79-04-10 CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
AGENDA
:M 79-121
~M 79-115/119
~M 79-114
SM 79-120
CM 79-117
CM 79-116
CM 79-118
Mound City Council
April 10, 1979
City Hall
7:30 P.M.
1~ Public Hearing - Delinquent Utility Bills Pg. 930-931
2. Planning Commission Recommendations Pg. 862-929
3. Industrial Revenue Bonds - Surfside Pg. 861
4. Dock Permit Variance Pg. 859-860
5. Tax Forfeit Land
A. Lot 17, Block 7, Shadywood Point Pg. 857-858
B. Lots 17 & 18, Block 14, Seton Pg. 856
6. Co~ents & Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit)
7. Elevator at City Hall Pg. 854-855
8. Transfer of Funds
9. Payment of Bills
10. Information Memorandums/Misc. Pg. 839-853
11. Committee Reports
Page 932
300 Metro Square Building, 7th Street and !qobert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 5510T~ Area 612, 291-6359
April 5, 1979
Mr. Leonard L. Kopp, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Leonard:
The following information is provided to you in response to your
March 26, 1979 request to examine the matter of the Enchanted
Island/Shady Island Interceptor sewer.
The Commission did respond to some of your concerns of inter-
community flow in their letter of December 6, 1978 to your
engineers McCombs and Knutson. In a disussion with Commissi6n~-.
staff, the following additional information has been obtained.
The Commission has expended considerable time and effort and
believe they now have the problem of large water flow from
Enchanted Island under control as much as possible. Hopefully
this is the case.
The sewer line was televised in May 1978 and several problems
of infiltration were identified. These problems were located
in the vicinity of where the road and sewer line was flooded
with lake water last year. The Commission did correct the
interceptor problems and this past March 14th and 20th did wit-
ness two sewer service line repairs by the City of Minnetrista
in the trouble areas. All of this work should substantially
reduce the infiltration in this sewerage system.
The sewage flow from Shorewood is high and no work was done on
the city or private systems in that city. The wastewater from
Shorewood is being measured as it enters and leaves Minnetrista
and an accurate flow into Mound is now being made. In Decem-
ber 1978, the sewage pumps of the two pumping stations at the
city limits of Shorewood and Minnetrista were calibrated and
timers of pump use were placed on their pumps. This allows for
accurate measurement of sewage pumped from Shorewood and
Minnetris%a. The Commission believes they have an accurate flow
measurement system on this line at this time.
- 2 -
The Commission is giving Mound full credit for this excessive
flow that took place in 1978 and is making adjustments to the
Mound sewer bill. The detail of this billing may be reviewed
with Ray Odde of the Commission staff.
The Minnetrista Interceptor on Enchanted Island has been a
problem. Hopefully, this problem is now under control. The
Commission believes that they have the problems under control.
If I can be of any further help, please let me know.
Sincerely, f
Maurice K. Dorton, Director
Physical Planning Division
: sje
cc: Richard J. Dougherty
mETRC~OLITFtFI
W~/I'E
CONTROL
coml'flI//ioFI
l:~,'in Cities
April 5, 1979
Mr. Leonard L. Kopp
City Manager
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Kopp:
This letter is in response to your letter of March 26, 1979 to the
Metropolitan Council of which the Commission was copied. Much of
the response in this letter is a re-statement of the determination
of intercommunity flow from Minnetrista to Mound as stated in our
letter of December 6, 1978 to McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc. a
copy of which is attached.
The Commission has pump running time meters in our lift stations
which pump wastewater from the Douglas Beach-Enchanted Island-Shady
Island areas of Minnetrista and Shorewood. The flow volume (based
on pump running time meter and calibrated pump capacity) was determined
and deducted from the Mound wastewater flow as measured at M-423. In
addition the wastewater flow volumes from other connections in Minne-
trista are and will be determined using pump running time meters and
calibrated capacity as stated in our attached letter.
The City of Minnetrista did on March 14 and 20, 1979 expose and repair
two single family residence sewer connections which had considerable
infiltration. The Commission intends to re-televise sections of this
sewer to determine the effectiveness of this repair and will continue
to assign wastewater flow to communities in which the flow originate.
The method of measuring flow via pump running time meter and calibrated
pump capacity in lieu of meters is considered an effective and accurate
method of flow measurement. We have requested this data be furnished
by the City of Minnetrista on a regular basis (i.e., at least quarterly).
Your interest in this matter is appreciated.
Very truly~,rs,
Chief Administrator
RJD:RAO:hw
Attachment
cc: City o~ Minnetrista
Ruth Hustad
George Lusher
Metropolitan Council
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 9, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-123
SUBJECT: CETA Contract
The required documents as listed on the attached memorandum
have been completed and are ready for signature.
A resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to sign the
documents is recommended.
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 9, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-122
SUBJECT:
Dinner Dance Permit. - Surfside
Application for a dinner dance permit for Surfside from
April 1st to April 30th has been received.
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 9, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-33
SUBJECT: Refunds oh Dock Permits
Attached is a copy of the list of refunds on dock permits
from the Dock Inspector. These will be listed on the
bills.
Approval of the Dock Permits will be listed on the Agenda
for April 24th meeting.
:!. · ,__ ....... - ......
ON ~ MINN~ON~ INDIAN ~URIAE MOUND~
534[ M~WOOO RO~D TELEPHONE
MOUN~. MINN~SOT~ 5536~ (612) 472-1155
~pril h, 1979
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Leonard Kopp
Dock Inspector
Refunds on Dock Permits
The fol~owin§ ~pplicants qualify for a refund of dock permit fees.
1. G~ry Cable; 4921 Drummond Rd.
2. Rey Grover; Box 81
3. Harry B~ert; 2977 Oakls%m Ln.
h. Lon Johnson; 2190 Cedar Ln.
5. Cyril Nicc~m; 2172 Noble Ln.
6. James Luff; 4761 Island View Dr.
7. David Anderson; 2541L~kewood Ln.
8. Jeff Hober9; 5001Woodr~dge Rd.
9, George Miller; 3018 Bri§hton Blvd.
10. H. Rein~tz; 3162 Alexander Ln.
11. Martin H~intz; 4978 B~rtlett Blvd.
12. Robert Bonnema; ~079 Bsrtleht Blvd.
Dick Thompson; 432 S. E. 6th St.
Mpls, Mn. 55404
Respectfully,
Don Rother
Dock Inspector
Shsrin§
Sherin9
Sh~ring
Sharin9
Sharing
Sharing
Sharin9
Sharon§
Sh~r~ng
Sharing
Sh@r~n§
Sharins
Permit den~ed
CITY nF MINNETRISTA
"7'7131 I~rlUNTY RI'tAD 1113 W. · MnUND, MINN£CIEITA 5,5364 · PHnNE [6123 4'72-3484
~-~ ' ~ I I - ~ I _]. Illl I
L
DATE
Leonard Kopp
City of Mound
5341. Maywood Road
Mound, Mn. 55364
April 6, 1979
Dear Len:
This is in response to your letter
dated April 4th.
Our Council cannot make the date you
have suggested. Council would pre-
fer a Wednesday meeting after
Easter Sunday. .The 25th would
be the best date since all of the
Council will be in town.
_Jeff Nelson
............. ~ SIGNED ..........................
of prt g.
P. O. BOX 452
4349 WARREN AVENUE
SPRING PARK, MN 55384
471-SO51 · 471-9055
April 4, 1979
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
402 East Lake Street
Wayzata, ~ 55391
Gentlemen:
At the request of the City Council of Spring Park
this letter is intended to express Spring Park's
position on the matter of the Boulder Bridge public
hearing set for 9 a.m., Thursday, April 5, 1979.
It is the concensus of this Council to reaffirm the
Districts right given by Minnesota Laws of 1967,
~mended 1969, Sec. 3 (F) to wit:
"T° regulate the construction, installation
and maintenence of permanent and temporary
docks and moorings consistent with federal
and state law."
/
o~o
z
Tad Jude
District 42A
Hennepin-Wright Counties
Communities:
Corcoran Maple Plain
Dayton Minnetrista
Greenfield Mound
Hanover Rogers
Hassan Spring Park
Independence St, Bonifacius
Maple Grove
House
Representatives
Martin Olav Sabo~
April 6, 1979
Mr. Leonard Kopp
City Administrator
City of Mound
2128 Centerview Lane
Mound, MN 55364
Dear .
Thank you very much for allowing me to use your City
facilities for Office Hours last Saturday. I was pleased
with the turnout, as well as the discussions held.
Please let me know if I can be of assistance to you or
the City during the remainder of the legislative session.
Although we haven't done much of substance during the
first three months of session, I have a hunch the next
six weeks will make up for a lack of previous activity.
Sincerely,
Tad Jude
State Representative
TJ:mb
Reply to: [] Office: Minnesota House of Representatives, State Capitol, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-4248
[] Home: 5230 Sulgrove Rd., Mound, Minnesota 55364 (612) 472~2790
P. O. BOX 452
4349 WARREN AVENUE
SPRING PARK, MN 55384
471-9051 · 471-9055
April 4, 1979
Mr. Leonard Kopp, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Leonard:
This ~11 confirm our arrangements to meet with your
Council committee on April 23rd at the Spring Park
City Hall at 7:30 P. M.
This committee to discuss the water interconnection
possibilities between our two cities.
Sincerely,
Patricia Osmonson
Administrator/Clerk/Treasurer
PO/ph
cc: Rockvam
Widmer
Goman
GERMAIN BOLL, President
Maple Plain
446o1067
[ILTON SKOOG, Vice President
Bloomington
881-6391
MRS. JUSTINE GOULD, Treasurer
Maple Grove
425-4472
DIRECTORS:
MRS. JUDY LEWMAN
Mound
472-4524
ADAM JACOBSEN
Minueapolis
729-0283
Hennepin County Agricultural Society
MRS. EILEEN ROEHLKE, Secretary - Rogers, Minuesota 55374 t
Route 1, Box 146 1
Tel. (612) 498-8502 , V~
A'[,.?'il 5 ;..I .c,"f9
TO: Honnep'L;3 fk.wzoty M~.nxicipalities
RE: HENNEPil.f f;OD2'ITY ?'AIR
p ..... ,..~.a~. a n~bor munJ. ciDa].ities each y
year contribut~ eur,~s to tb~ ~'~ ..... ~
........................ p ..... County
Agricult,zr~! 2oaioSy to halp fS.~.ana~ th~ Hennepin
County 7;aiz~,
MRS. EVELYN KORPI
Crystal
545-8239
RUSSELL STANSFIELD
· Golden Valley
545-2254
MRS, KAREN HUMPHREY
Maple Plain
479-1113
_ oo....x,,.,. ,. :.~ ng funds from this source.
Checks may be mailed to the Secretary°
The 1978 financial statement is enclosed. You
will note, that the major expenses are 4H club
exhitit premulns, judges and $quipment rental.
The 1979 Hennepin County Fair will be held at
the Bureau of P~!ic Servico~(Highway Dept)
buildings and grounds in Hopkis July 26.~27-28.
WESLEY ROEHLKE
Rogers, MN.
498-8502
Nearly all mtmicipa!ities are represented in the
county .4H clubs and other groups through out the
the county~
MEMBERS OF
ADVISORY BOARD
E.F. ROBB JR~
County Commissioner
GORDON HUSTAD
Administrative Service Manager
Department of Public Works
TAD JUDE
Representative District 42A
Under 1971 statute law nu~oer 38~2 ~PP~i0PP.2:ATXONS
BY CERTAIH M'SNiCIP.&LiTiES,~ .... Muncipalities can
give to the ccuuty-' Agyicultural Society arm. ua!ly
a sum not to excede ,~1000.00
Sincerely
l~ms. Eileen l{oohlke.~
Secret, sty
JIM KEMP
Extension Director
73rd ANNUAL tIENNEPIN COUNTY FAIR AT HOPKINS
Bureau of Public Service
County Rd. 18
July 26-27-28, 1979
HENNEPIN COL~NTZ A~RICU.LTi. RAL
HOPKINS ~
STATE~{ENT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSE[,~NT,"~
OCTOBER 21 ~1977 THRU OCTOBER
726 ,,00
12'!
77~.oo
! ~o?
2~03 ~ 33
~~oo
1 38 ~, OO
35~
74,25
:40o ~oo
BALM~CE; ,
Beginning of Period
REVENUE:
Space Rentals
Entry &pen Fees
Advertising & Premuim books
Donation
Refund
Sta2e Aid
County & Municipal Aid
Membership dues
Interest received
Premuim Checks cancelled~!976
Trasnfer to savings
Reimbursement
Sub total
Total amouuts
DISBURSEMENTS~ Premuims paid
Awards-other than premuims
Advertising & Promotional
Entertainment
Judging exhibits
Superiutendents & Assistants
Police
Admihistrative Expenses
Insurance
Audit
General Fair Expeuse
PayrSll taxese
Reut
Veterinary Expense
Additions & Labor
· ransfer to Savings
3~723o50
677°86
75.oo
36,00
100,00
~945~36
669.00
!,'172o25
~o5oo0
11.~o0~00
Total Disbursements
FUND BALANCE END OF PERIOD
26:2
O4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-121
SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Delinquent Utility Bills
The Council set the date of April 10th for the public hearing
on the delinquent utility bills - list attached.
On Tuesday, a list will be furnished showing the unpaid
accounts.
~-'-L~onard L. Kopp ~'!
Accounts delinquent for over six (6) months on utility billing
Account No. Account Name Amount
22232-2180-11 Kevln Williamson bt/!ll .PA__,[ ~/¢!37 $33.62
22238-/~891-81 Brenda Babi tz 54.57
22256_-_-4_988~-_b~1 Lr_e n~_Bar_r .....
222~6601-51 A1 Jeppesen 112.41
22280-5846-31 S & M Properties 63.08
22280-5910-71 M. Simor 41.30
6
2228_3~_59n0, 21 . Donaj_d_B_~ba~
22286-5915-31 S & M Properties 27.24
,/
22292-6033-21 F Todd Warner ~)~ f~v, ~J~;/O~ 51.~2
22298-29.6~r61 Tom Green 51.92
223'10-2695-21 Samuel Fox 101.99
22310-2881-81 Steve Laterner 61.88
22310-3198-61 June Mc Carethy 101.90
223-l_t -_6395 - 4_1 P~on a,.td..._B.a s.t .yn. _1.. ¢_0 .,_~ 9.._.~_~_.
22313-6439 Wm. Krutzig 63.98
22316~2882-11 Edward Rawley 139.70
22--346-- 5667---24- Rober. t--Brown -7..1-..-00-..¢ ,~ '
2237:.-5063-81 C. Kelly
,22376:2340_- 6.1 ............... Ma r `1eDe.]3a Ll~ey
,Z2404-~_8~-_5]
42343-2650-41
41199-2152-81
42343-2631-41
Surfside
Pal Fin Prop.
Steve Hesse
116.19
476. O0
199.61
80.90
$2248766
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 3, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-115
SUBJECT: planning Commission Recommendations
Attached is a copy of the Planning Commission minutes. The following require
Council action:
Item
1.
Side Yard Variance
Lots 23 and 24, Block 9, Woodland Point
Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet
The Planning Commission recommended a 4 foot side yard variance (from
10 feet to 6 feet) so the dwelling can be remodedled. The Administra-
tion concurs.
Special Use Permits
Lots 5,18,19 Parts of 15,16 & 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A
Zoned Commercial
The applicant has a special use permit for an auto repair shop--see
Resolution 76-371. The applicant wishes to rent the space used by the
repair shop to an auto body repair operator and move the auto repair
shop to a space now occupied as a warehouse.
Presently the buildings are occupied as follows:
4839 Shoreline Boulevard - In front - Insurance Office
in Rear - Zeb's Repair
4851 Shoreline Boulevard - Progressive Cabinet Shop
4853 Shoreline Boulevard - In Front - Travel Agency
In Rear - Warehouse
The plan is to move Zeb's from the rear of 4839 to the rear of 4853
and put a body shop into the rear of 4839.
In addition these buildings have a parking variance by requiring a
review as occupants change (See Resolution 77-157). The change in
occupants will have little or no effect on the parking.
The Planning Commission recommended that adjacent property be encompassed
to be included under special use permit, Resolution 76-371 (Broaden re-
solution to cover both properties), waiving application and to amend
Item 1 to read "no outside painting" with other conditions remaining
unchanged; owner to provide a plan for the paved area and green area
and show future expansion of blacktopped area as parking is required
and this be contingent on any future special use permits that are issued.
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-115
Planning Commission Recommendations - Page 2
Item
2. The Council should confirm April 24th as the Public Hearing date.
Street Front & Side Yard Variance/Non-Conforming Use
Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Devon ~
Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet
The Planning Commission recommended denial of a 5 foot sid~ yard
variance - suggesting that the garage be detached and moved forward
and that the proposed addition be narrowed. Existing non-conforming
uses that should be recognized and approved are 5 foot side yard on
existing house and a boat house too close to the Commons and extending
onto the access.
Lot Size Variance
Part of Lot 22, Lafayette Park
Zoned A-1 10,000 Square Feet
The Planning Commission recommended construction of a deck be allowed.
The existing lot is non-conforming with 8,888.64 square feet. The
Administration concurs.
Subdivision of Land
Lot 21, Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit F
Zoned Commercial
The Planning Commission recommended Lot 21 be divided in half with 1/2
going to Lot 20 and 1/2 to Lot 22. The resulting division would be:
Parcel A - Lot 20 and 1/2 of Lot 21 = 7,875 square feet
Parcel B - Lot 22 and 1/2 of Lot 21 = 7,875 square feet
The Administration concurs.
Lot Size Variance/Non-Conforming Use
Lot 22, Block 1, L.P.Creviers Subd. of Lot 36, Lafayette Park
Zoned Res. B - 6,000 Square Feet for Single Family Dwelling
The Planning Commission recom~ended the existing 2.8 foot side yard
variance and the 4800 square foot lot size be approved so the owner
can build a second story over the existing structure. The Administration
concurs.
7o
Non-Conforming Use
Tract A, R.L.S. 1150
Zoned A-1 Residential
10,000 Square Feet
The Planning Commission made no recommendation on the request to rebuild
this structure. There presently exists on this lot a two family struc-
ture. Whether or not the structure in question is more than 50% des-
troyed is the question under the zoning ordinance as to whether it can
be rebuilt or not. If less than 50%, it appears no variance is needed.
The Building Inspector has had the Engineer make an appraisal (see copy
attached. Also the City Attorney feels a more in-depth appraisal is
necessary. The Building Inspector is checking on this. We have attached
an appraisal made by the Assessor's office that shows the building to be
50% destroyed. ~
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-115
Planning Commission Recommendations - Page 3
Item
8. Vacation of Carnarvon Lane
The Planning Commission recommended the vacation of Carnarvon Lane,
a one block street between Denbigh and Wilshire (County Road # 125).
The Administration concurs.
A public hearing is required - May 22nd is suggested.
9. Vacation of Kinross Road from Dundee Lane to Alexander Lane
The Planning Commission recommended the vacation of Kinross Road sub-
ject to the City retaining a 10 foot temporary easement on the Dundee
end and a 15 foot easement on the Alexander end. In addition, possibly
N.S.P. would like a permanent easement for their street light. (To date
they have not replied to our request for information.) The Administra-
tion concurs with the vacation.
public hearing is required - May 22nd is suggested.
10. Vacation of Strafford Lane - Manchester to Dorchester Roads
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request to vacate
Strafford Lane between Manchester Road and Dorchester Road.
A petition has been received and a public hearing is suggested.
is also suggested.
May 22
11. Vacation of 5 feet on each side of Shorewood Lane - Resthaven to Lakeside
The Planning Commission recommended 5 feet on each side of Shorewood from
Resthaven to Lakeside be vacated. A public hearing is required. May 22
is suggested as the hearing date.
12. Request for Street Opening - Windsor Road - Dexter to Roxbury
The Planning Commission voted down a motion to open Windsor Road from
Dexter to Roxbury and Roxbury from Windsor to Island View as recommended
by the Engineer.
13. Drury Lane Street Closure
The request to close Drury from Hampton to Cumberland came to the Council
by a petition at the Street Hearing.
The Planning Commission recommended this not be closed. Attached is a
copy of the petition presented the Council at the street hearing. It
is not known whether or not a hearing is required because of the petition.
MINUTES OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
March 26, 1979
Present:
Chairman Russell Peterson, Commissioners Margaret Hanson, Bill Rennet,
Gerald Smith, Gary Paulsen, Bud Stannard and Lorraine Jackson; Council
Representative Gordon Swenson; City Manager Leonard L. Kopp; City In-
spector Henry Truelsen and Secretary Marge Stutsman
MINUTES
Smith moved and Hanson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the March 12,
1979 meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor.
BOARD OF APPEALS
Item
1.
Side Yard Variance
Lots 23 and 24, Block 9, Woodland Point.
Alan P. Hofstadter was present.
Paulsen moved and Hanson seconded a motion to reconunend that variance be
approved as requested. The vote was Jackson, Hanson, Paulsen, Swenson,
Renner and Peterson in favor with Smith and Stannard abstaining.
Note:
Taken into consideration was the fact that Lot 22 to South--side
needing variance--is wetlands and could not be used for building
site.
Special Use Permit
Lots 5,18,19 & Part of Lots 15,16 & 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A
Oswin Pflug was present. Also present was Zeb Hanson, who plans to
move his car repair shop into building at 4851 Shoreline, and persons
who plan to operate body shop at 4839 Shoreline.
Stannard moved and Swenson seconded a motion to recommend that adjacent
property be encompassed to be included under special use permit, Resolu-
tion 76-371 (Broaden resolution to cover both properties), waiving appli-
cation and to amend Item 1 to read "no outside painting" with other con-
ditions remaining unchanged.
Discussed.
Smith moved and Renner seconded a motion to amend original motion to have
owner provide a plan for the paved area and green area and show future
expansion of blacktopped area as parking is required and this be contingent'
on any future special use permits that are issued.
The vote on amendment was unanimously in favor as was the vote on the motion
as amended.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 26, 1979 - Page 2
Item
3.
Street Front and Side Yard Variance
Lots 18 & 19, Block 1, Devon
Victoria Bohnhoff was present.
Stannard moved and Hanson seconded a motion to recommend denial of variance.
The vote was unanimously in favor of denial.
Reason: Would not be hardship as a 20 foot addition could be constructed.
Lot Size Variance :
Part of Lot 22 (M & B), Lafayette Park
Richard Wolowicz was present.
Smith moved and Stannard seconded a~motion to recommend the 4 foot lake
front be granted with the understanding ~owner is planning to move utility
shed so it will not be in violation of side yard setback. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Subdivision of Land
Lot 21~ Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit F
Steven and Robert Chase were present.
Smith moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend approving the
subdivision of land as long as the East 1/2 of Lot 21 is combined with
Lot 20 and the West 1/2 of Lot 2]. is combined with Lots 22, 23 and 24.
The vote was unanimously in favor.
Lot Size Variance/Non-conforming Use
Lot 22, Block 1, L.P.Crevier's Subd. Part of Lot 36, Lafayette Park
Bert Landsman was present for Bradley J. Landsman
Smith moved and Jackson seconded a motion to recommend allowing expansion
of a non-conforming use and grant permit as reqUested. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Non-conforming Use
Tract A, R.L.S..ll50
Melvin Zuckman and Attorney Steve Rubin were present.
Smith made the following statement: Because we are an Advisory Board and
need an answer to the question of percent of structural damage, I would
like to make a recommendation that states the fact that structural damage
is in question and a determination of whether 50% damaged should be made
before a permit can be denied, and would advise the Council to take
separate action on this first before any decisions are made.
Paulsen moved and Jackson seconded a motion to send the above statement
to the Council. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 26, 1979 - Page 3
Item
8.
Vacation of Carn~.,~un Lane
Clyde Markeson was present.
Hanson moved and Jackson seconded a motion to recommend the vacation
of Carnavon Lane. The vote was unanimously in favor.
9. Vacation of K/nross Road from AleXander Lane to Dundee Lane
Jackson moved and Hanson seconded a motion to recommend vacation of
Kinross Road subject to the City retaining temporary easement of 10
feet on Dundee end and 15 feet on Alexander Lane end and contingent
on NSP's satisfaction on a permanent easement. The vote was unanimous-
ly in favor.
10. Vacation of Strafford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester Roads
No one present regarding this request.
Smith moved and Renner seconded a motion to recommend to the Council
that Strafford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester Roads not be
vacated. The vote was unanimously in favor.
11. Vacation of 5 feet on each side of Shorewood Lane (in area between
Block 6 and Block 7 of Shadywood Point)
Smith moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend approval of the
vacation with the condition NSP concurs. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
12. Street Opening - Windsor from Dexter to Roxbury
The folloWing persons were present: Paula Raguet, Jan Hasselbring,
Gary Cable, Phil Keintz, Mrs. L. E. Larson -- against opening both
streets. Cable & Keintz want to get to the Windsor side of their'
lots for garage sites.
Jackson moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to recommend following
the Engineer's recommendation and put in streets. The vote was Jackson,
Paulsen and Peterson - Aye; Smith Hanson, Renner, Stannard and Swenson-
Nay. Motion failed.
13. Drury Lane Street Closure
Smith moved and Hanson seconded a motion to deny closing off Drury Lane.
The vote was unanimously in favor.
14.
Material from Planner. 'Questionnaire: Hanson suggested changing # 9 to:
"What do you feel would improve quality of life in Mound?." All in favor.
No other changes. Comments favorable on material.
Peterson moved and Stannard seconded a motion to adjourn. The vote was unani-
mously in favor. So adjourned.
Attest:
HERBERT P. LEFLER
CURTIS A. PEARSON
J. OENNI..~ ()'BRtEN
DAVID J. KENNEDY
JOHN B. DEAN
JAHES D. LARSON
NARY J. BJORKLUND
LAW OFFICES
LrFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
I100 FIRST NATIONAL BANI< BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
March 30, 19 79
(612) 333-O5~3
Mr. Henry Truelson, Building Inspector
City of ~ound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55 364
Re:
Dear Henry
Burned House
Tract A, RLS 1150
I have this morning received a copy of Lyle Swanson's
letter to you under date of March 29, 1979. The letter
does not go to the central Question which is the amount of
damage done to the home by the fire. I call your
attention to Section 23.20, Subd. g, of the City Code which
reads as follows:
"Any building which is partially damaged or
destroyed by fire, earth Guake, wind, storm,
or explosion may be reinstated to its former use,
provided that no building which does not conform
ko the requirements of the use district in which
it is located, and which is thus partially damaged
or destroyed to the extent of 50% or more, may be
rebuilt or reconstructed other than for purposes
of conformity. Estimate of the extent of damage
or construction shall be made by the villa¢~e
council or its duly appointed agents."
I am enclosing herewith photocopy of various cases where
this question has been before the courts. I thought you might
like this for light reading. Please no~e that there must be
expert testimony that the building was destroyed to the extent
of 50% or more. Host zoning ordinances'define the 50% by assessed
valuation, bulk, reasonable value, or some other standard, but
our ordinance does not. I have therefore recommended to you
that you get a professional appraisal of the value of the
LAW 0 F F' ~ C I~. S
L~-FEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
Page 2
Mr. Henry Truelson, Build. inc~ Inspector
March 30, 19 79
building prior to the fire, an appraisal of the value after
the fire, and an. estimate of the costs of repair.
Lyle, the assessor or any appraiser hired by the city
to evaluate this home should keep in mind that they will be
requested to express a professional opinion as to the amount
of d. amace which occurred, to this structure. Please proceed
accordin~31y.
Very truly yours,
C'urtis A. Pearson,
City Attorney
CAP: ih
cc: Mr. Len Kopp
Mr. Lyle Swanson
COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~ LAND SURVEYORS ~fl SITE PLANNERS
March 29, 1979
Reply To:
12805 Olson Memorial Highway
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
Hank Tr.uelson
Building Inspector
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota '55364
Subject:
City of Mound
Burned House
Tract A, RLS 1150
Dear Mr. Truelson:
.On March '28, 1979, I looked at the house on Tract A,
RLS 1150, which recently burnt.
Virtually all of the structural members frOm the first
floor level up were damaged beyond repair. Many of these have
been replaced with new members since the fire.
There are stress fractures in the sublevel block walls,
but these were probably not caused by the fire.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
Lyle Swanson, P.E.
LS:sh
cc: Curt Pearson
Leonard Kopp
Minneapolis 'Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls
p:'ic, t,xi of, r,.,c,/cled
HC206 '
__ APP~AIISAL REPORT
HEI~IdEPIN COUNTY ASSES,~
Area
Owner
Address
Neighborhood
Lot Size
Streets
Area Code
Subdivision
.Value Range
.Topography
Utilities: Water.
Parcel
i1~)
Lot
7~/~__._~7--' /~- Block
Trend
Sewer.
... Gas ·
Comments,
Bldg. Type . Age .
Condition Roof style
Exterior Walls Gutters
Basement: 'Full , Part
Walls Course-Height
Sash Joists
Finish Rooms
Quality
Roof
Walkout
Floors ....
Beams--Columns
Walls
Baths
Other Plumbs.
Tile
.Floors
Ceilings
Rgb-ins
Fireplaces
1st Floor: Rooms
Heat .....
Air Cond.
Incin. __
Total
Floors
Kitchen-floors
Cabinets
.Walls
Counters
Trim ......
Extras
Bit-ins: Range
Baths
Vanities-other
Oven
Tub
Dish.
Shower
. Disp.
. , Tile
Cond. . _
Cond.
.Cond. __
Cond. __
__Cond.
Fireplaces '
Comments
2nd Floor: Rooms
Floors
Baths,
Porches-other:
Tub
Des. and list sizes
Walls,
....... Shower
Trim Cond.
..... Tile Cond.,
Garages: Att.
Description
Det.
Bsmt ......
Other Bldgs.
InsPection Date
,19
By
COMPUTATIONS
Extras:
Fireplace
Fireplace
Range-Oven
Dishwasher
Disposal
Baths
Tile__
Finished Bsm't
W.O. Bsm't.
Air Cond.
Brick or Stone Trim __
Drive
Fixt.
Total Extras:
$:
Dimensions Sq. Ft. Rate
x = @
x = . ~ ....
X = ~ -. =
Porch:
x = @ =
x = , @ =
Value
Totals
Extras:
total Replacement ~"~ ~,~
Less Depreciation: Physical
Functional
E~nomic
Net Value
Garage:
X
Tot~l
Less Dep
Other Buildin§s
Total Value Improvements
Land Value
Total:
PETITION
In accordance with Fdnnesota State Statues, Chapter 412.851, the
below majority of property owners, of land adjacent to the one
block length of Drury Lane, boardered between Hampton Road on the
south and Cumberland Road on the north (See map attached), hereby
petition the City Council and Street Maintainance Department of
the City of Mound, to permanently close this section of street to
all motor vehicle traffic uses. Due to its unusability in the
winter from ice and snow resulting in extreme slipperyness; Its
general rough condition in summer from rain wash, pot holes, rocks
and mud; Its blind access on to Hampton Road at the top of the
hill; And its high use by neighborhood children for walking and
riding bikes; It is unanimously deemed by the below signed
property owners, a highly dangerous and unnecessary access for
motor vehicle traffic.
NAME (Printed)
ADDRESS SIGNATURE DATE
AGENDA FOR
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING CO~MISSION MEETING
March 26, 1979
Minutes of March 12, 1979.
BOARD OF APPEALS
1. Alan P. Hofstadter, 5139 Woodland Road
Lots 23 & 24, Block 9, Woodland Point - Map 2
Side Yard Variance
Oswin Pflug, 4839 Shoreline Blvd.
Lots 5, 18, 19 & Part of 15, 16 & 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A - Map 5
Special Use Permit - Car Body Shop
Steven & Victoria Bohnhoff, 4687 Island View Drive
Lots 18 & 19, Block 1, Devon - Map 14
Street Front & Side Yard Variances
Richard WolOwicz, 5316 Three Points Boulevard
Part of Lot 22 (M & B), Lafayette Park - Map 2
Lot Size Variance
Steven & Robert Chase (Proposed addresses 5239-5247 Eden Road)
Lot 21, Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit F - Map 5
Subdivision of Land
Bradley J. Landsman, 2212 Fairview Lane
Lot 22, Block 1, L.P. Crevier's Subd. Part of Lot 36,'Lafayette Park - Map 5 ~
Lot Size Variance/Non-conforming Use
Melvin ZUckman, 5012 Tuxedo Boulevard
Tract A, R.L.S. 1150 - Map 12
Non-conforming. Use
8. Vacation of Carnavon Lane - Map 13
9. Vacation of Kinross Road from Alexander Lane to Dundee Lane - Map 12
10. Vacation of Stratford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester - Map 13
11. Vacation of 5 feet on each side of Shorewood Lane - Maps 2/2A
12. Request for Street Opening - Windsor from Dexter to Roxbury - Map 1~
13'~ Request for Street Closures - Drury Lane - Map 13
-14. Material from Planner
534! MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
TO:
The City Council
Mound Planning Commission
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Building Inspector
Board of.Appeals - Mound Zoning (3-26-.79)
1)
Alan P. Hofstadter, 5139 Woodland Point - Side Yard Variance
Lots 23 & 24, Block 9, Woodland Point
Required side yard is 10 feet (no~e: intended ingress to proposed garage
· addition is on owners property not from unopened street). Property to the
south,is questionable-as to being buildable as.it directly ~jpins the wet-
land's.
Can see no problem in granting lO:foot side yard variance as intended side
will be at minimal requirement of left.
2) Oswin 'Pf'lug, .4839.Shoreline Blvd. - Special Use Permit - Car Body Shop
Lots 5, 18, 19 & 'part bf 15,-16 & 17, Blk 1, Shirley Hilis Unit A
This area of the premises is presently being used as a Automobile Repair
Business, as per. Encl. #3, Council Res. 76-371. The proposed Body Shop is
to enter this structure and the Auto Repair is being moved into another loca-
tion within that particular business complex, of whieh there is not a per-
mitted use.. This will require a special use permit and also enter into the
contract parking agreement. At this time, there has been no application of
request. ! would like the Commission to view these premises and look for the
following requirements of Council Resolution 77-157 (Enclosure #1.for com-
pliance. ..
There have been new structures built within the City that have complied to and
with the parking requirements impgsed. It should be complied with for all
applicants, or remove the off street parking requirements from the ordinance.
The entirety of that business areas parking has been nothing but promised.
Perhaps, at this time, the requirements of the parking and the physical installa-
tion should be imposed as proposed and agreed by the City as per ordinance.
Enclosure #4 23.30, #3 76-371, #1 77-157.
Also, maybe at this time, there should be an amendment proposed to Council Res.
77-157 (Encl. #1) requesting an update of parking spaces allotted for each in-
dividual business within the complex and that each time a new business enters
this complex, an update of allotted spaces be disignated as per submitted plat
Hound Planning Commission continue8: (3-26-79)
page two
plan by.the applicant originally..
As a suggestion, if the Auto Repai? Shop is to be moved, an amendment to
Council Res. 76-371 (Encl: #3) should be added so as to control the number of
vehicles allowable for outside storage,'waiting for repair. A time limit con-
trol relative to time of outside storage as per Council Res. 78-394 (Encl: #5)
Also considering such things as fencing, lighting, operation hours, outside
part storage, refuse parts, and adequate marked fire la~es as per Fire Dept.
requirement and alterations to comply to State Fire and Building Codes.
3) Steven & Victoria Behnhoff, 4687 Island View Drive, Street Front & Side Yd Var.
Lots 18 & 19, Block 1, Devon
The existing premises are non-conforming use. Existing house requires 10 foot
side yard, is presently at 5 feet. The proposed addition will not conform, re-
quires'lO ft. sideyard, will have only 5 ft. side yard, existing boat house on
City right-of-way and in front yard setback should be required to be removed
from the premises if variance.is granted. Don't believe in granting variances
to allow a non-conformancy on both sides of property. Also, no size given on
proposed addition.
4) Richard ¥1olowicz, 5316 Three Points Blvd. Lot size variance
Part bf Lot 11. (M & B) La'Eayette Park
This deck request was brought before the commission previously and denied. How-
ever, permission was granted to erect a garage and. expand the second story of
the existing house, if the variance is granted I would like to suggest the utility
shed be moved to conform to side yard requirements or removed f~om the premises.
5) Steven & Robert Chase (5239-5247 Eden Road) Subdivision of Land
Lot 21, BloCk.2, Shirley Hitls Unit F
This is zoned Commercial and what size building can be erected on the property and
meet the. parking requirements. If subdivision is allowed, stipulate immediate
combinati.on with adjoining property into one parcel.
6) Bradley J. Landsman, 2212 Fairview Lane, Lot Size Variance/Non-cOnforming Use
Lot 22, Blk 1L.P. Crevier's Subd. Pt of Lot 36'Lafayette Park'
They are requesting permission to expand habitable area by adding full second
story only, no perimeter expansion proposed.
7) Melvin Zuckman, 5012 Tuxedo Blvd., non-co~forming use
Tract A R.L.S. 1150 ..
Two dwelling units, one parcel. One is at present a duplex, the other a proposed
single family residence which will require Watershed District variance to re-
build proposed existing structure. I feel this structure is more than 50% des-
troyed and the balance should be removed from the premises; all sublevel areas
be.filled to existing surrounding grade and returned to green area (either by
sod or seed). Note: reconstruction started prior to building permit being
issued. Lot size ~J,150.15 sq. ft.ahd zoned A-! Residential and existing grand-
father circumstance was issued to a Dr'. Dalufor.
Mound Planning Commission continued: (3-26-79)
page three
8) Vacation of Carnavon Lane
Not feasible to retain as City right-of-way bacause oF topography.
9) Vacation of Kinross Road from Alexander Lane to Dundee Lane
Serves no purpose of benefit to City. Vacate, but retain 20 foot temporary
easement until which time right-of-waY improvements are completed.
10) Vacation of Strafford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester
Retain.for City convience but obtain slope easement on Lot 13, Block 13,
Avalone as this bank and hedge impars traffic safety and visibility.
11) Vacation of 5 feet on each side of~ Shorewood Lane
Vacate 5 feet north side only, retain 5 ft. south side for purpose of future
installation of sidewal and/or bike-hike path. I feel this right-of-way is
a primary traffic flow street. We'should consider a sidewalk from the easterly
tip of Shadywood Point to County Road 110 or Commerce Blvd. for the safety of
our City youngsters and pedestrian traffic.
12) Request for street opening, Windsor front Dexter to Roxbury
Open Windsor from Roxbury'to Dexter also Roxbury from"that intersection south
· to I.sland View Drive and extend sewer and water from intersection of Roxbury and
.Island ViewD'rive.north tp intersection of Roxbury and Windsor. Buildable land
.. ~avai. labl~ west side of'l~oxbury?
13) Request for street closure - Drury Lane
Retain, buildable lands west side of Drury available.
tect i0n effeciency.
~srf~eYcTtor ~e 1 sen
Necessary for fire prO-.
HT/dd
'9-22-7'6 .:'~
RESOLUTION NO. 76-371
RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PE~4IT TO
OPERATE AN AUTOMOBILE REPAIR BUSINESS ON LOTS
5, 18 AND 19 AND PARTS OF LOTS 15, 16 AND 17,
BLOCK 1, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT A, WITH STIPU]~qTIONS
WI~REAS, Lots 5, 18 and 19 and parts of Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 1,
Shirley Hills Unit A, are presently zoned commercial use district~
and
~H~RF~S, application for special use permit to operate an automobile repair
business therefore has been made pursuant to sections 23.07 d
(4 and 5), ~4ound Code of Ordinances;
WqqERF~S, the City Planning Commission has made favorable recommendation
thereon, and
%J~EAS,..Notice of Hearing of the appiication Gas duly published and
hearing held thereon on September 22, 1976, at which hearing
all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to
be heard, and only the proponent appeared thereon, and it
appears in the public interest to grant the same upon certain
conditions,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MOUND,
MINI~SOTA:
That permit ~or the use of Lots 5, 18 and 19, and Parts of
Lots 15, 16'and l~, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A, be and
hereby is, granted to operate an automobile repair business
with the following stipulations:
1, No spray painting
2. No sale of gasoline '
3. No banners
4- All applicable Fire and Safety Codes be installed
and complied.
5- No parts, materials or accessories be stored outside
building.
6. Council reserves the right to require a hideaway fence
7- The drive approach off Shoreline be signed "No Parking,
Fire Lane".
Adopted by the Council this 22nd day of September, 1976.
76-371
9-22-76
4-12-77
IIESOLUTION NO. 77 - 157
i~k RESOLUTION GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
AND PARtQ[NG VARIANCE FOR A COMMERCIAL USE
ON LOTS7 - 11 Incl. - Part of 6, 14, 18 lndl. Block 1
SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT "A"
WHEREAS, Lots 7- l l~, Incl.
WHEREAS,
WHER. EAS,
WHE1K_EAS,
Part of lots 6 and Lots 14 ~ 18 Incl.
Block~l, Shirley Hills Unit A currently has a building
located or~ the property and this Council has previously
issued a Speci-,~l Use Permit to .... .
operate a cabinet shop
in said structure, and
the current owner desires to increase the size of the
building to approximately 6, .370 square feet and under
the provisions of Section 23.30 Subd 1 Subsectior~ (e)
requires B sq. feet of ~arkir~g for each one square foot
of. store floor area and this %you!d__ require 106 parking
spaces, and
the oxy-net of the property cgntends that his cabinet shop-
and proposed po.rte .17 .rnanufactur'.n3g and sales office' do
'not. require the large number of par.king spac~es required
by Section 23.3,0 Subd 1 Subsection (e) and that he
like to build the building and.provide a reasonable arnount
of .parkink and open s%ace and green area which %vill be
more aesthestically ati. racted to the community, and
the City Council is concerned that the property will be'
used for. Commercial uses whxch require more parking
than is proposed or is in-effect able to be provided on
the property and therefore the Council does not desire
to grant a Special Use Permit'and Variance %vhich pro~
rides less than one-half the number of space.s required
%mless the ovzner agree,s that all future uses will be sub-
mltted to this Council f6r reviev; and/or the owner will
conform to all existing parking requirements then re-
quired by the Zoning Ordinance. t
NO%V, .THEREFORE: BE IT RESOI.VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF MOUND:
The request tO construct a building of approximately
6, 370 sq. feet is gr.anted subject'to thg folloxving ~con-
dition s:
The ovmer will provide 47 parking spaces and
"A" ati:ach6d hereto and made a part of this
permit.
The uses permitted in the building shall be -
office space, a cabinet shop and a pottery
manu[acturing and sales s}~op. ~a~y and all
other uses in this structure or any expansion
of the exis'ting uses shall require an an~end-
rnent to this permit.
77 - !~7
4-12~77
The oxvner xx~ust agree.that any other uses
proposed for this building .will be Brought
before this Council for review of the patak-
lng requirements and if the use requires,
in the City Council's opinion, more than 47
spaces, the owner shall then provide the
required number of spaces,. If the p-~-operty
cannot provide the parking deemed necessary
the owner agrees that the use will not be per-
mitted in the building. No parking areas on
public streets shall be counted in meeting the
requirement of the Zoning Ordinance
(e)
This Special Use Permit'cov, ers the entire
property and incorporates conditions exist-
ing in curr,hnt out?tandi?g Special Use Permits.
~ changes in use are to be referred to the '
l~lanning .Commission for recpmmendation
and all Public Hearings required by the6rdin-
ance shall be held.
None of the uses on this property shall have any outside
storage or display areas. A 3' x 10' sign backe~d flush
to the front of Chis building.
This Special Use Permit shall not become effective until
the current owner has signed a copy. of this resolution ~
agreeing tob~ bound by the conditions contained in p.ara-
graph 1 and 7. and he further agrees to provide any new'
~ .
owner with a copy of this resolution and agrees to inform
any new put?baser of ~he Special conditions which restrict
the uses of this property. ..... ..
Agreed to by petitioner, Oswin Pt/ug
4851 ShoxelLne. ~lv~!.~, ' 'M°und' Mn.. 5536'4. . (] ~~' -
2 . fl ,._
'~aoptedbiCoucil~rh.s izm o'af'~--i~pri~ 7 ~ / - ·
77-157
4-12-77
INDIAN ~URI AL.
5341 MAY~VDOD ROAD TtELEPHONE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364. (632) 472-2'~55
}larch 9, 1977
l-!r. Zeb Hans on
n 37 Shoreline Blvd.
Mound, ~'2~ 55364
.Dear Mr. Hanson,
In reviewing your new business location at 4839 Shoreline Blvd., I
'find that the semi-trailer you had at your prev~ous loc~.tion, 5294 Shoreline
Blvd;~ has been moved to your new location, I wculd li~e to' inform you at
thlc--time, as prior~ by our conversation at your previcus location, that the
se.,;~trailer you now have at your new bus,.ness location is in violation of
'the Special Use Permit which allows your type of business-to function
lock,men. In soecific,' Resolution #76-371, Section five (5),
on.e~a.oe at this ~' .
Subsection line number five (5).
Also, be informed that the semi-trailer now located at your orevious
locztion, 5294 Shoreline .Blvd., is ~lso in violation of that use district;
This letter is to infbrm you to remove these semi-trailers from those
oremesis within twenty-four (2.~) hours of receiving this letter or the City
shall issue s. tag for violation of the Soecis1 Use Wermit allowed by the
City of Motmd Council. Also, the Mound City Council shall be infor~ed of
the violation and a reco..~:eodation to immediately take an action to revoke
the Special Use Permit which allows your tyne of bus,.ness to function at
this location.
~,e~'~'~ry K. Truelsen
City Inspector
Gity of l'~ound
HKT:ds
Enclosure
Conies:
'3itY Vanager)
Chief of ~olice
File.
.~.~ Subdivision 1.. O£.f-~troet ~utomo~ilo storage or 'pxrking ~p~oo
. [ .provided on any lot on which any Of tho 'followinE ~t~e~ ~ro her~fter .
%ouri~'h acco~odations,
. . O. ~tor, m~ium,.auaitortum, or other-'place~ o~ pu~lic.~%lY:
- d. Hotel:. · on~ ~rking s~ce for'6ach four ~uost ~le'epiug r~oms. ' '
' : ~-e. Stores ann other es~blish~en%s .in commercial businoo~ at,triers: .
. ' '' ... 'f. offihe Buildihg:- one ~rking s~ce for each ~00 squaFe'feet'of of~ge.
'g~. Inaustrial or ~nUfac~urin~ cs~blishmen~s:' on~ ~rkin~.
.;;00 ~u~r9 feet of gro. s~ floor area or for each five workers, '~sed on .
~ >' "' vehicl&s used inciden~l to the operation of the indu~tri~l~ or
.. Residential ·Town H6u,s~. 2 pamrking b~ces per rosidential-'un~t" - .
:'~' through ~ units - 2 s~ce~ per unit .
-. Beyond 1~. units '' · 1 1/5 s~co~ per unit With
'~" "' aha t~entz (20) feet in l~ngth e;:clus~v~ o~ access 8rlves~ an~
-~ce ~hll bo ~erv~ ~de~uately by acces~ drive4. All off-street
.'' ~rking shall be i~proved .with .concrete or. bituminou~ surfacing
'' ' -. least l~ !nc~e~. tnut~tckness %o control ~u~ and drair~ge. ~ch ~pace .
'',hal! hm~e ad'quake ~rRings ~inCc~ gn th& surfa~ to designate
- Indiwi'dual s~ce. and z~ll ~Ve bumpe~ curbs a't T~?t thre~ (5). feet- - -
Trom any interior property line or ~ ghard of normal'~zp~r heikht not:.
-. ' ' :" thin. ~ectlon' of.tho ordinance o~all bo[co?~lo~pt before %ho. ~ll~ivg..
" or t~prove.th~ ~rkin~ facilitius .bec~usg of'wogther, c~n~it~gns," tho-' -
owner r~y pest ~ surety'bond-with %he.Yillage )$an~gqr g~aran~oeing tho'-
. ' '-const~ctton of sa%d facilit{en, ~id b~d shall'.b0 tn an a~pfint'-6sti-
: :' " -m~ted ~y tho Building Inspector or ~he %'ilRago '~gineer' ~8
... . '" '- %0-cg~pl~to %ho roqulrod ~onst~'~bn and tn no 6vent sh~llf~ le~9 "'
-, /
C]CT¥ OF MOUND
M.ound~ I~,innesoh~
1978
COUNCZL
.o-~ . ..~. -
TO: '.~he Honorable I4ayor. and ~ity Council ":.. .. '
FROM: 'The City Manager ,.' . · ·
.$UBJECT~ ' .. :.~l~nin~ Com~ission Recommendations _.' ' '":"' "
"! L'? ..'.. - ''
Attachea is a copy of the Planning-Commission minUtes of NovLmbe~13~hj
Council action is requirea on the following:.3-/C-......~' ' · .'.' ""'.~'j... .1
· '~ ': 'L2 .- . : " " ? '' % : ' "' -."
'Item
· - 1.
.... - :..-..... - . _:'. ~-... : ':...'-:' :'.-.... .-.
" '" ' ' "." ."- - ....... '"' L.... ...... - .--.' . ..'-.;,: '.., ......... - ........... ...-....-...;
Lot 3~,-Auditor'~ S~'d."~G7
Zone~ Commercial -..
Th.e Planning Co-~mission rAc0m~-.ended ap~rL~al'of'the' special Use Permi~ ''['. ' "'
for a repair garage.witlz the following stipulations-- .. ..: . ..........
A. ~here Will b~ n0'bbdy work. ' ' "' "' ' " ' .... ":' ': "
Bo Normal business hours will'be 8 A.M_. to 6 P.[,{. : ..
C. NOise limits will not exceed those determined by O.S.A,
'D. Out.s..ide[overnight parki.ng will be limited to 3 vehicles.
· E. No- inoperable vehicle' parked outside. . :':' -' -
F, No sale of cars .' ' .:
Lighting will no~ ~e directea toward the nLighborso '':'"
·
No 'outside s~6rag~' 6f 'parts' or Supplies. ' ..... '' ' '
"-.'spaces for no,~) ':' -'. ... .
9?he Planning Com,nission vo.tcd do:~ a motion to grant a
Use Pe~.~[~ for 54 Apartmentm for the followi'r:g reasons;
Fence on South side of. ~r~pmrty -'redwood screening type of
earliest possible date is Tuesday,.Dec~mb. er 19th which is th~ third . .-'-'.:....'.[:;,.":' '
would sooner meet on the. 3rd Tuesaay, December'19th, rather than the .: :i".
4th '£uesday, Decenfoer. 26th" : .... : '
· . . o .' . -..- · . ..'.' .......:r.'.-..
: ..' ..' -. .-;' . ;;'. : .-- .'7. [ ' .
The earliest possible meeting in January is January. 2nd and that '
should be an qrganizakional meeting. ..
Conditional' Use Permit ..
Beachside Develope£s
NAME OF
APPLICANT
Address
APPLICATION FO~ARIANCE
CITY OF MOUND
ZONING
I~ROPERTY
AD DRESS
Telephone
Nnmber ~7
INTEREST IN PROPERTY (.')[/t//c//~/~l
FEE OWNER (if other than applicant)
Address
Telephone
Numb e r
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
FRONTI ] ACCESSORY
YARD FT. BUILDING
NOTE:
FT.1
SIDE
FT.I
YARD .....
LOT SQ.
FOOTAGE_Y,///~ ~
N. C. U.* or
OTHER (describe)
REASON FOR REQUEST:
'To ..... 7
1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing
showing location of proposed improvement
in relation to lot lines, other buildings
on property and abutting streets.
Z. Give ownership and dimensions of
adjoining property. Show approximate
locations of all buildings, driveways,
and streets pertinent to the application
by extending survey or drawing.
3. Attach letters from adjoining affected
property owners showing attitude toward
request.
permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the
council'resolution or variance granted becomes null and void.
CITY
IVlV.~r~an. ces are not transferable.
PLANNING COMMISSION RE COM1V[ ENDA TION
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO
DATE
*non- c onforming us e
30'
p~ant~ or enc~a¢~onts. . ..
CITY 0
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
VILLAGE OF MOUND
FEE $,
PLAT ~ / ~' ~'C' .. PARCEL = C'.-'~'-,2...~""
LOCATIONOF THE PROPERTY,, _
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 5~ 18t 19 a that part of Lots 15t 16 and 17 lying East
of a line parallel with and 10 feet West from the west 'line o~
Lot 18 and same ,extended including adjacent vacated alley lying
ZONING
betw~een ~he
'NWly extension o~'t~e NEly and 5wly lines of said loc 5
Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A
SPECIAL USE PE~.MIT (use),
Address ~~ , ..
Applicant's Interest in Property.
Tel. No.
State why this use, if granted, would not be contrary to the general purpose and
intent of the ordinance to secure public health, safety, general welfare, and sub-
stantial justice.
Residents and owner~ of property within , . feet:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION
Resolution no. DATE
APP LI CA TION FG~VARIA NCE
CITY OF MOUND
ZO NG_
PROPERTY
Address ~g.9~ '~5'~a~/~$~ .[~ ~IS ~ ~0-/17-~ ~
- --' · LO% /~-/~ BLOCK_
Telephone (~ ~v~ D~c~.~
Number~7~ V~ ADDITION --C~~a . ~
INTEREST IN PROPERTY [.~v,,fv~/~
FEE OWNER (if other than applicant)
Address
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
YARD
SIDE
NOTE:
B UI LDING F T.
Telephone
., Number
1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing
showing location of proposed improvement
in relation to lot lines, other buildings
on property and abutting streets.
2_. Give ownership and dimensions of
adjoining property. Show approximate
locations of all buildings, driveways,
REAR
YARD
' (describe) 'Y-"~DA~) 4A/O .,~}'0~.
FOOTAGE_~ by extending survey or drawing..
'- ~_. Attach letters from adjoining affected
property owners showing attitude toward
· request.
COU~Cll reso anc~ s*~,,~¢u uecomes null n
Variances a ~ ..... ~' .~~ ~-~~ ~[~
APPLICANT . .'~ ~' ~~ -~ ..... ~0 .~ . .. ~f~
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION:
-,-non- conforming use
RESOLUTION NO._
DATE
,/
/.
/
t/~VEY
! hereby certify that on. __19 ..... ~ I hereby certify that on__
I made a survey of thc location of thc building(s) on thc above~.i surveyed the property dcKri.b~. ,bore and that the above plat
described prol~rty -,nd that thc location of said building(s) is is a correct representation of said survey.
correctly shown on thc above plat.
ROY J. HANSE., REGISTERED SURVEYOR NO: 627/'
APPLICATION Ff~VARIANCE
CITY OF MOUND
APP LI.CANT
Address -~ / ~ ..-TL ye~
Telephone
HOUWlJ (~. [~.n. Number~G ¢ ~
INTEREST IN PROPERTY ...... O~ ~ C. ~
FEE OWNER (if other than applicant)
Addre s s
PROPERTY
ADDRESS ~"~/(~ ~}'e¢ P~'S'. ~/~"l
PLAT,,~/6 ?0 _ PARCEL
LOT 02 1 BLOCK
Te le phone
Number
VARIANCE REQUESTED: NOTE:
FRONT [ I ACCESSORY
YARD FT. BUILDING FT.
YARD . LOT SIZE .....
REAR l i LOTSQ.
YARD FT. FOOTAGE.
OTHER (deScribe) _ ._
1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing
showing location of proposed improvement
in relation to lot lines, other buildings
on property and abutting streets.
Z_. Give ownership and dimensions of
adjoining property. Show approximate
locations of all buildings, driveways,
and streets pertinent to the application
by extending survey or drawing.
3. Attach letters from adjoining affected
property owners showing attitude toward
r e que s t.
REASON FOR REQUEST:_ ~. _~SVe
DATE
:rmit must be applied for' within one year from the date of the
or variance granted becomes null and void.
not tr~nsierahle.
Signature
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO .........
DATE
'~::~ ~,~ - ~ onforming use
!
i
.//
I 'ZZ
:
ag'It
a,7 u9 ~uu.,j,/ ~7
. 8-21-78
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCEHN:
1;1~ DO NOT OBJECT TO A 10 FOOT DECK ON THE LAkeSIDE OF 5316 THREE
POINTS BLVD., ~OUND, MN.' %',E THINK IT WOULD INP~OVE THE ARF~. ·
APP
ATION FOR SUBDIVISION O
Sec. 22.03-a
VILLAGE OF MOUND
AND
e~,oo
FEE $ ~
FEE OWNER
ZONING 0_O ~'~7 Ch ~ t~ 0 I ~ I .
· (attach survey or scale drawing ~howing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed
building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number)
A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR:
New Lot No. From
Square feet TO
Reason:
"'-~signature)
AD,::,RESS I "lb g 3o ~ e s k~ ~, ~
Applicant's interest in the property:
CiTY OF MOUND
TEL. NC~. c/) %_ ~ 0 2.._~....
DATE
This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan-
ation given why this is not the case.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
DATE
Certificate o£ Survey
for Robert g. R~ppaport
o£ Lot 21, Block 2, Shirley Hills Unit F
Hennepin County, Pdnnesota
EDEN
72.0
ROAD
A
2
1
B
0
! hereby certify 'that this is a- true. ~nd correct repr~menta.tion of
a survey of the boundmries of (A) The West half of 4et 21, Block 2,
Shirley Hills Unit F, and'(B) The F~st half of 4et 21, Block 2,
Shirley Hills U~tt F; and the location of all existinE-'buildtng~, if
any, ther~n. It does not purport to shew other imprOvem~mts or en-
croachmen, ts.
Scale: 1" = 40'
Date : 3-15-79
o : Iron marke~'
Gordon H. Coffin' Reg. No. 6064
Alvin H. R~hd~r P~g. ho.13295
Land Surveyors and Pla~ers
4ong Lake, Minnesota
APP LI CA TION
~ARIANCE
CITY OF MOUND
ZONING
NAME OF
APP LI CAN T
PROPERTY
ADDRESS 2-
/~,~-~g&~.~',~PLAT ~t -~-)0 PARCEL i-L-O0 ..
Address
(-- ~'-~,. LOT
Te le phone
Number o~__p~~~ git ADDITION
BLOCK
INTEREST IN PROPERTY ..
FEE OWNER (if other than applicant)
'Addre s s
Telephone
Numb e r
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
FRONT
YARD
FTj ACCESSORYI
BUILDING
SIDE
YARD
YARD
LOT SQ.
FOOTAGE
NOTE:
FT.1
FT..']
N. C. U.* or
OTHER (describe)
REASON FOR REQUEST: ,
1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing
showing location of proposecl improvement
in relation to lot lines, other buildings
on property and abutting streets.
2. Give ownership and dimensions of
adjoining property. Show approximate
locations of all buildings, driveways,
and streets pertinent to the application
by extending survey or drawing.
3. Attach letters from adjoining affected
property owners showing attitude toward
re que s t.
within one year from t t~e'~o the ·
A buildingpermitmustbe appliedfor
council resolution or variance granted becomes null and void
ICi I OF MOUND
variances ar~ ~ot
APPLICANT~~¢ /~ ~ ..... DATE. 2-{
/'/ Signature
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION:
RESOLUTION NO
DATE
use ~ f l
FOR:
;RTIFICATE OF suRV
///zz-0///1
I
LE6A L
LoT
Lot
;toRY
/ /
2 3.7
~
!
r/ 1'/~ STo~'~"
~zzI G
!
81ockl, L,R Crcv~'er~
2//~o.o
O
[3
X 000.0
(ooo.o)
Denotes iron monument
Denotes offset stake
Denotes existing elev.
Denotes Proposed elev.
Denotes surface drainage
Proposed garage floor elev.=
DEblARS - GABRIEL
hND SURVEYORS, INC.
3030 Harbor Lane No.
Plymouth MN 55441
Phone: (612) 559-0908
PropoSed lowe.c;t floor elev. =
proposed top of foundation elev. =
BENCH MARK:
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of
the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, '
if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land.
File No.
· Book - Page
Scale
-' t:~ ~0'
APP LI CA TION
~RIANCE
CITY OF MOUND
NAME OF
APPLICANT
Melvin Zuckman
Address 5012 Tuxedo Boulevard
Mound, MN
Telephone
Number 827-1744
FEE $
ZONING. ' ~ '-/~
PROPERTY
ADDRESS 5012 Tuxedo Boulevard
PLAT 37942 PARCEL 4000
Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1150
ADDITION
INTEREST IN PROPERTY
fee owner
same
FEE OWNER (if other than applicant)
Address same
Telephone
Number
same
VARIANCE REQUESTED: NOTE:
FRONT [ FT.] ACCESSORYl FT.1
YARD BUILDING
YARD LOT SIZE
REAR
YARD
I
LOT SQ.
FT. FOOTAGE
N. C.U.* or
OTHER (describe)
REASON FOR REQUEST:
1, Attach a survey AND scale drawing
showing location of proposed improvement
in relation to lot lines, other buildings
on property and abutting streets.
Z. Give ownership and dimensions of
adjoining property, Show approximate
locations of all buildings, driveways,
and streets pertinent to the application
by extending survey or drawing.
3_. Attach letters frOm adjoining affected
property owners showing attitude toward
re que s t.
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference. ~j__.__~-D.
A building permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the
council resolution or v~rianc~grantedO~corpes null and void.
Variances are not tr~mm~l';. ~ ~ .
PLANING COM~SSION RECOMMENDATION
DATE
COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO.
DATE
*non-con£ormin~ use FY ~
EXHIBIT "A"
Applicant's dwelling, pictured as the 1-S Frame Unit on the
Surveyor's Certificate hereto attached as Exhibit "B" and
incorporated herein by this reference, was partially damaged by
fire. Thereafter, .Applicant requested that a building permit be
issued by the City of Mound to'enable repair and restoration of the
fire damage. The application for said building permit was denied by
the Mound City Building Inspector based upon his contention that the
dwelling was non-conforming to certain provisions of the Mound City
Zoning Ordinance, has been destroyed to the extent of fifty (50%)
percent or more, and therefore, comes within the purview of Mound
City Ordinance Section 23.20(g).
Applicant hereby alleges that the decision of the City Building
Inspector.is in error in that the damage sustained to said dwelling
did not exceed fifty (50%) percent within the meaning and context of
said Ordinance 23.20(g). Accordingly, pursuant to M.S.A. Sec.
462.357, Subd. 6(1), Applicant hereby appeals from the determination
of the City Building Inspector and requests that the City Planning
Commission and City Council direct that the necessary building
permit be issued.
In the alternative, if the determination of the City Building
Inspector is affirmed, Applicant hereby requests that the City
Planning Commission and City Council issue an appropriate variance
or special use permit enabling Applicant to repair and restore said
dwelling unit in the same location as it appears on Exhibit "B"
hereto attached. Said alternative appeal is made pursuant to M.S.A.
Sec. 462.357, Subd. 6(2).
Dated:
2146A
This ~ day of March, 1979.
MEL~VIN ZUCKMAN
I have no objection to the repair
or restoring of the ~'" '
existing lake-
side house damaged by fire at
5012 Tuxedo Blvd. ~Iound,~ Minn.
Name. ~
I have no objection t.o.the repair
or restoring of the existing lake-
side house damaged by fire at
5012 Tuxedo blvd. Mound,. Minn.
- ~ddress.
CITY of i 4OUND
Naroh 8, 1979
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Vacation of Carnavon Lane
Carnavon Lane is not open now.
The following are quotes from the Utility Companies and City DePart-
ments on the vacation of Carnavon Lane:
NSP - "Wa have no facilities within this street and it does not
appear there will. be any required in the future".
Minnegasco - "If Blocks 5 and 6 are to be developed so that proper-
ty can be served from other existing public right-of-way,
then I see no further need for the existing Carnavon Lane".
Continental Telephone - "Continental Telephone has no objection to
the vacating of Carnavon Lane".
Public Works - "The Public Works Department can see no reason for
denial of the vacation of Carnavon Lane. This street has
never been opened and has no utilities in it".
Fire Chief - "The Mound Fire Department does~not want any roads
closed as it is that much harder to service these areas with
roads closed".
City Engineer, McCombs & Knutson Associates - "Carnavon Lane ***
is.not required for future sewer, water, storm sewers or
drainage. We can see no reason why this street cannot be
vacated".
Police Chief - "The street closing **** would have no bearing on
public safety service in that area".
LLK/ms
APPI,ICATION FOR STREET VACATION
CITY OF HOUND
LEC.A.L DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY' APPLICANT: PLAT PARCEL
LOT_ 3 .~ ~, Si. B~oc~_~/~ su~v~sIO~ ~
~ ~sidents and owners p.f property ~utting the Street to be vacated:
Recommended by Utilities
·
Police Chief-,'~ .
Plann:~ ng Commission Recor,'~enda
Council Action
Date
ESSEX
.... STRATFORD
LANE '~
ZZZ.~
../
\
'"/;£4.,'
CF?Y of OUND
March 19, 1979
5341 MAY';,~OOD ROAD
MOUND, t~,'It~JNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-115,5
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Proposed Vacation of Kinross Road from Alexander Lane
to Dundee Lane
.L
North
Quotes from Utilities and City Department Heads:
Northern States Power Company - No reply to date.
Minnegasco - "The Minneapolis Gas Company has no facilities within the·
above *** or drainage and utility easement and has no objection to the
vacation ***".
Continental Telephone - "Continental Telephone has no objections to the
vacating of Kinross *** We have no facilities on this right-of-way now
and do not foresee any future needs."
Public Works - "I can foresee no need for the right-of-way on Kinross
Road now or in the future."
Fire Chief - Did not reply. - But in previous replies, he has stated that
the Fire Department is opposed to closing any streets.
~%ty Engineers - "The R.O.W. **** is not needed for street, City utility
or drainage purposes. "**** NSP has a power pole serving one or two
houses on the R.O.W. If this street is vacated, the City should retain
temporary easements for 1979 street construction on both ends. Ten feet
*** on Dundee and 15 feet on Alexander."
Memorandum to:
Subjec't:
March 19, 1979
The Planning CQm~.ission
Proposed Vacation of Kinross Road
from Alexander Lane to Dundee Lane
- Page 2
Police Chief - "**~* From a public safety viewpoint, it is unlikely
this roadway would be needed in the future, ,
This will be listed on the March 26th Planning Commission Agenda.
L~onard L.' Kopp
CC: ' -
R. Gehring
W. Erickson
R. MaXWell
CITY of MOUND
March 19, 1979.
5:34 1 }-~AY%*,~OOD ROAD
MOU,'~D, M~r4¢.'E30'rA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Vacation of Stratford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester
A request for the vacation of' one block of Stratford Lane has been requested:
Comments received to date are:
Continental Telephone - "We have no objection to vacating Stratford Lane
between Manchester Lane and Dorchester Lane; we have no facilities located
on this right-of-way and we cannot foresee any need for this right-of-way.
in the future".
Public Works Director - "My recommendation on this closure request is to
deny it. As I stated in my letter to Lyle Swanson on December 19, 1978,
it would create a large problem in snow plowing. We would have to go to
the end of Dorchester and turn sharply to the north to do the last portion
of Stratford. At this point, we would have to turn around in a private
drive to go back out. If we do not plow that portion of Stratford we then
will have to push all the snow on Dorchester into the yard and driveway at
the west end. After a.sufficient amount of snow, we would have to haul it
out which creates a large expense and .use of time and equipment which is
not necessary if Stratfo~ is left open.
There is a fire hydrant on the NE corner of Stratford and Dorchester at
this time. If Stratford was closed, a problem would arise with one fire
truck hooked to the steamer. The road would be blocked and no other emer-
gency vehicle would be able to reach the residences on Stratford."
Police Chief - "It is recommended that. the City not abandon or vacate
Stratford Lane between Manchester and Dorchester. By doing so it would
create a dead end at the end of Dorchester, making-it more difficult for
police and fire to respond to calls in that particular neighborhood.
Furthermore, there are two homes facing Stratford at this location and it
would make it more difficult to respond to these residences on public
safety matters."
Fire Chief - No reply to date, but he has stated that he opposes closing
any street.
NSP - No reply to date.
Minnegasco - No reply to date.
Building Inspector - No reply to date.
This will be on the March 26th Planning Commission Agenda.
.'~
,',; .,
~eohard L. Kopp
cc: T. W. Gerold
A. H. Lindskoog
APPLICATION FOR STREET VACATION
CITY OF I, IOU~ID FEE $
SIGNATURE OF AP
Address ~ - , /~ ; ~..?
Tel. No..~
Applicant's Interest in ?roperty~_~_
Recommender] by Utilities: NSP
Recommended by City: Public Works
__.; Minnegasco __; Continental Tel.
; ]:ire Chief ; Engineer
£?? -
ESSEX
· . :::,.;.:S-'[R A"f FO R D
LANE
//
CITY of i 4OUND
March 19~ 1979
5341 MAYWQ"}D ROAD
MOUND, tMINNE~OTA S5334
(6t2} 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Vacation of 5 feet on each side of Shorewood Lane
The City Council has suggested that 5 feet on each side of Shore-
wood Lane between the east boundary of Lot 6, Block 12, Shadywood
Point. and the east boundary of Lot 14, Block 11, Shadywood Point,
be vacated.
We have asked various utilities for their comments which are:
Min~a~co - "Attached is a map showing the location of
our existing gas main. Since there appears to be no
conflict, we have no objection to the vacation of the
.five foot str-%ps, as described%
Continenhal Telephone Company - "has no objections to
vacating five feet on each side of Shorewood Lane be-
tween Resthaven Lane and Lakeside Lane. Our facilities
are aerial-, attached to NSP poles on the.South side of
the-sLreet". "
City Eng____~ineer - 1) The City utilities (sewer, water and
fOrcemain)'are well within the center 50 feet of the R20.W.,
however, the water shutoffs are within 5 feet of the R.O.W.
2) If this street is improved and curb and gutter in-
stalled, we would probably need a portion of the outside
5 feet of R.O.W. for storm sewer purposes. 3) We have not
located NSP, telephone or gas-lines on the street. These
agencies should be contacted prior to vacating any portion
of the R.O.W.
We would have no objections to the outside 5' of R.O.W,
being vacated for street purposes in front of Lots 20 thru
23, Block 3, Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 and Lots 1 thru 5,
Block 12, Shadywood. We would, however, recommend that a
drainage and utility easement be retained on the entire
60 feet of R.O.W.
LLK/ms
Encl.
Northern States Power Company - No reply to date.
Lepnard n. Kopp
?
-/
March 19, 1979
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55354
(Gl2) 472-1155
TO: ·
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Request for Street Opening
At a February Council Meeting, the owner of Lots 3 and 12, Block 20, Devon
requested the opening of Windsor Road in order to have access to the rear
of.his lot.
At a later date, the Building Inspector was approached by a person who had
purchased land in Blocks 25 and 26 along Roxbury Lane asking how he would
get access to hiS property.
Attached are copies of letters from the Public Works Director and'the
Engineer about the opening of 'this street. Also attached is a copy of a
letter from one of the neighbors objecting to the opening.
A recommendation to the Council from the Planning Commission as to whether
or not the street or streets should be opened would be appreciated by the
Council.
T~is' will be on the March 26th Planning Commission Agenda.
_. :-/" , // /_z_,
.........LeOnard L. Kopp
LLK/ms
Encl.
cc: G. Cable
L.E. Larson '
Building Inspector
Public Works Director
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155
February 93, 1979
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Leonard Kopp
Public Works Director
Windsor Road
In reply to the request received to open %~indsor Road from Roxbury Lane to
Dexter Lane the opinion of the Public Works Department is as follows:
The only benefit to openin9 this road would be to the property owners on
Drummond Road which would allow them access to the rear of their property.
If it is put in without putting in Roxbury Lane from DrUmmond Road to this
new portion, we would have another dead end street. Th~se are a tremendous
problem in the winter for snow removal.
There are no utilities in this portion so the Public Works Department has no need
for access. I can see no benefit to the City to have a roadway installed in this
portion of Windsor Road.
Respectfully,
Robert Shanley
Pub!ic Works Director
cCOMBS-KNUTSON AS
CONSULTING EklGtI'~EERS 1~1 LAi~ID SUFIVEYE
CIATES, II,lC.
SITE PLANNERS '
March 8, 1979
Reply To:
12805 Olson Memorial Highway
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 ·
(612) 559-3700
Mr. Leonard Kopp
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota
55364
Subject:
City of Mound
Proposed opening of Windsor
Dexter to RoxburY
Dear Mr. Kopp:
As requested, we have looked at the feasiblity of opening Windsor
place from Island View to Roxbury and have the following comments
or recommendations.
We would not recommend opening Windsor unless Ro×bury from
Windsor to Island View were also opened. Opening only Windsor
would create another dead end street which would be difficult to
maintain.
Ail of the properties in Block 21 have access fKom other
streets as do lots'l, 2, ~'3 and 14 of block 20. The remains lots ....
in block 20 are 40" x 160' with frontage on Drummond and Windsor.
None of these lots have garages and probably canno_t construct garages
on Drummond,' because of lack of space-and grade'probIems. Opening ~
Win'dsor would e~a~le these properties, to construct g~ages if t~ey
wanted to.
Lots 13, 14 and 15 block 26 and 1, 2 and 3 block 25 are
potential building sites although they do not have sewer and waterl
Construction of sewer and water to these lots should be done
at the same time Roxbury is opened,
Roxbury from Windsor 'to Drummond cannot be opened ] because
of the steep grade.
From an engineering standpoint, there are no great difficulties
involved in constructing Windsor from Island View to Roxbury and
Roxbury from Island View to Windsor. I have some questions as to
the value of these streets to the adjacent properties. I suppose
this could be answered by a poll of the people involved or a public
hea~ing.
Very truly yours,
SON ASSO~IAfES, INC.
12 Pla.a.d,. ! 979
AgJ~z: ~. L~_or~e/~d Ko?p
CITY of MOUND
March 21, 1979
/3
5341 I';,AYWOOD ROAD
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
The City Manager
Request for Street Closures
When the City Council held hearings on the street improvements (curb,
gutters~ etc.) for 1979, requests were made to close several streets.
One of the streets is Drury Lane from Hampton ~o Cumberland.
Recommendations from Department Heads are:
Public Works Director -.See copy of letter attached.
Police Chief: It is suggested the requested street closing
on Drury be denied. From a public safety viewpoint, I believe
this street is necessary in offering alternate routes through
and around the top of the hill on that portion of land.
Fire Chief: No reply to date, but he has indicated that he is
opposed to closing any street.
ON LAK~ NIINHEONKA INDIAN I~URIAL, MOUND~
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155
October 17, 1978
TO:
FRO~-!:
SUBJm~T.
Mr. Kopp
Public ['~orks Director
'Street Closure at Drury &'H~mpton
It is my feeling that this one block piece of Drury not be closed for the
followin9 reasons.
This section is tiO-'be curbed and blacktopped in the 1979 project and it would
seem foolish to blacktop it and not use it. Also if it was closed and not black-
topped, we would have one block of gravel road that will wash out into the project
8rea. We -also have sanitary sewer and water mains in this street that require
m~intenance.
The people requestin9 this closure will st~ll have easy access'to their homes but
wh3t about the people south on Drury and Hampton that use this street for access?
Th~s leaves them with only Devon hill from the north for access which is as steep
or steeper. If they have to 90 around they will have to use Drury from Tuxedo
or Donald which are just as steep.and farther away from their homes.
As far as the children using it for walking and bike ridin9 that is a problem on
all streets and not a 9ood reason for closure of same street.
Respectfully,
Robert Shanley
Public Works Director
RS/jcn
TO: The Planning Commission
FROM: Charles Riese rg, Planner
For your review and comments.
City of Mound Planning Commission Press Release
The City of Mound Planning Commission announces the establishment of a
comprehensive planning update program. Started a few months ago, the
commission is in the process of formulating a new planning/zoning program
for the City which will address the concerns of land use, housing, parks,
transportation and zoning.
Aside from fulfilling a state law mandate, changing community development
trends and attitudes call for a new overview of City policy in order to
properly prepare for the future. Mound's existing comprehensive plan is
nearly 20 years old, while parts of the zoning ordinance date back even
further.
Initial planning commission discussions have identified the major community
development opportunities/issues for program addressment. Among these
concerns:
environmental ~ - how best may Mound maintain and enhance its
exceptional resources of lakes, wetlands and forest.
housing- how best to maintain good housing, the proper mix and need
for redevelopment.
downtown Mound - its traffic flow, parking and redevelopment opportunities.
To assist them in their work, the planning commission will be soliciting citizen
attitude and ideas through direct input from Mound residents. The following
are some of the methods which the commission will use to seek participation:
Monthly me~tin§s - every second Monday, the planning commission will hold an
informal workshop to review and study technical information and establish
policy. Citizens are invited to attend these workshops pending items of
interest. Public meetings - within a few months once sufficient progress has
been established on defining more specific policy, the planning commission
will be holding public meetings inviting citizens attendance and input.
Questionnaire - in an attempt to directly contact a majority of Mound residents,
the planning commission has prepared a questionnaire to solicit resident back-
ground and attitudes on future development/redevelopment. The April City
Newsletter will contain the questionnaire.
Dear Mound Resident:
The City of Mound Planning Commission recently started the process of
updating the City Comprehensive Plan. With~in the Planning process,
policies and ordinances will be formulated that guide future community
development and redevelopment in land use, natural resources, parks,
housing and transportation. Your assistance in the planning process
is needed in filling out the enclosed questionnaire so we may better
understand citizen ideas and desires.
Within a few months the Planning Commission is also intending on
establishing public meetings where citizens may become more informed on
future plans along with offering their input and ideas.
Check what seem to you to the best answers and return this~ sheet.
Your answers will be pooled with others; no individual will be identified.
Thank you.
Please mail the enclosed questionnaire to:
City Hall
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
or place in one of the three drop boxes around town:
Ben Franklin.
Bank, Super Valu, or
e
e
How long have you lived in Mound?
~'.. []a. less than 1 year [] c.
[]b. 1-3 years [] d.
What type of housing do you occupy?
[]a. own your home
[]b. rent an apartment
[] c. other
4-9 years
l0 years or longer
Where did you live before buying your present house?
[]a. within Mound
[]b. outside Mound Where
What is the age of the head of your household?
[]a. under 30 []c. 40-59
[]b. 30-39 []d. 60 or over
What City precinct do you reside in?
IZIFirst [] Fourth
[] Second F1 Fifth
[]Third [] Sixth
If you have children living at home, what are their ages?
[]a. pre-school
[]b. grade k-6
[]c. grade 7-12
[]d. post high school
[]e. foster children
numbers
Where would you like to live in 5 years?
[]a. same house
Fib. different house in Mound
[]c. outside of Mound
What do you feel makes Mound a good place to live? (please register your
priorities 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 in the boxes next to your preference).
[] a. good housing Fl e.
[]b. close to the lake [] f.
[]c. convenient shopping []g.
[]d. good schools
recreational opportunities
natural environment setting
other
What do you feel makes Mound a good place to live? (please register your
priorities 1,2,3,4,5,6 in the boxes next to your preference).
[]a. environmental protection []d. improve traffic patterns
[]b. redevelop downtonw Mound [] e. improve parks
[]c. provide better housing [] f. other
opportunity and rehabili-
tate existing homes.
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-119
SUBJECT: Addendum to Council Memorandum 79-115
Planning Commission Recommendations
Item 3 on the Planning Commission agenda was recommended for denial.
The applicant has amended his application requesting a 3 foot side
yard variance rather than a 5 foot variance. See copies attached.
ROY J. HANSEN
Land Surveyor
Civil Enltneer
OF PnO~'ERTY o~;
LOCATION ~¢~
O[~CRII[D A~ FOLLOW~
PLAT OF SURVEY
13907 ~rl~ lika Road
Hopkins, Minn. 55343
Telephone 93~-5671
Sc~\¢: t ""'
/
/
0)o
/
/
LOT
, Z
CERTIF~
,,ORVEY
CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDI.NG ...~ 4- .
! made a s~vcy o[ thc I~ation of thc building(s) on the a~ve ~ surveyed rhc pro~rty dc~ri~ a~ve and thit the l~ve plat
dc~ri~d pro~rty and that thc I~ation of ~id building(s) is ~s a correct rcprc~ntation of ~id su~ey.
courtly shown on thc a~ve plat.
A DP/T'/o N
BeDRooM
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
March 29, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-114
SUBJECT: IndUstrial Revenue Bond - Surfside
Mr. Joel Essig, President of Surfside, Inc. has asked to appear before
the City Council on April 10th to discuss Industrial Revenue Bonds and
present the final resolution for the Council's adoption.
CERTIFICATION
Cooks Bay Associates, a Minnesota general partnership
(the "Company"), hereby represents, warrants and certifies to
the City of Mound, Minnesota (the "City"), in connection with the
issuance and sale of a $900,000 City of Mound Industrial Develop-
ment Revenue Bond (Cooks Bay Associates Project) and the acquisi-
tion, rebuilding, constructing and equipping a restaurant, marina
and rental housing units and improvements to the site thereof,
located in the City, and to construct improvements thereto for
various commercial purposes (the "Project") that:
1. It is anticipated that the Project, upon completion
will create approximately 15 new jobs at an annual'payroll of
approximately $100,000 based upon currently prevailing wages~ In
addition, the Project will result in a commercially productive
and aesthetically pleasing facility. The Project will thereby
assist in halting the migration of persons out of the City and in
stabilizing the commercial character of the community.
2. It is anticipated that the acquisition, development
and construction of the Project will provide construction and
employment opportunities to the construction industry and that
the Project, upon completion will assist in stabilizing and ex-
panding the real property tax base of the City.
3. It is therefore anticipated that the Project will
assist in preventing economic deterioration; providing for devel-
opment of sound industry and commerce to use the available resources
of the community in order to retain the benefit of the community's
existing investment in education and public service facilities;
halting the movement of talented, educated personnel to other
areas and thus preserving the economic and human resources needed
as a base for providing governmental services and facilities; and
providing a more adequate tax base'to finance the cost of govern-
mental services.
COOKS BAY ASSOCIATES
-2-
This Application must be submitted to Commissioner in duplicate
***************************************************************
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE - SECURITIES DIVISION
APPLICATION
For.Approva~ of Municipal Industrial Revenue Bond Project
Date
To:
Minnesota Department of Commerce
Securities Division
500 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
The governing body of Mound , County of Hennepin ,
Minnesota, hereby applies to t-~ Commi~sio'ner of the State °f~innesota,
Securities Division of the Department of Commerce, for his approval of this
community's proposed municipal Industrial Revenue Bond Issue, as required
by Section 1, Subdivision 7, Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes.
We have entered into preliminary discussions with:
FIRM Cooks Bay Associates
ADDRESS 2670 Commerce Boulevard
CITY Mound STATE Minnesota 55364
State of Incorporation Minnesota general partnership
Michael J. O'Laughlin 1110 Northwestern Bank Bldg.
Attorney. Address Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
$900,000 City of Mound Industrial Development
Name of Project Revenue Bond (Cooks Bay Assoc~a~ Project)
This firm is engaged primarily in (nature of business):
Commercial and Industrial Real Estate Development
The funds received from the sale of the Industrial Revenue Bonds will
be used to (general nature of project): acquire, rebuild, construct
and equip a restaurant, marina and rental housing units
It will be located in Mound, Minnesota
The total bond issue will be approximately $ 900~000
toward payment of costs now estimated as fOllows:
to be applied
-1-
Cost Item
Land Acquisition and Site Development
Construction Contracts
Equipment Acquisition and Installation
Architectural and Engineering Fees
Legal Fees
Interest during Construction
Initial Bond Reserve
Contingencies
Bond Discount
Other
Amount
100,000
670,000
80~000
50,000
15,000
~0~000
50,000
25,000
It is presently estimated that construction will begin on or about
May 1 , 1979, and will be completed on or about May 1 , i9.8~
When completed, there will be approximately 15 new jobs created by the
project at an annual payroll of approximately $ 100,000 based upon
currently prevailing wages.
The tentative term of the financing is
19 79.
25 years, commencing May. 1 .,
The following exhibits are furnished with this application and are
incorporated herein by reference:
An opinion of bond counsel that the proposal constitutes a project
under Minnesota Stat., Chapter 474.02.
A copy of the city council resolution giving preliminary approval
for the issuance of its revenue bonds.
A comprehensive statement by the municipality indicating how the pro-
ject satisfies the public purpose of Minnesota Stat., Chapter 474.01.
A letter of intent to purchase the bond issue or a letter confirming
the feasibility of the project from a financial standpoint.
We, the undersigned, are duly elected representatives of Mound
Minnesota, and solicit your approval of this project at your earliest con-
venience so that we may carry it to a final conclusion.
Signed by;
'(Principal Officers)
This approval shall not be deemed to be an approval by the Commissioner
or the state of the feasibility of the project or the terms of the lease
to be executed or the bonds to be issued therefor.
Date of Approval
Commissioner of Securities
Minnesota Department of Commerce
-2-
FAEG R IE 8~ BENSON
130.O NORTHWESTERN DANK BUILDING
HINNEAPOLIS, HINNESOTA 5540~
March 30, 1979
Minnesota Commissioner of Securities
Minnesota Department of Commerce
Securities Division
500 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Re:
$900,000 City of Mound Industrial
Development Revenue Bond (Cooks Bay
Associates Project).
Dear Commissioner:
It is our opinion as bond counsel for the above-
captioned issue that the proposed project described in the
Application for Approval herewith constitutes a "project"
within the meaning of Minnesota StatuteS, Section 474.02,
Subdivision la, and that, when issued, the bond will be a
valid and binding instrument in accordance with its terms,
assuming valid authorization.
Very truly yours,
FAEGRE & BENSON
By
Extract of M±nutes of Meeting of the
City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular
meeting of the City Council of the-City of Mound, Minnesota was
duly held at in said City on
, the day of April, 1979, at o'clock
The following COuncilmen were present:
.M.
and the following were absent:
Councilman
introduced and read
the following written resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
TO A PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
BY COOKS BAY ASSOCIATES UNDER THE MUNICIPAL
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUTHORIZING
SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION TO THE COMMISSIONER
OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL THEREOF AND
AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS AND
MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
was duly seconded by Councilman , and upon
vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
TO A PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
BY COOKS BAY ASSOCIATES UNDER THE MUNICIPAL
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUTHORIZING
THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION TO THE
COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL THEREOF AND
AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS AND
MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT
Resolved by the City Council of the City of Mound, as
follows:
1. There has been presented to this Council a proposal
by Cooks Bay Associates, a Minnesota general partnership (the
"Company") that the City undertake a project pursuant to the
Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act (Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474), to provide financing for rebuilding, constructing
and equipping a restaurant, marina and rental housing units on
the Surfside Restaurant site for the Company in the City (herein-
after called the "Project"). Under the proposal, the Project
will be owned and operated by the Company, and 'the Company will
enter into a loan agreement with the City upon such terms and
conditions as are necessary to produce income and revenues
sufficient to pay, when due, the principal of and interest on up
to approximately $900,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds of
the City to be issued pursuant to said Chapter 474, Minnesota
Statutes, to provide monies for the Project, and the City will
pledge its interest in the loan agreement to secure the bonds.
2. It is hereby found, determined and declared that
the purpose of the Project is and the effect thereof will be to
promote the public welfare by the attraction, encouragement and
development of economically sound industry, agriculture and
commerce so as to prevent, so far as possible, the emergence of
blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment;
the retention and development of industry to use the available
resources of the community in order to retain the benefit of its
existing investment in educational and public service facilities,
by halting the movement of talented, educated personnel of mature
age to other areas and thus preserving the economic and human
resources needed as a base for providing governmental services
and facilities; and the more intensive development of land avail-
able in the area to provide a more adequate tax base to finance
the cost of governmental services in the City, County and School
District where the Project is located.
3. The Company has entered into preliminary discussions
with Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Ekstrom, Incorporated, as
consultants to the Company, and the consultants have reported
that the Project and the sale of the bonds therefor are feasible.
4. The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by
the City subject to approval of the Project by the Commissioner
of Securities and subject to final approval by this Council and
by the purchasers of any bonds to be issued and as to the ultimate
details of the Project.
5. In accordance with Section 474.01, Subd. 7a, Minnesota
Statutes, the Mayor and the City Clerk, and such other officers
and employees of the City as may from time to time be designated
are hereby authorized and directed to submit the proposal for the
Project to the Commissioner of Securities and request her approval
thereof, and the Mayor and the City Clerk, and other officers,
employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to provide
the Commissioner'with such preliminary information as she may
require. The Company, Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Ekstrom,
Incorporated, Messrs. Faegre & Benson as bond counsel, the City
Attorney, and other City officials are also authorized to initiate
the preparation of a proposed loan agreement, trust indenture,
and such other documents as may be necessary or appropriate to
the Project so that, when and if the proposed Project is approved
by the Commissioner and this Council gives its final approval
thereto, the Project may be carried forward expeditiously.
6. The Company has agreed to pay any and all costs
incurred by the City in connection with the Project whether or
not the Project is approved by the Commissioner and whether or
not the Project is carried to completion and to indemnify the
City, its officers and employees from all liability which the
City and any officers and employees may incur in connection with
the Project or the issuance and sale of the bonds.
7. The Company is hereby authorized to enter into such
contracts, in its own name and not as agent for the City, as may
be necessary for the construction of the Project by any means
available to it and in the manner it determines without advertise-
ment for bids as may be required for the acquisition or construc-
tion of other municipal facilities, but the City shall not be
liable on any such contracts.
-2-
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
City Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota, do hereby certify
that the attached extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City held April __, 1979, is a full, true and
correct transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to the
$900,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds of the City.
WITNESS My hand officially and seal officially as said
City Clerk this __day of April, 1979.
(Seal)
City Clerk
-3-
The Minnesota Commissioner of Securities
Minnesota Department of Commerce
Securities Division
500 Metro Square Building
st. Paul, Minnesota 55101
RE:
$900,000 City of Mound Industrial Development Revenue
Bond (Cooks Bay Associates Project)
Dear Commissioner:
Cooks Bay Associates, a Minnesota general partnership (the Company),
advises us that it intends to use the proceeds of the above-
referenced issue to acquire, rebuild, construct and equip a
restaurant, marina and rental housing units to be located in the
City of Mound, Minnesota (the City).
Based on the certification of kba Company, we believe this Project
will serve a valid public purpose under the laws of the State of
Minnesota, including the Municipal Industrial Development Act,
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 (the Act) for the following rea-
sons:
It is anticipated that the Project, upon comple-
tion, will create approximately 15 jobs in the
City of Mound~at an annual payroll of approxi-
mately $100,000, based upon currently prevailing
wages. In addition, the Project, when completed,
will result in an increasingly productive and
aesthetically pleasing facility. The Project
will, therefore, assist in halting the migration
of persons out of the City and in stabilizing the
commercial character of the community.
e
It is anticipated that the development of the
Project will provide construction and employment
opportunities in the construction industry and
that the Project, upon completion, will assist
in stabilizing and expanding the real property
tax base of the City.
e
It is, therefore, anticipated that this Project
will assist in preventing economic deterioration;
providing for the development of sound industry
and commerce utilizing the available resources
of the community in order to retain the benefits
of the community's investment in education in
public service facilities; halting the movement
of talented, educated personnel to other areas,
%hus preserving the economic and human resources
needed to provide governmental services and
facilities and providing a more adequate tax base
from which to finance the cost of government
services.
CITY OF MOUND
By
Its
-2-
DOUGHERTY, DA, Wi<INS, STRAND & EKSTROM
INCORPORATED
April lO, 1979
Minnesota Department of Commerce
Securities Division
500 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, MN 55101
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Mound City Hall
Mound, MN
Re:
Cook's Bay Associates
Proposed Apartment, Restaurant and Marina Complex (Cook's Bay Marina Center)
Proposed $900,000 Tax-Exempt Financing
Mound, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
At the request of Cook's Bay Associates, a proposed Minnesota General Partner-
ship, whose partners are to be Surfside, Inc., Joseph Palen, Steven Meyers,
Thomas Prokasky, Wallace Harris, Larry Williams and Robert Boisclair, we have
conducted an informal study as to the economic feasibility of the proposal
that the City of Mound issue up to $9~0,000 of revenue obligations under the
provisions of the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act to provide
financing for construction of a proposed complex of 7 apartments, 201-seat
restaurant and 65-slip marina to be located on approximately 1 acre of land,
on Cook's Bay in the City of Mound.
Our study has led us to the conclusion that, on the basis of current'financial
conditions and relying on the economic projections and financial statements
listed below, it appears the project will be economically feasible and that
the revenue obligations of the City of Mound will be able to be successfully
issued and sold to'institutional lenders. In reaching this conclusion, we
have reviewed and are relying on economic projections for the project as pre-
pared by Hirsch-Newman Company, Bill Bell Associates, and Cook's Bay Associates,
and an appraisal of the proposed project by Campbell Appraisal Co., Inc.,
which have been supplied to us by Cook's Bay Associates. We have also reviewed
and are relying upon the financial statements of the proposed parnters of
Cook's Bay Associates.
We have recommended to Cook's Bay Associates that the revenue obligations of
the City of Mound should be privately placed with institutional lenders.
Final amounts, terms and conditions of the issuance and sale of revenue obliga-
tions are subject to approval of the City of Mound, Cook's Bay Associates and
the ultimate institutional lenders who purchase the obligations, and are
subject to laws and regulations governing such institutional lenders. Sale
INVESTMENT BANKERS
414 IDS CENTER [] MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 [] 612/341-6000
-2-
and issuance of the obligations is also subject to approval of the proposed
project by the City of Mound, the Minnesota Department of Commerce and bond
counsel.
Very truly yours,
DOUGHERTY, DAWKINS, STRAND & EKSTROM
Incorporated
Executive Vice President
Ri'chard B. Riley
Vice President
0-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-120
SUBJECT:
Dock Permit Variance
The Park Commission recommends that a dock variance be granted permits
13660 and 13690 which would allow 52 feet between markers for swimming
area.
The Park Commission recommendation is:
A motion was made to "recommend to Council to grant variance,
but the City will not recognize the use of this area as a City
Swimming Beach".
The Council should by resolution approve or disapprove this recommenda-
tion.
BASSWOOD L,
o
0o
)NO
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 3, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-117
SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 17, Block 7, Shadywood Point
At the Mar~h 13th meeting, the Council directed that the subject
undersized lot not be released for sale for the time being. It was
requested by two lot owners across the street from the lot.
Attached is a copy of a letter from one of the lot owners asking
that their request be resubmitted. Does the Council wish to enter
into this before the adjoining lot is purchased?
This will be listed on the April 10th agenda.
LLK/ms
cc: S. Walton
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound~ Minnesota
April 3, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-116
SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land - Lots 17 & 18, Block 14, Seton
At the last Council meeting, the Council authorized putting the subject
lots on the sale list.
We need a temporary construction easement over the Southerly 10 feet.
A resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to acquire the easement
is required.
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-118
SUBJECT: Elevator in City Hall
Attached is a copy of a letter from the Architect about the wheel
chair lifts intended for City Hall.
They are not acceptable, to the Elevator Inspectors.
Does the Council wish to proceed otherwise?
cc: T. Prokasky
THOMAS WILLIAM
?ROKASKY & ASSOCIATES INC. · ARCHITECTS
April 2, 1979
Mr. Leonard Kopp, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota ~55364
RE: HANDICAP ACCESS
Dear Leonard:
Our conceptual drawing showed an elevator and a wheelchair
lift option to meet the handicap access to the City
Offices.
In reviewing it with State Code Officials I was informed
that there have been some problems with wheelchair lifts
that have been installed and that the elevator inspector
will not approve any installations in public buildings
until hearings have been held and the standards established.
Mr. Berdahl, of the State Building Code Division, informed
me the hearings will be held shortly but that we could be
looking at a year before the standards are drawn and
confirmed.
This leaves us with the option to put the wheelchair lift
option on the back burner or to pursue the more expensive
elevator option. 'Please let me know how the City would
like to proceed.
Thomas W. Prokasky .
TWP/p$ s
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-30
SUBJECT: City Land
Attached is a preliminary final plat on the property the
City is dividing into 4 lots.
Unless there are objections, we will have the Engineer
complete the plat.
,,v j 4 o 4 z ' W.__.__ '~
.?
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-31
SUBJECT: Request for Water & Sewer Bill Adjustment
Attached is a copy of a letter received asking an adjustment
of an unusually high water and sewer bill.
The Utility Billing Clerk reports as follows:
The owner called me on April 2nd and questioned the water
bill. The men went out and did not find a leak. The meter
reading was not out of line at present, but was from Septem-
ber 1978 meter reading to December 1978 - 82,000 gallons were
used. There is no explanation for this. We have no way of
knowing if it was the meter.
The Owner asked if they had to pay it all because there was
no proof where the water went. I told her I couldn't lower
it, but they could write a letter explaining what happened.
The Culligan man said it may have been the water softener.
Evidently the water went through the meter and into the sewer.
Date
March 1978
June 1978
Sept. 1978
USAGE
Meter Reading. Gallons
Read 254,000
Read 274,000
Est. 288,000
Late Card reading 299,000
Dec. 1978 Est. 309,000
Late Card reading 381,000
March 1979 Est. 391,000
March 1979 Read 398,000 (Owner)
April 2, 1979 R~ad 402,000 (City)
Gal. Billed Amount Billed
20,000 20,000 $27.40
14,000 20.70
25,000
21~000 28.52
82,000
82,000 92,22
4-10-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
April 4, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-32
SUBJECT: Summer Recreation Program
Lori Thonander, who has been directing the summer recreation
program is not returning this year.
The Park Commission has recommended that the City stay with their
own summer recreation program again this year.
Unless there are objections from the Council, we will proceed on
the same basis as other years on the summer program.
C1TY of MOUND
~pril 4~ 1979
5341 ~ZAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESO'rA 55354
(612) 472-1155
Mr. Richard J, Dougherty
Chief Administrator
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
350 Metro Square Building
7th & Robert Streets
St. Paul, MN. 55101
Dear Mr. Dougherty:
Thanks for your letter of March 28th regarding the sewer flow.
Sometime ago, I wrote you about your unmetered interceptor and the
abnormal flow coming in from Minnetrista.
Attached is a copy of a report from our Public Works people who feel
that the greatest amount of our flow is coming from the line in
Minnetrista. I wish we could get a meter at the boundary so we can
define the flow from those breaks in the under water lines on En-
chanted Island.
We would greatly appreciate hearing from you regarding the metering.
Sincerely,
LLK/ms
cc: Ms. Hustad
City Council
Moe Dorton
?¢7
ON LAKE MINNETOhlKA INDIAN BURIAL MOUND~
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD TELEPHONE
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155
April 3, 1979
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Leonard Kopp
Public Works Director
Infiltration £or March 19 to 20th
In answer to the letter that was sent to you in regards to a high rate of I/I
in March we have found the following.
Due to the heavy wet snow at that time I sm sure that a small percentage had
seeped into some of the low lyin9 manholes. Also we realize that a certain
amount of water will come in from floor drains in older homes which have gotten
water in the basem~nbs.
The major problem seems to have been with Minnetrista having two broken sewer
services on Enchanted Island. These 8re mostly below the surface water level
in the first place. One of these breaks was repaired on March 1~ 1979 by
Widmer Bros.
The second break was repaired by Widmer Bros. on March 19, 1979. We don't know
how long it had been running, but accordin9 to the Minnestrista sewer crew they
could hear it run into the service by listening at the service up by the house.
ReSpectfully,
Robert Shanley
Public Works Director
ON LAKE. MINNE'FONKA. INDIAN BURIAL. MOUND~ ~ ~'"~':~/'
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
April 4, 1979
TELEPHONE
TO:
FROM:
SUBJ E CT:
Leonard Kopp - City Manager
Charles Johnson - Chief of Police
Property taken in search warrant at residence of Hrs. Holm
Attached is a memorandum from Sgt. Hudson to me explaining the circumstances
of the seizure of certain property in a search warrant conducted on December 14,
1978 at the home-of Mrs. Holm.
For clarification, it is the policy of the police department to return all
property coming into our possession when the owner can be located. Property
which is seized and suspected of being stolen requires some form of acceptable
proof of ownership. On property items in which the ownership cannot be estab-
lished, after a waiting period of six months, the property is sold in accordance
with law at auction.
On any property which is seized by the police department in which the ownership
is disputed, the police department requires a court order for the'release of
that property. A court order is also required for the release of weapons which
are seized by the department and which the department has reasonable cause to
believe were used in the commission of a crime.
In this particular case there is certain property, which is referred to in the
report by Sgt. Hudson, which will certainly be returned to the rightful owner.
The owners have been notified and the property is available to them during
regular business hours.
Respectful ly,
Charles JSt~nson
Chief of Police
CJ:lao
CFFY ol MOUND
5341 MAYV/OOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
March 30, 1979
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Chief Charles Johnson
Sgt. William Hudson '
Seized property as a result of a search warrant
This letter is in response to the inquiry made by Mrs. Holm, also known as Mrs.
Olson, in reference to the items that we seized at her residence as a result of a
search warrant on December 14, 1978, at 4:00 p.m.
The search warrant was executed by myself and Off. Bostrom on the above date and
time in reference to stolen property being at that particular residence. In
reference to the letter, there are five items labeled A, B, C, and D that Mrs.
Olson states that are hers and she wants them returned.. Explanations for each
of those items are as follows:
Items A and B: Prior to going to the residence, we had information-frJm a confi-
dential reliable informant, that there were numerous stolen guns at the residence.
Upon going in the residence, the warrant was explained to one of the people that was
living at the house at the time. In going to the upstairs room, two weapons were
found and were seized. It was explained to the resident, at that time, that if we
could find that the weapons were clear, that we certainly would return it to him.
Mr. Olson, who is the father, called me a couple of days later and asked me about
the two guns. He informed me that both of those guns certainly were his and that
he had given them to his sons and he'described them to me specifically. I informed
Mr. Olson that I would most certainly return the weapons to him and he understood
after I explained it to him why we seized them. Mr. Olson stated that he would have
his oldest son, Wayne, come to the police department and the two weapons would be
returned to him. As of this date I am not aware of Mr. Olson coming to the police
department to pick the weapons up.
Item C: The speakers that were seized matched speakers that were particularly
described in the warrant and had been reported to be stolen to his police department
by a complainant in Mound. Mr. Holm,.who I had conversation with in reference to
the speakers, was informed of this and'he told me that he wasn't aware of whether'
they were stolen or not and that he had bought them from somebody else. I told Mr.
Holm that I was going to keep the speakers but that I would most certainly return his
radio which he particularly described to me. ~. Holm did not come back until, the
29th of March, some two months later, to pick the radio up.
Item D: This item was sold to Mrs. Olson by another party in Mound. This other party
that sold this item to Mrs. Olson is presently being sought for a burglary investi-
gation. This party did inform Sgt. Hudson that he did, in facti sell the item to
Mrs. Olson and that he had got it from another guy in payment for a debt, along with a
television, tie stated he wasn't sure if it was stolen at the time or not but that he
believed it to be. The serial number of this item has been turned over to the
manufacturer and they are in the process, hopefully, of tracing down the owner so
Chief Johnson
March 30, 1979
Page Two
positive identification can be made.
Item E: This item was seized after the resident there told me that when he bought it
he believed it to be stolen and he just couldn't turn it down due to the fact that it
was such a good price'. He did mention the name of the person that sold it to him and
I informed him to have that person come in and see me. He has failed to do this.'
Ail of these items were seized as a result of .charges being brought against a juvenile
for posession of stolen property. That juvenile was referred to Hennepin County Court
for posession of stolen property and the court, as of this time, has failed to notify
us of any disposition.
If you have any questions in reference to this, please contact me.
' /~illiam M. Hudson ' '
ound Police Department '
~RESIDENT
Ale<: W. Porkin
Rosevdle
VICE-PRESIDENT
William A. Boresh
Moose Lake
~ECRDI'ARY
Bob McGuire
Fridle¥
'REJ~,SURER
Wm. Weinknech~
Kas.~on
)IRECTORS
Duane Jensen
Fergus Falls
Manville Fuchs
Wells
James King
Blaine
William A. Baresh
Moose Lake
James L-Martin
Lakeville
Charles C. Waod
New Brighton
Robert McGuire
Fridley
Ernest.Surprenant
Tracy
Bob Snyder
Edina
Alec Parkin
Roseville
Wm. Weinknecht
Kasson
MIN N I g DTA
INCORPORATED
~n or~nh.i'ion of muni¢ip~ll¥-oporntod Di~pon~orio$ o{ 5 ~
HELP I' 'EMERGENCY I
Dear Fellow Manager, Mayors and Councilmen:
An ~cy has arisen' at the State Legislature which could have
devastating effects on your operations if this piece of legislation
passes out of the Senate or House.
I ~m referring to Senate File No. 513 "and House File No. 490 which
would eliminate 3.2 beer in the State of Minnesota, which would
then aliYw grocery stores', drug Stores, gas stations and 3.2 beer
joints to sell the same beer as we sell in our liquor store. (This
Bill is known, at the capitol as the 7% beer-~ll).
You can easily realize what this would do to our beer sales, which
in many stores account for 40 to 50 percent of their gross sales. The
grocery stores and ~ stations, I am sure, would use this product as
a "lost leader" selling it at, or even below cost to attract customars
to their stor~s.
We were unable to stop this Bill in the sub-committee and I am
assuming now that it will most likely squeeze out of the full committee,
and then we have problems. So, I desperately need your help, and time
is of the essence.
Mayors and Councilmen - please act now! Write your Senator and
Representative, call them and talk to them. It doesn't make any
difference at all how small your town is, as one of his or her
consti~nnts you are the only ones they will really listen to. If
this bill goes through, I can almost guarantee you that WINE will
be next - and we can kiss our stores g~od-bye!
Please act now - don't delay this for one day if you can help it.
I would appreciate it if you could mail a duplicate copy of your
letters to m~ at the return address on the envelope. Then I will
know who has been contacted and I can let you know how they voted.
Thanking you in advance for your deep concern in this very important
matter, I am,
Alec Parkin
President
LAKE
MINNETONKA
CONSERVATION
L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE
April, 1979
DISTRICT
Saturday
4-14-79
Water Structures & Environment Committee
7:30 a.m., Soda Fountain, Spring Park
Monday
4-16-79
Lake Use Committee
4:30 p.m., LMCD Office, Wayzata
Wednesday
4-18-79
Public Hearings: Foxhill, Mai Tai, & Pemtom-Eagle Bluff
7:30 p.m., LMCD Office
Saturday
4-21-79
Executive Committee
7:30 a.m., Soda Fountain, Spring Park
Wednesday
4-25-79
Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors
8:00 p.m., Gray Freshwater Biological Institute
4-2-79
VENS£N-I ODGE, INC
'
Public Finance and
Manale~,~nt
NEWSLETTER
April1979~/,f'l j
1900 Midwest Plaza Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612/338-3535 8001328-8200 Outside Minnesota
Funds Released
to Charities
In 1976, under statutes, rules and
regulations in force at that t~me,
the La Cros se, Wiscons in Common
Council decided to Advance Refund
$21,425,000 of General Obllgat ion
bonds. Evensen-Dodge assisted the
City in the sale which resulted in a
s av~ngs · to the taxpayers of
$1,133,621 in the form of lower an-
nual debt service. Due to arbitrage
regulations of the Treasury De-
partment, a s imilar amount of
savings was generated which could
not benefit the City. Rather than
award this $1.1 mil lion to the
federal government, or to under-
writers, the Council elected to make
the funds available to local
charit~es. As the first C~ty in the
nat~on to attempt this type of d~s-
trzbution, Evensen-Dodge, along with
the City's bond counsel Chapman &
Cutler, began the arduous task of
supervising the procedure.
Init~al action resulted in the
savings being placed in an escrow
fund held by The Northern Trust Com-
pany of Chzcag0 and determinations
made as to the el~gzbil~ty of ~nter-
ested organizations. Special federal
legislation sponsored by Senator
Gaylord Nelson of W~scons in and
others, has recently been approved
by Congress and now after 2-1/2
years of delays the funds can b.e re-
leased to eligible charities.
Evensen-Dod ge ~s proud to have
played a part in enabling this $1.1
million to be made available for
charltab le purposes.
Single Family
' Housing Update
As reported in our January Newslet-
ter, Single Family Mortgage Revenue
Financing utilized to provide mort-
gage money at lower than prevailing
market rates is becoming one of the
major activities in the tax exempt
bond market at the current time.
Although this type of finance has been
util~zed by State Housing Finance
Agencies to provide low ~nterest
mortgages to persons of low and
moderate income for many years, much
interest has developed at the local
level of government s~nce the
publicity concerning the City of
Chxcago's Mortgage Revenue Financing
this past summer. Although the
mechanics of this financing form are
generally similar, the public purpose
served through the issuance of the
bonds are varied and include
rehabil~tat ~on, new construct zon,
purchase of exzsting mortgages thereby
releaszng new mortgage money,
redevelopment of blzghted areas as
well as the traditional purpose of
providing low rate mortgages to
persons of low and moderate ~ncome.
We urge local un~ts of government
considering this type of finance to
establish the objectives that you hope
to accomplish through this type of
program and we would be happy to meet
w~th you and dzscuss the various
authorzzat~ons available for you to
carry-out such a program. It is our
intention to assist you zn de-
veloping a program that fits your
needs, xs sensitive to your
capac~ties, and is generally ac-
cepted zn the munrcipal market.
EVENSEN DODGE
Municipal Market Conditions
Unsolved fiscal and monetary worries have prevented the formulation of a clear
trend in interest rates although they appear to be drifting slightly .lower.
Year to date tax-exempt volume is far short of the pace set last year. The re-
duced volume could change however, as many state and local houszng programs are
coming to market along with the traditional spring volume.
With the appetite for new tax-exempts equal to or greater ~han supply, the
municipal issuer could possibly see improved rates with the overriding caveat
that inflation uncertainties must resolve.
Recent Bond Sales
Amount Moody's
Sale Date Issuer (000's) Purpose Run BBI Rating
Saul< Centre, Mn. 900 G.O. Improvements
Delavan Lk. San. Dist., Wise. 3,600 Sewer
Tomahawk Sch. Dist., Wise. 3,545 School Building
Duluth, Mn. 2,000 Tax Antic. Cert.
State of Minnesota 88,500 Various Purpose
Earlham CSD, Iowa 1,200 School Building
West Concord, Mn. 125 Improvements
Wayzata, Mn. 1,500 G.O. Redevelopment
Platteville Sch. Dist., Wise. 1,750 School Building
G.O. Bonds
Promissory Notes
G. O. Improvement
Nursing Home Revs.
Cert. of Indebt.
Metro Sewage
Corporate Purpose
Promissory Notes
Co. Public Hospital
Single Fam. ttsg. Rev.
School Bldg.
School Bonds
Promissory Notes
G,O. Storm Sewer
Various Purpose
Hsg. & Aux. Fac. Rev.
School Building
State- Aid Street
School Building
Road Bonds
March 14
13
13
12
7
7
7
6
6
Feb.
6 Clarinda, Iowa 450
5 Hudson, Wise. 750
5 Annandale, Mn. 160
28 Luke Co., Mn. 800
27 SSD #1, Minneapolis, Mn. 28,000
27 Milwaukee Co., Wise. 38,015
27 Milwaukee Co., Wise. 9,710
27 Village of Sussex, Wisc. '355
27 Henry Co., Iowa 1,500
22 Iowa Hsg. Finance Auth. 150,000
22 Columbus Sch. Dist. ,Wise. 1,900
21 Neenah, Wise. 2,000
21 Muskego, Wise. 670
13 West Bend, Wise. 2,000
12 Eldridge, Iowa 270
8 U. of No. Dakota 3,600
8 Bellevue CSD, Iowa 132
6 Marshall Co., Mn. 1,250
6 ISD #877, Buffalo, Mn. 6,300
6 Carver Co., Mn. 3,800
81/90 6.35 Baa-1 5. 662
82/99 " Baa-1 6. 157
80/94 " A 5.714
79 " NR 5.877
80/99 6.42 Aaa 5. 561
80/98 " A 5. 641
81/90 " NR 5. 750
82/05 " Aa 5.93
81/95 " A-1 5. 743
80/94 " 5.588
81/88 " A 5.636
80/89 ', Nlq 5.76
81/01 6.38 NR 6.99
2-28-80 " MIG-1 5. 787
80/98 " Aaa 5. 717
80/98 " Aaa 5.770
9-1-82 " A 5. 588
80/98 " A-1 5. 766
81/01 " A-1 6.755
80/94 6.33 A 5.619
80/93 " Aa 5.445
83/88 " A 5.50
81/94 6.31 Aa 5.441
81/96 " 5.431
93/02 6.22 A-1 6.41.1
80/87 " 5. 265
80/89 " A 5.377
82/99 " A 5.781
81/96 " A 5. 597
~" · FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS
FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MA E AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 612)
April 1, 1979
File: Financial Consultants: Ehlers and Associates
Please distrlbufe fo goYern[ng body members
The bloom of housing issues went into remission when it was found that Minne-
sota's IDB (tax exempt Industrial Revenue Bonds) law may not cover single
family dwellings, absent specific legislation. One recognized law firm will
approve them for developers but others say this is financing resale inventory.
A non-profit corporation proposal is before the attorney general for an opin-
ion. The Legislature is considering a bill to take housing out of the IDB
law altogether, while another bill would authorize cities (or the state) to
do it. Potentially a flood of bonds could dilute the value of tax exemption
for the "traditional" purposes, e.g. public buildings, sewerage, water im-
provements, schools, hospitals, etc.
Tax increment financing is a very important tool with which to accomplish
development and redevelopment. It uses the tax that the new development will
bring to finance those improvements and amenities necessary to bring the develop-
ment. These financings are complicated and require a good deal of research
and figure work, but they are doable and may be.more important than tax exempt,
industrial revenue financing. In fact, used in tandem it is another important
implement in the advisor's and the community's tool box.
The bond market remains remarkably
steady in view of world and national
developments. It is hard to assess
this since the uncertainties we have
seen; loss or threatened loss of im-
portant Mid East (oil) areas, the
China-Vier Nam war, potential Sino-
Soviet conflict, budget deficits,
continued inflation, etc., would
normally bring higher interest rates.
Maybe we are just saying that Arma-
geddon is irrelevant. As in certain
bridge hands, if the cards are dis-
tributed wrong, there is no way to
win; they are played as if the worst
could not happen.
DOW-JONES BOND INDEX: 6.93%
60(
GDO
~.,00
8.oc '1 I I I I
Weekly Avera&e of
Twenty 20 Year Bonds
I ,.aa
1978 i 1979 i
Il
5.0~- 5.00
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. has sent out new contract forms which are advisory
and need not be returned until you are ready to sell rated bonds.
Watching for the Robins, we are
Very t ru
you rs,
.._.
,,; !/,,'./:
CED
< o
o ~
0
o
~w
O0
O0
~--~
~ 0 "~ ~ 0 ~ ~0-o ~
~.0 ~ -,; 0 .-~.-,; 0 c~
~cl 2~¢D 0
0 ~ 0
;:~. -~ o~ ~-0 0
mid
0 ~
fD ¢0 fD c-
0
Z
000
0
O0
0
Co
z