Loading...
82-07-13MOUND CiTY COONCIL Tuesday, Jul?. 13, 1982 Regular Heating City Hall - 7:30 P.M. CI1Y OF HOUND AGE.NDA Mound, Minnesota Minutes.of June']5, 1982 - Board of Review Minutes.of June 22, 1982 - Regular Heetlng PUBLIC HEARING - Vacation of 1 foot of public lane known as Roanoke Access abutting Lot 19, · Block 1, Devon - Steven & Victoria Bohnhoff PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - FROM JUNE 14, 1982 A. Case 82-120 Steven & Victoria Bohnhoff & City of Mound 4687 Island View Drive Lot 19,' Block 1, Devon Application: Vacation of 1 foot of Roanoke Access B. Case 82-ll6 Ind. School Dist. #277 1881Comme~ce Blvd. Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 Pg. 1357-1361 Pg. 1362-1369 Pg. 1370-1372 Pg' 1373-1378 MAP 14 Pg. 1370-1372 Co Application: Case 82-117 Application: D. Case 82-]18 Applicatipn: Case 82-I19 Application: Sign Permit for Grandview Middle School-MAP 3 Pg. 1379-1381 Ind. School Dist. #277 5600 Lynwood'Blvd. Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 ' Sign Permit for Westonka Community Center-MAP 4 Pg. 1382-]384 community Services, Ind. School Dis.t. #277 5600 Lynwood Blvd. Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 Sign Permit for Informational Sign - MAP 4 : Pg. 1385-1386 James H. Peterson Brunswick Road.. Lot 4 & ½ of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood Variance for Lo~.Area MAP'12 PLANNI'NG COMMISSION ITEMS - FROM JUNE' 28, 19'82 F. Case 82-]22 Ho Application: Case 82-123 Application: Case 82-124 Application: Case 82-126 Weldon Hintz Grandview Blvd. & Sunset Road Lots 16, 17 & 18, Mound Addition Lot Split, Subdivi.s. ion Lillian Vogt 5816 Grandview Blvd. Lot 1, Mound Shores Special Purpose Fence Thomas R. Smieja 3207 Amhurst Lan'e Lots 19 & 20, Block 17, Devon Front Yard Variance Application: MAP 4 MAP 4 MAP 15 Carl R. Hanson 1677 Avocet La~e Lot 8, Block 7, Dreamwood MAP 2 Variances Side Yard, Lot Size & House Size Pg. 1387-1394 Pg. 1395-1399 Pg. 1400-1402 Pg...1403-1408 Pg. 1409-1413 Pg. 1414-1417 Page 1354 Case 82-128 Our Lady of the'£ake Church~ Temporary Sign permit - Advertising the Incredible Festival from July 23 to Aug. 2. Porta Panel Sign to be placed in Parking Lo~ East of Burger Chef Bldg. 4. Set Date for PUblic Hearing - Conditional Use Permit for Arcade, etc. - Rodney W. Storrusten - 5559 Shoreline Blvd. Suggested date August 3, 1982 5. Set Date for Public Hea~ing - Vacation of North 10 feet of North Beachside Road - Heinz'Stefan/ Agent for Tim Heyman, 1972 Shorewood Lane Suggested date August 3, 1982 6. Preliminary Engineering Report for Storm Sewer - Peabody A~enue City Engineer will be present. 7. Preliminary Report on Drainage Problem - Block 10, Woodland Point (Referred from'May llth Meeting)' City Engineer 8. Final Payment Request - County Road llO Street Light Project 9. Parking on Lakewood Lane - Police Chief Bruce Wold 10. Parking on Clare Lane - Police Chief Bruce Wold 11. Assessment Search Fees - Increase Recommended 12. Public Dance Permit - Westonka-Orono Sports Center for the Harold J. Pond Sports Arena - They have asked the fee be waived 13. Pg. 1418~1420 14. 15. 16. 17. 8:00 P.M. - August 6, 1982 to 1:O0 A.M. - August 7, 1982 Gambling Permit - Our Lady of the Lake Church - July 31 and August 1, 1982 Request for ReFund for Tree Removal Assessed to Wrong Property Proposed'Settlement Agreement with West Suburban ProPerties Payment of Bills INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Memo from Police Chief on City Administrative Vehicles B. Letters from the Engineer to Hardrives on Tuxedo Blvd. and Bartlett Blvd. C. Petition asking fOr signing n~ar Three Points Park and Solut. ion to the Problem. D. Eagle Lane - Hedge Obstructing View - Safety Problem E. Article on Neighborhood Boards F. Mound Arcade - Letter from'City Manager Reply from Tom Watson G. Letter from Metro Council asking for Comments on the Post Office Relocation in Mound. H. Report fron Fuel Recovery Company on the Loss of Gasoline from Public Works' Underground Storage Tanks I. Notice of Minnegasco's Proposed Rate Increase J. Letter Commending the Police Department Pg. 1421-1422 Pg. 1423-1424 Pg. 1425-1433 Pg. 1434-1443 Pg. 1444-1448 Pg. 1449 Pg. 1450 Pg. 1451-1452 Pg. 1453 Pg. 1454-~455 Pg. 1456 Pg. 1457-1462 Pg. 1463-1464 Pg. 1465-1468 Pg. ~469-1470 Pg. 1471-1472 Pg. ,1.473 Pg. 1474-1475 Pg. 1476-1477 Pg. 1478-1479 Pg. 1480~1481 Pg. 1482-1483 Pg. 1484-1491 Pg. 1492 ~..age 1355 18. Oo R. S. T. U. V. Wo Letter Commending the Police Explorer Post Lette~ from James Regan Thanking the Council for Prompt ~ction Articles Regarding Arcades Action Alert.- Proposed Discontinuance of Federal Surplus Property Program Maple Plain Newsletter Article - Continental Rate Hearing 2 Letters from Residents on the Continental Rate Case that will be Forwarded to Bruce Campbell, Hearing Examiner Ehlers & Associates Newsletter - Tax Exempt Bond Market Ameri. can Legion Post #398 - June Gambling Report Assoc. of Metro. Municipalities Annual Report for 1981-82 L.M.C.D. Meeting Schedule for August L.M.C.D. Minutes - May 26, 1982 Meeting DAC Agenda for the July 15, 1982 Meeting DAC Minutes from the June 30, 1982 Meeting Notice from Ind. School Dist. #277 of meeting July 12, 1982, for the coordination of community services. Surfside - Butch Essig 'Pg~ 1493 Pg. 1494 Pg. 1495-~499 Pg. 1500 Pg. 1501 Pg. 1502z1503 Pg. 1504-1505 Pg. 1506 Pg. 1507-1524 Pg. 1525 Pg. 1526-1529 Pg. 1530 Pg. 1531-1534 Pg. 1535 Pg, 1536-1569- Page 1356 123 June 15, 1982 BOARD OF REVIEW (continutation from June l, 1982) Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Board of Review reconvened in the Council Chambers of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at 5341 Maywood Road in said City on June 15, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, .Robert Polston, Gordon Swenson and Donald ~lrick. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, Hennepin County Assessor'Milt Hilk, and City Clerk Fran Clark. Also present were the following interested citizens: Loren Pi~pkorn, Harvey Reder, Herbert Wolner, Ron Gehring, David Thurston, Eugene Garvais, William Netka, Nell Froeming, Marshall Weimer and Larry Webber. The Mayor reconvened the Board of Review. The Mayor explained'.that at this meeting the Assessor; Milt Hilk, will give the assessor's decisions as to the value of the.property questioned at. the June 1~ 1982, Board of Review. After the decisions are given and approved by the Council, if the property owner still feels that the value is too high,'he has the right to appeal the decision to the County Board of Review. PID #13-117-24 31 0060 - Loren Piepkorn Lindlan moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve a reduction of the assessed value of. the Piepkorn property from $69,400 to $66,000. The vote was 2 in favor with Charon, Polston and Ulrick voting nay. Motion denied. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Piepkorn prop'erty from $69,400 to $68,000. The vote was 3 in favor~ with Swenson and Lindlan voting nay. Motion carried. .. PID #23-117-24 32 0043 - Harvey Reder Charon moved and Polston seconded a motion to concur with the Assesser's recommended'reduct!on of the assessed value of the Reder property from $15,400 to $9,000. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.. PID #24-1.17-24 24 0017 & #24z117-24 24:0018 - Herbert WOlner Polston moved and Charon a motion to concur with the Assessor's assessed value of the Wolner property at $14,500.on PID #24~117-24 24 0017 and $160,900 on PID #24-117-24 24 0018. The vote was, unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PID #25-117-24 21 0113 - Ron Gehring Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property from $150,100 to $146,300. The vote was 3 in favor with Lindlan and Swenson voting nay. Motion carried. PID #13-117-24 22 0028 & #13-117-24 24 0040 Ron Gehring Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property PID #13-117-24 22 0028 from $26,400 to $20,000 and PID #13~117-24 24 0040 from $4,400 to $4,000. The vote was unanimously in favor, Motion carried, 124 June 15, 1982 PID #13-117-24 12 O101 Ron Gehring Lindlan moved and Polston seconded a mOtion to reduce the assessed value of the Gehring property from $40,800 to $32,500. The vote was 2 in favor with Charon, Swenson and Ulrick voting nay. Motion denied. Charon moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended, reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property from $40,800 to $37,500. The vote was 3 in favor with Swenson and Lindlan voting nay. Motion carried. PID #13-117-24 .12 0205 - Ron Gehring Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property from $9,900 to $7,000. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PID #13-117-24 12 0201 - Ron Gehring Charon moved and Polston seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property from $9,900 to $6,000. The vote was unanimously in favor, Motion carried. PID #12-117-24 43 0055 - Ron Gehring Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring proper~y from $62,700 to $52,000. The vote was 4 in favor with Mayor Lindlan voting nay. Motion carried. PID #19-117-23 23 0023 - Ron Gehring .- Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property f~om $102,600 to $88,500. The vote was unanimously, in favor. Motion carried. PID #19-117-23 24 0018 - Ron Gehring Charon moved and Polston seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Gehring property from $99,500 to $85,300. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried, PID #18-117-23 23 0055 David Thurston Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Thurston property from $1OO,300 to $92,400. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PID #14-117-24 32 0040 - Eugene Garvais The Assessor's recommended reduction in the assessed value of this property was from $13,200 to $12,000. Lindlan moved and Swenson seconded a motion to reduce the assessed value of the Garvais property from $13,200 to $11,000. The vote was 4 in favor with Councilmember Charon voting nay. Motion carried. PID #14-I17-24 32 0010 - Eugene Garvais Polston moved and Charon seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Garvais property from $86,100 to $84,900. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ~25 ~une 15, 1982 PID #13-117-24 33 O052~- William Netka Swens0n moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommended reduction of the assessed value of the Netka property from $425,000 to $400,000. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PID #13-117-24 41 0046 - Nell Froeming. Charon moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to concur with the Assessor's recommende8 reduction of the assessed value of the Froeming property from $122,600 to $119,400. The vote was 4 in favor with Mayor Lindlan voting nay. Motion carried. PID #24-117-24 34 0008 - Larry Webber representing J. E. Nolan The property owner is asking that the Assessor take another look at this property and the valuation they have on it, It is presently valued at $1OO,iO0 which the owner feels is too high. PID #24-117-24 22 0007 - Marshall Weimer It was determined, by the Assessor, that.this property should be getting a seasonal recreational tax credit because the owner is only a resident of Minnesota for 6 months out of the year and does not rent out the residence when he lives in Florida. Ulrick moved and Polston seconded a motion change the residential class- ification of PID #24-117-24 22 0007 to a seasonal recreational classifi- cation. The vote was unan mously in favor. Motion carried. Councilmember Pinky Charon left the meeting at 9:55 P.M. ALL OTHER PID NUMB£RS: The Assessor gave his determinations to the Board of Review on the values of the following properties. These property owners were not present at this session of the Board of Review but had been at the June 1st meeting. PID #24-117-24 24 0014 - Frank Livingston The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $191,000 to $187,3OO. PID #23-117-24 24 0045 - David Hintz The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $81,700 to $79,000. PID #23-117-24 43 0026 - Herbert Flesher The Assessor recommended no change in the value of this property. Value - $88,900. PID #12-117-24 43 0054 - Willard Hillier The Assessor recommended no change in the value of this property. Value - $110,400. PID #14-117-24 42 O010 - Robert G. Wiese The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $73,800 to $72,500. " 126 June 15, 1982 PID #23~.117-24 31 0037 - MiChael Gerlicher The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this propert~ from $105,900 to $94,500. PID #25-117-24'.11 0043 Kevin Hetchler Thc Assessor recommended no chnage in the value of this property. Value - $72,900. PID #23-117-24 32 0006 - William Niccum The Assessor recommended no change in the value of this property. Value - $111,900. PID #12-117-24 43 0003 - Roger Polley The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $100,100 to $94,800. PID #14-117-24 33 0006 #14-117-24 33 O0O5 #14-117-24 33 0004 #14-117-24 34 OOlO - all belonging to Dr. Harold Borg The Assessor recommended no change in PID #14-117-24 33 0006. Value - $19,800. The Assessor recommended no change in PiO #14-117-24 33 000~. Value - $22,000. The Assessor advised the Board of Review that Dr. Borg'did not want PID #14II17-24 33 0004 reviewed. So the value would stay at $100,200. The Assessor recommended no change in PID #14-117-24 34 OOlOo Value - $30,800. Mayor Lindlan moved to reduce PID #14-117-24 33 0006 from $19,800 to $16,800 and also reduce PID #14-117-24 33 0005 from $22,000 to $18,000. Motion died for lack of a second. PID #24~117-24 24 O011 - Leroy Jessen The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $207,700 to $205,900. PID #13-117-24 21 0056 - John Knoernschild The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $111,700 to $108,800. PID #13-117-24 21 0051 John Knoernschild The Assessor recommended no change in the value of this property. Value - $8,200. PID #14-117-24 34 0034 Maurice Johnson The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $74,800 to S73,200. ] 3/ o ,.. 127 June.15, 1982 ?ID #23-117-24 4~ 0002 Paul Van Risseghem The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $61,300 to $60,100. PID #18-117-23 23 0057 - Julie Finn The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $111,2OO to $102,9OO. PID #25-117-24 41 O149 - C. E. Gemar The Assessor recommended reducing the value of this property from $71,2OO to $70,000. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to approve the above property valuations as presented by the Assessor for 1982. The vote wa~ unanimously in favor, with Councilmember Charon absent. Motion carried. Swenson moved and Potston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-163A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT ROLL AS PRESENTED AND CORRECTED The vote was unanimously in favor with Councilmember Charon absent. Motion carried. The Mayor closed the Board of Review. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to adjourn at l l:OO P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor with counci lmember Charon absent. Motion carried. City Manager Attest: City Clerk 128 June 22, 19.82 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to due call and. notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council' of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on June 22, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Polston and Gordon Swenson. Councilmember Don Ulrick had another meeting and arrived later' in the Council meeting. 'Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, Assistant City Attorney Jim Larson, Police Chief Bruce Wold, Assistant City Engineer John Cameron, Sewer and Water Superintendent Greg Skinner, Acting City Clerk Marjorie Stutsman; Joel'Settles of Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District; George Boyer of Hi'ckok and Associates;.Rod Hamblin of the Neptune Water Meter Company and the fol- lowing interested citizens: Phyllis Jessen, Chair, and Margaret Hanson and Gary Paulsen of the Wetlands Committee; Robert Hanson, John Wagman, Frank Kelley, Mr. & Mrs. Robert Dybing, Leo Bullock, Mark Richardson, Tim and Nora Harrell, Mitchell Erickson, Joel Essig and Buzz Sycks. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of June 8, 1982 were presented fo~consideration. Swenson moved'and Charon seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the.June 8, 1982 meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion' carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF HEARING ON PROPOSED WETLANDS ORDINANCE .' The City Manager explained that since the last meeting on the Wetlands Ordinance, he and John Cameron had met with Joel Settles of Hennepin Soil and Water Conserva- tion District; the outcome of that meeting was the decision to delete the numeri- cal designations for wetlands because hardly any wetland can be entirely classified by a single designation. The changes made in the ordinance are: First - one single general designation Of wetlands (Maps are the same minus the numbers) and second is the Standard Section - If you take fill out of wetlands, you could not put anything back with more pollutants or change the volume. City Manager suggested the hearing be continued so that the Wetlands Committee could review and work on the changes with Mr. Settles. The Mayor then opened the public hearing for comments on said proposed wetlands ordi- nance from persons present who wished to express their views thereon. The following persons offered comments or questions: Gary Paulsen thinks we should post whole gamut of definitions of what wetlands _. are- no place are wetlands defined' and questioned what is advantage to delayi, ng the numbers? ......... ~' Joel Settles responded that by not numbering, we are treating all wetlands appli- cations the same - all grade into each other. Doesn't hurt the ordinance by taking out the numbers. Descriptions are still on file in City Office. Phyllis Jessen wants material to be kept on hand for reference showing the classi- fication of wetlands; like us to have resources of our own. Questioned if they were to take Ordinance to Planning Commission and then to the Council? 129 June 22, 1982 Frank Kelley, Attorney f~r Ms. Anderson, asked that he be given oppgrtunity to participate in the discussions of the Committee. Margaret Hanson suggested that Committee's review of the Wetlands Ordinance not be put off. The Mayor then closed the hearing. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to continue the hearing on the Wetlands Ordinance to August 4, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. The vote on the motion was unanimously in. favor. DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Mayor Lindlan opened the public hearing for input on said delinquen.t utility bills from persons present. Hearing no objections or comments, he closed the public hearing. Charon moved and Polston seconded the following'resolution. RESOLUTION 82-164 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,556.91 AND AUTHORIZING DISCONNECTING SERVICES FOR ACCOUNTS IN ARREARS. The vote was unanimously in favor. PROPOSED ORDINANCES The City Manager explained that the Police Chief and Prosecuting Attorney went over .our ordinances and points that they feel needed ordinances and this proposed ordi- nance is the result. ' Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to adopt the following ordinance herein quoted by title: ORDINANCE 435 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTIONS 46.13, 51.40, 51.45, 51.50, 55.07, 55.08, 52.135 AND AMENDING SECTION 52.14 RELATING TO UNNECESSARY ACCELERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES, PUBLIC NUISANCES NOISES, PARTICIPATION IN NOISY PARTIES, DIS- TURBANCE OF THE PEACE, ENTERING UPON LAND, WINDOW PEEPING AND GIVING FALSE INFORMATION TO POLICE The vote was unanimously in favor. SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT The City Manager explained that this is a general resolution supporting the senior citizens housing; Larry Blackstad of Hennepin County has asked the area Councils to consider passing to demonstrate local support. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-165 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT The vote was 3 in favor, with Lindlan voting nay. wrongly presented to the Council. Lindlan thought item had been CONSIDERATION OF SOLUTION TO WATER METER PROBLEM The City Manager explained'that the Water Superintendent Greg Skinner and he had looked at the alternatives that could help solve the water meter problem; 20% [Neptune) 13.0 June' 22, 1982 have misfunctioned; doesn't know if replacingwith Badger system is the answer. Polston stated that the national average failure for this type is 15 to 20%.. The Mayor opened the discussion. The following persons had comments: Rod Hamblin, local respresentative for Neptune, stated failure is a universal problem and offered an alternative type--the ARB System--more of an electronic device which has a failure rate of approximately 1% and has more Options; does require running a third wire. DesMoines has over 65,000 accounts which have the ARB System with a 1% failure rate. System has been in over 10 years. Minne- sota towns with the system include Fairmont (10 years) and Winona (1½ years) Bruce Gliem of Canary. Lane stated recently he received a $480 water bill arrearage; in checking, found that the reader had been broken for 2½ years and never been fixed; very disappointed with the billing department in.not getting the reader fixed and thinks City should make amends. City Manager stated that this was classic example of problems we have had. Mayor asked the City Manager to take a look at billings, go back and check what records were and try to rectify bill. Water Superintendent commented that the 2 or 3 man department can't keep up with the failures. If the City went to the ARB System, providing manpower to put in the 3 wires would be a factor; questioned how to get third wire through in finished basements. Discussed pros and cons of types. Would ARB System be adaptable to the Badger meters already installed? Providing manpowe~ for work involved and being able to get work done in a reasonable time is part of report needed. The Council asked that City Manager get background and figures and repor~ back as soon as possible. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS BY CITIZENS PRESENT No comments or suggestions were offered at this time. Councilman Ulrick arrived back at meeting at 9:20 P.M. MAINTENANCE PERMIT FOR STEPS TO COMMONS FROM CANARY LANE The Mayor moved this item ahead bn the agenda because there were some interested citizens present on this item. The City Manager explained that the Park Commission had recommended the City construct a new stairway and residents have agreed to re- move the old stairway. Leo Bullock and Mark Richardson commented on the hazardous condition of present stairway located in front of Dybing's residence and the need foE safe access down the 30 foot drop from Canary Lane. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-166 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PARK COMMISSION'S RECOM- MENDATION AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO CONSTRUCT A NEW STAIRWAY FROM SOUTH CANARY LANE TO WIOTA COMMONS The vote was unanimously in favor. 131 June 22, 1982 .. LIQUOR LICENSES Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following Fesolution. RESOLUTION 82-167 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF THE RENEWAL CLUB LICENSE TO THE AMERICAN LEGION MINNETONKA POST 398 FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 1982 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1983 The vote was unanimously in favor. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-168 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF THE RENEWAL CLUB LICENSE TO THE CHAMBERLAIN GOUDY VFW POST 5113 FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 1982 THROUGH JUNE 30, 198:3 The vote was unanimously in favor. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-169 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF RENEWAL OF CLASS A AND CLASS B LIQUOR LICENSES FOR DONNIE'S ON THE LAKE JULY 1, 1982 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1983 The vote was unanimously in favor. STORM SEWER PETITION FROM RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO PEABODY AVENUE City Manager explained the problem of the water from Sherwood and County Road 110 washing into catch basin where Peabody Avenue s platted, then rushes across land caus!ng erosion into channel that has been dug in the vacated street causing channel to silt in. The residents are tired of having to pay for having channel d'redged because of City/County drainage. Swenson moved and Charen seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-170 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE A PRELIMIN'.RY ENGINEERING REPORT FOR STORM SEWER The vote was unanimously in favor. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF BIDS FOR 1982 STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM The City Engineer presented a tabulation and recommendation on the bids for the 1982 Street Overlay Project - Priest Lane, Rust:icwood Road, Gumwood Road and Langdon Lane Charon moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-171 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND MANAGER.TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR THE 1982 STREET OVERLAY PROJECT AND ACCEPT THE LOW BID OF AERO ASPHALT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,885.50. U1rick moved and Polston seconded a motion to amend the resolution to include: CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE LEVEL OF INSPECTION AT HIS DISCRETION TO INSURE THAT THE JOB IS DONE WELL The vote on the amendment was unanimously in favor. The vote on the resolution as amended was unanimously in favor. Motion as amended carried. 132 June.22,' t982 COMPLETION OF WATERBURY ROAD The City Engineer presented bids for the completion of Waterbury Road that h'ad not been completed previously because of condemnation proceedings to acquire the ease- ment. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-172 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT TO COMPLETE WATERBURY.' ROAD ACCEPTING THE LOT BID FROM VALLEY PAVING IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,067.00. The vote was unanimously in favor. DROPPING UNIT CHARGES FOR COMBINATION OF PARCELS The City Manager asked for edification and clarification on whether unit charges should be dropped for combination of land. The Council acknowledged that prior to the assessment hearing, they did recognize the combinations; but the policy is not to do so after properties are assessed, especially for two buildable sites, as City woul'd have to pick up shortfall or have another hearing.. CONTRACT AMENDMENT - SCHOOL DROPOFF ON .COMMERCE BOULEVARD The City Manager briefly explained that a change order is needed in the amount of.' $900 to cover cost of wood chips, mat and plastic edging for.the turn around near the ice arena and this cost will be assessed back against the School District. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. ~, RESOLUTION 82-]73 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $900 TO COVER COST OF WO.OD CHIPS, MAT AND PLASTIC EDGING (ITEM 4 OF DROP-OFF PROJECT NEAR THE ICE ARENA). The vote was unanimously in favor. SPECIFICATIONS FOR WELL NO. 8 George Boyer of Hickok and Associates briefly explained the 2 part specifications for the proposed well. Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-174 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING THE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR WELL NO. 8 - BID OPEN.lNG TO BE JULY 27TH AT l0 A.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. EXTENSION OF TIME LIMIT FOR FILING PLAT FOR PELICAN POINT The City Manager explained that this request has been made for a year's extension because the economic climate has made it impossible to proceed with development of the plat at this time. Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded the follo~ing resolution. 1:33 June 22, 1982 RESOLUTION 82-175 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF THE TIME LIMIT OF RESOLUTION 80-238 TO JUNE 9, 1983. The vote was unanimously in favor. PAYMENT OF BILLS Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to approve the payment of bills as pre- sented on the prellst in the amount oF $9l,Oli.89 when funds are available. Roll call vote was 4 in favor with Polston abstaining. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS The City Manager briefly provided information on the following items: 1. Letter from Suburban Public Health Nursing Service 2. Letter from McCombs-Knutson Associates regarding 1981 Street Project 3. Letter from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 4. Letter from Mound State Bank regarding Downtown Loan Program 5 Notice from Post Office regarding new location solicitation 6 Letter from Burlington Northern 7 Letter from L.M.C.D. 8 Letter from Hennepin County Park Reserve District 9 Anti-Trust letter from Curt Pearson 10 Proposed policies and procedures for administration of Downtown Loan Program QUOTES FOR PAINTING ISLAND PARK HALL The City Manager asked the Council for suggestions on how to.approach the problem of painting the Island Park Hall as the quotes varied so much in $ amount and methods of how to prepare the surface for painting. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION 82-176 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO SPEND UP TO $2,300.00 TO PAINT ISLAND PARK HALL. The vote was unanimously in favor. SURFSIDE LIQUOR LICENSE The City Manager explained that the last item on agenda at the request of the applicant is consideration of the liquor license for Surfside. Joel Essig filed bankruptcy under "Chapter l l" on June 9th; there are delinquent taxes on Surfside. City Ordinance requires that there shall not be delinquent taxes or other financial claims for renewal of liquor license; also State Statutes provides that licensee pay when due all taxes, license fees, etc. to the municipality as provided by law. Mr. Essig is asking the City Council to amend the ordinance; also stated that it is his understanding that under Chapter 1t, the Federal Law supercedes State or Local Iaws. City Attorney Jim Larson advised that he is not in position to give an opinion as he has been unable to contact the referee at the Bankruptc~ Court or the Attorney General. Suggested solution would be to amend ordinance or Mr. Essig could go to Court asking that the City be directed to issue the license. Discussed the matter at great length. There is insufficient information and also a question of status of insurance coverage renewal and bond. Council members were polled---they are against changing the ordinance based on the evidence on hand. The Council agreed to meet next week after getting more information and opinions on " 13~ June 22,.1982 the law. Not in 'favor of putting anyone out of business; But changing ordinance unfair to other citizens; have responsibility to taxpayers. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to recess this meeting until 6:30 P.M. on June 28, 1982. The vote was unanimously in favor. Marjorie Stutsman, Acting City Clerk Jon Elam, City Manager BILLS ..... JUNE 22, '1982 Arcon Construction Applebaums Assn of Metrop Munic Acro Minnesota Badger Meter Ben Franklin Blackowiak & Son F.H. Bathke' Janet Bertrand Holly Bostrom Robert Cheney Bill Clark Standard Coast to Coast Continental Tele Fran Clark Carver County News Chapin Publishing Cy's Mens Wear Donnies on the Lake Davies Water Equip Dictaphone Ecklund Refrigeration Educational Aids Jon Elam Nick Gronberg Gopher Sign Co. Henn Co. Dir Prop Tax Henn Co. Finance Henn Co. Treas. Eugene Hickok & Assoc Henn Co. Sheriffs Dept Robert E. Johnson Internal Revenue Internatl Inst. Munic Richard W. Johnson Kromer Co. Kelley & Kelley, Inc. League of MN Cities J.H. Larson Electric The Laker Doris Lepsch Lutz Tree Service Lake Mtka Conserv Distr. City of Mound MN Park Superv. Assn Metro Waste Control City of Minnetrista MS Print McCombs-Knutson Clerks 592.40 32.69 1,383.00 69.13 176.17 9.14 24.00 13.80 58.5O 153.OO 334.OO 3,265.07 100. O4 1,110.99 39.85 7.OO 25.O8 309.91 135.00 3,074.55 55.99 222.45 119.98 12.64 310.OO 58.O8 1,745.58 20.00 1,545.OO 858.OO 393.75 41.36 54.OO 45.OO 3.OO 8.4O 200.00 58.5O 525 OO 183 9O 45 OO 3,535 O0 1,998 5O 22 30 15 OO 1,262 25 396 OO 224 49 6,390 OO Metro Waste Control 19,277.27 Minnegasco 115.92 Mound Fire Dept .6,182.55 Mound Medical Clinic 18.75 Wm Mueller & Sons 5,437.73 Jackie Meyer 25.33 City of Mound 97.33 Metro Fone 225.00 Mid Central Fire 104.40 Minn Comm 28.50 Mound Explorers 27.00 Martins Navarre 66 54.00 N.W. Bell 60.30 Navarre Hdwe 216.26 N.S.P. 7,584.92 Planning & Develop. Serv 1,225.OO Precision Striping 414.00 Recreonics Corp 188.75 Reo Raj Kennels 291.OO Don Rother 42.46 Nels Schernau 9.24 Spring Park Car Wash 77.50 State of MN Documents 2.10 Sno Pros 105.00 Thurk Bros. Chev ~ 213.77 Unitog 264.80 Veterinary Diagn Lab 1~.00 Westonka Sani.tation 5,452.50 Westonka Chamber Commerc 20.00 Waconia Emerg. Physn .. 28.50 Xerox, Inc 82.72 Xerox, Inc. 1,546.39 Ziegler, Inc. 87.74 Griggs, Cooper 2,136.13 Johnson Bros. Liq 4,374.89 MN Distillers 1,132.90 Old Peoria 1,318.84 Ed Phillips 1,264.91 TOTAL BILLS 91 ,O11.89 APPLICATION FOR STREET VACATION CITY OF HOUND APPLICANT' Steven & Victoria Bohnhoff and the City of Mou'nd ADDR]ESS 4687 Island View Drive 5341 Manhood Road Mound, MN. 5.5364 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY Ai~PLICANT: PLAT PARCEL LOT 19 STREET TO BE VACATED BLOCK I SUBDIVISION Devon / .5'-~4, v~s~_ The Easterly one (1) 'foot of the public large from Island View Drive to the Commons that abuts Lot 19, Block l, Devon. REASON FOR REQUEST To get the boathouse on Lot 19, Block 1, Devon off the publ.ic la.n'e. Address 4687 .Island View Drive and 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN. Tel. No. Applicant's Interest in Property Owner Residents and owners of property abutting the street to be vacated: 1370 Recommended by Utilities: NSP__ ; Hinnegasco ; Continental Tel. May 25, 1952. BOHNHOFF CASE The Council[ during Executive Session, discussed with the City Attorney possible ways to settle this case. Background. The Bohnhoffs on Island V[.ew Drive are suing for the damage to a boathouse which they alleged was damaged as a result of a pipe that leaked. The pipe being owned by the City. Their original claim was for $8,615.00. Our insurance company, Aetna, refused to participate in the matter. Now, after negotiations, the Bohnhoffs'are willing to'settle for $4,000.00 of which the ~nsurance company has agreed to pay $2,000.00 if the'City will pay $2,000.00. The more difficult problem is the fact that the existing damaged boathouse encroaches on a public lane by approximately I/IOth of a foot. The City Manager is recommending that the Council vacate the easterly I foot of the public ~ane which will get the boathouse-off of public property and that this vacation will not have an adverse affect of the public 'interest. Th~ City'Attorney recommended that the Council initiate, with the Bohnhoffs, the vacation of the easterly l'foot of the public lane from Island View Drive to the Commons and as~uming::that after the public hearing, the 1 foot is vacated, the Counci~ would then agree to pay the $2,000 and the insurance company $2,000 to resolve the disputed lawsuit. Charon moved and Ulrick s~conded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-151 .'RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INITIATION, WITH THE ~OHNHOFFS, FOR'THE VACATION OF THE EASTERLY I:.FOOT OF THE PUBLIC LANE FROM ISLAND VIEW DRIVE TO THE COHt~ONS AND ASSUMING THAT AFTER'THE PUB[lC HEARING, THE 1. FOOT IS VACATED,. THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN AGREE TO PAY THE $2,000 AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY $2,000 TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTED LAWSUIT The vote was unanimously in. favor with Councilmembers Polston and.$wenson qualifying their yes votes.' The.only re~son they. voted yes'was because 1979 the Council authorized a variance and the boathouse encroachment wa~ overlooked at that time. Motibn carried. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to. adjourn at The vote wa~'unanimously in' favor.'"Motion carried:' C i ty~ager Clt-y Clerk- ' PLAT 13907 Spd n.'¢ Hol:~ln~,. Minn. i ./ /. ./ '~ 1 ~ ," 7~o~ / c~n~c~ o7 suuvzv I hereby ctrfify that on__ 19 . _~ I hereby ctrfify that on ~ . I made a s~'cy of thc It~al[on of Ibc building(s) on thc u~vcx~ surveyed thc pro~rty dc~ri~ a~v~ ~nd Ihnt thc ~v¢ plat dc~ri~d pro~xty ~nd that thc I~afion corr~tly ~hown on thc a~vc plat. /32~ ~o~ ,...,.~.. ~.~ ~o~ .o. . THIS MAP COVERS ALL PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FROM 6-14 and 6-28 THIS MAP COVERS ONLY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FROM 6-14-82 I 1879 ,, AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 14, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 24, 1982 BOARD OF APPEALS B. Case No. 82-116 Independent School District # 277 Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 - 1881 Commerce Blvd. Sign Permit for Grandview Middle School - Map 3 C o Case No. 82-117 Independent School District # 277 Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 - 5600 Lynwood Boulevard Sign Permit for Westonka Community Center - Map 4 O o Case No. 82-118 Community Services, Westonka School District # 277 Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 - 5600 Lynwood Boulevard - Map 4 Sign Permit for Informational Sign E o Case No. 82-119 James H. Peterson, Applicant - 496 Brunswick Road Lot 4 and 1/2 of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood Map ~2 Variance for Lot Area A o Case No. 82-120 Steven & Victoria Bohnhoff and City of Mound Lot 19, Block 1, Devon; 4687 Island View Drive - Access abutting this property Vacation of portion of public lane Case No. 82-121 Eric Christianson Philbrook Insurance/Smith Heating Company 5450 Shoreline Boulevard; W. 242 5/10 Ft. of Lot 36, Auditor's Subd. 170 Site Plan Approval (Council approval not required) Other Business 1. Mobile/Manufactured Housing Discussion 2. Fencing Ordinance Interpretation - Discussion Map 1ti. MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF June 14, 1982 Present were: Chairman Russell Peterson; Commissioners Liz Jensen, Frank Weiland, George Stannard, Gary Paulsen and Michael Vargo; Council Representative Gordon Swen- son; City Manager Jon Elam; Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1982 were presented for consideration. Stannard moved and Weiland seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1982 as presented. The vote was un- animously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case No. 82-116 Sign Permit for Grandview Middle School, 1881 Commerce Blvd. Metes and Bounds Desc., Section 14 Bert Larson, Independent School District 277, was present. Weiland moved and Vargo seconded a motion to approve the sign permit and placement as requested. The vote was unanimously in favor. o Case No. 82-117 Sign Permit for Westonka Community Center, 5600 Lynwood Blvd. Metes and Bounds Desc., Section 14 ' Bert Larson was present. Discussed size of the sign and that the individual tenants [10 to date) would be listed on the sign; individual signs would take more space and be impracti- cal. Paulsen moved and Vargo seconded a motion to approve sign permit as requested located approximately 40 feet north of Lynwood Boulevard. The vote was un- animously in favor. Case No. 82-118 Sign Permit for Informational Sign - Community Services, 5600 Lynwood Boulevard - Metes & Bounds Desc., Section 14 Don Ulrick, Community Services Director, was present. Request is for a portable informational sign to be used 5 times a year for 7 days at a time. Vargo moved and Weiland seconded a motion to approve the sign usage as re- quested for one year subject to review after the year. The vote was un- animously in favor. REFUND OF FEES - Case Numbers 82-116, 82-117 and 82-118 School District 277 Vargo moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to recommend refund of the fees paid by the School District # 277 for the sign permits. The vote was unanimously in favor. /37 Case No. 82-119 Variance of Lot Area, 496 Brunswick Road Lot 4 and 1/2 of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood Applicant, James H. Peterson, was not present. The Building Official' recommended approval of the variance, so remnant lot with no available land could be used. Applicant's house would meet all other requirements. Lot is Il00 square feet undersized. Planning Commission Minutes June 14, 1982 '- Page 2 The abutting property owners in this block, Roger Meland, Scott Bi'schke and Dick Jensen, were present. Meland and Bischke stated they tried to purchase this lot (at Tax Forfeit Land Auction) and are still willing to buy to add to their parcels if it could be purchased at a reasonable price. All are not in favor of'having a house built on this undersized lot. Stannard moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to recommend denial of the variance because.of the excessive amount of variance. The vote was unani- mously in favor of the denial. Case No. 82-120 Vacation of 1 foot portion of public lane known as Roanoke Access abutting Lot 19, Block 1, Devon. Applicants are Steven and Victoria Bohnhoff and the City of Mound The City Manager explained that this proposed I foot vacation of the public lane is part of a legal settlement. The City has a storm sewer down the middle of this fire lane and in 1978, the sewer developed a break or crack. The City Maintenance Department tried to correct by filling with dirt. Every- time it rained, water continued to saturate the ground and it evidently caved in the back wall of Bohnhoff's boat house. Bohnhoffs filed suit to restore or replace the boat house which encroaches on the public lane by approximately l/lO of a foot. As a part of the settlement to resolved the di'~pute, the City Attorney recommended the vacation. Paulsen moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend that I foot of the public lane abutting Lot 19, Block 1, Devon be vacated. The vote was Weiland - Nay; all others Aye. Motion carried. Reason for nay vote: In the past, it was recognized that building is on public street,and it should not be allowed to be repaired. Case No. 82-121 Site Plan Approval for a Professional/Office Building next to Philbrook Insurance Building, 5450 Shoreline Boulevard W. 242 5/10 Ft. of Lot 36, Auditor's Subd. 170 Eric Christianson was present. The Building Inspector reviewed the plans for the proposed 2 story wood frame building (3120 sq. ft) for office space on pilings next to the existing struc- ture which is built on a sl~b. Existing structure to be remodeled to blend with the new. Proposed parking plan will have 10+ stalls ~ width of 9 feet. Scheme A Parking Access is recommended. Discussed drainage; will go north away from Shoreline Boulevard. Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to approve Site Plan with Scheme A Parking Access. The vote was unanimously in favor. Council action not needed ~ informational item. Other Business Chairman requested that absent Planning Commission members be advised of their attendance record. 1. Mobile/Manufactured Housing Discussed. The Building Official suggested amending the Zoning Ordinance - Subsection 109 on Page 10. The City Manager recommended a subcommittee be appointed to study this issue ,, Planning Commission Minutes June 14, 1982 .- Page 3 and to also go through the old and new Zoning Ordinances llne by line and pin- point if we need to integrate some things back in the new ordinance that were left out. Chairman asked for volunteers. It was decided to wait until fall to appoint a task force. Building Official to keep a file of changes needed in the new ordi- nance. Fencing Ordinance interpretation - Discussed briefly and decided 'this should be included in the study. Adjournment Vargo moved and Weiland seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 P.M. All in favor, so meeting adjourned to the next regular Board of Appeals, June 28th. Attest: APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOU~qD NAME OF APPLICANT PROPERTY PLAT /~/~/~/ PARCEL Address ~-v'g .~LOT. /47 -- Y~. BLOCK Telephone /z/-//7 -.2 ~z /~ Number~7~--[ 6 oD ADDITION "-~J.~ .. INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Addre s s Telephone Number VARIANCE REQUESTED: FRONT YARD ACCESSORY FT. BUILDING SIDE YARD FT'I LOT SIZE YARD I LOT SQ. FT. FOOTAGE N. C. U. * or OTHER (describe) REASON FOR REQUEST: NOTE: 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 adj6'ining affected property owners showing attitude toward request. A building permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the council resolution or variance granted becomes null and void. Variances are not r sf,r 1 . X~ ~- t~/~; PLANNING COMMISSION RE COMMENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO DAT~ /3771 o o I~, ~ I'~ TJ 0 ¢0 ~ 0 Z r. m ~. z: z Z rn '-i 0 :a 0 C Ln ~ C j-j . i, // APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOUND ~'~ d~ FEE $ ZONING. NAME OF APP LI CAN T 3-~ 1~/'~,o 0 ~ u 7' PROPERTY ADDRESS PLAT /. / Address Te le phone Number ,LOT B LOCK /~/-//'? 3 '/ ~// ADDITION ,J._~xl.' ) INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Address VARIANCE REQUESTED: FRONT YARD FT. SIDE YARD [ FTJ REAR YARD NOTE: ACCESSORY[ [ · B UI LDING F T. LOT SIZE i FTJ Telephone Number 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 request. i"-',! ......... ,.. .... -4" -' "'i'~-,' ~:'.':2 r. ~ ,--.,' ~ .... ~ '.,i, , , A~;~Xt4~} ermit must be applied for within one year from the date of the council resolution ~ variance granted becomes null and void. APPLICANT ] ~/' DATE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO /~ ~_~ DATE i\ SPEED-MEMO REORDER FR~hM REGENT STANDARD FORh~I~ INC. INTER'STATE INDUSTRIAL PARK. BELLMAWR. NJ 060il SUBJECT: J -- "'" _.-I / '/I FROM WESTONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 27? Central Administration ~)ffice 5600 Lynwood Boulevard Mound, Minnesota 55364 Phone 612-472-1600 35.00 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF MOUND RECI iVED ZONING Commerci al OF APPLICANT Community Services Westonka School District #277 PROPERTY ADDRESS PLAT 5600 Lvnwood Blvd. PARCEL Aclclres s 5600 Lynwood Blvd. Te ie phone Number 472-1600 LOT ,BLOCK ADDITION INTEREST IN PROPERTY Owner FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Addre s s None Telephone Number VARIANCE i~E QUES TED: FRONT I ' I ACCESSORY[ YARD. FT. BUILDING , SIDE YARDI FTJ LOTSIZE [ I LOT SQ. FT. FOOTAGE NOTE: FT.I N.C.U."' or-,- OTHER (describe) Si9n Variance 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. 2. Give ownerslMp ancl'dimensions of adjoining property. Show approximate locations of ali 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. #1 This request is for 5'X12' portable (on wheels) informational siqn (5 times per .year) for a maximum of seven days per use for proqrams that are heavily responded to by citizens.. We have regularly received complaints from patrons that they were unaware of reqistration dates and deadlines. Those siqns will provide an informational , _s_~e.[rvice to all resident_s. (See~attached paqe~) . , ,~,,' ....... '¢o'an-~t-re: ~lution ~r ~arianc'e-~r~l.l~eg~rnes ~)~ and void. ' '. ~ / ~g Variances RE COMMENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO DATE " APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE - continued A variance is necessary because city ordinances accommodates maximum of 9 square feet per sign. All persons desiring signs over this maximum have requested and received variances for permanent signs. Our request is for temporary use to a maximum of 35 days per year. We request the council waive the fee. APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE CITY OF IV[OW'ND OF APPLICANT Address ADDRESS Tele phone_z_ fdA/.... Nurnber ~5 7J '/J ~'tFADDITION / INTEREST IN PROPERTY FEE OWNE~ (if other than applicant) Addre s s P LA T PAR CE L LOT ¢~L,C BLOCK ~ Telephone ~ Numb e r ' - VARIANCE REQUESTED: FRONT [ FT.'I ACCESSORY YARD BUILDING YARD FT. LOT SIZE kRD [ LOT SQ. FT. FOOTAGE N. C. U. *or OTHER (des cribe) ~t-J~ / ~ (f REASON FOR REQUEST: NOTE: 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement I } in relationto lotlines, other buildings FTt on property and abutting streets. Z. Give ownership and'dimensions of adjoining property. Show approximate FTt locations of ail buildings, driveways. and streets pertinent to the application .'_ · ~ ~'~-"' by extending survey or drawing. qf~O,~ 3, Attach letters from adj6ining affected property owners showing attitude toward request. r~l-~'"t! t',:' rat ,t~dirl~liff'~ ~,ermit must be applied for within one year from the date of the -- -- ~-t'-res olu~ion or v, riance. ~,~?~me~ ~U'~ ,na VOl~. -~/~' Signature ~ / P LAN~NG CO~SSIO~RE COmmENDATION DATE COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO DATE " /JY 7 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of June 14, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-1'19 Legal Desc.: Lot 4 and 1/2 of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood Zoning Dist.: R-3 Request: Variance for Lot Area Applicant: James H. Peterson 33 Union Terrace Plymouth, MN. Phone 545-7368/348-2005 The applicant is requesting an 1,140 square foot lot size variance approval to construct a dwelling to conform to all other requirements of the Zoning Ordi- nance related to lot width, front, rear and side yards, minimum 840 square feet floor area, and 2 parking spaces. The lot area is 4,860 square feet which is 80%+ of the required 6,000 square feet in the R-3 Zoning District. The appli- cant stated he was unaware of the undersize provision for a lot of record at the time of lot purchase. He has been assessed an unit charge as a building site. He was formerly approved as a building site by the Planning & Zoning Com- mission, but subsequently was denied by the City Council, as the neighbors voiced an intention of purchasing the land. The applicant has not been ap- proached by the neighbors to purchase the lots. Comments: I. Comprehensive Plan 1. Housing Survey a. States that Mound reflects a national trend in housing value in- creases due to inflation and higher construction cost. b. States that Island Park and Three Points have a majority housing units in need of rehabilitation and thedistribution is randomly distributed throughout the neighborhoods. c. The Section 235 low interest loans assist some qualifying house- holds in the construction of new homes plus rehab, loans (MHFA) Future Housing Needs Forecast a. States in the next ten years some 200 more households, in addition to the present stock, are expected. Housing - Policies to Implement a. States a need for modest cost new construction and to continue to provide this housing with local zoning standards allowing smaller lot construction. b. Realize the unique historical platting practices in certain areas by allowing greater flexibility in bulk/area regulations in older platted areas. II. Housing Density I. The neighborhood density should be considered as it relates to the mini- mum standards for health, safety and welfare. The present zoning surround- ing this property is R-3 & to the west rs R-2, conducive to higher density housing III.City Improvements 1. The areas such as Minnetrista and Orono do not have the Metropolitan improvements such as Mound and are still trying to limit any rapid land development. Planning Commission Agenda of June 14, 1982: Page 2 Board of Appeals Case No. 82-119 Applicant: James H. Peterson Mound has new and costly City improvements recently completed. They have begun a continuing effort of improvement and a strong tax base is needed to maintain these demands. IV. Family Living of Today 1. The current trend for smaller families and working spouses lends itself for less time available to maintain property and structures. The family time spent together in recreation, as well as property maintenance, is an important part of life to most couples. Environmental Protection 1. New housing is to be developed in areas with good site condition pro- tection from: a. Flooding b. Wetlands c. Steep slopes d. High water and bedrock VI. Vacant/Tax Forfeit Land 1. Empty lots tend to be collection sites for weeds and debris which this lot has at the present time. 2. City staff is needed to maintain scattered sites and to stop violations of illegal dumping. 3. County may pressure the City, if too many lots stay off the tax rolls. 4. Other requests for development will be forthcoming, as stated previously, in older platted areas with remnants of blocks which are presently fully developed. VII.Undersized Lots 1. A realistic percentage of the present required lot area could be estab- lished such as now exist relating to side yard setbacks on lots of record. 2. If the other requirements of setbacks, width, floor area and parking are not meet, a variance would still be required. Recommendation: i would recommend approval of the lot size variance recognizing the environmental advantage of the site, flexibility in the existing platted lot remnants, and that it will not adversely affect the general public safe- ty, health and welfare. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Jan Bertrand Building Official ETON ..... · ROAD RO. NO. I '. ~ 16 ,?,o ~ ROAD T~i$ block is ROAD 31 This b/ock is ~, ' marsh ., ..':;". 5 Plat of Survey for Hussm~n Investment Company in Lots & and 5, Block 36, ~chwood Hennepin County, F~nnesota Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 4 and the Easterly 20 feet of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood, and the location of all existing buildings, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroach~ments. For purposes of this survey, the "Easterly 20 feet" has been assumed to mean the Easterly ~20 feet as m~asured along the Southerly and Northerly lines of said Lot 5. Scale: l" = 30' Date : 1~-10-78 o : Iron m~rke r Alvin R. Rehder Reg. No.13295 Land Surveyor and Planner Long Lake, Minnesota ()% Jo"/ c:) ~m c::) ::~:~ C~ --.i CD 11 Ii Ii :'d 10-6-80 ~mbe~ 14, 1978 Jouncilmember Polston moved the follow]n§ resoluti'on, RESOLUTION NO. 78-526 RESOLUTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE OF LOT SIZE AS REQUESTED Po e t' 1 WHEREAS, ow~e~ 6~ property described as Lot 4 and east 20 ft. of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood has requested a lot size variance of 1,200 sq. ft.,and WHEREAS, adjoining property owners have requested opportunity to purchase land and divide same and add to each owners property, and' WHEREAS, adjoining property owners are.opposed to building on this undersized 'lot, if they can purchase same to be added to their property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCI.L OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That Council does hereby deny the request for a lot size variance of 1,2OO sq.'ft on property zoned Residential B - 6,000 sq..ft for S'ingle family dwelling and described as Lot 4 and the east 20 feet of Lot 5, Block 36, Wychwood. The motion for ~h~ adoption of the foregoing resolution'was duly seconded by Councilmember Fenstad and upon vote' being taken thereon, the fol]owipg voted in favor thereof:Fenstad, Lovaasen, Po~ston and Swenson, ..the following voted against the same: none, with ~ithhart abstaining, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signatur~ attested by the City Clerk. Attest: City 'Clerk la?? THIS MAP COVERS ALL PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FROM 6-28-82 .! AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 28, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 1982. BOARD OF APPEALS F. Case No. 82-122 Weldon Hintz, Applicant Lots 16, 17 and 18, Mound Addition - Grandview Blvd. & Sunset Road Lot Split, Subdivision - Map 4 Case No. 82-123 Lillian Vogt, 5816 Grandview Blvd. Lot 1, Mound Shores - Map 4 Special Purpose Fence Case No. 82-124 Thomas R. Smieja, 3207 Amhurst Lane Lots 19 and 20, Block 17, Devon - Map 15 Front Yard Variance I. Case No. 82-126 Carl R. Hanson - 1677 Avocet Lane Lot 8, Block 7, Dreamwood - Map 2 Variances - Side Yard, Lot Size and House Size J. Case No. 82-128 - Our Lady of the Lake Church ' Temporary Sign Permit Advertising the Incredible Festival from July 23 to Aug Porta Panel Sign to be placed in Parking Lot East of Burger Chef Building HINUTES OF THE MOU~ ADVISORY PLANNII~G COMHISSION HEETING June 28, 1982 Present were: Chairman.Russell Peterson; Commissioners Li.z Jensen, Frank Weiland, Stan Mierzejewski and Michael Vargo; City Inspector Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsm~n. Commissioner George Stannard arrived at 7:50 P.M. and Council Representative Gordon Swenson and City Manager Jori Elam arrived at 7:55 P.M. from the City Council meeting. ~ MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 1982 were presented for consideration. Weiland requested changing the last sentence in the first paragraph at the top of page 2 to read: "All present are not in favor ...... ,i Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to approve the minutes as changed. The vote was un- animously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case Ro. 82-122 Lot Split/Subdivision Lots 16, 17 and 18, Mound Addition Mr. Hintz was present. o Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend that t~e request to approve the subdivision of 10ts be granted. ~he vote was unanimously in favor. Case No. 82-123 Special Purpose Fence " Lot i, Mound Shores : Robert and Nancy Fiebelkorn were present for Hrs. Vogt. Discussed that since access was improved, great increase in traffic and use of the access. Also discussed garage encroachment on the access. Chairman asked City to investigate whether land could be sold so garage will be on her prop- erty. Corner of garage is 1.5 foot onto access. The legal height of fence ~ that would be allowed is .42 inches from the lake to the house on the property line (wi'thout a variance). Request is for a 6 foot privacy fence. Weiland moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend that a 30 inch vari- ance for a 6 foot fence be denied; the proper height fence would serve the purpose. Commissioner George Stannard, Council Representative Gordon Swenson and City Manager Jon Elam arrived at meeting. The vote on the motion was g~eiland, Jensen and Stannard in favor of the aenial; Vargo, Mierzejewski, Peterson and Swenson against the denial. Motion failed. Reasons for: Weiland Problem was worse before improving access and making it useable--they cut across her property more then; not a fence that would restrict use. Stannard voted aye as he didn't 9et out to see it. Reasons against the denial: Vargo - Unique circumstances; improve her use of her property and privacy and helpful for her to be able to screen her land from the deterioratin9 hockey rink and School property. I.~ierzejewski - Lots of fishermen and snowmobile traffic down this access. Peterson ~ Rot sure ~. ~ foot fence is in best interest; but thinks she should be allowed it. Swen- son - Based on other cases, can't turn down the request. "/ 77 Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1982 . Page 2 o Case No. 82-12'4 Front Yard Variance for 3207 Amhurst Lane Lots 19 and 20, Block 17, Devon Thomas Smieja was present. Vargo moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend request for front yard variance be approved. The vote was unanimously in favor. Case No. 82-125 Conditional Use Permit for Arcade - 5559 Shoreline. Boulevard Part of Lots 2 and 3, Auditor's Subd. # 170 Rodney W. Storrusten was present. Mr. Storrusten explained that the name of the company is "Space Odyssey"; have ll locations in Florida. Locally have one in Northtown Shopping Center and 'opening one in Elk River. Are oriented toward the family type operation; plan to have a snack area and the arcade upstairs; downstairs eventually may put in a mini-video theater which would be free of charge. Management people are highly trained; do not allow any foul language; no drugs, drinking or smoking; do not allow any loitering on the premises or any place around area. They would like 'hours of operation to be from 10 A.M. to 10 at night. They do not allow a child to skip school; but feel that since there are other people travel- ing through the community that might want to stop in, they would like to be open for their business. Hope to hire an off duty police officer. Wcu]qd use parking on other side of street -- thinks there is ampl~ parking. Will be fixing up outside of building - cleaned up and painted; investment between $10,O00 -$18.,'OOO. Sign will be repainted; Christmas lights will be taken down and also metal picket fence. Will set out plants in front and brighten up. Will be well lite. All rules and regulations will be posted and enforced by himself and Manager. Can view whole area from proposed office area. There will be a separate ~ntrance to theater area/only open while movie is on/plans special days for senior citi- zens/family day - things like that - family oriented. The Planning Commission asked various questions including if a 6'~onths renewal permit would be acceptable? Was suggested rear 'entrance should be changed to fire access ~ith no entrance. Weiland moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend that matter be tabled to have applicant bring back a complete list of conditions that has been talked about for arcade. APplicant to get input from the Police Depart- ment on do's and don'ts for the arcade management on outside area. Discussed. Have back for Planning Commission meeting of July 12th if they have completed information by then. Like list of references with addresses, ... The vote on the motion was unanimously in favor. Case No. 82-126 Sid d, Lot Size and House Variances - 1677 Avocet Lane Lot 8, Block 7, Shadywood Point Carl Hanson was present. Request is to rebuild existing house and add a 10 X 12 foot deck to square up back of house. Former owner gutted house. Plans to bring. everything up to code. Vargo moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend the reques~ for varianc~o be approved. The vote was unanimously in favor. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1982 - Page 3 Case No. 82-127 Vacation of North lO Feet of North Beachside Road Adjoining 1972 Shorewood Lane; Lot 19, Block 2, Shadywood Point Tim Heyman, Agent, was present for Owner, Heinz Stefan; also present was Bruce Larson, 1968 Shorewood Lane. Mr. Heyman explained that the owner had the property for approximately 9 years; always meant to fix.up and remodel the old cabin; month ago he received letter from the City to demolish structure as it .i.s :in hazardous condition. Lot is under- sized by City's Zoning by 14OO square feet. Owner wants to sell for a building site and a vacation of 10 feet of fire lane next to property would give them a 10,OOO square foot site. Discussed. City would need to retain l0 by 20 foot jog for pump station. Fire lane is 60 feet wide. Also Lot 19 is low lot in area; lot has a drainage pro- blem. It was thought a storm sewer ran through lot underground. City would no~ give up storm drainage rights. ~ Jensen moved and Vargo seconded a motion to recommend vacation of the requested 10 feet of Beachside Lane based on the deed stating that when a structure is built on the site, the builders will assume all government costs incurred in constructing necessary gutters, sewers, etc. needed to properly drain the area's storm water and that existing structures be removed within six months. The vote was: Stannard and Weiland voted against; Jensen, Vargo and Peterson voted in favor and Mierzejewski and Swenson abstained. Motion carried. Case No. 82-128 Temporary Sign Permit Advertising the Incredible Festival at Our Lady of the Lake Church; Porta Panel Sign to be placed in Parking Lot East of Burger Chef Building from July 23 to August 2. Jensen moved and Vargo seconded a motion to recommend approving the temp6rary sign permit as requested. The vote is unanimously in favor. ADJOURNMENT Stannard moved and Vargo seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 P.M. All in favor, so meeting adjourned. Attest: APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF Sec. 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND LAND FEE $ FEE OWNER , PLAT \/,J ~' l d o,.~ L= 'Jr' ~ ! ~ PARCEL Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: To be divided as follows: (attach survey or scale drawing showing 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 Square feet Reason: [ ~ (sign~ A~DRESS /77~ st in the property: TEL. NO. /7/~''''~ -- [t/O~ ~'~';')~.~, DATE ~his application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan- ation given why this is not the case. VtlSSION RECOMMENDATION: DATE CITY OF HOUND gound, ~innesota Planning Commission Agenda of June 28, 1982: Case No. 82-122 Grandview Blvd. & Sunset Road Lot 18 and S. 20 ft. of Lot 17, Mound Addn. - Parcel A Lot 16 and Lot 17 except the S. 20 ft. Mound Addition - Parcel B Request: Lot-Split, Subdivision Zoning District R-3 Applicant: Weldon E & Alta Hintz 1770 Baywood Shores Drive Phone: 472-1406/932-8679 The applicant is requesting a subdivision of his property at the intersection of Grandview Boulevard and Sunset Road to allow for a conforming lot size for two two-family dwellings. Pursuant to the Ordinance for the R-3 Zoning District, the minimum lot width is 70 feet and the minimum lot area is 12,000 square feet. The lot dimensions shown on the submitted survey exceeds the minimum requirements. The existing structures on the property exceed the minimum setback, bulk of structure and yard space requirements in the R-3 Zoning District. Recommend: Refer to the City Council - July 13th. I would recommend approval of the subdivision with a request that the'bwners locate the utility connections to the existing structure and~hat all the parties with financial interest in the property have signed the subdivision request. Als~'that additional unit charges be assessed against the newly created lot. ~. Jan Bertrand Building Official J B/ms I r~ I I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: Lot 18 and the south 20 feet of Lot 17, MOUND according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota and Lot 16 and Lot 17 except^south 20 feet thereof, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. And of the locations of all buildings, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. As surveyed by me, or under my direct Lano Surveyor., Minn. Reg. No. 10938 ,~i~ 1':)%-.~' I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ~M¢COMBS-K"UTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. f~_~_/~'~ i for Stre'et-Address of.'Property ~'~ I& 2. Legal Description of Property: Lot Addition CITY OF MOUND Application No. /~_~ Fee Pa id ,,._~, 0 b Date Filed ~-'i~'-~ ~ APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) L LVb, PID No. 14-117-24 13 0003 Plat 61870 Parcel O1OO Owner's Name V'O6-I- Address .~(~ J~ ~-~--t~JO~ V IC:]~l~ Day Phone No. q7.~"-- 4. Applicant (if other than owner): Name Day Phone No. Address 5. Type of Request: (X') Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. *If other, specify: ( ) Amendment ( ). Sign Permit ( )*Other Present Zoning District R-2 Existing Use(s) of Property ~)j~_ ~J~oL.b Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? ~10 If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. ~-'~' ~ '~ '/~ 2~-'~' Date ~ Signature of Applicant ~-_~/)..~.~L4,-m'Z.~.,~ , . -' Planning Commission Recommendation: Date 1 Action: Resolution No. Date Request for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2) Case #__~ D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Ill. Request for a Zoning Variance A. All information below, a site plan, as described In Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Does the present use of the property conform to all use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (X) No ( ) · If "no", specify each nOn-conforming use: C. Do the existing structures comply, with all area height and bulk regulations for the zone district in which it is.located? Yes ( ) No (X) If ~'no", speci, fy each non-conforming use: Garage on the attached survey does not meet the 4 ft. sideyard requirement as well as there Is a 6 foot slde yard needed for The scructure. D. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject proper~y prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses.permitted in that zoning district? ( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil ( ) Too. small ( ) Drainage.. ( ). Sub-surface ( ) Too shallow ( ) Shape (X) 'Other: Specify: See attached. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after 'the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (X) If yes, explain: F. Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes (X) No ( ) If yes, explain: The improvement of the public landing has increased traffic substantially, especially increasing the G. Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar 'only to the property described in this petition? Yes (X) No ( ) If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) See at~flchCd. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? No CITY OF HOUND Hound, Hinnesota Planning Commission Agenda of June 28, 1982: Case.No. 82-123 5816 Grandview Blvd.' Lot l, Mound Shores Request: Special Purpose Fence Zoning District: R-2 Applicant: Lillian Vogt 5816 Grandview Blvd. Phone: 472-6425 The applicant is requesting a six (6) foot high privacy redwood fence to be constructed within her property line along the Northeast corner of the house toward Dutch Lake. The existing structure is apprbximately 4 feet ± to the Northeast property line at its closest point. The detached garage is encroaching unto the Grandview Drive public access by approximately 1 foot ~. The requested fence is 6 foot in height and the fencing requirements call for ~ 42 inch height maximum in the required yard and open space on lakeshore lots. Recommend: To recognize the existing non-conforming aspects of the struc- tures on the property and the stated hardship that the land owner has brought to the attention of the City, such as tPes- passing, traffic and noise. To afford the owner with privacy to their property by possibly granting their request. The possibility of the owner agreeing to remove the encroachment onto the public lake access. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Refer to the City Council - July 13th. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms IY 7 Application No. CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) Street Address of Property Legal Description of Property: Lot _. .../._~ 7 Fee Paid ? Date .Fi le DEVON Block PI D No. .. 25-:'117-2~ I 1 O07~ 37870/67.q-0 Day Phone No. 4. Applicant (if other than owner): Name ~'" Day Phone No. Address 5. Type of Request: Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit Zoning Interpretation & Review Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. *If other, specify: ( ) Amendment ( ~ Sign Permit ( )*Other Present Zoning District ~--'~ Existing Use(s) of Property .Single Family Dwelling Has an application'ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? /-V/c~ If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required' papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Signature of Applicant ~~..__~-~jJ~,.,_~..~'._,. Planning Commission Recommendation: Date 6-28-82 !ncil Action: Resolution No. Date 4/82 Request for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2) Case D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Ill.-Request for a Zoning Variance A. All information below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Does the present use of the property conform to all use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (/~ No ( ) If "no", specify each non-conforming use: Do the existing structures comply with all area height and bulk regulations for the zone district in which it is.located? Yes ~ ~- No (~) If.~.~"no", ~'~/specifYr~°~ ~ ~. ~~each non-conforming ~/~use:~ Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its rea)onable use for any of the uses.permitted in that zoning district? /~'.Too narrow ( ). Topography ( ) Soil ( ) Too small ( ) Drainage ( ) Sub-surface ( ) Too shallow ( ) Shape ( ) ~Other: Specify: Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No -J~ If yes, explain: F. Was the hardship created by any oth.¢r man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No,~- If yes, explain: Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in'this petition? Yes ~ No ( ) If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? H. What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the are~~ns that will permit you to make reasOnable use of your land? (Specify, maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) I. Will granting of the'variance be materially detrimental to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Case No. 82-124 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of June 28, 1982: Board of Appeals 'Case No. 82-124 3207 Amhurst Lane Lots 19 & 20, Block 17, Devon Request: 6.14 Ft. Front Yard Variance+ (3.14 Ft. Front Yard Variance of the garage overhang) Zoning District: R-2 Applicant: Thomas R. Smieja 3207 Amhurst Lane Mound, Minnesota Phone: None The applicant is requesting to remove an existing 5 foot by 9 foot bathroom and reconstruct, in the same location from Hanover Lane (South side), a 5 foot by 22 foot bathroom and entryway to his house. He is also requesting to extend his garage overhang to line up with the existing building line (East side) with a second story above. The garage wall tuckunder portion would be setback 20 feet from Amhurst Lane property line, but the second story would be 13.36 feet from the East property line (Amhurst Lane). The present house is 612 square feet; the additional living area would be 527 square feet; total 1,139 square feet. The ordinance requires 840 square feet minimum. The R~2 zoning district requires a 20 foot setback on both yards facing public right-of-ways. The only extension of an existing building line would be at the second story portion over the attached garage. The lot grade drops down approximately 4 feet to the North end of the garage. Recommend: I feel that the additional living space would bring the living area to more than conform to our'minimum floor area. The ad- ditional width of the existing 5 foot by 9 foot to 5 by 22 foot may obstruct visibility at the intersection of Amhurst and Han- over Road slightly more than at present (3.8 feet toward Amhurst). The garage entrance would remain at the existing 20 foot setback. The second story would require a support beam and post at the overhang line on the Northeast corner. I have not discussed the roof line construction as yet with the applicant. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Refer to the City Council - July 13th. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms ~EP~?E~ilC~T": GF SUI~VEY 4 SCALE: 1"-20' E.L. BOLDON /6.9~ DESCRIPTION: Lots 19 & 20, Block 17, DEVON We hereby certify tha! this is a true and correct representation of'n survey of the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildings, any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. Dated this 9th Fi le No,t 1603 day of May __,1977 . £GAN, F.J.,ELD & .NOW^~. INC. - , '/z/Id CITY OF HOUND Application No. APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) Fee Paid 1. Street Address of Property 2. Legal Description of Property: Lot 2 Addition /'./))-~-~ ~0~ Z Address Date Filed 82-126 $35.00 6-18-82 Block PID No. /~2--///"'/'~-,2.'/'/Z Day Phone No. ~K~ 4. Applicant (if other than owner): Name Day Phone No. Address 5. Type of Request: Ye (~/~ Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment ( ~ Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: Present Zoning District Existing Use(s) of Property Has an application ever been made for zoning, v. ariance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? /~2 If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Planning Commission Recommendation: Date Council Action: Resolution No. /4.17 /~/82 Date Request for Zoning Variance Procedure (2) Case # 82-126 D. Location'of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff' and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. III. Request for' a Zoning Variance A. All information below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general application must.be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. Does the present use of the property conform to al.1 use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes (~-~ NO ( ) If "no", specify each non-conforming use: C. Do the existing structures comply with all area hei~hLand bul_~,regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes ('.) No If "no", specify each non-conforming use: Side yard 3.3' and ~L~ ~/- ~ lot undersized ~' p~ c ) ~ ..... --'' ' O 1500 sq.ft D. Which unique ysi a characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil ((~) Too. small ( ) Drainage ( ) Sub-surface Too shallow ( ) Shape ( ) 'Other: Specify: Was the hardship described above created by the action'of anyone having property interests in the land after the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (~) If yes, explain: F. Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No ~) If yes, explain: G. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance p~culiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ) No (~) ' If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? H. What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) I. Will granting of the variance be materially>detrimental to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Case 82-126 Certificate. o£ Survey for West Suburban Properties of Lot 8' Block 7, Dreamwood Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify.that this As a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 8, Block 7, Dreamwood, and the loca- tion of all existing buildings, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments except an existing fence. Scale: 1" = 30' Date : 9-15-80 o ~ Iron marker Oordon R. Coffin Reg, No. 6064 Land Surveyor and Plarmer Long Lake, Minnesota b I I ,' ,,< ,'1' il Il' Request ~ee De wa~veo. Application No. CITY 6F MOUND Fee Paid Date'Filed..... APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ' (Please type the following information) Street Address of Property 2. Legal'Description of Property: Lot Block Addition PID No. Owner's Name _/~)e(~3'~-- ~-/rOcE~:~>~7'~ ~//'dY~'~/~/~hone No. Address ~q~~'~~,,~V~-~m'' ~'~/0,.~ 5/~"'J~"~/'~ Applicant (if other than owner): Address Type of Request: Day Phone No. g/"7,,.~.- ~0~--~ (') Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment Sign Permit ( )*Other e *If other, specify: Present Zoning District Existing Use(s) of Property Has an application ever been made for zoning, vaziance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property?~7/~'~' If so, li~t date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) ../,-,,r</ / ./ I :, Copies of PrevioUs resolutions shall accompany present request. · I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true' and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the Premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or o/f"~rsting, maintaining notices as may be required by law~.~_v/7 ~/// Signature of Applicant ///~7~/~mz////~_~¢~//~)~/(J/ Planning Commission Recommendat['6n: [~/ and removing such Date Date Council Action: Resolution No. 19'/? I~/~? Date ', ~'287 July, 8~ 1~80 Councilmem~er Polston moved the following resolution, RESOLUTION NO. 80-258 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A TEMPORARY SIGN PERMIT WHEREAS, Our Lady of the Lake church located 2385 Commerce Boulevard has requested · a temporary sign permit, and WHEREAS, Said sign would be of Porto Panel type on wheels to promote the Lake Festival, August 24th, and ' WHEREAS, said sign would be parked on the Super Valu parking lot close to the road, 110 County Road and be in use August I1 through 25th. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNE- SOTA: That Council concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission and does hereby approve a temporary sign permit for a portg panel sign on the Super Valu parking lot effective from August 11 through the 25th. Further, that said sign be pa~ked in such a manner so as not to impair traffic vision and that fee be waived. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded.by Council- member Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof; Lovaasen, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Withhart, the following voted against the same; none', whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attesv~: City C. lerk CMC s/Tim Lovaa~n Mayor AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 28, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 14., 1982. BOARD OF APPEALS Case No. 82-125 Rodney W. Storrusten, 5559 Shoreline Blvd. Part of Lots 2 and 3, Aud. Subd. # 170 - Map 5 Conditional Use Permit for Arcade, etc. (Tabled to July 12th P[anning Commission Meeting) Set Date of Public Hearing CITY of MOUND July 8, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK ARCADE at 5559 Shoreline Blvd. The Planning Commission unanimously tabled this item at their June 28th meeting until their July 12th meeting. They did this to enable the applicant to bring back a complete list of conditions that there talked about for the proposed arcade and also for him to bring in a list'of references with addresses. The Planning Commission' will meet on July 12th and if they approve the arcade, a date will have to be set, by the Council, for a public hearing. Recommended date is August 3, 1982. AGENDA FOR THE HOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COHHISSION HEETING June 28, 198Z City Hall 7:30 P.H, Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 1982. BOARD OF APPEALS Case No. 82-127 Heinz Stefan/Agent: Tim Heyman - 1972 Shorewood Lane Lot 19, Block 2, Shadywood Point - Map 2A Vacation of North 10 Ft. of North Beachside Road (see app.) Set Date of Public Hearing APPLICATION FOR STREET VACATION CITY OF MOUND Case 82-127 I- LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY APPLICANT: PLAT PARCEL Applicant.'s Interest ~n Property Tel. NO. 9qq-ygq' __ Residents and owners of property abutting the street to be vacated: .- ; Minnegasco ; Continental Tel. JUNE 22, 1982 - COUNCIL MINUTES STORH SEWER PETITION FROH RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO PEABODY AVENUE City Han~ger exp]ained the problem of the water from Sherwood and County Road ]]0 washing into catch basin where Peabody Avenue is p]atted, the'n rushes across land caus!n9 erosion into channe] that has been dug in the vacated stree.t causing channe} to silt ~ ~n. The residents are tired of having to pay for having channel d~edged because of City/County drainage. Swenson moved and ChaFon seconded the fo]lowing resolution. RESOLUTION 82-170 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE A PRELIHINARY ENGINEERING REPORT FOR STORH SEWER The vote was unanimously in favor. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ! LAND SURVEYORS ~ PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 June 30, 1982 Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SuOject: Mound, Minnesota Preliminary Engineering Report Peabody Road Storm Sewer File #6510 Dear Mayor & Council Members: As requested, we submitting herewith a preliminary engineering report are storm sewer for the extension of in Peabody Road from County Road #110 east to the existing channel. have any questions or If you require further information on anything in this report, to discuss this with you at your convenience. we will be pleased Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. William H. McCombs, P.E. WHM:j Enclosure 10 Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria- Eagan printed on recycled paper PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Peabody Road Storm Sewer July, 1982 I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 6/30/82 .................................. Minn. Reg. No. 7411 William H. McCombs General The low area which covers the platted right-of-way known as Peabody Road and drains northeast to a dredged channel has evidently been a problem for some time. At times of peak runoff, erosion occurs and silt is carried through this area and is filling in the channel. This problem was compounded when County Road llO was upgraded last year with curb and gutter and additional storm sewer. More storm water is now carried directly to this area through the system constructed by the county which outlets at the toe of the slope from County Road ilO. It then flows overland approximately 300 feet to the channel. This overland flow is causing severe erosion in this area and accelerating the filling of the channel. The Owners of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Sherwood Shores have requested that the storm sewer be extended to the channel to prevent more erosion and filling of the channel. Design We propose to extend Hennepin Countys 21" storm sewer to the end of the open channel. The structure proposed for the angle point of Peabody Road would have an inlet grate to pick up additional runoff from the surrounding area. The outlet at the channel would have hand placed rip rap to prevent additional erosion. We do not propose the City do any dredging of the existing channel since this area is now private property. Easements will have to be acquired over the portion of vacated Reabody Road if the City did not retain any rights at the time it was vacated. Costs Tne estimated cost of the project proposed in this report is $13,300.00. This estimate includes contingencies and engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative costs. A detailed cost breakdown is included in this report. Hennepin County has agreed to pay 17.4% ($2,314.00) of the cost based on their share of the drainage area and it has been the City's policy in the past to pay 12% ($1,596.00). The cost remaining to be assessed is $9,390.00. Assessments Storm sewers have been assessed in the past to the properties in the drainage area on a square foot basis. This method is further complicated by the fact that some of the property in this drainage area was already assessed for storm sewer as part of the 1980 Street Improvements. This would include the properties fronting Grandview Boulevard from County Road llO to Bellaire Lane. It would be very difficult to assess them again. There is also additional property which contributes water to the iow area of Peabody Road directly from overland runoff, namely the housing complex at Balsam and County Road #110. Following are two possible methods that could be used to assess the cost of this project. Method 1 Since the project is essentially an extension of the storm sewer installed by Hennepin County, the cost could be adUed to Mound's share of that project and assessed by the method suggested in our preliminary engineering report dated Oanuary 1981. The City has not received the final cost, as of this date, so we would still be using estimates. The City's share was estimated at $83,850.00 spread over an area of 1,741,400 S.F. This results in a charge of $0.048 per square foot. If the $9,390.00 to be assessed on this project is added in and the square footage left as is, the charge per square foot would be $0.054. The major problem with this method is that one of the two lots benefiting from the project, Lot 2, Block l, Sherwood Shores, would not be assessed. The reason being that it does not front on the County Road project. This method could be carried one step further by assessing a percentage oR this project directly to these two lots. If 1/3 of the assessment is divided between the two lots and the remainder added to the County Project the assessment for the County storm sewer would then be approximately $0.052 per square foot. Method 2 This alternate method could be assessed by the drainage area excepting those properties already assessed. All the area handled by this one system outleting on Peabody Road would be assessed including those parcels fronting on the County Road. However, we believe Lots i and 2, 8lock l, Sherwood Shore receive a major benefit and should be assessed 1/3 of the assessment divided between the lgts or $1,550 each. With this method the other properties within the defined drainage area would be charged approximately $0.025 per square foot. For the lots fronting on the County Road this would be in addition to the $0.048 per square foot assessment for the storm sewer installed by the County. Conclusions and Recommendations It is the opinion of the Engineer that the proposed improvement is feasible and can best be accomplished as described herein. Cost Estimate Item Quantity Unit Price Amount 21" RCP Street sewer manhole Catchbasin manhole Concrete apron (reuse existing) Rip rap (hand placed) Tree removal Restoration Granular material Contingencies 310 L.F. $ 22.00/LF $ 6,820.00 1 EACH 900.O0/EA 900.00 i EACH 900.O0/EA 900.00 i EACH iO0.O0/EA lO0.O0 5 C.Y. 50.O0/CY 250.00 5 EACH 125.00/EA 625.00 Lump Sum 500.00 60 TON 7.00/TN 420.00 1,050.00 Total Estimated Construction Cost $11,565.00 Engineering, Legal, Fiscal & Administrative Costs 1,735.00 Total Estimated Cost ............................................. $13,300.00 I HARRISONS BAY LAKE MTKA G 64 65 66 C2 60 59 58 BALSAM RD. DENOTES DRAINAGE AREA ---13 > DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LANO SURVEYORS · SITE PLANNERS MINNEAPOLIS and HUTCHINSON,MINNESOTA SCALE = 200 ~)OOK IPAGE 6510 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT PEABODY RD. STORM SEWER MOUND? MINNESOTA MAY 11, 1982 - COUNCIL MINUTES DRAINAGE PROBLEMS - BLOCK 10, WOODLAND POINT - BETWEEN EAGLE AND DOVE LANES The City Manager explained that the owner of Lots 4, 5 and ½ of 3 has asked that the City get the water off these lots so he can make it a buildable site. The water the owner is referring to comes from the culvert that crosses Eagle Lane, follows the small ditch through Block lO:and across his lots and goes over to Dove Lane. The Council asked the City Engineer why this was not corrected during the street projects. City Engineer John Cameron stated that 'fwhen Eagle Lane was improved in 1975, the minimum storm sewers were constructed to save costs, since only a few scattered streets were included in the project and it was not possible to provide areawide storm sewers. The City Manager explained that there arb 3 alternatives: Alternative #1 costing $3,200.00 (which the engineer does not advise) Alternative #2 costing $9,700.00 Alternative #3 costing $14,450.OO The City Engineer pointed out that traditionally, this type of work il done by the property owners themselves because this area was always a natural drainage way. The Council asked if there were any other areas around this one that also needed storm sewer. The Engineer stated that he would have to check the 3 Points area and see. The Council did not want to have the Engineer prepare a preliminary plan and expend alot of money if the project is not going to be done for sure. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to have the City Engineer obtain additional preliminary informatio~ on this drainage problem as follows: 1. See where the watershed is for this connection. 2. Verify if it can be connected to the storm sewer in Jennings Road. 3. See if there are other problems in the 3 Points area that need correcting. '. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. i ' McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ·LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 April 30,. 1982 Hr. 3on Elam City Hanager City of Hound 5341Naywood Road Hound, MN 55364 Subject: Drainage Problems Block 10, Woodland Point Between Eagle Lane & Dove Lane File #6456 Dear 3on: As requested, we have reviewed the drainage proolems in Block 10, Woodland Roint, between Eagle and Dove, with emphasis on Lots 4 and 5. As shown on the attached drawing, a culvert under Eagle Lane empties into a small ditch which wanders through a number of lots before it reaches a culvert under Dove Lane. When Eagle Lane was improved in 1975, the minimum storm sewers were constructed to save costs, since only a few scattered streets were included in the project and it was not possible to provide areawide storm sewers. For this reason, the culvert under Eagle Lane at the lot line between Lots 3 and 4 remained in place, with openings left in the new curb to direct the water through this culvert. The small ditch which flows through Block 10 is evidently a waterway that has existed for many years. The paving and curb and gutter on Eagle added very little additional water to this natural drainage way. We have looked at three different alternatives for rerouting the water to make Lots 4 and 5 Ouildable. Alternate No. 1 would consist of extending the culvert under Eagle to the rear lot line of Lot 4 and redoing the ditch from that point to the south until it intersects the existing ditch. A new catch basin would also have to be built in the gutter line at the west end of the existing culvert in Eagle. Alternate No. 2 would carry Alternate No. 1 a step further. The storm sewer pipe would be extended along the rear lot lines to approximately the line between 17 and 18 and then angle southwest and connect to the existing culvert under Dove Lane. A catch basin would have to be built at this location also. This would make not only Lots 4 and 5 buildable, but also the remaining lots in Block 10 usable with fill aOded in the low area. There are a number of large trees that would have to be removed in order to construct either Alternates No. 1 or No. 2, the cost of which is not included in the attached estimate. Easements would also have to be obtained for Ooth of these alternatives. Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled paper Mr. 3on Elam April 30, 1982 Page Two Alternate No. 3 involves constructing a storm sewer in the street south to Jennings Road and connecting to the existing storm sewer at that point. This method would be costly Oecause of the restoration of the street. SUMMARY Even though Alternate No. 1 is by far the least expensive, we do not feel it would ce the most economical in the long run. In order to make the remaining vacant lots buildable, the storm sewer would have to Oe extended to Dove Lane as suggested in Alternate No. 2. This would require additional expense and more easements. We do not feel that the City of Mound should bear the full cost of improving the drainage through this area since this has always been a natural drainage way and the property owners will receive substantial financial benefits by oOtaining some buildable lots. Traditionally, this type of work is done by the property owners themselves. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. OC:lr Enclosure John Cameron COST ESTIMATES STORM SEWER - BLOCK 10, WOODLAND POINT ALTERNATE NO. 1 qUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST Catch Basin 1 Each Curb Repair 15" R.C.P. 70 L.F. 15" 90° Bend i Each 15" Reinforced Concrete Apron 1 Each Ditching * TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 1 $800.O0/EA LUMP SUM 20.O0/LF 200. O0/EA 250.O0/EA LUMP SUM 800.00 300.00 1,400.00 200.00 250.00 250.00 $ 3,200.00 ALTERNATE NO. 2 Catch Basin 2 Each $800.O0/EA $ 1,600.00 Manhole 2 Each 900.O0/EA 1,800.00. CurO Repair LUMP SUM 300.00 15" R.C.P. 280 L.F. 20.O0/LF 5,600.00 Restoration LUMP SUM 400.00 * TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 2 $ 9,700.00 ALTERNATE NO. 3 Catch Basin Manhole 15" R.C.P. CurO Repair Street Restoration 8it. 1 Each 2 Each 390 L.F. 125 TON TOTAL ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 3 $800.O0/EA 900.O0/EA 20.O0/LF LUMP SUM 30.O0/TN $ 800.00 1,800.00 7,800.00 300.00 3,750.00 $14,450.00 * Tree Removal Not Included .C~ ~I'~ '] ~ O O DA ECOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS J LAND SURVEYORS I PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 July 7, 1982 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Drainage Problems Block 10, Woodland Point File #6456 Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we are submitting herewith additional information to our letter dated April 30, 1982 on the drainage problem in Block lC, Woodland Point. A copy of the previous letter-is attached. As stated in that previous letter, we do not feel that Alternate No. 1 is the most economical. We have determined the drainage area that contributes to the flow through the existing culvert. Contingencies and engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative costs have been added to our original estimates for Alternates 2 and 3 to arrive at costs to use for assessment purposes. The estimated cost for tree removal has also been added to Alternate No. 2. Attached are these revised costs for Alternates 2 and 3. The cost of this improvement could be assessed to properties which are within the drainage area. The street right-of-way accounts for approximately one fourth of the drainage area; therefore, we have charged the City 25% of the cost and propose assessing the remainder. Since the two vacant properties in Block l0 receive the most benefit from this project, we feel they should be charged one half of the assessment. The following shows the proposed assessment for Alternates 2 and 3. Alternate 2 - Proposed Assessment Total Estimated Cost City's Share (25%) Amount to be Assessed 1/2 Assessed to Lots 4, 5, & 1/2 of 3 and 6, 18, 19 & 20, Block 10 Amount to be Assessed to Remaining Drainage Area $ 13,540 3,390 5,075 $ 5,075 $5,075 - 45,400 S.F. (drainage area) = $ O.1t2/S.F. /¢¢/ Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Eagan printed on recycled oaoor Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council 3uly 7, 1982 Rage 2 Alternate 3 - Rroposed Assessment Total Estimated Cost City's Share (25%) Amount to be Assessed 1/2 Assessed to Lots 4, 5 & 1/2 of 3, and 6, 18, 19 & 20, 8lock l0 Amount to be Assessed to Remaining Drainage Area $ 18,300 4,580 6,860 $ 6,860 $6,680 - 45,400 S.F. (drainage area) = $0.151/S.F. We do not recommend the City consider Alternate 1, since it is only a temporary solution. Either Alternates 2 or 3 are feasible and, in the opinion Of the Engineer, can best be accomplished as described herein. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. OC:sj Enclosure REVISED COST ESTIMATES Storm Sewer - Block 10, Woodland Point Alternate. No. 2 Catch Basin Manhole Curb Repair 15" R.C.R. Tree Removal Restoration Contingencies 2 EACH $ $800.O0/EA = 2 EACH $ $900.O0/EA = LUMP SUM = 280 L.F. ~ $20.O0/LF= 5 EACH ~ $200.O0/EA = LUMR SUM = Total Estimated Construction Cost Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, and Administrative Costs Total Estimated Cost $ 1,600.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 300.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 1,O00.O0 $ 400.00 $ 1,070.00 $11,.770. O0 $ 1,770.00 $13,540.00 Alternate No. 3 Catch Basin Manhole 15" R.C.P. Curb Repair St. Restoration (Bit.) Contingencies i EACH $ $800.O0/EA = 2 EACH $ $900. O0/EA = 390 L.F. $ $20.O0/LF= LUMP SUM = 125 TON $ $30.O0/TN = Total Estimated Construction Cost Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, and Administrative Costs Total Estimated Costs $ 800.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 300.00 $ 3,750.00 $ 1,450.00 $15,900.00 $ 2,400.00 $18,300.00 COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS [] LAND SURVEYORS W PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 July 8, 1982 Mr. Jori Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound County Road #110 Street Lights File #5951 Dear 3on: Enclosed is Pay Estimate No. 3 in the amount of $6,387.94, which is the final payment to Collins Electric for the street lights on Commerce Boulevard. This project was substantially completed last fall except for painting some of the light poles, which was finished this spring. Based on our latest re- view, all work has been completed and is essentially in accordance with the plans and specifications. Even though the completion date of November 1, 1981 was exceeded, we feel that no liquidated damages should be charged to the Con- tractor. We recommend final payment in the amount of $6,387.94. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. / William H. McCombs, P.E. OC:WHM/jb Enclosure Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria- Eagan printed on recycled paper CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIHATE NO. ;03 MOU~D, MN.FUPJ~ISHING & INSTALL STREET LIGHTS PAgE O1 ENGINEER: McCOHBS ENUTSON CONTRACTOR: COLLINS ELECTRIC CO 18800 HWY SS 1809 GLENWOOD AVE PLYMOUTH, MN MPLS. MN 55405 DATE: 0~/30/8~ -- CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIMATE SUMMARY -- THIS PERIOD ~ OATE COMPLE~O STREET LIGHTS 3,447.G0 ~,854.40 MA~EIALS ON ~I~ ST~ET LIGHT~ O. O0 0.00 ADJUSTEO TOTAL 3,447.60 88,854.40 LESS EETAINAGE - 5% PREVIOUS, 0% CURRENT -8,940.34 0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT OUE FOR M~P~K COMPLETED TO DATE LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $,3B?.94 68,254.40 0.00 55, B66.46 TOTAL AMOI.~T DUE 6,3B7.94 6,387.94 -- SUHHARY OF PREVIOUS PAYMENTS -- ESTIMATE NO. DATE ! 11/30/81 8 OP. IOII~ AMOUNT TOTAL oTs. s ,oTs. 4,~/ 5~, 866.46 CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. i03 ~OU~Q, MN FU~ISHING ~ II, STALL STREET LIGHT~ STREET LIGHTS PAGE O2 ENGINEER: McCOMBS KNUTSON CONTRACTOR: COLLINS ELECTRIC CO 18800 HWY 55 1809 GLEN~X]OD AVE PLYMOUTH, ~N HPLS. MN 55405 DATE: 06/30/8~ -- PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR WORK COMPLETED TO DATE -- ITEM ITEM 'NO. DESCRIPTION 1 ST LIGHT 5' HAST 8 ST LIGHT 8' MAST 3 FACTORY COLOEEO FIXTURES 4 8ASE COVERS ON ALDER ED. S EXTRA-F~I FACTORY PAINT TOTAL STREET LIGHTS CONTRACT - QUANTITY UNIT` 88.0 EA 44.0 EA 78.0 EA 8.0' EA 1.0 L.S UNIT PRICE 831.B0 845.00 18.00 110.00 ?00.00 ---- THIS PERIOD ........... TO DATE QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTII~ AMOUNT 8.0 1,663.60 88.0 83,B90.40 0.0 0.00 44.0 37,1B0.00 78.0 864.00 78.0 864.00 8.0 880.00 8.0 880.00 1.0 700.00 1.0 700.00 3,447.60 68,854.40 CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIHATE NO. ~03 59S~. HOLED, HN.FURNIe~HIHO ~ INSTALL STREET LIOHTS STREET LIGHTS PAGE 03 ENGINEER: McCOMBS~ ENUTSON CONTRACTOR: COLLINS ELECTRIC CO i8800 HWY 55 1209 GLENWOOD AVE PLYMOUTH, MN MPLS. MN S5405 DATE: 06130/88 -- PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR MATERIALS ON SITE -- THIS PERIOD ITEM ITEM CONTRACT UNITS INVOICE UNITS TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY DELIVERED PRICE ON SITE ITEM VALUE PRICE TO DATE ~NITS ON SITE TOTAL ITEM VALUE TOTAL STREET LIGHTB 0.00 0.00 IFF7 CITY DF HOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) 82r132 Fee Paid ~. oD Date ,Fi led.~//~///~- 1. Street Address of Property 5579 Auditors Road 2. Legal. Description of Property: Lot Comm. at N.E. CDr o£ Lot 6 Block Th W. Addition Mc Naughts Addn to Mound P ID No. 13-117-24=33 0049 3. Owner's Name rP'hnm~,q M: ~qge~ Day Phone No. 471-7557 Address 29'59 !Oi. cke~ l',a~n~.~ Mm~rt~ ~i~ 5536~, 4. Applicant (if other than owner): Name Day Phone No. Address 5. Type of Request: (X) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: JPresent Zoning District Existing Use(s) of Property Bus ine s s-fl ommeri ca.] Auto Par%,~' Store Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? No If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) (Not by present applicant) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. ! certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Planning Commission Recommendation: Date incil Action: Resolution No. Dat~ MARINA AUTO SUPPLY 8OX 18,4 MOUND, MN. 55364 471-8569 ~he height off the sign must be twelve or more fleet above the Street, to permit freight trucks to pass freely under it to reach the shipping area. It is important that the sign be at least a 4x8 size to enable the customers to read it from the incoming streets. The location 'off the sign must be to far right ~of the property to enable cars and customers to s.ee it when coming £rom the Commerce Blvd St. Thomas Helget, Pr REVISED AGENDA FOR THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 12, 1982 City Hall 7:30 P.M. Case No. 82-132 Thomas M. Helget, 5579 Auditors Road Metes & Bounds Desc., McNaughts Addition to Mound - Sign Permit for Auto Parts Store Map 5 Case No. 82-133 Harold J. Pond Sports Center, 2121 Commerce Blvd. Temporary Sign Permit for sign 5 Ft. by 12 Ft. - "STATE BABE RUTH BASEBALL TOURNAMENT" "JULY 30TH .... AUGUST 7TH". CITY 'OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMHISSION (Please type the following information) Street Address of Property. ~2.1~'/~ ~/'/)~,~~ ~/_~F'3 Legal' Description'of Property: Lot Request Fee Be Fee ?aid Waived Date Filed Addition Owner's Name Block PID No. Day Phone No. Address Applicant (if other than owner): Address 5. Type of Request: Ye ( ) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( ) Amendment ~) Sign Permit ( )*Other *If other, specify: resent Zoning District Existing Use(s) of Property Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? ~ If so, l~st date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and~rovide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application~ny authorized official of the City of Mound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of p~s~ffing, ~aintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. I tI D Planning Commission Recommendation: ' // / Coancil Action: Date Resolution No. Datg, CONTltACTO~I PAY ESTIMATE NO. ~OC-~ HOL~D, MN FUPJ4ISHING ~ INSTALL STREET LIGHTS STREET LIGHTS PAGE 04 ENGINEER: McCOMBSK~UTSON 18800 HWY SS PLYMOUTH, MN DATE: 05/30/88 CHANGE ORDER NO. 01 04/14/88 ITEM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION 8 FACTORY COLECO FIXTURES 4 BASE COVERS OH ALDER RD. S EXTRA-F&I FACTORY PAINT CONTRACTOR: COLLINS ELECTRIC CO 1809 GLE~WOOO AVE HPLS. MN 5S40S SUMMARY OF CHANGE ORDERS -- 1,784.00 PREVIOUS QUANTITY UNIT PRICE 0.00 EA 0.00 0.00 EA 0.00 0.00 L.S 0.00 'CHANGED AMOUNT AMOUNT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE : DEDUCTED ADDED 78.00 EA 18.00 8.00 EA 110.00 880.00 1.00 L.B 700.00 lO0. O0 PREVIOUS CONTRACT PRICE G0,410.40 + CHA~GE 1,784.00 = REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT 68,854.40 ORIGI)~AL CONTRACT PRICE 60,470.40 + CHANGE 1,784.00 = P£VISED CONTRACT AMOUNT 68,854.40 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 June 7, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BRUCE WOLD JON ELAM ~ PARKING ON LAKEWOOD LANE At the present time parking is on the south side of this street and as such conflicts with the mail boxes that line the street. Would moving the parking to the north side cause any problems? All this would take, I would think, would be a simple resolution by the Council. JE:fc TO: JON ELAM FROM: BRUCE WOLD SUBJECT: PARKING ON LAKEWOOD LANE don. I have looked at the street and can find no reason for not moving the street signs. All that should be necessary is for the council to act on the ordinance. A spinoff of the ordinance change would be to put no parking next to the lift station at Bartlett and Lakewood which could be adventagous. CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 ' June 16, 1~82 TO: BRUCE WOLD FROM: JON ELAM RE: CLARE LANE I have a request to post "No Parking" on one side or the other of Clare Lane. Could you give me a report. 1. Making Sure it's not already in the Parking Ordinance. 2. Whether we should put "No Parking" in. 3. If we do, where it should or should not go. Thanks. JE:fc TO: JON ELAM FROM: BRUCE WOLD RE: CLARE LANE An inspection of Clare Lane, found no street signs posted. The ordinance calls for No Parking Anytime on the west side of Clare Lane from Wilshire to the dead end and from Galway Rd. to Kildare Lane. The street sign at Galway Rd and Clare Lane is turned the wrong direction. The erection of these No Parking Anytime signs would take care of the complaint you received. Additionally, there appears to be a need for the signs to move emergency vehicles. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Date: June 24, 1982 To: Jon Elam From: Sharon Legg Re: Assessment Search Fees Presently we are charging $5.00 per search except there is no fee to the owner. I propose that we raise the fee to $10 for any search which is made. Do we need to get council approval? See the attached survey of other municipalities. Survey for Assessment Search: Anoka Bloomington Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Columbia Heights Excelsior Fridley Minnetonka Orono Robbinsdale Wayzata 5.00 6.00 - cash 7.00 ~ billed 5.00, 10.00 5.00 - no fee for owner 10.00 5.00~ 7.50 5.O0 no fee for owner 10.O0 5.OO no fee for owner * considering raising to $10.00 CITY OF M0~O~.~D Mound~ Minnesota PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT APPLICATION Street ~ (5) Does anyone other t~n above ~ve fi~ncial interest (~) Location of ~nces . , ~~7~ 6) If A=ual D:nce Per. t: From wieen to when (7) Fee: Single Z~nce - [;lO.O0 per ~ay *If the answer to Item ~ is "Yes," please list others having a finnncial interest in the business below, giving n~me, address and telephone number. 15.00 Single Permit CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR GAMBLING PERMIT · Our Lady of the Lake Church Name of organization , 2385 Commerce Blvd, Address Mound ~ MN. , aChurch, Non profitorganization, hereby applies for a sing le annual/single occasion gambling permit. Date to be used July 31, Aug 1, 1982 Phone Number of Organization 472 1284 Date Organization was organized 1909 Purpose of Organization Church - School Type of Gambling to take place: Paddlewheel Yes Tipboard Yes Raffle Yes Location of Gambli.ng: Address: No Raffle No Wheel of 'Fortune No Pull tabs Money tree Mound MN 55364 2385 Commerce Blvd. Name of Building Owner Our Lady of' the Lake,' Church Is the building_owned or leased by the organization OWNED Date ownership was acquired 1909 If leased, expiration date of lease (Copy of lease must accompany application) Gamb!ing Manager: Name of Gambl in9 Manager Howard Watkins . Chairman Home address 3110 Doanld Dr. Mound MN Is Gambling Manager an active member of organization Date membership acquired A~u,~t lg7g is Gambling Manager paid by the organization for handling the gambling NO (The answer to this question must be no - Sec. 43.40) Amount of bond furnished by Gambling Manager $10,000 474 l179,offic Home Phone 472 ll7~,home (Requ i red) (At least $I0,000.) Name of Company furnishing Bond Safeco Ins, Co, of America agree to file a copy of the bond with the City Clerk. and we Name of Bank where gambling funds will be kept Mound State Bank, Mound MN. (2) . Bank Account N~mber for gambling funds ~191668 Are funds in the above account mixed with other funds (Answer must be "No") NO AGREEMENT The Our l~v of t~ T.~ C~]~ hereby agrees that if the license hereio Name oW Applicant is granted that the Our l_~d¥ of the 'I~ke Ch~ save the City, its officers Name of Applicant and agents harmless against any claims or actions and the cost of defending any claims or actions arising out of or by reason of the granting of the license or the conduct of any of the activities authorized by the license. It is further agreed that monthly reports shall be furnished the City by the Gambling Manager as directed in the Ordinance and theCh-lr Lady of the Lake Chruch Name of Applicant hereby authorizes the Bank named above as the keeper of gambling f~nds to allow the City access to the figures and activity of account number ~3g1668 listed above. Signed by authorized Officer of Orga,nization , ~ ,~~~ Title ([~~ The above appl ication is made on behalf of the Our Lady of the Lake Church and all information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. / D;te Signature Title Annual Licenses: Expire on January 31 of each year. Fees are not prorated for licenses purchased after February l. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 June 24, 1982 TO: Jon Elam, City Manager In 1980, I marked and later removed an elm tree on property that the tax records indicated belong to Adeline Carr, 4700 Aberdeen Road. The cost for removal was assessed to her property because of an error in the tax records. The prop- erty did not belong to her at that time. She now has brought this to our attention and is requesting a refund. Would you ask the City Council to consider authorizing a refund of the following amount: $100.00 Tree Removal Cost 10.05 Interest Chris Bollis Park Director CB/ms A.THOMAS WU R 5-T GERALD T. CARROLL CURTIS A. PEARSON THOMAS F. UNE) ERWOOD ALBERT FAULCONER JAMES D. LARSON LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 July 1, 1982 JUL 198o_ TELEPHONE (612) 338-8911 Ms. Jan Bertrand City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MLN 55364 Dear Jan: Enclosed is the revised review and let's discuss. CAP: ms ~nclosure ~ proposed settlement agreement. City Attorney Please AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MOUND AND WEST SUBURBAN PROPERTIES WHEREAS, West Suburban Properties, hereinafter referred to as the Owner, is a purchaser on a Contract for Deed of certain lands located on Bartlett Boulevard (County Road No. 110) at the Mound-Minnetrista border, and said lands have been described as the "Minnetonka Mobile Home Park, 6635-6639-6643 and 6701-6705-6709 Bartlett Boulevard, Mound/Minnetrista; legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement, and ~EREAS, the above-described lands contain a substantial number of mobile homes or trailer houses plus three other buildings known as an offiCe/residence structure, an old house at 6635 Bartlett Boulevard, and an old cabin located ad- jacent to Lake Minnetonka (Halstead Bay), and ~EREAS, the entire property is non-conforming to the Mound Zoning Code for a number of reasons, but primarily because of the large number of structures on one lot, side yard setbacks, front yard setbacks, setbacks from the lake, and other reason or reasons relevant to this action, and WHEREAS, the original cabin which lies southerly of Halstead Avenue is a part of a non-conforming use and is non-conforming in and of itself because of set- backs from the lake and from the adjoining properties and has been neglected and was in a deteriorated condition prior to the time the property was acquired by the owner, and k~EREAS, the owner was cited by the City of Mound from commencing construc- tion without a building permit and the owner appeared in Court and plead not guilty and then applied for a building permit and said permit was issued by the inspector on Thursday, April 1, 1982, but after checking the Code and checking with the City Attorney, and based on allegations of citizens residing in the neighborhood, the building permit was withdrawn by the City on April 5, 1982, and a stop order was placed on any construction, because it was alleged that the non-conforming use had been lost by abandonment, and that repair to the building required structural changes, and WHEREAS, the City of Mound through its agents advised the owner that no fur- ther work could be done on this cabin abutting Halstead Bay without applying to the Planning Commission and the City Council for a permit or a variance from the Code, and WHEREAS, the owner refused to make application for such permit or variance stating that it would not do any good because it would be refused, and I~rHEREAS, the Building Inspector and the City Attorney have had numerous meetings with the legal representatives of the owners and with the owners concern- ing this problem, and it appears that litigation to determine the rights of the owners and the City will be necessary unless a negotiated settlement can be reached, and kVHEREAS, the City of Mound contends and alleges that the property is non- conforming and that it cannot be repaired under Section 23.404 of the City Code because the non-conforming use as it relates to this structure was discontinued for a period in excess of 12 months and that the only maintenance which can be done on the non-conforming structure is normal maintenance that does not include struc- tural repairs, and further that no alterations could be made without the approval of the City Council, and that no variance or permit has been applied for or granted by the City, and WHEREAS, the positions of the owner and the City are such that the only way the conflicting views and ~positions can and will be resolved is by litigation unless there is a stipulated settlement, and 2 WHEREAS, the City's Building Inspector and City Attorney have indicated to the owners and their attorney that they will recommend a settlement consistent with this Stipulation and Agreement if the owner agrees to certain conditions and the termination of the use and removal of the building on or before July 1, 1985. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED ~{D AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE OWNERS AND THE CITY, as follows: 1. That in an effort to resolve a controversy and a dispute between the parties, the City, the owners and the City have negotiated a complete settlement which will result in substantial savings of legal expenses and other administra- tive costs. Each party represents and contends that this Agreement would not be reached and this settlement would not be approved except for the fact that the individual parties will benefit by the settlement. 2. The owner hereby agrees to execute this Stipulation and Agreement and will apply to the Planning Commission and the City Council for a special permit and a variance to the City Code provided the terms contained herein are agreed to by the City Council. 3. This Agreement is conditioned upon the City Council approving this Stipulation and Agreement, and upon said approval both parties will be bound by its terms. If not approved by the City Council neither party shall be bound by is terms. 4. The owners shall be allowed to make the following limited improvements at 6639 Halstead Avenue, i.e., the lakeside cabin at the Minnetonka Trailer Court. These limited repairs have been recommended by the Building Inspector as minimal to protect the health and safety of anyone who may reside in the cabin, but are also limited to minimizing the expenses incurred by the owners so that the owners will not contend or claim a right to continue beyond the agreed date because of the money spent in repairing the cabin. The items to be repaired and the permits - - ' / Lo to be issued shall be limited as follows: door. C. fan. a. The owner shall insulate and patch the siding where missing. The owners shall install steps and landing at the house entrance O%mers shall complete the installation of a bathroom exhaust - 4 - Owners shall correct plumbing and connect to the City system in complete conformity with all City Codes if it can be established that the raw sewage is discharging into Lake Minnetonka. e. Owners shall disconnect any illegally installed wiring and electrical circuits and shall correct and upgrade the electrical system and bring it to the minimum standard required by the City Code. f. Owner shall correct and complete repairs to the heating system in- cluding gas piping and other fuel systems to protect the safety of the occupants all as per City Code. g. Owners shall patch the roof so that the building does not leak and attach any loose roofing. h. Owners shall install missing basement windows or window. 6. The City agrees to grant a permit to complete the repairs as aforestated with the following express conditions: a. The City Council shall approve this Agreement. b. Owners shall obtain all necessary building permits and pay all building permit fees. c. The City is allowing this use to continue with the express under- standing and contractual responsibility on the part of the owners to remove said structure on or before July 1, 1985. d. The owner shall provide to the City a bond or a cash deposit or some other acceptable security of at least $2,000 agreeing that this struc- ture shall be removed from the property on or before July 1, 1985, and o~er shall also provide the City with express authority to enter upon said premises on July 1, 1985, and demolish the building if it has not been removed prior to that date. The City shall have the authority to demolish the building and use the cash deposit for said purpose or purposes. 7. The owners and the City are further agreeing that this lakeside cabin will not be utilized in any manner contrary to City ordinances or codes on or after July 1, 1985. 8. It is the further understanding of the parties that each is subjugating their rights to the other to avoid litigation to determine the many questions Which relate to this site. This Stipulation and Agreement shall also bear the legal descrip- tion of the property and shall be recorded with the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles. 9. Each party hereby waives their rights against the other party subject to the conditions contained herein, but each party further reserves to themselves the right to litigate items not contained herein or other areas of dispute concerning other non-conforming uses as it relates to the overall site. 10. That the City agrees to dismiss the criminal complaint issued against the o~ers for construction allegedly being done without a building permit. IN k~TNESS k~rlEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this day of ATTEST: , 1982. City Clerk WEST SUBURBAN PROPERTIES, A MI~ESOTA PARTNERSHIP BY: CITY OF MOUND BY: SEAL , /~ BILLS-.---JULY 13, 1.982 Air Comm Auto Con Industries Acro Minnesota Affirmative Business Commun Air Pneutronic Co. Bryan. Rock Prod Holly Bostrom Badger Meter F.H. Bathke' Burlington Northern Brooklyn Printing Commiss of Revenue Como Specialty Co. Coast to Coast Continental Tele Cole Publications Fran Clark Conway Fire & Safety Robert Cheney Chapin Publishing Bill Clark Standard Driver & Vehicle Serv Dock Refunds Davies Water Equip Dependable Services Ernst Associates(HUD CDBG) Fidelity Bank & Trust(Bonds) Fuel Recovery Co. Flaherty Equip Corp Flexible Pipe Tool First Bank Mpls Garrett Freightlines Glenwood Inglewood Gerrys Plumbing Gopher Sign Co. Margaret Hehl William Husbands(W/C Henn Co. Sheriffs Dept Eugene Hickok & Assoc Henn Co. Treas Hayden Murphy J.B. Distributing Robert E. Johnson The Johnson Corp Herman Kraft Lake Upholstery Jerry Laurie Doris Lepsch The Laker Glen Litfin Transfer Long Lake Ford Tractor LOGIS Sharon Legg 1,975.O0 110.70 123.O6 140.O0 830.52 283.90 362.00 24 06 61 62 533 33 35 25 5,490 07 8 O0 563 5O 1,142 48 128. O0 57 73 636 02 334 O0 35 91 5,185 82 3.25 278.25 131.60 33.00 2,065.10 1,636.55 4,249.51 22.72 50.34 20.00 30.12 44.6O 61.80 9.89 35.OO analysis)2,135.OO 64.73 523.86 1,335.OO 640.OO 213.86 4O.48 245.33 25O.OO 85.OO 390.19 15.OO 118.43 3OO.OO 36.30 1,472.94 31.62 Mound Fire Dept 3,624.05 Wm Mueller & Sons 7,718.94 Mound Super Valu 55.77 Mound Hdwe 50.25 Marina Auto Supply 414.40 Mound Medical Clinic 44.00 MN Playground Inc 236.57 Mound Locksmith 6.75 Munic Finance Officer Assn 60.00 Metro Fone 11.80 Mpls Star Tribune 366.51 Martins Navarre 66 23.00 Minn UC Fund 4,268..00 MacQueen Equip 82.35 Minnesota Fire Inc 337.72 City of Minnetrista 16 OO City of Mound 36 20 Mound Postmaster 406 32 Navarre Hdwe 288 48 North Star Service 59 55 Natl Registry of EMT 15 O0 N.S.P. 4,194 36 Police--2nd ½ unif allow 1,050 OO Pitney Bowes Credit 26 OO Popham, Haik, Schnob. 1,266 93 Peat, Marwick, Mitcheli(Cn~te~14,536 OO Soil Exploration Co 1,228 16 Scott Racek ~ 37 43 Reo Raj Kennels 284 OO Howard Simar 245.00 State Bank of Mound(Bonds) 40,304 75 Swenson Nursery 50 5 Don Streicher Guns 77 25 Russell Smith Assoc 175 OO Rick Sorenson 320 80 Spring Park Car Wash 88 O0 Seton Service 3 70 Timberwall Landscaping 274 OO T & T Maintenance 1,807 41 Thurk Bros. Chev 142 80 Unitog Rental 222 15 Waconia Ridgeview Hosp 61 81 Water Products Co 217.39 Weber & Troseth 55.00 Westonka Firestone 388.56 Widmer Bros. 3,564.00 R.L. Youngdahl & Assoc 5,470.00 Ziegler, Inc. .228.76 Sub-Total .... Bills 129,O71.86 (Continued other side for Liquor Bills) LIQUOR BILLS .. Bradley Exterminating Butch's Bar Supply Coca Col a City Club Distrib Day Distrib. East Side Beverage Gold Medal Beverage Home' Juice Co. Johnson Paper & Supply Kool Kube The Liquor House Midwest Wine Co. A.J. Ogle Co. Pog reba Distrib Pepsi Cola Bottling Regal Window Cleaning Real One Acquisitions Sterne Electric Thorpe Distrib The Liquor House Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Co. Ed Phillips & Sons 19.00 97.20 265.50 4,041.10 5,957.40 5,698.65 119.71 38.12 172.20 517.50 616.56 610.10 2,712.55 3,582.15 279.00 10.75 675.0O 59.36 5,413.OO 874.91 3,327.22 6,446.45 1,144.78 1,267.83 2,377.78 Sub Total---Liquor bills 46,323.82 GI:b~ND TOTAL ...... ALL BILLS 175,395.68 INTEROFFICE MEMO TO: Jon Elam FROM: Bruce Wold SUBJECT: City Administrative Vehicles DATE, June 16, Several'weeks ago you asked me to begin checking into some smaller cars that could be used as administrative vehicles.· ~.~ objective in checking into these cars was to attempt to stay well within the monies budgetted by the City Council. When the budget was passed it contained $24,000 for the purchase of three administrative vehicles. In early April, I met with a Bloomington investigator who was inMound on a police matter. I.worked.on the matter with him, and in the process rode in the car that the city provided for him. ~e car he was using was a Ford Fairmont M~ich the City of Bloomington purchased from Hertz as a used car. The car was nicely equipped, and seemed perfectly suited for the type of service that the city would put it through. I also found out that the purchase, price was well below that of a nmv car. The car was a 1981 model with about 15,000 miles. With this information I began to explore this market for our .purposes. ~ Over the past few months, several articles have'been published in national magazines as well in the Minneapolis newspaper. These artigles spoke of the number~ of cities that are turning to car rental and leasing companies as a source of cars for administrative cars. ~bst of the articles spok% of-the-initial low purchase price, and the higher resale value these types of cars have. Usually when a city purchases cars, the city buys stripped models that have little resale value after use. As a result the city loses is two ways. First is the depreciation attributed to driving the car off the showroom floor, and second is the low resale value because of the model of car purchased and the way that model is equipped. ~]~e articles also spoke of the maintenance records available, the warranties offered by the rental companies, and the generally good care that the cars get. 'Addition- ally, the rental companies do not sell those cars that have a bad'history of repair or have been involved in severeaccidents. All cars are touched up and completely cleaned out prior to sale. I spent about four days over the past month attempting to compare prices on new verses used cars. In general I have found, that the City of~5und can afford to purchase new carsforadministrative use. However, all of the monies budgetted for these items would have to be spent. Pae to the ti~t budget that we face, I feel.~at this is not a good idea. Even if the budget were not tight, I would question spending the monies for new cars. I visited the major car rental companies and also one car leasing firm. I found that it should be possible to purchase three cars for approximately $6000 to $6400 per car. ~is would put the price of the cars in the range of $18,000 to 19~,200, considerably below the purchase price of new cars with- out the same equipment. Con't. Depending on the company we purchased the cars from the warranties would run from 12 months 12,000 miles to 24 months 24,000 miles. ~he types of cars that I looked at were smaller fuel efficient models which deliver gas mileage from 20 28 MPG. I would propose that you authorize Dick Schnable and I to further investi- gate the purchase of three used cars from a rental car agency. That Dick and I be allowed to pick out the three cars and place a hold on them pending action by the City Council. ~ Cities are saving money by purchasing automobiles from the used-car fleets of commercial auto rental companies. "I never expect to buy another new car..." You might expect to hear this state- ment from a discouraged working-class American who has just experienced a strong dose of "sticker shock" at his local new-car dealer. Instead, it came from a municipal fleet manager who was dis- cussing the acquisition of city vehicles for Pasadena, California. Like most cities, Pasadena maintain§ a !arge fleet: approximately 1130 vehicles, ranging from sedans to garbage trucks to fire apparatus. A steady supply of auto- mobiles is needed for transporting ad- ministrators, building inspectors, social workers, and others as they go about their assigned duties. Pasadena officials have seen the cost of owning and operating the city fleet grow more than 100 percent since 1974. To with this increase, as well as with revenue cutbacks that resulted from Proposition 13 and from federal revenue- sharing reductions, city officials initiated a program called "Overfleet." This pro- gram has already ~aved the city more than $170,000. As part of "Overfleet," the city's total fleet was cut by eight percent. Overall fuel consumption was reduced through the acquisition of smaller cars. Improved maintenance techniques extended each vehicle's operating life to seven years or 100,000 miles. "A key ingredient in our 'overfteeting' program," says Richard Pennock, Pasa- dena's director of administrative services, "is buying used rental cars for our fleet. Each year, we have to replace a certain number of vehicles in our fleet. We have bought 59 used rental cars over the past two years, saving approximately $3000 each. Based on the excellent results we have had with those cars, I never expect to buy another new car for our regular pool. It just wouldn't make sense." Pasadena saves money twice by buying late-model, low-mileage used cars from rental agencies. The initial price for a typ- one-year-old sedan is as much as less than the price of the same car ght new 12 months earlier. Several years later, when the car is sold, the city again makes money by selling the car. Dick Newkirk, program manager for l the state of California's Fleet Adminis- tration Division, reports, "We get a higher recovery price for the former rental cars--about $200 apiece more than for our standard, stripped-down state vehicles when we sell them off at 100,000 miles." Pasadena and the state of California are only two of man5' governmental units that are putting used rental cars into their flee ts. Hertz, best known as a car rental agency, is also the world's largest retailer o fused cars. Hertz reports that it has sold used rental cars from its fleet to 14 California state agencies and departments, to 88 California cities, to 23 California school districts, and to two transit districts. Hertz, like other major auto rental companies, constantly recycles its rental fleet so that it can offer its rental cus- tomers the newest possible cars in the lat- est models. In 1970, Hertz began selling at retail some of its used cars. The com- pan3' now has more than 150 retail outlets across the country where it sells one-year- old cars with from 15,000 to 25,000 miles on their odometers. Many government fleets made their first used-car purchases from Hertz to get normal-looking cars for undercover po- lice work. Typical government fleet cars are fairly conspicuou, s, with their lack of exterior trim, single'color, and blackwall tires. Even without a city seal on the door, the fleet look is obvious. San Francisco and Monterey County are two California jurisdictions that pur- chase police undercover cars from Hertz, but seldom discuss this use publicly be- Pasadena's Director of Administrative Services Richard Pennock with two 1980 Ford Falrmounts, typical of the dozens of used cars that the city has purchased. · / AMERICAN CITY & COUNTY: May 1~82 53 cause they want to preserve 'the vehicles' anonymity. Other California cities- Walnut Creek and Belmont, to name two -- use former rented autos both for police undercover work and for' general motor pool applications. As Al Sunseri, Hertz western region car sales manager, points out, "When the city's budget analysti see the savings pos- sible with used vehicles (purchased for police undercover work), they start buy- ing them for everyday assignm'ents out of their normal car pool." The choice is not limited to a few se- dans, either. Hertz' inventory includes 36 models from Ford, Mercury, Pontiac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, Buick, Toyota, Lincoln, Cadillac, Mercedes, and Volvo, as well as vans, pick-ups, and a limited number of heavy-duty trucks and tractors for 18-wheel rigs. From these, govern- ment purchasing agents can personally choose vehicles that fit the mileage and price range required for their fleets. The University of California at San Diego, for example, is using 16 vans from Hertz for its increasingly popular van- pool system. The school has an additional ten vans on order. Assistant Manager for Parking and Transit Lloyd Ellis estimates that the school is saving from $3000 to $5000 per vehicle compared to the cost of purchasing similar vans new. But interest in used rental cars has not been limited to cities caught in a financial squeeze. Houston, Texas, has a triple-A bond rating, but recently purchased nearly 600 used cars from Hertz -- a record sale to a municipality for that company. The 1981 models, mostly Ford Fairmoms and Mercury Zephyrs, cost the city more than $3.0 million. According to Dan Ragsdale, Hertz re- gional fleet sales manager in Richardson, Texas, all units will be fully serviced and will carry a 12-month, 12,000-mile limited powertrain warranty. "We have set up an in-house warrant5, program for the city of Houston. The city estimates its savings to be approximately $750,000. It gained 133 additional cars by purchasing Hertz used cars, which will enable it to retire 133 old, high-mileage, high-maintenance cars for even greater savings." The city of Dallas bought 122 cars from Hertz atter it had budgeted to buy new 1981 units but found that the anticipated 15 percent price increase actually turned out to be 28 percent. The Hertz price of S4600 for each sLx-cylinder 1980 Ford was 14 percent below the price of new cars, attractive enough to cause the city to pur- chase the used cars. Other jurisdictions in the south that have purchased used cars from Hertz in- clude 40 cities -- among them, San An- tonio, Gah,eston, Atlanta, Baton Rouge, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Fort Lauderdale, Memphis, and Mobile- two counties, Clayton County, Georgia, and Clarke Coumy. Alabama; and the states of Georgia, Oklahoma, and South Carolina. Elsewhere, the Virginia State Police, the State of New Jersey, and the City of Bal- timore have purchased cars from Hertz. A major concern of purchasers of used vehicles is the possibility of increased maintenance costs. Pasadena's Pennock reports that "We found that the major rental agencies are an excellent source for 'reliable vehicles. The Hertz company not only has detailed records showing how well-maintained each car has been, it also has a limited 12-month, 12,000-mile pow- ertrain warranty on each vehicle. They simply do not sell any weak or damaged automobiles." The city of Belmont, California, which pioneered the use of Hertz used cars in a city fleet in 1974, actually reduced the size of its fleet because of Hertz reliabil- ity. "We had fewer breakdowns with the cars we got from Hertz than with the cars we purchased new," claims Belmont Chief Mechanic Bob McDougal. "And since the cars were not tied up in the shop, we could cut our fleet from 13 cars to 10. pennock's determination to save Pas- adena money by buying used rental cars got some support from city em- ployees when they realized that they now would have radios and air conditioners in "their" cars. But the attractiveness of the new cars caused problems, too. "We ran head-on into the 'my car' syn- drome,'' reported Pennock. "We discov- ered that some city cars were being used as little as five or ten miles a month by department personnel who felt that they needed their own car. Now, everybody gets a car assigned for only a trip at a time -- and if it's a very short trip, we call a cab." In a large operation such as Pasadena's, says Pennock, "We know there is always a certain percentage of vehicle users ab- sent or sick each day." By figuring in this absentee factor, Pennock has reduced the fleet even more. The surge of purchases by economy- minded municipalities has created an awareness of the finite limits of used rental cars available for sale. Hertz offi- cials and some fleet buyers now are work- ing out the details of some sort of advance- purchase arrangements. Such an agree- ment might specify that a municipality would want 15 vehicles with an average of from 15,000 to 25,000 miles for deliv- ery in early 1984. Knowing that it was committed to sell these vehicles, Hertz could then order them from a manufac- turer for its 1983 fleet, and operate them as rentals until the specified delivery date. Pasadena's Pennock sees this sort of arrangement as the most likely way for his city to go in the future. "I want to be sure that I can get the best cars for my fleet without having to resort to ordering new cars," he says. ACC /gAcERICANCITY & COUNTY: May 1982 Most municipalities that have purchased used vehicle parts have done it just to save mon.ey, but g~)od experience with these pads, plus quick availability and extended warranties,, ~re making used pads as acceptable as used houses. Snow removal is tough work. When a truck is to be used for plowing, an ex- perienced fleet manager orders it fur- nished with the heavy duty components needed to withstand the added stresses of carrying a heavy plow and pushing masses of wet snow. When a plow is mounted on a truck not initially designed for snow removal, the fleet manager does the best he can to upgrade the truck for the added burden. Last year, the Michigan Department of Transportation decided to incorporate pickup trucks into its snow removal ef- fort. As part of the necessary truck up- grading, department officials decided that the standard radiators should be replaced with heavy-duty versions. The5, found that the quickest source of these radiators was a local automobile dismantler/recycler. "It was the first time our department tried this approach," said Bruce L. Bord- net. assistant district maintenance engi- neer. "We got the parts we needed-- and at a very good price. We're very pleased." A number of local governments are finding recycled auto parts a viable alter- native to new parts. Recycled parts offer both cost savings and good availability. Robert Karo, who works for the city Valdosta, Georgia, says that his de- ent has been buying used parts for some time. He sees them as a "valuable part of the effort to keep fleets running cost efficiently." Kato estimates that from 15 to 20 percent of all of the parts pur- chased for Valdosta fleet vehicles are used. Still, despite the fact that the use of used and rebuilt parts by local govern- ments is not new and is, in fact, increas- ing, it is not an extensive practice. Ken Wright of Capital Auto Parts, Inc., Thomasville, Georgia, has been selling parts to the local government for 12 years and reports that these sales account for only about one percent of his total vol- ume. Thomasville's Gerald Vickery reports that the parts that the city has purchased, although relatively few in number, have proven satisfactory. "We've had very good success, and we've been buying used parts for at least eight years. They work." Despite the good results reported by municipalities that have used recycled parts, there exists a certain psychological barrier to their greater acceptance, even in communities that already have used them successfully. Dismantlers!recyclers igree. "There's mistrust there," says Harden Haskins. owner of Haskins Auto ~arts, Ocala. Florida, "It's a stigma from the past. Used parts are sometimes looked at like used clothes. We're trying to get peo- Gerald Vickers, garage manager for Thom- asville, Georgia, watches as Ken Wright of Capital Auto Parts points out a used part In this police car, ple to look at them like a used house -- there's still plenty of use there. The prob- lem is getting government fleet parts buy- ers to try used parts." In an attempt to overcome that image problem, Haskins and several thousand other dismantlers have formed the Au- tomotive Dismantlers and Recyclers As- sociation. ADRA has encouraged the upgrading of salvage yards through such innovations as "long lines." These are regional communications networks that allow recyclers to exchange information with their counterparts. The communications network has per- formed a less visible but probably more important service. For the system to work, the participants must know their inventories and have constantly updated records about parts availability, service- ability, and sources. Membership in a network is an indication that a recycler maintains a level of professionalism about his operation. Another factor in upgrading the image of used auto parts is the fact that many recyclers now cover them with a war- ranty. Bob Karo reports that Valdosta gets at least a 30-day warranty when he buys used parts--and sometimes 90- days, which is the normal warranty on new parts. "Let's face it," says Karo, "you only get a 90-day guarantee on new parts. AMERICAN CITY & COUNTY: May 1982 Getting 30 days on a used part that can cost up to 75 percent less is worth it- especially when the part works." Bruce Bordner of the Michigan DOT is a backyard mechanic and often buys used parts for his personal vehicles. When his department considered the same pol- icy, Bordner had some recommendations about finding dependable parts. As a re- sult, Michigan DOT purchases used parts from Schram Auto Parts in Pontiac, where it receives a 90-day warranty. "The 90-day guarantee is a big reason why we've overcome a lot of the mis- trust," says Schram's Bill Fitzgerald. In some cases, Schram extends its guarantee to 100 days on "hard" parts and to as much as a year on electrical equipment. Extending the g.uarantee concept to its limit, Hayden Haskins will provide a life- time warranty on some parts: "We offer a lifetime guarantee on about 75 percent of the used parts we sell, with at least 90 days on everything else." Once government agencies do learn of the availability of used parts, their pti- maD' motivation to use them is lower cost. Bill Fitzgerald says that Schram Auto Parts is doing more business than ever with local government fleets, and he credits economics: "There has been a no- ticeable increase in th~ last five years. I'm sure the rising cost of new parts is a major reason." Bob Kato estimates that Valdosta saves between. 15 and 20 percent on its fleet maintenance costs by using recycled auto and truck parts. Still, Karo is quick to point out that cost isn't everything. He is cautious, for example, about using re- cycled parts on heavily used police vehi- cles. He also likes to check on the source of the parts. "If they are available," says Karo, "I like to see the service records on the en- gine or wrecked vehicle the parts came from. And I like to know the people we're dealing with. If you can find the right kind of shop, the availability, savings, and ser- vice can be very good. You've got to know your suppliers. You've got to go out and look over their operations. "We've had real good luck with used parts," Karo continues, "but we make sure of where they come from." Recycled parts should not be consid- ered just as an alternative to' new ~arts, either. Michigan DOT's Bordner says, "We've been using recycled parts from Schram for some time now and have found them to be cheaper and much more dependable than rebuilt units." Overall, recycled parts offer local gov- ernments several advantages. Although municipalities have 3,et to purchase these parts in significant quantities, that situa- tion may change as they become aware that the junkyards of the past have been replaced by sophisticated dismantling or- ganizations that can provide guaranteed parts quickly and at low cost. ACC 55 CONSULTING ENGINEERS f LAND SURVEYORS ~: PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 July 8, 1982 Mr. Tim Albers Hardrives, Inc. 7200 Hemlock Lane North Maple Grove, MN 55369 RE: Tuxedo Blvd. File #5387 Dear Tim: On April 27, 1982, Chuck Wilson and John Christianson of our ~ffice met with Mr. Dwight K. Beglau of Twin City Testing on Tuxedo Boulevard. Twin City Testing was called to offer us an explanation as to what was wrong with the bituminous surface and to tell us what must be done to save the street. He told us that the street structure was sound and that only a surface correction was necessary. The surface abrasion appearing on Tuxedo was' due to ~n open texture surface of the pavement, which does not prevent water penetration which in turn helps to strip the asphalt cement and fines from the pavement. This open texture surface was due to a breakdown in the application procedure. The joints and holes should be repaired with a 2361 mix and in the four areas of worst stripping a skin patch should be applied prior to sealcoating. It was his opinion and ours that a sealcoat be applied on the portion of the street beginning at Brighton Blvd. and ending at the crest of the hill between Windsor and Drummond. Very truly yours, MoCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. WHM/jb _ cc: City of Mound William H. McCombs, P.E. Minneapolis- Hutchinson- Alexandria- Eagan p'~,~ed on recycled p,~per ' , COMBS-KNUTSON .. ASSOCIATES, INC, CONSU!LTING £NGINE£RS LAND SURVEYORS PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plyrnouth, Minnesota 55441 {612) 559-3700 3uly 8, 1982 Mr. Tim Albers Hardrives, Inc. 7200 Hemlock Lane North Maple Grove, MN 55369 Subject: Mound, Minnesota Bartlett Blvd. File #4213 Dear Tim: Bartlett Boulevard has had a number of patches and still long stretches of the centerline seam are split open. This is not typical of the standard of work Hardrives does, and, not the standard we expect for a street only one year old. We feel this street does not meet minimum standards for final acceptance without the addition of a sealcoat. Prior to this sealcoat, the joints and cracks should be filled with a joint filler and any minor corrections made. This street has been under close scrutiny by many since its reconstruction and has received much criticism. We are all hoping to get this corrected soon. He need your efforts to be directed to finishing out these old problems and some of your punch list items from this spring quite soon. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ohn A. Christianson 2AC/ih Minneapolis- Hutchinson- Alexandria- Eagan June 29, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: Bruce Wold FROM: Jon Elam Enclosed is a letter and a petition regarding the "all American" issue of safe children. Give me your design plans for this problem and we will move to implement. Thanks. JE:fc enc. TO: JON ELAM FROM: BRUCE WOLD RE: Mother hood and apple pie I believe that two signs would provide the kind of protection that the neighborhood is seeking for their children. One sign could be placed between Finch and Gull on the South side of Three Points Blvd. The other sign should go east of Heron, before the Stop Ahead sign, on the north side of Three Points Blvd. The sign inscription could read: 1) CHILDREN AT PLAY 2) PARK AHEAD CHILDREN PLAYING 3) PLAYGROUND AHEAD City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Gentlemen: I am writing this letter because I am concerned about the safety of the children that live in the Three Points Park area near my home. There are no street signs posted warning motor vehicles of the presence of children playing near the park and I feel that there is imiaent danger of these children being injured. Fly neighbors and I feel very strongly that something should be done about this situation before an accident occurs. We have signed our names to this letter in the hope that the City Counsel will act accordingly and post street signs to alert motor vehicles of this potential hazard. Very truly yours, Lori Nelson 1717 Gull Lane Mound, MN 55364 197: CITY of MOUND M E M 0 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: Bruce Wold FROM: Jon Elam~/~~ SUBJECT: 1652 Eagle Lane Mel Larson has let his hedge grow right to the property line and when he parks his car by it, it makes it impossible for the next door neighbor to see when he backs out of his driveway. The result was that the neighbor had an accident here last week. Solutions might include, cutting back the hedge 4 to 5 feet, puttipg up no parking signs from here to driveway or asking Mr. Larson to cooperate to eliminate a safety problem. What do you think? JE:fc TO: JON ELAM FROM: BRUCE WOLD RE: 1652 Eagle Ln. Attempts to reach Mr. Larson during the day have proved futile. However, if we could get Mr. Larson to comply we face other problems in the neighborhood. Mr. Larson could easily point to the hedge at 1653 Eagle Lane as being worse than his. He could also point to the vacant lot at the corner of Eagle Lane and Jennings Rd. which is just as obstructive because of the wild vegetation growing there. I feel the best way out of this one is to try to get Mr. Larson to cut back his hedge. However, I feel it should be done by letter. I also feel that the other owners of the above mentioned property should be put on notice also. This could include the city who may have to trim the brush from the right of way. July 6, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER If live ever seen a story that could be used in Mound, this would appear to be it. Do any of you think the idea of Neighborhood Boards for say, The Island, Highlands, Dutch Lake, Three Points and the Central Area of Mound would make sense as a way to get people to resolve individual and neighborhood problems? JE:fc · June 14, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (6'12) 472-1155 Mr. Tom Watson 3013 Bluffs Drive Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Tom, This. is to put you on notice that the City has received a number of complaints regarding the external problems related'to the Arcade.. These inc.lude, excessive noise coming from the Arcade juke box when the doors are open; bicycles laying all over the front road area; and perhaps worst of all complaints is an excessive level of trash causi.ng us to have t'o ~ire a summer student to spend from one .to two hours a day cleaning up the street area around the Arcade and the parking lot adjacent to it. If these problems continue, I do know'the issure will again come up at the City Council and we may well have a repeat of last winter, especially in light of the conditions under which the Arcade was originally approve~ which seem to be not.being met as originally anticipated, These include: Condition #2 - "Keep area around the building policed and all trash picked up, including the City parking lot to the South of the facility." Condition #3 - "Provide handicapped parking space to the west side of Marion Street'and necessary bike racks in front of the building for all Arcade users." Condition #4.-'~ontrol noise of'the Arcade portion of the building." Condition #7 - "The Licensee will submit a report to the City every three months outlining any'problems they are having with parking and Arcade operations." Condition #8 - "Owner will do everything within his power to prevent loitering around the outside of the buildi.ng and the parking area." It would appear that the area around the Arcade is fast becoming the central hangout in the City. People walking up Auditor's Road are often verbally abused and generally the kids intimidate both old and young alike. The result is that a number of good kids, from our reports, are not going near the Arcade who might otherwise. The burden to prevent these kinds of situations rests, to a major extent, with you and when you see these kinds of problems, the police need to be called so appropriate measures can be taken. Page 2 Mr. Tom Watson June 14, 1982 We have also received complaints from Mr~ Kromer who rents the area below the Arcade, that kids are going down the ramp, .smoking and causing some vandalism. This is an issue you probably should talk to Mrs. Moy or Mr. Kromer about. Finally, you should probably know that the City has received, what would appear to be, a fairly'serious inquiryabout'whether we would issue a license to someone t° put in a family type arcade~where Branty's was. It would appear'these people have 'received Mrs. Moy's encouragement. That would seem to be somewhat of a direct conflict with the Arcade but you~ probably should again check with Mrs. Moy regarding this development. As always; if I can'be of help,.please let me know. Sincerely, ~i ~~E~M1 aanmage r JE:fc enc. cc: Mrs. Moy TO: John Elem FROM: Tom Watson DATE: July 6, 1982 ou~,-: Mound Arcade In answer to your most recent letter regarding the external problems O related to the Mound ~cade as we discussed on my visit to y u.: Complaint #l - Excessive noise coming from the arcade jute box when doors are or;on. Solution - I agreed to~ hgve the volume control removed so the kids could not turn the volume so high. Complaint #2 - Bicycles laying all over the front o.f arc~de. Solution - I'm having the person on duty personally line up the bikes during peak periods. Comolaint =o _ Excessive level of trash around arcade Solution'~ - I offered to reimburse the City the ~ount of S25 per month until the problem is corrected. Com'sl~,int ~4 - Not providing handicapped p~rking soace. Solution - You agreed to take care of this for CompIa~nt ~5 - Loitering around the outside of building and the parking area. Solution - With the he!o of Chief Nold and his department we are not allowing any one to sit in their c~rs or stand in the parking lot. Complaint ?]~'6 - Kids going down the ramp to smoke. Solution - We are keeping a close eye on th~'.t ramp and ~-nj one c~.u[j:~ down there "~! ~'~' dolt with severly. John Elem Page 2 July 6, 1982 Th~nk you~for bringing these problems to my attention. our best to correct them at once. TW:mw cc: Mrs. Moy Chief Wold We will do 300 Metro Square Building, 7th Street and Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 June 16, 1982 Area 612, 291-6359 To ~om It May Concern: United States Postal Service Relocate Post Office Mound, Minnesota Received 06/09/82 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 10571-1 The Metropolitan Council has received an application for federal funds to' accomplish the above referenced project. The federal procedures for review of these applications require that any pctentially affected units of government, neighborhood organi- zations, groups, and human rights commissions be notified of the project and given an opportunity to comment. The interest of your communit7 groups should be expressed by means of a letter describing the effect the project might have on your community er the type of additional information you would like to receive. Upon receipt of a notice of your interest, if any, it is incumbent upon the ~4etropolitan Council to arrange a conference with the applicant for the benefit of all interested parties. If you desire to review the application, copies are on file at the Metropolitan Council and in the offices of the applicant. Sincerely, ,.~ T~RC~P OL I TAN ~OUN C !L. Referral Coordinator JR/ChThomas cc: Harren, Administrator, State A-95 Clearing House Metropolitan Council District 16 An Agency Created to Coordinate the Planning and I)evelopment of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Comprising: //OL,/ An Equal Opp,>rtunity IEmploy{:r OUR REF: SUBJECT: TO: UN]TED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Field Real Estate and Bulling Office P.O. Box 69009 St. Paul, MN 55169 433 :RV :RWVS :dn Proposed Postal Facility - A-95#1 Mound, MN 55470 Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area 300 Metro Square Building 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, MN 55101 June 7, 1982 Gentlemen: This will serve as notice that the Postal Service intends to relocate the subject office to other quarters in Mound, Minnesota. The preferred area is within or adjacent to the main business district. 'The specific site location and description will follow at a later date. If you should have any questions, please feel f~ee to contact this office at (612) 725-7385. Ross Van Sickle' is handling ~his project. Sincerely, R~BERT VOGEL/~''' Field Supervisor Field Real Estate Office CC: Day file PO file J'-"PS--. . This is not a request for funding. Fuel Recovery Company SPECIALISTS IN UNDERGROUND FUEL AND CHEMICAL RECOVERY Reaney St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 DUANE L. KNOPIK 612-771-2272 June 16, 1982 Mr. Greg Skinner City of Mound 4845 Manchester Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Sir, On May 25, 1982, it was requested that Fuel Recovery Company conduct exploratory tests at the City of Public Works, Mound, Minnesota. Our drilling team was sent to the contaminated site that afternoon and began preliminary test borings. Pertinent information concerning the test exploration and recovery procedures is as follows: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ~he City of Public Works employee (Mr. Greg Skinner) detected a 10ss of gasoline from their underground storage tanks. Shortly after'the gasoline loss hydrocarbon vapors began infiltrating the-sewer system. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) was alerted of the pro- blem and in turn notifi'ed our company. Upon notification we activated our test exploration team and they conducted some preliminary tests. The results of the tests are. explained further in the attached boring logs and the proceeding summations. SOIL COMPOSITION In the area immediately surrounding the spill area, the soil conditions consisted of clay to approximately 7'. .From 5/to 6' the soil consisted of a clayey sand. From 7/to 12' the sand was more pronounced. At this level there was only small amounts of detectable fine soils (i.e., silt or clay). The soil conditions in the sand lens represents a condition that liquid could be highly conductive. This highly porous sand. is not found in all borings. Boring #1 and 3 did not contain any evidence of a prominent sand condition. SITE ELEVATION A breakdown of the surface elevations are attached. GROUND WATER DATA he static water level differed from boring #1 & 2 to boring #3 in that t?.3 water levels in borings #1 & 2 were recorded at 9' whereas boring #3 had a water level at 22' Based on the water level differential, we City of Mound 2 Jun~ 16, 1982 have determined that there is a perched water table at 9' surrounding the underground-.storage tank area. The water is contained in the same strata as is the sand. However, in the area that does not possess a sand lens, there is no perched water table (water level at 22'). HYDROCARBON CONTAMINANTS Free product was pumped from the excavated area surrounding the under- ground storage tanks. The product was pumped from the excavated site for approximately one hour. The trench did not recharge after pumping. Several recovery wells were drilled for a vacuum recovery attempt. Only two wells showed any amount of product. The two w~lls were pump- ed but did not recharge with gasoline. The contaminated area was limited to the Public Works property, except for the migration of product along the sewer line. Migration of pro- duct along sewer cuts are more pronounced in clay soil conditions than in a higher porosity soil as sand. DISCUSSION Due to the potential dangers and extreme emergency of this situation, verbal approval was made through MPCA to install an Interceptor Vent System (IVS) to prevent any further infiltration of hydrocarbon ya~ors into the sewer system. At the same time, vertical PVC pipes wer~ stalled in the contaminated area to prevent further infiltratio~ and to extract the residual product from the soil. The area of contamina- tion has been outlined in the attached schematic. The IVS over an un- determined time span, will clean the contaminants from the soil. Therefore, we recommend no further recovery action be taken. If there are any further questions pertaining to our procedures please call Fuel Recovery Company at 771-2272. Sincerely, Fuel Recovery Co. GRJ:pj Encs. Fuel Recovery Company, Inc. NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGE IN RATES TO: Governing Body of Each Municipality and County Affected by the Proposed Change in Rates This Notice is being provided to you as required by Minnesota Statutes Section 216B.16, Subdivision 1. On May 21, 1982, Minnesota Gas Company ("Minnegasco") filed a general rate increase application with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 216B.16. The filing has been assigned Docket No. G-008/GR-82-249 by the Commission. Minnegasco's application states that the higher rates are necessary to recover increased (1) costs of labor, material and purchased services; (2) uncollectible accounts; (3) cost of mandated customer conservation programs; (4) taxes; (5) cost of capital funds; and (6) investment in facilities. The staff of the Minnesota Department of Public Service is cur- rently reviewing Minnegasco's books and records. The department staff and other persons who choose to intervene in this case may contest the increase proposed by Minnegasco at the evidentiary hearing. Further notification will be sent to you when public hearings are scheduled. Interim rates will be effective for gas service rendered on and after July 20, 1982 and will increase annual revenues by $21.5 million or 4.53 percent over present rates. Final requested rates will generate an annual increase in revenues of approx- imately $29.8 million, an overall increase of 6.27 percent over rates presently in effect. If any portion of the interim rate increase is disallowed by the Commission, the disallowed portion will be refunded to customers, with interest, as ordered bY the' Commission. While individual rate changes may be substantially higher or lower, the monthly bill for a typical residential heating customer will increase by approximately $2.50. The Minnegasco rate filing and requested final rate schedules are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Department of Public Service, 790 American Center Building, 160 East Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul and at Minnegasco's offices located at 201 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis; 2400 North Front Street, Mankato; and 620 West Litchfield, Willmar. If you Plan to intervene as a formal party in this case, contact the Office of Administrative Hearings, 400 Summit Bank, 310 Fourth Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 for information. Dated: July 2, 1982 STATE OF MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION · In the Matter of the Appli- cation of Minnesota Gas Company for Authority to Change its Schedule of Rates for Gas Utility Service in Minnesota Docket No. G-008/GR-82-249 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) )S.S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) E. A. Schroedermeier, Vice President-Regulatory Affairs of Minnesota Gas Company, being first duly sworn, certifies that on July 2, 1982, he served the attached Notice of Proposed Cha.nge in Rates by first class mail upon the governing body of each municipality and county in the area affected by the rate change, as listed on the attached pages. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day of July, 1982. Notary Public E. A. Schroedermeier Vice President-Regulatory Affairs Minnesota Gas Company 201 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612/372-4745 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION, Lillian Warren-Lazenberry Leo G. Adams Roger L. Hanson Terry Hoffman JuanJta R. Satterlee Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner In the Matter of the Application of the Petition of Minnesota Gas Company for Authority to Change its Schedule of Rates and Charges for Natural Gas Service in Minnesota. DOCKET NO. G-OOa/.GR-82-249 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS JURISDICTION The Minnesota Public Utilities Co~ission (the Co~Jssion) finds that a hearing is necessary in the above-entit)ed matter to determine the reasonableness of certain rate increases proposed by the Hinnesota Gas Company (MJnnegasco or the Company). The Commission is authorized to conduct such a hearing by M. S. ~ 216.16. II. PROPOSED RATES The rates proposed by Minnegasco would generate an addltlonal $29,758,000 of annual revenues. The effect of the proposed rates is summarized as follows: FIRM INTERRUPTIBLE TOTAL Present Rate 360,48I 114,123 474,604 Requested Rate 387,367 116,995 504,362 Increase 26,886 2,872 29,758 Percent 7.46~ 2.52t 6.27t A copy of the Company's requested rates ts on file in the offices of the Department of Public Service and is open to public inspection during normal office hours. A copy is also available for publlc inspection at the Company's office, 201 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. The Commission has suspended the ra:e schedule filed by the Company pending the hearing ordered herein. The Commission has also directed the Company to place an interim rate increase of $21,521,000, or 4.53% into effect beginning July 20, 1982. The interim rates are subject to refund if the Commission ultimateIy orders a lesser increase. III. PROCEDURAL OUTLINE The hearing on the petition will be conducted by a Hearing Examiner appointed by the Chief Hearing Examiner of the State of Minnesota and will be held in compliance with the applicable laws relating to the Public Utilities Commission, the Administrative Procedure Act (M. S. ~ 15.O411-15.O52), the Rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings (9 MCAR ~ 2.201-2.222) and the Rules of Practice of the Public Utilities Commission (Minn. Reg. PSC 500-521), to the extent that they have not been superseded by the Rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings. These rules may be purchased from the Documents Section of the Department of Administration, 117 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155, 612/297-3000. The rules provide generally for the procedural rights of the parties including: rights to advance notice of witnesses and evidence, right to a preheating conference, rights to present evidence ~nd cross examine witnesses, and rights to purchase a record or transcript. Parties are entitled to issuance of subpoenas to compel witnesses to attend and produce documents and other evidence. Any person intending to intervene as a formal party to these hearings must submit a Petition for Leave to Intervene to the Hearing Examiner and serve the petition on all existing parties. The petition must state how the Petitioner's legal rights, duties or privileges may be determined or affected by the Commission's decision ~n the matter and shall set forth the grounds and purposes for which intervention is sought and shall indicate the Petitioner's statutory right to intervene, if one exists.. All parties have the right to be represented by legal counsel, by a person of their choice or by themselves if not otherwise prohibited as the unauthorized practice of law. A Notice of Appearance must be filed with the Hearing Examiner within 20 days of the date of service of this Order if any party intends to appear at the hearing. The Notice of Appearance is not required if the hearing date is less than 20 days from the issuance of this Order. Potential intervenors shall attend the preheating conference scheduled below with information which will facilitate the scheduling of -2- hearings permitting all of the parties to present their evidentiary views in a manner and within a time frame which would be as fair and expeditious as possible. Matters which may be discussed include: the r~asonable time period required to prepare direct testimony for filing on al) of the issues; the time period for preparation of direct testi.mony by intervenors; recommended areas for hearings to receive public input regarding the petition; time required for parties to prepare for depositions and other discovery; and other matters that will facilitate full and fair hearings on the petition. If persons have good reason for requesting a delay of any hearing, the request must be made in writing to the Hearing Examiner at least five days prior to the hearing. A copy of the request must be served on the Commission and ali parties. Failure to appear at the hearing may result in the issues set out herein being deemed proven. A possible result is that the rates proposed by Minnegasco may be accepted by the Cor~nission. Following the contested hearing, the Commission may approve all or any part of the proposed rate increase but may not approve an overall increase greater t~an that proposed by the Company; However. the Co~rnlssion may adjust rates for classes of customers to levels greater than those proposed by the Company and make other rate adjustments based upon the testimony of other parties. If no person contests ~he proposed rate increase at the hearing, the rates may be approved as proposed. Any question concernlng informal disposition of this matter or discovery of information should be addressed to James T. Jarvls, Special Assistant Attorney General, 7~0 American Center Building, St. Paul, Minnesota $51OI, 612/296-6030. AII other questions concerning thJs hearing should be addressed to the Hearing Examiner assigned: Richard DeLong Administrative Hearings Off,ce , 400 Summit Bank Building 310 South 4th Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 GI2/341-7604 ORDER A contested case hearing concerning this matter shall be held, commencing with a prehearing conference at the Large Hearing Room, American~ '3- Center Building, 7th Floor, 160 E. Kellogg Blvd., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, on Friday, July 30, 1~82 at 9:30 a.m. 2. Minnegasco shall facilitate in every reasonable way the investigation of the Department of Public Service. All parties shall furnish adequate responses within I0 days to all reasonable information requests from other parties. 3- The Company shall keep records of sa16s and billings such that any potential refund can be determined by computing what each customer's bill would have been during the refund period had the finally ordered rates been in effect and subtracting such amount from the amount actually paid by each customer during that period. 4. This Order snail be served on Mlnnegasco who shall mall copies of the same to all municipalities in its service area, all parties who filed petitions to intervene (timely or untimely) in its two most recent rate proceedings before the Commission (Dockets No. G-OOS/GR-77-1237 and G-OO$/GR-80-630) and to such other persons as the Deoartment of Public Service may request. 5. Public hearings shall be held at locations within the service area of the Company. 6. In addition to the individual notification as ordered ~y the Commission on June 23, 1982, the Company shall also publish notices of the preheating conference, evldentiary hearings and public hearings in the form of newspaper display ads, at least )0 days prior to the dates of their commencement, in newspapers of general circulation in towns within its service territory. The heading on the display ad, RATE INCREASE NOTICE, must be minimum 30 point bold face type. 7. As part of its affirmative rate case presentation, Minnegasco shall provide the following information regarding its diversified operations: a. The general purposes of the diversified operations and the effect on ratepayers. b. A statement of the goals of diversification including the types of non-utility activity contemplated and the expected time frames for various stages of diversification. c. Describe the corporate organization plan by which diversification will be accomplished. ~ -4- d. A statement detailing the impact of diversification on the utillty's corporate and financial structure. e. Indicate what proportion of the business will be devoted to non-utility activities, for example, a proportion of total assets, sales, revenues, or other relevant ~asure. 8. This Order shall become effective i~ediately. BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION S~RV~CE OA~: JUN 2 8 1982 (SEAL) -5- The Ame.rica Luthera Church Division for Life and Mission in the Congregation 422 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612-330-3100 June 18, 1982. Police Chief Bruce Wold Mound Police Dept. Explorer Post ¢~776 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Chief: I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the committee, volunteers, and youth of the Challenger District, which consists of handicapped Boy Scounts and Campfire Girls, for a job welt done by the Explorer Post that is sponsored by your department. Because of the combined effort of the Police Explorer Post and the training that they have received from your department, we of the planning committee and the volunteers of the Camporee felt a lot more secure and content because of the full cov'~rage we received by the patrolling and security that your Explorer Post extended on behalf of our young people. Because our young people are special they sometimes get disorientated in the woods and can get lost which could become a tragedy. Your young people, because of their vigilance and dedication, were able to avert problems and no one was lost. You and your organization are to be commended for sponsoring an Explorer Post. You have exemplified the true spirit between the police department and the community, as the young people from your post did much to create good public relations. So a heart- felt thanks on behalf of the 200 plus handicapped young people and volunteers who were at the Camporee on June 4-6, and for allowing your Explorer Post to be in attendance to help us run the Camporee. It gave alt of us a more secure feeling knowing there was someone who was watching so we could pay more attention to programming and work more cIose[y with the individuals. Hopefully, in the near future, I wilt have the opportunity of thanking you personalty for a job well done. I would appreciate your extending our thanks to all of those respon- sible letting them know that we do care and appreciate everything they did for us. God luv ya. Yours"i~-~j~ se~e and for a better ~ , ~. Robert P..G~.I2, Commissioner Challeng~ist;iot ~n0~v. pcil, Boy Scouts cc= Tom Shanight J. E. Regan 5334 Piper Road Mound, MN 55364 3une 18, 1982 Honorable Mayor City of Mound Mound, MN 55364 RE: Amendment of Section 38.64 of City Code Mr. Mayor: I would like to take this opportunity in behalf of my neighbors and myself to say "Thank You" for the manner in which you and the other members ~f the City Council addressed our concerns. With the problems that the Council must try and solve each week, it is refreshing to see that they still have time to solve the small concerns of the people they represent. Again, I say "Thank You" and also say thanks to the city staff who do all the unnoticed work. Sincerely, JER:jh 0'~ '-Video-game Ordinance. Her~ are the major provisions o~ . the, video-game ordinance ap- proved unanimously last month by the Minneapolis City Council.. Mu-' nicipal officiaLs and video-game in- dustry spokesmen generally con: sider the ordinance a"model other communities.- gl. Any'establishment with six or more video games must obtain a city license: Establishments with fewer games need city council per- missiofl to operate the games,. tn License fees [or video arcades will be .$360 per year. gl ~ideo arca(~es will be restricted to neighborhood commercial zones and to downtown. i~Vide6 arcades must be super- vised by adults, and arcade manag- ers will be responsible for control- ling litter outside their businesses. In neighborhood arcades that cater to youngsters, cigarettes may not be sold. ~Bars that allow youfigSters to play video games without parental supervision must provide separate , game rooms with separate en- trances. l:l video arcades in neighborhood~ may stay open to midnight. There will be no hour restrictions on downtown arcades. fain 'all Iocati6n$ ~'here video' games are. present, the city's child curfew laws must be obgerved. ¢. Community/Lake (8). - ,~Minneapolis Star and Tribune/T-hut., June 10, 1982 Video 'understand why city governments /". are interested in reg,41ation. "What's happened is ~hat in the last couple of years, we've had a situa- tion in our industi'y comparable.to parents,having a new child and who then let the child run without controls," said industry lobbyist Norm Pink, a vice president for Advance-Carter Co. in Minneapolis, operators of the Twin Cities, .larg- 'est amusement arcades. "The amusement 'industry is not' new. But we have new amusement out; · lets (the video games) and new customers (children and teen--. agers), and_some n&w. operators ~: lured by the prospect of quick prof- '- its.' .. ':--. ".' '.... .. ' "IX' that situation,-ther~' Can. be ' · problems,:' Pink said. i:"?-- :'~? .. ' '.::_ ..,' '...~ ",:... · ;. ~'~..".'..-¥;.'%-,..~:. ".' ,. Video games and amusement ar-' cadesare not, by themselves, dan- gerous, Pink argued. However, cit- ies. are responsible for protecting. . the health and welfare of their residents and are naturally con- cerned abo'ut any activity that'at- tracts large numbers of children 'and teen-agers, Pink said, I For that reason, reties probably are justified 'in invoking 'police-powers'-'J to control, for example, the loca- tion of arcades. "You'd be crazy to build an arcade next to a school, but therb are some newcomers to the business who' would do ..that," Pink said. :. .. Similarly,, ordinances'-controlling hours of operation and levels-of supervision also are justified, he said. The' Minneapolis ordinance orilgl- ' nally was aimed at closing a loop- . hole in state liquOr laws that per-'~ mitted youngsters to enter some bars to play video game§, Hibarger said. "Who can argue with keeping kids out of bars?" Some communities ha~;e, iearn[d .by experience that rules and regu- lations may be necessary. In Brooklyn Centei', police prob- lems wtth two now-defunct ar- cades-the Electric Emporium and Snacks & Knick Knacks, both at the Humboldt Square Shopping Center--led to passage of that city's ordinance last m6nth, said Ron Warren, director of the cii:y's planning and, inspection depart- ment. "We'had reports of gambling arid vandalism and some suspicions of illegal activity (involving custom- ~/rs) .although' nb charges were' ever brought," Warren said. "Up to then, we had' regulated, these places through our regular special- use perm. it process. But we found that was just inadequate." ' W~fren said the city carefully stud: ied "the kid problems, the hangout problems", and adopted an ordi- nance that addresses both situa- tions by requiring arcades to pro- vide full-time adult supervision and by carefully regulating.where ar- cades can be built or where video games can be installed. Although some communities have experienced problems with video arcades, much of the. r~gulation pears to be anticipatory. In Blaine, City M. anager Johnson said the tough ordinance being considered by his council was drafted by the city administration with the approval of council' mem- bers who had heard informally that some Blaine parents were Chh- cern_eft about video games. Yei: Johnson a~knowledged that there have been no significant po- lice problems at any of Blaine's three video arcades and no one has yet appeared before the council to lob.by for the tough new controls. Ne(,ertheless,.the Blaine ordinance woul'd prohibit operation of video games fr6m midnight to 7 a.m. . (except in hard lqiuor bars), would prohibit, minors .from using-' !h'e.'. games before 3 p.m. on school days;2would prohibi[ any business lrom installing, more than three .games. without first obtaining aa "amusement center license," and would prohibit video arcades near residential zones and schools. ' '. "Om: purpose' ts not.to prevent businesses from having video- games, but to make sure that.peo- ple playing the games are isolated from people doing ,other things," Johnson said. He said the city won't actively po- lice video arcades to ensure com- pliance with age and hour restric-. tions, but will respond to citizen 'complaints. ' Some cities may have one addition- al motivation for regulating video games, one industry official said-- greed· ?'C.;!tes are reading the naUonal press and theY're reading the fig-. ures put out.by some of the (video game) manufacturers, to 'boost. stock' sales, and they decide we're' making money hand ovei' fist," · Pink said. "...'.. ~ ~- Sbme cities h'av~"~:'stablished '1[-' 'censing, fees that . are .. designed to make.money for. the city, not lust cover-administratiVe and inspec- .tion costs,.he said." ' .:' _'". West St. P~.ul, .for example, Is con- .sidering an annual $.200. per ma- chine tax.that city officials admit is designed .to 'raise money. South St. Pau! already charges a-$200 tax. LicenSing fees of $100 per machi'n[ in Edin. a and (proposed) in Blaine,-. also are suspect. . ' "They want a piec~ of the action," 'charged one industry official who asked to remain anonymous. Hibarger said the Minnesota Music Operators Association, the official amuse.me.nt industry voice, will challenge the West St. Paul flax. Taxes cji that size wipe out an oper- ator's profit margin, he claimed. Hiba}-ger, Pink and other industry officials said they believ~ the vid- eo-game industry will survive the flurry of regt/latory activity. league of minnesota cities June 22, 1982 TO: FROM: RE: Mayors, Managers and Clerks Joel Jamnik, Research Assistant Proposed Discontinuance of Federal Surplus Property Program The Commissioner of Administration has proposed to discontinue the Fedecal Surplus Personal Property Distribution Program in Minnesota. This program provides for the distribution of surplus federal property to governmental and non-profit organizations at prices far below the original acquisition cost of the property. The procedure the state will follow is to have Governor Quie request that the Federal Government Service Administration close the program out. The letter may go out as early as Friday, June 25 or Monday, June 28. The federal procedure will take about six months to complete. If the program is discontinued, Minnesota will be the only sta~e without access to federal surplus property. ' The Commissioner's motive in proposing to discontinue the Minnesota program is to save the state the cost of staffing and operating the distribution center (an estimated annual cost of $60,000 over what the state receives). It is possible that the benefits to local units of government exceed the cost to the state in administering the program in which case the discontinuance of the program would actually cost Minnesota taxpayers more than continuing to operate the program. If your city has used the program in the past (or would like to use it in the future) and would like to see it continued, you should write a letter to, or call, Governor Quie stating how you have used the program and the amount of money your city has saved and ask Governor Quie to at the least delay requesting that the program be discontinued until a more thorough analysis of its impact is conducted. Facts and figures are needed and we request that cities also inform the League as to what has been purchased and how much has been saved through the use of the program. Prompt action is required if we are to convince Governor Quie to delay (or decide against) requesting the federal government to discontinue the program. JJ:rmm (~],_00 h.zz':r". :',.,:~r' r.~,~.~ii,]~r~_:, wino cecie~p street, saint paul, mir~nesota 5E51 01 [ES1 2) 222-2BE~1 FROM THE MAPLE PLAIN NEWSLETTER FOR JULY & AUGUST CONTINENTAL RATE HEARING On June 7th, local residents had their opportunity to be heard regarding the recent increase in phone rates. The turnout was much 'smaller than expected, but the people that attended had plenty to say. The elderly were well represented and complained the loudest about a necessity which is being~made so expensive as to make it totally unaffordable. The phone company and Public Utilities Commission were asked about the possibility of special senior rates to which the response was negative. The phone company was also requested to provide a breakdown of what costs make up. the extended area portion of the total cost for publication in this newsletter. That information has not yet been forwarded to the newsletter. The primary complaints were that the phone company was trying to make too much money, and that we should not have to pay any more than the Bell customers nearby for the same service. There were $cilt complaints of nagging service problems and it seems that alot of people have given up calling.every time that there is a problem. It was stressed that it is very important to call when there, is a problem, it is the only way the P.U.C. will know how good the phone company service is or isn't. To the 57 persons that came to the hearing, thank you for doing your part to help fight the rate increase. For those of you that would like to provide input to the hearing examiner, please write to the following address: Mr. Bruce Campbell, Hearing Examiner 400 Summit ~uilding Minneapolis, Mn. 55415 Your input is important, and your h~lp is needed. If you want to help the 1 1 efforts which are proceeding on our~ behalf, please send your contribution to: THE RATE CHALLENGE FUND P.O. BOX 44 MAPLE PLAIN, MN. 55359 Please help.if you feel that your rates are too high! The Rate Challenge Fund wishes to thank the following persons for ~their support in efforts to lower the phone rates: in June Edna Gabriel Maple Plain Harvey Cederholm Maple Plain Neva Mills Maple Plain Clarence Stangl Maple Plain Harvey Anderson Maple Plain Curt Carlson Maple Plain June 23, 1982 Dear Sir: I £eel that any company that takes Minnesota dollars out o£ the state should not be allowed as a public service. Continental Telephone billing is Missouri and their main o££ice is in Missouri, several workers were also brought here £rom Missouri. Why not do what other states have done, and throw the high priced, ine££ieient Missouri based telephone co. out o£ the state, and switch to a new company? Northwestern Bell has a great record and low prices. I think this is the only o stop and put an end to all this controversy. Why not advertise a petition to throw them out? think your results would be overwhelming. I Regards, 2976 Highland Blvd. Mound, Mn. 55364 cc Bruce Campbell C .A.H.R. June 25, 1982 Mr Bruce Campbell Hearing Examiner 400 Summit Bank Bldg Minneapolis Mn ~415 RE: Continental Bell Service Dear Mr Campbell, We have been Mou~d residents since November 1980 and have had the dubious honor of being serviced bY Continental Bell. We were disgusted to hear that the base rate then was almost double that of Northwesteren Bell and that we really did not have any .choice in the matter but to pay the bill. Of course, with the'rate h~kes, our bills(as all Of Mound) have not improved any and neither has the service. We have had static on our phones, bad connections and a couple of occasions where our phone went dead for no reason whatsoever. The inconvenience caused by such occasions, waiting for the business office to open in the morning, loss of tide from work etc. has been too much. ' If their service had improved any, I'd certainly endors,~ the hike but since there hasn't been any noticeable amelioration we definitely oppose the hike. Sincerely, EK1 und 5031 Woodridge Mound Mn 55364 cc; City of Mound FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 612) June 1, 1982 Newsletter File: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, lnc. Please distribute to governing body members spending when it comes down to getting re-elected. inflation? The tax exempt bond market struggles for better prices (lower interest rates), but the budget battle denies any real improvement. With the inflation rate now at 5%, tax exempt yields are probably the best deal around. However, everyone wonders if, politically, it will be possible to reduce federal Will we have enough statesmen stand against Any attempt to reduce "entitlement" expenditures is attacked as a "soak the poor" program. There is a legislative bias against "capitalists", against "rich" private interests, and against "unearned" dividend or interest income. But there must be a source of capital to finance any economy and it is much preferable to have capital in the hands of people than in government. We have had enough talk of "tax expenditures" to describe income that the government hasn't taken, as if the citizen gets a subsidy if he isn't fully taxed. DOW JONES MUNICIPALS 14 WEEKLY AVERAGE OF TWENTY 20-YEAR BONDS ~1 I I I tASTWEEK 13.21'% ~o PF~EV. WEEK 13.01% THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Monday, June 14, 1982 There is a host of "new" tax exempt financings, some of which are interesting, all of which are a reaction to a very difficult debt market and many of which simply shift risks to the issuer. Some, leasing especially, are devices to circumvent election laws and some are put forth as ways to sidestep [capital] budget problems. But when it gets down to it, conventional long-term financing, if available, is the preferred way. In any case a government about to embark on a more exotic financing should seek independent advice and should consider seeking competitive offers. We enjoyed seeing many of you at our seminars and at your convention. There is much to learn and seminars are a "must" if we aren't to become obsolete. Our seminars on short-term financing solutions were very well attended and many commented that this was some of the best time they have spent on continuing education. Some attendees suggested repeat courses and we'd be interested in hearing from you. Have a good summer. Very truly yours, cc c~ co cc co cc c~ cc cr o,o,~ o- 'Americsn GA M~ LING Y~ P 0RT Le¢on Post 398 DATE JUN~E 30, 1982 CURRENT MONTH {171o. oo YEAR TO DATE ~9305.00 GROSS: EXPENSES: SALES TAX PAYOUT AS PRIZES: ~000,00 ~!345.04 ~ 5a oo. oo PROFIT: 628.60 2560. DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: ALAN0 LIONS ALL STAR BASEBALL ~W~VTP,~:~',,~-t~' S CENTER SPORTS CENTER WESTONKA SEN. CLASS LEG. SOFTRALL ~OUR. FEES LEG. BASEBALL INS. LEG. BASEBALL UNIFOFU{S LEG. ~25.oo 25;oo 200.00 1000.00 25.00 [~,00 202.~0 ~92.61 UMPIRE FEESZ88 00 CH~.C~:I NG ACCOUNT .65 089. !0 ae$ociation of metropolitan munici'palitiee June 22, 1982 TO: Mayors, Managers and Delegates RE: ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES ANNUAL REPORT OF OPERATIONS FOR 1981-1982 MEMBERSHIP YEAR (JUNE 1981 - MAY 1982) The AMM has now completed eight years of Operations and I am pleased to submit to you the attached annual report~.for 1981-1982. The financial position of the AMM remains strong and the number of member cities stable. I would like to emphasize that the AMM Officers, Board Members, and Staff welcome your inquiries, suggestions and advice as to how we can make the AMM more' beneficial to its member cities. Your participation and input is what makes the AMM work and please do not hesitate to contact the Association office whenever we can be of assistance. Sincerely, Vern E. Peterson, Executive Director VP/cw .attachment aeeociation of metr. opo![t,.an munlclpalll'lee ANNUAL REPORT O F O P E R A T I O N S FOR FISCAL YEAR 1981-198o, Issued' June 22, 1982 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minr',esotz. 55]0] (6]2) 227-$600 ANNUAL REPORT OF OPERATIONS II. LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES The Major function of the AMM is to provide representation (lobby) for the common interests of its member cities to the Legislature, State Agencies, Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan-Commissions. The AMD! had approximately 72 legislative "action policies" for the past legislative biennium. These action policies were the culimi- nation of many, many hours of work by the AMM Policy Committees, Board of Directors and Staff. As a result of the deteriorating national economy and the continuing state financial crisis, we did suffer some major setbacks in state pass through revenues and levy limits. In spite of these setbacks, the A~IM was successful in accomplishing 45 of the 72 action policies for the past biennium. The AMM was successful with the help of its member city officials to modify a major bill on surface water management to preserve the basic authority and responsibility for surface water management at the local level. Helped to defeat severe restrictions on Tax Increment Financing and the use of Industrial Revenue Bonds; cities containing active gravel pits will share in the distribution of the tax levied by the county; the Metro Governance Study Bill which was sponsored by the AMM was passed; implementation of the Co- efficient of Dispersion penalty was delayed until 1984~ and the maximum interest rate for municipal bonds will float monthly based on the Bond Buyers' Index of 20 municipals plus one perdent and then rounded to the next highest full percent. (For a more complete' analysis of the legislative activity, see Appendex A). The AMM Policy Committees will start meeting in late July to develop policY for 1983. METROPOLITAN LEVEL ACTIVITIES At the request of the AMM, the l~etropolitan Council prepared and adopted a "Procedure for Adopting or Amending ~[etropolitan Council Regional Policy Plans". This is equivalent to the State Admin- istrative Proceedures Act (~PA) and should provide for a uniform and consistent process to be followed by the Metropolitan Council in their dealings with local government and the general public on policy matters. The Metropolitan Council did propose one major new policy plan in late 1981 relative to Surface ~fater Management and the AHM found this proposed plan 'to be completely unnacceptable. The Council is now in the process of revising its proposal and we will continue to watch this activity very carefully. The AM~i's position is that the Council's plan must be in conformance with the newly passed state law for Surface Water Management. The Me~ro~ i't.~ Council has modified its Transportation Policy Plan to allow ? -2- III. consideration of light rail transit and the metropolitan counties are forming a transit authority to acquire abandoned rail right of ways for possible future public uses. The AMM also helped defeat a proposal which would have transferred control and operation of the Mosquito Control District to the Metropolitan Council from the counties in the metropolitan area. The AMM also provided input for a number of other minor.council projects and programs including their 1982 budget and work pro§ram~ The AMM also played a role in r~commending and advising the Metropolitan Council in relationship to membership on several Metropolitan CounCil Advisory Committees including the Transportation Advisory Board, the Technical Advisory Committee, the Chairmans' Advisory Committee, the HRA Advisory Committee and the Cable Communications Task Force. SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES The AMM provides a number of support services to its member cities in addition, to the lobbying and representation activities. We coordinate and manage the Metropolitan Area Salary Survey and cont'ribut~ one third of the total funding. We also published the'1981 Elected Officials Salary Survey and coordinated and published a Municipal Fee Survey in July of 1981. The, Municipal Fee Survey'will be updated and published in odd-numbered years. The AMM continued its financial support for the on§oing coordinated labor relations manaaement effort for metropolitan area cities. The 5th. Annual Levy Limit Seminar to train elected officials and city staff members was attended by over 200 officials last July. The LMC contracted with the AMM to conduct four additional seminars in outstate Minnesota which had combined attendance of over 300 more officials. The last tasks identified in the cooperative agreement between the' AMM and Metropolitan Council with respect to identifying steps which can be taken by cities to hold down the cost of housing were completed. The fifth and last report in a series of joint.reports entitled "The Cost of Public Service for Housing" was published in June of 1981. A wrap-up conference entitled "Where will our children live" was held in September and more than 250 people were in attendance. The joint LMC/AMM Legislative Conference held in January was well attended and included more than 100 Legislators and State Agency Officials. Roger Peterson continued to represent the AMM on the 208 Water Quality Advisory Committee and Vern Peterson represented the A~d.l on the State Shade Advisory Committee and the Metropolitan Councils' Chairmans Advisory Committee. Jan Haugen, AMM Board Member served as the AMM's representative on the Metro Aggregate Reserves Advisory Committee. The A:',L,~i continued to provide the secretarial and administrative support for the ~letropolitan Area Management Association. Cindy Rodd, the Secretary and Administrative Assistant left the A.,'IM Staff and was '' replaced by Carol Williams who was formerly the City Clerk in Hugo. IV. -3- ~IEMBERSHIP, FINANCES AND BUDGET The AMM ended the year with 63 city members containing over 85% of the residents ~n the 7 county metropolitan area. Several other cities have voted to join or rejoin the AMM for 1982-83. The AMH Board and Staff will continue ongoing efforts to attract new members. Even though these are difficult times financially for cities, there is good opportunity for membership increase. After holding the line for four years, there will be a general dues increase for 1982-83. The increase in rate is not large but it is based on the 19SO population figures and so in some cities it will be more noticeable. The AMH dues are based on the LMC dues and are currently set at 48% for 1982-83. It should be noted, however, that as a percentage of LMC dues, the A~M dues rate has decreased from a high of 60% in 1975 to 48% for 1982. The decrease in AMM dues as a percentage of LMC dues is a result of growth in membership, higher than expected earnings on investments, and careful monitoring of expenses. The AMM has now completed its eighth year of operation and during that period of time the budget increases averaged 5.4% per year contrasted to the general inflation rate which averaged slightly over 10% per year during this same period. The AMM began the year with a reserve of $56,460 and ended the year with a pre-audit reserve of $53,3]0 (See Appendex B for budget and financial details). A LOOK TO TtIE FUTURE (1982-83) As we close the books on 1981-82 membership year and look ahead to 1982- 83 which will be the ninth year of operation for the A~2I, there is reason for optimism. While most signs from the state and federal level indicate that pass thru funds to cities will not be increasing as they did during the past decade, there might be opportunities for cities to regain more control of their own destinies. A number of policy makers at the state level are talking about eliminating local government mandates, giving political subdivisions more local options for raising revenue and perhaps dedicating a portion or a fixed percent- age of the sales tax receipts to local units of government. There is not overwhelming support for any of these possibilities but they are being discussed seriously by key people. Significant changes to levy limits is also a possibility. While there is immense political timidity among legislators to eliminate levy limits; there is' increasing awareness among informed legislators that levy limits may have the opposite results from those intended. What does this all mean?. There are difficult changes and challenges ahead for the cities in the metropolitan area. By working together through the A~IM, there will also be many opportunities to strengthen the abi].ity of city officials to serve their constituents more effectively.. As then President Jim Krautkremer said in concluding ~,.s report at the AMM Annual Meetinff~ on ).iay 26th. you as member city of£icials will determine the effectiveness and future o:[ the Association of ?.[etropolitan ~unicipalities in representing the interests of metropolitan area cities you are the Association! APPENDIX B Financial Statement SECTION 1 1982-83 BUDGET PERSONNEL 1980-81 1981-82 1981-82 1982-83 ACTUAL ACTUAL * BUDGET BUDGET Salaries S 78,799 $ 86,721 $ 86,900 $ 93,955 PERA 4,284 4,735 4,780 5,175 Health Insurance 2,450 2,676 3.;420 3,780 Social Security 4,357 5,103 5,200 5,800 Life Insurance 393 429 435 435 S 90,283 $ 99,664 $100,735 $109,145 OPERATIONS Conf. & Travel Rent Telephone Postage Equipment LMC. Services Office Supplies Miscellaneous Audit S 4,770 $ 4,088 4,877 5,652 1,601 1,597 1,639 1,893 94 315 3,721 4,122 1,190 1,400 576 890 475 525 $ 18,943 $ 20,482 5,800 6,100 1,900 2,'000 395 4,100 1,000 900 500 22,695 6,000 6,200 2,100 2,300 410 '4,600 1,000 1,000 575 24,185 SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES Salary Survey $ 10,106 $ 11,104 $ 11,400 $ 12,100 Labor Relations 3,000 3,270 3,270 3,170 Newsletter 1,637 1,445 2,200 2,200 committee Support 310 247 700 1,100 $ 15,053 $ 16,066 $ 17,570 $ 18,670 $124,279 $136,212 $141,000 $152,000 * Pre-Audit Figures APPENDIX B SECTION 2 STATEMENT OF INCOME A[~ FUND BALA.~CE (PRE-AUDIT) 1981-82 FISCAL YEAR Beginning Year Balance- Dues IncQme Interest Income Other Income $ 56,460 122,006 11,022 34 $189,522 Expenses Ending Year Balance Net Gain (Loss) S136,212 53,310 (3,i50) SECTION 3 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED INCOME EXPENSE A:X-D FUIX7) BALANCE 1982-83 FISCAL YEAR Beginning Year Balance- Projected Dues Income Projected Interest Income 53,300 140,000 7,000 Projected Total Funds Available Projected Expense (Budget) Projected Ending Year Balance $200,300 152,000 $48,300 0 0 0 '".O.q, ~ I I 0 0 ~- o l 0 · 0 0 · 4.; 0 ~J O J,J ~ b 0 h 0 ,.~ ~ 0 ~ k.,. 0 0 0 0 ~ I I I ~ 0 fb 0 0 cr 0 ~ 0 ,"~ C~ k.n c¢ 0 "'1 0 ¢¢ ',.-q ,4::: 0 k.-., 0 o c~ 0 I..-,. rt. I,-.,. 0 k,. 0 .'3 (n 0 f"l' :'1 0 ct, 0 o o 0 0 O 0 0 t.-,. I C) h LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE July & August~ 1982 Saturday 8- 7-82 Annual Conference for Public Officials 11:30 a.m., Execlsior docks Aboard the Lady of the Lake Saturday 8-14-82 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:30 a.m., Park Bench Eatery, Spring Park Monday 8-16-82 Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m., ~{CD Office, Wayzata Saturday 8-21-82 Executive Committee 7:30 a.m., Park Bench Eatery, Spring Park. Wednesday 8-25-82 Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors 8 p.m., Tonka Bay Village Hall 4901Manitou Road (County Road 19) 7-2f82 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION .DISTRICT AGENDA Regular Meeting, 8 p.m., Wednesday, June 23, 1982 TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL 4901Manitou Road (County Road 19), Tonka Bay 2. 3. 4. o o Call toOrder Roll Call Minutes: May 26, 1982 Treasurer's Report A. Monthly Financial Report B. Bills C. 1982 Budget Committee Reports A. LAKE USE COMMITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) 1982 Buoy Program (b) Q.W. Request - Cedar Point (c) Rule Dispensers (d) Code Amendment - Special Event Fees (e) Water Patrol Report (f) Other (2) Action Item: Q.W. Public hearing (3) Other WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE (1) Committee Report (a) P.H. Report: Windward Marine (b) 1982 Dock Licenses (c) Public Hearings June 30 (d) Code Amendment: 3.08, Sub. l(b) (e) Rental vs. 4 Boats (f) Tonka Bay Bridges (g) Lafayette Ridge Dock Removal (h) Dock Width (i) Violations (j) Other (2) Action Item: Windward Marine Variances & Lincense (3) Other Code Amendments A. Special Event Permit Fees (first reading) B. Overwide Dock Continuance (first reading) Other Business Adjournment 6-17-82 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL May 26, 1982 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was called to order by Chairman Brown at 8:05 p.m. on Wednesday, May 26, 1982 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. Members present: Richard Garwood (DeephaVen), Jerry Johnson (Excelsior), Robert Brown (Greenwood), Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Lois Johnson (Minnetonka Beach), Jo Ellen Hurr (Orono), Robert Rascop (Shorewood), Frank Hunt (Spring Park), and Robert MacNamara (Wayzata). Communities represented: Nine (9).~ Garwood Moved, Hunt Seconded that the minutes of the April 28, 1982 meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). J. Johnson Moved, Garwood Seconded that the Treasurer's report be approved and the bills paid. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee reviewed Special Event Permit'applications and made recommendations. The committee reviewed a memo concerning the establishment of fees for Special Event Permits, and, desiring to keep any fee schedule as simple as possible, requested a draft Code amendment for further review for single events at $50 and for multiple events at $100. The 1982 Lake Use Study will be scheduled, subject to weather, on the weekend of July 17 or 24 (the shoreline storage counts will be continued during the summer as in the past by the LMCD Inspector). The committee reviewed citizen calls about the placement of buoys for the 1982 boating season; complaints are to be passed on to county Public Works for corrections as needed. The committee accepted the Water Patrol's quarterly report which indicates a reduction of patrol activities during the first quarter (the reduced complaints on thefts and vandalism resulted from heavy snow cover this season). 'Lt. Peterson reported that 14 volunteer trainees had completed their first aid training and would begin patrol work; while the budget is currently under consideration by the Sheriff's Department, it is anticipated that despite cuts, all snowmobiles, boats, and men would be retained. L. Johnson Moved, Garwood Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hurr Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that the Special Event Permit application by the Women Anglers of Minnesota be approved. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). MacNamara Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the Special Event Permit application by the Antique Boat Parade be apProved as stipulated. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). CALL TO ORDER ATTENDANCE MINUTES TREASURER'S REPORT SP. EVENT PERMIT FEE LAKE USE STUDY BUOY COMPLAINTS W.P. REPORT SP. EVENT PERMITS: WOMEN ANGLERS, ANTIQ BOAT PARADE LMCD Board Minutes May 26, 1982 Page 2 WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Rascop reported that the committee reviewed the public hearing report for Driftwood Shores and made recommen- dations for that application as well as for several other dock license applications. Overwide dock review was continued to th~ next meeting. The committee discussed allowing continuation of four boats per lot with current rental stipulations, setting other requirements as to minimum number of boats allowed, requirements of different sizes or horsepower ratings, or simply to reduce the number of allowable boats to less than four; the com- mittee continued the discussion. The committee also reviewed a proposed amendment to simplify the Code by combining certain two sections under general dock licensing concerning village land use matters (3.08, Subd. l(a) and l(b) ); after review the committee did not wish to detete the specific reference to municipal Parking rules. The committee accepted notice from the Watershed District of plans to delay final consideration of the modification of the dam operating plan. The committee was advised that the Watershed's water quality report for 1981 indicated that clarity is improving in the Lake but that the lower depths are showing lower dis- solved oxygen and higher phosphorus levels. MacNamara Moved, Garwood Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hurr Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that the 1981 'and 1982 Driftwood Shores: 1. dock license application be approved for 11 slips (to meet LMCD 1/50' requirement); 2. DUA and setback variances application be approved (to continue existing parallel docks at Lots 1 and 2 in Block 3, and at Lot 3, Block 2); and 3. main dock be opened for channel access if ever needed. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hunt Moved, Garwood Seconded that the minor reconfiguration of the West Beach Apartments dock plan be approved. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hunt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the 1982 dock license applications by Lakeview Restaurant and North Shore Drive Marina be denied. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hurr Moved,'MacNamara Seconded.that the 1982 dock license renewal for Chaska Marine, Inc. be approved. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). Hurr Moved, J. Johnson Seconded that the 1982 dock license applications by Gayle's Marina Corp., Hary T. Kreslins, and Loring Acres Beach Association be approved subject to agreement with their respective cities. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). DENSITY DISCUSSION LAND USE CODE REVIEW' DAM PLAN WATER QUALITY DRIFTWOOD SHORES DOCK LICENSE & VARIANCE WEST BEACH AMENDMENT LAKEVIEW & .NO. SHORE DENIAL CHASKA MAR] LICENSE GAYLE'S, KRESLINS, LORING'ACR~ LICENSES LMCD Board Minutes May 26, 1982 Page 3 OTHER BUSINESS: The DNR's request for an .LMCD representative on its task force to consider Lake access matters was reviewed. J. Johnson Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the LMCD's representative on the DNR's task force on Lake access matters be Robert Tipton Brown, with Executive Director Frank Mixa to participate in the meetings and be the alternate representative. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). J. Johnson Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the City of Greenwood's dock license amendment application for Rhode and Bechtell be given temporary approval for one boat at each location, subject to a future public hearing and review. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (4), Abstains, (1): J. Johnson, Hurr, Rascop, and Hunt voting Nay, and Brown abstaining; Motion failed. The lease agreement with the City of Wayzata for LMCD office space in the depot is terminating the end of 1982; information on alternative locations would be appreciated. Garwood Moved, MacNamara Seconded that an additional (fourth) Slow b~oy be placed in the Carsons-St. Louis area as recommended. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). The Save theLake fund drive, is in progress; the 1982 budget will be ready for Board review at the next meeting; and outside financial aid for the Veterans Camp on Big Island may not be needed at this time since additional funding is anticipated from the state. ADJOURNMENT: Hunt Moved, Rascop Seconded at 9:35 p.m. that the meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (9), Nays (0). DNR TASK FORCE GREENWOOD AMENDMENT OFFICE LEASE BUOY PLACEMENT ADJOURNED Submitted by: Robert P. Rascop, Secretary Approved by: Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Downtown Advisory Committee Rob Chelseth, City Planner July 9, 1982 Items for the next DAC meeting The next DAC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, July 15, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. There are several important issues the Committee may wish to address at this time. Discuss plans for the July 29th public meeting. Review a proposal to use $5,000 of 1982 CDBG monies to provide architectual consulting services to down- " town building occupants proposing improvements for their building facades. Reconsider the criteria for participation in a down- town low interest loan program. At its last meeting, the DAC tentatively identified the following components for a loan program: - applications would be taken and funded on a first come/first serve basis, as long as the proposed activities met established guidelines (e.g. work on,the building exterior, consistent with City plans, etc.) - applicants would be allowed a maximum loan from the low interest loan pool of an amount equal to $300 per lineal foot of building frontage. - applicants would be required to provide matching funds from another source (including an additional loan or cash) equal to at least 25 percent of the amount of the low interest loan they receive. Looking forward to seeing you next Thursday evening. Rob Chelseth City Planner RC/ms Encl. Minutes - Mound's Downtown Advisory Committee - June 30, 7:30 p.~. City Hall Present:' Paul Pond, Mary Campbell, Frank Weiland, Ron Norstrem, Donna Quigley, Jerrs LongPre, George Stevens Also: Rob Chet.seth, Diane Arneson, Dr. Chuck Carlson, Dr. Jerry Petersen, Mike Vargo, Gene Ernst, John Weidt, and Gary Hittle The meeting commenced at approximately 8:00 p.m. Gene Ernst announced he and John would walk the committee through the brochure they had prepared. He spoke of leaving the brochures and exhibits, The ideas were designed to.tie the downtown together - with emphasis on the pedestrian, the circulation system, crosswalks, and nodes. Plantings wilt also tie the downtown together and provide shade and greenery. John Weidt talked about storefronts. The goal isa worn, hometown feeling that Mound can develop effectively and honestly. Elevations and other sketches show the artist's conception. The Branty's elevation - buildings appear disorganized. Signage and front treatment needs work. Space bleeds back through .the alleyway. Buildings'near the alleyway should be "done up', to attract attention to the alleyway. Some storefronts need very little development. A lot of buildings function as good vine supports. The 'Clinic elevation ~' a negative, vacant, and blank front of the Anderson~.Building could be developed into a strong fea- ture. It illudes to an older, historical reference. The Longpre elevation - the Longpre building may be the key building in town. Designer would put a false front on Dr. Borg's building~ A mix of commercial and residential buildings can be done better - without the commercial overpowering the re.~i- dential. The Ace Hardware elevation = these buildings are really just..billboards. They could be developed playfully. West Commerce elevation - the spaces' need spiffing up, pedestrian accesses, plantings. Key features could be Netka's and the Koenig & Robin building. Because of the T-intersection, this view sets the tone of the town. Clean up the signage. The bank could be a key feature or not. The overall theme could be called cottage community. Slides were viewed. John Weidt emphasized that each building does not need to be spectacular. "A nice pleasant background building can be nicer than a poorly done one that screams for attention" Our alleyways and pedestrian walkways are underused. Rears of buildi.ngs are aiso important. Visual clutter should be avoided in signage. The sign should 'reflect the quality of what you are tryi.ng. to show. 'Signs can be oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Windows and doors should be kept-in'good repair. Don't block windows off. Use them for display. We have more awnings than most communities. They set a lively character. Even though they require maintenance, awnings are energy savers. And visually they help tie buildings together. Entryways need to be inviting and in character. If windows are to be used for signs, limit that to no more than 15% of the window area. Paint - keep the colors simple. Enhance natural materials such as brick, wood, and plantings. Even though persons have freedom of choice with color, that person's rights end where they start to tread on the rights of others. No more than three colors per building. Don't use color to divide the building. Be conscious of what is around w en selecti.n9 a paint.color. Don't paint masonrs surfaces,. as that's-when the maintenance starts.' ' · Gene Ersnt - colored ban. ners can create excitement and help brong people downtqwn. Parking is mQre inviting when plantings are included. Tree grates can be used'"even' with narrow side'walks'[.see'5Ot'h & France area).' In .Wayzata., people are demanding more benches. Brick, Baumanite, and lockstone add inter- est to sidewalks. Pedestrian linkage to Lo~t Lake 'i's something to keep in mind. Bollard's and cobblestone encourage pedestrian flow and keep cars out. Don't forget flowers. Their color adds a tremendous sparkle.~ Daytilies and tulips are effective. Larger size planters-look more permanent than' smaller ones' Recommend as first priority for visual impact the north side of County 15. Trees would soften this parking lot'.' 'Flavor and fun can be added wi.th other plantings. John wrapped up presentation of the design concepts. These sketches do not show exactly what you should do. If'the committee wants a cohesive development, some kind of review process is needed. That is necessary to accomplish the goals. Pick key elements to develop. Leave the rest. The results could be excellent. They ·could also be worse than what we already have. ~ Gene hopes they have gotten the committee excited. Many things can happen here and the designers h'ope to be further 'involved: Paul Pond agreed .the committee "certainly got our money's worth':. You did..a helluva job. Now where do we go. from here'?" Designers responded.that instead of selling apples or T-shirts, they sell hours. They would be happy to sell more 5ours to Mound.area merchants, and landowners. Weidt added there is a'tremendous saving in group planning vs. merchants designing one by one by one. Weidt advised the committee to focus the money on l~he key points -'where it will show. "otherwise, it's a whitewash". Mike Vargo'advised the DAC to make apublic'presentation and to put·the displays in a public place,·such as the library. Dr. Carlson thinks the plans have application. There have to be practical direc- tions in the financing. He thinks the parking and landscaping look fabulous,. but will 'be harder to sell. He truly believes the concepts are cost-effective'.' and conservative.- "' ' Ernst Says it is important to get the enthusiasm going - to make a strong statement. Let's go for it'. Put the emphasis on ideas',"not pretty pictures. Campbell says the consumers want to see the trees, Ernst says when the presentation is made to a mixed group, we will really be able to get the temperature. He says the "dog and pony show mould be done for $1507 Longpre suggested the Chamber could· sponsor it and hold it in the lecture hall of the Westonka Community Center. Six brochures were delivered as per contract, pp.58 plus cover and fronti'~piece DAC/3 Norstrem th.inks ~e need more copies. We need copi. es for si§Bi.n9 out'at the. library and at'CitS Ball. They could be reproduced"at Alb'ensons.' Perhaps'we need more than one public meeting with the designers. Pond recommends we try one public meeti.n9 and see what happens. Ernst asked whether there was any way to have an open air presentation. He added that labor and material costs for streetscaping are currently down by as much as 20%:. VargQ added that the committee should reach out to'contractors, carpenters, etc. for'attendance at'the Public-meeting: Tentative date for the public meeting was set for Wednesday, July 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting should be advertised in local newspapers. Meeting should be stimulating as opposed to technical. Vargo pondered connection of public meeting and Incredible Festival foot traffic. Could be have a display or advertisement, downtown? Campbell prefers meeting be indoors for purpose of attention, fewer distractions. ,Chelseth suggested it could start indoors and move outdoors. Norstrem moved and Campbell seconded a resolution for the Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce to sponsor the meeting and to be.responsible for~it. resolution was approved by unanimous'voice vote. The Nuserymen could be solicited through Ernst and We.idt for some sort of.publicity or outdoor display of how the streets could look with trees and plantings. Pete Ward has resigned from the committee, Recommend Mike Vargo take hi,~ place. Fifty copies of the booklet are authorized for reproduction. Rob Chelseth will take 'care of that. Vargo recommended that slide reproductions also be purchased from Ernst & Weidt. The elevations (which members like so well) belong to the designers. The discussion moved to the financing, issues. Two pots of money were discussed- the $40,000 C.D.B.G. fund for'use as leverage to get money flowing into these projects - and the $5000 the City has set aside for technical services in · design work. Committee. could use as criteria for awarding cheaper money a) bringing in extra money at market rate, and b) staying within the program guidelines. First coni6, first served with. these fun~s. Rob Chelseth advi.sed th'at equal 'opportunity for the funds be ensured' by adequate'publicity~ Norstrem spoke of using front footage as a guideline. Stevens addressed the problem of landlord vs. tenant. Norstrem thought $300 /front foot might be high. Use of funds must be approved. Design leverage'up front can be accomplished by tying into initial hours (5 hours?) to Weidt & Ernst. An hour was estimated as costing $50 - 75. The five hours might buy a site visit, concept sketch, and cost estimate. Clients would be free to choose other architect'after that on their own. /~,~Sond reaffirmed that the financing will be the key to controlling this who'le plan. The meetJn§ was' adjourned at 11:30' p.m. The next meetin§ w~11 be-Thursday, duly 15th at 7.:30 p.m. Diane Arneson, Secretary . 0 WESTONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT 5600 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 PHONE: 472-1600 July 7, 1982 277 SUPERINTENDENT Dale E. Fisher ASST. SUPT. BUDGET & PLANNING Donald Brandenburg ASST. SUPT. INSTRUCTION & PERSONNEL Erwin F. Stevenson ACCOUNTING Sandra Schmidt COMMUNICATIONS Ann Bergman DEAR FRIEND! You are invited to attend three important board functions on Monday, July 12, at 7:00 p.m. in the district lecture hall in the Westonka Community Center in downtown Mound. The first is a hearing on the 1982 discretionary levy which is expected to supply an important part of school funding in 1985. About a half hour later, the school board will meet with its Community Services Council to hold an annual review of the coordination of community services of all kinds. At about 8:00 p.m., the school board will hold its organizational meeting in which officers will 'be elected, with groundwork laid for Subsequent actions through the year, and a minimum amount of formal business will be enacted.' In the recent school board election, Richard Haefele and Rodney Pitsch won their first three-year terms, and membership now 'stands as COMMUNITY SERVICES follows: Donald Uh'ick FOOD SERVICES Florence Peterson SPECIAL SERVICES Larry Litman Patricia Chelberg William Goblirsch Richard Haefele Gary Mayer Harold Pellett Rodney Pitsch Peg Tuttle The school support. Please welcome you! board invites your comments and appreciates feel free to come to our organizational meeting. your ,We G K M/bd TREE US: Flor.th / ain · Hutchinson,/Y innesota 55550 July 6, 1982 To: All Burlington Northern Shippers/Users RE: July 20 Meeting with Burlington Northern Representative Dear Burlington Northern Shippers, There will be a meeting of all users of the Burlington Northern Railroad at 2:00 p~.M., Tuesday, July 20 at the Central District Service Building, Boar . Perhaps you are now aware that the Burlington Northern line from Wayzata to Hutchinson has recently been reclassified from a class two (2) line to a class five (5) line. This is the first major success of the BN Task Force because by the reclassification, BN is saying that we are no longer under consideration for abandonment, that we are a viable line, and that upgrading can commence. However, exactly what "upgrading" means is still uncertain and many questions are unanswered. Mr. Dennis McLeod from the BN will be with us on the--20th to bring . the shippers up to date on their recent 'de~isi6n-. ....... - Please be present at this meeting to get the information you need and show BN that we are serious about our need for rail service in Hutchinson. ' Sincere15%, / C~. Coston, EVP Hutchinson Area Chamber of Commerce July 9, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: SURFSIDE Enclosed is the file on the Surfside and what has transpired since the Council Meeting June 28th. Please understand that as of this date all these actions are of no consequence because Curt has just advised me that at the hearing today before Judge Lord, the Judge refused to issue a continuance of the original restraining order, refused to force the City to issue a new license, and denied all requests for relief by the Surfside. Mr. Essig has now request~time on the Agenda this Tuesday night. WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON Mx. Jon Elam Page 2 July 1, 1982 court order. This would leave Surfside out of business on the 4th of July weekend. In an attempt to work with and to help the Surf- side, I proposed that if we could enter into a stipulation, we could probably keep them open as long as they would not commence any action against the city. I further stated that since the court had told him he was going to lose on his motion, I thought I was being very generous and that I would have to sell this idea to the city council. I called Fran and told her what we had in mind and the format of the stipulation was in effect worked out with the judge, his clerk, Mr. McNamara and myself. We were proposing that under a different section of the bankruptcy code the Surfside would have until August 9 to pay its taxes and comply with all of the provisions of the city's ordinance and state statute. In return for. this the city was to be excused from any f~ture litigation against the council members individ- ua%ly, the city attorney and/or the city itself. The afternoon was spent trying to get input from the various council members who could be contacted and from your office. We were able to ~eventually reach thre~ of the councilmen and in effect they indicated that if we were recommending 'this type~ of a stipulation and if it meant that the taxes were going to be Paid, they would not object to my signing such a stipulation as city attorney. Mr. Polsten came to my office to review the stipulation and went to the court with me as he had reservations about this method of proceeding. When we got to the court at 4 o'clock I thought the matter had been resolved, but Mr. McNamara and Mr. Essig refused to change the stipulation and in effect wanted to leave open the same questions that we had spent the entire day with the court deciding, i.e., that the court had no such authority and that the automatic stay did not affect this case. As a result of this, the judge then ruled from the bench that the plaintiff's motion for an order directing the city to reissue the debtor's liquor license was denied and also his request for costs, expenses and attorney's fees. McNamara already had his appeal prepared and that was also signed and he went off to the federal district court to try to find a judge to issue an order which would allow the Surfside to continue selling liquor after June 30. Copies of the court's order and the appeal notice are enclosed. I am also sending a copy of the papers served on me by Mr. McNamara on the morning of June 30. UNITED STATES BANKR~ COURT FOR THE DIS In re: Surfside, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation, Plaintiff, . ~V 4-82 335. Vo City Council, Mound, MN, and each Council msmber individually, Defendants, arising in or related to the bankruptcy case of: Surfside, Inc., a ~ii~nesota corporation, Debtor. BKY 4-82-1029 APPEAL AND NOTICE OF EXP~-~DITED APPEAL TO: Defendants above-named through their attorney, ~is A. Pearson, Esq., 1100 First Bank Place West, Minneapolis, ~N 55402. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the debtor herein appeals the Order of the Honorable Hartley Nordin dated June 30, 1982, denying debtor's request for an Order ccr~pelling the City of Mound to ~iately reissue the liquor license of the debtor, and debtor asks for an expedited hearing of such appeal. Dated: June 30, 1982 Filed with the undersigned Bankruptcy Judge this 30th day of June, 1982. Hartley Norden, Bank~n~ptcy Judge ~ichael J~/McN~ar~ Attorney for Debtor/Plaintiff ~t109 Plymouth Building 12 South 6th Street ~inneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333-7256 at Filed MICHAEL J. MCNAMARA M109 PLYMOUTH BUILDING 12 SOUTH 6TH STREET MINNEA.I~LIS, MINNF_.SOTA 55402 TELEPHONE: (612) 333.7256 June 29, 1982 Curtis A. Pearson, Esq., or James D. Larson, Esq. 1100 First Bank Place West Hinneapolis, MN 55402 Robert J. Kressel, Esq. Assistant U.S. Trustee 550 United States Courthouse 110 South 4th Street Minneapolis, ~.~ 55401 Re: Surfside, Inc., BKY Case No. 4-82-1029 Adversary Complaint No. ~_~_~7 Dear Sirs: Enclosed herewith and served upon you find Notice of Hotion and Motion, Adversary Complaint, Affidavit, Memorandum of Points and Auth- orities, and proposed Order in the above referenced case. Sincerely, Michael~. McNamara MJM: ka Encl. CC: Clerk of Bankruptcy Court UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re: Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Plaintiff, v. City Council, Mound, MN, and each Council member individually, Defendants. Adversary Complaint No. Arising in or related to the bankruptcy case of: Bankruptcy Case No. 4-82-1029 Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Debtor. NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR EXPEDITED HEARING TO: THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL AND EACH COUNCIL MEMBER INDIVID- UALLY, AND TO THEIR ATTORNEY, CURTIS A. PEARSON, 1100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 30th day of June, 1982, at 10:00 in the forenoon, in Courtroom No. 2 of the United States Bankruptcy Court, 600 Galaxy Building, 330 South 2nd Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55401, before the Honorable Hartley Nordin, debtor, by and through its attorney, will move the Court fo~ an expedited hearing in the attached Complaint for an injunct- ion. MOTION The undersigned, attorney for the debtor herein, will move the Court at the date and time aforementioned for expedited re- lief in the above-captioned case on the ground that delay will result in the failure of the debtor's reorganization under Chap- er 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. This motion is brought pursuant to 11 U.S.C.§§105, and UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re: Surfside, Inc., a blinnesota corporation, Plaintiff, V. City Council, Mound, MN, and each Council member 1ndividually, Defendants. Arising in or related to the bankruptcy case of: Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Debtor. Adversary Complaint No. Bankruptcy C~se No. 4-82-1029 filing of the debtor herein under Title 11, Chapter 11, U.S.C., and pursuant to 11 U.S.C.Sections 105 and 362; and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1473. Facts 2. The debtor filed a petition for financial reorganization under Title 11, Chapter 11, U.S.C. on June 9, 1972. 3. At the time of filing, the debtor owed unpaid property taxes in the approximate amount of $28,000.00 COMPLAINT TO ISSUE LIQUOR LICENSE Jurisdiction The jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to the COUNT I 6. By demanding that the debtor cure its delinquent property taxes before a liquor license is re-issued to it, the City of Mound, by. and through its City Council, is in violation of the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. Section 362, by its term "Applicable to all entities." COUNT II 7. By demanding that the debtor cure its delinquent property taxes before a liquor license is re-issued to it, the City of Mound, by and through its City Council, is purposefully attempting to defeat the policies and purposes of the United States Bankruptcy Code (1978). COUNT III 8. By demanding that the debtor cure its delinqu6nt property taxes befOre a liquor license is re-issued to it, the City of Mound, by and through its City Council is willfully and knowingly jeopardizing the ability of the debtor to successfully reorganize. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the debtor seeks for an Order of this Court requiring that' 1. The City of Mound, by and through its City Council, immediately re-issue the debtor's liquor license; 2. Refrain from any and all attempts to collect the afore- mentioned unpaid property taxes from the debtor except and unless, through proper bankruptcy code procedure; 3. For the costs and expenses incurred in the bringing of this Adversary Complaint, in the reasonable amount of six hundred and s~xty dollars ($660.00). UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MIN~ESOTA In re: Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Plaintiff, v. City Council, Mound, ~, and each Council member individually, Defendants. Adversary Complaint No. Arising in or related to the bankruptcy case of: Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Debtor. Bankruptcy Case No. 4-82-1029 AFFIDAVIT OF JOEL R. ESSIG Joel R. Essig, being duly sworn, on oath states: 1. That he is the President of the debtor herein, Surfside, Inc. 2. That there are due and owing on the debtor's premises prop- erty taxes in the approximate amount of $28,000.00. 3. That because of said unpaid property tax amount the City Council of Mound, defendant herein, and each of the individual council members, have refused to re-issue a liquor license to the debtor, pursuant to a ~ound City Ordinance (copy attached). 4. That various attempts at obtaining said liquor license through out-of-court channels have been made, including ap- pearances at City Council meetings by affiant and the debtor's attorney at which affiant and the debtor's attorney unsuc- cessfully argued that the Council was violating the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C.§362 by refusing to re-issue said license. 5. That the last such appearance before the City Council was made the evening of June 28, 1982. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re: Surf side, Inc., a 'Minnesota corporation, Plaintiff, V o City Council, Mound, MN, and each Council member individually, Defendants. Arising in or related to the bankruptcy case of: Surfside, Inc., a Minnesota. corporation, Debtor. Adversary Complaint No. Bankruptcy Case No. 4-82-1029 MEMORANDUbl OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES Facts The debtor filed a petition for financial reoganization under Title 11, Chapter 11, U.S.C. on June 9, 1982. At the time of filing, the debtor owed unpaid property taxes in the approximate amount of $28,000.00. According to Mound City Ordinance Chapter 11, Subdivision 1~, a liquor license shall not be renewed to an establishment having delinquent taxes, inter alia (copy attached). Joel R. Essig, President of the debtor, had a number of conver- sations with various city council members before and after the debtor's petition was filed in which the debtor's delinquent property t::::es were discussed. Section. 1'05. POWER OF COURT (a) The bankruptcy court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. 11 U.S.C. Section 362 (in pertinent part)' Section. 362 AUTOMATIC STAY. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a petition filed under section 301, 302, or 303 of this title operates as a stay, a~plicable to all entities, of (6) any act to collect, assess, or recover claim against the debtor that arose before the commencement of the case under this title (emphasis added); 28 U.S.C. Section 1473 (in pertinent part): 28U.S.C. Section 1473 VENUE OF PROCEEDINGS ARISING UNDER OR RELATED TO CASES UNDER TITLE 11. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (d) of this section, a proceeding arising in or related to a case under title 11 may be commenced in the bankruptcy court in which such case is pending. Additionally, by the definition of "creditor" contained at ll U.S.C. Section 106 (c)(1), it can be seen that the City of blound, as a governmental unit seeking the payment of a debt owed it by the debtor, falls within the scope of the Bankruptcy Code' 11U.S.C. Section 106(c)(1) (in pertinent part): (c) Except as provided in subsections (a) and (b) of this section and notwithstanding any assertion of sovereign immunity -- (1) a provision of this title that contains "creditor", "entity", or "governmental unit" applies to governmental units; and The City of Mound apparently relies on the police and regulatory ~ower exception of 11 U.S.C. Section 362 (b)(4) to claim that the Court lacks jurisdiction in this case, which section reads as follows: 11 U.S.C. Section 362(a) prohibits the City o£ ~ound from ~efusing to renew the Debtor's liquor license. By requiring the immediate payment by the debtor of delinquent p~-operty taxes before the debtor's liquor license will be renewed, ~he City of Mound, by and through its City Council, is violating the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. Section 362(a) "applicable .to all entities," by seeking to "collect, assess, or recover a claim against the debtor that arose before the commencement of the case..." In addition, if the City of Mound were successful in such a calculated tactic, it would have the practical effect of resulting in a preferential transfer under 11 U.S.C. Section 547, in an..improper postpetition transaction under 11 U.S.C. Section 549, and in an imporper set-off under 11 U.S.C. Section 553. Ill. 11 U.S.C. Section 525 Prohibits the City of Mound from refusing to renew the debtor's liquor license. By refusing to renew the debtor's liquor license unless the delinquent property taxes are paid, the City of Mound is als'o in violation of 11 U.S.C. Section 525, which (with certain exceptions not applic- :~b]e here) requires that a governmental unit "may not...refuse to review a license...to...a person that is...a debtor under this title...(emphasis added) (From 11 U.S.C. Section 101(30),."person" i~cludes a corporation). An)' argument by the City that it is denying the liquor license because of unpaid property taxes and not because Surfside is in bankruptcy misreads the clear holding of Perez v. Campbell, 402 U.S. 057(197), upon which this section is based, and the clear language ~.>£ the statute, which includes by its terms debtors which are currently to do so would defeat the purpose of Chapter 11 by preventing a successful reorganization, and where an injunction would preserve the going-concern value of the debtor's business. Re Traders Compress Co., 581 F. Supp. 789 (D.C. Okla., i975). The decision demonstrate the scope and width of Section 10S, ~llowing the Court, fox' example, to enjoin actions which would ~n'~erfere with its jurisdiction, or which would disturb the status quo of the bankruptcy proceeding, in either case resulting in the frustration of the purposes and policies of the bankruptcy laws. In the instant case, the exercise of the Court's authority and power to order the City of Mound tO renew the debtor's liquor license would be both "necessary" and "appropriate", as it would serve to preserve the on-going concern value of the debtor's business and to p~-event the City of Mo-und from interferring in the proper administration of the .debtor's financial reorganization. Such an order would be in keeping with the intention of the section to "form the basis' for an e.xtensive exercise of judicial powers during the course of administra- tion of a case under Title 11 (Collier's on Bankruptcy, Section 105.02) Conclusion For each and all of the foregoing reasons, this court should order that the City of Mound, by and through its City Council, inu~',ediately renew the debtor's liquor license. June 29, 1982 Dated: Michael J~. McNamara Attorney for Debtor M 109 Plymouth Bldg. 12 So. 6th St. Hpls., MN S5402 (612) 335-72S6 (7) the refusal of the Council to re-issue the debtor's liquor license unless such taxes are paid; 2. The City of Mound, by and through its City Council, will undermine the purposes and policies of financial reorganiza- tion under the United States Bankruptcy Code, and effective- ly eliminate the debtor's chances for a successful reorgan- ization should it be allowed to withhold the debtor's liquor license for unpaid property taxes; 3. There is no threat to the public health or safety in the re-issuance to the debtor of its liquor license. . Upon the foregoing findings, it is hereby: ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: The City of Mound, by and through its City Council, shall re-issue the debtor's liquor license, effective immediately; The City of Mound shall refrain from any and all attempts to collect property taxes owed by the debtor e~cept and unless by proper bankruptcy code procedures ; The City of Mound shall pay to the debtor's attorney the sum of six hundred and sixty dollars ($660.00) as and for reasonable attorney fees and expenses incurred in ~he preparation and argument of the Adversary Complaint and accompanying Motion for expedited relief in this case. Hartley Nordin United States Bankruptcy Court Judge -2- WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON Page 2 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager ~July 6, 1982 The third and most preplexing is a letter from Mr. Michael McNamara which came postage due and which is enclosed and is dated July 1, 1982. As I indicated to you on the phone, Mr. McNamara misquotes me when he says that I indicated to him that there would not be a challenge to a court order compelling Mound to reissue the liquor license. I told both he and Judge Nordin that I would not have appeared if he hadn't asked for attorneys fees because it was the position of the City that if the Surfside was entitled to a stay and the Court ordered the reissuance of the license, the Council would not object. I also told him we would vigorously participate so long as he kept demanding attorneys fees and costs, and you will note in his most recent communication that he is pursuing that avenue because "the correctness of our position convinces me that I must seek fees and expenses should ~e go back 'to court." On the preliminary instruction from you that the 'Council is not going to meet and change the ordinance nor is it going to voluntarily issue the license unless the taxes are paid, and in anticipation of appearing before Judge Lord, Jim and I have talked it over and think we should have an affidavit from you which we could transmit to the Court. I have prepared a suggested affidavit and ask yOu to review it and if it is in order, complete it before a Notary Public as it is a sworn statement and then get it to us as soon as possible. If later in the day I hear from you on the other aspects of this case, I will then draft a letter to Judge Lord setting forth the City's position. Ve/~ truly~y~o~, ~~ Curtis A. Pearson, City Attorney CAP:ih Enclosures UNITED STATES DI~Iq~ICT DISTRICT OF FOURTH DIVI$IO~ IN T~E MATTER OF: SU~FSIDE, INC. BKY No. 4-82-1029 You are hereby notified that in the ab~te-entitled action, on the 30th day of June · 19 82, we filed the following: TRANSMITTAL OF RECORD ON APPEAL fr~m Order of Judge Hartley Nordin filed June 30, 1982. and regarding denying debtor's request for an order compelling, t~e City of Mound'to immediately ~dissue the liquor license of debtor'. The above appeal has been assigned to Judge. Miles W. Lord under Civil No. &-82-912 , Eleanore Piwoni Counsel should contact at 725-2022 for further lnformatio~ concerning this appeal. ~ Pursuant to 'Bankruptcy Rule 807, briefing schedule is as follow~: Appellant to serve and file ~rief within 15 dsys after entry of appeal on the docket. Appellee to serve and file brief within 15 days after serv/ce of appellant's brief. Appellant may serve and file reply brief within five days after service of brief of appellee. ROBERT E. HESS, CLERK By: Deputy Clerk cc: Michael ~. HcNamara M109 Plymouth Bldg. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Curtis A. Pearson & JaRs D. Larson 1100 First Bank Place W. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Bankruptcy Court 600 Galaxy Bldg. Minneapolis, MN 55401 DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA FOURTH'DIVISION Civil No. 4-82-912 SURFSIDE, INC., Plaintiff, CITY COUNCIL, MOUND, MINNESOTA, Defendant. T~PORARY RESTRAINING 'ORDER An expedited hearing for relief was duly held this day on the motion of Surfside, Inc., for an Order compelling ~he City of Mound, Minnesota, to immediat, ely reissue the liquor license of the debtor herein notwithstanding debtor's obligation for unpaid property taxes. Debtor's motion'for expedited hearing was granted. Argument of debtor's counsel was heard. Now, based upon said arguments and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY O~ERED debtor's motion for a Temporary Restraining Order barring. the City of Mound, Minnesota, from failing to reissue debtor's liquor license is granted for a period of ten days from the date of this Order, with such temporary restraining order becoming a pe~anent injunction is no appeal is made by the City _ of Mound, Minnesota, to this order. ~£~;~-~-- ~' ~~/~ ~t/~'~/'~'~"/~/~/'~ -/:"'/" Dared: June 30, 1982. ~I~.E~'~,. LORD, Chie~ Judg~ United States District Court A true copy/t~__~ sheets_ Certifled~lg_~_~_ ROBERT E. t~SS, CLERK,. Deputy Robert ~. Hess, Clez~K DeputY STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HF. NNEPIN) AFFIDAVIT OF JON ELAM, CITY MANAGER, CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA I, Jon Elam, being first duly sworn, state on oath as follows: 1. I am the City Manager of the City of Mound, Minnesota, a municipal corporation. 2. Surfside, Inc. has had an on-sale license to dispense intoxicating liquor and said license ran from July 1, 1981, to June 30, 1982. 3. That in mid-June, 1982, Mr. Joel R. Essig, President of Surfside, Inc., presented an application for a renewal of the liquor license to commence on July 1, 1982. That the city staff reviewed said application and found that it had not been adequately filled out and there were numerous documents and information which were missing and that on June 22, 1982, the Police Department so informed your affiant and the applicant, Surfside, Inc. 4. That on June 2~, 1982, the City Council considered a request from Surfside, Inc., that the City's liquor licensing ordinance be amended and that Chapter 11, Subd~ 11, was considered by the City Council and the Council declined to amend the ordinance which would excuse the non-payment of real estate taxes. 5. That your affiant further discussed with the City Council and the City Attorney Minn. Stats. Sec. 340.12 which requires that the state mandated bond be conditioned requirihg the licensee "to pay to the municipality when due all taxes, license fees, penalties, and bther charges provided by law." 6. That your affiant indicated to the City Council at its meeting on June 22 that there was not a proper application before the Council for consideration because of the aforestated reasons and that the Council continued the City Council meeting from June 22, 1982, to June 28, 1982, which was a special Council meeting called for the express purpose of considering the issuance of a license and which would have given the applicant, Surfside, Inc., an additional six days to get its application in proper order and to have all information and documentation to the City staff. 7. That at the special meeting on June 28, 1982, the City did not have a proper application before it and the Council concluded that there was nothing to discuss. The Mound City Council took no action to deny or grant a license, but rather took the position that the applicant was required to comply with all City ordinances and state statutes and that because Surfside, Inc. had filed under Chapter 11 of the Bankmuptcy Act, it did not bestow upon the licensee any special privileges. Your affiant wishes to stress to the United States District Court that the Mound City Council did not have before it a proper application for a renewal of the liquor license and that it has never moved to revoke the license which ran from July 1, 1981, to June 30, 1982. Further your affiant saith not except that he makes this Affidavit to the Honorable Miles Lord, of the United States District Court, to explain the City's action to date and to further indicate to the July 12, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: CI'TY MANAGER Enclosed is a copy of a letter that Butch Essig is sending out to everyone through his employees. At this point, I would expect a large turnout of people (and petitions) accusing the City O~ shutting the Surfside down. Thus in the end it seems we are back where we started. Only we spent better than $1,000 to defend the City Ordinance and a Minnesota Statute. Somehow the issues do get confused although they are, it seems to me: 1. The Surfside voluntarily filed for Bankruptcy. 2. He chose not to pay his property taxes; he knew this was a violation of the City Code because he called me to see if.the City would change it. The City didn't. 3. If he would bring his taxes up-to-date, he would get his li'cense almost instantly. It is that simple. 4. We lose, by him not having a license as well, to the tune of $4,000 plus the recent legal costs we have had to incur.. These seem to me to be important also. In the end, expect a somewhat messy affair. Other materials from Curt, are also enclosed for the meeting'. JE:fc Madna · Dinner Menu · Banquet Facilities July 9, 1982 Dear Friend, Because of the action or inaction of the Mound Oity Council~ our liquor license will expire at midnight, Saturday, July 10, 1982. The problem stems from our inability to pay p~operty taxes required by Mound City Ordinance. The reasons for our inability to pay these taxes are as follows: 1) A 100% assessment on the new city parking lot. This '- as"kes'~'ment ($50,000) doubled our annual taxes from $9,000 to $18,000 annually_. .. 2) The 1981 sun~ner boating season was one of the poorest boating' seasons on record. It rained 17 consecutive sundays, 22 Of 50 days in June, 14 consecutive days in July, and 13 consecutive days in August. 5) The road 'const'ruction on county road 110 from Surfside. to Three Points Boulevard which made travel impossible from July 1 until Novembe'~ 5. 4) The winter of 1982. Remember? The City Council has scheduled another meeting on Tuesday, July 13th and we are very hopeful that the matter can be resolved at that time. If you are a friend of Surfside, your attendance may be helpful. Since we are last on the agenda, attendance prior to 9:50 PM would not be necessary. Sincerely, Joel R. Essig, President SURFSIDE IHt. ~t?." ?c .... e'ce ¢ \ WURST (3£RALD T. CARROLL C. URTIS A. P£ARSON THOHAS F. UNDERWOOD ALBERT FAU LCON £R JAHES ~).LAR$ON LAW OFFICES WURST, CARROLL & PEARSON I100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55~0:~ July 9, 1982 TELEPHONE (61~) 33~,-89~1 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Surfside, Inc. vs. City of Mound and each Councilmember IndividUally Dear Jon: The case of Surfside, Inc. vs. the City of Mound has be~n con- cluded before Judge'Miles Lord this morning, July 9, 1982. The plaintiff in this action filed a 17 page motion, proposed order and memorandum with us and the court about a half hour before we were scheduled to appear. I have not read it all and I don't think the court read any of it. We appeared for argument and the judge indicated immediately to Mr. McNamara, representing Surfside, Inc. that he did not believe that he had'the power to continue this matter any further or to order the City Council to take legislative action. He in effect adopted the findings of Judge Nordin in his Memorandum of Denial on June 30, 1982. The request for relief against the City has been denied in all respects and the license will terminate at 12 o'clock midnight on July 10, 1982. I have informed Fran Clark of this by telephone and she will direct the police department to notify the licensee that the sale of all intoxicating and non-intoxicating liquor, etc. shall cease at midnight on Saturday. The only possible thing which could happen would be for the plaintiff to appeal the matter to the Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis. I coubt very much that this will. happen. I am sending a copy of all the materials filed by the applicant to you but I am not sending copies to the councilmen. If any of them desire to review or read the arguments presented to the court by Surfside the materials will be in your possession. WURST. CARROLL & PE:ARSON Mr. Jon Elam Page 2 July 9, 1982 There is one other.thing that I should stress in conclusi.on. There have been indications that the Mound City Council and/or the Mound City Manager and City Attorney have tried to 'get' Surfside and that the City has not been cooperative. I believe this is totally untrue and have stressed to both the Bankruptcy Court and the Federal District Court that the City is not trying to make life difficult for Surfside, Inc, but essentially is in the same position as the court and that is that it can not deviate from its own code and state statute and does not have the power to in effect waive certain required items or give a preference to one licensee. During the course of the proceedings we attempted to indicate this to counsel for Surfside and on June 30 even proposed a method by which they could have resolved their problems, supposing that they got their taxes paid by August 9. Surfside indicated that they fe~t they were right on the law and therefore they would not submit to what we con- sidered to be reasonable conditions, and as a result they have lost everything as far as their appeal to the courts. City Attorney CAP: ms Enclosure cc.. Mayor and Councilmen