPER-AUTO
VEH-200 LESS-MS-TAMPER ENTER-TRUCK BUS
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-TAMPER WITH WITNESS
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL OP.D PROTECTION
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-VIOL HAR]~ASS REST ORDER
1
2
2
1
2
14
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
TG150
?Gl51
?G159
11063
~3498
.E026
'E081
'E082
X2200
~<]040
':~250
×3360
Report Totals:
378
~un: 29-Apr-98 13:54 OFF01
Primary ISN's only:
i'ate Reported range:
range each day:
Dispositions:
Activity codes:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
No
03/26/98 - 04/25/98
00:00 - 23:59
Ail
Ail
All
All
MObq~D POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page
..... OFFENSES CLFJ~RED ....
&CT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
~0DE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HAAFDS-ASLT-AC
A5403 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-NO WPN-ADLT~STR
%B503 ASLT 5-MS-FEAR BOD HRM-NO WEAP-ADLT-STR
A5505 ASLT 5-TNRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-CHLD-ACQ
%5508 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY ~ARM-NO WEAP-PUB OFFIC
%L351 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-I~D-FAM
kL352 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HAIDS-ADLT-AC
DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HAN~DS-CH-FAM
Bl164 BURG 1-OCC RES FRC-N-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT
¥i294 BURG 1-OCC RES NO FRC-U-UN WEAP-COM THEFT
~2334 BURG 2-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNq< WEAP-COM THEFT
F3694 BURG 3-OCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THE
'ilB1 FORGERY-FE-MAKE-ALT-DEST-CHK-OV 2500-PER
722C1 FORGERY-GM-UTT-POSS-PLACE-CHK-201-2500-PER
~8540 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSESSION
/~C500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPE-POSSESS-UNK-UNK
~>H530 CON SUB 5-POSSESS-SYIq NARC-UNK
12149 CRM AGST FM-GM-CRIM ABUSE VI/LN ADLT-OTHER
13060 CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT OF A CHILD
~3069 CRM AGNST FAM-MS-NEGLECT CHLD-OTHER
CRIM AGNST FAM-MS-MALIC PUNISH~4ENT CHILD
13109 CRM AGNST FAM-MS-ENDANGER CHLD-OTHER
J2501 --TRAFF-GM-DUI LIQUOR-UNK INJ-UNK VEH
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100 . 0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100 . 0
Run: 29-Apr-98 13:54 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 03/26/98 - 04/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 2
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- AC773AL
~ODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING
...... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JTrVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
J2E01 TP~AF-ACC-GM-AL 10 MORE-b-NK INJ-M~; 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
32R01 TRAFF-GM-FAIL TO SUBMIT /TD TEST-UNK INJ-MV 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
J3501 TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
J3E01 TR3%F-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
M3001 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
>~3005 JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 5 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 100.0
M4140 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
M5313 JI/VENILE-CURFEW 4 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10¢
>~5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 3 0 3 1 0 2 0 2 66.6
~3030 DIS~73RB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
N3190 DISTLrRB PEACE-MS-HA~SSING COMMUNICATIONS 2 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 50.0
33882 OBSENITY-MS-OBSCENE PHONE C;LLL-ADULT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
72110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
72190 PROP DAMAGE-GM-OTHER P-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
73110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
Q2208 STLN PROP-GM-POSSESS UNK PROP-201-500 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
?B229 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-STREET-PK LT-OTH PROP I 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
?C159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR XrEH-OTH PROP 1 0 i 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
?F021 THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-MON~EY 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
FF159 THEFT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0.0
¥G009 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-UNKNOWN-OTH PROP 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 10~
TG021 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-MONEY 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
TG029 _THEET-LESS 200-MS-BUILDING-OTH PROP 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
Run 29-Apr-98 13:54 OFF01
Pr:mary ISN's only:
Sale Reported range:
range each day:
Dispositions:
Activity codes:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
NO
03/26/98 - 04/25/98
00:00 - 23:59
All
All
All
Ail
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 3
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
~ODE DESCRIPTION
REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION
TG059
TGI50
TG151
TG159
U1062
31063
33498
JE026
JE082
<2200
>:3040
i<3250
i<3360
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
TOTAL CLEARED
1 50.0
0 0.0
0 0.0
1 7.1
0 0.0
0 0.0
0 0.0
0 0.0
1 50.0
0 0.0
2 100.0
0 0.0
2 100.0
1 100.0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP 2 0 2 1 0 0 1
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MO77DR VEH-U1NqfNO$~N 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY 2 0 2 2 0 0 0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER 14 0 14 13 0 1 0
THEFT-FE-IT{FT BY SWINDLE TRICK-2501-19999 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
THEFT-FE-BY SWINDLE-TRICK-501-2500 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
VEH-200 OR LESS-MS-THEFT-BICYCLE-MTRI 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
VEH-200 OR LESS-MS-T;kMPER-ALrrO 2 0 2 1 0 1 0
VEH-200 LESS-MS-TAMPER ERrrER-TRUCK BUS 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
CRIM AGNST ;%DM OUST-GM-GIVE FLSE NAM-POL 2 0 2 0 2 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADMN OUST-MS-TAMPER WITH WITNESS 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADMN JRJST-MS-VIOL OR-D PROTEC?ION 2 0 2 0 2 0 0
CRIM AGNST ADM OUST-MS-VIOL HARRASS REST ORDER 1 0 1 0 1 0 0
Report Totals:
105 0 105 59 20 21 5 46 43.8
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
May 6, 1998
TO:
CITY MANAGER
FROM: CITY CLERK
APRIL MONTHLY REPORT
The Council had 2 regular meetings with Minutes, and 18 resolutions
with the follow-up items from these meetings.
The bids were opened on the following project:
1998 Sealcoating Project. There were 3 bidders.
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 Skill
There were the usual calls and questions from residents.
and 1 ordinance along
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
To: Mayor, City Council and City Manager
From: Joel Krumm, Liquor Store Manager
Date: May 4, 1998
Re: April 1998, Monthly Report
The farmers are probably complaining about the lack of rain. We here at the Liquor store sure
have no complaints. Are you ready for the monthly figures? For the month of April 1997 total
gross sales were $117,322.00. Customer transactions were 8,645.00. The weather over that
period of time was nasty, wet and cold. This April, under ideal weather conditions, brought gross
sales of $141,110.00, and a customer of count of 9882. What a difference pleasant weather will
bring to this business. It also helped to have the Easter holiday fall in April, whereas last year in
came in March.
Now Jon Sutherland and I were comparing notes at our last staff meeting. Does good weather
contribute to the rise in sales or building permits? Undeniably so we agreed. Jon believes that
this could be a result of EL NINO! Its too bad that we have to budget so early in the year for the
following year. For example, if we knew that 1999 was going to be anther EL NINO year we
could project revenue income more accurately. If someone told me a few years ago that a baby
would have a profound effect on our business, I would have deemed them LOCO in LA CABESA.
printed on recycled paper
HOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
Mom Mown{ To DAIg TO DAr~
54 43 186 214
MOUND FI~ 1~' 8 ~ 51
~G~ 16 16 75 73
...5~= ~ONKA BEACH
~iN~iTR!STA F!~ 3 1 5 14
OiONO F~ 6 2 15 14
,, ~G~ 3 0 7 5
SHOREW00D FI~ 0 0 0 1
~~ 0 1 2 1
5~R!NG PARK FI~ 6 2 11 3
~.~G~ 1 4 15 24
MUTUAL AID ,FI~ 1 2 3 2
~~ 0 0 0 1
TOTAL FIRE CALLS 31 17 74 90
TOTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 23 26 112 124
~CI~ 2 0 4 1
FZSiD~L~ 6 0 9 18
~'~ o 0 o o
Ab~ 0 0 2 3
FA~E .~M / FIRE ~ 11 7 27 37
~. OF H~ FI~ 236 143 669 1229
- MOUND ',~G~ 263 267 1342 1459
~7, 499 410 2Oll 2688
FIRE 59 40 124 82
- MTKA BEACH ~G~ 23 26 49 0
~T~, 82 66 173 82
~I~ 92 ] 5 ] 28 436
M' TR I STA ~.~G~ 37 82 265 447
~ 129 97 393 883
FI~ 107 27 ~45 486
- ORONO ~G~ 76 O 155 70
... ~ 183 27 501 556
FI~ 0 0 O 21
- SHOREWOOD ~G~. 0 21 44 21
~ 0 21 ~ 42
~I~ 133 35 219 53
- SP. PARK ~G~ 20 73 273 422
~ 153 108 %92 475
F~ 17 31 48 . ~
- ~.~ ,~D ~G~ 0 0 0 20
T~ 17 31 48 ~
TOTAL DRILL HOURS 167.5 165 660' 687.5
TOTAL FIRE HOURS 544 291 1534 2367
TOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS 419 469' 2128 ~4~9
~L F~E & ~G~ ~S 1063 760 3662. 4806
~4UTUAL AID RECEIVED 0 0 1 3
MUTUAL AID GIVEN % 2 3 ~
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
CIPLINE & TEAMWORK
;RITIQUE Of FIRES
PRE-PLAN & INSPECTIONS
TOOLS & APPARATUS IDENTIFY
HAND EXTINGUISHER OPERATIONS
WEARING PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
FLLMS
FIRST-AID & RESCUE OPERATIONS
USE OF SELF-CONTAINED MASKS
HOURS TRAINING PAID:
DATE
PUMPER OPERATIONS
FIRE STREAMS & FRICTION LOSS
HOUSE BURNING
NATURAL / PROPANE GAS DEMOS
LADDER EVOLUTIONS
SALVAGE OPERATIONS
RADIO OPERATIONS
HOUSE EVOLUTIONS
NOZZLES & HOSE APPLIANCES
EXCUSED X UNEXCUSED ...
O PRESENT (not paid)
MISCELLANEOUS: _ I ,,,- . ._~ , ·
~ It 'L. j. ANDERSEN
Z ~i'~ D. BOYD ~'\~ R. KRYCK ~1~ M. SAVAGE
- ~"~ C. HENDE~ON __ ~ T.P~M
~; OF FIR~JG~S ~NING OFFIC~~
;)ISCIPLINE & TEAMWORK
;RITIQUE OF FIRES
PRE-PLAN & INSPECTIONS
TOOLS & APPARATUS IDENTIFY
HAND EXTINGUISHER OPERATIONS
WEARING PROTECTIVE CLO~G
FILMS
:IRST-AID & RESCUE OPERATIONS
JSE OF SELF-CONTAINED MASKS
HOURS TRAINING PAID:
EXCUSED
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
DRILL REPORT
PUMPER OPERATIONS
FIRE STREAMS & FRICTION LOSS
HOUSE BURNING
NATURAL / PROPANE GAS DEMOS
LADDER EVOLUTIONS
SALVAGE OPERATIONS
RADIO OPERATIONS
HOUSE EVOLUTIONS
NOZZLES & HOSE APPLIANCES
X UNEXCUSED ..- O PRESENT (not paid)
PERSONNEL
ANDERSEN ~.- P. HENRY ~\ ~ ~ G. PEDERSQN
G. ANDERSON ~[~ M. HENTGES 2~ C. POUNDER
P. BABB Z~J~ M. J~UBIK ~{~ R. ROGERS
D. BOYD ~1~ R. KRYCK Z~l~ M. SAVAGE
B. ~WF~D t~{~ J.~ Z~~ B. SV~
R. ENGEL~T ~ ~ J. NELSON ~ ~ ~ S. VANECEK
K. G~DY ~[~ G.P~ ~t~ T. WILLIES
C. HENDERSON ~ ~ ~ T. P~
TOTAL # OF FIREFIGHTERS
TRAINING OFFICER~
DATE I~.Y 4~199~
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT
TOTAL MAINTENANCE FOR MONTH OF APRIL 1998
-~ J. ANDERSEN
-~ G. ANDERSON
~ ~z p. BABB
~ D. BOYD
/J/~ S. BRYCE
// R. ~G~T
~ D.~y
B. ~S~SON
c. ~mso~
M. ~GES
J. ~ON
MEN ON DUTY
TOTAL MONTHLY HOURS
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT
~/t{tS_ . ..LAST IBIS' YEAR LAST YEAR
MON/~ MOh~ %'O DA~I~ TO DA~
D~ OF ~RIL 1998
~. 0F C~
~4 43 186 214
FI~ 12 8 34 51
~tOUND
D~G~ 16 16 75 73
FI~ 3 2 '6 5
HI NNETONKA BEACH
~G~ 1 1 2 0
FI~ 3 1 5 14
MINNETRISTA
FI~ 6 2 15 14
ORONO
~G~ 3 0 7 5
FI~ 0 0 0 1
SHOREW00D
~~ 0 1 2 1
FI~ 6 2 11 3
SPRING PARK
~.~G~ 1 4 15 24
FI~ 1 2 3 2
HUTUAL AID
~~ 0 O O 1
TOTAL FIRE CALLS 31 17 74 90
TOTAL EMERGENCY CALLS 23 26 112 124
~CI~ 2 0 4 1
~$ID~ 6 0 9 18
~'~ 0 0 0 0
~S & ~~S 11 8 29 28
A~ 0 0 2 3
F.~E ~ / FIRE ~ 11 7 27 37
h~. OF H~ FI~ 236 143 669 1229
MOUND '~G~ 263 267 1342 1459
~ 499 410 2Oll 2688
FI~ 59 40 124 82
- MTKA BEACH ~G~ 23 26 49 0
~ 82 66 173 82
FI~ 92 ] 5 ~ 28 4~6
H' TR I STA ~.~G~ 37 82 265 447
~ ~9 ~7 393
FI~ 107 27 ~46 486
- ORONO ~G~ 76 0 ~55 70
~ 183 27 501 556
FI~ 0 O 0 21
- SHOREWOOD ~G~. 0 21 44 21
~ 0 21 44 42
FI~ ~133 35 219 53
- SP. PARK~ ~G~ 20 73 273 422
~ 153 108 492 475
F~E 17 31 48
- ~ ~D ~G~ 0 0 0 20
T~ 17 31 48 80
IOTAL DRILL HOURS [67.5 165 6~ 687.5
IOTAL FIRE HOURS 544 291 1534 2367
IOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS ~19 469 ~128 2439
~ FIRE & ~G~ ~S 1063 760 3662. 4806 ,..
HUTUAL AID RECEIVED 0 0 1 3
I1,1
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
MOUND, MINNESOTA
FOR MONTH OF APRIL 1998
FIRE FIGHTERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE
Q/13 ~/20 ~ ~ ~ ~
1 JEFF ANDERSEN X X 2 19.00 ~ 44 6.50 ?~6 NN
2GREG ANDERSON X X 2 19.00 3 54 6.50 351.00
3 PAUL BABB X X 2 19. O0 2.5 44 6.50 286. O0
4 DAVID BOYD X X 2 19.00 0 30 6.75 202.50
5 SCOTT BRYCE X ~ 1 9.50 1.5 21 6.50 136.50
6JI~ CASo~f X X 2 19.00 3 26 6.50 169.00
7BOB CRAb,FORD X X 2 19.00 3.5 31 6.50 201.50
8RAArOY ~INGELHART X X 2 19.00 11 18 6.50 117.00
9DAN GRADY X X 2 19.00 2 29 6.50 188.50
IOKEVIN GRADY X X 2 19.00 2 27 6.50 175,50
llBRUCE GUSTAFSON X X 2 19. OO 2 35 6.50 227.50
12PAT HANLEY 6, )0
13CRAIG HENDERSON X X 2 19.00 3 45 6.50 292.50
14P^UL HKNRY X X 2 19.00 3 24 6.50 156.00
15~IT H]~NTGES X X 2 19. O0 2 37 6.50 240.50
16~[AT~ JAKUBIK X X 2 19.00 2.5 31 6.50 201.50
17ROGER KRYCK X X 2 19. O0 2 27 6.50 175.50
1830IR~ LARSON X X 2 !-19.00 2 29 6.50 188.50
19JASON MAAS X X 2 19. O0 3.5 43 6.50 279.50
2OfONY ~fERS 6.50
21~OHN NAFUS X X 2 19.00 4.5 40 6.50 260.00
22JAMES NELSON X X 2 19.00 0 21 6.50 136.50
22BRET NICCUM X X 2 19.00 3 21 6.50 136.50
24GREG PAL~ X X 2 19. O0 2 31 6.50 201.50
25MIKE P;J.2'l X ~ 1 9.50 3 35
6.
50
227.
5O
26TI~ PALM X X 2 19.00 1 35 6.50 227.50
27GREG PEDERSON X X 2 19.00 0 25 7.00 175.00
28CHRI S POUMDER X X 2 19.00 3 34 6.50 221.00
29RICHARD ROGERS X X 2 19. O0 2.5 35 6.50 227.50
3(~,~I KE SAVAGE X X 2 19.00 0 16 6.50 104.00
31KEVIN SIPPRELL X X 2 19.00 2 16 6.50 104.00
32RON STALLMAN ~--~ X ] 9.50 3 21 6.50 136.50
33BRUCE SVOBODA X X 2 I9.00 0 21 6.50 136.50
_34. ED VANEC~i X X 2 19.00 2.5 36 _ ~_6.50 234.00
_3,SRICK WILLIA~S X X 2 19.OO 9 26 6.5Q 169.OO
36TI~ WILLIA~ X X 2 19. O0 3 22 6.50 143. O0
37 nk~W~qTg I.~qYT~ X X 2 19.00 3~ 33 6.50 214.50
34 33 67
· D~ 85 82.5 167.5 636.50 93 1063 ~ 6~929.50
167.5 ll~I[l,q 636.50
93 MAIN% 1,250.00
~ 8,816.00
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CiTY MANAGER
GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR
APRIL FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment Activity
Bought:
Money Market 4M Plus 4,053
Money Market First Bank 115,358
CP Smith Barney 5.613% 419,134
Matured:
Money Market 4M Plus (300,000)
CP smith Barney 5.58% (344,262)
Year 2000
On April 16 the users of the financial system met to discuss the Year 2000 conversion
with the firm that supports the software. We were assured that the conversion will be made
and that all users will be notified in writing of the detailed process and cost by June 1998.
1998 Safety and Loss Control Worksho_o
On April 30, 1998 I 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:
- Understanding of cultural diversity and discrimination as it pertains to city staff
and services
- Detailed analysis of employment basics and recommendations
- Overview of the Fair Labor Standards Act/Overtime
- Record retention requirements and New Technology
Trends in insurance claims/coverage and LMClT financial condition
What is and is not covered by LMCIT insurance
Revised LMCIT property coverage
Recycling
A special thanks to the many people who helped to make Mound Spring
Cleaning Day on May 2nd such a successful event. Again, Joyce Nelson
and Greg Skinner did a great job in coordinating the whole affair.
Thanks, Joyce. Thanks, Greg.
Git o! Mound
Monthly Report
Utilities
Month of: April 1998
No. of Customers:
Water
Sewer
Water Used:
(in 1,000 gallons)
Billing:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Payments:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Utility-98
Total
1,122 123 1,245
1,121 123 1,244
15,682 2,124
Total
17,806
$27,088 $4,658 $31,746
$65,360 $14,276 $79,636
$6.041 $124 $6.165
$98.489 $19.058 $117,547
$26,348 $5,062 $31,410
$58,253 $14,582 $72,835
$5.361 $114 $5.475
~ $19.758 109_$_~g_.~_
Total
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
May 8, 1998
Apt'il'~.~ Honthly Report.
Street De,pal- tment
We spent the entire month s~eeping the streets. ~Je tried
a new type of broom for tine finis}] work this year. This left
a fine layer of sand on tine street so ~4e will go back to the
old style broom for next year. ~e had some time at the end of
the month so we hauled out some of the sweepings and should
have all of the sweepings hauled by the middle of May. ~Je
also hauled out 250 yds of wood chips. ~eight restrictions
>~ere lifted on the first of May.
[date]- Department
[de repaired 6 wat. e~- shut-off:s and 1 fire hydrant, this
montin. 3erry has been locati[]g shut-offs and meter work.
Sewer .D_epartment
We televised 3,000 'ft. of sewer line. There was some
pipe that was found to be in bad shape and some that needed
some cleaning. At this point we have started to either jet or
rod out the these lines and then we will look into repairing
some of the broken pipe. Damon and Scott have also started to
clean out catch basin~.
printed on recycled paper
Gray Freshwater Center
Hwys. 15 & 19, Navarre
Mail:
2500 Shadywood Road
Excelsior, MN 55331-9578
Phone: (612) 471-0590
Fax: (612) 471-0682
Email:
admin @minnehahacreek.org
Web Site:
www. minnehahacreek.org
Board of Managers
Pamela G. Blixt
James Calkins
Lance Fisher
Monica Gross
Thomas W. LaBounty
Thomas Maple, Jr.
Malcolm Reid
District Office:
Diane R Lynch
District Administrator
Pr~ed~;~ recyCed paper containing
at leas130% post consumer wasle
RECEIVED 4 1998
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
May 1, 1998
TO:
FROM:
Mayors, City Managers and Public Works Directors
Chair of Board of Supervisors
Stormwater Task Force ~ t \'~-~'
Diane Lynch, District Administrator .'~
RE:
Rule B, Stormwater Management
Recommendations of the Stormwater Task Force
Meeting Tuesday, May 12
2-4:30 p.m.
Boards and Commissions Room
Minnetonka City Hall (note change of building)
(City Hall is right behind the Community Center)
14600 Minnetonka Blvd.
Enclosed are two copies of the last revision of Rule B by the
Stormwater Task Force. One is a copy with the changes indicated and
one is a clean copy.
Please review the changes and be prepared to give your comments to
us at the meeting.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 471-0590.
Thank you for your continued interest.
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
RULE B
STORM~ATER MA.NAGE~NT & EROSION CONTROL PL?~
FOR ~'L~,- u. rr~UAL LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
I. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
(a) Require stormwater facilities to be oc.n:..'x:':::~ en !n~!v!&:':! :!t:: included in land development
proiects where practicable and effective.
(b) Manage stormwater and snowmclt runoff on a regional or subwatershed basis
haW'fa: :_~,~.~.:A_ :. r: ..... throughout the District to:
promote effective water quality treatment --.nd '.;'.h:r: pe::'~b!: ..... :a ..... u
where feasible, prior to discharge to surface waterbodies and wetlands; ana_
2) ~ limit developed peak rates of runoff into major surface water bodies a~ to
less than or equal to existing peak rates; and
3) promote infiltration of both precipitation and runoff.
(c) Require preparation and implementation of erosion control plans for c:nztn:ct:..en and land
development activities, during the period of construction.
2. REGULATION. Except as provided [n ~arag:'aF~ 5 herein, prior to commencing any land altering
activities :vng.n:'e3en' · , a developer of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public
roadway uses shall submit a stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan to the District in
conformity with the requirements of this rule and secure a permit from the District approving the stormwater
management plan and the erosion control plan. Except as provided herein, & a_stormwater management
plan and an erosion control plan are required for new development, redevelopment or additions to an
existing site. The managers will review a stormwater management plan and the erosion control plan only
after the applicant demonstrates that the project has received preliminary approval from the municipality
indicating compliance with existing municipal plans. (Please refer to the "Summary of Regulatory
Requirements" b~low.)
SUMMARY OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
LANDUSE/PROJECT REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
SINGLE FAMILY HOME NO PERMIT
CONSTRUCTION
SUBDIVISIONS NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RATE RUNOFF
LOT SIZE > 1/2 ACRE CONTROl., QUALITY AND
RURAL RESIDENTIAL BMP'S RATE CONTROL,
(SINGLE FAMILY HOME) BMP'S
SUBDIVISIONS NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL,
LOT SIZE < 1/2 ACRE RATE BMP'S
HIGH DENSITY CONTROL,
RESIDENTIAL BMP'S
(MULTI UNIT)
ROADS, STREETS AND SEE SECTION 2(e) SEE SECTION 2(e)
HIGHWAYS(~)
COMMERCIAL BMPS RUNOFF RATE CONTROL RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL,
INDUSTRIAL AND BMP'S BMP'S
INSTITUTIONAL
SUBDIVISION/PROJECT AREA (acres)
NOTE: Administrative permits will be issued whenever BMP's only are required. All other permits and waivers
require a public headng.
fa) Single-Family Homes. A permit is not required for the construction or reconstruction ora
single family home or its residential appurtenances.
(b) Single-Family, Developed or Redeveloped Subdivisions. A permit is not required fcr *.~=
~::'e!c~.-..::: c.- r:~:'.':!c~.."...=:', cf :::~!v!:!c:: from the MCWD for the construction of less than
five (5) acres with a density of two (2) units or less per acre. A permit is required for residential
development or redevelopment of subdivisions with a density of two (2) units or less per acre on
sites of five (5) acres or more, as follows:
( 1 ) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five ('5) acres or more but less
than ten (10) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this
rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of ten (10) acres or more but
less than twenty (20) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3
and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
Draft - April 29, 1998
(3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of twenty (20) acres or more.
the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(c) Medium to High Density Residential Land Development. A permit is not required for
the development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions less than two (2) acres with a density
of more than two (2) units per acre. A permit is required for development or redevelopment of
residential subdivisions two (2/acres or greater with a density of more than two (2) units per acre,
as follows:
(1) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of two (2) acres or more but less
than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this
rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5/acres or more but less
than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the
water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of eight (8) acres or more, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(d/ Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Development or Redevelopment. A permit is
required for commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, as follows:
(1) For all commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of one-half (1/2/acre or more
but less than eight (gl acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3
and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of eight (8) acres or more, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(el Roads, Streets and Highways. A permit is not required for the maintenance or
improvement ora public or private road, street or highwa;/, if the project does not result in a net
increase in impervious surface. A permit is required for a public or private road, street, or highway
project that results in a net increase in impervious surface area, as follows:
( 1 ) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of less than one ( 1 )
acre, the best management practices in section 3 of this rule will be required;
Draft - April 29, 199~
(2) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one fl) acre or
more, but the total proiect area is less than five (5) acres, the best management practices
provisions set forth in section 3, and the water quantity control provisions set forth in
section 4 are required to treat the increase~
(3) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (I) acre ore
more and the total project area is five (5) acres or more, the best management practice~
provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4,
and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required to treat the
increasel
(4) Sidewalks and trails which do not exceed ten (10) feet in width do not require a
permit and are not included in any calculation of net increase in impervious surface when
part of a road or street project.
(f) Performance Bond. A performance bond or other surety in a form satisfactory to thc
District is required for all activity, including clearing, grading, and excavation, that results in the
disturbance of t.~a-(4~ five (5) or more acres of land. The District will not require a performance
bond or other type of surety from cities, townships, municipal corporations, counties, the state or
federal government, or agencies of any of the aforementioned.
3. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS. DEC!S!ON CPdTEPdA FOR
(a) Permanent (Structural and Non-structural). Permanent BMPs consist of structural and non-
stTuctural practices. Permanent BMPs must be incorporated in all proiects requiring a permit under
this rule and must be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual "Protecting Water Quality
in Urban Areas (revised July 1991) and its future revisions. Other permanent BMPs. not addressed
in the MPCA manual may be allowed on an experimental basis if their use will generate new and
useful data or information regarding effectiveness of the practice. The following table is a summary
of the MPCA BMPs and their effectiveness for removal of metals, phosphorus, nitrates, and
suspended solids from stormwater, and for controlling rates and volumes of runoff.
BMP Type Effectiveness of Selected BMPs
Memm Phosphorus Pho~phonm N~te$ Solids Floa~bl~ Ra~ Volume Con~l
S~c~ml
Infil~on (no ove~) h~h h~h h~ high h~h h~h y~ yes
D~ Detain (24 ~r) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yes I~
S~m~ ~ ~ ~ no ~ Y~ ~ nO
Gross sm~swam ~emm I~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ I~
Non-s~ctu~l
Draft - April 29, 1998
10
We~ands yes yes' yes' yes' yes yes yes papal
o~jamc I~et management Iow yes yes yes yes yes no no
Sleet sweeFXng yes yes yes " yes yes no no
~e~lize~ management - rno~-hig~ m<xl-~igl~ - no no no no
¢atc~ basin Oeaning Iow no no no Iow"' no no no
sub-grade i:~e~amaon
non-pl~ospl~o~s fe~dlizem
Temporary
S131w Oale~ yes yes no no yes~ no no no
Temgomry sediment basin yes yes design specific -- yes outlet design Iow
Rock entrance ~ no no no no yes no no no
Natural wetland~ can also oo~bute nut~ent~
No data to evaluate effectwenesl
Small volumes only
(b) Temporary BMPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule, as
follows:
(I) An Erosion Control Plan must be.prepared by a qualified individual :~a!! showing
proposed methods of retaining waterborne sediments on-site during the period of
construction and c~a!! showin_.g how the site will be restored, covered, or revegetated after
construction;
(2) The Erosion Control Plan shall be consistent with specifications of the MPCA
manual "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" (revised July 1991) and its future
revisions;
(3) Permanent detention/retention ponds, used as temporary sedimentation basins must
be cleaned out after construction is completel
Erosion control measures, such as silt fences and hay/straw bales shall be removed
after all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized;
Sites with high erosion potential characterized by steep slopes or erodible soils may
be subject to the provisions of section 2, paragraph (f) of this rule.
4. WATER QUANTITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. DECIe_.IO.x! CPJTEP2A FOP.
(a) The peak rate of stormwater runoff from the site shall not increase as a result of the proposed
development. Developed peak rates of runoff shall be controlled such that the existing peak rates
are not exceeded. This criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events of critical
Draft - April 29, 1998
11
duration with return frequencies of 1, I0 and 100 years in the subwatershed in which the site is
located.
(b) Natural existing low areas will be used, where feasible, for detention of runoff to comply with
rate control criteria. Reservoir routing procedures and critical duration runoff events shall be used
for design of detention areas and outlets.
(_c g) The proposed project shall not adversely affect water levels offthe site during or after
construction.
d(~_g) Runoff dra[n!ng :nt: th: :!t: tributary to the proiect must be accommodated in the analyses
and design of new stormwater management facilities.
(~ h) The volume ofsi~ runoffmay not increase due to the project when the receiving area of said
runoff is landlocked, and not capable of handling the increased volume of runoff. In addition, the
applicant shall either own or have proper rights over the landlocked property to handle water fi.om
the development. Back-to-back 100-year runoff events will be used to analyze holding capacity and
freeboard for landlocked areas.
(_f i,) All stormwater rate control facilities shall be located above the projected 100-year flood
elevation for the site and within drainage, utility and/or flowage easements to provide access and to
prevent future alteration or encroachment.
(g.~) Water quantity control methods and facilities used or constructed pursuant to Stcxw.':.'ater
Management P[anz under this rule shall be in conformance with approved Municipal Stormwater
Management Plans.
(h h) The outfall structures ;;'!t~!n
~ shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring.
(_i J~) AH new r~M:.nt:.=[, :emme.-::a~, !nd'-'-:trla! and !.n:dt'--'t!en=! buildings and structures shall
c:.n:tr_':::d :'.:':~ t~a: a!! have door and window openings ar4 a minimum of two feet above the 100
year high water elevation cf n:arby :::~a:: ;:'::::bod[::, '.'.'::!and: and :tc.w'...water
WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.
(a ,) Wet detention bas!n: pond shall be mq::!.-:d :.-. :!t: and designed for at least 50% phosphorus
removal efficiency !.n
~,~ ~,; ..... :a- ~ r.k.- o .... ~ n.~-..--~ ~ ro m/~ mc~ n ~ no~ ~.,.-~' an~l;c~,., shall use the
PondNet (or approved equivalent) model to detemine ~moval efficiency of the pond, using a 2.5"
rainhil. Total ~;,~ ar:a ~-n .........:k'":-- ~ :it: ~ibu~ drainage area shall be used to
calculate pemanent pool volume.
Draft - April 29, 1998
12
runoff before~for a 1 year event. All ponds must provide a ten (I0) foot safety bench at a
sloue no steeper than 10H:IV and two (2) feet of freeboard above the 100 year pond level. -
(b) The outfall structures shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scourin~
(c) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of two feet
above the 100 year high water elevation.
Draft. April 29, 199~
13
~Q~D E~BITS (S~T ~ D~LICA~}.
(a) If the water qu~tiw or water quali~ provisions set fo~ in sections 4 and 5 of this role appI~ to
a proposed development, pl~s ce~ified bg a professional engineer registered in the S~te of
Minnesota ~d reflecting the following items shall accompang the pemit application (one set of
pl~s must be hll sizei one set must be reduced to a m~imum size of 11" x 17"): ~: f:ll:wkng
(1) Prope~ lines ~d delineation of l~ds under o~ership of ~e applic~t.
(2) Delineation of the subwate~hed con~ibuting runoff from off-site and proposed ~d
existing subwatersheds on-site.
(3) Proposed ~d existing sto~water facilities location, alig~ent, and elevation.
(4) Delineation of existing on-site wetl~d, m~shes, shorel~d, ~or floodplain ~e~.
(5) Existing ~d proposed no~al, ~d 100 year water elevations on-site.
(6) Existing and proposed site contour elevations at ~o foot inte~als, related to NG~,
1929 datum.
(7) Construction pl~s and specifications of all proposed sto~water management facilities.
(8) Sto~water mnoffvolume ~d rote ~alyses for ~e 1, 10 ~d 100 ye~ critical even~,
existing ~d pro~sed conditions.
(9) All hydrologic, water qualiW, ~d hydraulic computations completed to desi~ the
proposed sto~water management facilities.
(10) Documentation indicating eonfo~ance wi~ an existing municipal sto~water
management plan. When a municipal plan does not exisg d~umenmtion that the
municipali~ h~ reviewed ~e project.
(11) Delineation of~y flowage ~emen~ or o~er pro~ interests dedicated to
sto~water management pu~ses, including, but not limited to, eounW or judicial ditches.
(12) Documentation that the project h~ received a National Pollu~t Discharge
Elimination System ~PDES) Sto~water Pe~it from ~e Minnesota Pollution Consol
Agency (MPCA) if required by ~e MPCA, once available.
Draft. April 29, 1998 14
(b e) A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet
structures for such ponds, culverts, ouffall structures, and all other stormwater facilities. The
maintenance agreement shall specify the methods, schedule and responsible panics for maintenance
and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District's Maintenance Agreement
Form. A Maintenance Agreement Form will be provided to the applicant for use by the applicant as
a maintenance agreement or as guidance if the applicant desires to draR a separate maintenance
agreement. The maintenance agreement must be recorded with the county within l0 days of the
issuance date of the permit.
(dc_) Geotechnical soil boring results if available.
EXCEPTIONS.
(a) If the District ~as approved a municipal stormwater management plan for a municipality, or for
a subwatershed within a municipality, the requirements !a ~:.=~':~.F. 3 of this rule w)fi~.-M~K.-m~
~"~; """- ..... ...-..--.r-.:~:-" r.--.-]~' -..-,,'u'n may be deemed satisfied upon showing of compliance by an individual
developer with the municipal plan.
(.b) The water quantity requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Boa,-,l
of Managers that a downstream facility(ies) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(ies)
designed with adequate capacity to limit the ~ak runoff rate from the subwatershed under fully
developed conditions. The water quantity requirements of this rule may also be waived upon
determination by the Board of' Managers that the time of concentration of the downstream receivinv_.
water body is sufficiently long such that_ limiting the peak rate of runoff from the proiect has eithe,
no practical effect or an adverse effect.
c) The water quality requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Board of
Managers that a downstream facility(les) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(ies) is
designed to remove at least 50% of the total phosphorus from runoff entering the facility from th,~
subwatershed under fully developed conditions .
Draft. ApH! 29, 1998
15
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
RULE B
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & EROSION CONTROL
FOR-LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
1. POLICY. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to:
(a) Require stormwater facilities to be included in land development projects where practicable and
effective.
(b) Manage stormwater and snowmelt runoff on a regional or subwatershed basis throughout the
District to:
1 ) promote effective water quality' treatment, where feasible, prior to discharge to
surface waterbodies and wetlands;
2) limit developed peak rates of runoff into major surface water bodies to less than or
equal to existing peak rates; and
3) promote infiltration of both precipitation and runoff.
(c) Require preparation and implementation of erosion control plans for land development
activities, during the period of construction.
2. REGULATION. Except as provided herein, prior to commencing any land altering activities, a
developer of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public roadway uses shall submit a
stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan to the District in conformity with the requirements
of this rule and secure a permit from the District approving the stormwater management plan and the
erosion control plan. Except as provided herein, a stormwater management plan and an erosion control plan
are required for new development, redevelopment or additions to an existing site. The managers will review
a stormwater management plan and the erosion control plan only after the applicant demonstrates that the
project has received preliminary approval from the municipality indicating compliance with existing
municipal plans. (Please refer to the "Summary of Regulatory Requirements" below.)
Draft - April 29, 1998 7
SUMMARY OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
LANDUSE/PROJECT REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
SINGLE FAMILY HOME NO PERMIT
CONSTRUCTION
SUBDIVISIONS NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RATE RUNOFF
LOT SIZE _> 1/2 ACRE CONTROL, QUALITY AND
RURAL RESIDENTIAL BMP'S RATE CONTROL,
(SINGLE FAMILY HOME) BMP'S
SUBDIVISIONS NO PERMIT BMP'S RUNOFF RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL,
LOT SIZE < 1/2 ACRE RATE BMP'S
HIGH DENSITY CONTROL,
RESIDENTIAL BMP'S
(MULTI UNIT)
ROADS, STREETS AND SEE SECTION 2(e) SEE SECTION 2(e)
HIGHWAYS(T)
COMMERCIAL BMPs RUNOFF RATE CONTROL RUNOFF QUALITY AND RATE CONTROL,
INDUSTRIAL AND BMP'S BMP'S
INSTITUTIONAL
SUBDIVISION/PROJECT AREA (acres)
NOTE: Administrative permits will be issued whenever BMP's only are required. All other permits and waivers
require a public hearing.
(a) Single-Family Homes. A permit is not required for the construction or reconstruction of a
single family home or its residential appurtenances.
(b) Single-Family, Developed or Redeveloped Subdivisions. A permit is not required from
the MCWD for the construction of less than five (5) acres with a density of two (2) units or less per
acre. A permit is required for residential development or redevelopment of subdivisions with a
density of two (2) units or less per acre on sites of five (5) acres or more, as follows:
( l ) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5) acres or more but less
than ten (1 O) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this
rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions often (lO) acres or more but
less than twenty (20) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3
and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
Draft - April 29, 1998
(3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of twenty. (,20) acres or more,
the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(c) Medium to High Density Residential Land Development. A permit is not required for
the development or redevelopment of residential subdivisions less than two (2) acres with a density
of more than two (2) units per acre. A permit is required for development or redevelopment of
residential subdivisions two (2) acres or greater with a density of more than two (2) units per acre,
as follows:
( 1 ) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of two (2) acres or more but less
than five (5) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this
rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of five (5) acres or more but less
than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 and the
water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment of subdivisions of eight (8) acres or more, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(d) Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Development or Redevelopment. A permit is
required for commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, as follows:
(1) For ali commercial, industrial, or institutional development or redevelopment, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3 of this rule are required;
(2) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of one-half(l/2) acre or more
but less than eight (8) acres, the best management practices provisions set forth in section 3
and the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4 of this rule are required;
(3) For development or redevelopment activities on sites of eight (8) acres or more, the
best management practices provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control
provisions set forth in section 4, and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of
this rule are required.
(e) Roads, Streets and Highways. A permit is not required for the maintenance or
improvement of a public or private road, street or highway, if the project does not result in a net
increase in impervious surface. A permit is required for a public or private road, street, or highway
project that results in a net increase in impervious surface area, as follows:
( 1 ) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of less than one ( 1 )
acre, the best management practices in section 3 of this rule will be required;
(2) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one ( 1 ) acre or
more, but the total project area is less than five (5) acres, the best management practices
Draft - April 29, 1998
9
provisions set forth in section 3, and the water quantity, control provisions set forth in
section 4 are required to treat the increase;
(3) For projects that result in a net increase in impervious surface of one (1) acre ore
more and the total project area is five (5) acres or more, the best management practices
provisions set forth in section 3, the water quantity control provisions set forth in section 4,
and the water quality provisions set forth in section 5 of this rule are required to treat the
increase;
(4) Sidewalks and trails.which do not exceed ten (10) feet in width do not require a
permit and are not included in any calculation of net increase in impervious surface when
part of a road or street project.
(f) Performance Bond. A performance bond or other surety in a form satisfactory to the
District is required for all activity, including clearing, grading, and excavation, that results in the
disturbance of five (5) or more acres of land. The District will not require a performance bond or
other type of surety from cities, townships, municipal corporations, counties, the state or federal
government, or agencies of any of the aforementioned.
3. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Permanent (Structural and Non-structural). Permanent BMPs consist of structural and non-
structural practices. Permanent BMPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under
this rule and must be consistent with specifications of the MPCA manual "Protecting Water Quality
in Urban Areas (revised July 1991) and its future revisions. Other permanent BMPs, not addressed
in the MPCA manual may be allowed on an experimental basis if their use will generate new and
useful data or information regarding effectiveness of the practice. The following table is a summary
of the MPCA BMPs and their effectiveness for removal of metals, phosphorus, nitrates, and
suspended solids from stormwater, and for controlling rates and volumes of runoff.
BMP Type EffectJvenell of Selected BMPI
Metals Pho~phonm Phosphorus--Nltrate~ Solidi __Floatables Co-~olRate ¥o ume Control
Structural
Infiltration (no overflow) high high high high high high yes yes
D~ Detention (24 hr) moderate Iow Iow iow moderate outlet yes Iow
specific
Oil/grit separators moderate Iow no no Iow yes no no
Skimmers no no no no no yes no no
Grass strip/swale moderate Iow Iow Iow moderate Iow Iow Iow
Diversions no no no no ctesign specific no partial partial
Non,4tructural
Wetlands yes yes* yes' yes' yes yes yes partial
organic litter management Iow Yes yes yes yes yes no no
Street sweel~ing yes yes Yes - yes yes no no
Draft - April 29, 1998
10
fertilizer management " moO-high mod-high '* no no no no
catch basin c~eaning ~ow no no no iow'"" no no no
sub-graOe preparation
non-phosphcrus fertilizers
Temporary
Temporary silt fence yes yes no no yes'*' no no no
Straw bales yes yes no no yes"" no no no
Temporary sediment basin yes yes design specific '* yes outlet design iow
specific specific
Rock entrance pad no no no no yes no no no
Natural wetlands can also contnbute nutrients
No data to evaluate effectiveness
Small volumes only
(b) Temporary BMPs must be incorporated in all projects requiring a permit under this rule, as
follows:
(1) An Erosion Control Plan must be prepared by a qualified individual showing
proposed methods of retaining waterborne sediments on-site during the period of
construction and showing how the site will be restored, covered, or revegetated after
construction;
(2) The Erosion Control Plan shall be consistent with specifications of the MPCA
manual "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" (revised July 1991) and its future
revisions;
(3) Permanent detention/retention ponds, used as temporary sedimentation basins must
be cleaned out after construction is complete;
(4) Erosion control measures, such as silt fences and hay/straw bales shall be removed
after all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized;
(5) Sites with high erosion potential characterized by steep slopes or erodible soils may
be subject to the provisions of section 2, paragraph (f) of this rule.
WATER QUANTITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) The peak rate of stormwater runoff from the site shall not increase as a result of the proposed
development. Developed peak rates of runoff shall be controlled such that the existing peak rates
are not exceeded. This criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events of critical
duration with return frequencies of 1, 10 and 100 years in the subwatershed in which the site is
located.
Draft - April 29, 1998
11
(b) Natural existing Iow areas will be used, where feasible, for detention of runoff to comply with
rate control criteria. Reservoir routing procedures and critical duration runoff events shall be used
for design of detention areas and outlets.
(c) The proposed project shall not adversely affect water levels offthe site during or after
construction.
(d) Runoff tributary to the project must be accommodated in the analyses and design of new
stormwater management facilities.
(e) The volume of runoff may not increase due to the project when the receiving area of said runoff
is landlocked, and not capable of handling the increased volume of runoff. In addition, the applicant
shall either own or have proper rights over the landlocked property to handle water from the
development. Back-to-back 100-year runoff events will be used to analyze holding capacity and
freeboard for landlocked areas.
(f) Ail stormwater rate control facilities shall be located above the projected 100-year flood
elevation for the site and within drainage, utility and/or flowage easements to provide access and to
prevent future alteration or encroachment.
(g) Water quantity control methods and facilities used or constructed pursuant to this rule shall be
in conformance with approved Municipal Stormwater Management Plans.
(h) The outfaii structures shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring.
(i) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of two feet
above the 100 year high water elevation.
WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Wet detention pond shall be designed for at least 50% phosphorus removal efficiency. The
applicant shall use the PondNet (or approved equivalent) model to determine removal efficiency of
the pond, using a 2.5" rainfall. Total tributary drainage area shall be used to calculate permanent
pool volume. Pond outlets shall remove floatables from runoff before discharge for a 1 year event.
All ponds must provide a ten (10) foot safety bench at a slope no steeper than 10H: 1V and two (2)
feet of freeboard above the 100 year pond level.
(b) The ouffall structures shall incorporate designs to minimize erosion and scouring.
(c) New buildings and structures shall have door and window openings a minimum of two feet
above the 100 year high water elevation.
REQUIRED EXHIBITS (SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE).
(a) If the water quantity or water quality provisions set forth in sections 4 and 5 of this rule apply to
a proposed development, plans certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of
Minnesota and reflecting the following items shall accompany the permit application (one set of
plans must be full size; one set must be reduced to a maximum size of 11" x 17"):
Draft - April 29, 1998 12
Property lines and delineation of lands under ownership of the applicant.
(2) Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed and
existing subwatersheds on-site.
(3) Proposed and existing stormwater facilities location, alignment, and elevation.
(4) Delineation of existing on-site wetland, marshes, shoreland, and/or floodplain areas.
(5) Existing and proposed normal, and 100 year water elevations on-site.
(6) Existing and proposed site contour elevations at two foot intervals, related to NGVD,
1929 datum.
(7) Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater management facilities.
(8) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the 1, 10 and 100 year critical events,
existing and proposed conditions.
(9) All hydrologic, water quality, and hydraulic computations completed to design the
proposed stormwater management facilities.
(I 0) Documentation indicating conformance with an existing municipal stormwater
management plan. When a municipal plan does not exist, documentation that the
municipality has reviewed the project.
(11) Delineation of any flowage easements or other property interests dedicated to
stormwater management purposes, including, but not limited to, county or judicial ditches.
(12) Documentation that the project has received a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) if required by the MPCA, once available.
(b) A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures
for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures, and all other stormwater facilities. The maintenance
agreement shall specify the methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must
include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District's Maintenance Agreement Form. A
Maintenance Agreement Form will be provided to the applicant for use by the applicant as a
maintenance agreement or as guidance if the applicant desires to draft a separate maintenance
agreement. The maintenance agreement must be recorded with the county within 10 days of the
issuance date of the permit.
(c) Geotechnical soil boring results if available.
EXCEPTIONS.
(a) If the District has approved a municipal stormwater management plan for a municipality, or for
a subwatershed within a municipality, the requirements of this rule may be deemed satisfied upon
showing of compliance by an individual developer with the municipal plan.
Draft - April 29, 1998
13
(b) The water quantity requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Board
of Managers that a downstream facility(les) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(les) is
designed with adequate capacity to limit the peak runoff rate from the subwatershed under fully
developed conditions. The water quantity requirements of this rule may also be waived upon a
determination by the Board of Managers that the time of concentration of the downstream receiving
water body is sufficiently long such that limiting the peak rate of runoff from the project has either
no practical effect or an adverse effect.
c) The water quality requirements of this rule will be waived upon a determination by the Board of
Managers that a downstream facility(ies) is in place or has been ordered and the facility(ies) is
designed to remove at least 50% of the total phosphorus from runoff entering the facility from the
subwatershed under fully developed conditions.
Draft - April 29, 1998
14
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 13, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
· Joint Workshop/Planning session with MCWD, 5/20/98 @ 6 P.M.
READING OF MINUTES - 4/22/98 Regular Board Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
CONSENT AGENDA - Consent Agenda items identified with a (*) 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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1) Aahhhz of Excelsior Park, Consideration of new on-sale Intoxicating Liquor License
application for the charter boat Sunboat II;
2) Chartered Leasing, Inc., Consideration of new on-sale Intoxicating Liquor License
application for the charter boat Sea Breeze;
3) Seanote Cruises, Inc., Consideration of new on-sale Beer and Wine License
applications for the charter boat Halfnote;
4) Hennepin County Environmental Services, Spring Park Bay, Consideration of a new
Multiple Dock license application to accommodate 72 Boat Storage Units (BSU), a
Variance application to extend dock to 108', and a Special Density License application to
increase BSU's from 65 to 72;
LAKE USE & RECREATION
A)
B)
C)
D)
(*) Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Significant Activity Report;
Jim Zimmerman, Consideration of request for no-wake buoy;
Staff recommending Board approval of renewal Liquor/Wine/Beer License
applications as outlined in 5~6~98 memo;
Additional Business;
e
t
WATER STRUCTU RES
A) Meadowbrook Boat Club, Inc., Consideration of 1998 renewal without change
application;
B) Ordinance Amendment, First reading of an ordinance relating to boat
overhang;
C) Review of draft policy' regarding dimensions at tie-on BSU's;
D) (*) Staff recommends full refund of $250 deposit for City of Wayzata/Boat
Works Development variance application;
E) Additional Business;
EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
A) (*) Minutes of the 5/8/98 meeting (handout)
B) 5/8/98 meeting report;
C) (*) Evaluation of Truck Hauling Bids for the 1998 EWM Harvesting Program,
staff recommendation to award bid to Minnetonka Portable Dredging Co.;
D) (*) Evaluation of RFP for chemical control of EWM on three public accesses,
staff recommendation to award contract to Lake Management, Inc.;
E) Consideration of compensation adjustment request from Marsh Gabriel, EWM
Diesel/Hydraulic Mechanic;
F) Additional Business;
SAVE THE LAKE
FINANCIAL
A) Audit of vouchers for payment (5/1/98 - 5/15/98);
B) Additional Business;
ADMINISTRATION ~
A) Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for
Administrative Assistant, Diane Samis;
El) Additional Business;
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
DRAFT
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
7:00 PM, Wednesday, April 22, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Babcock called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Douglas Babcock
Deephaven; Craig Eggers, Victoria; Bert Foster, Tonka Bay; Lili McMillan, Orono; Craig
Nelson, Spring Park; Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Kent Dahlen, Minnetonka Beach; Bob
Rascop, Shorewood; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Sheldon Weft, Greenwood. Also present
Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Gregory Nybeck, Executive Director; Diane Samis,
Administrative Assistant.
Members Absent: Greg Kitchak, Minnetonka; Tom Gilman, Excelsior.
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock announced that the Lake Minnetonka
Association (LMA) is coordinating a meeting to discuss Lake Minnetonka Water Quality on
Wednesday, 5/6/98 at 7 p.m. at the South Shore Center in Shorewood. He added the MCWD
is coordinating a Clean Water Festival on Saturday, 10/16/98 at 10 a.m. at the Grays
Freshwater Center.
READING OF MINUTES - 4/1/98 Workshop/Planning Session 4/8/98 Regular Board Meeting
MOTION: Foster moved, Partyka seconded to approve the minutes of the 4/1/98
Workshop/Planning Session as submitted.
VOTE: Ayes (9), Abstained (3; Ahrens, Ambrose, and McMillan); Motion carried.
MOTION: Wert moved, Foster seconded to approve the minutes of the 4/8/98 Regular Board
meeting as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda (5 min.).
There were no comments from the public.
CONSENT AGENDA- Partyka moved Ahrens seconded to approve the consent agenda as
submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Items so approved include: 3A Beer/Wine/Liquor
license renewals, Staff recommending approval of 1998 renewal Beer/Wine/Liquor license
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 2
applications as outlined in 4/16/98 staff memo; and 4A Minutes of the 4/10/98 EWM/Exotics
Task Force meeting.
1. FINANCIAL
A. Review of 1997 draft Audit'.
Babcock introduced Steve McDonald, an accountant from Abdo, Abdo, Eick, and
Meyers, and asked him to report on the draft audit and management letter.
Steve McDonald stated this is the second year that his company has performed the audit
for the District and made the following comments:
· The auditor is responsible to ensure the financial statements are fairly presented
and to ensure there are not material misstatements in them.
· He reported no significant audit adjustments or disagreements with management
in the audit.
· He reported a reserve balance of $138,282, as of 12/31/97 for the General
Fund, Which includes a transfer of $35,000 to Equipment Replacement. He
added there was a reduction of over $28,000 from the previous year and that the
balance is approximately 50% of annual expenditures for this budget category.
He noted this is consistent with LMCD policy.
· He reviewed the Special Revenue Funds balances noting they consist of Save the
Lake, Eurasian Watermilfoil, New Equipment Acquisition, and Equipment
Replacement funds. He reported a reserve balance of $167,691 for Eurasian
Watermilfoil as of 12/31/97 and noted this is significantly higher than policy
that recommends a balance of 100% of annual expenditures for this budget
category. He stated he believed this needed attention based on his review.
· He reviewed the year 2000 issue and how it relates to accounting functions and
other systems.
He asked the Board if they had any questions he could address.
Babcock asked if the zebra mussel budget was part of the Eurasian Watermilfoil budget?
Nybeck stated it was.
McMillan suggested the District might want to consider budgeting for less revenue for
Eurasian Watermilfoil in the future.
Babcock stated that is an option and that he believed the District has benefited from low
growth years the past couple years and an efficiently run operation.
Wert asked if there are maximums for reserve fund balances?
Babcock stated the District has a policy targeting 50% for Administration and 100% for
Eurasian Watermilfoil of annual operating expenses for these two budgets.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 3
Nybeck stated he believed this could be addressed in the near future because the 1999
LMCD Budget needs to be forwarded to member cities by July 1.
Babcock stated it might be appropriate in 1998 to make a transfer of $35,000 from
Eurasian Watermilfoil to Eq(fipment Replacement. He added he believed this was not
budgeted for 1998.
MOTION: Ahrens moved, Rascop seconded to accept the draft 1997 LMCD audit
as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. Audit of vouchers for payment (4/16/98 - 4/30/98).
Nelson reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment as submitted.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the audit of vouchers for
payment for the period of 4/16/98 - 4/30/98 as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. March financial summary and balance sheet.
Nelson reviewed the March financial summary and balance sheet as submitted.
Rascop questioned the increase in prosecution fees in comparison with previous years,
noting that court fines are low in comparison to these fees.
Nybeck explained prosecution fees are up for this year because of the pending court
case that is challenging whether Water Patrol Special Deputies can make arrests. He
added there are further activities that have contributed to this increase and he stated he
would check into this further.
Nelson stated when Tallen came before the Board earlier in the year, he cautioned the
Board that expenses might rise because of the change in BWI legislation.
Rascop stated he believed Nybeck should check further into this with Tallen.
Foster suggested the District may wish to check with the courts to see if it is
possible to have court fines increased.
LeFevere stated this should be checked with Tallen prior to investigating with the
courts. He noted he would check with Tallen on this.
McMillan asked for clarification on why liquor license revenue is higher than
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 4
e
budgeted.
Nybeck explained that this amount would be reduced in the near future because this
figure reflects deposits and he noted they would be refunded.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Weft seconded to accept the March financial summary
and balance sheet as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
WATER STRUCTURES
A. Baycliffe POA, Consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of new
multiple dock license, with minor change, and variance applications to add 30" to one
dock finger for better boat access.
MOTION: Foster moved, Rascop seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Order
for approval of new multiple dock license, with minor change, and
variance applications.
Babcock asked for clarification on extended lot lines and whether a variance is actually
needed.
LeFevere stated staff had some similar questions and determined it would be easier to
process a side setback variance application because the applicant was willing to do so.
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously
B. Bayview Apts., staff update on the new multiple dock license application to
reconfigure a non-conforming facility under LMCD Code Section 2.015.
Babcock introduced the agenda item noting there has been some minor changes to the
proposed site plan.' He asked Nybeck to bring the Board up to date on these changes.
Nybeck stated on the proposed site plan, slip 3 should be 17' wide rather than 16', that
slips 19, 21, and 23 should be 9' wide rather than 8' and that slip 13 should be 16'
long rather than 24'. He noted staff had discussed this with the applicant and reported
that they had agreed to these changes. He reported these changes do not increase the
cumulative square footage of the facility and that staff recommends approval with these
changes.
MOTION: Foster moved, Rascop seconded to approve the new 1998 multiple dock
license application for Bayview Apartments.
LeFevere suggested there is not a need for an Order for these changes; however, the
minutes should reflect the square footage approved by the Board.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 5
Ce
Babcock proposed a friendly amendment to note a slip size change for slip 3 from 16' x
32' to 17' x 32', to note slip size changes for slips 19, 21, and 23 from 8' x 16' to 9' x
16', and to note a slip size change for slip 13 from 12.5' x 24' to 12.5' x 16'. Foster
and Rascop agreed to this friendly amendment.
Nybeck added the applicant has agreed to provide a CAD drawing that further reflects
these adjustments in slip sizes. He added a condition on their 1998 multiple dock
certificate is that staff will verify their proposed slip sizes by conducting actual
measurements of their slips when installed.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
Babcock noted that the width of the structure had increased from 178' to 210' because
the width of the fingers had increased from 2' to 3.5' He added there was not an
increase in slip size dimensions.
Groveland HOA, staff update on the new multiple dock license application to
convert seven slide BSU's to seven slip BSU's under LMCD Code Section 2.015.
Babcock introduced the agenda item and asked Nybeck to bring the Board up to date.
Nybeck updated the Board on the pending application noting that staff had not
authorized the installation of the dock as of 4/17/98 because of pending concerns with
the site plan. He added staff has met with the applicant since this date and has
submitted a proposed site plan for Board review. He noted that Randall made a point
in the staff memo regarding slips 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, and 32 that merit
Board discussion because staff needs direction. He stated that these slips are two-sided
tie-on slips, that the applicant is proposing 8' widths at these locations, and that the
square footage calculations at these locations are subjective.
Babcock explained that these slips at the previously approved site plan were approved
for a certain square footage. He added in the proposed site plan, the applicant has
proposed to reduce the square footage at these slip locations yet leave the structure the
same. He noted staffs concern is why would you allow the same slip structure to
continue to exist but count it for less square footage.
Foster stated he believed it is impractical to apply for 8' widths at these slip locations
when the beams on most boats exceed this width. He stated he believed that a tie-on
width dimension should have a credit of no less than 10'.
Babcock stated he believed this a policy question whether the Board should approve this
tie-on at lesser dimensions although the structure has not changed. He added a possible
condition suggested by staff is that if these 8' x 16' slips dimensions are approved by
the Board, that there may be a need to restrict boat size at these locations.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation' District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 6
Nybeck stated staff is comfortable with slips 1 - 18, 19 - 22, 29, 30. He added the tie-
on issue is the problem that staff needs Board direction on and that staff has not
authorized the installation of the dock because of this issue and the lack of a policy.
Foster stated he believed one unresolved issue that needs Board attention is whether
overhangs in slips are to be permitted. He noted there has been increased pressure
to put larger boats in existing docks, which may result in the overhang issue. He stated
he wanted to discuss this under New Business in the meeting. He asked the applicant
what boat length is intended to be stored in these slips?
Suerth stated the Association currently does not allow for boats longer than 25'.
Foster stated the intent of the Code would be violated if a 25' long boat was stored at a
10' x 16' tie-on. He asked the applicant if they would be comfortable to restrict boat
length in the tie-ons to no more than 1' longer than the slip.
Suerth stated the Association would not be comfortable with that.
Foster stated the purpose of the envelope concept ordinance was that either the number
of boats or cumulative square footage of the slips would need to be made up elsewhere
if the applicant wants larger boats.
Babcock stated this ordinance does not allow more boats, it does not allow for a
cumulative increase in square footage at the slips that store the boats and it does not
allow for a further encroachment into side setback areas.
Foster stated the size of the facility as presented has increased because square footage at
the tie-on locations in question has been reduced and transferred to other locations.
Nybeck stated in the Minnetonka Beach application, 10' widths were used at tie-on
locations.
Babcock stated before this ordinance, no changes were allowed at a legal, non-
conforming facility. He added that when the ordinance was being established at the
committee level, the issue of overhang was recognized as a potential problem. He
noted this is the first application for the re. configuration of a non-conforming facility
in which this potential problem has become an issue.
Rascop stated he believed the issues of overhangs and sidehangs were encouraged when
this ordinance was adopted. He added he believed the Board should consider the
proposed application under the existing Code. He noted he opposed this ordinance all
along because of issues such as those presented before the Board.
Babcock stated the intent of the ordinance is to not allow growth at a legal non-
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 7
conforming multiple dock facilities.
LeFevere stated he believed the Board has the ability to make a determination on slip
widths at the tie-on locations. He added the applicant has the ability to enclose the
BSU by putting a finger on the third side of the tie-on location.
Foster stated he believed it is not practical to allow for an 8' width at tie-on locations
and added the Code needs to be amended to address this.
Babcock asked LeFevere whether the Code established a minimum slip size for this
ordinance.
LeFevere stated this provision of the Code was established to prevent applicants from
maintaining their BSU's by approving impractical slip sizes. He noted the Code does
not allow for slips smaller than 6' x 14' to be used to maintain their grandfathered
number of BSU's.
Partyka stated for the tie-on locations with proposed dimensions of 8' x 16', a solution
may be to restrict boat length to these dimensions.
Babcock noted that staff has already suggested that. He added he agreed with Foster
that from a practical standpoint, a 24' long boat cannot be stored in 8' wide slips.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Nelson seconded to approve the new multiple dock license
application for 32 BSU's, as presented, and to direct attorney to prepare
an ordinance amendment to address overhangs and sidehangs.
Partyka stated he believed there is a problem with the motion unless the applicant is
willing to restrict boat lengths at the tie-ons. He added without this, he believed
expansion is being allowed.
MOTION:
TO
AMEND
Foster moved, Partyka seconded to restrict boat lengths at slips in slips
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, and 32 to 18'.
Nelson asked if it would be feasible to approve the application and restrict boat length
to 20' rather than 18'.
John Beattie, a resident of the Association, expressed concern with the conversion rate
for slides to slips at 100 square feet.
Babcock stated that has already been decided and asked that comments be made about
the motions on the floor.
Beattie stated that conversion rate made it difficult for the Association in complying
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 8
with the ordinance. He noted the Association has made a management decision to have
all 32 BSU's in slips in the water. He added they made the decision to convert the
seven slide BSU's to seven slips BSU's and made the application for a conversion rate
of 200 square feet.
Babcock restated his request to discuss the motions on the floor and not the conversion
rate of slides to slips.
Beattie expressed concern with the motion on the floor to restrict slip lengths at the tie-
on locations and added he believed it is unreasonable.
Foster stated he believed restricting boat length at these slips is reasonable because the
intent of the ordinance is to prohibit growth at legal non-conforming facilities.
McMillan stated she believed the problem is that boat sizes are getting larger while
shoreline is not.
Rascop stated he would oppose the amendment because currently there is no policy or
philosophy restricting boat size at tie-ohs, because of the conversion rate allowed for
the buoy field at Sailors World Marina that were 12' x 32', and because he questioned
whether there are any regulations with regards to regulating boat lifts.
LeFevere stated lifts are structures and are regulated because they have to be within
dock use areas, but are not taken into account in provisions relating to slip sizes. He
added he did not recall discussion on how lifts would affect slips sizes under the
envelope concept ordinance.
Foster stated he would not support the motion if the amendment fails.
VOTE ON: Ayes (9), Nayes (2; Nelson and Rascop), Abstained (1, Suerth); vote on
MOTION motion to amend approved.
TO
AMEND
VOTE ON: Ayes (11), Abstained
ORIGINAL carried.
MOTION
(1, Suerth); vote on original motion, as amended,
D. Minnetonka Yacht Club (Lighthouse Island), Consideration of new multiple dock
license application, with minor change, for changes identified in 4/16/98 staff memo.
Babcock reviewed the proposed changes noting they are identifying where the 14'
sailboats are being stored on shore, the docks for slips 13-21 have been moved in closer
to. the island, and that service slip 5 is being moved next to service slip 4.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting,
April 22, 1998
Page 9
ge
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the new multiple dock license
application, with minor changes identified above, for Minnetonka Yacht
Club (Lighthouse Island).
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously
Minnetonka Yacht Club (Carson Bay Facility), Consideration of new multiple dock
license application, with minor change, for changes identified in 4/16/98 staff memo.
Babcock reviewed the staff memo noting the proposed changes are to re-designate six
slips from service to other and to determine whether there has been an increase in
slip size at slips 33 and 34. He questioned the re-designation of these slips to "other"
because the Code currently interprets slips as either transient or non-transient based on
overnight storage. He stated the Board in the past had considered some slips as
service recognizing the boats stored in these slips are essentially work boats to support
the facility, not typically to be rented to the public. He asked the applicant if the
proposed changes at these six slips would be rented.
Tom Burton, representing the applicant, stated they would not necessarily be rented out
because they still have service boats. He noted a couple of these locations had been
rented out in the past.
Babcock stated he believed the Board needs to determine whether they want to allow
the conversion from service boats to other boats and whether to consider it under
the application submitted. He added he believed a new multiple dock license
application with public hearing should be submitted because the proposed conversions
will have impact on the bay.
Burton questioned whether that is necessary because the number of slips is still
remaining the same and because it is clarifying past practices of boat storage at the
facility.
Babcock stated because a previous application was denied with critical bay density
being one subjective criteria considered, he believed the conversion could have similar
impact and that a public hearing should be held.
Burton stated he believed a rental boat would have less activity on the bay than a
service boat.
Nybeck provided background to the Board noting that staff was attempting to clean up
site plans at Lighthouse Island and Carson Bay based on the amendments highlighted by
Jack Strothman. He noted staff was comfortable proceeding with a minor change
application at the Lighthouse Island facility but was not as comfortable proceeding with
the same application at the Carson Bay facility because of slips 33 and 34.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 10
Rascop recommended Babcock make an executive decision in that the proposed changes
cannot be considered under a minor change application.
Bacock stated the Code does not allow the proposed changes in designation of the six
slips to be considered unde{ a minor change application.
MOTION: Foster moved, Ahrens seconded to treat the proposed changes under a
minor change application and consider them tonight.
VOTE:
Ayes (8), Nayes (4; Babcock, McMillan, Rascop, and Partyka); Motion
carried.
Foster asked what concerns there are at slips 33 and 34.
Babcock stated on the approved site plan, these slips are adjacent to each other and are
to be stored on 5' x 14' floating platforms. He added the proposed changes include
relocating slip 34 and staff has questioned whether this would allow for an increase in
boat size.
Burton stated they would be willing to restrict boat length to 26' at these two slips.
Babcock questioned how a 26' long boat could be stored on the floating platform.
Burton reconsidered the proposed changes and noted they would maintain slips 16, 32,
and 33 as service slips and that slips 34, 35, and 36 be re-designated as other slips.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the new multiple dock license,
with minor change, application for Minnetonka Yacht Club (Carson Bay
facility), with the condition that only slips 34-36 be re-designated as other
slips.
Wert stated he would oppose the motion because he believed the proposed changes
would increase the number of boats using the lake.
Burton stated slips 35 and 36 have been rented for some years and that they are trying
to clean their site plan accordingly.
LeFevere strongly recommended the Board decision on these applications be based on
what is licensed, not what they have been getting away with, without coming before the
Board for proper approval. He advised the Board not to encourage licensees to
get away with something so they could possibly get additional rights in the future.
VOTE: Ayes (1, Foster); Nayes (11); Motion failed.
F, Sailors World, Inc., Consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of
Lake Minnetonka Conservation- District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 11
Ge
new multiple dock license application to accommodate 79 BSU's, and variance
application for variances from 40' side setback required by LMCD Code to zero
feet and for length from 100' to 200'
McMillan questioned whether there was any discussion that the docks cannot be
reconfigured within 100' from the shoreline.
Babcock proposed a change to the Findings in sentence 2, paragraph 3 on page 1.
recommended it say "However, 79 slips of the size currently licensed will not fit
within the authorized dock use area and variances previously granted".
He
MOTION:
Foster moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and
Order for approval of new multiple dock license and variance
applications, with the proposed change recommended by Babcock.
McMillan questioned what was the hardship in this approval.
LeFevere stated the draft Order being reviewed by the Board was an amendment to the
1998 Variance Order which took into consideration the discontinuation of the District
Mooring Area in addition to the converging lot lines. He added staff treated the
application as new and did not consider the District Mooring Area because the 1988
Variance Order had expired. He noted Board decided at the 4/22/98 meeting to
consider this Order and the District Mooring Area, in addition to the
converging lot lines as hardships and practical difficulties.
Babcock stated he would vote in favor of the Findings of Fact and Order because he
believed they accurately reflect the Board decision at the 4/22/98 meeting although he
is not in favor of granting the variances. McMillan concurred with Babcock.
VOTE: Ayes (10), Nayes (1, Partyka); Motion carried.
1998 Multiple Dock Licenses, approval of 1998 multiple dock license applications,
w/o change, as outlined in 4/15/98 staff memo.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Nelson seconded to approve the 1998 multiple dock
license applications, without change, as outlined in the 4/15/98 staff
memo.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
H. Additional Business.
Babcock stated there is a letter from the City of Orono with some outstanding issues
with facilities that may come back before the Board at a future date.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation- District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 12
3. LAKE USE & RECREATION
B. Additional Business.
e
There was no additional business
EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
B. 4/10/98 meeting report.
Suerth reported on the following:
· Dr. Ray Newman, U of M Fisheries, will' be coming back with a proposal in the
near future regarding potential LMCD support of continued research of weevils on
Lake Minnetonka to control milfoil.
· John Barten, Hennepin Parks, suggested a water quality study on one of the western
bays with poorer water quality to investigate having a macrophyte dominated bay to
improve water quality.
C. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
6. 'ADMINISTRATION
B. League of MN Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), consideration of liability coverage
limits.
Babcock moved this agenda item up on the agenda. He asked for background from
staff.
Nybeck stated it is that time of year when the District renews its insurance policy with
the LMCIT. He added in order to proceed with renewing the insurance policy, the
Board needs to decide whether or not to waive monetary limits on municipal tort
liability. He stated most cities do not waive it.
MOTION: Foster'moved, Ahrens seconded to not waive monetary limits on municipal
tort liability in the renewal of the LMCIT insurance policy.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Wert left at 9:45 p.m.
9. NEW BUSINESS
Babcock moved this agenda item up to discuss whether to direct attorney to draft a 4'
overhang ordinance amendment.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
A, prl122, 1998
Page 13
LeFevere stated the drafting of the ordinance amendment would not be difficult. He
questioned whether anyone has an idea of current violations. He noted the ordinance if
adopted could be so strict that it could cause political problems.
Babcock recommended a viable way to address this concern is to apply the ordinance
amendment apply when either a conforming or a legal, non-conforming facility comes in to
· reconfigure. He agreed with LeFevere that this would be easier to deal with politically.
Ahrens asked if this ordinance amendment would address slips facing lakeward with boats
that are larger than the slips.
Babcock stated current Code may cover this scenario because it requires that both
structures and boats be stored within the authorized dock use area.
Rascop asked how inboard/outboard motors would be interpreted in the ordinance
amendment.
Foster stated that would depend on how the ordinance is drafted. He noted you could
define it as the hull length or the length at the waterline.
Babcock stated there are three terms that boat manufacturers use. He noted they use
waterline, hull length, and length overall (LOA).
Rascop stated the Board needs to establish which terms to use in the ordinance.
Babcock and Foster stated they preferred LOA.
Suerth asked what is the objective.
Foster stated he believed the objective is to not have the growth of larger boats in smaller
slips.
Babcock stated the goal of an overhang is to tie in boat size to slips size and keep that
proportionate.
Rascop questioned whether the ordinance amendment would create a larger supply of sites
that are in non-compliance.
Babcock stated he believed it is time to tighten up the loose end with regards to overhang .
and how it relates to envelope concept applications.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Suerth seconded to direct attorney to prepare an ordinance
amendment regarding overhangs, to administer the ordinance to new multiple
dock license applications, to allow for 4' overhangs, and to use the length
overall measurement.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation' District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 14
Ambrose questioned whether there should be public hearing notice for this ordinance
amendment9.
LeFevere stated Code does not'require public hearing notice unless the Board sees fit.
Babcock suggested a friendly amendment to the motion that references this ordinance
'amendment in the multiple dock section of the Code. Foster and Suerth agreed to this
friendly amendment.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION:
Foster moved to direct attorney to prepare an ordinance amendment to amend
LMCD Code Section 2.015 to require a minimum slip width of 10' at one-
sided or L-shaped tie-ons.
Babcock suggested taking a different approach that requires slips widths to be two feet
wider than boat widths. He added he believed this applies beyond the envelope concept
ordinance.
LeFevere stated it might be more appropriate to address this through policy rather than an
ordinance amendment. He added he believed enough background has been shared and that
he could work with Chair Babcock in putting this policy in place.
Foster withdrew his motion.
Foster asked the Board to comment on the letter from the City of Minnetonka Beach
regarding noise on a specific charter boat company. He suggested the company be called
in to answer concerns addressed in the letter.
LeFevere stated the Code allows for a lot of leverage and discretion for charter boats that
have liquor, wine, or beer licenses. He added the Code does not have the leverage and
discretion for charter boats alone. He noted he could provide options for the Board to
consider at the 5/13/98 meeting.
Babcock stated he believed noise and hours of operation concerns would get better attention
if you addressed it across the board for all charter boat operators.
The consensus of the Board was to direct staff to contact this charter boat company and
notify them that the Board wants to discuss with them charter boat operations and noise.
5. SAVE THE LAKE
A. Review of draft 1998 "Save the Lake" Budget.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation'District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 15
Nybeck reviewed the draft budget noting that the Board has already approved projects
identified. He added this was brought before the Board to make them aware of the
overall budget.
B. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
6. ADMINISTRATION
A. Update on Planning/Special Projects Intern position;
Nybeck stated applications were received from five candidates from which four were
interviewed. He added all four candidates interviewed were qualified but staff is
recommending Board approval to offer the three month internship to Patrick Lynch at
an hourly rate of $11.00.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Eggers seconded to authorize staff to offer the
Planning/Special Projects Intern position for three months at an hourly
rate of $11.00.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
C. Staff recommending the 5/6/98 Workshop/Planning Session be cancelled and
rescheduled on 5/20/98 for a joint meeting with the MCWD.
Babcock stated the intent of this meeting is to review the Environmental Section of the
Management Plan with the MCWD Board. The meeting is scheduled for 5/20/98 at
Shorewood City Hall and he encouraged full Board attendance.
D. Update on scheduling phosphorous-free fertilizer issues at Mayor's meeting.
Foster stated he had talked with Mayor Bennis about getting this on a future Mayor's
meeting agenda. He added he had not heard back from Mayor Bennis.
E. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Nybeck reported on the following:
· The zebra mussel educational pamphlet has been completed and is in the print shop. He
circulated a copy of the pamphlet for the Board to review.
· An Executive Director Newsletter had been sent out recently and he encouraged Board
members to use it as assistance when reporting to their city council's.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 16
~.. · A letter from the City of Minnetonka Beach has been received regarding noise problems
from a specific charter boat company.
8. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business
101 ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Babcock adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Douglas Babcock, Chair
Eugene A. Partyka, Secretary
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 13, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
· Joint Workshop/Planning session with MCWD, 5120198 @ 6 P.M.
READING OF MINUTES -4122198 Regular Board Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
CONSENT AGENDA - Consent Agenda items identified with a (*) 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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1) Aahhhz of Excelsior Park, Consideration of new on-sale Intoxicating Liquor License
application for the charter boat Sunboat II;
2) Chartered Leasing, Inc., Consideration of new on-sale Intoxicating Liquor License
application for the charter boat Sea Breeze;
3) Seanote Cruises, Inc., Consideration of new on-sale Beer and Wine License
applications for the charter boat Halfnote;
Hennepin County Environmental Services, Spring Park Bay, Consideration of a new
Multiple Dock license application to accommodate 72 Boat Storage Units (BSU), a
Variance application to extend dock to 108', and a Special Density License application to
increase BSU's from 65 to 72;
4)
LAKE USE & RECREATION
A)
B)
C)
D)
(*) Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Significant Activity Report;
Jim Zimmerman, Consideration of request for no-wake buoy;
Staff recommending Board approval of renewal LiquorANine/Beer License
applications as outlined in 516196 memo;
Additional Business;
Se
WATER STRUCTURES
A) Meadowbrook Boat Club, Inc., Consideration of 1998 renewal without change
application;
B) Ordinance Amendment, First reading of an ordinance relating to boat
overhang;
C) Review of draft policy' regarding dimensions at tie-on BSU's;
D) (*) Staff recommends full refund of $250 deposit for City of Wayzata/Boat
Works Development variance application;
E) Additional Business;
EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE
A) (*) Minutes of the 5/8/98 meeting (handout)
B) 5/8/98 meeting report;
C) (*) Evaluation of Truck Hauling Bids for the 1998 EWM Harvesting Program,
staff recommendation to award bid to Minnetonka Portable Dredging Co.;
D) (*) Evaluation of RFP for chemical control of EWM on three public accesses,
staff recommendation to award contract to Lake Management, Inc.;
E) Consideration of compensation adjustment request from Marsh Gabriel, EWM
Diesel/Hydraulic Mechanic;
F) Additional Business;
SAVE THE LAKE
FINANCIAL
A) Audit of vouchers for payment (5/1/98 - 5/15/98);
B) Additional Business;
ADMINISTRATION '
A) Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for
Administrative Assistant, Diane Samis;
El) Additional Business;
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
DRAFT
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
7:00 PM, Wednesday, April 22, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Babcock called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Douglas Babcock
Deephaven; Craig Eggers, Victoria; Bert Foster, Tonka Bay; Lili McMillan, Orono; Craig
Nelson, Spring Park; Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Kent Dahlen, Minnetonka Beach; Bob
Rascop, Shorewood; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Sheldon Weft, Greenwood. Also present
Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Gregory Nybeck, Executive Director; Diane Samis,
Administrative Assistant.
Members Absent: Greg Kitchak, Minnetonka; Tom Gilman, Excelsior.
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock announced that the Lake Minnetonka
Association (LMA) is coordinating a meeting to discuss Lake Minnetonka Water Quality on
Wednesday, 5/6/98 at 7 p.m. at the South Shore Center in Shorewood. He added the MCWD
is coordinating a Clean Water Festival on Saturday, 10/16/98 at 10 a.m. at the Grays
Freshwater Center.
READING OF MINUTES - 4/1/98 Workshop/Planning Session
4/8/98 Regular Board Meeting
MOTION: Foster moved, Partyka seconded to approve the minutes of the 4/1/98
Workshop/Planning Session as submitted.
VOTE: Ayes (9), Abstained (3; Ahrens, Ambrose, and McMillan); Motion carried.
MOTION: Wert moved, Foster seconded to approve the minutes of the 4/8/98 Regular Board
meeting as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda (5 min.).
There were no comments from the public.
CONSENT AGENDA- Partyka moved Ahrens seconded to approve the consent agenda as
submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Items so approved include: 3A Beer/Wine/Liquor
license renewals, Staff recommending approval of 1998 renewal Beer/Wine/Liquor license
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 2
applications as outlined in 4/16/98 staff memo; and 4A Minutes of the 4/10/98 EWM/Exotics
Task Force meeting.
1. FINANCIAL
A. Review of 1997 draft Audit.
Babcock introduced Steve McDonald, an accountant from Abdo, Abdo, Eick, and
Meyers, and asked him to report on the draft audit and management letter.
Steve McDonald stated this is the second year that his company has performed the audit
for the District and made the following comments:
· The auditor is responsible to ensure the financial statements are fairly presented
and to ensure there are not material misstatements in them.
· He reported no significant audit adjustments or disagreements with management
in the audit.
· He reported a reserve balance of $138,282, as of 12/31/97 for the General
Fund, which includes a transfer of $35,000 to Equipment Replacement. He
added there was a reduction of over $28,000 from the previous year and that the
balance is approximately 50 % of annual expenditures for this budget category.
He noted this is consistent with LMCD policy.
· He reviewed the Special Revenue Funds balances noting they consist of Save the
Lake, Eurasian Watermilfoil, New Equipment Acquisition, and Equipment
Replacement funds. He reported a reserve balance of $167,691 for Eurasian
Watermilfoil as of 12/31/97 and noted this is significantly higher than policy
that recommends a balance of 100% of annual expenditures for this budget
category. He stated he believed this needed attention based on his review.
· He reviewed the year 2000 issue and how it relates to accounting functions and
other systems.
He asked the Board if they had any questions he could address.
Babcock asked if the zebra mussel budget was part of the Eurasian Watermilfoil budget?
Nybeck stated it was.
McMillan suggested the District might want to consider budgeting for less revenue for
Eurasian Watermilfoil in the future.
Babcock stated that is an option and that he believed the District has benefited from low
growth years the past couple years and an efficiently run operation.
Wert asked if there are maximums for reserve fund balances?
Babcock stated the District has a policy targeting 50% for Administration and 100% for
Eurasian Watermilfoil of annual operating expenses for these two budgets.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 3
Nybeck stated he believed this could be addressed in the near future because the 1999
LMCD Budget needs to be forwarded to member cities by July 1.
Babcock stated it might be appropriate in 1998 to make a transfer of $35,000 from
Eurasian Watermilfoil to Eqfiipment Replacement. He added he believed this was not
budgeted for 1998.
MOTION: Ahrens moved, Rascop seconded to accept the draft 1997 LMCD audit
as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Audit of vouchers for payment (4/16/98 - 4/30/98).
Nelson reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment as submitted.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the audit of vouchers for
payment for the period of 4/16/98 - 4/30/98 as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
March financial summary and balance sheet.
Nelson reviewed the March financial summary and balance sheet as submitted.
Rascop questioned the increase in prosecution fees in comparison with previous years,
noting that court fines are low in comparison to these fees.
Nybeck explained prosecution fees are up for this year because of the pending court
case that is challenging whether Water Patrol Special Deputies can make arrests. He
added there are further activities that have contributed to this increase and he stated he
would check into this further.
Nelson stated when Tallen came before the Board earlier in the year, he cautioned the
Board that expenses might rise because of the change in BWI legislation.
Rascop stated he believed Nybeck should check further into this with Tallen.
Foster suggested the District may wish to check with the courts to see if it is
possible to have court fines increased.
LeFevere stated this should be checked with Tallen prior to investigating with the
courts. He noted he would check with Tallen on this.
McMillan asked for clarification on why liquor license revenue is higher than
Lake Minnetonka Conservation- District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 4
e
budgeted.
Nybeck explained that this amount would be reduced in the near future because this
figure reflects deposits and he noted they would be refunded.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Wen seconded to accept the March financial summary
and balance sheet as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously
WATER STRUCTURES
A. Baycliffe POA, Consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of new
multiple dock license, with minor change, and variance applications to add 30" to one
dock finger for better boat access.
MOTION: Foster moved, Rascop seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Order
for approval of new multiple dock license, with minor change, and
variance applications.
Babcock asked for clarification on extended lot lines and whether a variance is actually
needed.
LeFevere stated staff had some similar questions and determined it would be easier to
process a side setback variance application because the applicant was willing to do so.
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously
B. Bayview Apts., staff update on the new multiple dock license application to
reconfigure a non-conforming facility under LMCD Code Section 2.015.
Babcock introduced the agenda item noting there has been some minor changes to the
proposed site plan.~ He asked Nybeck to bring the Board up to date on these changes.
Nybeck stated on the proposed site plan, slip 3 should be 17' wide rather than 16', that
slips 19, 21, and 23 should be 9' wide rather than 8' and that slip 13 should be 16'
long rather than 24'. He noted staff had discussed this with the applicant and reported
that they had agreed to these changes. He reported these changes do not increase the
cumulative square footage of the facility and that staff recommends approval with these
changes.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Rascop seconded to approve the new 1998 multiple dock
license application for Bayview Apartments.
LeFevere suggested there is not a need for an Order for these changes; however, the
minutes should reflect the square footage approved by the Board.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 5
Co
Babcock proposed a friendly amendment to note a slip size change for slip 3 from 16' x
32' to 17' x 32', to note slip size changes for slips 19, 21, and 23 from 8' x 16' to 9' x
16', and to note a slip size change for slip 13 from 12.5' x 24' to 12.5' x 16'. Foster
and Rascop agreed to this friendly amendment.
Nybeck added the applicant has agreed to provide a CAD drawing that further reflects
these adjustments in slip sizes. He added a condition on their 1998 multiple dock
certificate is that staff will verify their proposed slip sizes by conducting actual
measurements of their slips when installed.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
Babcock noted that the width of the structure had increased from 178' to 210' because
the width of the fingers had increased from 2' to 3.5'. He added there was not an
increase in slip size dimensions.
Groveland HOA, staff update on the new multiple dock license application to
convert seven slide BSIJ's to seven slip BSU's under LMCD Code Section 2.015.
Babcock introduced the agenda item and asked Nybeck to bring the Board up to date.
Nybeck updated the Board on the pending application noting that staff had not
authorized the installation of the dock as of 4/17/98 because of pending concerns with
the site plan. He added staff has met with the applicant since this date and has
submitted a proposed site plan for Board review. He noted that Randall made a point
in the staff memo regarding slips 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, and 32 that merit
Board discussion because staff needs direction. He stated that these slips are two-sided
tie-on slips, that the applicant is proposing 8' widths at these locations, and that the
square footage calculations at these locations are subjective.
Babcock explained that these slips at the previously approved site plan were approved
for a certain square footage. He added in the proposed site plan, the applicant has
proposed to reduce the square footage at these slip locations yet leave the structure the
same. He noted staffs concern is why would you allow the same slip structure to
continue to exist but count it for less square footage.
Foster stated he believed it is impractical to apply for 8' widths at these slip locations
when the beams on most boats exceed this width. He stated he believed that a tie-on
width dimension should have a credit of no less than 10'.
Babcock stated he believed this a policy question whether the Board should approve this
tie-on at lesser dimensions although the structure has not changed. He added a possible
condition suggested by staff is that if these 8' x 16' slips dimensions are approved by
the Board, that there may be a need to restrict boat size at these locations.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 6
Nybeck stated staff is comfortable with slips 1 - 18, 19 - 22, 29, 30. He added the tie-
on issue is the problem that staff needs Board direction on and that staff has not
authorized the installation o£ the dock because of this issue and the lack of a policy.
Foster stated he believed one unresolved issue that needs Board attention is whether
overhangs in slips are to be permitted. He noted there has been increased pressure
to put larger boats in existing docks, which may result in the overhang issue. He stated
he wanted to discuss this under New Business in the meeting. He asked the applicant
what boat length is intended to be stored in these slips?
Suerth stated the Association currently does not allow for boats longer than 25'.
Foster stated the intent of the Code would be violated if a 25' long boat was stored at a
!0' x 16' tie-on. He asked the applicant if they would be comfortable to restrict boat
length in the tie-ohs to no more than 1' longer than the slip.
Suerth stated the Association would not be comfortable with that.
Foster stated the purpose of the envelope concept ordinance was that either the number
of boats or cumulative square footage of the slips would need to be made up elsewhere
if the applicant wants larger boats.
Babcock stated this ordinance does not allow more boats, it does not allow for a
cumulative increase in square footage at the slips that store the boats and it does not
allow for a further encroachment into side setback areas.
Foster stated the size of the facility as presented has increased because square footage at
the tie-on locations in question has been reduced and transferred to other locations.
Nybeck stated in the Minnetonka Beach application, 10' widths were used at tie-on
locations.
Babcock stated before this ordinance, no changes were allowed at a legal, non-
conforming facility. He added that when the ordinance was being established at the
committee level, the issue of overhang was recognized as a potential problem. He
noted this is the first application for the reconfiguration of a non-conforming facility
in which this potential problem has become an issue.
Rascop stated he believed the issues of overhangs and sidehangs were encouraged when
this ordinance was adopted. He added he believed the Board should consider the
proposed application under the existing Code. He noted he opposed this ordinance all
along because of issues such as those presented before the Board.
Babcock stated the intent of the ordinance is to not allow growth at a legal non-
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 7
conforming multiple dock facilities.
LeFevere stated he believed the Board has the ability to make a determination on slip
widths at the tie-on locations. He added the applicant has the ability to enclose the
BSU by putting a finger ot~ the third side of the tie-on location.
Foster stated he believed it is not practical to allow for an 8' width at tie-on locations
and added the Code needs to be amended to address this.
Babcock asked LeFevere whether the Code established a minimum slip size for this
ordinance.
LeFevere stated this provision of the Code was established to prevent applicants from
maintaining their BSIJ's by approving impractical slip sizes. He noted the Code does
not allow for slips smaller than 6' x 14' to be used to maintain their grandfathered
number of BSU's.
Partyka stated for the tie-on locations with proposed dimensions of 8' x 16', a solution
may be to restrict boat length to these dimensions.
Babcock noted that staff has already suggested that. He added he agreed with Foster
that from a practical standpoint, a 24' long boat cannot be stored in 8' wide slips.
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Nelson seconded to approve the new multiple dock license
application for 32 BSU's, as presented, and to direct attorney to prepare
an ordinance amendment to address overhangs and sidehangs.
Partyka stated he believed there is a problem with the motion unless the applicant is
willing to restrict boat lengths at the tie-ons. He added without this, he believed
expansion is being allowed.
MOTION:
TO
AMEND
Foster moved, Partyka seconded to restrict boat lengths at slips in slips
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, and 32 to 18'.
Nelson asked if it would be feasible to approve the application and restrict boat length
to 20' rather than 18'.
John Beattie, a resident of the Association, expressed concern with the conversion rate
for slides to slips at 100 square feet.
Babcock stated that has already been decided and asked that comments be made about
the motions on the floor.
Beattie stated that conversion rate made it difficult for the Association in complying
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 8
De
with the ordinance. He noted the Association has made a management decision to have
all 32 BSU's in slips in the water. He added they made the decision to convert the
seven slide BSU's to seven slips BSU's and made the application for a conversion rate
of 200 square feet.
Babcock restated his request to discuss the motions on the floor and not the conversion
rate of slides to slips.
Beattie expressed concern with the motion on the floor to restrict slip lengths at the tie-
on locations and added he believed it is unreasonable.
Foster stated he believed restricting boat length at these slips is reasonable because the
intent of the ordinance is to prohibit growth at legal non-conforming facilities.
McMillan stated she believed the problem is that boat sizes are getting larger while
shoreline is not.
Rascop stated he would oppose the amendment because currently there is no policy or
philosophy restricting boat size at tie-ons, because of the conversion rate allowed for
the buoy field at Sailors World Marina that were 12' x 32', and because he questioned
whether there are any regulations with regards to regulating boat lifts.
LeFevere stated lifts are structures and are regulated because they have to be within
dock use areas, but are not taken into account in provisions relating to slip sizes. He
added he did not recall discussion on how lifts would affect slips sizes under the
envelope concept ordinance.
Foster stated he would not support the motion if the amendment fails.
VOTE ON: Ayes (9), Nayes (2; Nelson and Rascop), Abstained (I, Suerth); vote on
MOTION motion to amend approved.
TO
AMEND
VOTE ON: Ayes (11), Abstained
ORIGINAL carded.
MOTION
(1, Suerth); vote on original motion, as amended,
Minnetonka Yacht Club (Lighthouse Island), Consideration of new multiple dock
license application, with minor change, for changes identified in 4/16/98 staff memo.
Babcock reviewed the proposed changes noting they are identifying where the 14'
sailboats are being stored on shore, the docks for slips 13-21 have been moved in closer
to. the island, and that service slip 5 is being moved next to service slip 4.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 9
ge
MOTION:
Rascop moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the new multiple dock license
application, with minor changes identified above, for Minnetonka Yacht
Club (Lighthouse Island).
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously
Minnetonka Yacht Club (Carson Bay Facility), Consideration of new multiple dock
license application, with minor change, for changes identified in 4/16/98 staff memo.
Babcock reviewed the staff memo noting the proposed changes are to re-designate six
slips from service to other and to determine whether there has been an increase in
slip size at slips 33 and 34. He questioned the re-designation of these slips to "other"
because the Code currently interprets slips as either transient or non-transient based on
overnight storage. He stated the Board in the past had considered some slips as
service recognizing the boats stored in these slips are essentially work boats to support
the facility, not typically to be rented to the public. He asked the applicant if the
proposed changes at these six slips would be rented.
Tom Burton, representing the applicant, stated they would not necessarily be rented out
because they still have service boats. He noted a couple of these locations had been
rented out in the past.
Babcock stated he believed the Board needs to determine whether they want to ~low
the conversion from service boats to other boats and whether to consider it under
the application submitted. He added he believed a new multiple dock license
application with public heating should be submitted because the proposed conversions
will have impact on the bay.
Burton questioned whether that is necessary because the number of slips is still
remaining the same and because it is clarifying past practices of boat storage at the
facility.
Babcock stated because a previous application was denied with critical bay density
being one subjective criteria considered, he believed the conversion could have similar
impact and that a public hearing should be held.
Burton stated he believed a rental boat would have less activity on the bay than a
service boat.
Nybeck provided background to the Board noting that staff was attempting to clean up
site plans at Lighthouse Island and Carson Bay based on the amendments highlighted by
Jack Strothman. He noted staff was comfortable proceeding with a minor change
application at the Lighthouse Island facility but was not as comfortable proceeding with
the same application at the Carson Bay facility because of slips 33 and 34.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 10
Rascop recommended Babcock make an executive decision in that the proposed changes
cannot be considered under a minor change application.
Bacock stated the Code does not allow the proposed changes in designation of the six
slips to be considered unde{ a minor change application.
MOTION: Foster moved, Ahrens seconded to treat the proposed changes under a
minor change application and consider them tonight.
VOTE:
Ayes (8), Nayes (4; Babcock, McMillan, Rascop, and Partyka); Motion
carried.
Foster asked what concerns there are at slips 33 and 34.
Babcock stated on the approved site plan, these slips are adjacent to each other and are
to be stored on 5' x 14' floating platforms. He added the proposed changes include
relocating slip 34 and staff has questioned whether this would allow for an increase in
boat size.
Burton stated they would be willing to restrict boat length to 26' at these two slips.
Babcock questioned how a 26' long boat could be stored on the floating platform.
Burton reconsidered the proposed changes and noted they would maintain slips 16, 32,
and 33 as service slips and that slips 34, 35, and 36 be re-designated as other slips.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the new multiple dock license,
with minor change, application for Minnetonka Yacht Club (Carson Bay
facility), with the condition that only slips 34-36 be re-designated as other
slips.
Wert stated he would oppose the motion because he believed the proposed changes
would increase the number of boats using the lake.
Burton stated slips 35 and 36 have been rented for some years and that they are trying
to clean their site plan accordingly.
LeFevere strongly recommended the Board decision on these applications be based on
what is licensed, not what they have been getting away with, without coming before the
Board for proper approval. He advised the Board not to encourage licensees to
get away with something so they could possibly get additional rights in the future.
VOTE: Ayes (1, Foster); Nayes (11); Motion failed.
F, Sailors World, Inc., Consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of
Lake Minnetonka Conservation- District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page
new multiple dock license application to accommodate 79 BSU's, and variance
application for variances from 40' side setback required by LMCD Code to zero
feet and for length from 100' to 200'
McMillan questioned whetfier there was any discussion that the docks cannot be
reconfigured within 100' from the shoreline.
Babcock proposed a change to the Findings in sentence 2, paragraph 3 on page 1.
recommended it say "However, 79 slips of the size currently licensed will not fit
within the authorized dock use area and variances previously granted".
He
MOTION:
Foster moved, Dahlen seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and
Order for approval of new multiple dock license and variance
applications, with the proposed change recommended by Babcock.
McMillan questioned what was the hardship in this approval.
LeFevere stated the draft Order being reviewed by the Board was an amendment to the
1998 Variance Order which took into consideration the discontinuation of the District
Mooring Area in addition to the converging lot lines. He added staff treated the
application as new and did not consider the District Mooring Area because the 1988
Variance Order had expired. He noted Board decided at the 4/22/98 meeting to
consider this Order and the District Mooring Area, in addition to the
converging lot lines as hardships and practical difficulties.
Babcock stated he would vote in favor of the Findings of Fact and Order because he
believed they accurately reflect the Board decision at the 4/22/98 meeting although he
is not in favor of granting the variances. McMillan concurred with Babcock.
VOTE: Ayes (10), Nayes (1, Partyka); Motion carried.
G. 1998 Multiple Dock Licenses, approval of 1998 multiple dock license applications,
w/o change, as outlined in 4/15/98 staff memo.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Nelson seconded to approve the 1998 multiple dock
license applications, without change, as outlined in the 4/15/98 staff
memo.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
H. Additional Business.
Babcock stated there is a letter from the City of Orono with some outstanding issues
with facilities that may come back before the Board at a future date.
Lake Minnetonka Conservatiorr District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 12
3. LAKE USE & RECREATION
B. Additional Business.
e
There was no additional business
EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
B. 4/10/98 meeting report.
Suerth reported on the following:
* Dr. Ray Newman, U of M Fisheries, will' be coming back with a proposal in the
near future regarding potential LMCD support of continued research of weevils on
Lake Minnetonka to control milfoil.
· John Batten, Hennepin Parks, suggested a water quality study on one of the western
bays with poorer water quality to investigate having a macrophyte dominated bay to
improve water quality.
C. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
6. 'ADMINISTRATION
B. League of MN Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), consideration of liability coverage
limits.
Babcock moved this agenda item up on the agenda. He asked for background from
staff.
Nybeck stated it is that time of year when the District renews its insurance policy with
the LMCIT. He added in order to proceed with renewing the insurance policy, the
Board needs to decide whether or not to waive monetary limits on municipal tort
liability. He stated most cities do not waive it.
MOTION: Foster'moved, Ahrens seconded to not waive monetary limits on municipal
tort liability in the renewal of the LMCIT insurance policy.
VOTE: Motion carded unanimously.
Wert left at 9:45 p.m.
9. NEW BUSINESS
Babcock moved this agenda item up to discuss whether to direct attorney to draft a 4'
overhang ordinance amendment.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 13
LeFevere stated the drafting of the ordinance amendment would not be difficult. He
questioned whether anyone has an idea of current violations. He noted the ordinance if
adopted could be so strict that it could cause political problems.
Babcock recommended a viable way to address this concern is to apply the ordinance
amendment apply when either a conforming or a legal, non-conforming facility comes in to
· reconfigure. He agreed with LeFevere that this would be easier to deal with politically.
Ahrens asked if this ordinance amendment would address slips facing lakeward with boats
that are larger than the slips.
Babcock stated current Code may cover this scenario because it requires that both
structures and boats be stored within the authorized dock use area.
Rascop asked how inboard/outboard motors would be interpreted in the ordinance
amendment.
Foster stated that would depend on how the ordinance is drafted. He noted you could
define it as the hull length or the length at the waterline.
Babcock stated there are three terms that boat manufacturers use. He noted they use
waterline, hull length, and length overall (LOA).
Rascop stated the Board needs to establish which terms to use in the ordinance.
Babcock and Foster stated they preferred LOA.
Suerth asked what is the objective.
Foster stated he believed the objective is to not have the growth of larger boats in smaller
slips.
Babcock stated the goal of an overhang is to tie in boat size to slips size and keep that
proportionate.
Rascop questioned whether the ordinance amendment would create a larger supply of sites
that are in non-compliance.
Babcock stated he believed it is time to tighten up the loose end with regards to overhang .
and how it relates to envelope concept applications.
MOTION:
Foster moved, Suerth seconded to direct attorney to prepare an ordinance
amendment regarding overhangs, to administer the ordinance to new multiple
dock license applications, to allow for 4' overhangs, and to use the length
overall measurement.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation' District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 14
Ambrose questioned whether them should be public hearing notice for this ordinance
amendment?
LeFevere stated Code does not require public hearing notice unless the Board sees fit.
Babcock suggested a friendly amendment to the motion that references this ordinance
· amendment in the multiple dock section of the Code. Foster and Suerth agreed to this
friendly amendment.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION:
Foster moved to direct attorney to prepare an ordinance amendment to amend
LMCD Code Section 2.015 to require a minimum slip width of 10' at one-
sided or L-shaped tie-ohs.
Babcock suggested taking a different approach that requires slips widths to be two feet
wider than boat widths. He added he believed this applies beyond the envelope concept
ordinance.
LeFevere stated it might be more appropriate to address this through policy rather than an
ordinance amendment. He added he believed enough background has been shared and that
he could work with Chair Babcock in putting this policy in place.
Foster withdrew his motion.
Foster asked the Board to comment on the letter from the City of Minnetonka Beach
regarding noise on a specific charter boat company. He suggested the company be called
in to answer concerns addressed in the letter.
LeFevere stated the Code allows for a lot of leverage and discretion for charter boats that
have liquor, wine, or beer licenses. He added the Code does not have the leverage and
discretion for charter boats alone. He noted he could provide options for the Board to
consider at the 5/13/98 meeting.
Babcock stated he believed noise and hours of operation concerns would get better attention
if you addressed it across the board for all charter boat operators.
The consensus of the Board was to direct staff to contact this charter boat company and
notify them that the Board wants to discuss with them charter boat operations and noise.
SAVE THE LAKE
A. Review of draft 1998 "Save the Lake" Budget.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 15
Nybeck reviewed the draft budget noting that the Board has already approved projects
identified. He added this was brought before the Board to make them aware of the
overall budget.
B. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
ADMINISTRATION
A. Update on Planning/Special Projects Intern position;
Nybeck stated applications were received from five candidates from which four were
interviewed. He added all four candidates interviewed were qualified but staff is
recommending Board approval to offer the three month internship to Patrick Lynch at
an hourly rate of $11.00.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Eggers seconded to authorize staff to offer the
Planning/Special Projects Intern position for three months at an hourly
rate of $11.00.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously
C. Staff recommending the 5/6/98 Workshop/Planning Session be cancelled and
rescheduled on 5/20/98 for a joint meeting with the MCWD.
Babcock stated the intent of this meeting is to review the Environmental Section of the
Management Plan with the MCWD Board. The meeting is scheduled for 5/20/98 at
Shorewood City Hall and he encouraged full Board attendance.
D. Update on scheduling phosphorous-free fertilizer issues at Mayor's meeting.
Foster stated he had talked with Mayor Bennis about getting this on a future Mayor's
meeting agenda. He added he had not heard back from Mayor Bennis.
E. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Nybeck reported on the following:
· The zebra mussel educational pamphlet has been completed and is in the print shop. He
circulated a copy of the pamphlet for the Board to review.
- · An Executive Director Newsletter had been sent out recently and he encouraged Board
members to use it as assistance when reporting to their city council's.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation-District
Regular Board Meeting
April 22, 1998
Page 16
.. · A letter from the City of Minnetonka Beach has been received regarding noise problems
from a specific charter boat company.
8. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business
10~ ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Babcock adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Douglas Babcock, Chair
Eugene A. Partyka, Secretary
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
From:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
Date:
Subject:
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1657
(612)
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island V~ew Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
To;
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
To~
From:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
Date:
Subject:
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
prlnted on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(6;12) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Mayor and City Council
Jim Fackler
Date:
Subject:
May 12, 1998
Temporary issuance of a abutting dock site #42129
not paid to date, to a non abutting applicant.
At this time the dock site #42129 assigned to 4705 Island View Drive, Gene Smith has not been
renewed for the 1998 boating season.
As policy, City Staff can assign any abutting dock site that has not been renewed for the current
season to a non- abutting applicant as long as it is accessible from a public access.
The dock site #42129 is accessible from the Roanoke Lane access and a applicant, Todd Stead
has agreed to use this site on a temporary basis for the 1998 season.
The abutting home owner, Gene Smith will be able to have first priority for the 1999 season as
stated in Mound City Ordinance 437:05 Sub. 7.
printed on recycled paper