Loading...
83-11-15 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1983 1. Approve Minutes of November 1, 1983, Regular Meeting Pg. 2667-2672 PUBLIC HEkRING; To consider construction of a tennis court, Outlot A, The Bluffs. Pg. 2673-2689 PUBLIC HEA~ING; To consider reallocating $1,250 of 1983 CDBG'funds for the purpose of installing a handicapped access at the Pond Ice Arena. Pg. 2690-2691 Continuation of PUBLIC HEARING from October 18, 1983, for the issuance of "On & Off Sale Beer" Licenses to Roger & Gail Rag,r, dba. Three Points Tavern. Pg. 2692-2712 ~UBLIC..HEA~ING; On proposed zoning change amending restaurant classifications, application to B-l, B-2 & B-3 Zoning Districts and permitting residential uses within the B-3 Zoning District. Pg. 2713-2720 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Delinquent Utility Bills for November. Pg. 2721 Continuation from November 1, 1983, regarding a request for an 8 foot front yard variance. CASE ~83-258: Schlee Builders, Lots in Woodcrest 3rd Addition. Pg. 2722-2741 PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS CASE #83-260 - Mike Smith (Smith Hearing & Air Conditioning), 5448 Shoreline Blvd., W. 242 5/10 ft. of Lot 36, Auditor's Sub. #170 RE: Sign Variance Pg. 2742-2745 CAS.E #83-261 - Thomas Grudnowski, 5259 Bartlett Blvd., NWly 85 feet of Lot 32, Auditor's Sub. 170. RE: Recognize existing nonconforming accessory buildings. Pg. 2746-2751 10. CASE #83-262 - Thomas Gl, re, 1703 Jones Lane, Lot 1, Block 1, Replat of Harrison Shores RE: Front Yard Variance. Pg. 27 52-27 57 11. CASE #83-263 - Allan Moran, 6155 Evergreen Road, Govt. Lot 3, Unplatted 23-117-24 RE: 10 Foot Variance Pg. 2758-2762 Page 2665 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 20. 21. 22. 'A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present. Presentation by the City of Mound's representative to the West Hennepin H~nan Services Planning Board - Nancy ~ Request to defer special assessments. Request for Annual Maintenance Allotment. Approval to advertise for bids for One (1) Four Wheel Articu- lated, Rubber Tired Front End Loader (included in 1984 Budget). Request to purchase City owned lots. Lots 29, BO & 31, Block 1 Arden. Amendment to Sewer Ordinance. Payment Request from Webco Tank Co. for 1983 Island Park Water Tower - $5,044.50. Approval of 1983 year-end fund transfers. a. General Fund to Area Fire Fund - $62,411. b. Liquor Fund to General Fund - $50,000. c. Liquor Fund to 1983 Seal Coat Program - $57,408.53. Payment of Bills. INFORMATION/MIS CELLANEOUS LMCD Meeting Schedule - November-December 1983. Chamber of Commerce Newsletter. Notice - Mark Koegler. Notice - League of Cities. Evenson-Dodge Report. American Legion Post Gambling Report. Met Council "Review" Industrial Revenue Bonds Memo. Town Square Project Area Appraisal Report. Pg. 2763-2775 Pg. 2776-2777 Pg. 277 8-277 9 Pg. 2780 Pg. 2781 Pg. 2782 Pg. L~f 8~-27 86 Pg. 2787 Pg. 2788 Pg. 2789 Pg. 2790-2791 Pg. 2792 Pg. 2793 Pg. 27 94-27 95' Pg. 2796 Pg. 2797-2800 Pg. 2~01-2~02 Pg. 2803 Pg. 2804-2805 Pg. 2806 Pg. 2807-2811 Page 2666. 2 November 1, 1983 '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 Rcad in said City on November 1, 1983. Those present were: Mayor Robert Polston, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Gary Paulsen and Russ Peterson. Councilmember Phyllis Jessen was absent and excused. Also present were: '.City Manager Jon Elam, City Attorney Jim Larson, Building Official Jan Bertrand, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Larry Connolly, Russ Fierst, Eugene Schlee, William & Muriel Stewart. EXTENSION'OF TEMPORARY LICENSES THREE POINTS TAVERN The City Manager explained that the Staff is asking that an extension of Mr. Rager's Licenses be granted until the November 15th meeting in order to work out the conditions to be put on the issuance of the Licenses. · Peterson moved and Charon seconded a motion to authorize the extension of all Licenses for Roger Rager dba Three Points Tavern until the November 15, 1983, Regular Meeting. The Vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BLUFFS TENNIS COURT PROJECT The City Manager asked that this item be delayed and placed on the November 15th Agenda. Notices have been advertised and sent for November 15. Peterson moved and Charon seconded a motion to extend the Public Hearing on the proposed Bluffs Tennis Court to the November 15th Regular Meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. pUBLIC HEARING: DELINQUENT UTILIT~ BILLS " The Mayor opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone preach% who wished to address the Council on any of the delinquent utility bills listed. There were no con~nents. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. Charon moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #83-196 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN THE AMDUNT OF $2,791.78 AND AUTHORIZE /]{E STAFF TO SHUT-OFF WATER SERVICE FOR THOSE ACCOUNTS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REQU~$.! FOR STREET LIGHTS The City Manager explained that he has received 2 requests for street light installations, one at 5013 Shoreline Blvd. and one at 5932 Lynwood Blvd. The Police Dept. has done some research into these requests and has interviewed the neighbor~ in the two areas. The Staff recommended the installation. November 1, 1983 Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~83-197 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NSP TO INSTATL A STREET LIGHT AT 5013 SHORELINE BLVD. AND 5932 LYNWOOD BLVD. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CASE 83-125: SCHLEE BUILDERS, WOODCREST OF MOUND ~gD ADDITION, 8 FOOT FRONT YARD S~ACK VARIANCES The Council asked questions about the drainage easement and temporary drainage ditch on Lot 3, Block 4. The Building Official explained that a permanent culvert has been installed to handle drainage from Outlot A north to Lake Langdon and the temporary ditch is not needed any longer. Councilmember Paulsen asked about the size of the culvert and whether the material the culvert is made of will hold up for the future. The Building Official stated it is a 12" culvert and is made of corregated metal. She will check with the City Engineer on the corregated metal to see what problems could arise from using that material. She also stated that the Builder has withdrawn this particular lot from his variance request. The Council moved on to the the ramaining lots for which variances were requested. Councilmember Paulsen asked if the lots could be built upon without variances if they are brought back up to where they were before the former developer changed the drainage plan. The Building Official answered yes, but it would be quite costly to get the drainage plan back to what it should has been. Mayor. Polston stated that he would be hard put to vote for any of theses variances because to him they did not seem to meet the criteria needed for a variance. 'Mr. Fierst, the developer, stated that he is just trying to give any potential buyers a bigger back yard area and not have the ho~.es built right up against the hill, by obtaining the variances to the front setbacks. He stated he can go ahead and build 840 square foot homes with the existing setback requirements and leave the problems to the future owners. The City Attorney read Section 23.506 'of th~' Zoning Code on the criteria by which variances can be granted. Peterson moved and Polston seconded a motion to table this item until the November 15th Regular Meeting and have the City Engineer present to conmmnt on original drainage plan in comparision to the present drainage plan and any future drainage problems that could come up for these lots. ~ Councilmember Paulsen asked specifically about Lot 2, Block 1 and having a future drainage plan for behind Lots 1 and 2. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to concur with the Planning Cim~nission recommendation and ~ the 10 foot front variance request on Lots 1- 5, Block 1; Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2,' Block 3; and Lot 3, Block 4, all in Woodcrest of Mound 3d Addition. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 2 November 1, 1983 Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #83-197 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NSP TO INSTALL A STREET LIGHT AT 5013 SHORELINE BLVD. AND 5932 LYNWOOD BLVD. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CASE 83-125: SCHLEE BUILDERS., WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION, § FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANGES The Council asked questions about the drainage easement and temporary drainage ditch on Lot 3, Block 4. The Building Official explained that a permanent culvert has been installed to handle drainage from Outlot A north to Lake Langdon and the temporary ditch is not needed any longer. Councilmember Paulsen asked about the size of the culvert and whether the material the culvert is made of will hold up for the future. The Building Official stated it is a 12" culvert and is made of corregated metal. She will check with the City Engineer on the corregated metal to see what problems could arise from using that material. She also stated that the Builder has withdrawn this particular lot from his variance request. The Council moved on to the the remaining lots for which variances were requested. Councilmember Paulsen asked if the lots could be built upon without variances if they are brought back up to where they were before the former developer changed the drainage plan. The Building Official answered yes, but it .would be quite costly to get the drainage plan back to what it should has been. Mayor Polston stated that he would be hard put to vote for any of these variances because to him they did not seem to meet the criteria needed for a variance~ Mr. Fierst, the developer, stated that he is just trying to give any potential buyers a bigger back yard area and not have the homes built right up against the hill, by obtaining the variances to the front setbacks. He stated he can go ahead and build 840 square foot homes with the existing setback requirements and leave the problems to the .future owners. The City Attorney read Section 23.506 of the Zoning Code on the criteria by which variances can be granted. Peterson moved and Polston seconded a motion to table this item until the November 15th Regular Meeting and have the City Engineer present to comment on original drainage plan in comparision to the present drainage plan and any future drainage probIems that couId come up for these lots. Councilmember Paulsen asked specifically about Lot 2, Block 1 and having a future drainage plan for behind Lots 1 and 2. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to concur with the Planning Commission recon~mendation and d~n¥ the 10 foot front variance request on Lots 1- 5, Block 1; Woodcrest of Mound 3d Addition. The vote was 3 in favor with Council- member charon voting nay. Motion carried. 2 November l, 19B3 ~CAS£ ~-Z57: 'WILLIAM & MU~r~L STEWART, Z960 HAZELWOOD LANE - LOT 1~, BLOCK 11, -~ ~E HIGHLANDS - LOT SPLIT/SUBDIVISION The City Manager explained that this is a lot split on a tax forfeit lot that was sold to adjoining property owners and now needs to be divided between them and combined with their respective property. Peterson moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~83-198 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION FOR LOT 14, BLOCK 11, THE HIGHLANDS, PID ~23-117-24 31 0027 The vote Qas unanimously in favor. Motion carried. CASE #83.259: 'JACK WANG, 4408 D~N~IGH LANE, LOT 89, PHELPS ISLAND PARK 1ST DIVISION - VARIANC~ TO gECOGNIZE A NONCONFORMING LOT TO EXPAND THE EXISTING GARAGE - · -The City Manager explained that the applicant is asking to be allowed to construct a 10' x 22' carport to his existing detached garage on the west side. The Planning Commission has recommended approval upon the condition that the City be granted a 15 to20 foot easement for future road purposes, recognizing the existing nonconforming lot with the existing structures cohforming to City code. Charon moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~83-199 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE A NON- CONFORMING LOT FOR LOT 89, PHELPS ISLAND PARK 1ST DIVISION - PID (19-117-23 24 0024 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from the citizens present. Mr. Stewart asked about the letters to the editor that appeared in the Laker regarding the parking variances and the alleged threat made by a City employee to a citizen. The Mayor and the City Manager stated that they can't and won't defend employees being abusive to citizens but on the other hand also will not defend any citizens being abusive to city employees. FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST: FALLS & NYHUSMO~ - FIRE STATION ADDITION - $4,65q.00 Peterson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the final payment request of Falls & Nyhusmoen for the Fire Station addition in the amount of $4,654.00. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. November 1, 1983 PAYMENT REQUEST - A & K CONSTRUCTION, INC. - 1983 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - Paulsen moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the payment request of A & K Construction for work on the 1983 Water System Improvements in the ~0ount of $16,788.02. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILLS Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to approve the bills as submitted on the bill list, in the mmount of $95,203.81, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Announcement of Annual Planning Institute to be held Decembe~ 9, 1983. Be Mediation Center Announcement. The Mayor suggested that the newspaper write up something on this and see if there are any citizens interested in serving on the Advisory Board of the Community Mediation Center. C. Article on plant closings from the July-August, Harvard Business Review. .D. Public Hearing Notice - Maple Plain Sewer - November 17, 1983, Maple Plain City Hall at 7:30 P.M. .E. Announcement of Meeting in Orono on the improvement of County Road 15. Mound Police Reserve Mamo regarding hours donated to the City for the month of September. School District #277 Minutes '"September 12, 1983 & Oct~oer 11, 1983. H. Construction Cost in 1984.'article. Public Meeting on Siting Transfer Stations and Solid Waste Processing (RDF) Facilities - G~den Valley City Hall, November 9, 1983, at 7:30 - J. Letter from Roger Reed on Podany Property. K. Letter from City of Wayzata.'regarding seaplane activity on Lake Minnetonka. Ce Minnehahs Creek Watershed District- Agenda for October 20, 1983 and Minutes for September 29, and Septemer 15, 1983. Twin Cities Labor Market Information - October, 1983. 4 ?eterson was unanimously in favor. November 1, 1983 Metro'Council Review - October 14, 1983. Letter and check from Dowden Ccmmunications. .. November calendar. moved and ?aulsen seconded a motion to ajourn at 9:15 P.M. Motion carried. The vote Jori Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk 5 BILLS ..... NOVEMBER 1, 1983'~ Air Comm 100. OO A & K Construction 16,788.02 Earl F. Andersen 38.63 Autocon Industries 145.80 Acro-MN 245.08 Holly Bostrom 248.00 Jan Bertrand ' 44.99 Bradley Exterminating 38.00 Butler Paper 368.68 Burlington Northern 533.33 Continental Telephone 1,568.91 Cash Register Sales 34.10 Dependable Services 33.00 Director of Property Taxes 268.12 Donaghue Doors 79.00 Jon Elam 40.09 Floyd Security 405.50 Fire Control Extinguisher 10.OO ~First Bank Mpls 4.00 Farmers Steel.. 84.95 Forensic Engineers 540.00 Gopher Sign Co. 18.27 Henn Co. Chiefs Police 305.00 Henn County 870.30 Hayden Murphy Equip 17.OO Robert E. Johnson 10.12 lilies & Sons 1,115.OO Johnson Service 55.00 K's Mechanical & Excav 1,400.OO Low~l'ls Auto 97.83 Sharon Legg 13.O0 Minnegasco 3.00 Mound'Super Valu 8.76 MN Co. Attorney Assn 77.29 Metro Fone 23.60 Miller Davis 24.90 Mound Medical Clinic 180.OO McCombs Knutson 2,716.O0 Natl Business Furniture 280.19 Power Group Trust 73.;29 Popham Haik 1,4OO.OO Pitney Bowes Credit 26.00 Real One Acquisition 1,188.44 Reo Raj Kennels 97.00 Suburban Tires 805.90 Stevens Well Co. 32.50 Smith Heating 37.50 Stewart Warner Co. 46.69 T & T Maintenance 37.75 Twin City Testing 420.00 Thrifty Snyder Drug 87.97 Vandoren-Hazard Widmer Bros Winner Industries Water Products Commissioner of Revenue Director of Prop Tax II II II Falls & Nyhusmoen Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liq. Labor Relations Assoc City of Mound City of Mound City of Mound Mound Postmaster MN State Documents Mound Postmaster City of Mound Old Peoria Ed Phillips Jon Scherven State Treasurer R. L. Youngdahl 4,085.00 174.O0 4.61 553.80 6,138.62 29,629.23 178.87 4,654.00 2,331.O8 3,O41.21 ~7.00 38.O1 77.24 2O.OO 6OO.OO 124.50 120.O0 8.26 " 1,325.20 1,717.97 59.00 1,416.71 5,723.00 TOTAL BILLS 95,203.81 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT' TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of. Mound will meet in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, November 15, 1983, to consider the making of the following described improvement: A Tennis Court, Outlot A, "The Bluffs" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.O1~ to 429.111. The area proposed to be assessed for such improvement is all 35 lots in "The Bluffs". Th~ estimated cost of such improvement is $32,700. Such.persons as desire to be heard wi\th reference to the'proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. F~cene c. C~lark, City Clerk Publish in The Laker on November. l, 1983 & November 8, 1983 June 17, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: RE: CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER TENNIS COURT PETITION FROM THE BLUFFS Enclosed is a petition, signed by nearly every household in The Bluffs. What they are requesting is that the City would undertake a preliminary feasibility study to analyze the engineering problems and costs in implementing this proposal. The residents are proposing that the cost of the court be assessed against the residents over a period of up to lO years. This could be an interesting approach to implementing higher cost recreation facilities in the various neighborhoods. Because having a park, tennis court, etc. close by can increase house values and neighborhood attractiveness, people may be willing to support the projects when other times they might not. I would suggest moving this proposal on to the engineer and then conduct a public hearing to see how much formal support exists for this approach. JE':fc Ne the undersigned residents of "The Bluffs" in Mound, MN are in favor of building a tennis court on the land presently called "The Tot Lot" on Bluffs Lane. We would like the city to review this request. We realize that there might be a small annual assessment. NAME ADDRESS PHONE ~ _ ._-5o/.,5' ;1 o~ 7.?t~ /-fiSoN Hi ~ON \ \ Hl~OIq i McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING [NGINt[RS · LAND ~URVt¥OR$ · PLANNERS -ReDly To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 3uly 7, 198~ HonoraDle Mayor and Members of the City Council City of MounO 5341MaywooO Road MounO, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Preliminary Engineering Report Tennis Court, Outlot A, "THE BLUFFS" File #6865 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we are submitting herewith a Preliminary Engineering Report for a proposed tennis court located on Outlot A, "THE BLUFFS". If you nave any questions or require further information on anything in this report, we will be pleased to discuss this w~th you .at your convenience. Very truly yours, McCDMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC, ~RC:sj Enclosure PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT TENNIS COURTS OUTLOT A, "THE BLUFFS" MounO, Minnesota July, 1985 I hereby certify that this report was prepared Dy me or unOer my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Rrofessional Engineer unOer the laws of the State of Minnesota. ?/?/85 ............................................ Reg. No. 7~11 William H. McCombs GENERAL A number of residents of The Bluffs have requested by petition that the City investigate the possibility of constructing a tennis court on putlot A, .tHE BLUFFS". T~is property is more commonly known as "The Tot Lot" and is owned by the City of Mound. At the present time it is undeveloped but is main- rained as a play area Dy mowing. The lot measures ?0 feet wide by 125 feet deep and is fairly level in the front, but rises sharply at the rear, which re- sults in a difference of approximately 14 feet in elevation. For this area of the country a north-sou(h orientation for tennis courts is recommended, but be- cause of the lot configuration, we will be restricted to an east-west direction. DESIGN The recommended fenced in size of a standard court is 60 feet Dy 120 feet, with the actual playing court being36 feet by 78 feet. Because of the limited space available with this lot, we would recommend reducing the length between six and ten feet. For purposes of this report we will De using 60 feet by ll4 feet. Because of the extreme graOe O~fference from front to Oack on this lot, retaining walls will be a necessitity. We have inyestigated the use of two Oifferent retaining walls, poured reinforced~concrete and'timber. Either of these walls will work satisfactorily, but the~e is a substantial cost differ- ence Detween the two which will be shown later in. this report. At the north~ west corner, the wall will extend approx2mately seven feet above the playing surface and at the southeast corner, the playing surface will be approximately four feet above the adjacent ground. Tne drawings included with this report show a plan view of the court and also three elevations.~ The court surface woulO be asphalt, much the same as the two courts in Island Park Park. An as- phalt curb will De required along the south side to Oirect the runoff to the street. Because the construction of this court woulO not meet any of the required setbacks for this residential district, we feel the Planning Commission should be involved. It would also be a good idea to pass the proposal through,the Park Commission. The Mound codes limit a residential fence to six feet in height, whereas the recommended height for the tennis court enclosure is ten feet. Since the homes are very close on Doth sides, we would recommend at least a ten foot high fence. With a lot size of 70 feet Dy 125 feet and a court enclosure of 60 feet by 114 feet, the setbacks from each side would oHly be 5 feet. We would recommend the retaining wall and fence be built on the rear lot line whlch would leave approximately 9 feet to the front lot line and 19 feet to the curb. If a tim- ber wall is constructed on the rear lot line, a larger temporary construction easement would be needed from the'property owner to the west. COST The estimated cost for the tennis court, as proposed in this report, is $32,700. This estimate includes contingencies and engineering, legal, fiscal, and administrative costs. A deta/led breakdown is included in this report. If poured reinforced concrete were to be used in lieu of wood tlmber..for the retaining w~lls, approximately $9,500 would be added to the project. Be- cause of the added expense, we would recommend using the timber walls. ASSESSMENTS Since this proposed tennis court would be more a neighborhood facility and is being requested by the residents of The Bluffs, we are proposing to spread the cost as a per lot assessment. Using the estimated cost of $32,700 divided by the 35 lots in The Bluffs, the estimated assessment per lot would be approx- imately $935. This couldbe spread over a period of ten years. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS From an engineering standpoint, the project is economically and technically feasible. However, we hesitate in giving a positive recommendation for this project because of the problems created by the small size of the lot ava/lable. Our big concern is with the court extending into the normal setback area beyonO the front lines of the adjacent homes. COST ESTIMATE Item Rough Grading Retaining Wall (Timber) Standard Court (~0' x 114') witn 10' Fence Bituminous curd Contingencies Total Estimated Construction Cost Engineering, Legal, Fiscai an~ AOministrative Costs TOTAL ESTIMATED COST Quantity 900 S.F. 11.5 L.F. Unit Price L~p S~ $ 8.00/SF Lump Sum $ 5.00/LF Amount $ 2,000 7,200 15,000 ,2~475 $27,250 5~450 $32,700 ~~?;']L" c S- N TSO ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ~INNEAPOLIS.nd HUTCHINSON.MINNESOTA 1,.I o P--'T~ mo\ D ...... S 0 1.3'T¼ S~W__ J McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINE[RS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612} 559-3700 August 31, 1983 Mr. Son Elam City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 5536a Subject: Mouhd, Minnesota Proposed Tennis Court Outlot A, "The Bluffs" #6865 Dear Oon: As requested we have investigated a number of ideas and concerns brought up by citizens present at the neighborhood meeting held on August 18, 1983. As you are.aware an on site inspection of the drainage problems in the Bluffs was made on August 25, 1983. Since that time drainage calculations have also been done in our office. It appears that the erosion and flooding problems at the curve on. Bluffs Lane and Bay Ridge Road have been solved with the addition of an earthen berm behind the curb. The resident who's driveway is adjacent to the catch basins in the curve at the intersection of Highview Lane and Bay Ridge Road informed us there is a problem with water overflowing the curb in'this area. Our calculations also show that the capacity of the two catch basin inlet grates are below that of a 5 year'storm. The solution here would be to add another catch basin, the cost of which would be in the range of $1,200.00 to $1,500.00. We do not feel that the added runoff from the proposed tennis court would be significant enough to create any additional problems. We do propose to restrict the flow from the court by use of a smaller opening in the curb. -~ We have also discussed with a local tennis court contractor the possibility of flooding the court in the winter for use as a skating rink. The people who manufacture the final color coats, which is .an acrylic material, do not recom- mend the use of tennis courts as ice rinks. The contractor we talked to said he has seen a number of installations used for ice rinks with no adverse affects. He did indicate that some small hair line cracks could appear but they would not affect the life of the playing surface. The City of Duluth floods one of their multiple courts each year and have had very little problems as a result. Son Elam August 31, 1983 · Page Two We have also reviewed our cost estimate keeping in mind the lowering of the court and the use of a removable fabric for the upper portion of the east half. The quantity of retaining wall required would be increased a small amount by lowering the. court, but the area of permanent fence would be decreased. After talking with the contractor about costs, we feel the overall estimate should be left about the same at this time. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact US. Sincerely, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. Ooh~n~meron~~ 3C:j CITY of MOUND October 26, 1983 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 ((~t2) 472-1155 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Mound will meet in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, November 15, 1983, to consider the making of the following descr;~d' improvement: ~~ ,~~ A Tennis Court, Outlet A, "The Bluffs" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111. The area proposed to be assessed for such improvement is all 35 lots in '~The Bluffs". The estimated cost of such improvement is $32,700. Such persons es desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Fr~cene C. Clark, City Ci~rk Publish in The Laker on November. 1, 1983 & November 8, i983 // THE BLUFFS 22-117-24 44 0001 2. '22-117-24 44 0002 3. 22-117-24 44 0003 4. 22-117-24 44 0004 5. 22-117-24 44 0005 6. 22:117-24 44 0006 7. 22-117-24 44 0007 22-117-24 44 0008 9. 22-117-24 44 0009 10. 22-117-24 44 0010 11. 22-117-24 44 0011 12. 22-117-24 44 0012 13. 22-117-24 44 0013 1.4. 22-117-24 44 0014 'Van Eeckhout Bldg. Corp. Donald Ulrick 3003 Bluffs Lane, Mound Richard I. Rone & Wife Gerald Crowell 3019 Bluffs Lane, Mound R & B Floeder Robert & Barbara Floeder 3017 Bluffs Lane, Mound B & J Benz Bernard G. Benz 3025 Bluffs Lane, Mound Halstead-Crest Dale Sher.burne 6511 Bayridge Road, Mound Henri G. P. Heystek, et al H. Hetstek & M. Peterson 6501 Bayridge Road, Mound D & P Hules Donald N. Hules .' 6459 Bayridge Road, Mound Suzanne K. Carrier 6449 Bayridge Road, Mound Phillip G. Petersen & Wife L. A. Donnay 2703 Ensign Ave. North New Hope, MN. 55427 P & D Anderson (280624-5) Paul A. & Dorothy J. Anderson 6429 Bayridge Road, Mound. Ralph N. McMillan & Wife 6419 Bayridge Road, Mound J & A Soussa Joseph M. Soussa 17924 San Rafael St. Fountain Valley, California 92708 John T. Scott, et al 3040 Highview Lane, Mound. Robert A. Humphrey & Wife 3032 Highview Lane, Mound. Lot 1, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 2 Lot 2, Block 2 Lot 3, Block 2 Lot 4, Block Lot 5, Block 2 Lot 6, Block 2 Lot 1, Block 3 Lot 2, Block 3 6439 Bayridge Road Lot 3, Block 3 Lot 4, Block 3 Lot 5, Block 3 Lot 6, Block 3 Lot 7, Block 3 PAGE 2 - THE BLUFFS 15. 22-117-24 44 0015 16. 22-117-24 44 0016 17. 22-117-24 44 0017 18. 22-117-24 41 0007 19. 22-117-24 41 0008 20. 22-117-24 41 0009 21. 22-117-24 44 0018 22. 22-117-24 44 0019 23. 22-117-24 44 0020 24. 22-117-24 44 0021 25. 22-117-24 41 0010 26. 22-117-24 41 0011 27. 22-117-24 41 0012 28. 22-117-24 41 0013 29. 22-117-24 44 0022 Dale C. & Diane M. Mack 3024 Highview Lane, Mound, Chester C. Pirk & Wife 3016 Highview Lane, Mound, J & B Solberg James B. & Barbara Solberg 3008 Highview Lane, Mound, Larry Patterson 3000 Highview Lane, Mound. Halstead-Crest A. Ferrara - R. Johnson 642 Jackson St. N. E. Mpls., MN. 55413 Horace Mann Educators Corp. Attn: M. J. Wiggers 1 Horace Mann Plaza Springfield, Illinois 62715 Thomas J. Goulette & Wife 3010 Bluffs Lane, Mound, R & KRone Richard Ira Rone 3018 Bluffs Lane, Mound, Gerald & Carol Laurie 6460 Bayridge Road, Mound, T & G Watson Thomas Watson 3013 Bluff Drive, MOund, R E Burke & L L .Burke Robert E. & Lori L. Burke 3005 Bluffs Drive, Mound W & T Olson William 01son 2997 Bluffs Drive, Mound, T & S Huberty Thomas M. Huberty 2996 Bluffs Drive, Mound, Alvin George Reiners 3006 Bluffs Drive, Mound, P & MAxt Paul R. & Mary K. Axt 3014 Bluffs Drive, Mound, Lot 8, Block 3 Lot 9, Block 3 Lot 10, Block 3 Lot 11, Block 3 Lot 12, Block 3 Lot 1, Block 4 Lot 2, Block 4 Lot 3, Block 4 Lot 4, Block 4 Lot 5, Block 4 Lot 6, Block 4 "Lot 7, Block 4 Lot 8, Block 4 Lot 9, Block 4 Lot 10, Block 4 30. 22-117-24 44 0023 31. 22-117-24 44 0024 32. 22-117-24 44 0025 33. 22-117-24 44 0026 34. 22-117-24 41 0014 35. 22-117-24 41 0015 W & L Dunkley Willaim ~ Lorraine Dunkley 3022 Bluffs Drive S., Mound, Bayview Investment, Inc. Terry J. Frovik 3023 Highview Lane, Mound, E & F Fithyan Edward R. Fithyan 3015 Highview Lane, Mound, Michael H. Daniel & Wife 3007 Highview Lane, Mound, J..A. Davis & B. P. Schroeder 2999 Highview Lane, Mound, Glenn Smith 2991 Highview Lane, Mound, Lot 11, Block Lot 12, Block 4 Lot 13, Block 4 Lot 14, Block 4 Lot 15, Block 4 Lot 16, Block 4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Mound will hold a public hearing for the purpose of reallocating $1,250 of the 1983 CDBG Funds for the purpose of installing a handicapped ramp at the Pond Ice Arena. The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, Novemberl5-, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, MN. Anyone wishing to comment on the above is hereby notified of the public hearing. Franc~ene C. Clark City Clerk Publish in The Laker October ~, 1983 WHEREAS, Community Development Block Grant Funds can be used to assist in making a public building accessible to handicapped and elderly persons; and WHEREAS, the Harold J. Pond Ice Arena does not conform to this requirement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound hereby authorizes the City to expend up to $1,250 from CDBG project funds for 1983 and that the Harold J. Pond Ice Arena Board will pay all the remaining construction costs for the installation of the required handicapped access. CITY OF HOUND Mound, hinnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF "ON AND OFF SALE BEER LICENSES" NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, October lB, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, a public hearing will be held to consider the issuance of "On and Off Sale.'Beer Licenses" to Roger D. Rager and Gall J. Rager DB~. Three Po~hts Tavern., 5098.Three Points Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, described as: Lots 12, 13, 14 and 15, Block 2, Dreamwood PID Numbers 13-117-2~ 12 OO20,'~3-117-24 12 OD21 ~nd ]3-117-24 12 0022. 'All persons appcarlng at said hearing will be given an.opportunity 'to be heard. Frencene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish in the Laker October J~, 1~83. ,Annual Fee ON SALE OFF SALE $200.O0 $25. co CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road' · Mound, Minnesot~ 55364 Licens6 Period: May 1 through'April 30 of the followln~ year. APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL _ NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR Date of Application ~--~-~z~ '- ~ Original:~Renewal: _~ · (Owner/Manager) (First) j _ (MidOl-e) _~oc. r' ^ ~(L'a$.t~ ' Citizen: Security 'Company Telephone No.: ' (Mi.ddle) (Da'~e of Birth.) (First) (First)' (Middle) .(F{iddle) Type of Business '~,~, References: (List three - name and address of each) (Date of Birth) (Date of Birth) Indicate whether you sold $10,000 or moF~ of non-intoxicating malt liquor or wide In ~r~- vious year: Yes: No:.'/<. All a~plicants are to fil. e a copy of the proof of insurance ~]th fha'Commissioner S~fet~/'[Minn~Stat., Sec. 3/~0.11, Subd. 21). ;?IOX 32.D3. ~l/cm%ton for ~!cense. A~.! ~pp~c~t~ons for emy ~cense ~o' references ms ~ ~e required, his citizenship, the business is %p be c~rri~d on, whether such ~pp!!c~tion ~ines~, %he %ime.~uch ~pp~!c~nt h~ been Department Approval/Denial (Submit memo if denied) Ap p~ve~d. Denied Administrative'~ Street Dept. Bldg. Dept. Fi re Dept. Water & Sewer Dept. st. ~*~L ~*,M,o~, sase2 STATE OF I~INNESOTA 4s~) ~4~a~ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY APPLICATION ~OR PERMIT TO ONLY ALLOW CONSUMPTION & DISPLAY OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR In answering the tollowin[~ c~ueslions "APPLICANT" shall be Doverned as JolIows: For I Pannershlp, one o~ 1he part.rs sha~l execule lhi~ application Jot all mem~r~ o~ the Fo; I Co;potalion. one officer shall exe~le this aDplical~on to~ all officers, direc~o~, an~ ~t~kholOer$. For a Club, one oJ 1he club officers shall execule this application Jor ~ll the ~m~rs. If (FEE FOR PER~IT - EVERY QUESTION ~UST B~ ANGERED hereby .apply for ~ permit ellowiqg consumption and display of intoxicating liquor S~1e of Minn~ota. in accordance wixh the pr~isions of M.S. 340.1~9. Tel. No~L/~ % 4. FOR'A PUBLIC BUSINESS: If ~ p~me~hlp, stmte n~me mhd ~6dress of e~ch mem~r of m corporation, s~te n~me ~nd ~fr~s of ofliee~ ~n6 dlrec~o~. 5. FOR A PRIVATE CLUB:, Date club was organized number of members · ~ented membership · length of time in present location · what is the membership dues club maintain lockers Ia be used by members Jar storing intoxicating liquor i , is club incorporated __, __ , is club building owned or · what are the requirements for · Names of all officers and/or directors of the club: IN=me) {~eo~-,~) Enclose wi~h this application a copy o] the Constitution and By-Laws of the club and current list of bona fide members. B. If applk:ant or any partner, corporation officer or director, club officer or director, is not a citizen of the United States, lift such non-citizens 7. State name of person who will operate or manage busiKess: 8. On what floor is the establishmenl totaled, or Io be located ~ c~ 9. How ere the premises classified under the zoning ordinance DO NOT USE Check Cash ReC'C~. Ret'cl. by Cashier 1D. State ~me and address o4 owner or owners of building wherein the business will be located: · ' ; 11. lies applicant; if parmership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director; ii club, any club officer or d;recior, ever had a license under the Minnesota Liquor Control Acq revoked or suspended or been convicted for any' violation of State Laws Dr local ordinances; ii so, 9ire dale and details _ 12. Is applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director.; if club, any club officer or director, a member of the .ooverning body of the municipaliW or counw in which this per. mit is t0 be i~sued; if so, in what capacity 13. Has applicant; if partnership, any partner; H corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club officer or director, any interes~ whatsoever, directly or indirectly0 in any liquor establishment in ~he State of Minne~o~ , Give name and address of such establishment -( 14. Furnish the name and address of at lee~t three buslne~ references, including one bank reference: 15. ~ill in/oxi~ting liquor'~ sold on the premis~ 16. (,) Sta~e ~e~her application is: 1. Original (b) Former licensee's name t ,..oe,,,.,4 '% 2. Renewal )~ 3. Transfer , trade name 17. Are the premises now occupied, or to be occupied, entirely separate and exclusive fro.rn any other. business establishment IJr~'~ ~.~?~:~__~0., · ' 18. State trade name to be used 'T~'ep ~'~l,~--~ ~U~or' ~, 19. S~te whether an "On.S~le" or "Off-Sale" Non-Intoxicating Malt Beverage License has or will be granted in conjunction to this business and for the same prer~ises ~,~ ( " · 20. Has there been issued, or will there be issued, a S54.D0 Federal :Retail Liquo~ Dealer's Special Tax Stamp ior the sale of liquor on these premises L1 C) 21. Has your local 9overnm. ent an ordinance regulating the consumption and display of intoxlcatlng.liquor 22. If operating under zoning ordinance how is location of bui.!ding classified jmm~.d~te ,~*~.~eellon eI thh ~rmit. IT IS FUR3HER UNDERS3OOD THAT ANY PERMIT I~UED HEREUNDER DOES NOT ALLOW THE NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE OIVE' TO ~r(~ %',~ ~g~4 ~ ' THIS APPLICATION UNLESS APPROVED AS If appti~nI is located in the County, the Chairman ' / E%~,.,~ ~o~.~ ~,~1 Of Rep~tati~the Board shall°f approveC°Unty thisC°mmissi°~appli~tion, or his Subscri~d and sworn To ~fore me this C~ day of ~ ,~ , 19 ~ . If applicant is ~oc~ted in a Municipality, the President of the Council or his Representative 'shall approve This application. My Commission expires ~/.:: .. ,. ' -.':Z' ;. ' '-'-:: i."T'"" ' .( D~)e Ra.~er and ~ i -T '% -(. p. O. ~IoJ. re.x,. . ! I t J ! License Period: May 1 through April 30 of the ~ following year CITY OF MOUND 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 LICENSE APPLICATION Billiards, Pool and Bowling Lanes (Owner/Manage:r). i rst) (Mi dd'l ~o~ ,o: Company A~idress :.~C~_ ~-~F'~fd. ~~ ~ UC~ ~ Company Officials: 1. ~r~ P---K'x · [(~ rst) (First) (Middle'l (First) ' (Middle7- . ( te of Birth) -. Does anyone other than above have a financial interest in the business? (If the answer is:"Yes", please list others having a financial interest on'~ck of this application giving full name address telephone number and date of birth.) Application is hereby requested for: Number .. I tern Fee ~ Pool Tab.les $10.00 Each Billiard Tables $10.00 Each Pigeon Hole Tables $10.00 Each Pagatelle Tables $10.00 Each Bowling Alleys $10.00 Each(Bowling Lane, not '- ' Ten Pin Alley $10.O0 Each game) DePartment ApproVal/Deni'al '(Submi~ memo if denied) S:gn:tu~,e ot Applicon -App/~ov~d Deni Police Dept. Street Dept. Bldg. Insp. '' Fire Dept. Administrative o~.~ Water & Sewer CITY O~'MOUND 53~1Maywood Road Hound, H~nnesota 5~364 License ~riod: kay 1 thro.ugh ~pril 3D of the. following, year.. Home Telephon'e No.' Company Name: Comp9ny Company Officials: 1. 7P..3 I .... (Fi'rsti Social Does anyone other (If the answer if "Yes" application, giving ful~ ~es~ription of Games ~'f (Middle] Security No.:~-&~- Company Telephone No.: 'zip: c/ (Date of Birth) (Date of Birth) (First) (Middle) (Las~)' (Date of Birth) than above have a t~inancial interest in the business? _ ~ . . please l~st others having a 'fina'ncia~ interest on b~ck-of this name, address, telephone number and date of birth.) ~' Skill for which license is required: Number . \ , Description Fee $25.00 Each $'i ~n~tu/re of App) i E-ant' Department Approval/Denial [Submit memo Police Dept. Street Dept. Bldg. Dept. Fire Dept. Administration W~ter/Sewer Dept. if denied) Denied CITY OF HOUND 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 License Period; May 1 thro.ugh Ap?bi..30' of the following year Date of Applicant Name: (OwAer/Manager) Applicant Date of LICENSE APPLICATION - AMUSEMENT DEVICES Home'Telephone No.:L'/7,.~--_~ C7// / Social Comp6ny. Address: 5r--]q~ "~h FE'e p-~s,-fi lu c~ .; (F~st) (Middle) Original :__ Renewal :._~ (Last) - w . . Security No.~,.~'O~-b~L Company Tel ephone - (Last%V - 110 (Date of Birth) · . ky ~-/" - (First (Middle) t (Date of Birth) x~-r~.. ' 'rst]) (Middle) ~Last) (Date of Birth) ' Does anyone'other than above have a financial interest in the bdsiness? th~.~ ' (if the answer is "Yes", please list others having a'financ~al interest"ontgack of this application, giving full name, address, telephon.e number and date of birth.) ., Application is hereby requested for: (Hdurs oGoperation: 10:00 a.m. to.12:OO..midni~ht) Number Item Fee Juke Box $10.00 Each Other (De'scribe) --. S~gn:tuf, e of Appl Department "~Submit memo Approval/Denial Police Dept. Street. Dept. Bldg] Insp. Fire Dept. Administrative Water & Sewer Dept. i f den i ed) Ap~/~ov~d Denied Fee $50.00 ~nnual Fee CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT (1) (2) (3) Street state. .o . 7g,-3 -"-/// Zip 'Does anyone other than above have financial interest in the business? ~e of Entertainment ~~.k (5) License to be applicable: From To *.If answer to Item 3 is "Yes", please list others h'aving a financial interest in the business on this application, giving name, address and telephone number. CITY OF HOUND 5341Haywood Road Hound, Minnesota 55364 Annual Fee: $5.00 License Period: May I through April 30 of the followi~R year Date of Application RESTAURANT LICENSE APPLICATION Renewal: Company Offici~s: (F~rst) (Middl.~) (F. trst) [Middle! - (.Fi rst) (.M i"dd 1 e) Social Security No..:~-O~ -~ 'qll o ~ompany Telephone No.':,g ? A-g & & ~ of B~ rth) [Date of B ir~'l.. il)ate of Birth). Does anyone other than above have f~hanci'al interest In the 5us~nes-~-4~' ~ ' ill the answer i's 'lYes", please li'st other~..ha¥[~9 a f~nanc~al ~nteresto~back of this ap~Iication, g~v~ng full name~ address,' telephone number an~ date of birth [if possible), Section 37.10. License Required That ali Restaurants, Cafes and Public. Eating Houses shall secure a license to operate, from the City, which license shall, run for. one year, and be signed by the City Clerk, The. license fee shall be $5.00 and said license shall expire.annual- ly on April 30. (Revised - Ordinance 397 2-27-7~) ' · Dep~ttment A~rog~l/D~nial '(Submit memo if denied) A.~r~r o~ e d Denie, Street Dept. Bldg. Insp. Water/Sewer Dept, Fire Dept, Administrative CITY OF HOUND Annual Fee: $12.00 License ~eriod: 3-1-83 to 2-2B-B /- CIGARETTE LICENSE APPLICATION ~" (Print or type only) . ate of application: ~x~-- 2~.~ Original. Renewal,.. ~J (First) . rMi ddl e) (~Q~ ,,er) ~ ,ome Phone Number:...~Y~--SV'// Social S,~,ri,y Number: ~0 Company Address:.-~ST~r~ ~]~)~~ r'~ioA , ComPany Officials: ~'Fi rst) Ordinances, City of Mound, Minnesota August, 1960 Birth) (Date of Bi ~ffice Use Only Department /~pp rove 1/Den'i a~ Submit memo if denied) Chapter 37 - Licensing and Regulation of Certain Sales .. Part A Cigarettes, Cigarette Wrappers, Cigars, Pipe Tobacco, Cigarette Tobacco, Snuff, Chewing Tobacco Section 37.0~ Restrictions No such license shal'l be issued except to a person of good moral character. No IJcense shall be issued to any applicant at any place other.than his established place of business. No license shal~ be issued for a vending machine for the vending'of cigarettes, cigarette wrappers, cigar~ pipe or cigarette tobacco, snuff or chewing tobacco, except that such vending machine be located'in such place where'persons under the age of 18 years-~de prohibited from entering. No person, except e bona fide and duly t.icensed and registered pharmacist or physiclan shall-keep for sale, sell or dispose of in any form any opium, morphine, jimson weed, belle donna, strychnia, cocoaine, marijuana, or any deleterious or poisonous drug except nicotine. Sionatu~e of AppliCant 'olice Dept. qdministrative Street Dept, Bldg. Insp. Park Dept. Sewer/Water Dept. A~~', D~nia Fi re Dept. 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 TO: City Council and Staff FROM: Mark Koeg. ler, City Planner E~TE: November 8, 1983 SUBJECT: Three Points Tavern APPLICAWT: Mr. Poger Rager As directed by the City Council, Staff has reviewed the Tnree Points Tavern and has ccmpiled a number of ccnxnents. Police Chief Wold will have additional information for verbal presentation at the City Council meeting. Existing problems can be categorized as being caused by either physical deficiencies or operational deficiencies. Ccmplaints aired at recent public hearings fall into one of these two categories. Operational deficiencies are a direct result of management practices. As such, they can occur regardless. of the physical condition of the facilities. After hours parties was the major operational problem mentioned during previous public hearings. In order to address the problem, many c~,~,unities have enacted what is known as an "evacuation ordinance" which requires patrons to leave bars and the premises that they occupy at the specified closing time. At the present time, Mound does not have such an ordinance and consequently, any complaints regarding after hours parties and noise have to be reviewed and.. prosecuted under nuisance or noise provisions. Such provisions are much more generalized (and harder to enforce) than the specific provisions found in evacuation ordinances. Therefore, enactment of an evacuation ordinance may provide police with a better tool in responding to such ccmplaints. Three Points Tavern contains a large deck on the rear of the structure which has the potential for another operational problem. Use of deck areas for food and beverage service is a fairly cc~amon practice in bars throughout the Twin Cities. Most bars, however, are not located within a residential neighborhood. As a result, in most cases, noise from deck areas does not cause a problem to surroundi, n~ properties. sign existing retaining wall proposed parking '~proposed concrete drive / r'deck ~mpstlr ~aterlal ~]sign ~ E] J--]~/PaJJets" parking Three Points Blvd Three Points Tavern no scale City Council and Staff Page Two November 8, 1983 The deck area at Three Points Tavern, however, does have the potential for noise conflicts with the abuttin~ properties during the summer months. The word potential is important because as far as Staff know~, no ccmplaints of this nature have been received. To gua~ against futur~ operational changes, however, it seems realistic to specify hours of occupancy and use of the deck area. The Three l%Dints Tavel~n structure is in good condition. The parking area and grounds, however, contain a number of physical deficiencies. Correction of these deficiencies would make the property more attractive while bringing it into conformance with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Rager is currently in the process of ccmpleting two improvements on the property. He' is having the entrance driveway paved frcxn Eagle Lane to the lip of the parking lot area. Additionally, he is installing posts on the northern side of the parkir~ lot to serve as vehicle stops. Both of these improvements will remove existing problems. One of the major existing physical deficiencies mentioned at the public hearirr~ is the growth of weeds on the property. In reviewing the site, the lot consists of either ha~ surface paving, the building, or weeds. None of the land surrounding the building contains sod or landscaping treatment. Weed growth seems to be particularly prcminent along the north side of the parking lot. In this area, the parking lot sits substantially higher than the neighboring residential property. The slope between the two areas is excessively steep and will not permit sodding or seeding. Ground cover planting in this area is also highly questionable due to the severity of the grade and Minnesota's climate. The only realistic method of permane.ntly r.e...moving the weed problem in this area is to construct a retainirG wall along the base of the slope creating a maintainable landscaped strip along the topi This concept is graphically depicted in the attached section sketches. Weed growth also occurs along the steep slope between the deck and the parking lot and along the western side yard of the structure. Discussion at the public hearing a/so involved the possibility=of requiring Mr. Rager to pave the parking lot area. In reviewing the existing situation as well as Mound's present ordinances, Staff feels that such a requirement is unnecessary providirg that the existing lot is maintained. In addition to the weed problem, other physical deficiencies should be addressed. These have been incorporated into the following reca,',,endations. Staff recon,~ends that the City Council approve the issuance of an "on and off sale beer license" for Three Points Tavern conditioned upon the following: That Mr. Rager be required to construct a retaining_ wall and landscaping on the northern side of the parkinG lot area or propose other methods to accomplish the same purpose. Plans for such construction or alternative Existin§ lilacs P.roposed posts Weed §rowth kisting hobse Bou]ders- Existing Conditions Landscaping Sod, mulch 'or ground cover Retaining wall 'Suggested Retaining Wall No Scale ~?~? city Council and Staff Page Three November 8, 1983 proposals should be subject 'to the review and approval of the City E~gineer ar~ the City Planner. It is further suggested that Mr. Rager be given one year to implement such plans. Therefore, cc~pletion of this work would have to be accomplished prior to the reissuance of the license in late 1984. That the existing trash dumpster be placed on a concrete pad and screened with a wooden fence enclosure. In the front of the building, approximately five (5) wooden pallets have been placed along the foundation apparently as wheel stops. These pallets should be removed and replaced with precast concrete wheel stops if it is necessary to protect the building fr~m patrons vehicles. A pile of~ fill material exists in the northeastern section of the parking lot. It' is reccr~nended that this material be removed. Be Permit deck usage only between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily. These recc~nendations assume that the posts will be installed and the driveway entrance will be paved in accordance with Mr. Rager's con~,ents. It is anticipated that these improvements will be in place prior to the City Council meeting. If not, the ccmpletion of these items should also be conditions for the .license approval. In addition to the aforementioned recon~nendations specifically focusing on 3 Points Tavern, Staff also rec~,ends that the City Council direct the Police Chief and the City Attorney to prepare a draft of an evacuation ordinance for future action. .INTEROFFICE MEMO FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Bruce Wold, Chief of Police Licensing of Rager's Pub (Three Points Inn) DATE November The public hearing for Three Points Inn resulted in an assignment to the City Staff to investigate conditions which should attach to any license issued by the City of Mound. The Council charged the planner, building inspector, and police chief with' establishing standards for operation, maintenance, and capital improvement. My report will focus on operational conditions the Council should attach to the licensing of Three Points Inn. Mark Koegler and I had several conversations concernin~ the Inn. Initially, ~rk was interested in historical data the police 'department maintained. The police had limited information available with the bulk of data being disturbance complaints. I' mentioned to Mark that problems had arisen over the past few weeks. The problems concerned disturbances, assaults, 'and persons occupying the property after closing. I asked Mark to recommend the passage by the Council of an evacuation ordinance. An evacuation ordinance is designed to set a limit on the time pa{tons can stay on the property of a licensed liquor establishment past cl'osing time. The ordinance would apply to all liquor and beer businesses in Mound. I believe the evacuation ordinance would speed the departure of patrons and help hold the possibility of disturbances outside the confines of the building to a minimum. I am currently researching communities that have evacuation ordinances and will review these with Desyl Petersono Desyl and I will recommend a draft ordinance to the Council if the Council decides an evacuation ordinance is needed. After hearing the complaints from residents r~siding near the Inn, I asked the · poiice officers to report all calls to Three Points Inn. Since October 28, ~983, five police contacts and three citizen complaints have been reported. The police contacts are' 1. 10-28-83 2. 10-28-83 .3. 10-30-83 4. 11-08-83 5. 11-09-83 - DWI arrest - Interfering with police officer Assault - Interfering with police officer (DWI arrest) - Consumption of beer after closing (1:15 a.m.) The police reports tend to show a tone of defiance inMr. }lager with each contact. His attitude seems to be that his busin&ss is exempt from any enforcement activity and that, "police officers should stay off the property unless they hold an arrest warrant for someone.on the property" ~st of the interference officers receive from Mr. RaRer or members of his staff, occur while arresting patrons of the Inn. On three occasions persons operating a vehicle under the influence have attempted to use the Inn as a refuge when officers were pursuing them. In each instance, officers have had to put up with attempts to free the suspect or verbal abuse while keeping the suspect under control. This type of interference creates a potentially dangerous o o Jon Elam, City Manager November iQ, 1983 Page Two atmosphere for the officer while performing his duties. I am concerned that Mr. Rager's attitude may become more defiant if the Council acts to give him an oper- ating license. ~he assaults and DWI arrests are incidents'Mr. R~ger has little or no control over. However, the frequency of these events does tend to reveal something about the type of patrons the Inn attracts. ~here seems to be a direct correlation between assaultive incidents and disturbances reported by residents. The citizen complaints concern noise outside the Inn and assaultive behavior by ~.~. Rager when he acts as a booncer. The noise complaints come from Ymry Prociw, 1672 Eagle Lane .and Melvin Larson, 1664 Eagle Ln.~ Both residents complained of noise in the parking lot of the Inn on SUnday, November 6, 1983, at l:lS a.m. The noise was sufficient to awaken both residents. The assault occured when Mr. Rager ejected a customer by pushing him thru a window7 The customer was later arrested in the parking lot for assaulting a woman. The officer transported the customer, who was now under arrest, and the customer complained of his treatment by 'Mr. Rager. The customer sustained cuts that were checked by an ambulance crew. I am sore that some of these incidents have logical explanations. However, there are a number of other businesses in Mound serving beer, wine, liquor, and set-ups that have no complaints. The police activity at Three Points Inn is especially heavy when one considers 'the location of the Inn. Mr. Rager should exert more effort to control~ his patrons because of the residential character of his business. I am reluctant, at this time, to urge a permenant operating license to Mr. Rager. TOM LOUCKS & ASSOCIATES 1409 Willow St. Minneapolis, Minnesota 5,540~3 (6m) MEMORANDUM November 14, 1983 From: To: Subject: Tom Loucks Roger Rager "On and Off Sale Beer License" - Three Points Tavern I have discussed your application (i.e. potential site planning and operational problems) with City Planner, Mark Koegler and reviewed his Planning Report dated November 8, 1983. I am of the opinion that reccomendations 2, 3, 4, and 5 contained on page three of the report are reasonable and should be implemented in order to enhance the "Neighborhood Character" of your establishment. I have no specific concern regarding the additional reccomendation to develope an "Evacuation Ordinance", other than to express the opinion that such an ordinance is consistant with your operation and management practices. The City Council should be encouraged to implement such an ordinance. Reccomendation #1 contained on pages two and three of the report suggests that you be "required to construct a retaining wall and landscaping on the northern side of the parking lot or propose other methods to accomplish the same." I am of the opinion that this reccomendation is the result of a chronic weed problem that has existed on the slope adjacent to the north portion of your parking lot. It is estimated that the proposed retaining wall solution will cost in the vacinity of $3,000 to $3,750. ' We have evaluated an alternative solution which consists of regrading the slope to 3:1, mulching, :seeding with Crown Vetch or Ajuga ground cover, and stabalizing the slope and plant material with staked nylon mesh. In view of the fact that this alternative will solve the problem at a cost estimated to be $1,000, I would suggest that it be proposed to the City. In addition to the Planners Report, I have been provided with the City Manager's Memorandum dated November 14, 1983. In order to put this matter in proper prospective, I have quoted the Manager's Memo and outlined your time table and intent for compliance with the conditions setforth below: Page 1 "1. Limit hours the Deck may be used from 11:00 a.m. tO 10:00 p.m." Will be complied with immediately. "2. Complete entrance driveway hard surfacing." been completed. Has "3. Install parking posts on north side of parking lot." Will be installed in conjunction with improvements to north slope area. "4. Submit plans for the installation of a retaining wall by May 15, 1984, and have the project completed by September 1, 1984." ..... Plans for a retaining wall or an approved alternative and construction will be completed in accordance with the suggested schedule. "5. Complete landscaping plan for area near the deck and north side of parking lot." Will be completed in accordance with schedule in item # 4 above. "6. Existing trash dumpster to be place on a concrete pad and screened with a wooden fence enclosure." To be completed by December 1, 1983. "7. The removal of the wooden pallets and replace with concrete parking bumpers." To be completed by December 1, 1983. "8 o Grade back-side of parking lot and remove fill to facilitate drainage." To be completed in conjunction with item # 4 above. "9 · That the temporary licenses be extended for 6 months to May 15, 1984, at which time we will have detailed police reports for the location and the applicant will have had time to submit final site improvement plans." Work with the Police Department and neighborhood residents to resolve potential operational problems and submit plans in accordance with Item # 4 above. It is my judgement that completion of the aforementioned site improvements and your commitment to the solution of potential operational problems will satisfy the ordinance and license requirements for the City of Mound. If we can be of any further assistance, feel free to contact me at your earliest convience. Page 2 November 14, 1983 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: RE.' CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER~..~ RAGER'S APPLICATION You have probably now had a chance to review Mark Koegler's and Bruce Wold's memos regarding the Three Points Tavern. I thought I would try and integrate the two memos into one plan. For approval purposes several physical deficiencies need to be addressed. 1. Limit hours the deck may be used from 11:O0 a.m. to 10:00 plm. 2. Complete entrance driveway hard surfacing. 3. Install parking posts on north side of parking lot. 4. Submit plans for the installation of a retaining wall by May 15, 1984, and have the project completed by September 1, 1984. Complete landscaping plan for area near the deck and north side of the parking lot. Existing trash dumpster be placed on a concrete pad and screened with a wooden fence enclosure. The removal of the wooden pallets and replace with concrete parking bumpers. 8. Grade back-side of parking lot and remove fill to facilitate drainage. That the temporary licenses be extended for 6 months to May 15, 1984, at which time we will have detailed police reports for the location and the applicant will have had time to submit final site improvement plans. The passage of the Excavation Ordinance along with existing ordinances covering our administration and enforcement of City license holders should be enough to allow the City to do whatever it wishes. If the Council would wish to deny the licenses, this would be an appropriate time to do it, as the applicant has made minimal investments in the property and his actions and behavior as outlined in Bruce's memo surely have not been very positive. JE:fc CITY OF HOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on November 15, 1983 at 7:30 P.M. at the Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, the City Council will hear proposed zoning change amending restaurant classifications, application to B-l, B-2 and B-3 Zoning Districts and permitting residential uses within the Bo3 Zoning District. The proposed amendments are as follows: a. Amend Section 23.302, restaurant definitions to include new classifications I-IV b. Amend Section 23.625.3 to add Class Ill and Class IV restaurants as conditional uses in the B-1 zone. c. Amend Section 23.630.3 to add Class II, Ill and IV restaurants as conditional uses under B-2 d. Amend Section 23.635.3 to add Class IV restaurants to the list of conditional uses in the B-3 ~one. e. Amend Section 23.635.2 to allow R-l, R-2, R-3 and R-4 uses as permitted uses in the B-3 zone. All persons appearing at said hearing will be given an oppor- tuni~y to be heard. Francene C. Clark, City Ct'erk 2 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 TO: Planning C~[~-~ssion and Staff FRCM: Mark Koegler, City Planner ~%TE: October 3, 1983 SUBJ: ..Restaurant Definitions At last months discussion meeting, considerable time was spent reviewin~ several options on restaurant classifications. From the discussion, Staff was asked to draft a definition for a Class IV restaurant and examine amending the B-3 zoning category to permit residential uses. If amended in this fashion, the zoning ordinance would contain the following definitions: Restaurants (Class I). Traditional Restaurant - food served and consumed by customers while seated at a counter or table. Cafeteria - food selected by customers while going through a serving line and taken to a table for consumption. Restaurants (Class II). Fast Food, Convenience and Drive-In - restaurants where a majority of custQmers order and are served their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises; or able to be taken to a table, counter, automobile; or off the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an auton~bile regardless of hc~ it is served. Restaurants (Class III). Liquor Service Restaurants - restaurants where food and intoxicating liquors are served and consumed by custcmers while seated at a counter or table and/or restaurants which contain entertair~ent, either live or prerecorded. Food sales in such facilities shall account for a minimL~of 50 percent of a restaurants gross receipts on an annual basis. Restaurants (Class IV). Non-intoxicating Liquor Service Restaurants - restaurants where food, non-intoxicating liquors (i.e., 3.2 beer) and set-ups are served and consumed by custcmers while seated at a counter or table. Plannin~ Cc~nission Page TWo 0ctob~r 3, 1983 Based upon these definitions, restaurants could apply-to the existin~ zoning categories in the following manner: B-1 B-2 Class I (Traditional Restaurant) - Permitted Use Class III (Liquor Service) - Conditional Use Class IV (Non-intoxicating Liquor Service) - Conditional Use Class I (Traditional Restaurant) - Permitted Use Class II (Fast Food, Convenience) -Conditional Use Class III (Liquor Service) - Conditional Use Class IV (Non-Intoxicating Liquor Service) - Conditional Use B-3 Class IV (Non-intoxicating Liquor Service) - Conditional Use RECOMMENDATION: In order to incorporate these definitions and uses into the existing ordinance, the following will have to occur: 1. Substitute the new definitions (Classes I - IV) for the existing restaurant definitions in Section 23.302. 2. Amend Section 23.625.3 to add Class III and Class IV restaurants as conditional uses in the B-1 zone. 3. Amend Section 23. 630.3 to add Class II, III and IV restaurants as conditional uses under B-2. 4. Amend Section 23.635.3 to add Class IV restaurants to the list of conditional uses in the B-3 zone. Additionally, the Planning Commission directed Staff to prepare language modifying the B-3 zoning to permit cohversions from commercial uses to residential uses. This could be accomplished by: 5. Amend Section 23.635.2 to allow R-i, R-2, R-3 and R-4 uses as permitted uses in the B-3 zone. If the proposed changes in this report are acceptable, the Planning Commission should recommend that the City Council amend the zoning ordinance by incorporating Items 1 through 5. (84) (85) (86) (87) (88) (89) (90) (91) (92)' (93) (94) (95) Performance Standard - Criterion established to control noise, odor, toxic or noxious matter, vibration, fire or explosive hazards, or glare or heat generated by or inherent in used of land or buildings. Planning Commission - The Planning Commission of the City of Mound. Principal Structure or Use - One which determines the predominant use as contrasted to accessory use of structure. Property Line - The legal boundaries of a parcel of. property which may also coincide with a right-of-way llne of a road, cartway, and the like. Protective Covenant - A ~omt-ract entered into between private parties which constitutes a restriction of the use of a particular' parcel bf property. Public Lane - Land owned or operated by municipal, school district, county, state or other governmental units. Reach -' A hydraulic engineering term to describe a longitudinal segment of a stream or river influenced by a natural or man-made obstruction. In an,urban area, the segment of a stream or river between tWo consecutive bridge crossings would most typically constitute a reach. Recreation, Public - Includes all uses such as tennis courts, ball fields, picnic areas, and the like that are commonly provided for the public at parks, playgrounds, community centers, and other sites owned and operated by a unit of government for the purpose of providing recreation. Recreation Equipment - Play apparatus such as swing sets.and slides, .sandboxes, poles for nets, unoccupied boats, and trailers not exceeding twenty feet in length, picnic tables, lawn chairs, barbecue stands, and similar equipment or structures but not including tree houses, swimming pools, play houses exceeding twenty-five square feet of floor area, or sheds utilized for storage of eq~i.pment.. Registered Land Survey - A survey'map o7 registered land designed to simplify a complicated metes.and bounds description, designating the same into a tract or tracts of a Registered Land Survey Number. See Minnesota Statutes 508.47. Restaurants (Class I) - Traditional Restaurant - Food served and consumed by a customer while seated at a counter or table and the r~staurant does not serve intoxicating liquor or provide live entertainment. Cafeteria: Food is selected by a customer while going through a serving line and taken to a table for consumption. Restaurants (Class II) - Fast Food, Convenience, Drive-In and Liquor Service Restaurants - A restaurant where a majority of customers order and are served their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises, or able to be taken to a table, counter, automobile, or off the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile regardless of how it is served; or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. 23.625 23.625.1 23.'625.2 23.625.3 CENTRAL BUSINESS (B-I) .Determination of Conformity. Before any building permit is approved' for a multiple dwelling the City Council upon recommendation of tke ~ull~ng Inspector skall ~etermlne whether the proposed use will conform to the performance standards. The developer or landownef shall supply data necessary to demonstrate such conformance. Such data may include description of equipment to be used, method of refuse disposal, type and location of exterior storage,.etc. It may occasionally be necessary for a developer to employ a specialized consultant to demonstrate that a given use will n~t exceed the performance standards. Purpose This district is established to recognize the unique character of the Central'Business District in terms of land use, height regulations, parking requirements and circulation. Permitted Uses Within any B-1 District no structures or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: Retail business - stores and shops selling household goods over the counter Banks Barber and beauty shops Medical and dental clinics Physical culture and dance studios Restaurants (Class I) Liquor Stores Public Buildings Theaters Business or Trade School Laundry and dry cleaning Hospitals and clinics Churches Service Shops Private Lodges and Clubs Offices Conditional Uses Within any B-1 District no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Tavern Commercial recreation Wholesale and assembly operations Minor auto repair, tire, battery stores Boat and marine sales Bus terminal and taxi stands Multiple dwelling structure Newspaper printing or publishing shops Cultural and fraternal institutions 27/7 Commercial Parking Lots not affiliated with principal use Drive-in retailing establishments Animal Hospital or Kennel Auction Hall 23.625.4 Permitted Accessory Uses Within any B-1 District the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: 23.625.5 Private garages, o?~-stre~t parking Temporary construction buildings Decorative landscape features Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use. Lot. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements 1. Maximum building height is 45 feet, conditional use is over 45 feet, 2. 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size. 3. Side and rear setback if abutting residential district: same as B-2 23.630 23.~30.1 GENERAL BUSINESS (B-2) Purpose. The General Business District will allow ~ocal retail sales and service~ along with office space opportunities to serve local population demand. and needs of non-highway orientation. This district will encourage com- pact center for retail sales and services by grouping businesses in patterns of workable relationships, by limiting and controlling uses near residential areas and by excluding' highway oriented and other business that tends to disrupt the shopping center or its circulation patterns. 23.630.2 Permitted Uses Within any B-2 District, no structure or land shall.be used except for one or more of the following uses: AIl those uses permitted in Section 23.625.2 Drive-in Retailing establishments 23.630.3 Conditional Uses Within any B-2 District no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Tavern Commercial recreation Wholesale and assembly operations Major and Minor auto repair, tire, battery stores Boat and marine sales Bus terminal and taxi stands Newspaper printing or publishing shops Cultural and fraternal institutions Commercial Parking 10ts not affiliated with principal use Open'sales 10ss Class ii restaurants Multiple dwelling structure Motor fuel stations Liquor store Car wash Motel and motor hotels Television and radio stations Any building over 35 feet high 23.630.4 Permitted Accesso.[y Uses ~ ~. With.in any B-2 District the following uses shall be permitted acce[sory uses: Private garages, off-street parking Temporary construction buildings Decorative landscape features Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a per- mitted principal use. 23.630.5 Lot Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements 1. No building shall exceed 35 feet in height 2. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 square feet 3- Front, Side, Rear setbacks: 30 feet 4. Minimum setback from side or rear lot .line if abutting any residential. district 50 feet If more than one building, the City Council allows on one lot, an open space equal to ½ the sum of the heights of the two buildi.ngs must be provided between the'buildings. 6. Refer' to Section 23.704, paragraph 2. 23.635 23.635.1 23.635.2 7. Minimum Lot Width: 80 feet NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS (B-3) Purpose The neighborhood commercial center shall function as a small service area which may supply local retail sales to nearby residents. Permitted Uses t.]ithin any Heighborhood Business District no structures or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: None 23. 635.3 23.635.4 23'.635.5 Conditiona'l Uses Within any Neighborhood Business District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Delicatessen and dairy store Drug Store Grocery Store Accessory Structures other than garages Minor fuel station and motor fbel station convenience store Permitted Accessory Uses ~ithin any Neighborhood Commercial District the following uses shall be permitte~ acces'sory uses: Those uses permitted in Section 23.630.4 Lot Area, Height, Lot ~lidth, and Yard Requirements L. No building shall exceed 35 feet in height 2. Minimum Lot Area: ~0,O00 square feet 3. Front, side, rear setbacks: 30 feet 4. Minimum setback from side or rear residential area: 50 feet 5. Refer to Section 23.704, paraQraDh 2. 23.640 23.640.1 23.640.2 6. Minimum Lot ~lidth: 60 feet' LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (I-l) purpose This district shall serve as a development opportunity for industrial sites. Permitted Uses Within any Light Industrial District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following: Warehousing and wholesaling, except where specified in Section 23.64O.3 Offices Public Buildings Research laboratories Construction and special trade contractor Public and private utility uses B-I, B-2, B-3 uses ~ 0~3 ~89 9~ 11 016 1701 51 11 022 161o 61 11 025 1661 21 11 028 1584 O1 11 028 1688 91 11 031 1617 21 11 055 5139 21 11 067 1920 41 11 070 4625'01 11 082 1779 31 11 085 4987 21 11 085 5048 21 il O85 5O98 71 11 100 2085 41 11 112 5917 O1 11 112 5971 71 11 169 6256 21 11 169 6348 71 11 175 5448 31 11 175 5517 51 11 193 2131 11 11 193 2135 21 11 199 2149 O1 11 211 2136 O1 DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER ~1o4.7o 163.38 72.00 52.52 61.64 lOO.7O 60.42 48.04 190.60 124.7o 145.88 45.48 84.5O 209.46 95.80 137.70 93.69 69.96 138.12 105.50 59.45 72.50 146.73 44.01 11-9-83 $250o.18 CITY OF HOUND Hound, Hinnesota -Planning 'Commission Agenda of October 24, 1983: Board of Appeals Case No. 83-258 Location: Woodcrest of Hound, 3rd Addn. Legal Desc.: Lots 1 - 5, Block Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block Woodcrest of Hound 3rd Addition Request: 1D Foot Front Yard Setback Variance Zoning Distl- Applicant: Schlee Builders, Inc. Russ Fierst 3140 Harbor Lane North Plymouth, MN 55~1 Phone: 559-2200 The applicant, Md.. Fierst, has attached to my comments his explanatlon for the requested l'O.foot variance for 9 lots as described. He has provided one Set of up-to-date surveys, of the lots described in his Eequest with existing and proposed yard grades. He Has provlded (12) copies of the 'City approved grading plans for the subdiv~sion,'the plat copies and a signed petition of neighbors' approval to his request. ' The developer had an approved grading plan with the City which was not adhered to before the property was forfeited back to the financial'institution. Before for- feiture, Deerwood Drive was installed with utilities. The lots, 1 - 5, Block were undercut and a portion leveled with some of the fill removed'& placed for road purposes..and on the south side of the road, Lots 1 -and 2, Block 3 and Lot 4, Block 2. In doing so, the developer left a steep hill to the south and fil.led the area to the north with t~o ridges, one'at about the 30 foot setback line and on'e at the approximate boundary of the wetland. The foundation'area of the pro- posed building s~te has not been determined to be suitable for placing a structure, as it possibly was not a controlled compaction of the filled foundation area. -would'like the Planning Commission to'note that Paragraph (2).does state that t~e ...bdilding contractor would like to mlnlmize..their.~oil corrections. Lot 3, Block 4, off of Setter Circle has a large drainage ditch. The ditch was dug as 'a ~emporary drainage way for the area until the permanent culvert and catch basins were installed. Outtot A is drained north by storm sewer to Lake Lan9don. The permanent system'is installed ~nd functloning. The temporary dralnageway can now be filled and graded. Comments: The main ~uestions before the Commission are: Does the City want to Have the building contractor adhere to the original grading plans? Or, does t~e City want to allow some grading modification, but not grant the variance? And/or, does the City want to modify the grading by granting'the variances as requested? Of the lots remaining in the ~oodcrest Additions, the're are others with similar situations. Recommend: The Staff recommends denial of the request as it is not of 9ood planning practice. However, I would also recbmmend a modification in the approved grading plan on file with the City for Lots 1-5, Block l; Lot ~, Block 2; and.Lots 1 and 2, Block 3. The revised grading to be approved by the City Engineer with slope reran- sion plans for any slope greater than 1:3 ratio. Jan Bertrand REALIOR' 3'~,0 HARBOR LANE · MINNF~APOLIS. tMINNESOTA55441 TELEPHONE 55~220D oCuobez 5, ~983' City of Mound 53&l Manhood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 RE: Lot Variances - 20' set back Lots 1 - 5, Bldck 1, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd addition Lo: &, Block 2, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd addition Lois 1 & 2, Block 3, ~oodcrest of Mound 3rd addition Lo% ~., Block ~, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd addition · .Dear City of Mound: : I am requesting ]ut variances on the above mentioned lots for the followin§ reasons: Lots 1 - 5, ~lock 1 have a large, steep bank on the rear of the · property. The land contours were changed from the proposed grading plan, which ~as approved on the final plat. .'Now, if a 26 x 42 home is placed on those lots, ~ith the current 30' set back, the home is tight at the bottom of the steep bank. This in our mind creates future drainage p'roblems. With a 20'set back from the street, we will be able to contrdl that problem. Also, behind Lots 1 & 2, Block l, is a ponding'area that needs some special ~ttention in keeping'the water out of the future home's basements. By hawing the 20! set back from.the street, we will be far enough from the pond to be able to control the natural drainage to.that pond. Also with the vari- ance, the future homeowner's will be able %o have a small area tbat'wi!l ~e usab]%. Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, and Lot &, Block 2 ar~ very steep in a.normal 30' set Sack, a 26 x 42 home is very close to being in the park area. This is very ~et and a lot of soil correction'will be needed. With the..~ari= an~es, we Could keep the homes out of the ~et areas and minimize our soil corrections. Lot 3, Block 6~ has a large drainage ditch in the rear of the lot. When a 26 x ~2 is put on the tot, with the normal set backs, the rear of the home is right on the edge of the'ditch and drainage pond." A 20' set back would allow us to be l0' from the ditch and ponding easement area. Also, it would help us Lo properly drain off the water run-off. So with the above mentioned hardships, we feel that a ~0' ~ront set back is well warranted. Thank you. Sincerely, SCHLEE BUILDERS, !NC. r_u~ene ~. Sch!ee, rresident follows: .Lots 1-5, 'Block I; Lot ~., Block 2; Lots 1 & 2, Block 3', Lot 3f Block ~; ~11 in ~oodcrest of Hound 3rd Addltlon. .. Bud Schlee and RUSs Fierst were present. The applicant is requesting street fron't variances for ~ lots in the Woodcrest 3rd Additlon due to drainage, soil and topography problems. Soil borings ~' been taken in two places ~nd in some areas the topography drops 23~ feet. \' The Building Inspector ekplained that the original grading plan for the · development was no~ adhered.to -- what was proposed for the lots to the south of Deerwood was not to cut the hill so drastically or whbt they'have. The developer came in and cut hill leaving a steep hill to the south (topography drops approximately 23 feet) and then used that to level off for the road and took some of dirt and fillled the side north of the road. On the north side of. road toward Outloz A, there are 2 ridges now; one is at about the edge of the wetlands vegetation and the other is at where the proposed setback line was. (Deerwood sites) Off of Setter Circle on Lot 3, Block ~, there is a drainage.easement marked on the north portion of that to Westedge. A large ditch was dug as a tempo- rary drain~oe way to back part of lot; now ;.e' permanent culve'rt and'catch bas~nstailed to.h~ndle drainage from Outlot A north to Lake Langdon and t~e temporary ditch is not requi'red. Chairman questioned type of structures'being proposed.fo~ various lots. Fierst' thought. Lot 1-5,'Block 1 'on Deerwood would probably be'tuckunders; one on.Setter might'be split entry with attached garage, or a rambler;.the houses on north side of Deerwood would probably be split entry. Fierst stated that they are finding out there is a lot of p~oblems with some of the lots; some have drainage problems, .some soil problems, some fill. The · -original developer sold the good lots and the ones that are left h~ve prob('-'~ lams. Discuss'~6~ continued. · Byrnes'suggested t~at Planning Commission do these in three parts: )). .' Setter Circle lot, 2) Area south of Deerw~od an6 3)'Area north of Deerwood 1) Setter Circle lot - disdbssed that temporary ditch could be filied; would ~till drain due to elevations. ~ichael questioned "if you fill in ditch, presuming drainage would be okay, you would not. need a variance, would you?" He feels that if we .could save trees and not 'have to give variance, be better off in t~e long run. Fierst stated trees would be lost anyway with driveway, etc. and variance ~o keep drainage away from t'he house would be better. Discussed. Byrnes moved and Jansen seconded a motion to deny a variance on Lot 3, Block 4 (Setter Circle lot). The vote was unanimously in favor of denial. 3) Discussed the lots north Df Deerwood with the two ridges in them (Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 and Lot ~, Block 2). Lots could have more fill - origina) proposal was to bring back of property to 9~l~'iEV&ould take a lot more work and soil compaction. Byrnes asked if City Engineer has looked at lots to see about feasibility of filling. Discussed whether fill put in was in a controlled manner. The Building Inspector stated Engineer has been out; the soil borings that were done did not indicate any soil problems at all Fierst stated that only one house has been built on Deerwood and they feel the whole block should 9et variances because there would be consistency of house setback lines'-have nice looking street. Lots drop off--whole bjock should.be pulled forward. Other tots on street were sold by them, but are in ~orse situation then t~ese lots variances are requested for. Discussed Planning Commission Minutes October 24, 1983 - Page 3' that devel°per should have been required to have a bond to do 'grading job rig,-t; .develop~ so.Id.choice lots and Bank got the problem lots back. Also, covenant was not filed and is unenforceable. Byrhes moved and Jensen seconded a motion to deny variances on Lots 1 and 2, Block'3 and Lot 4, B3ock 2, Woodcrest 3rd Addition. Discussed. Michael asked "argument for consistency or conformity in neighZ borhood as opposed to vacant land sitting there 'has no merit--if vote would be to remain consistent with first one, where are we?" Chairman stated · first lot off by itself. The vote on the motion was Byrnes, Jensen and Charon in favor of the deni~l; Michael and Weiland opposed to the denial Motion carries 3 to 2. 2) 5 lots in Block'.l - the Building.Inspector stated Lot 4 has a 23 fo~t fall; lots were overcut or undercut,' however you look. at it.. Charon feels there is more'of a hardship on th'~se lo'ts - others can be filled;'can't do much with a steep slope. Discussed. Anything more'than a 3:1 slope has 'to be sodded or.seeded. Charon moved and Byrnes seconded a motion.to approve l0 foot variances for Lots. I, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block l, Woodcrest 3rd Addition. The vote was unanimously in favor. -- ' Applicant requested tha't this be considered at the November 1st Council meeting. ', ;'Y OF MOU ND ST.~ee..~' Add, ,.~.s . , A?PL.ICATION TI:) I~LAi~NING & 20NING COMHISSlON (Pi~ase type the followinB informal:ion) perry. Legal 'Description .of ?ropeFty: Lot '.~¢~ _~--~-/-" " Block Appl. lcant '(if other than owner): Type:of Request: ~Vari'ance ( ) Conditlbnal Us& Permit ( ) Zonlng Interpretation ~ ~c~iew ) ~etland ?er~it ( ) P.U.D. ) Amendment ~ Sign Permit )*Other ( *if other, specify: Present'Zoni.n9 District ~(~2._ / other zoning procedure for thls property? If so, .list 'date(s); of l i'st al.ate(s) of application, action taken a'nd I~rovide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resoluzions shall accompany present request. certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required .pars or plans to be submitted herewith ~re true and accurate. $ consent to the eh. try in upon thc premises described in .this ~pplica.tion by any authorized official, of the City Kound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, malntain[ng and removing such arming Co~isslon Recommendation: Date 10-2~-83 DJncil Action: Refolution No.. Request for Zoni~ Variance Procedure D. Locatlon of: Signs, tasements, un6e'rground utilities, ~tc. E. Indicate North compass direction ' .~. Any a~dltlona~ inform~tlon as may reasonably be requlreJ by the [Ity ~ta~ and applicable Sections of. the Zoning Ozdinance. II1. ~equest for a Zonln~ Variance A. All.i~formation below, ~ site plan, as described in Part I1, ~nd general .application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled. . B. Does .the present use of.the property'conform to ~11 use regulations for the zone district in ~hich. it is located? Yes (~ No ( )' If "no". , specify ~ach non-conforming use: Do '.the existing structures comply, with all area height and bulk.~egulatio'ns for the z6ne district'in'wh)ch )'t'is.located? Yes (~) . No.' ( ...... If ~'no", specify ~ach non-conform)n9 use: D ~hich unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for.any .o~he uses.permitted in that zoning.district? ( ) .Too qarrow (~ Topography ~ Soii' ( ) Too. small' '- m(~' Drainage- (-) Sub-surface ~.) Too shallow (.) Shape ( ) Other: Specify: E..Was-the hardship described abJ~ 'createJ by the a~tion of anyone havi.ng property interests in th~ ~and altec the 2ohing Ordinance w~s adopted! Yes ( ) No ~ If yes, exp~aln:.. F. Was the hardship created by"anY"O~he~ man-made change, such as the reloca- · .tion of a road? Yes ( ) No ~X~ If yes, explain: G. Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ) No if no, ho~ m~ny other properties are similarly affected? H.'.~,'hat is the "minimum" mod-ific~tion (variance) from the ~rea-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your 1~nd? (Specify, using m~ps, site plans with dimensio,~s ~d wri~te~ exp~n~tiDn. Attach I. Will grenZ[n~ of ~he v~r~nce b~ m~zerJB y d¢zr]m~nz~ oo oo 0 Denotes iron Monument · Denotes Wood Szake XO00.O Den6tes Existing Elevation (000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation 4 . ..Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drainage ./ D~oposed Top of Foundation Elevation----- .. Proposed Garage Floor £ievation = Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation = ! hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a surye¥ of the boundaries Lot !, Block 1, WOODCREST OF MOL59D 3P~ ADDIT~-ON, Hennepin County, ~innesota. And of the tocat;on of all buitdings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. it also shows the locaton of the stakes as 5~t iora proposed buiidina. As surveyed~./ by me this iithdayof ]~,ay 19 ~';2-E3 3J$ · Land Super,or CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for DIC 3m V ./ O Denotes Iron Monument · a Denotes Wood Stake XO00.0 Denotes Existing Elevation {OOO.O) Denotes Proposed Elevatlon < Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage · ./ / i~r0posed Top of Foundation Elevation Proposed Garage F~oor Elevation: Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation: hereby certify that this is a true and' correct [epresentatlon of a su~ey of the boundaries of: ' Lot 2, Block 1, WOODCR~ST OF MOL.~D 3RD ~J~DITtON, Hennepin County, !.~inne sota. And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. tt also shows the Iocaton of The slakes as/(.et for a pro ,~.se~_.~/'lding. As surv~ey~d bymethis llthdayof May 19 79 ~ /~ ~7 ' ", ,' ~ · · F ~ ..~ . .,- ''~ ~.~/:~/~~-~3~ ~o~,as ~. ~er~quzs~ /~ - . 7-12-~ 5J~ . ~nd Sure 'or. M, inn. Reg. No.TM ~cCOM~S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. '~s CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for D/CH lvl ~.TI-~ . 0 Denotes Iron Monument. n · ' Denotes Wood Stake XO00.O Denotes Existing Elevation {OOO.O) .Denotes Proposed ESeva~ion 4 -Denotes Direction of Surfacd Drainage c?/.,,~.? Ptopose~l Top of Foundation Elevation ~--- Proposed Garage Floor Elevation =- Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation-- 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey o4 the boundaries o~: Lot 3, Block 1, WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin Countyt Minnesota. And of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or As' on said land. tt also shows the Iocaton of the stakes as s~t {or a propy, sed b~jding, suq~ey~d · ~e-~ t~-~,~-~.~ <-.~-I Tho,mas S. Bergquist//~' 12.83 COMES-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES. INC. .and Surve~ 'or. Minn. Reg. No. 7725 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for JM / 0 XO00.O Denotes Existing Elevation (000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation Denotes Direction of Surfac(~ Drainage., Denotes Iron Monument Denotes Wood Stake Pr'0posec~'Top of Foundation Elevation--- Proposed Garage Floor Elevation = Proposed Lowest Floor £1evation---- ! hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a sun;ey of the boundaries of: Lot 4, Block 1, WOODCRE$'E OF HOUND 3RD ADDITION, Pti nnesota. Hennepin County, And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from on said land. tt also shows the Iocalon of the stakes asA~t for a proBosed~h~'iding. A~.survey,~ by me ~his !it~ day of ~'~ay 3~.'./ ./I/ // ',1~:. , - ;,' - ~ /.I/:,.../:.~ / ~;, .:~/,,, ..,~ _~ ~_,,......, .., Thomas R~V, 7'12-E3 5J~ , Land Su~e'~or. ~inn. Reg. No."7725 3 - ' . ~ ~ ~ I'~ ~~:.~ ' ~-?~_ '" ? ~ ~ ..... ~ __--'t _ ' .... I " '_'t _ ~03~ ' ~-4~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ~ ~ ~ ~ [,~, ]'-:' for [ '. ..... . [k,cCOk~_S-K~UTSON ~SSOCIATE~, 1NC. ~ . 0 Denotes Iron Monument n Denotes Wood Stake XO00.0 Den6tes Existing Elevation {OO0.0) Denotes Proposed E~eYat~.on Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drainage Proposed-Top of Foundation Elevation Proposed Garage Floor Elevation Proposed Lowest Floor Elevatlon ! hereby certify that this is a true and correct rep[esentation of a survey of the boundaries of: Lot 5, Block 1, WOODCP~EST OF MOU%~D 3RD ~3DiTiON, Hennepin County, . t&in'.~e 5 o t a. And of ~he location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on reid lend. ir also shows the iocaton of the s~akes es~e[ for a proposed building. As surveyed/ /2- E5 5JB . ~/x~/~ Land Sure ,or. ~nn. Re~. No. 7~ 2 5 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for ¢/C/Y L417'/-4 ./ /- O Denotes Iron Monument ... o' - Denotes Wood Stake XO00.O Denotes Existing Elevation (000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation P¢oposed Top of Foundation Elevation ~ Proposed Garage Floor Elevation :- < Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drair)aoe. .Proposed Lowest FIo,o,r Elevation = I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: Lot 4, Bloc); 2, WOODCREST OF I40U~,~D 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County, 14innesota. fl. f And of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. It also shows the locaton of the slakes as,,'set ~or a proposed building, As surveyed 7-/2 - E3 ~d~ ,or. Minn. Reg. No. 7725 CEETIFICAIE OF SURVEY for D/J/( J iV)/.TH ,/ O Denotes Iron Monument -o Denotes Wood Stake XO00.O Den6tes Existing Etevation (000.0). Denotes Proposed Elevation -.(------ Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drainage Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation--' Proposed Garacje Floor Elevation ~ Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation---- I hereby certify that this is a true and' correct representstion of a su'rVey of the boundaries o~': Lot 1, Block 3, WOODC~EST OF MObq,~D 3.~D ADDITIO~, Hennepin County, Minnesota. And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereon, and ali visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. It also shows the Ioca~on of the slakes as s,et for a proposed buildino. As survey (~.~.Jc~ Thcmas S. Bergquist /~ ~(/~ Lan~ Su~eyor. ~inn. Re~. No. 7725 , ~:. ;~))~.._ OMBS'KNUTSON for . / O Denotes Iron Monument Denotes Wood Stake XOO0.0 Den6tes Existing Elevation {OO0.O) Denotes Proposed Elevation ~ ' Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage.. Propose'd Top of Foundation Elevation--- · Proposed Garage Floor Elevation= ' Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation = I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: Lot 2, Block 3, WOODCSLEST OF )~OUND 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County, l{innesota. I And of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. It also shows ~he Iocaton of the stakes as ,~.t for a proposed building. As su ,r~.yed , by me this 16th day of May 19 2~ . .~ ~ ,~ ;;-.r ... ~P~. 7-12-53 $J~ ,~,',.c//z/~ . L~nd Sum, e,,or. Minn. Rog. No. :~_~.-~~ _~'~: ........... ~ .... -. ~Sc;O~ - ~ _ - .... ._ ,,, ~,_,, ,, _', ~ ~L ' ~/_~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY · , ~ ..... ', r.,,cCOM¢~-KNUTSON ASSOC ATES, INC. ~ D/CH ?1 ! I I ! I ,£ O Denote~ Iron Monument ~ Denotes Wood'Stake X000.0 Denotes Existing Eleval[on (000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation "~'---..Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drainage P. ropose¢ Top of Foundation Elevation .~ Propose'd Garage Floor Elevation = .' Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation'= Lot I hereby certify lhat this is a true and correct representation of a survey of The boundaries of: 3, ~iock 4, WOODCREST O? ~40U~ND 3RD ADD!TTON, I'.'ennepin County, Minnesota. And of the location of all bui/dines, if any. thereoJ% and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on .staid land. It also shows the I~)caton of the stake~ ~s ~ by me this ! ~ · . t for a proposed building; As su~eyed 7 ~h day of ~-~ay 19~. ~ Tho~,as S. 5er~quist /~ , Land Surveyor, Minn. Reg. No. 7725 /-.¢'o CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for D/C/< / TI-4 I oO o) ;i!/; : I 0 _.I 0 PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 83-258 RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR LOTS 1 - BLOCK 1, WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION WHEREAS, the owner, Schlee Builders, Inc., of the property described as Lots 1- 5, Block 1; Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3;-~et 3, Block II; all in Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition PID Numbers 23-117-24 23 0087/0088/0089/ OO~O/00~1/OO96/OO97/OO98, has applied for a lO foot building setback vari- ance from the required 3'0 foot stre~ front in the R-1 2oning District, and WHEREAS, the Planni.ng Commission has reviewed the request and recommends denial of the request for Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3; Lot 3, Block 4; all in Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition due to the fact that no hardship was established, and WHEREAS, the Planni.ng Commission does recommend granting the 10 foot variance for Lots 1, 2, 3, ~ and 5, Block l, Woodcrest'of Mound 3rd Addition as the extreme toppgraphy of the rear portion of these described lots create a hazard to the structures, if placed too close .to the slope" NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLYED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Council does hereby concur with the Planning Commission to approve a 10 foot front yard setback variance for'Lots J, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition. A? il CITY OK HOUND Fee Paid Z~. ~o' Date Fi led kPPL I CAT I ON TO PLANN I NG & 20N lNG COMH I SS I ON (Please type the following information) Legal Description of Property: Auditor's Sub. # 170 ~ddition OwnerJs Name (~ [ ~C ~Klq .. Plat 61290 Parcel 9100 Lot W. 242 5/10 ft. of Lot 36 Block PIg No. 13-117-24 33 0024 Day Phone N0., - q o' O£OA/O Appllcant '(if other than owner): ' Day Phone No. Address Type of Request: ( ) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Iot~rpretatioh & Review ( ~ Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. \ (i.)'Amendment -, (X) Sign Permit · ( )*Other *If other, specify: Present 2onin9 District 'B-1 ' '- -H~s ~n application ever been mad~ for zoning, var]an~e, or conditional use permi~ or other zoning procedur~ for this property?.. ~.~ If so, list date(s)of llst. date(s) of application, action taken and provide. Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that alt 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 ~s m~y be required by law. Signature of Applicant ~/~/ _ . .' P]annino Commission Recomn~endation: ' Date Council Action:· Resolution No. APPLICATION FOR SIGN PERMIT NAIVE O.F 'A?PLICAI~T A "c J'l~' C S~ree~ Number City · CITY OF MOUND Zip LOT W. 242 5/10 Ft. of R6 BLOCK PLAT 61290 PARCEL 9100 PlO # ADDITION Auditor's Sub' 170 13-117-24 33 0024 ZONING B-1 PLEASE DESCRIBE REQUEST AND REASON FOR REQUEST ~'~ ~ SIGN SIZE BEING REQUESTED LENGTH OF TIME SIGN TO BE ERECTED: ERMANENT 'L~ TEMPORARY  TYPE OF SIGN: ( ~ A' c:~ WALL MOUNT ("/~ ~.)~'/~/'~ 'j PYLON (Tempo.rary sign not to be for period in excess of two months) FREE STANDING PORTABLE OTHER Does .it conform to all setback and other requirements relating to the Zoning Ordinance? / Is sign for a community organization and does it meet all the standards(Ord. 440)? If additional information is attached, please 'submit 8½" X ll" maximum sized drawings. Recommendat i on: Approved: City Manager -2 7'9t3 CASE NO. 83-26O ]1 016 1701 51 11 O22 1610 61 11 O25 1661 21 11 028 1584 O1 11 028 1688 91 11 031 1617 21 11 055 5139 21 11 067 19~O 41 ll 070 4625 O1 11 082 1779 31 1'1 085 4987 21 11 085 5048 21 il 085 5098 71 11 100 2085 41 11 112 5917 O1 11 112 5971 71 11 169 6256 21 11 169 6348 71 11 175 5448 31 11 175 5517 51 11 193 2131 11 11 193 2135 21 11 199 2149 O1 11 211 2136 O1 DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER S. H'~chcliff $75.70 Mike Condon Lon Holthe Richard Juhl Michael Becker Jack Breazile Jan Vetsch Richard Schoenfeld Three Pts Tavern 109.46 Gerald Baker Thomas Jerde Arnold Merideth Sharry Johnson Mr. Sherman Deanna Mohn M. Mittelsteadt 46.73 Glenn Reger 11-9-83 1o4.7o Paid S29.00.Signed contract 163.38 .Paid 72.00 1610 Dove Ln. 52.52 Paid 61.64 1584 Finch Ln. 100.70 1688 Finch .Ln. 60.42 1617 Gull Ln. 48.04 Paid +9~3~Jo~°~820 Sh°rewood Ln. 124.70 145.88 45.48 84.50 209.46 137.70 93.69 69.96 138.12 105.50 59.45 72.50 146.73 44.01 Closing 11-29. Will pay then 1779 Wildhurst Ln. " Paid Paid Paid $1OO.00 2085 Ironwood Rd. 5917 g'umwood Rd. Made arrangements 6256 Lynwood Blvd. 6348 Lynwood Blvd. Paid Paid Paid 2135 Cedar Ln. Paid $100.00 2136 Overland Rd. $2500.18" $1574.19 PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case #83-260 RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A SIGN PERMIT WHEREAS, the Smith Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. have requested a sign variance, and WHEREAS, said sign would be erected on the face, wall mounted, of the building at 5448 Shoreline Boulevard and be 40 sq. ft. in area as drawn on Exhibit A, and WHEREAS, said 'sign would identify the location of Smith Heating & Air Condition, Inc. at 5448 Shoreline Boulevard known as W. 242 5/10 ft. of Lot 36, Auditor's Sub. #170, PID #13-117-24-33 0024. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City Council of the City of Mound does hereby approve the sign variance as requested for 5448 Shoreline Boulevard and decribed on Exhibit A. .- 09Z-£g 'ON aSVO ,"n .0 MARION I I I ~: ~, CYF~RESS I NOB! CASE NO. 83-261 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of November 14, 1983: Board of Appeals Case No. 83-261 Location: 5259 Bartlett Boulevard Legal Desc.: NWly 85 feet of Lot 32, Auditors Subd. # 170 Applicant: Thomas G. Grudnowski 5259 Bartlett Boulevard Phone: 472-4847/332-1111 Request: Recognize existing non-conforming accessory buildings Zoning Dist: R-1 The applicant is requesting to construct an attached garage, entry and kitchen 'to their home. The existing boathouse and detached garage have non-co~forming setbacks and ~ideyards. The applicant is proposing to remove the "L" portion '(3 X 10 foot 3) of the boathouse which is encroaching onto the neighboring prop- erty. The City Code Section 23.407(5)a requires a 4 foot side yard on lakeshore lots to the side property line for accessory buildings. The existing garage has a .5 to .8 foot side yard setback. The boat house will have an approximately one (1) foot side yard setback. Reco.mmend: I would recommend recognizing the existing non-conforming accessory building setbacks to allow the construction of the addition to the principal structure upon the condition that the encroachment be re- moved as proposed by the applicant, Mr. Grudnowski. The abutting property owners have been notified. '~J~an Bertrand Building Official JB/ms I /~/ ~ CITY OF MOUND $35.00 Fee..Pald ~S. po )//~, ICATION TO PLANNING & .ZONING COMMISSION ~~~0~ (Pl~se type the followin~ infor~tion) ~ddition PID No. ~ -//~ -~ ~¢ ~ · -) Applicant '(if Other than owner): N~ZX~~ Day Phone No. Address , Type'bf. Request: ()~x~ Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit (] )'Amendment ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Sign Permit ( )' Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ;ent Zoning District ~-/ 'Existlng. Use(s) of Property' ..( )*Other · Has ~n application ever been made for zoning, yariance, or.. conditional use permit or · other zoning procedure for this property? j_~£~ If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken an~ provide Resolution No.(s) .- Copies of previous resolutions shell Bccompany present request. I certify that ~11 of the above statements and the state~nts contained in ~ny required papers or pians to be su~m~tteo herewith are tru~ =nd accura~o ' consent to .h_ entry ~n 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, malnt~ining and re~vlng such notices ~s may be req~jred, x~. , ~::~bY law. ~~_~ ///~//~ Sionature of Applican~ ////~'~ ~ Date ~ Planning Eo~ission Reco~endation: 1 Act ion: Resolution No. ~G~,est for Zoni.ng variance rroccnure Lzl D. ca'tlo of: Signs, easements~ underground utilities, etc. E.V Indicate North compass direction Any additional inforr,~tion as ma~ reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning O. rdinance. III. Request for a Zonin9 Variance A. ~ll..i~formation below, a site plan, as descr'ibed in Part Il, and general · application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled. B. Does .the presen.t use of. the property' conform to all use regu. lations for the.zone district in .which it is located? Yes ( ) No (~)()' If "no", specify each n'on-conformin9 use: 6. Do .the existing.structures compl, y. with all area height and bulk.'regulations for the Zone district'in'~'hich i't'is-.located?' Yes ( ) No ' (X) if :'no", specify Each non-conforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the.uses.permitted in that zoni.ng.dJstrict? ( ) .Too qarrow (.) Topography ( ) Soil ( ) Too. small '. .( )' Drainage- (.) Sub-surface ( ) Too shallow ( ) Shape ( ) Other: Spec!fy~ E, .Was-the' hardship described ab~e 'create~ by the a~tlon of anyone havi.ng pcop~rty interests in the land altec 'the Zohing Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (>C) yes, F. Was' the hardship created, by"any'o{her man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No (~/() If yes, explain: Ar~ the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( ): No ('?~) If no, how ~ny 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, i'f necessary.) 1. Will granting of the v~riance be materially detrimental to property in t.he same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Certificate of Survey ~'~"/~'~'"~ for Thomas C. Crudnowski in Dot 32, Auditor's Subdivision ]'1o. 170 Hennepin. County, l<~nnem~ta I / t. ! I hereby certify t,hat this is a true and correct re.ore- sentation of a survey of the boundaries of the Northwest- er!y 85 feet of'-Lot 32, Auditor' s Subdivision Number l?O Hennepin County~ F~nnesota, and the location of all exis%- lng bui~hereon. It does · not ,:nzrCort,t ,o~show~ ~ other pr ove ,me r~. s q4 #n croa chments. Gordon R. Coffin 1to. Land Surveyor and. Planner Long Lake, }~nnesota Scale: !" = £0' Date : 2-18-81 o : Iron ~rker PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case //83-261 RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE AN EXIST.I~IG NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS FOR NWly. 85 feet of Lot 32, Auditors Sub. //170 PID //24-117-24 24 0007 WHEREAS, Thomas G. Grudnowski, the owner of property described as Northwesterly 85 feet of Lot 32, Auditor's Subdivision //170, PID #24-117-24 24 0007 has applied for a variance to allow the construction of an attached garage with entry and kitchen to the dwelling with conforming setback to the property lines, and WHEREAS, the existing accessory structures on the property have nonconforming setbacks to the property lines, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommends the variance as requested to afford the property owner reasonable use of the properyo NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEDTHATTHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA does hereby approve the variance as requested to allow the construction of an attached garage with entry and kitchen to the dwelling for Northwesterly 85 feet of Lot 32, Auditors Sub. #170, 5259 Bartlett Boulevard LAK~WO"OD ( CO RD ! '/UNIT N N E T CASE NO. 83-262 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission .Agenda of November 14, 1983: Board of Appeals Case No. 83-262 Location: 1703 Jones Lane Legal Desc.: Lot 1, Block 1, Replat of Harrison Shores Request: Front Yard Variance Zoning D[st: R-1 Applicant: Thomas Giere 1916 Cottage Lane Minnetonka Beach, MN. Phone: 866-5936 The applicant is requesting to build a new.1200 square foot home with an attached garage. The open deck ko the east side of the property is proposed to be within 20 feet of the lot line. The City Code Section 23.604.5 for the R-1 Zoning District requirements for a lot of record-w~dth of 40 feet and less than 80 feet, a 6 foot.side yard, and 80 to 100 feet, an 8 foot s~de yard.. The.proposed side yard is 8 feet to the south prop- erty line. The front yard setback, Section 23.408(5) for lots of record which abut on more than one ell street shal~ provide one side' yard setback based on the lot width of 51--80 feet equal to 20 feet. The other front yard setback to be 30 feet ~n R-! DIstrict. The proposed setbacks to Three Points Boulevard and Jones Lane-~s 20 feet and 20 feet. Zoning Code 23.408(6) states 'Where adjoining struc- tures exi'sting have a shorter setback, from that required, the front setback of a new structure shall conform to .the average of the setback observed by the adjoin- ing houses on either side, but not closer than (20) twenty feet." The existing house to the south is approximate!y 22 feet to Jones Lane property line.' If the new structure is aver.aged to Jones Lane, the required setback wou!d be 26 feet. Comments: The house to the south had a p.ropos~d setback of 36 feet at the time it was buildi.ng in 1980. The open deck proposed for the new structure would haYe no view to the south if constructed at a 30 foot setback to Jones Lane. The structure to the south actually has a setback of 22 feetS. The narrowness of the lot would make it d~fficult to provide the 30 foot setback to the Three Points Boulevard side without' placing the garage in a different location. The grades of the lot have not been provided at this time, but the lot is wooded and f~lls off to the south. Recommend: I would recommend approval of the requested 10 foot variance to allow the structure to be placed 32' feet to the east lot line with a 12 foot open deck within 20 feet of the property line. This would allow the property owner a reasonable use of the property as the neighboring structure will be in alignment with the open deck area The abutting neighbors have been notified. Jan Bertrand Building Officla! JB/ms '... -'..-' ,.x,. CITY OF. MOUND ~ ~'~ R,~C~:,~,',~=' (Please ~ype ~h~ following infor~tion} , Street ,' Legal Description of Proper~y: Lot.,. / 'Block .. Owner's Name ~pb~¥? ~/~-~-~ Day Phone Applicant '(if Other than owner): Nam~ ' '' Day Phone No, Address 5. Type'6f. Reques~: Variance ( ) ConditiOnal Use Permit Zoning Int~rpretatioh ~ Review ~ Wet}and Permit ( ) P.U.D. (' ) Amendment ( ) Sign P~rmit :.( )*Other *if other, specify: 8. .Has an application ever been made for zoning, v~['ian~e, op.-conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property?. /~).... If So, list date(s).of list· date(s) of application, action taken and provide'Reso]utlon 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 b~ 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 es may be required by la~ / ' Signature of Applicant ........ ~ . Plann.ing Co~mission Recommendation: Date 11-14-83 Council Action: Resolutlon No. D~te D. Loca'tion of: Signs, easements, underground utilitles, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction 'iF. Any additional information as ma~ reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning O.rdinance. !il. Request for a Zonln9 Variance A. ~ll..i~formation below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general · application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled. B. Does .the presen~ use ~f. the property'conform to al.1 use regulations for the zone district in ~hich it is located? Yes ('/J 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 i"t'is'.located?' Yes (xTL) No'( ) if )'no", specify each non-conforming use: ....... D. Which unique physica) characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the.uses.permitted in that zoning.district? ( ) .Too qarrow (.) Topography ( ) Soil ( ) Too, small ' :. .( )' Drainage- '(. ) Sub-surface . . ( ) Too shal'l~w (.) ShQpe ( ) Other: Specify~ E. .Was-the' hardship described above created by the a~tion of anyone havi.ng pCoperty interests in the land after the Zohing Ordinance was adopted? Yes ( ) No (k,/~ If yes, explain:. F. Was' the hardship created by"any'o~her rr~n-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No ( ) If yes, explain: . ~ons of ha'rd~h-ip f-or which:you request a variance peculiar only to the property described'in this petition?' Yes (x,~L): /40 ( ) .. I¢ no, how many other properties are similarly affected?-- .What is the "minimum" modification .(variance) from the area-bulk regulations '. that will per'nit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, i'f necessary.) Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? · CASE NO. 83-262 "m E ~'~'~N,' FI ELD . . DESCRIPT]ON: Lo~ 1, Block 1, REPLAT OF H~RISON SHO~S. NO~:, Bearings sho~ sre hereby certify thel this l~ · true .nd correct r~prtsent~tion of e survey Oeted thlt~dey of Jy]v ., 1~2 . E~K,~LD t W~I.~i~ · ': .... ,%. si I .... r- ° g'lsl · 0 £ I :SV (]3~183S~ '~lOd A3A~f'l: PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case #83-262 RESOLUTION N0.83- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES PID #13-117-24 22 0026 WHEREAS, Mr. Thomas Giere, the owner of property described as Lot 1, Block 1, Replat of Harrison Shores (1703 Jones Lane), PID#13-117-24 22 0026 has applied for a variance to allow the construction of an open 12 by 26 foot deck within 20 feet of the Jones Lane front property line, and WHEREAS, the City Code requires the front yard setbacks for lots of record which abut on more than one street shall provide one side yard setback based on the lot width which would require a 20 foot and a 30 foot front yard setback in the R-1 zoning district, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the requested 10 foot variance ~E~ and does recommend approval due to the topography of the lot and the adjoining structure to the south of the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota does hereby approve the variance as requested upon the condition the property owners do not enclose the open deck at any future date unless another variance is granted. ..'~j .! ',.__. I · ......£~ ~ ., ..,- CiTY OFI MINNETRIST~ CiTY OF I~OUND I 26 ! I I I /~'.._ _J Lot (zsz) " I' /NOTE, Detail '~f lB ' HARRISON see record \ tERY,/O, \ I ! ore It dr°I CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota CASE NO. 83-263 Planning Commission Agenda of November 14, 1983: Board of Appeals Case No. 83-263 Location: 6155 Evergreen Road Legal Desc.: Govt. Lot 3, Unplatted 23-117-24 Request: l0 foot variance Zoning Dist.: R-1 Applicant: Allan Moran 6155 Evergreen Road Phone 348-8498 'The applicant, Mr. Moran, is requesting to build a detached garage within 20 feet of his west property line and 33 feet~ from the curb line. The side yard ~ill be 13 feet to the property line. The City Code Section 23.407(5)b states "All accessory buildings'shall meet the same front yard setback requirements as the principal building". The corner lots of record with a width and depth of more than 81 feet shall have 30 feet to the property lines at both streets on corner lots in the R-1 Zoning District Section 23.408(5) and 23.604.5(3). Comments: The area where the garage is proposed has an approximately 4 foot grade change (drop) from the Westedge Boulevard street grade. The owner does not want to move the garage to the east as they feel it will obstruct the rear of the house and also would cut into the hill further. The garage could have been designed to.sit at the top of the hill with the driveway to be placed on the existing grade. Mr. Moran's application states that the placement of the garage as per the con- tractor "was originally told by the City Officials that the garage could be located 20 feet from'~he p~perty line". I have dealt with Sussel several.times the last few weeks. The application for the building permit approved.a 30 foot property line setback from the west lot line. The abutting property owners have been notified. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms NOV - 1983 CITY OF MOUND ION TO PLANNING & 2DNING CDMHISSlON Legal bes~rlptlon of Property: Lot ~ Applicant '(if o~her ~han owner): I Address Day Phone No. -- · Type of Request: ~ Variance ( ) Conditibnal Use Permit ( ) Zoning Int~.rpretation & Review ( )' ~etland Permit ( ) P.U.D. \ (! ) Amendment ( ) Si.on Permit ( )~Dther ~If other, specify: sent Zoning District ~)-J - '- .Has an application ever been trade for zoning, variance, or. conditional use permit or · other zoning procedure for this property? h~ If $o, list' date(s) of list date(s) of application, action t~ken and ptovideResolution No.(s) '~ Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. certify that all of the above statements and the statera~nts contained in any required apers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in r upon the premises described in this application by any authorized o'fficial of the City f Mour, d ~,or the purpose of inspec'ting, or of posting, malnt~inin9 and removing such 0rices es m~¥ be required by law. ionat~re of AppI icmnt ~ Date lann.ln9 Corr~iss;on Recon*mendation: ouncil Action: Resolution No. " Date Loca'tion of: Signs,' easements~ underground utilities, etc. Indicate North compass dlrectlon Any additional information as m,~. reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning D. rdinance. Ill. Request for a Zonin~ Yari~nce Ao ~ll..)~for~ation be)ow, a site plan, as descr'ibed in Part 11, and general app1)catlon must be pro¥ided before ~ he~ring.~ill b~ scheduled. B. Does .the presen~ use of.the.property'conform to~ use regulations for the zone district in ~hich ~t is located? Yes If pno", specify each non-conforming use: Do Zhe existing-structures compl.¥.with all ~re~ heioht and bulk..FegUlatiohs for the Eone district'in'which )'t'is'.~ocated?' Yes ~ No.' { ) ...,... If !'no", spe'cify ~ach non-conforming use: 'D. l~hlch uniqu~ physica~ character~stilcs of the subject property prevent .its re~sonab)e use for any of the .uses .permitted in that zoni.ng.dJstrict2 ( ) .Too qarro~ (.) Topography ( ) Soil' ( ) Too. small ' :. .( )' Dr~in~g~. · · '(.. ) Sub-surface -- E...~as-the'h~rdship described ab~ 'createJ by th~ ~tion of anyone havl.ng p[Op~rty i'nterests in the land after the Zohing Ordinanc~ ~'es adoptedl Yes ( ) No y s, explain:. ~as' the hardsh.ip create~d b~y"any"ol~her m~n-m~de change, such ~s the reloca- . . ~r~ t~e conditions o~ h~rdship fo~hich'~you request a variance peculiar only to the property described'in this petition~: Yes No If no, ho~ r~ny other properties ~r~ similarly H..~hat is the "minimum" ~dification .(v~ri~nce)from the ~rea-bulk regulatlons' that will permit you to ~ake rea$on~b)e use of your land? (Speclfy, using ~aps, site plans with dimensions and ~rltten explanatlon. Attach addiFion~l sheets, i'f necessary.),] .,,w~.~ ~...L~t. ' & Jo .~ '_~~ I. ~il~ ~F~ntino o, the ¥~riance be m~teria11¥ dctrlmental ~o property in th~ same zone, or to the enforcemsnt of zhis ord~r,~nce? I ~l :Z n . . (4o3 1~31 ~ RD ° EVERGRE ,~ OUTLOT . 149.7 I')10 (~ Z6 ', 12 25 102,96 IlO I EAST. ~" ~USI'ICWOOD RD £AST 15o.4z 59 ° r'~1 IDLEWOOD PROPOSED RESOLUTION Case #83-263 RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE FOR PT. OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, UNPLATTED PID # 23-117-24 24 0010 WHEREAS, Mr. Allan Moran, the owner of property described as Pt. of Govt. Lot 3, Unplatted (6155 Evergreen Road), PID #23-117-24 24 0010 has applied for a variance to allow the construction of a detached accessory building within 20 feet of the Westedge Boulevard front property line, and WHEREAS, the City Code requires the front yard setbacks for lots of record which abut on more than one street shall provide one side yard setback based on the lot width which would require a 30 foot and a 30 foot front yard setback in the R-1 zoning district, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the requested 10 foot variance and does recommend approval due to the topography of the lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota does hereby approve the variance as requested to allow the construction of a detached accessory building within 20 feet of the Westedge (west) property line. THE CITY OF MOUND The West'Hennepin Human Services Planning Board is requesting funding support from the City of Mound for its 1984 operating budget. Our request is at the rate of 12.5¢.per capita based on the 1980 census figures, or a total of 1,164..' WHHS acts mainly as a planning and coordinating agency through which citizens are a part of the decisionmaking process in delivering needed health and social services for the 160 square mile West Hennepin area. It provides edu- -cation, consultation, and technical assistance on issues pertaining to human services delivery system. It provides linkages between governmental units, consumers and services providers; increases awareness of available human ser- vices resources; identifies and advocates for needed services and improvements of the existing services system; and assists others in the development of human services programs. West Hennepin Human Services also coordinates the delivery of services when there is no other agency to do it. Our work in the Emergency Services Program, the federal surplus commodities program, and the Energy Assis- tance Program are examples of this. West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board has an agreement with each of the local police departments, including Mound, for the referral of people to Emer- gency Services. There were seven intake offices, including one at Mound Senior Center, located throughout the West Hennepin area for the Energy Assistance Program, for the processing of applications for fuel assistance. 225 households were served in the Energy Assistance Program in Mound. A data report compiled by West Hennepin Human Services will provide you with numbers of users of such services as detox, battered women's she'lters, Suburban Community Services (for seniors) and other services that West Hennepin Human Services has had a part in securing for the suburban area. WHHS compiled and arranged for printing and distribution of a directory of available services which was sent to approximately 70,000 West Hennepin residents and is used by police and other municipal officials, or about 3,850 in the City of Mound. Unemployment was identified by the Board as a priority for 1983 and a directory of services and a survival skills manual for the unemployed is being compiled by the Unemployment Committee of West Hennepin Human Services. This committee, as are all the WHHS co~T~ittees, is composed not only of Board members but also interested citizens and service providers outside of the Board. Other areas that we are currently involved with are family ciolence, mental health services, services for youth, and services for the elderly. 1984 Funding Request, page 2 One of the most important functions of West Hennepin Human Services is to ad- vocate for services that the citizens in our area need in order to maintain a good quality of life in our communities. For example we were able to Success- fully advocate for Hennepin County to provide a $41,0D0 fund for emergency food, shelter, clothing and transportation for unemployed residents of our communities. The program began in June of 1982, and we served 184 people in Mound in 1982. In the first 9 months of !983, 150 peopl~ in Mound have received emergency a~sistance from us. This service was not available in the West Hennepin area before. This is an example of the impact that we have had in helping to brin§ our fair share of taxes that we pay back into our communities as community- based, decentralized and accessible services. -Other examples of services that we've developed are the West Hennepin.'Community Center for Mentally Handicapped people, health screening programs for senior citizens, a residential treatment program for chronically mentally ill suburban residents, Parents Anonymous (a support group for parents who potentially may or do abuse their children), and suburban detoxification services. West Hennepin Human Services is the only agency providing these planning and coordinating services to the citizens of Mound and the West Hennepin area. Funding for WHHS in 1983 came from Hennepin County, the 15 member municipalities, Energency Assistance Program funds, and a small grant for general operating exp~nses from the Minneapolis Foundation. It is the Board's feeling that primary responsibility for human services, not provided by private agencies, lies with the County. However, municipalities should be willing to share in the cost of. tho~e services that are used by their citizens, or which act as a catalyst to ensure the delivery of services to their citizens through planning, coordination and funding. We appreciate your thoughtful considerat'ion of this funding request, and we look forward to continuing to assist the residents'of Mound in the delivery of human services. SUGGESTED MEF~ER MUNICIPAL CONTRIBUTIONS. 1984 CITY POPULATION* SUGGESTED CONTRIBUTION Deephaven 3,716 $ 465. Excel sior 2,523 318. .Hopkins 15,336 1,923. Independence 2, 64 0 330. Loretto 297 36. Maple Plain 1,421 177. Medina 2,623 330. Minnetonka 38,683 4,851. Mound 9,280 1,164. Orono 6,845 854. P1}~outh 31,615 3,963. St. Louis Park. 42,931 3,588.** Sborewood 4,646 582. Tonka Bay 1,354 168. Wayzata 3,621 456. 167,531 ~ " $19,205. '1980 census of population **St. Louis Park contributes: $5,622 rent for space at Brookside ComMunity Center in addition to our request of $3,588 for a total of $9,210. For your information, the total municipal contributions in the other suburba~ areas are: South Hennepin Human Services Council Northwest Rennepin Human Services Council $34,615 $20,986 The population of the three .areas is approximately the same. 0 .u r lOth 'Anniversary 10 years have brought about many changes for West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board and in the delivery of human services. .When West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board started, our primary con- cerns were the delivery of health care and decentralization of services. Our primary function was planning and we had seven member municipalities. WHHS changed as needs and concerns of our community changed, we broadened our base of support to fifteen member municipalities. We have .broadened · our functions to include coordination of services, policy and legislative advocacy, community education and the provision of direct services. We expanded our focus to include a broad range of social services issues, economic assistance issues but also continuing an involvement, and concern for health care. The theme of decentralization is still with us. We are proud of the progress made in this area - the new Hennepin County Ridgedale Service Center, the development of many new community-based services, and the recognition by policymakers and service providers of the needs of subur- ban residents - but there is much left to do to make services accessible to our heighbors in the West Hennepin area. For human services, this has been a time of profound change. 10 years ago resources were plentiful, unemployment was much lower, and the struggle for' survival was not a paramount issue. Today we' are working to help people meet their basic needs; we are looking for local solutions to problems a's government funds recede, and we have had to work cooperatively an~ creatively to ensure that effective services were provided to meet our communities needs. The next 10 years hold great challenges. Challenges that will require your commitment to work with our friends and neighbors to build a sense of com- munity, to build strong services to meet community needs, and to ensure active local participation in the decisions that effect us. I believe this can be done. I want to take this opportunity to thank our many, many volun- teers for their important contributions. It is to them that we owe our strong history of active involvement and our many accomplishments these past 10 years! ~ ~ Pat Meyer Chairperson, Board of Directors h~nn~pin human planning board $~rvi n~: Minne tonka Deephauen Mound 'Excels ior Orono Hopkins Plymouth Indepe~ldence $[. Louis Park Loretto Shorewood Maple Plain Tonka Bay Med ina 4100 uc~rnon aucnu( ~outh rt. |oui~ park, minnesota $S416 920-5S33 miiAon West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board was formally created in 1973 by a joint and cooperative agreement among area cities and consists of municip~lly appointed consumers and elected provider men~bers. Our mission is to ensure com- munity participation for'human services in the west Hennepin area by: providing education, consultation, and technical assistance on issues pertaining to h~nan services delivery systems; providing linkgges b~tween governmental units, con- sumers and providers; increasing aware- ness of available, human services re- sources; identifying and advocating for needed services and %o improve the exis- ting ser~ic~ system; assisting others in the deve!oplne~t of human services pro- g~ams. " educotion & coordination With the financial assistance of 12 area banks, we revised, published and distri- buted 65,000 copies of the Directory of Human Services for West Hennepin residents. We continue to also distribute our 6 direc- tories about specific service areas, our slide show on human.services, and video- tape on group homes for the mentally re- tarded. Each month, WHHS takes approxi- mately 75-100 information and referral calls. During 1982-83, we also provided the following services in response to requests: letters of support (after careful evaluation); technical assistance; and presentations to community groups and churches. These presentations have been a~ut subjects such as suburban poverty, human services resources, human services legislation, effects of budget cuts. we participate in Providers west (a sol-vice coordinating group started by WHHS) and the west Hennepin Child Sol-vices Providers. W-HHS continues to provide staff assistance %o the west Hennepin Family Violence Com- mittee. The committee has sponsored a nu~r of educational events on subjects such as the role of the male in family violence, child protection, f~/ly vio- lence in legislation. In addition, the committee looks at local issues about family violence and provides assistance to the development of area family vio- lence services. artioioatlon 1982 was the second year that west Hennepin Human Services Planning Board served as the officially recognized (by the Hennepin County Board) group to provide citizen participation in the Community Social Services planning pro- cess. we developed a series of high service priorities for funding by Hennepin County after the fo]lowing process: a demographic study of the west Hennepin area; a survey of 40 agencies and community groups; 2 surveys of our oM Board of Directors; 2 informational meetings on 11 service areas using expert tes- timony and a'co~munit¥ public hearing on our report. This priorities report was presented to County Staff and Commissioners and was used as a framework for monitoring and advo- cating for community needs during the Henna- pin County budget process. We were heartened that our efforts were successful as many of our priorities were funded. After learning from last year's process, we continue in 1983 to seek even broader community input in our priority setting process. W-HHS provided staff assistance in organizing the County- wide Coordinating C6uncil, ond its presenta- tion to the Hennepin County Commissioners. We hmve also provided extensive technical assistance to the new Minneapolis human services councils including arranging a training program for the Board members of all 7 hu~aan se~;ices councils. At its 1983 retreat, the WHHS Board of Directors established the problems of the unemployed as a new priority area for activities. A new committee, the Unemployment Committee, was established and is in the process'of developing a survival skills manual and directory of services for unemployed people (which will be published this summer). In addition, the coramittee provided testi- money and actively advocated for state legislation ~o restore the general assistance safety net and to establish a state jobs bill. The committee also will be monitoring and assisting in the implementation of the State & Federal jobs programs, we also are participating' in a west suburban Chamber of Commerce unemployment committee and with the Legal Aid Lociety to develop a survi- val skills fair for unemployed people. _ anglng ¢esouroes assistance In March of 1882, W~HS cc-sponsored,.with the o~her suburban human services councils, a com/nunity foru~ attended by over 130 people to look at the effects of govern- ment funding cutbacks and steps the conmmunity could take to fill the gaps created by these cuts. Out of this forum, W-HMS sponsored a series of community meetings to look at com- munity solutions. It was decided to focus on the Wayzata-Plymouth-Long Lake area and the Creative Partnerships for.Community Action was created which is a public-private partnership which focuses on local community issues. In other responses to the federal and state budget changes, W~H$ has monitored the effects and has included this research as part of its 19~3 Daha Report which also includes infor~a'tion on West Hennepin area de,graphics and service usage. The first data report was published in 1982. WHHS also responded to these budget changes by distributing information about proposed legislation to community groups and pro- viding information on WHHS positions, to ou~ congressional delegation. t s rviaeS I:or senior; Our effor%s in this area have focused on a nuanber of County-wide projects which affect our co--unities. We participated in the County-wide Ho~ Delivered Meals Advisory Committee and the Hennepin County Transpor- tation Coordination Program Advisory Commit- tee. In both committees we were involved in selection of projects for funding. We al~o were involved in the Chore Services Coordi- nation Project task force which developed a series of reco~nendations to the Metro Council on provision of services. W~HS also sponsored a community forum regarding the role of these three coordination pro- jects in the West Hennepin area. We also continued our active involvement in the ~evelopment of Hennepin County Aging Service Delivery Study and provided tes- ti~Dny to the Metro Council regarding the recc~m~endations of this study. We have also participated in efforts by the City of St. Louis Park to develop low-cost chore services, an effort with First Call for Help %o start a directory of services for senicr citizens, we also continue our interest in local senior health screening services (sponsored by Metropolitan Visit- ing Nurse Assn.) through participation in their advisory committee. With the other two suburban human services councils, we sponsored the energy assis- tance program which served rural and su- burban Hennepin County. Utilizing federal and state funds, the 3 councils served over 4227 households giving out over $1.4 million for payment of heating bills with an average grant of $295. In the West Hennepin area, 1455 households were served for a total of about $500,000. using 39 volunteers (1449 volunteer hours), we pro- vided intake sites in Excelsior, St. Louis Park, Plymouth, Mound, Minnetonka, Hopkins and Loretto. This year we also were able to use a $43,710 fund to provide assistance to homeowners for conservation and repairs. With the Urban Coalition, we developed an experimental affordability program which has served 125 people. This program deter- mines what the participants can afford to pay for their energy bills, and pays for the remainder of their bills. Results of this program and an evaluation by the Urban Coali- tion will be available at the end of this su~er, we also receive Energy Crisis tervention funds to do outreach and community education. The Suburban Energy Advisory Committee provides co~ununity advice to the program and also studies and acts on energy assistance related issues. As part of our energy assistance efforts, the Wh"HS also testified and advocated at the State legis- lature on behalf of weatherization programs which would lessen program recipients heat- ing bills. erital health In a joint effort with South Hennepin Human Services Council, we organized a community k~sed task force which advo- cated for the development of Janus, a suburban residential treatment program w),ich opened in March, 1982. We ar~ continuing our work in this area through a joint task force ~rith North- west Hennepin Human Services Council to establish anon-her residential treatment program. During 1982, ~ helped organize the West Hennepin Mental Health Aftercare Co~m%ittee and continue to provide staff assis- tance. The committee started a local self-help 9roup and an advo- cacy group - both groups are for famililies of the mentally ill. Zn addition, they advocated for Henne- pin County funding of Vail Place and for the de~elo]m~ent of transportation services to mental health program~. .178 board In 1982 WHH$ received $21,880 from Henne- pin County to provide emergency food, clothing, shelter and transportation pro- gram to 739 people who had no other re- sources. We have been funded for $41,000 for 1983 to continue this program. This is a cooperative effort with STEP, Inter- church Community Association, Westonka Christian Services and Interfaith Out- reach wi~h assistance from F~rst Call for Help, YES, our 12 local police depart- ments and Home Free and Sojournez Shel- ters. In addition WMHS has coordinated ~'w~ co~nodity foods distributions. 3,166 households were served in October, 1982 and 2,442 households were served in March, '1982. We continue'to provide publicity for the commod'ies distributions which are now coordinated by the 4 ~mer- gency Services agencies. A special thank you to the following organizations for financial 6r in-kind contributions which supported the-activities of west Hennepin Human Services Planning Board during the past year: * Mennepin County * City of Minnetonka * City of Deephaven * City of Mound "City of Excelsior * City of Orono * City of Hopkins * City of Plymouth * City of Independence * City of St. Louis Park * City of Loretto * City of Shorew~x)d * City of Maple Plain * City of Tonka Bay City of Medina * City of Wayzata The Minnesota Department of Economic Security/ Office of Economic Opportunity · Community Services Administration · Minneapolis Foundation ' Northwestern Bankwest, Minnetonka State Bank-Excelsior, State Bank of Loretto, First National Bank of Wayzata, State Bank of Maple Plain, Wayzata Bank & Trust, First Bank Produce, National City Bank of Ridge- dale, Ridgedale City Bank of Minnetonka, First Minnetonka City Bank, Park-National Bank, and Shelard National Bank · St. Louis Park Public Scho~ls/Community Education Department ~sinesses in Excelsior ny other supportive individuals, community agencies & organizations we particularly want to thank our local munici- palities and Mennepin County for their on-going financial as well as many other types of support. They howe been the mainstay of our organization. CHAIRPERSON - Pat Meyer VICE CHAIRPERSON - Jennifer Samaha SECRETARY/TREASURER - Debbie Atterberry EXECUTIVE COb~MITTEE -- Bill Albertson, Patti Betlach, Collen Gallus, Bob Malooly MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATIVES - Nicky Gerber- ding (Deephaven), Vi Rapley (Deephaven), Mary Hathaway (Excelsior), Marcy O1son (Excelsior), Margaret Reinhardt (Inde- pendence), Colleen Gallus (Independence), Zoe Ann Palmer (Maple Plain), Judy Suth- erland, Maple Plain)', Judie Stangl (Maple Plain)*, Jane Thorfinson (Medina)*, Jackie Smith (Medina)*, Ted Anderson, ~innetonka), Jennifer Samaha, (Minnetonka), Sue Lovaasen (Mound)*, Gloria Swanson (Orono), Ellie Ogden (Plymouth), Robert Malooly (Shorewood), Anita Vogel (plymouth), Marie Boehlke (St. Louis Park), Jim MC- Donnough (St. Louis Park), Gerene Bruner (Tonka Bay), Pat Meyer, (Wayzata), Lucy McCarthy (Wayzata), Nancy Sedlock (Wayzata)* PROVIDER MEMBERS - Debbie Atterberry, Patti Betlach, Grace Norris*, Colleen Faber,Gina MacRae, Sue ~-~orrison, Jim Stoebner*, Christy Dachelet, Betty Bothereau, Bev. Bill Albertson, Tim Nelson, Florence Bogle, Bryan Litsey * Resigned or term of office completed Ingrid Chain-Nemzek Lois Gunderson Roberta Nichols Marcy Shapiro Energy Assistance Staff: An]] Burgoyne Carol Cas~man Bernice Eicher Bruce Larson Kristine Roe Linda Terrell ~m ~m puno~,~ su~dOH ~uo~auuTw 0~- Nos~9 '3 ~n~B OB¥OB 9NINN¥gd S33IAB3S NYW~H NI~3NN3H 911,~ olos~uulw p~ooq wYBguB~ 33N¥1SISS¥ AgB3N3 NI~3NN3H IS3M 1982 - 1983 WEST MENNEPlN ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROCR~ CITY R~CAP :ity_ ~Of: M~un~ ~AL 0 --.30 31 - 45 45 - 60 ~er GO ALL AGES ~o~u~ation, g.45D ~L G~NT DENIAL G~NT DENIAL G~NT DENIAL G~NT DENIAL G~NT DENI~. ~PPLI CATIONS I , ~OUSEtlOLD XNFO~ATION t I . Caucasian ~& 55. I 3 74 ~ 3 29 I 3 64 I 5 222 ~ X4 Non Caucasian 4 0 J 0 I J 0 2 J 1 0 ~ 0 3 J Handicapped ~ Home 149 17 [ 1 42 ~ 2 .., ~ 2 58 [ 4 140 1 ~nt- Apartment 79 '1~ [ O 9 I 0 3 ~ 0 3 ', 1 28 ~ ItOUSEIIOLD SIZE 1 Person Household 2 Per~on Household 4 Person Household 32 Ii 1 15 I ~ 2 ~ 0 2 ~ 0 30 I , I I I I u.aer S s~oo0 ~n ~ J 0 ~2 J 0 ~ t 0 2~ J 0 6e J $ 5,000- $10,000 121 33 } i 37 J I 15 J 0 32 J 2 117 [ $10~O00 - $15t000 36 8 [ · 0 12 i 1 7 [ 1 4 { 3 31 I ~er $20 fO00 5 0 sources or ~.co~z I Salary & Wages 108 30 { 3 44 I, 3 16 Il 2 10 l, 0 100 ,I Ritm0n~& Sup~rt 12 4 i, 0 4 } 0 4 } 0 0 { 0 12 ~1 Self mplo~ent ]7 7,. I 0 6 { ~ 2 I 1 ~ , 0 15 [ ~ne=a[ Assistance ' Unemplo~ent 34 ii{ i i4[ 2 51, o iI , o ~l,l , NON IN~E SUP~RT I I i t I I I I I I F~ Stamps 3~0 26 I 0 2e ~ 0 9 J 0 ~ J 0 79 J I I I I I Medical Assistance 52 18 { 0 ~ J 0 ~ J 0 8 J 0 52 { PR~RY IIEATING S~RCE I I I I I Natural ~s 1R4 4f' J 2 62 { 11 26 J 2 43 { 2 177 ~ Other (w~ etc.) 2 0 I Population information taken fro~ Minneapolis S~ar and Tribune Coau~unlty/Northwest Section Source - Metropoiitan Council CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 DATE: TO: FROM: 'RE: NOVEMBER 8. 1983 JON ELAM SHARON LEGG DEFFERAL OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS We have received an application for deferral of Special Assessments on PID #14-117-24 41 001. The owner has met the guidelines with regard to income, homestead status and age. I have attached a resolution which authorizes deferral. This should go to council at the next meeting so it can be sent to the county for deferral of 1984 specials. 2,,'7?6, RESOLUTION No. 83- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, the state le§islature has enacted M.S. 435.193 to 435.195, which authorizes a city to defer the collection of special assessments for homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, and The City of Mound adopted Resolution #77-420 "Providing Standards and Guidelines for Deferral of Special Assessments because of Hardship for Senior CitizenI' pursuant to M.S. 435.193, and the 6wner of the following property has applied for deferral and has met the above mentioned guidelines: LEVY # PID # DEFERRED AMOUNT 8653 14-117-24 41 O001 $1,897.28 8654 14-117-24 41 OO01 511.O0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND: That the special assessments on the above be deferred and bear interest at 6% per annum on the unpaid balance. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 November 8, 1983 Mr. 3on Elam City Manager City of Mound 53~1 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Subject: M,S,A, Streets, Mound, MN Annual Maintenance Allotment #7023 Dear Oon: Its that time of year again to submit the necessary Municipal State Aid reports, etc. We will need another resolution from the City Council requesting the increased amount for the 1984 Maintenance Allotment. Enclosed is a copy of last years resolution with the appropriate corrections made. I'm assuming that the City will want to request the $34,000 again, if not, that figure should be changed. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact US. Sincerely, · McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. OC :j December 7, 1982 Councilmember Swenson moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION NO. ~ RESOLUTION REQUESTING'AN INCREASE IN M.S.A. MAINTENANCE FUNDS DUE TO INCREASED MAINTENANCE COSTS ON CITY OF MOUND M.S.A. STREETS WHEREAS, Municipal State Aid streets are on a rotating basis for seal .coating, and WHEREAS, some older constructed State. Aid streets are increasingly needing repair, and WHEREAS, ,~ interest payments on the 1981 State Aid Bonds are ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That.the City Manager is hereby directed to.write the State Aid Engineer requesting Mound's Maintenance Allotment be.$34,OOO.OO per year because.of the added maintenance cost and debt servlce cost. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded.by Councilmember Ulrick and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted .in favor thereof: Charon, Polston,'Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; the followlng 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. ss/Leighton Lindlan Mayor Attest: City Clerk ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED, RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER FOR THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will receive sealed bids for furnishing and delivering One (1) Four Wheel Articulated Rubber Tired Front End Loader. Bids will be received until 10:00 A.M. on November 30, 1983, at the City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at which time and place the bids shall be opened, read aloud, and tabulated. The bids will be considered by the City Council at 7:30 P.M. 6n Tuesday, December 6, 1983. Proposal forms, including specifications, are on file and may'be obtained at the office of the City Clerk. Proposals must be made on the forms as furnished and shall be submitted to the office of the City Clerk on or before the time stated above. Proposals must be placed in a sealed envelope with an indication thereon statir "PROPOSAL FOR ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER" and addressed to Fran Clark, City Clerk, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364. All bids must be accompanied by a cash deposit, certified check, or bid bond, payable to the City of Mound i~ the amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the total bid. The City Council reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids, to waive any informalities in the bid and to make such award as it may deem to be in the best interest of the City. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish in The Construction Bulletin November 11, 1983 and The Laker November 8, 1983 o o October 31, 1983 951-18~ Ave N.E. Ninneapolis, ~N 55418 Jon Elam City Nanager, City of Nound 5341 Na~¢ood Road Round, ~,~ 55364-1687 Dear Nr. Elam: We hereby offer to purchase the lots 29, 30, and 31 in 'Block l, subdivision of Arden, Nound, for the total sum of SS,066.~cash payable at closing, and assume assessments totaling $3,466.04. Sincerely, i V. Paasonen Bor~ie J. Paaso~en ~roposed Resolution RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING POLICY RELATIVE TO THE MAINTENANCE OF SEWER SERVICE LINE FROM THE DWELLING TO THE SEWER MAIN, LATERIAL AND/OR TRUNK WHEREAS, the City Councll has adopted Resolution 72-104, April 25, 1972, and WHEREAS, the City Staff feels the stated Resolution.72-104 should be clarified in its wording, and WHEREAS, the City Staff is limited in number of personnel to provide all necessary repairs that do not pertain to the sewer mains, lateral and/or main trunk lines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the City will maintain all sewer mains, laterals and/or trunk lines. That the property owners will maintain their individual sewer services from the sewer main, lateral and/or trunk to the dwelling. a; Exemption is if the sewer main, lateral and/or trunk is found to cause a break and/or damage to an individual service ~uilding sewe~ on the City right-of-way, it would be the City's responsibility to repair such damaged or sunken service. October 31, 1983 545 Indian Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-4224 Jon Elam,'City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: 1983 Water System Improvements - Standpipe Dear Jon: Enclosed please find two (2) copies of Invoice No. 5694 as submitted by Webco Tank, Inc. for work performed on the above referenced project..' This i. nvoice has been checked, appears to be in order, and is being forwarded to you for your approval and subsequent payment by the City. If you. have any questions and/or comments, please contact me at 473-4224. Sincerely, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES George W. Boyer, ~.E. Vice President bt Enclosure CONIRACTOR' S AFFIDAVIT AND PARTIAL ~'AIVER OF LIEN STATE OF Oklahoma COUNTY OF Creek ORDER NO. T.R. Fawcett of Sapulpa, Oklahoma, being sworn, says he is Assistant Secretary of ~ebco Tank Incorporated ( hereinafter referred to as %he "Contractor") and is familiar with the facts herein s~ated. The Contractor ,he's furnished all material, labor, tools, equipment, construction fa. cilities and everything of every sort and performed' all work covered by Contractor's Invoice No. 5694 , dated 10/28/83 for the sum of $ 5,044.50 under the contract entered into with the City of Mound dated the day of , 19 pertaining to: Constuction of water tank The Con{rector has full.v paid for all said material, labor, tools, equipment and construction facilities furnished by it, or by its sub- contractors or materialmen, upon said premises, or furnished therefor-. Upon payment of said invoice to Contractor-of s.aid sum, it hereby waives all liens and claims against the City o% Mound , its premises and property, and, further it represents that no other person or party has any right to ~ lien on account of any work performed.for, or material furnished to Contractor in regard to the charges covered by sa'id invoice. Sworn to me and subscribed in my p~~e .this ~ day of ~6-t~r~ Public My Commission WEBCO TANK INCORPDRATED AsSistant Secretary COh'IRACIOR' ~ AFFIDAVIT AND PARTIAL WAIVER OF LIEN STATE OF Oklahoma COUNTY OF Creek ORDER NO. T.R. Fawcett of Sapulpa, Oklahoma, being sworn, says he is Assistant Secretary of Webco Tank Incorporated ( hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor") and is familiar with the facts herein s~ated. The-Contractor 'ha's furnished all material, labor, tools, equipment; construction fa'cilities and everything of every sort and performed all work covered by Contractor's Invoice No. 5694 , dated 10/28/83 for the ~um of $ 5,044.50 under the contract entered into with the City of Mound dated the day of , 19 pertaining to: Constuction of water tank COntractor has fully paid for all said material, labor, tools, equipment and construction facilities furnished by it, or by its sub-. contractors or materialmen, upon said premises, or furnished therefor'. Upon payment of said invoice to Contractor of said sum, it hereby waives all liens and claims against the City of Mound , its premises and property, and, further it represents-that' no other person or party has any right to & lien' on account of any work performed.for, or material furnished to Contractor in regard to the charges covered by said invoice. Sworn to me and subscribed in my p.~,s~n~:e this ~a d_ay of ~o-tir~ Public HX Commission expires /~/0~- WEBCO TANK INCORPORATED By: ~ Assistant Secretary, ~ZCZ~vzD OCT 3 INVOICE V~=~Fn T~J~d K I N C O F::~ F~O I:::~ AT EE D P.O. BOX 1208 · SAPULPA. OKLAHOMuk 74066 SAPULPA 91 i~.--,~24.6232 Please Remit To: WE~tCO TANK, INC. Dept. #42 Tulsa, OK '/4182 1 1983 F City of Mound, Minnesota SOLD % George Boyer, Hickock & TO ~ 545 Indiana Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Assoc. i DATE: 10/2.8./83 N-~ '5694 INVOICE_ CUSTOMER ORDER NO: CONTRACT DATE: JOB NO.: 2654 TO invoice you for progress on water tank at Mound through 10~29~83 as follows: Foundation & earthwork 95% ~30,600 $29,070.00 Materials on site 100% 33,015 33,015.00 Tank erection ' ' 100% 30,813 30,813.00 Painting 12,950 Cathodic Protection 3,950 Electrical 5,900 Total earned to date $98,503.00 Less: Retainage @10% 9,850.30. .~~ $88,652.70 'Less: Previous invoices 83,608.20 v TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION $ 5,044.50 CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 DATE: OCTOBER 31, 1983 TO: JON ELAM FROM: SHARON LEGG RE:' TRANSFERS Attached are three resolutions which need to go before the Council for approval. This first resolution authorizes the 1983 transfer from the General Fund to the Area Fire Service Fund of $62,4li and also from the General Fund to the Fire Capital Outlay Fund. These were the budgeted amounts. The Second resolution authorizes the transfer from the Liquor Store to' the General Fund of $50,000. The third authorizes the transfer from the Liquor Store to the ]983 Sea]coat Project Fund of $57,408.53. I have in- cluded a breakdown of costs associated with the Sealcoat Project thru September 30, 1983. If there are any other costs related to the Sealcoat Project which I have not included, let me know, RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO AREA FIRE SERVICE FUND AND FIRE CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WHEREAS, Resolution 81-394 created a Special Revenue Fund called the Area Fire Service Fund to account for operations of the fire department, and WHEREAS, the City of Mound entered into a fire contract with five surrounding mun'icipalities, and WHEREAS, Mound's share of the total cost o~. fire service is $109,'65~.'65 for 1983, and WHEREAS, $41,275.90 of Mound's share is provided by special tax levies which are credited directly to the Fire Relief Fund and Fire Equipment Certificate Fund's, and WHEREAS, $68,378.75 was budgeted in 1983 in the General Fund to transfer to the Area Fire Service Fund and Fire Capital Outlay Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota To transfer $62,411.15 from the General Fund to the Area Fire Service Fund and $5,967.60 from the General Fund to the Fire Capital Outlay Fund. RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO MAKE THE 1983'LIQUOR TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND WHEREAS, the 1983 budget included a transfer from the Liquor Fund to the General Fund of $50,000, and WHEREAS, there is sufficient cash to make the transfers, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of Mound, Minnesota: To transfer $50,000 from the Liquor Fund to the General Fund. RESOLUTION NO. 83- RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER $57,408.53 FROM THE LIQUOR FUND TO THE 1983 SEALCOAT PROJECT WHEREAS, Resolution 82-46 approved the plans and specifications for a five year seal coating of the streets in Mound, and and WHEREAS, Liquor Fund Revenues are to pay for the project costs~ WHEREAS, the 1983 Sealcoat Program costs were $57,408.53. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the. City of Mound, Minnesota: That the City Council does, hereby, approve a transfer from the Liquor Fund to the 1983 Sealcoat Program of $57,408.53. CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA 1983 SEALCOAT PROJECT EXPENDITURES TNRU 9-30-83 Mueller McCombs Legal Publication Towing Allied Blacktop Buffalo Bituminous Section 3-Bit. C Section 5-Conc. C Section 6-CSA1515 & G Replacement & G Replacement Sidewalk $ 7,956.51 I,O37.31 168.46 90.00 38,267.75 3,546. OO 3,915.O0 2,427.50 $ 57,408.53 BILLS .... NOVEMBER 15, 1983 Ai rComm, Inc. Blackowiak & Son Holly Bostrom Badger Meter Jan Bertrand Coast to Coast Copy Duplicating Prod. Robert Cheney Bill Clark Oil Cargill Salt Donaghue Doors don Elam E1 Marketing John Henry Foster Feed-ri te Controls Govt Training Service G 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood · Harmon Glass Henn Co. Sher.iff's Dept Island Park Skelly Internatl City Mgmt Assn Internatl Assn Chiefs Police Lutz Tree Service Lowel 1 s L.O.G.I.S. Mpls Oxygen Co. Minn Comm Mound Fire Dept Mpls. Saw Co. Medical Oxygen & Equip M i nn.ega sco P.D.Q. Food Stores Regal Window Cleaning Real One Acquisition Nels Schernau Spring Park Car Wash Shepherds Rug Rental Stevens Well Drilling Sterne Electric Co. Suburban Community Services Thurk Bros. Chev. Twin City Testing Uni tog Rentals Village Chevrolet Water Products Co. Western Tree Service Western Area Fire Train Westonka Sewer & Water Pam Amidon Lynn Cote Bill Clark Oil Fire Dept Officers 75 O5 56 OO 141 O0 181 85 31 56 '148 98 39.25 334.00 3,465.55 733.60 215.00 4O.34 284.67 42.54 238.46 25.OO 32.25 43.00 291.72 10.00 24O.00 58.OO 1,885.00 41.67 1,409.35 21.O0 28.75 4,256.10 26.50 17.50 435.77 2,145.15 10.75 675.OO 6.38 91.90 16.80 886.55 61.00 831.75 32.11 420.00 285.25 IO8.02 54.40 725.OO 240.00 90.O0 89.19. 6.00 225.97 4,300.00 Griggs, Cooper Reinhard Hohenstein Johnson Bros. Liquor Johnson Paper N. Craig Johnson Metro Waste Control II II Il MN Public Empl. Labor Reltn Old Peoria Co. David Norton Ed Phillips & Sons Research Inst. of Amer Suburban Homes Greg Skinner Webco Tank Lowell Zitzloff Butch's Bar Supply Kool Kube Ice Pepsi Cola/7 Up Royal Crown Beverage Coca Col a City Club Distributing Thorpe Distributing A.J. Ogle Co. Day Distributing Twin City Home Juice East Side Beverage Pogreba Distributing Bryan Rock Prod. The Laker Marina Auto Supply Wm Mueller & Sons N.S.P. Navarre Hardware Popham Haik Schnobrich TOTAL BILLS 3,553.51 75.OO 4,17o.o6 21o.13 6,500.00 26,126.47 841.50 5O.OO 466.52 25.oo 2,481.30 36.00 25O.OO 47.38 5, O44.5O 35.oo 65.8O 120.90 183.45 92.60 211.70 2,766.30 5,346.34 1,894.05 2,574.34 61.O0 3,100.95 3,450.15 144.03 69.08 466.72 2,879.99 4,443.64' 363.22' 1,339.04 105,636.35 November 7, 1983 545 Indian Mound Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 473-4224 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: 1983 Water System Improvements - Watermain .Dear Jon: Enclosed herewith please find two (2) copies of F. F. Jedlicki, Inc., Pay Estimate No. 3 and Final for work performed on the above referenced project. This estimate has been checked and appears to be in order in terms of the costs and work performed. Note that the pay estimate includes the additional $3,770 for the bituminous leveling course. If the City pays the $9,810.95 due, then we will need to determine the proper split of the $3,770 for the bituminious leveling course and F. F. Jedlicki and Hickok and Associates would then need to reimburse the City of Mound. I will leave it up to you as to how you want to handle the $3,770 split on this Pay Estimate. Let me know your decision on this matter. Sincerely, KOK AND ASSOCIATES George W. ~ Boyer, Vice President bt Enclosure OWNER: PROJECT: City of Mound, Minnesota 19B3 Water System Improvements F. F. Jedlicki, Inc. PAY ESTIMATE NO. 3 & FINAL Uriginal Contract Amount ...................... $132,570.00 Contract Changes Approved to Date ................... $ 9,703.25 (List Amendment Nos.) 1 & 2 Revised Contract Price ....................... $ 142,273.25 Work Completed to Date (see attached) ................ $ 124,587.05 Retainage to Date, 5% ....................... $ 0 Work Completed to Date Less Retainage to Date ............ $ 124,587.05 Total Amount Previously Certified .................. .$ 114,776.20 Payment Request This Estimate .................... $ 9,810.85 CERTIFICATE OF CUNTRACTOR hereby'certify that the work perfomed and the ~mterials supplied to date, as shown on the request for payment, represents the actual value of acccmplis~nent under the ten~s of the contract dated June 8, 1983 bel~een Ci~'y of Mound, Minn. (Name of 0wner) a,d F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. · . (Name of Contractor) and all authorized changes thereto. F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. (Name of Contracto~r)- ~ ~ , Title President F. F. Jedlic~(i, Inc. E. A. Hickok and Associates ty of Mound, Mi nnesot .~~~~,~, ,~' o o LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE November-December 1983 Wednesday 11- 9-83 Public Hearing: Cedarhurst Association New Dock License 7:30 p.m., LMCD Office, Wayzata ·Saturday 11-12-83 Water Structures & .Environment Committee 7:30 a.m., James J. Hill Ironhorse Inn, Way·zata (formerly Harts Cafe)· Monday 11-14-83 Lake Use Committee 4:'30 p.m., LMCD Office, Wayzata Saturday 12- 3-83 Executive Committee 7:30 a.m., Lafayette Club Wednesday 12- 7-83 Regular meeting of the Board of Directors 7:30 p.m., Tonka Bay Village Hall 4901Manitou Road (County Road 19) 10-31-83 CALENDAR L NOV. 1 MOUND RETAIL COUNCIL - Mound City Chambers, 7:3u A;M.. 3 GOVE~NTAL AFFAIRS COUNCIL - Lafayette Club, 7:30 A.M. ' Dave Anderson ~74-8881, Dan ReRan . "BreaKfast - Reservations ..~ Board of Directors - Twin Birch, 7:00 A.$. SPRING FARK/NAVARP~E P~TAIL COUNCIL - Fare Bench, 7:~5 A.M. Lynette McCullough 471-7265,Sharon Step- -' henson 471-017~ 10- BOARD OF DIRECTORS ANNUAL R~TREAT - Lafayette Club, l:O0 F.M. 16 GENERAL MEMBERSHIP -~ Minnetonka Mist - 11:30 A.M. Social, 12:00 ..... _ ~ -~ij~.i;!~LLunch, Reservations very helpful 472-6780 FEB. 24 MID-WINTER BALL"L - ~. ~' La£ayettei'Club:"-- Diane Theis 472-1144 A special hello and get well wish to Rep. John'Burger! - Welcome to Twin Bitch's new administrator, Cory Glad,and Goo~ Shepherd's new pastor, Rev. Bob Iverson. The new directories are available. I will be distributing them to various locations. They will also be available again at next month's.meetings. Please contact me for delivery if you are unable to make the meetings. Everyone attending the Directors and Chairpersons ~etreat should plan on it lasting through the early evening. We w~ll oe eating dinner at Lafayette. - -7'-: .... :- ~-''- ' · ' ; · ' T & E E~INEERING ' ~ Jerry Tasa GOOD SHEFHERD LUTHERAN CHURCH - Rev. Bob Iverson MINNEGASC0 ~ ~- Ralph Johnson- ... Wk'LCOMJE N~ AREA BUSINES~E~ PIZZA FACTORY ..... '!~ John ant Delores McGinnis ' CONGRATULATIONS Nk%~ DIRECTORS'~ -~ ~ '~ Jim Dickinson '198d J~hn Burger 1~8~-85 Helen Daum Faul ~ond 1~84 Roger F~nn~s I~-~D Dan Regan Donna Ouigley 1~8~ Tee KoenecKe a~8~-UP Diane Theis Auerey Schultz l~a Goerge Stevens IW~4-~D Steve Wood 1W8~-86 1984-86 198~-U6 CiTY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 league of minnesota oities October 31, 1983 TO: City Officials FROM: Don Slater, Executive Director Peggy Flicker, Legislative Counsel RE: IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEARINGS: MINNESOTA TAX COMMISSION The following are hearing dates for the Minnesota Tax commission: Tuesday, November 15 Monday' November 21 City Council Chambers Moorhead, Minnesota Room 83, State Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota Tuesday, November 22 Room 83, State Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota Tuesday, December 13 Wednesday, December 14 Location to be announced Duluth, Minnesota Location to be announced Rochester, Minnesota Thursday, December 15 Location to be announced St. Cloud, Minnesota Tuesday, December 20 Location to be announced Marshall, Minnesota I-5 pm 6-10 pm 6-10 pm 1-5 pm 1-5 pm 1-5 pm 1-5 pm City officials Should Participate in These Hearings Representatives of city governments and other interested members of the public will be able to testify before the Minnesota Tax Commission at a series of public hearings to be held around the state in November and December. The League encourages you to attend these hearings and to participate. This bulletin will briefly explain the work of the Commission and suggest some issues to emphasize. over I 83 univeemiCy avenue ease, sC. paul, minnesota 551 01 (61 2) 227-5600 -2- These hearings offer an excellent opportunity for city officials to inform the Tax Commission about cities' views and experiences concerning both the problems of Minnesota's current tax structure and possible solutions. The Commission The Minnesota Tax Commission (sometimes referred to as the Latimer Tax Commission since it is chaired by St. Paul-Mayor George Latimer) is a bi-partisan group of 16 citizens appointed by Governor Perpich to conduct a major study of Minnesota's tax structure and to recommend changes to improve the state and local revenue system. The Commission is required to make a full report on Minnesota tax policy to the Governor and the Legislature by December 15, 1984. In the words of the Commission, the "report is to contain recommendations for tax policies that will remove inequities, promote economic .growth, stabilize revenues, meet the needs of Minnesota's people and provide Minnesota with. a competitive position among the states." What is the Purpose of the Hearings? According to the Commission, "the purpose of these hearings is to receive the viewpoints of the public regarding the equity, administration, and efficiency of the Minnesota state and local tax structure. Specific topics of interest to the Commission include the interrelationships of state and local taxes and direct' tax relief programs, the state sales tax and its base, the need for and usage of property tax relief programs, the relationship between taxes and business and Job development, simplification of the income tax system, tax policy'relating to agricultural land, the appropriate mix of taxes, and proposals for tax changes, including innovative tax sources. Not included in the scope of these hearings are topics relating to the state and local expenditure structure, level of expenditures or the issues pertaining to the structure of workmen's compensation and unemployment compensation programs." What Issues Might Cities Brin~ Before' the Commission? There are several main themes that cities should bring before the Commission. If the cities testifying echo common themes, the Commission will be. more apt to give time and attention to the concerns of city officials. Ther~ are hundreds of questions that could be asked about the Minnesota tax system. .With your testimony, you may help narrow down these questions and assure that issues important to cities are examined. A. Simplification and Understandability of the Property Tax System Right now, it is very difficult for even informed taxpayers to figure out who is responsible--and at which level of government--for the various decisions that ultimately determine the amount of their annual property tax bill. (And often it is city officials who get blamed for the tax bill even though the city share of the entire bill is usually 25 percent or less and lately many city property tax increases are a direct result of state level decisions or cut backs!) JgAO fonu~A~a ao$ x~ K~a~doad oq~ uo Klaa s~uomuaoAo~ i~oI aoq:o ao soI~ls plnoqs :uo:xo ~qa oI £sm~z~oad ~aiiaa x~ K:a~doad )o s~sos'~q~ ioa~uoo plnos (£ (~ gx~ K~a~doad i~u~N ~q~ XAsI o: $~I=Io )o K~lltq~ ~q~ (! ~smea$oad puv s~i=llod xe7 ~TeTs a~q~o qTIm 7~!I~UO~ ga~Iadoadd~ III~S m~a~o~d sai=~a~dsip i~sl~ aq~ si (9 gs~I2Iunmmoo snola~a u! pied s~x~2 )o :unom~ ~q2 q2im qNnoaq~ paqsIidmoss~ ~q $aII~a x~ K~aado~d plnoqs ($ fuapanq xe2 ~2aadoad ieooI aq2 asnpaa o2 sanuaAax (C x~ K~aado/d ao$ su~z!~D s~$ lo ~lun I~]uamulaAO~ ~ )o psau ~q: ~ulmaa~ap o~ ~aa~tao aq~ sq pInoqs ~tl~ ~s~nuaa~I ~s ~o ,,p~u,, ~som uI uoi~ps!in~ ~q= ~AleDaI su~o~/s~!~I~/saI~uno~/sIooq~s qoIqM (Z p~ads su~panq x~ K~do~d a~V fp~qs~idmooo~ ua~q (! sm~aMoad aa~su~a~ Ie~UamUa~AoMaa~uI aq~ ~o X~InbM '~ Zp~Ao~dm~. ~q o~ p~au m~s&s ~uamss~ss~ ~q~ a~oG Zp~l$1pom ao p~!ldm!s ~q sm~a~o~d pun$~a pu~ ~!p~ xw~ X~a~do~d ~q~ pInoqs ~pa~npa~ aq ~uamu~aAo~ ~o slaAaIII~ ~ &~lI~q~uno~ aAo~dm~ o~ s~ os p~I~!Idm!s ~q ma~s~S ~ua~an~ aq~ u~D (I :suo~s~nb assq~ asod o~ qs~m K~ noA --4'-- 5) 'Should cities be given the authority to raise non-property taxes, e.g. local sales, income or payroll taxes? Should local governments be reimbursed for services provided to tax-exempt properties? Should tax-exempt properties be required to pay some property tax? Format of Hearings Individuals and groups wishing to present testimony to the Commission should: *Limit their testimony to twenty (20) minutes; *Provide 20 written copies of their ~estimony (advance copies are requested, but not required); *Either inform the Commission in writing regarding their plans to testify on a specific date or sign up on a schedule sheet that will be provided at the hearings (places and times) listed on page 1. The Tax Study Commission address is: Minnesota Tax Study Commission Department of Finance 309 Administration Building St. Paul, MN 55155 DS:PF:lw THE 'EVENSEN DODGE IIEPOIiT Trends In Public Finance 3608 IDS Tower, Minneapolis, Minnesota Yr 612/338-3535 ~ 800/328-8200 800/328-8100 Minnesota Market Trends Rates Down, Volume Ui~ For Tax-Exempts in 1983 After sizable declines through May, 1983, tax-exempt ~interest rates eased higher and have gen- erally stabilized at rates 50-75 basis points above 1983 lows. The graph on the reverse side dem- onstrates movement in rates from 1982 to the present using the Bond Buyer Index of 20-year bonds and one-year U.S. Treasury bills. Volume of tax-exempt financ- gs smashed.previous records for first 'half of 1983. This high volume was attributed to a resurg- ence in advanc, e refundings, lower interest rates, and a preference on the part of numerous issuers for selling bonds before the July 1, 1983, registration deadline. Since JulY, .1983, tax-exempt volumes have returned to more customary levels. It is not known how the tax- exempt market will react to legis- lation under consideration in Con- gress to restrict certain private purpose tax-exempt financings. Known as the "Pickle" or "Ros- tenkowski" Bill, this legislation would restrict bonds issued for multi-family, student loan and private projects 1o state-by-state volume caps. The Bill also changes arbitrage rules for stu- dent loan bonds, depreciation rules for solid waste facilities, and aPOSeS other restraints. The Bill s been withdrawn from floor ac- t/on by Rep. Rostenkowski pend- ing further committee discussion. Bond Registration Update New Regulations Less Burdensome To Tax-Exempt Issuers The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsi- bility Act of 1982 made widespread changes to the federal tax laws. An amendment to the Internal Revenue Code requires that almost all municipal bonds sold after June 30, 1983, be in registered form. This provision prohibits tax- exempt interest on an unregistered munici- pal bond. Anticipated investor resistance to registered municipal bonds has not materialized. Many major banks have begun serving issuers as Registrar/Transfer Agent/ Paying Agent/Trustee. To be acceptable to the underwriting community, these institutions must be capable of perform- ing these specific duties within' industry standards based on SEC regulationS; for corporate securities. The fee for this comprehensive service varies. Compari- son is difficult since registrars have altered fee schedules frequently in this initial period and fees are sensitive to the number of ownership transfers. Evensen Dodge assists clients in obtaining current fee schedules from registrars and select- ing an institution to provide effective services at a competitive fee. Advance Refunding A Widely Used Financing Tool Returns After Court Ruling Refunding an outstanding bond issue is an important tool for the financial .management of state and municipal go;,- ernments. The refunding procedure pro- vides a means to reduce interest costs. restructure debt service payments. lengthen maturities (reducing annual debt service costs) and eliminate restric- tive bond covenants. Refunding transac- tions can be among the most complex financings conducted by state and local governments. Their complexity results mainly from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) arbitrage regulations restricting the rate at which proceeds of refunding bonds can be invested, The investment rate can not be materially higher than the rate on the refunding (new) bonds. The first half of 1983 saw a large increase tax-exempt refunding issues due to the IRS's acquiescence following a favorable court decision in a suit brought by the State of Washington. This IRS decision, together with substantially lower interest rates in early 1983, allowed a number of'governmental jurisdictions of all sizes across the nation to issue refunding bonds to replace high coupon debt with Iow coupon debt. Cash Flow Financing Low Interest Rates and Economic Hard Times Generate Higher Volume State and local jurisdictions often ex- perience variations in cash receipts and disbursements. Seasonal cash cycles may cause temporary cash deficiencies despite otherwise healthy financial statements. Bank loans, lines of credit and revenue and tax anticipation notes are among the financing tools used to meet these cash flow needs. Secured by future revenues, taxes, or fees and structured properly, these borrowings can often be conducted at favorable rates. Early in 1983, highly rated one year notes sold at net interest rates as low as 5%, although recently the one year rates have increased to about 6%. In structuring cash flow financings, an issuer must conform to state laws and federal arbitrage regulations, as well as cash flow needs. Careful analysis of alter- natives minimizes net borrowing costs. Evensen Dodge has assisted clients with over S2 billion in short-term financing in the last two years. Evcnsen Dodge. Inc.. formerly T.G. Evensen & Associates. Inc., was founded in 1922 as the nation's first independent financial consultant to state, regional and local governments. The firm assists its clients in planning, structuring and marketing cash ftoa, capital improvement and other long-term financing. Evensen Dodge also prepares feasibility studies, performs ra~e analyses, and provides computer services, softwa?e, and a variety of additional financial services. ' O ~1~',,~ October 27, 1983 BOND BUYERS INDEX RECENT MARKET HISTORY Prepared by Evensen Dodge, Inc. 5.0% 14.0% 13.0% 12.0% 11.o% 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 20 Year G.O. Index This Week -- 9.81% Last Week N 9.68% 1 Year Treasury Bills This Week -- 9.65% Last Week N 9.58% Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec Date 08-25 09-1 10-~ 10-4 10-4 10-4 10-5 10-5 10-5 10~5 10-Il 10-11 10.Il 10.Il 10-1'1 10-12 10-12 10-12 10-12 10.13 10-17 10-17 10-17 10-18 10-18 lq-]8 10-19 10-19 10-19 10-19 10-20 10-20 10-25 RECENT BOND SALES 15.0% 14.0% 13.0% 12.0% .0% '10.0% 9.0% 8.0% P/ease distribute additional copies to members of your board or council. Issuer (000's) Purpose Maturities BBI Rating NIR Minnesota HFA $ 51,205 Res. Mtg. Rev. 85/14 9.59% Aa/AA- 10.41% (TIC) North Dakota HFA 58,375 Single'Family R~v. 85/I,1 9.75% Aa/A+ 10.70% (TLC} Los Angeles, CA 10,615 GAN 1-86 9.49% MIG-I . 6.49% Sun Prairie, WI 3,200 Improvements 85/93 9.49% Al 8.28% Johnston CSD, IA 3,800 School 85/99 9.49% A 8.93% Omaha, NE 10,000 Various 85/03 9.49% Aaa/AAA 8.39% Charleston Co. Sch. Dist., SC 19,700 School Building 86/01 9.49% Aa/AA 8.78% New York, NY 200,000 TAN 1-84 9.,t9% MIG-I 5.89% (Neg) New York, NY 550,000 RAN 6-84 9.~19% MIG-I 6.13% (Neg) Willmar ISD #347, MN 2,775 AAC 9-84 9.49% NR 6.42% Winston Salem, NC 9,265 Various 85/01 9.67% 'Aa I/AA+ 8.30% San Bernadino Redev. Agcy., CA 11,000 Refunding 85/I,~ 9.67% Baa 9,34% (lns.) State of Montana 40,630 Various 84/94 9.67% Aal/AA 7.22% Minneapolis SSD #1, MN 15,000 AAC 9-84 9.67% MIG-1 5.93% Crookston, MN 810 Library 86/99 9.67% Baa I 8.74% University of Texas 33,000 University Rev. 84/03 9.67% Aaa/AAA 8.45% Hoover, AL 9,575 Improvements 85/98 9.67% A/A+ 8.76% State of Connecticut 25,000 Various 6-84 9.67% MIG-I 5.87% State of Missouri 45,000 Various ~/08 9.67% Aaa/AAA 8.81% Williamsburg CSD, IA 775 School Building 85/91 9.67%, A Brooklyn Center, MN 930 Tax Increment 86/97 9.68% Al 8.40% Hastings, MN 1,740 Improvements 86/00 9.68% A 8.80% Moorhead, MN 1.525 Tax Increment 85/90 9.68% A 7.43% State of California 160.000 Various 81/03 9.68/~ Aa/AA '8.45% Robertson Co., TN 9.060 School Refunding 8,~/02 9.65% A 9.19~ piscataway Twp.. NJ 8.2~ Various 85/99 9.68~ Aa/AA- 8.34~ . Flint. MI 9,225 Dev. Ltd. Tax 86/05 9.68~ Baa 9.80% (Ins.) New Orleans, LA 52.000 Improvements 8~/03 9.68/~ A/A'+ 9.86t~ Tulsa. OK 16.500 L~d. Access. Fac. 87/05 9.68% Aa l 8.65~c Amigo. WI 1.325 Imp, Refunding 84/01 9.68~ A 7.95~ LaCrosse Co.. WI 1.110 Improvements 85/98 9.68% Aa 8.33~ Iowa Stale University 18.000 Acad. Bldg. Rex', 86/03 9.689~ Al 8.39~ Maryland DOT 22.2'~0 Trans. Rex,. 85/98 9.68~ Aa/AA 8.71% American Legion Post 398 DATE Oct. 3!. 1983 Gam~lin£ R~port CURRENT IVK)NT H YEAR TO DATE GROSS: ~2335.00 ~2~,!50.00 EXPE~ES: Sales ~ax ~132,16 Supplies 237.Z4 PAYOUT AS PRIZES: ~369.60 1300.00 ~3507.0a !3,3oo.0o PROFIT: ~'665."0 DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: Le~.! on !ns~ai±~ t!on ~'~2.57 Ho,.cke~T Boosters 300.00 Boy Scouts 150.00 Alano 25.00 Ch~,ck!n5 Account fl?02.93 5.17.57 P7771.65 300 Me~rb Squ~e'B'l ., St. Paul, MN 55101 ...>" ;.-,,,. · , · :.' '-= :~',~ <..' ~:?,: -r General,Office, Telephone (61.2) 291-6359 ..? ~..;, .~.~.~ ' ' .,' A Metropolitan Co~ .............. For more information on items in this publication, call the Public Information Office bt.291,-646,4. October 28, 1983 RECENT COUNCIL ACTIONS (Oct. 17-28) Health--The Council recommended the state deny a pro- posal by Careview Home, Inc., Minneapolis, to build a $1.9 million five-level structure adjacent to its existing facility to eliminate all three-bed rooms~ The Council said the project is in conflict with the state's 1983 nursing home moratorium law that seeks to curb rising cbsts for nursing home patients. The Council also recommended approval to the state health department of a change in the ambulance license of District Memorial Hospital, Forest Lake, from basic life support to advanced life support. The recommendation is for all undis- puted areas in the hospital's primary service area, including portions of Anoka, Washington and Chisago Counties. District Memorial and Health Central Hospital, Inc., are currently negotiating a dispute over which hospital should serve Lino Lakes and Centerville. Racetrack--The Council reviewed the transportation and environmental aspects of an environmental assessment work- sheet prepared by Eagan dealing with the city's proposed race- track, office and retail complex. The Council said its comments do not presuppose the location of a racetrack in Eagan and that the Council's review of the city's proposed racetrack is a separate issue. Water Quality-The Council approved the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's acquisition of approximately 14,000 feet of existing sewer in New Brighton. The sewer will be extended 3,000 feet east to the Arden Hills city limits at a to{al cost of $1.8 million. The Council also decided to spend an additional $400,000 to design a project to dechlorinate wastewater from the big ' Metro sewage treatment plant in St. Paul. The project, which the commission expects to cost about $3.3 million, will be 90 ~-,e. rcent funded with state and federal grants and 10 percent funded with metropolitan funds. Finally, the Council awarded a no-interest loan of $30,675 to Farmington for its development of a storm water manage- ment plan. This makes a new total of $278,650 in state grant funds that the Council has allocated for local planning over the past two years. St. Anthony Falls-The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is examining the feasibility of a $33 million project to provide additional hydropower generation at Upper and Lower 'St. Anthony Falls in Minneapolis. In its review of the report, the Council asked the Corps to: - Evaluate measures to ensure a minimum flow of water over the dam comparable to the present flow; -- Discuss potential impacts on Central Mississippi Riverfront Regional Park; - Continue discussions with Minneapolis concerning potential harm to development of the riverfront area; and -- Include reference to a boat launch proposed for Boom Island. Airport South-The Council accepted an amendment to Bloomington's comprehensive plan, reailocating the city's sewage flow to serve proposed development in the Airport South area (old stadium site). Council acceptance of the sewage proposed Airport South development. Parks-The Council authorized $173,165 for Ramsay County to buy additional land for Battle Creek Regional Park, St. Paul, for a new total of $1 ~ million in regional acquisition funds spent on the park. Solid Waste-The Council adopted a report reviewing pro- posals from Metropolitan Area counties for solid waste reduc- tion and recovery. The proposals-waste [eduction, source separation, composting and solid waste energy recovery-are the basis for a plan intendsd to satisfy the Region's solid wa~e. management needs until the year 2000. For a copy of the report, Review of County Proposals for Solid Waste Reduction and Recovery, ~No. 12~3-133;-call the Communications Department at 291-6464. PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC MEETINGS Landfill Sites--The Council and Dakota County will hold a joint public meeting on Dec. 7 at 7:30 p.m. at the Empire Town Hall to hear comments on two potential solid'waste landfill sites. Both sites, AA and BB, are located in Empire Twp. The hall is located one block east of Hwy. 3 on 197th, in Farmington. To speak at the meeting, call Shirlee Smith, Plannlng Assi~t- anco, at 291-6421. For a copy of a review of the Dakota County landfill sites, call the Communications Department at 291.6464. Economic Policies--The Metropolitan Council will hold a public hearing Nov. 16 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers to r~ceive comments on proposed interim economic policies for the Region. The policies are intended to ensure the Council gives appropriate consideration to economic needs in its regional planning decisions. To speak at the hearing, call Shirlee Smith, Planning Assistance, at 291-6421. For informa- tion about the policies, call William Byers, planner, at 291-6322. Waste to Energy-The Council will hold a public meeting Dec. 6 to hear.c~m, m.e~ts on a draft environmental impacj;r,m~ ._ statement (ELS) on the proposed Ramsay/Washington County. Waste-to-Energy Project. The meeting will be held at the Woodbury Jr. High School library, 1425 School Dr., Wood- bury at 7 p.m. The counties have proposed building a facility 'in the southwest corner of Lake Elmo that would burn solid waste to be converted to steam and piped to the 3M company's Mapiewood headquarters. To speak at the meeting, call Shirlee Smith, Planning Assistance, at 291-6421. For a free summary of the draft, or a copy (at cost) of the report, Ramsay/WashingTon Count3/ Waste-to.Energy Project Draft ElS, no. 09-83-134, call the Communications Department at 291-6464. For information on the drafL call Solid Waste Program Manager Lynne BIy at 291-6412. COUNCIL OFFERS AFFORDABLE HOUSING EDUCATION PROGRAM Where will our children live? This is the theme of a Metropolitan Council affordable housing education program offered upon request to local civic groups. The 45.rrdnute program examines today's housing market and the need to orovide affordable housing. Information kits and booklets provide information on a varie~'~ .of housing issues. For more information, c. all Council housing planners J¥ Paterson or Aaa Stern at 291.6472. ATTENTION MAYORS ... "Shaping Your Ciw's Economic Future" is the theme of the 1983 Minnesota Mayors Association Annual Conference to be held at the Thunderbird Motel in Bloomington on Dec. 9-10. Whether you're a mayor of a large or small city, this conference offers you an opportunity to gain practical knowledge and skills on a wide range of timely issues facing all Minnesota Cities. For more information, contact Government Training Service, 202 Minnesota Bldg., 46 E. 4th St., St. Paul, MN 55101, or call 222-7409. MINNESOTA INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW REPLACES A-95 The Minnesota Intergovernmental Review Process has replaced the A-95 review pr.ocess for federal grants and pro. grams. The Metropolitan Council will review applications for approximately 87 federal programs and will forward informa- tion to the state clearinghouse. Following is a partial list of the programs subject to Council and state review. °'CF DA" means Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance published by the federal Office of Management and Budget. The asterisk means that no CF DA number has yet been assigned. A list of the remaining programs will be published over the next few issues of the Review and can be obtained by calling the Communications Department at 291-6464. tEPARTMENT. OF AGRICULTURE CFOA No. Program 10.405 Farm Labor Housing Grants 10.409 Irrigation and Drainage Loans 10.411 Site Development Loans 10.411 Self-HelD Site Deveior3ment Loans 10.413 Recreation Facility Loans 10.414 Resources Conservation & Development Loans 10.415 Rural Rental Housing Loans 10.418 Water & Waste Disposal Loan & Grant Program 10.419 Watershed Loans end Advances 1.0.420 Mutual and Self-HelD Housing Grants 10.422 Business and Industrial Loans 10.423 Communiw Facilities Loanr 10.424 Indu~rial Development Grants 10.430 Energy Impacted Area Development Assistance 10.432 B/amass Energy & Alcohol Fuel Loans 10.557 ' Special Supl>lemental Food Program for Women, In,ants and Children 10.901 Ple~ource Conservation and Development 10.904 Watershed Planning and Operation 10.904 Flood Plain Management · National Forest System Land Ntanegement Practices Which Involve Direct Oevelooment DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE CFDA No. Program 11.300 11.301 11.3C2 11.303 11.30a 11.305 11.306 .307 11.550 11.a00 Economic Devetol3ment--Grants for Public Works and Develooment Facilities Economic DevetoDmenl--Business Development Assis3ance Economic Development-- Suopo~ for Planning Organizations Economic Development--Tecbni~l A~sisZance EConomic D~etoomen~--Public Works ~m~ec~ Projects Economic D~eio~ment- State an~ Lo~l Economic DeveloD~en~ Planning Economic DevetoDmem~- Di~ric~ Operation Assistan~ NEW PUBLICATIONS Ma',rolo/iran Council Review of ,Anoka Counl3/.8/eine ,Airl~orr Exercise: Twin Caries Health Behavior. 0c~. 19~3. Rel:om says Twin mile a ear. A~u[ 1 in 10 resi0en~s ~0gs regularly, Rec0mmefldt health of Ares resi0ents. No. 18~3.1~; 24 DO.; ~1. Trens~orzatFon: The R~A~ea~. SePt. 1983. Transcript of Council. sponsored forum held las~ ~ear on transDo~ation issues facing Twin Cities Area. Issues ~iscuss~ inciuoed how transi~ ~houl0 be Drovid~ en~ Paid for. NO. 26~3~71; 42 DO.; S1.50. Hou~ing Marker Study: 1983 UO~,~ on Housing Affordabili~ in ~e Twin C/rie~ M~rro~oli~n Area. 5eD~. 1983. ReDo~ ~ys the gad ~tween median prices of n~ end existing single-family homes il nar. rowing. The median Dr/ce of an existing single.family home is S91 a n~ one, 5~,3~. However, there's a much br~der price range for existing homes than new ones, so efforoable units are s~ill No. 19~3~8; 36 ~D.; S3.50. Hou~ing Market 3~dy: Condominiums in ~e Twin Citie~ po/iran Area. Sept. 1983. ReDo~ ~ys graph in number of condom/n/. um units ~ocally has been phenomenal, from fewer than 950 in 1990 24,980 bY 1982. ~me rea~ns: more ~oDle are living ~lone; ~ny are Dost~ning marriage and having fewer children. No. 19~3~5; 36 ~.; S1 .~. Guidelines for Land Use ComDat/bEi~ wi~ A/rcraf~ Noise, Amend. ~nr To Aviation ~ter, MerroDo/i~n Oevelo~enr Guide. 1983. GuiOeiines ~ffe~ areas around Minnea~Hs-St. Paul International Air~or~ and the Area's other seven eirDo~s. Guidelines 0iscour~ge development not compatible with noise from aircraft ~raffic, such single.family homes, and encourage comDatibie land uses. No. 25~3- ~; 32 DP.; $1 COMING MEETINGS (Nov. 7-18) flnformation be/ow is tentative. To verify, ca//291.6464.) Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission-Monday, Nov. 7, 3 p.m., Council Chambers. Program Development and Review Committee- Monday, Nov. 7, 5 p.m., Council Chambers. Air Quality Committee-Tuesday, Nov. 8, 9:30 a.m., Conference Room B. Management Committee-Tuesday, Nov. B0 1 p.m., Con- ference Room E. Long-Term Care Forum-Metropolitan Council-"Epilogue: Public Policy Issues"-Tuesday, Nov. 8, :3 p.m., Council Chambers'. Committee on Metropolitan Commissions-Wednesday, Nov. 9, 1:30 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan Health Planning Board-Wednesday, Nov, 9, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Community and Development Committee-- Thursday, Nov. 10, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Council Committee of the Whole-Thursday, Nov. 10, 3 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Council--Thursday, Nov. 10, 4 p.m.0 Council Chambers. Program Development and Review Committee-Monday, Nov. 14, 5 p.m., Conference Room E. Arts Advisory Committee-Tuesday, Nov. 15, 5:15 p.m., Council Chambers. Management Committee-Tuesday, Nov. 15, 1 p.m., Conference Room E. Special Commit-tee on Resource Management-Tuesday, Nov. 15, 3 p.m., Conference Room E. Transportation Advisory Board-Wednesday, Nov. 16, 9 a.m., Council Chambers. Commi~ee on Metropolitan Commissions-Wednesday, Nov. 16, 3 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan and Community Development Committee-- Thursday, Nov. 17, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Mayor's Lake Overflow Task Force- Thursday, Nov; 17. 3 p.m., Conference Room E. Computer Security Subcommi~ee of the Criminal Justice Advisory Commi~ee-Thursday, Nov. 17, 7 p.m.,' Northwestern National Life Insurance 8',dg. Auditorium, 20 Washington Ay. S., MDIs. . - Aging Advisory Commi~ee--Friday, Nov. 15, 9 a.m., November 2, 1983 TO: FROM: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks Don Sl~ter RE: Industrial Development Bond Authority Attacked in Congress IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED At this hour, the continuing struggle in Congress to restrict and, eventually, to eliminate local authority to issue Industrial Development Bonds hangs precariously im the balance. The situation is complex. Procedural maneuvering and clever efforts to enact these limits without a fair discussion of new restrictions have moved the threat closer than ever before. The bottom line remains the same. Minnesota city officials must immediately contact their members of the U.S. House of Representatives and both our U.S. Senators urgently requesting'that they support the continued authority of cities to issue IDBs without new restrictions, state quotas, or other measures which discriminate against M%nnes0ta cities, and, potentially, frustrate local economic and redevelopment efforts by city governments. · WHAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED On october 24, the House Ways and Means Committee reported out a tax bill, H.R. 4170, a comprehensive measure dealing with a great many tax policies, but also containing a chapter on IDBs. Final consideration of the restrictive IDB provisions was, completed in secret. The final bill eventually had 24 sponsors from among committee members (including Congressman Frenzel), including committee chairman, Dan Rostenkowski and senior Republican member, Barber Conable. The anti-IDB provisions include the following new restrictions: 1) A $150 per capita limit on the amount of IDBs which may be issued annually in each state. The state volume cap would be allocated 50% to the state government and 50% to local governments on the basis of population. The Governor, on an interim basis, and the Legislature would be able to revise the allocation. 2) New, severe,and confusing limits on artitrage. 3) Limiting the use of small issue IDBs for a principal user not to exceed more'than $40 million of IDB debt outstanding after issuance. 4) A prohibition on the use of IDBs for the purchase of land or existing facilities. __ (~)~ ~.r. ~:-:ve~,t~5, ~'.,e.~ue em=s~. ~. ~=~!. rmi~te~©~ ~_~5 ~1 {~q ~) ~7,~00y -OVER- Denial of tax exemption for bonds issued with federal g~arantees. 6) Other limitations. -The House Ways and Means Committee bill went to the Rules Committee with a request that no amendments to the bill be permitted on the House floor, including the IDB provisions. A coalition of Rules Committee members insisted that the IDB provisions be debated and amended when the bill was on the House floor for a final vote. Rather than face the possibility of amendments to the IDB provisions, Congressman Rostinkowski withdrew his request for floor consideration of the bill. (He hopes that pressure from other beneficiaries of the tax bill, particularly the insurance industry will pressure the Rules Committee.to force a "closed rule" i.e., no amendments, in order.that the other provisions of the tax bill be enacted before Congress recesses on November 19). WHAT THE SENATE MAY DO IF THE BILL IS APPROVED IN THE HOUSE Meanwhile, in the Senate, the Finance Committee is working toward a tax package. It appears, however, that the Senate bill will not have an IDB section. Senate tax · Committee Chairman Dole has not developed a consensus with regard to the final shape of a Senate tax proposal, but if the House passes a tax bill, the Senate could act on short notice and send a tax bill to a conference committee with.representatives of the House Ways and Means Committee (who support IDB restrictions). DANGEROUS POSSIBILITIES FOR THE FUTURE OF IDBS The dangers at play here include the possibility that Congressma~ Rostenkowski will ultimately succeed in getting the tax bill to the House floor with no opportunity for significant amendments to be offered to the IDB provisions of the bill. The comprehensive tax proposal could then go to conference where representatives of the Senate Finance Committee might well agree to the entire House IDB proposal and hammer out other compromises as well. Then both the House and the Senate would be faced with approving a final tax package of which the IDB portion is only a small part, with enormous pressure to vote approval. In ~his event, the Congress would never have considered the IDB provisions in open session. Cities would simply be handed the final set of regulations and restrictions. STATE VOLUME CAPS AND ARBITRAGE SPELLS TROUBLE Perhaps the most damaging feature of the new IDB restrictions is the state volume cap. Enactment of this regulation would mean that the Governor and the legislature would decide how to allocate the limited authority to issued IDBs, first between the state and the cities, and secondly, among and between cities, counties, and urban townships. Minnesota already exceeds any of the proposed annual volume caps and would face extraordinarily difficult problems of how to cut back IDB programs throughout the state. It is also arguable that the new restrictions on arbitrage (which are patterned on restrictions in the Housing Revenue Bond legislation of a year and a half ago) would prevent mamy cities from issuing IDBs at all. WHY IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO DELAY ACTION TO CONTACT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Even though the proposed tax package would remove the sunset from Housing Revenue Bonds, it is difficult to see that this gain is worth the immediate loss and potential long-rerm struggle at the state level which would result from the enactment of the federal legislation. Cities should immediately inform their Congressmen and Senators of their opposition to the IDB regulations proposed in H.R. 4170. Please provide the League office copies of your correspondence and any feedback you receive. .~~ TOWN S~UARE PROJECT AREA PROPER~ 10. 20. 22. 2B. 24. 25. 26. Medical Properties, Inc. Eugene BiCkmann Thomas L. Giesen/Paul E. Busche City of Mound M. E. Mueller Mound Builders (Johnson) State Lan~' Dept. Broich Agency Broich Agency City of Mound City of Mound Wm. N. Johnson Medical Properties Medical Properties M. E. Mueller. M. E. Mueller Geo. Shepherd/John R. Morrison Geo. Shepherd Great Northern RR/Conco Parking Lot Garage ~ouse - Parking Lot Tom Thumb Vacant Vacant Super Valu Parking Lot Alley Ci"M~CH7. ~ m LYNWOOD BLVD' u~ 17 Anderson Building Bakery Mound Clinic Alley Muetler Pharmacy Alley Laundromat Vacant Coast-to-Coast ;HURCH RO '1,%' -' ~ ~ .Town Square ... Mound, MN ~ ¥ "~ ~l°°L. t~  ' ! ' ' Lynwood Blvd '"! Utilities Sanitary Sewer Water Storm Sewer Manhole or Catch Basin TOWN SQUARE PROJECT AREA (2) (6) (7) (10) (20) (21) (22) (24) (25) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) 13-117-24-32-0161 MEDICAL PROPERTIES, INC. 13-117-24 33 0027 EUGENE BICKMANN 13-117-24 32 0125 THOMAS GIESEN/PAUL BUSCHE 13-117-24 43 0129 CITY OF MOUND 13-117-24 33 0001 M. E. MUELLER 13-117-24 33 0058 MEDICAL PROPERTIES, INC. · 13-117-24 33 0059 MEDICAL PROPERTIES,INC. 13-117-24 33 0060 M. E. MUELLER 13-117-24 33 0061 M. E~ MUELLER 13-117-24 33 0062 GEO. 'SHEPHERD/JOHN MORRISON 13-117-24 33 0063 GEO. SHEPHERD 13-117-24 33 0041 STATE LAND DEPT. 13-117-24 33 0042 BROICH AGENCY/SUPER VALU 13-117-24 33 0043 BROICH AGENCY 13-117-24 33 0044 CITY OF MOUND 13-117-24 33 0045 CITY OF MOUND 13-117-24 33 0046 WILL N. JOHNSON 13-117-24 33 0064 WILL N. JOHNSON (BLDG.) GREAT NORTHERN R.R. (LAND) 1983 ' ASSESSOR' S APPRAISED ASSESSED TAX MARKET VALUE VALUE VALUE LAND BLDG. 1276.14 20700 '0 63000 8901 3635.24 62400 24200 125000 35738 849.15 19000 26200 52000 8324 .00 0 0 82500 0 3888.94 11600 80800 95000 38232 8179.78 13800 176700 285000 80~15 61.22 1400 0 2300 602 1993.70 6500 42500 115000 19600 34.98 800 0 1100 344 1688.52 5600 35900 48000 16600 101.71 2500 0 5000 1000 .0o 0 0 5100 0 9496.35 26400 194200 245000 93358 1360.28 31100 0 45000 13373 .00 0 0 1100 0 .00 0 0 100000 0 2371.17 6400 51300 50000 23311 1513.37 36~50.55 34600 (R.R.) 165000 14878 242800 631800 1485100 354676 RTn VALUE OF TAX EXEMPT PROPERTIES:' VALUE O? R.R. PROPERTY: TOTAL ~IBB,?oo 130,000 1,1 93,300 DIEFFERENCE BETWEEN ASSESSOR'S YKLUE$ & APPRAISAL REPORT - $291,800