The URL can be used to link to this page

2000-09-26PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONF~ & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000, 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine fin nature and will be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. OPEN MF. ETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PAGE 2. SWEARING IN OF POLICE OFFICER MICHAI::.I. BUETOW ...... 3918-3919 3. APPROVE AGENDA *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTF3: 1. AUGUST 29, 2000 BUDGET WORKSHOP .............. 3920 2. SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 BUDGET WORKSHOP ............ 3921 3. SEPTEMBER 13, 2000, RESC~~ REGULAR MEETING ....................... 3922-3940 *B. APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS ................... 3941-3960 *C. APPROVE PAYME~ OF PAYMENT REQUESTS 1. KUSSKE CONSTRUCTION AUDITOR'S ROAD ........................ 3961-3965 2. MACHTEMF_3 STREET & UTIL IMPR ........... 3966--3969 *D. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. PUBLIC LAND PERMIT: DOCK SITE #41824, DEVON COMMONS - MARK SMITH - 4665 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE .................. 3970-3982 COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTF3 PER SPEAKF~R.) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS A. CASE g00-48: VARIANCE - GREG PETRICH - 4856 DONALD DR ............................. 3983-3996 3916 PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. CASE ~0-§8: VARIANCE - TED OARE - 1801 RF~THAVEN LaN ........................... 399'74013 e SENIOR CENTER A. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON AGREEMF_MT FOR STORM WATER PON-DING ON CITY PROPERTY. B. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON SENIOR CENTER REQUF~TS. . . 4014-4016 PRESENTATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WEST EDGE BOULEVARD. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON AMENDED OUTDOOR STORAGE AGREEMENT .................................... 40174032 10. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ORDINANCE REVISION REGARDING VEHICLES FOR SALE IN CITY-MAINTAINED PARKING LOTS ....................... 4033 11. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON lvflNNEHAHA CREEK WATERSI-I~D DISTRICT REQUEST FOR REPRESENTATION ............... 4034-4041 12. WORKSHOP: DISCUSSION ON GUIDELINES FOR AN ETHICS POLICY .................................. 40424049 13. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Advisory Park and Open Space Commission meeting minutes: Sept 14 ..................................... 4050-4053 B. LMCD Correspondence ........................... 40544069 C. Memo on Hennepin County Member At-Large Appointments .... 40704071 Do Notice of public hearing from Hennepin County Board of Commissioners ................................ 40724105 E. Letter from Metropolitan Council on appointment .............. 4106 F. Letter from Metropolitan Council on Town Hall Meetings ......... 4107 G. Letter from Hennepin County on Fair Housing ................ 4108 H. Communication from Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative. 41094112 I. Financial Reports through August 2000 .................. 4113-7115 3917 PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. $. Notice of new compost location ......................... 4116 K. AMM Fax News ............................... 4117-4118 L. Notice of new web site address ......................... 4119 M. Westonka Senior Center President's Message ............. 4120-4021 N. Planning Commission Minutes; September 11, 2000 ........ 4122-4127 This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. More current meeting agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: www. cityofmound, com. 3918 LEN HARRELL Chief o! Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 PUBLIC TRUST Edwin J. Delattrc When a citizen pins on a police badge, he voluntarily agrees to bear the public Wast. He is entrusted to protect the safety and the rights of his fellow members of society. -- To provide these protections, the officer is given special authority and powers. He has the authority to investigate other people, to abridge their normal liberties, and to use force when necessary. There are two basic limits t~ the rightful use of his authority and powers by the police officer. First, it is wrong for the officer to use his office ,f6r personal profit or gain, wrong for him to accept any favor that places his own advan ,tag, ~ above the welfare of the public. Second, it is wrong for the officer to violate the ConstitUtion or the laws in the performance of his work. : Some officers are offered favors.by citizens who hope for preferential treatment at a later time. Those who accept such favors dishonor themselves and the badge. Likewise, officers are confi'onted with monstrous crimes and rightly want to get perpetrators off the streets. But they have no right to behave illegally to accomplish this purpose. The police officer must abide by the laws guaranteeing citizen rights to the fullest extem of his training and understanding of them. Beyond these requirements, the officer must bring personal qualities to his work that the badge cannot provide for him. The most important qualities are common sense and common decency. He should never expose himself needlessly to danger, he should maintain his physical fimess and his skillfulness in the use of the tools of his work, and he should pay attention to the needs of the people he serves.. Living up to the public trust is demanding work. It can.involve disappointment, weariness, and stress. These are the facts of life in police w'°'tk. But this is the work each police officer has chosen for himself. The Mound Police Departmem is obligated~o provide the best possible training and support for its officers throughout their ~. When the officer pins on the badge, he becomes public servant, but he also becomes a member of the Department. I have read and understand the values contained above and agree to conduct myself always in a manner that honors the department and the community. Michael Buetow September 22, 2000 LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS As a Law Enforcement Officer, my fun~ental duty is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property;...to '~r~0tect the ~0cent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimida~tion, and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and to respect the Constimtioff~d fights of all men to liberty2 equality, and justice. I will keep my private life unsullied as an example ~o all; maintain courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn, ridicule; develop'self-restraint; and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others. Honest in thought and deed in both my personal and official life, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of .the land and the regulations of my department. Whatever I see or hear of a confidential nature or that is confided to me in my official capacity will be kept ever secret unless revelation is necessary in the performance of my duty. I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities, or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminals, I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately withom fear or favor, malice or ill-will, never employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities. I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith, and I accept it as a public trust to be held so long as I am tree to the ethics of the police service. I will constantly slxive to achieve these objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession ... law enforcement. Michael Buetow September 26, 2000 BUDGET WORKSHOP MINUTES - CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 29, 2000 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met for a Budget Workshop session on Tuesday, August 29, 2000, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Pat Meisel, Council Members: Andrea Ahrens, Bob Bwwn, Mark Hanus and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Fran Clark, and the following Department Heads: Finance Director Gino Businaro; Park Director Jim Fackler, Public Works Superintendent Greg Skinner, Building Official Ion Sutherland, Police Chief Len Harrell, and Fire Chief Greg Pederson. The Department Heads presented their proposed 2001 Budgets to the City Council. The Council discussed different aspects of the proposed Budget and decided they needed to continue this meeting to Wednesday, September 6th at 6:00 P.M. to discuss the enterprise funds. Kandis Hanson, City Manager Attest: City Clerk CONTINUED BUDGET WORKSHOP MINUTES - CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met for the continued Budget Workshop session on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Pat Meisel, Council Members: Andrea Ahrens, Bob Brown, Mark Hanus and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Fran Clark, and the following Department Heads: Finance Director Gino Businaro; Park Director Jim Fackler, Public Works Superintendent Greg Skinner, and Police Chief Len Harrell. The Council reviewed the enterprise funds and gave direction to the City Manager and Finance Director. They would like only a 6% increase in the overall budget. Brown moved and Ahrens seconded a motion to adjourn at 10:35 P.M. The vote was ,nanimously in favor. Motion carried. Kandis Hanson, City Manager Attest: City Clerk DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 MINIYFES - CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Wednesday, September 13, 2000, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Pat Meisel; Council Members: Andrea Ahrens, Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were Acting City Attorney Mac LeFevre City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Fran Clark, Building Official Jon Sutherland, City Planner Loren Gordon, Park Director Jim Fackler, City Engineer John Cameron, and Recording Secretary Diana Mestad. The following interested citizens were also present: Ken and Sally Custer, Gary Hart, Peter Meyer, Mike Huspek, Gerald Babb, Chester Yanik of Yanik Companies, Lowell Olson of Yanik Companies, Tom Raner, Cai Korth, Betty Carlson, Tabatha Hanly, Nancy Hanly, Jennie Carlson Baltutis, and John Evans. *Consent Agenda: Ail items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed frorn the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Meisel opened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. and welcomed the people in attendance. The pledge of allegiance was recited. APPROVE AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA The City Manager added item F Resolution Authorizing Application for the Livable Communities Demonstration Program and requested that items 6 and 7 be reversed on the Agenda. Council Member Hanus asked to have the POSC Minutes of August 10, 2000, moved from the information section to the last item before adjournment item 14B to new item 15 for discussion. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus, to approve the agenda and consent agenda with the changes noted above. The roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. CONSENT AGENDA *1.0 APPROVE MINUTES: AUGUST 22, 2000. REGULAR MEETING. Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. *1.1 APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS. '1.2 *1.3 Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. APPROVE MOVING OCT 3, SPECIAL MEETING FOR 2001 BUDGET WORKSHOP TO 6:00 P.M., OCTOBER 16, 2000. Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. SET PUBLIC ItEARINGS: OCTOBER 10. 2000. A. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS: UNPAID TREE REMOVAL BILL: AND UNPAID DRIVEWAY APRON BILLS. Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. B. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR CBD PARKING. Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: · 1.4 CASE//00-41: MINOR SUBDIVISION - 6301 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD - JENNIE CARLSON BALTUTIS. RESOLUTION//00-79 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION TO CREATE ONE ADDITIONAL LOT FROM THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6301 LYNWOOD BLVD., LOT 1, BLOCK 11, MOUND TERRACE, P & CASE//00-41, PID//14-117-24 33 0002 Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. · 1.5 SIGN PERMIT: OUR LADY OF THE LAKE - 2385 COMMERCE BOULEVARD - "INCREDIBLE FESTIVAL". Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. · 1.6 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR TIlE LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM. Ahrens & Hanus, unanimously. Motion carried. 1.7 CANVASSING OF ELECTION RESULTS. OPEN SPACE REFERENDUM. Mayor Meisel read the Resolution certifying the results of the Municipal Questions Election Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 as Presented at the Canvass Vote of the September 12, 2000 Election: Pet. Pct. TOTAL 5 6 QUESTION #1 YES 92 51 181 14 2 185 212 863 NO 119 85 221 213 203 117 958 QUESTION#2 YES 84 43 162 142 168 192 791 NO 128 90 238 213 216 134 1019 Question No. 1 - 863 Yes votes and 958 No votes. Question No. 2 - 791 Yes votes and 1019 No votes. The Canvassing Board hereby certifies that Question No. 1 was defeated and Question No. 2 was defeated. Brown moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//00-81 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE MUNICIPAL QUESTIONS AS PRESENTED AT THE CANVASS OF VOTE OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2000, ELECTION The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ABOUT SUBJECTS NOT ON THE AGENDA. (PLEASE LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SUBJECT.} John Evans, 2025 Arbor Lane, asked whether anyone had thought about changing the name of the town to West Tonka, as that would be more accurate. He wondered how he could go about beginning this process. Acting City Attorney LeFevre stated that Council could support such an application and that he would get back to Mr. Evans regarding the proper process to follow. Council Member Brown stated that the town was originally named Mound because of the Indian burial mounds located there. Pete Meyers, 5748 Sunset Road, inquired where Council was on filling the Park Board position that had been vacant since January. He stated that the POSC interviewed candidates on July 13. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Mayor Meisel asked why this had not been included on the Agenda. Council Member Hanus added that advertising for additional applicants should also have been done. The City Manager stated that the advertising would take place this weekend and that the procedure for interviewing candidates is in tonight's packet. 1.8 PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CHANGING SUNDAY ON-SALE HOURS FOR LIQUOR SALES. Mayor Meisel opened the Public Hearing at 8:00 p.m. John Evans, 2025 Arbor Lane, stated that he thought this was a good idea. Mayor Meisel closed the Public Hearing at 8:02 p.m. The City Clerk stated that she prepared the memo for this request because she had been approached by local businesses asking for this change to allow Sunday on-sale of liquor sales to start at 11:00 a.m. Council Member Brown stated that he backs this proposal. The City Clerk stated that the notice would have to be published and the earliest it could take effect would be September 24, 2000. Hanus moved and Brown seconded the following Ordinance: ORDINANCE//111-2000 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 800:05, SUBD. 5 OF THE CITY CODE RELATED TO HOURS FOR CLASS B ON-SALE SUNDAY SALES The vote was unanimOusly in favor. Motion carried. 1.9 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE g00-42: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ROBIN LANE - JENNIE CARLSON BALTUTIS. The City Planner stated that the minor subdivision has been approved, but that this is a permit to move the house. He stated that it was Staff's recommendation to approve the request with the following condition: 1. Remove only those trees on the west side of the driveway as needed to accommodate the move. Council Member Brown stated that Planning Commissioner Weiland had wanted it made clear that the house should be brought up to code with no variances granted. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Council Member Hanus stated that the Resolution did state "variances" in item 2 and wondered what they were. The City Planner stated that the term "variances" was incorrect and should be struck from the Resolution. Council Member Hanus asked what the arrangements were for hookup fees and utilities needed to be placed in the street. The City Planner stated that Hennepin County would want the hookups in Robin Lane. Council Member Hanus asked who would be paying the assessments. The City Planner stated that the utilities were in the right-of-way dedicated to the City and that Rottland would put them in and pay for them. The City Engineer confirmed that this was the case. Council Member Hanus pointed out that Robin Lane would be moving somewhat and wondered if the drawings reflected the new setbacks. The City Planner stated that the setbacks would come down about 10 feet but still be to code. The City Building Official stated that Staff would be reviewing this one more time, as the building permit on this project was the same as for new construction. Mayor Meisel opened the Public Hearing at 8:12 p.m. Gerald Babb. 2169 Birch Lane, stated that the neighbors are aware of this plan and are in favor of saving this historical building. Jenny Carlson Baltutis, 4845 10th Ave S, Minneapolis, stated that she grew up on the property adjacent to the house and wants to save the house. Peter Meyers, 5157 Sunset, stated that he strongly backs moving this house. Dan Carlson, 6301 Lynwood Blvd, stated that he felt there was some confusion about Robin Lane. He stated that property owners have sold 10 feet on each side for setback and there will be a 50-foot roadway. Mayor Meisel closed the Public Hearing at 8:16 p.m. Ahrens moved and Weycker seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~ffi0.82 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDmONAL USE PERMIT TO RELOCATE A SINGLE FAMILy RESIDENCE FROM 1000 ROBIN LANE TO 6301 LYWOOD BLVD., P & Z CASE//00-42 Motion carried. The vote was unanimously in favor. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 1.10 DISCUSSION/ACTION ON PETITION FOR SWENSON PARK PLAY STRUCTURE. Park Director Jim Faclder stated that replacement of this playground equipment is requested at $30,000 as part of the capital outlay for 2001. Council Member Brown stated that he had been out to the park and the equipment is in very bad condition. Council Member Ahrens stated that this was a request made by the Park Commission last year. Council Member Brown asked if any of the existing equipment was dangerous. The Park Director stated that whether it was replaced or not, the existing equipment would have to be removed either this fall or early next spring. Shelley Dewitt stated that she was the person who started the petition asking for new equipment. She stated that the kids get slivers from the old equipment and that all that is left is monkey bars and a slide. Joan Cannon stated that she lives across from the park. She stated that the kids are getting into the tennis courts because there is nothing else to do. She further stated that back in the 1970's there was a rink in this park and she would like to see that back. Betty Carlson, 4743 Dorchester Road, stated that the basketball hoops at the park are also missing and further stated that the existing equipment needs to be taken down for safety reasons. Peter Meyer, Park Commission Board, stated that the Park Commission has had this high on its list for three years and is asking for money in this year's budget for this project. Krista Flit, 4740 Richmond, stated that she wanted a new park to use for the summer parks program. Lindsay Dewitt, stated that she wanted a new park because the current park was not fun. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to go all out this year to bring the equipment up to standard and to make a commitment not to eliminate this item from the budget. Discussion: Council Member Hanus stated that he felt the Motion was inappropriate as stated because it was necessary to find a place in the budget for this expenditure. He did feel that planning for outdoor ice would work out and that the Park Director could best determine how to get that done. He further stated that the Council's intention does not need a motion and given Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 the current budget condition this was not the best course of action. Council Member Brown stated that he felt this would give Staff direction on the Council's priority. Mayor Meisel asked whether the $30,000 for the playground equipment was a good number. The Park Director stated this was a good number and that Staff would be doing the ground preparation and installation to keep the cost down. Council Member Hanus asked what the $30,000 would buy. The Park Director showed sketches of the proposed playground including two tot toys, a climbing structure and a swing set. This would also include the under-structure, a new berm, drainage, handicap accessibility and would essentially double the size of the existing playground. Council Member Brown stated that in the past the fire department would go out with the tanker truck to flood the rinks and wondered if this was still done. Mayor Meisel stated that although the fire department does a lot of things to benefit the community, it was not the place of Council to commit them to doing the flooding. Council Member Weycker stated that at this point, the playground equipment was the issue. The Park Director broke down the cost of the equipment as follows: Swings $1400-$1500 Tot toys $500 each (2) Benches $275 The Park Commission is planning to save on excavation costs by doing the work themselves. The Park Director stated that if a contractor did the work the cost would be $36,000- $37,000. Council Member Hanus stated that the $30,000 did not include any leeway money and was counting on Staff to do the work. The Park Director stated that it would be possible to cut back on some of the toys and put those in the next year. He further stated that it was important to prepare the site first. Council Member Ahrens stated that there was not much shade for a summer park program and wondered if there would still be room for a pavilion that had been talked about at one time. The Park Director stated there would not be room for the pavilion with the proposed expansion. Council Member Brown suggested leaving out the tot toys and placing a small gazebo in that area. Council Member Hanus pointed out that the City did not have money for a gazebo. Mayor Meisel suggested the possibility of the pavilion being funded by the Jaycees or the Lions Club, but also stated there was a need to protect enough land for a baseball field. She Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 further stated that finding the money for the playground equipment in the budget would take some work and asked for some ideas from the Park Director on this. The Park Director stated that he has looked at the putting the money in the regular capital outlay and also the possibility of doing the playground in stages. He has also approached the Jaycees for funding for this project. Council Member Brown stated that the VFW has a Support the Children Program, which is financed from pull-tabs. He will ask them for funding. Mayor Meisel stated that the bottom line was to find avenues to make this project happen. Council Member Ahrens stated that she wanted a commitment that this will get serious consideration. The Motion was reread and Council Member Brown decided to withdraw his original motion. MOTION, by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to direct Staff to make it a priority to keep Swenson Park playground equipment in the budget if at all possible. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. Mayor Meisel called a break at 8:50 p.m. Mayor Meisel called the meeting to order at 9:08 p.m. 1.11 STAFF REPORT: MEETING WITH CITY OF MINNETRISTA ON WEST EDGE BOULEVARD AND WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS FOR LANGDON BAY SUBDIVISION. The City Planner stated that he and the City Manager went to a workshop meeting with the City of Minnetrista to determine if Minnetrista was receptive to the road planned for the Langdon Bay project. Minnetrista has requested that the Mound Council meet with them on October 9, 2000 to further discuss this issue. Minnetrista has indicated that they do not have an issue with the plans for the water main. Council Member Hanus asked whether it was Minnetrista's intent to tap into the water main when their development went in. The City Planner stated that this was something that still needed to be worked through. The City Engineer stated that issues with water were with the property owner and not Minnetrista as no easement exists. The land has never been platted south of the railroad tracks. Council Member Brown asked whether the plan was to pave the whole road. The City Engineer stated that the current plan is to pave from 15 to the south corner of the Rottland Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 development and it sounds like Minnetrista is requiring their developer to improve that stretch of road. The current issue is putting curb and gutter on both sides, as Minnetrista is not willing to contribute to this cost. Council Member Ahrens stated that she recognized that it was Minnetrista's policy to have the developer pay these costs, but she felt this was a unique situation in that the road is owned by two cities. The City Manager stated that initially Minnetrista's stand had been that this road should keep its rural character but now some of their council is agreeable to the curb and gutter on both sides. Council Member Hanus pointed out that Mound has already considered doing the curb and gutter on both sides, but there is not enough money available for this. Council Member Ahrens stated that at the hearings held in Mound, Minnetrista residents had expressed concern about runoff and this may be having an impact on the Minnetrista Council. The City Engineer stated that Staff is suggesting ordering a feasibility study to look at the road and to do some survey work for the design. Council Member Ahrens stated that Council needed to make a decision as to whether they were interested in having the Mound developer pick up the cost for Minnetrista. Council Member Hanus stated that he would need to see the study first. The City Manager stated that the road drops off on the west and asked whether the feasibility study might show that a natural type of drainage is best on this road. The City Engineer confirmed that this was possible. Council Member Ahrens asked whether the feasibility study might show that there was no need for curb and gutter on the Mound side. The City Manager stated it would probably only affect the west side of the road. Mayor Meisel asked whether the City Engineer was looking for $2,800 to do the feasibility study. The City Engineer confirmed this was the amount and stated that this project requires a 4/5 vote to order the project and specs per the City Attorney. He further stated that the 35 % required for the pefiton includes both sides and Rottland does not have enough on its own. Council Member Weycker asked whether the cost of the study could be assessed. The City Engineer stated that it would be reimbursable. MOTION, by Hanus, seconded by Brown, to authorized up to $2,800 to conduct a feasibility study. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 The City Manager stated that the City of Minnetrista has invited the Mound City Council to a joint meeting on October 9, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. to discuss this project. She estimated that the meeting would last about one hour. MOTION, by Ahrens, seconded by Brown to hold a special meeting with the City of Minnetrista on October 9, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. 1.12 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: CASE//00-50: FINAL PLAT - GILLESPIE ADDITION - 2590 COMMERCE BOULEVARD - WESTONKA SENIOR CENTER. The City Planner stated that he would be discussing some issues that needed to be resolved with the developer. He also stated that Council needed to determine if the final plat was consistent with the preliminary plat, as the final plat shows two lots and the preliminary plat had shown only one lot. He explained that a state statute allows the senior center to get a tax exemption if the lot is less than one acre. Splitting this into two lots allows this exemption for the building lot. Staff is suggesting that because lot 2 is for parking and not another building, the two lots should be held together. Council Member Brown asked for confirmation of the senior center's tax-free ability. The City Planner stated that this was not a Council action to approve. The City Planner stated that there is an issue with the developer regarding the building setback. Originally it was stipulated that the south side setback be no less than 23 feet, but the revised site plan now shows a setback of 21.4 feet. Council should consider approving a new south side back or moving the building to conform to the original stipulation. Council Member Hanus asked why this setback issue had occurred. The City Planner stated that he did not know, but thought that the building would not fit on the site as originally planned. Council Member Brown asked whether the Planning Commission would be seeing the revised site plan. The City Planner stated this would not go back to the Planning Commission. Council Member Brown stated that on the new sheet the corners are not angled on the building as they were at the Planning Commission. Council Member Hanus pointed out that the drawings did not show the easement. The City Planner stated that the documents indicate a 10-foot easement access on the south edge of the property, which now impacts the driveway and plantings. Council Member Hanus asked if there was still room for this easement including room for a backhoe for pond maintenance. The City Planner stated there was room. Council Member Brown pointed out that the new plan shows a walkout and patio and t0 Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 wondered if that would reduce the setback. The City Engineer stated that because the property line angles, the setback should still work. The City Planner stated that on the preliminary plat the rear yard setback was 16 feet, but on the final plat it is 11.7 feet. Council Member Hanus pointed out that the angle actually makes this less and that it should be measured to the footings. The City Planner stated that the angle was actually looked at as decorative rather than structural. Mayor Meisel asked the architect and the developer on this project to address the Council. Chester Yanik stated that they wished to discuss the process of the original preliminary plat. In reference to the replatting of the lots, Lowell Olson stated that at the time of the original submission, they were not aware of the one acre limitation for tax relief, but that was always Roger Reed's intent. The plat is laid out in this fashion for this purpose only. Chester Yanik stated that they would submit all the legal documentation supporting this to the City and that there was no problem with putting a restriction to tie the lots together. Council Member Hanus stated that this was not a problem, but the lots would need to be linked and a restriction against placing a building on lot 2 would be necessary. Mr. Yanik asked whether approval on this issue was necessary to move forward. The Acting City Attorney stated that the conditions in the Resolution would accomplish this. Mr. Yanik stated that in reference to the building placement, setbacks on the south and east, and the easement in reference to the location of the pond, it was decided to move the pond to the northeast and enlarge it. This would also include a storm sewer system. The City Engineer stated that he had not reviewed this yet. Mr. Yanik stated that an 8 foot maintenance easement has been moved to the south side, the building now exits on all sides for the fire code, and only one comer is a 21.4 foot setback on the backside of the building. Council Member Hanus asked why the comers of the building were now square. Mr. Yanik stated that this made more sense with the floor plan, but that the building is in the same place. Council Member Brown stated that when the preliminary plat was brought before the Planning Commission the set back was 30 feet and it was agreed that it would go to no less than 23 feet. There was a strong concern of crowding the neighbors behind this decision. Council Member Brown further stated that he feels it is an issue when the preliminary plat is changed and is not brought back before the Planning Commission. Mr. Yanik stated that he was advised by the City to do it this way and that it was not a purposeful move. tt Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Council Member Hanus stated that the preliminary plat had been a painful process with the neighbors and these changes had not been noticed to the neighbors. He recalled that at the preliminary plat stage, the maintenance easement was on the north side and not the south side as is now presented. He stated that he did not think there was room on the south side. Mr. Yanik stated that the irregular lot line was controlling the setback on the north side and that there would not be access on that side. He stated that they had talked with Staff and decided that it made sense to use the south side where 30 feet was available. Council Member Brown stated that the Planning Commission had wanted the building further to the north, but the developer suggested that the easement was best served on the south side. Now that the easement is on the south, Council Member Brown suggested moving the building over to the north. Council Member Hanus asked what the setback on the north side was. Mr. Olson stated it was 13 feet. Council Member Weycker asked where the easement for the trial had gone. Mr. Olson stated that the public access for the proposed trail is the same as the easement to the pond. Council Member Hanus stated that this was a complicated process to begin with and now the Council would need to go through it again as there is a need to protect the public. Council Member Ahrens asked whether 4 feet of landscaping on the south side would now be lost. Mr. Yanik confirmed this. Council Member Weycker asked for clarification of the trail. The City Planner stated that the idea was to provide a link between Commerce and the trail. Council Member Weycker stated that there was trail on the preliminary plat. Mr. Olson stated that the trail was shown only as an example of where one would likely be in the future. Council Member Brown suggested moving the setback to 16 feet on the east, moving the building to the north and then it would work out. Council Member Hanus agreed with this solution. Mr. Yanik stated that he could also agree with this. Council Member Ahrens stated that the neighbors had left the preliminary plat hearing with the impression that there would be a 23-foot setback on the south side and that the access would be on the north side. Council Member Brown pointed out that the building could not move further to the north because of the loading dock on that side. Council Member Ahrens asked how much the building could be moved. Mr. Yanik stated that in the final plan the dock is hidden on the north side, but the building could move over. He made a commitment to work with the City Planner to move the building as much as possible. Council Member Hanus stated that he is not concerned about there being too much traffic on Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 the south side easement with the exception of snowmobiles. Mr. Yanik stated that snowmobiles were also a concern of his. Council Member Hanus suggested some type of barrier be put in place to restrict any motorized traffic. Mr. Yanik stated that he has shared the new plan with two or three of the neighbors and that the seniors want to be good neighbors. Council Member Weycker questioned whether the City Engineer's opinion was necessary before the Council could approve the final plat. The City Engineer stated that this could be left as a condition and also that he still felt the pond needed to be moved further. The City Manager asked whether the access to the pond was intended to be hard surface. Mr. Yanik stated that this was not the intention. The City Manager stated that it was necessary to ensure accessibility to the pond. Council Member Hanus stated that it could be 15 years before access was necessary and he did not want hardcover put in now. The City Manager wondered whether the pond location would allow room for the passage for pedestrians and bicycles. Mr. Yanik stated that he was not sure, but that a walkway is planned for there. The City Engineer stated that the Watershed requires a 16-foot buffer, but he is not sure if that is measured from the high water or normal water level. Mr. Yanik stated that the Watershed has reviewed this and is close to signing off. He further stated that he has a letter of approval and the authority to proceed with this. The City Engineer stated that he needed to look at the issue of the pond moving and the access for maintenance and the trail. He stated that he had requested a paved surface for the access and pointed out the City could need to get in there as soon as five years from now. Mayor Meisel stated that she did not want to see a paved access there and thought cedar chips would be a nicer look. Council Member Ahrens added that pavement would create a hardcover issue. Council Member Weycker asked whether the Watershed knew about the proposed trail and asked the City Engineer to address the slopes of the pond to allow access to future trails. Hanus moved and Ahrens seconded the following Resolution with the following exceptions: the south side yard should go from 23 feet to 26.4 feet and the side yard on the north should be 8 feet. RESOLUTION//00-83 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GILLESPIE ADDITION FINAL PLAT AND VARIANCES FOR Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 SENIOR CENTER LOCATED AT 2600 COMMERCE BLVD. P & Z CASE g00-50 Discussion: Council Member Ahrens stated that the City Engineers issues with the pond should be included. The City Planner stated that item 25 in the City Engineer's report does include a trail to be improved as needed without hardcover. Amendment by Hanus, accepted by Ahrens, to include item 25 of the City Engineer's report for a trail to be improved as needed without hardcover. Mayor Meisel called the question. The vote on Resolution//00-83 was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. Council Member Weycker asked whether originally a paved trail and easement were included in the hardcover calculations. The City Planner stated they were not included. Council Member Brown stated that in the future he would like plats with such extensive changes to be sent back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Meisel stated that at the last Council meeting it was voted to not have the final plat come back so as not to further delay projects. If Council cannot work out a solution, then the plat would be sent back to the Planning Commission. 1.13 WESTONKA SENIOR CENTER REQUEST. The City Manager stated that she had received a letter from the Westonka Senior Citizen's Foundation requesting funding and that such a letter is going to all the cities. Mound is being asked for an "in-kind" donation and the other cities are being asked for a monetary donation. Council Member Hanus stated that in reference to the request, the Senior Center would like to be included in the Mound snow removal program which is set up for the parking downtown. If the Center was able to help provide parking for downtown it might fit the criteria for this program, but under the circumstances it does not. Mayor Meisel stated that she felt the request was actually for the City to do the snow removal at no cost. Council Member Ahrens stated that the City is already losing taxes on this property. Council Member Brown stated that the tax-free status is a donation on the City's part. Council Member Weycker stated that she felt there were others who would do the snow plowing as a donation to the Center. Council Member Hanus stated that the Center should be made aware of the City's tax loss on the property. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Mayor Meisel stated that the cost of the ponding is unknown at this time and she recommended holding off on this until the numbers are known. Council Member Brown agreed that this should be tabled until the costs and the tax losses are known. MOTION, by Brown, seconded by Ahrens to table this item until the next meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. 1.14 ACTION ON MUELLER-LANSING PROPERTIES REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM CBD PARKING PROGRAM. Gino Businaro, Finance Director, stated that Mueller/Lansing is requesting that their property be removed from the CBD Parking Program. MOTION, by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to direct the City Manager to send the letter acknowledging the withdrawal. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. 1.15 WORKSHOP: DISCUSSION ON GUIDELINES FOR AN ETHICS POLICY. MOTION, by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to move Agenda this item to the next meeting. Discussion: Council Member Ahrens suggested that Council Member Hanus give his thoughts on this policy to the City Manager before the next meeting so that Council could think through the issues before the meeting. Council Member Hanus stated that he would do this. Mayor Meisel called the question. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. 1.16 DISCUSSION/APPROVAL OF 2001 BUDGETS AND GENERAL FUND LEVY AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATES. The Finance Director stated that the Resolution reflects the Council's discussions at work sessions. The City Manager stated that the fund balance is troubling at such a low level and that the City has so many needs and so many projects being deferred. Council Member Hanus stated that the target is 35 %. This is a 6% increase this year and last year there was an 8 % increase. He felt that the taxpayers can only tolerate so much for so long. He felt there was a need to find a way to keep this reasonable. He suggested looking at how much is necessary to maintain essential services and still maintain healthy finances. t§ Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Mayor Meisel stated that more than essentials were at issue as many projects have been put on hold for years. Council Member Weycker stated that no one wants to raise taxes, but the residents expect a standard to be maintained and she felt it was not being done. Council Member Weycker stated the lack of a maintenance plan for the City is a problem. Council Member Ahrens stated that unfortunately it was not maintenance that was causing the problem, but rather employee contracts eat up the levy. Council Member Brown stated that incentives axe necessary to keep good employees. Council Member Hanus stated that it was not 6%, but that with addition of the storm water collection, the cost came closer to 8% to the taxpayer. Ahrens moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//00-84 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2001 PRELIMINARY GENERAL FLrND BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,526,940; SETTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY AT $2,065,800 LESS THE HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA) OF $502,920, RESULTING IN A PRELIMINARY CERTIFIED LEVY OF $1,562,880; APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR 2001; AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATES The suggested dates for the public heatings axe Monday, December 4, 2000 and if needed, Monday, December 11, 2000. Discussion: The City Manager stated that it was necessary to stop thinking that there was money to fall back on. She saw realistic budgeting and spending to be the City's goal. Council Member Hanus asked why the day-to-day expenses axe going up at a rate of two times the rate of inflation. The Finance Director stated that personnel contracts were a part of this cost. Council Member Ahrens stated that she did not see individual departments going over budget, but rather felt the problem was the ~nickel and diming" done by the Council. The Finance Director stated that some of the departments have personnel turnover and that saves a salary and improves the year-end budget. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13.2000 Council Member Ahrens stated that a comfort level is the wrong attitude for City spending. Council Member Weycker stated that the parks and streets have maintenance put off because there is no money in the budget. Council Member Ahrens stated that each department needs to look at line items and make decisions. The City Manager stated that in the past it has been a problem when departments have budgeted on a shoestring, for example, repair of a retaining wall was budgeted at $4,000 and the actual cost was $17,000. Council Member Brown stated that retaining walls, sewers, and water pipes were all in need of maintenance and wondered when the City's last full-blown capital assessment was. Mayor Meisel stated that this was in the process. Council Member Hanus asked when a capital improvement plan would be considered. City Manager stated that this was slated for next year and was part of the key financial strategy. The Mayor Meisel called the question on Resolution//00-84. AYES: 3 NAYS: 2 (Meisel, Weycker) Motion Carried. 3-2. 1.17 DISCUSSION/APPROVAL OF THE 2001 HRA LEVY. Ahrens moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//00-85 RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO EXCEED $53,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469, HOUSING AND REI)EVELOPMF. aNT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 2001 The vote was unanimously in favor. 1.18 ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 10, 2000. Council Member Hanus stated that he noted in the Minutes that a group called the Tobacco Free Future for Youth is endeavoring to write an ordinance banning smoking in Mound public parks. Because he felt Council would not pass such an ordinance, he wished to put a stop to it now before any consultant fees were incurred by the City. Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 Council Member Weycker stated that a proposed ordinance prepared by the group was presented at the meeting. Council Member Hanus stated that any changes to the ordinance would require Staff involvement. Mayor Meisel stated that Carol Weber from the group had already interviewed the Council Members and was informed by Council Members Brown, Ahrens, Hanus and Mayor Meisel that they would not be in favor of such an ordinance. Council Member Weycker stated that the tobacco group would be making all changes to this ordinance and no Staff would be involved. Council Member Hanus stated that when the ordinance reached the Council, it would require Staff involvement. Mayor Meisel stated that the ordinance would come through the City Manager and she could route it directly to Staff without involving any of the consultants in the process. The City Manger stated that it was necessary to let this go through the channels as no one could be denied access to the City Council. Council Member Hanus stated that this was a political and controversial issue. Council Member Ahrens stated that the tobacco group has meet individually with the Council Members and got a sense of what the Council's opinion would be. Peter Meyers, 5717 Sunset, stated that the issues involved in the request by this group include mentoring, role models, and 2~ hand smoke. He further stated that Mound Bay Park is full of cigarette butts. Council Member Hanus stated that the major cost here was the loss of liberty and wanted to direct Staff not to spend money on this ordinance. The City Manager stated that money would not be spent without Council direction. Council Member Ahrens asked Mr. Meyers if he was in favor of banning smoking in the public parks. Mr. Meyers stated that the City would be able to save money on cleanup costs and that fines for violating the ordinance could be collected. Council Member Hanus stated that it would cost more to enforce the ordinance than the City would ever collect in fines. He further stated that this is an incremental issue and could grow to other areas. INFORMATIONfMISCELLANEOUS A. Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes: August 17. B. Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes: August 17. t§ Mound City Council Minutes. September 13. 2000 C. Planning Commission Minutes of August 14. D. FYIi: Consolidation Proceedings for St. Bonifacius and Minnetrista. A. Article: Clues to Small Town Survival. B. Announcement: Mound Police Department Community Policing Award. C. Mound Police Department Monthly Report: August 2000. D. FYI: Resolution for Appointments to Advisory Commissions. E. LMCD Correspondence. F. Notice of Appointment to Metropolitan Council. G. LMC Call for NLC Board of Directors. H. Letters Regarding Supporting Expanded Water Patrol. I. Resolution from Lafayette Club in Minnetonka Beach Opposing Trail. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to adjourn the meeting at 11:40 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. Kandis Hanson, City Manager Attest: City Clerk PAYMENT BILLS DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 BILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE BATCtl # t~0091 AMOUNT $215,389.74 TOTAL BILLS /£ ~,]~ It-'voi CE DuE ~OLD iA). I~;VO]CF.. i,,'tsR DATE DATF STATUS F' U rt C r A 5 .-- d f: U :-I '~ A L CITY CF ~')dNZ, 10.45 5 .~3 5.42 ]0.76 5.64 5.a5 27.05 27. og 27.08 27.08 DE SC;~I PT i Dr~ 07-Cb 29t-905~ F-.JSINARJ, GIRd d7-90 5c0-4351 SkI:;N[P, GoEG CT-f~O 500-435~ SKINNE~, GREG 07-00 5o0-4351 SKIN~E~, GPEG 07-00 9n5-07~9 HA'J~ON, KAt;DIS ~7-00 554-652~ WATER 07-00 554-6520 SEU[R 07-00 5~-21~0 PATROL =845 07-~0 5~-6401 HA~ELL, LEONAP 07-00 5~1-6404 PLAZEE 07-00 5bi-6~40, S~UAD ;~40 ............... 27.08 07--00 '581-6441, SOLIAD #g4l 27.0S 07-00 5,~1-t, 442, S,~L;AD ~842 27.0~. 07-00 551-G443, SOUAD ~843 ....................... 27.08 -" 07-00 581-6'444', SQUAD .3o 07-00 723-7560, ROUND FIRE .71 07-00 751-3572, ENGIHE ~18 ..................................... 7.~2--'GT-'OD 75%-S573, ~OUND FIRE 7.~! 07-00 875-4502, RESCUF TRUCK 9/26/00 9/2~/00 2&i.45 JPNL-Cb 000831 7.81 O~-OC 296-9058, BUSINARO, GINO lO&.Ti 08-00 590-4351, SKINniER, GREG 10~.71 08-Ou 590-4351, SKIN'4FR, GRE~ !~.76 0~-00 965-o7J9, hA::SON, KANDIS ............. o.87'~ 08-0~ ~5~-6'520, W~%Etl 0.S7 08-00 554-6520, S~wER 27.21 0~-00 581-2110, PATROL ~45 27.Oh o~-O0 5~1-6404, ~:LAZfR 27.00 O8-O0 501-6440, SOdAD 29.22 OB-O0 5~I-6442, SDUAD :842 27.08 Og-O0 5~.1-o443, 5~dAD ~843 .$0 CP-0C 723-7560, ~.;O'JND F ~.34 O~:-0O 751-3572, [';SINE 7.S~ 0F-00 5?5-4502, RFSC'JE TRUCK 9/20/00 9/20/00 7~.50 JRNL-Cb 4]wTuUCH CEL~ULAR/bELLEVdE V~NDDF: ~OTAL ~042.~5 ~'8-5 ~5-~ ............ ....... .'/2b/Og 9/2C/U0 "tAILING 5YST£ VL:,DC~ l(iTAL ACCCU!JT 01-4090-3220 01-~2~0-322G 73-7300-3220 7&-7BO0-3220 01-4040-3220 73-7300-3220 70-7~J0-322u 01-4140-322o 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 01-w140-3220 01-4140-3220 22-4170-3220 22-4170-3220 22-4170-322~ 22-4170-3220 1010 01-4090-3220 01-4280-3220 73-7300-3220 7d-7800-3220 01-4040-3226 73-7300-322C 76-7800-3220 01-4140-3220 01-414~-3220 01-41w0-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4%40-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 01-4140-3220 22-4170-3220 22-4170-3220 22-4170-3220 22-4~70-3222 1010 24.44 10-01-00 THRU 12-%]-00 METER 24.44 10-01-o0 THRJ 12-31-00 METER 2~.44 10-'~1-00 THRu 12-31-0 24.44 19-0!-(;0 TtlRJ 12-31-J0 METER g.15 10-0i-00 THRd 12-31-30 METER ~.15 '10-01-0~ THRU ~2-3:-00 MEl~R 12.22 10-01-~0 THRU !2-31-00 METER 12.23 10-01-00 THRU 12-3!-00 METER 01-4040-2200 01-~090-2290 01-4140-2200 01-4190-2200 01-4340-3210 01-42~0-3216 71-7!00-32]0 73-7300-321~ 7m-73~0-3210 1Clg 162.95 PRL :'AG[ 2 ~P-Cu2-Oi N0. ~NVO~C£ INVOICE ')dE HOLD DATE DATE STATdS PURCHASE CITY Oi- ~DJNL: A"'dUNT D£$C~,I F'T I,gh J O t; k N A L :051J i27i? ¥t~6/0~ 912t/00 792.23 07-0u CDhSTRUCTIOP O~SERVATION 792.23 JRNL-CD- AND ASSOCIATES LTD VENDO? TOTAL ')/20/0~ g/2o/O0 19b777uO v/26/00 9126100 32~S~100 792.23 1,779.~ LIQUOR 1,779.G~ JRNL-CD I,~40.55 LI~UOR 1,440.55 JRNL-CD i20.35 ~ISCELLANEUUS 12u.35 JRNL-Cb L I ~UOR JRNL-CD i9722400 i,657.45 9/26/00 9/2o/00 1,~57.~5 ELLoOY C01~PuRATiON ~ENDOR TOTAL 519~.15 ........................................ 51~o5 08-00-GARq~GE PICKUP'- ' 31.66 08-00 GARBAGE PICKUP 3i.67 0~-00 GARBAGE PICKUP ....................... 9t2~700 -~725~ ........... ~.99-' Jq~L-CD ...... 10055352 67.U1 OS-O0 GARBAGE PICKUP .................... ~126~- 9/2o/0~ ...... ~7~01 dRY, U-CD .......... 10055406 184.10 OF-O0 GARBAGE PICKUP ...... ~/2~AOO- 9/26t0~- -- lf4.10 J[~NL-CD 10055200 !7.75 0~-00 GARDAGE PlCKU~ .............. 9126/00' ~/2~FOO ......... 17.76 JIfy;L-CD ......... i0055206 67.07 08-00 GAR~AG£ ALONG STREETS 67.07 JRN~-CD ..... ,LACf,,O~IAK A:;D SU~J VEI.fD;'/R 1OTAL 430.93 .,(, 723 7058 261.16 SDD ~/26/00 9/26/00 281.16 JRNL-CD ;kO.~:~, JIH SOD FARL VEN;)OF' TOTAL 2Ei.16 9/26/0u 912o/00 10.04 CC!MBO LAMP JR '4L -C 3 ~/26100 9120/00 40.24 ."I ] 5C EL L A NF (,"JS SUPPLIES ~,0./4 JRNL-CD ¢/25/06 912o/00 o5.04 -ELECT;~tC FRACF CgNTP.'],L 95.[~4 JRt;L-CD CHAN~-ION AOTO ...... ~ENDOF TO~-AL 146.7-2 .... cog7Q ~l~ll~? .................................. ACCUUr:T NJ~mER 55-587g-3100 lOlO 71-7!u0-0510 1010 7i-7100-9510 Jul0 71-7100-9550 ioio 71-71oo-951o 1010 01-4280-3750 73-7300-3750 75-7800-3750 1010 22-4170-3750 1010 01-~3~0-3750 1CiO 71-7100-3750 1010 01-4280-3750 01-4280-4200 1010 01-434o-31;2o 1GlO 01-4340-~20 lolO 01-4250-2310 1010 PRE - AM N Jo iNvO]CE N"~P D,~T£ DATE V/26/00 9/26/00 COC~'-COL~ muTTL]:~G-~[DwEDT VE'~DOR TOTAL 031031 '~/PGIOC k L k £ H A 5 L J O U R N A L CITY OF HOLD, STATUS A~OU,,J DESC[i IPT ].,ON ACCOUr;T 11o.55 JRNL-C~ !~iU 7~.o4 32~N[-C ~, lClo 320.95 lO-Og DPINCIDL[ T~UF VALJ~ 55-5S81-6100 ~4C.~V 1~-00 'lWTFNEST qi~UE VALUE 55-5~1-6110 961.84 JRIL-CD 1Ol0 ' 4,972.00 0~-00 PPOFES£IONAL SERVICES Z~A:)~ICK AND ~EETZ~ P.A VENDOR TOTAL 4972.00 illSC S195 i59.30 LENS, ETC 9/26/00 9/20/00 159.30 JRNL-CD .............................................................. CUSTOM FIR~ .;1200 10~314 10~3i5 APPAkAIUS VENDOR TOTAL 9/20100 9/~/00 ~/26/00 ¢/2o/00 · ¢/~o/OC q/26/O0 ~{,:,olPMEi-,t- VENDOR '~O:fAL 10~9~7 --- · W/26t~0 9t2~t00 21201o0 10~722 .;AY ~IST~I~Ui IN6 COHCANY VshDgF TOIAL '12o~ ~OIU2el~7 ~/26/06 ,~IA'qUND VOGEL PAINIS V£NDf}R IQIAL 159.30 2&U.NO JRNL-CD - 29.49 29.49 JnNL-CD 207.o~- AI~ CYt!~:~ER HY~C TEST ' 207.og JR'~L-CD 477.17 6~5.80 ~EER 0~-5.~0 3R~L-CD ~I~CELLAI,~uU5 TAXabLE 544.45 ~E~R 544.45 JmNL-CD 1.202.~5 J~NL-CD 2469.70 64.o~ Y£LLO~ 64.6% i45.~ ArrivAL 01-4110-3120 1010 22-4170-3620 101o 22-4170-2200 1010 22-4170-2290 1~10 22-4170-2200 lO10 71-7100-~530 1010 71-7100-g550 1Ol0 71-71U0-95~0 1010 71-7100-05~6 Jul0 7d-7800-2300 1~10 01-4140-4270 A 6792~7 07.m9o9 ..... -o-61495 ~- ~8-2793 ...... 0 S~4 ~ 3'6- P O P, C H A S F' J 0 U ;< N A L CITY OF INvOIC[ D~JE HOLD PRL- DATE DATE STATUS A~OUNT DESCRIPTIDX ACCOUNT 'J ,,;r, AM VE'4DOF TOTAL 1~5.00 - 3,119.20 BE~R 71-7100-o530 ¥/26/00 9/26/00 3,119.20 JRNL-CD 1Ol0 ~.25 'qI~CELLAN~OU5 TAXA~L~ 71-7100-9550 Y/26/00 9/2(,/00 ~5.25 JP<L-Cd lC10 152.00' BE-E~[S5 71-710D-9530 ~/26/00 9/20/00 152.00 J~NL-CD .......... 1,478.~5- ~[~D ................ 71-710Q-95~0 ~/2o/00 Q/20/00 1,47E.25 JRNL-CD ]U1U ............. 7'4.OD- 9/26/00 9/26/00 74.00 JRNL-CD 1010 ..................... 2,222~B0' ~'c~R .... v/26/00 9/2~/00 2,222.~0 J~NL-CD ........................ 48-.35---~]SC£ULA~EOUS-TAXABLE - ' 9/26/00 9/26/00 4g.35 JRNL-CD £-A ST - -$+D,~-B~E V [~RAGE ............ v 'E-N DCh~, - T©T A-L ...... 715~ ~6-5 1425 009710 g5.O0 TtJRN' ROTORS ................... -~ / 26/~fie 9/2-t)/0-0 ............ g 5 .~0 - -d;+NL-C-D ........................... -_DDILS AUTu AND MARINE VENDOR TOTAL 85.00 [1450 17674 ,~,3F, 3.b5 OP-OU ;;ISCELLAt;EOUS TIF ~//Fa/Ou 9/20/00 6,3~3.65 J~NL-CD 17675 150.00 05-00 LANGDO;, REDEVELOPMENT 9/26/00 9/26/00 150.00 JRNL-{D 71-7100-9530 1010 71-7100-955U 1010 22-4170-3S20 1010 55-5840-31c0 lClu 55-5862-3100 1ul0 17070 150.00 0~-00 AUDITORS RS °EDEVELOP~EN 55-5853-3100 :~/26/00 9120/00 150.00 JkNL-CD ]CiO 17677 930.00 0~-(0 METRo PLAIHS SCH, OL 55-5884-310U 9/26/00 9/26/00 930.00 JRNL-CD 1010 :FHLEK5 F, ASSDCIATE5 JNC vEhDOR TOTAL 95]3.05 ;__t5-9~:--~0--10~0 ............... 1,-2'Q9,-'15'' ~38-'16-~T0' THRU -U~-Z!-~O0 SERVICE 55-58~3-3i00 ~/26/0~ 9120/00 1,299.15 JPNL-CD 1ulO EVE~GRC--EN LAND S£RvICES CO VENDO~c TOTAL 1299.15 - - E1515 1251 0,779.35 0~-00 CU:~RSID[ RECYL]I.:6 70-4200-4270 ..... 9/26/0U 9/2t,/00 O,77V.~5 ' JRNL-CD 1010 :-Z RECYCLING ]NC VfNDOR IOTAL 6779.35 F171u 000920 2~.12 07-25-06 THRu 0g-24-00 CELL PH 01-4040-3220 VI NDOR 1 !;VO! CE ND. iNvOI£F ,~!'Dc DAT[ : F ANCEiNF_ CL Ar{K ~1750 4 f)'~ t 26 ~/25/00 DuE HOLD DATE STATJS 9/2c/00 VE~DON TOTAL v / 2,",/00 9/26/00 PURCHASE CITY OF x,r)Jt,'D A~,iOUNT 112.37 112.37 27.74 27.74 27.74 24.76 24.76 24.76 .157.50 DESCF, I PT I3N JENL-CD 0~-22-30 0~-22-u C, ~'AT$ 0 ~-22- 0 O ~ATs 0&-22-60 ll:~ l FOdMS 05-22-00 UU ~F Ow'~S 0S-22-00 U;; I F O:~t,'3 JOWL-CD 41&173 20.05 09-05-00 "ATS 7/2o/00 9/26/00 20.65 JRNL-CD 41o171 3o.&9 09-05-00 HATS ~/26700 9/26/00 30.50 JR;~L-CO 416172 29.75 09-05-60 '~ATS ¥/26/00 9/20/00 29.75 JP'~L-CD 413659 11.08 t 11.08 ................................................ 24.76 2~.76 .................................................. ~/26/00 ~/2o/00 107.53 - 422~0~ o ~ ~ SE/,VICES 3]752 54152449~161 3ALLS INC 467 5-0- .~A~RY'S bt-ESEL 318%7 7520 ,LASh PLJ5 08-29-00 ~'ATS 08-29-00 MATS 0~-2~9-00 --'" A-TG .......... 0~-29-00 Uh IFOR~,S u~-29-GO UNIF0;~HS -0'B- ~'~--0 0 U~; I F OR~S ....... JR NL -C D ............... 10.59 09-12-gg -+~-A T-S ....... 10.59 !0.59 .............. 2~ .76 · 24.76 2/,.76 Vt2o/OO - 9/2-~-/0~ 19~5;05 v/Z6/O0 c/Z6/00 Vgl;DOF: TP, l AL 9/20/0U 9/2C/00 5Ef-'VlC£ v£NDOl- TOt AL 09-12-00 '-! A TS 09-12-00 rATS O0 - 1'2 -'u O'-L"~ F~'~,~$ .... 09-12-00 UN IFORN~S 0~-12-00 Uh IFOR~'S -J~;L -C D ........... 45~.37 V :.: '; DC i: TOTAL ~30.3! ACCOUNT k' d";:: E k 1010 01-4200-2250 73-7300-2250 75-780C-2250 01-42b0-2240 73-730~-2246 1010 71-7100-4210 lO!U 01-4340-2330 1010 22-4170-2230 lOlO 01-4280-2250 73-7300-2250 78-7800-2250 01-4280-2240 73-7300-224U 75-7800-2240 1010 01-42~0-2250 73-7300-2250 70-780D-2250 01-42~0-2240 73-73~0-2~4~ 75-7800-2240 lOlO 22-4170-3g20 1010 7~-7000-3m10 1010 22-4t70-3&2U fOlD 1010 ~AGE 6 P U k C H A S £ J C, U :~ ~,: A L AP-C~2-01 CITY OF MOUNS VENDOR i:;¢OICE DUE HOLD NO. II~VOIC£ I.~',oR SAlE DI, TE .STATUS A~'OLINT DESCRIPTION Slb~d 300°.31 lg.00 0&-00 ~32'~45500 GLE'~uOD INGLE~OUD VENDOR TOTAL 18.00 .]1960 00~911 777.45 SIDEWALKS f/26/0~ 9/26/~0 777.45 JRNL-CD ~REEN ~ITH E:~VY LA~N EASE V£N~ TOTAL 777.45 -3A~72 26-378f ................. 37~T5-- '-.'I'4E ......... 9/26100 9~26~00 374.15 J~NL-CP .... 264 7~)~+ ...................... 9126100 9~26~00 1,117.90 JRNL-CD ...... 2'6t 2~1 ........................... 5-5.-20 '- -w~'RE ............. 9/26/0u 9~26~00 55.20 JRqL-CD .... 267233 .................................. ~32,0'3 ---'~ I NC .............. c,/26/00 ~/26/00 432.03 JRNL-CD 267974 ............... 21~.96- 9/26/0U 9/26/00 21~.96 2196.24- L~ OilOR JRNL-CD ACCOUi, T NJ~S_~R A 2Z-4170-4100 !010 01-4230-4200 1~10 71-7100-~52G 1010 71-7100-9510 1010 71-7100-9520 lOlO 71-7100-9520 101¢ 71-7100-9510 1010 31977 000901 3.00 06-00 LONS DISiANC[ SERVICE 01-4340-3220 .... utZG/OO 9 t 2~,-t9 O ....... ~.00-' JRNL-CD ........ !010 00olCl-:B 163.42 Do-00 472-3093 PHOebE SERVICE 71-7100-3220 ....... ~t26t00 9126/09 165.~2' JR~¢L-£D ..... 1010 HI,,,NESOTA Vi K'DOR TOTAL 166.,~2 2773~ 14b.95 GARBAGE C .~ ~,' S )12010,5 912c, 100 145.95 JRNL-Cu 27767 14.54 GARBAGE CANS 9/26/00 9/26/00 14.54 JRNL-CD dECK5EL I-~ACHINE 5HuP V[NDff[ TOIAL i63.49 h215i 9t.25 PROPE~ff LA~ELS ~/26/00 9/2C/00 gi.25 JRNL-CD HEN~EPt+~-CoU:~Y tREaSUrER VENDO~ TOTA~-- 91.~5 .... ~/26/Ou 9/2¢/00 2,002.25'- JR'~L-Cb' - 9126100 PL AH r'~ ] K.S SERVICES CASES SERVICES 1,332.50 OL-O0 PLA~kI;,G 1,332.50 J~t~L-CD oougo7-B 01-42S0-3750 lOlu 01-4280-3750 1010 55-5581-3100 1010 01-4190-3100 01-4190-3100 lOlO VOugO7-D UOOq07-E .... O0'J 907-F It,,¢OJCE ?b~ HOLD DATe DATE STAToS · :u/v0 v/26/00 9126100 9120100 912C/00 9126100 9/2~/00 9/26100 9/2~,/00 ...... ~O0907-H 9~26~00 9/26/00 F u R C H A S 'Z J ,,9 U ;'.~ :, A L CITY OF !"gal' .... A"' 0UNT DESC2[PT IOr, ~.~7~:~6 O,~-OU v]S~UNS PLAW':I,~!G SERVICE 4.670.46 JRNL-CD 1,4~OO.UO US-O~ L~,t;$:)OT,:I,~UDI-TO~S SE'r,'v~'CE i,400.~0 JR[,4L-CD ,;O'O.Og O~-~ :lFq~[; PL',Z,I,,,S-PRO SERVICE 400.00 JR~,L-CD 500.00- '0~-0U-~'OST -OFFICE ~'RO-$ERVICES §00.00 JR;;L-CD -~00.u0 08-00 1_,'-,'ST LA~K~ SITE SERVICES 400.00 JRNL-CD JR,,L-CD 9120100 9~26~00 317..37 ...... '0-0~;~--J ......................... ;" ,692; 3Y~----~08-'0'0 -El)ST 'LAK~ ~5]-T[' ~f¢O ~,ERVI ~/26100 9~26~00 2,092.36 JRNL-CD bER--r~P:OUP,¢ -VE+~DO~, TOT'",L ..... 17'2'1-~;6.~ ............................. i 24r~0 5857 7,;.73 ............... vt26/0u -;t2'6/00 .... 7,;. 75--- dRNL-CD ........ 5877 42.b2 TIRE A"~[" ~IOUKTING 59~1 40.00 5995 13.U0 FLAT TIRE REPAIR .......... ~Fk6t-00--"-9/2~t00 - 15.gO- JRTCt-CD "~t2b/90 912r100 i03.$5 SEAL CO/~T TOwI:'G 105.05- JR,.IL-Cb · - 5826 23.00 BALANCE - ' 9f26/0~J ~/2c/o0 23.0~- JR~L-C*D 3~;.00 FLAT 'T]RE REF:'/~IR - g'/?blOu 'g'126 log 3~.gO Jot-;t-CU - 58b4 57.00 9f2blO'j 912~/00 57.0,') J~'t;L-C D ~t2~100 912~/0~ .,t2ttO0-. 123.05 OATTERY, iTC 123.05 JRNL-CD 4g.$6 REPAIP DUOR PA;,;EL ~.J6 JRr4L-CO 5','.~5 tS.b", FLAT T.IL'~ , EP/-i:~', ~TC. ACCOUi~T NU~[JER 1ClO 55-58g0-3100 1010 55-5gg2-3100 1ulo 55-5884-3100 1010 55-597P-3100 ]ulO 55-5878-3100 1010 55-50S0-3!00 lO!O 55-5878-3100 1310 01-4340-3810 lo10 01-4340-3620 1ClO 01-4340-332~ ]OiO 01-43~0-3~20 ]o10 27-5800-2340 !C]O 01-414o-3~16 lOlO 01-4140-3g10 i01~ 01-4140-3~10 1010 01-4140-3~!6 i0]0 AP-C02-01 V £ hD ') R ~$LA~D PA~ 5K~LLY J2579 1155106 1100903 1150904 ]leVI, ICE DUE HOLb DATE DATE STATUS 9/~6700 9/2~/00 V£t:D~R TOTAL 9/26/O-0 Vl~6/00- 1100~05 P u N C H A S E J G U .~ :, A L CITY ('..f Hqd.qD A~'OUKT DEgCRIPTION ~5.~ JqhL-Cu 599.47 c, 61. ~_e Bel.2~ J~t~L-CD 1,579.55 1,579.5'5 3R~L-ED 1,771.00 LIQUOR 1,771.0~-- 3Pt~L-%~ ............. 1,027.40 LI ~gUOk ................... ~ t 26AO~d'--~t'? 6 ti+~ ............... 799.25' ---OR NU--C-D-- .................... 1160905 34.25 ~INE ACCGULT NuMbER 1010 71-7100-9510 1GlO 71-71o0-9520 1010 71-7100-~510 1010 71-7100-P510 1010 71-7100-9520 ]010 71-7100-9520 ............... ~ t-'-~'0 /00-- --9t26 /-0'0 ............. JOHNi~ON 3ROTHERS LI@UOk VENDOR TOTAL 6072.73 JZb.d2 001031 117.36 lO-O0 F'~I~JCIPLE TRUE VALUE 551.75 10-00 IRTENEST TRUE VALUE ......... ~-t20t-06 - ~126/u0 ........ o69;-11 ;JRNL-£~D ............... JOHr~SOI;~ PHYLLIS VENDOR TOTAL J2~OO 00001~ 1L.20 MILEAGE ~EIMBUKSE~ENT ~1~o100 g/26/00 1~.20 JR;4L-CD ........................................... JL;YCE r~ELSON VENDOR TOTAL J ~-6~'---~,g-~ g 14 ........... v/2o/OG 9/2(,/00 ~/26/00 9/26100 .J U ~-]~-~ ODD 5 ..... -VENDOR TOT ~L- · ,2060 00090053 lg.20 - -t 0-.-4~. -- ~D(~-N~dTE.--FY~~- "~E ~ 'fq?~6-S- ............... 10.43 Ji~!~L-CD - - - 34 ;-O-B - COUNCIL (qL)Kt-~ ....... 34.08 JRNL-CD ~ 4.5~5 ................ 296.99 PLASIIC CA~S, LIDS ................. :, 12610~2 q/~otO0 -29~o-9~ -J~,~'d.:-CO .............. 'rAY PARK-R[CREATIONAL Cr.)NP V[t, UgF: TOTAL 295.99 ,2725 OOu91~ 5,210.11 PAYMEt;T FIE~gU~ST :6 FI'IAL '~/2o/00 ~/2o/00 5,210.11 JENL-CD ,.uSSr. E CONSTRUCTIOt; Co I;,C V~t;DOR TOTAL 5216.11 ~P77~ ~0~13 - 4,054.~9 ,T~ 4, T~ ~Ogg LEVY PAY"ENT w/Z~/OO ~/2(,/J9 4,u54.ZO 3NNL-Cb 1010 55-5g~1-6100 55-5&gl-6110 lOlO 01-4090-33&0 1010 70-4270-4120 1010 01-4020-4120 lO1O 01-~2d0-3750 lOlO 2o-5700-500U lOlO 01-4020-4130 1010 PRE- AH ,'EM)JR Ih'vOICE DoE ,tOL~ NO. INFOiCF :q~':,~' DATL DATE STATUS _ANE ~.:tNt~EIu:,,Ar, CO~VEF,:SAI! V[;,,DF)E TOiAL uZ~li tllgC '9126700 9/20/00 llglt ' ' 9126/00 912o/00 11152 ~/Co/Ot 9/26100 uA~SUN P~,I~.:TkN6-~', GRAP'~IC! vi~;gOf: TOTAL :2~22 1375738 W/26100 9126/00 PRODUCTS, It, C. V£!;DOR TOTAL 5358 ................................. 32~ 9126100 ~/Z6/O0 328 015692 0157B~ 015906 LAKE PO.~ER 5-39;2~1 b-302110 5-3021a7 -- 9-/!o/Ou 9/?ttOO E~UIPM[hT V~NDOR TOTAL ~/26/0~ 9/2t/O0 9/26/00 ~/2c/O0 P o K C '~ A S [ CITY OF ~.qu'~b '//26/00 9/26/00 uOWELL'S AU'{(!MuTiV~_tZ.~TC'J~ V[",DOl*, tOTaL r'301c ~057 dOo2 J O U =, W A L A?'oUNT DESCRIPTION 4054.29 393.98 ~93.95 JRNL-CD ~.52 Lr,,<I';C-,TE ~HO,~[ wU"g>ERS' b. 52 Jt~NL-CD 15.9g LA~:IUA TES 15.9g JRNL-CD 11.06 PLIO CARE SLT 11.06 PLIO CADM B'L~ 11.06 PLIO CAP~ 5LT 33.18 JPNL-CD 33.18 .02--- .02 JRNL-CD 32~ .~2 2g.~2 kI~EH PLATE, ETC 2b.02 JR~L-CO 37.74 THROTTLE LEVER, ETC 37.74 35.&3 ROFE ROTO~, ~TC. 101.59 77.68 ROTOR A~.:D DISK P&D SET 77.~P J;~ NL-CL; 14.56 RAU]ATOR HOSE 14.56 JRNL-CD 9.3~ ~ELOC+I;OL'~EE, iTC 9.36 t~iLOC+~fILDLR, iTC 9.35 NELOC+ ~OLDER, 20.07 JR~:L-CL: 143.50 0~-17-00 ~:LIVERY 169.~0 OF-2~-O6 DELIVZRY CHARGE ~69.~g -- ACCDU,~T NUHdER A 01-4023-3500 lOlO 22-4170-3500 101o 22-~!70-2100 1010 0i-42o0-2250 73-7300-2250 78-7800-225~ 1010 22-~170-4110 lOlO 01-4230-2310 1010 01-4280-231o lO1C 01-4230-2310 101o 01-4140-3~1 0 lJlO 01-42~0-23] 0 0i-4230-225~ 73-7300-2250 76-7800-2250 71-7100-9o00 71-7100-Q660 71-71'' -$. o~b~ lC AP-Cu2-O1 VE;~90R It;vOICF DLJ5 MOLD NO. ]',~OIC~ N,t:~R ~)AT~ DAT[ STATUS ~12610~ 9126100 P U i-; C ~ A S [ J u b R OilY OF Y, DUN'j A ".' C, U :,. T LJESCRIPT IgN 17.50 J~:,;L-CD N A L 9/26/00 lO0.10- 0~-31-0'C' Dkt:IV[RY CHARGE i00.10 J~ NL-CL; - 5-tv-8 ~,'/25/O0 9/2C/00 ]1,90 09-0-5-C~ DELIVERY CHAP. GE 11.90 912(;/00 100.~0'- 09-07--0~0-~,;LL]'V£RY CHARGE lO0.&O JRNL-C[, ..... F.'l-4-O ............... 9/z6/00 9/2~/00 - ' - 9.~'0- OO-ll-O~)"-'DEI_IVS-R¥ ,..HA GE Y.$O J'~ ,~L-C D - - 119.00 09-14-00 OEI_'[V~-RY CHARGE 9126100 9/26/00 11~.00 JRNL-CD '-~ARL-tN'5 7WUCK.-b",G ....... VE-~iDOR tOTAL .... 572,00 ",3030 1~;2 525 2.340.85 SEER .................. -9 t 2-61t) 0 -- --9 / 2-6 t0t) .... 2.3~. 6 ~t. 5 ' '"'dk NL- C'0 ............... 194962 1,858.95 BEER .................... 9t26t.~u - 912-6/00 ..... I;, 85-~. 95 dR k't-fD ..................... 19-,9S3 92.00 LtUUO? ....... vt~OtO0 9t2~t00--' 92.00 ;JRNL-CD -' 196656 ........... 9t26t0~' ~/26/0-9 .... 39.25 HISCELLANEOUS TAXABLE ~9;25 JRNL-CO ACCOUkT NJNbER 1ulO 71-7100-96~C 1010 71-7100-9600 1UIO 71-7100-9600 1OlO 71-710~-9600 lOlO 71-7100-9600 1OlO 71-71o0-9530 lO10 71-7100-9530 1010 71-7100-9510 1010 71-7100-9550 197541 2,046.10 ~ELR 71-7100-9530 ......... o/Zo/O0 o/20/00 ' '- 2,046;10 J~NL-CU 1010 ':ARK VII DISTDIPUTOR VEhDOR TOTAL "'30bO 341~3 .I/Z6100 9126100 ~126/00 9126100 ~3E3.15 277.00 O~-O0 2000 SEAL COAT PROJECT 277.00 JRNL-CD 495.00 Og-O0 3LDG INSPECT E:;6 SERVICE A95.00 JRNL-CD ASo.OO 0~-00 F/Z ENtI:,EE~ING SEkVICES 450.00 JR~:L-C~ 785.00 o~-O0 STREETS £~SINEEPING SERV 7~5.00 JRNL-CH lhO.oo 0~-00 ~TER ENGIWEERING SFRVIC l~O.o0 O~-Oo SEWER [NoIH[ERI~:G SERvIC · - 56o.'u0 JRNL-CD 45.00 0~-00 PA~S E{~GIKEERING SERVIC &5.uO JR~L-CD 34184 ?/26/00 9/2~/00 .54285 341 g6 34157 9126100 9~20~00 ~t26/0u 9/2at00 34180 .... 9126100 9/2~/00 27-5~00-3100 01-4190-3100 1010 01-4190-3100 1010 01-4260-3100 1010 73-73~0-3100 7~-7g00-3100 1010 01-43&0-310~ 1010 PRi- AM &k-Cu2-O1 54z9U ..... 3~i95 - - INVOICE DOE HOLD D~I£ hiaTuS 9126100 O/26/C0 ;12610,0 9120100 ~/2O/OU 9126100 9/20/u0 9/20/00 1, g/26/00 9/20100 9126100 9/20/D0 P b £ C H A 5 E J 0 L' ~ ~, A L CITY OF hJJND 9120/00 9/2o/C0 ..... 5425 .... 342S.2 34203- 34207 9126100 9/20/00 2,395.77 JRNL-CD ............................. i ,'Of6-.-~ --- -(;~--9~ ~C~'J A'S-T - TC--C'OA~T- -SE PV ] C ES 9/26/0~ 9125100 1,0~6.00 JRNL-C~ .............. 550~'~--O~-00-D~*BSST-E PROP 5212 tYt:W0 - ~/26/00 9/2~/00 550.20 J~NL-Cb 9125/00 9/2o/5~ 352.00 90.-00-~%-0~ f~LIV~--Ef-~G!NEF~ING SER 9120100 -~/26/0u 9/26/C9 )/26/C,J ~/26/00 9~20~00 · ,:CCO~,;;.:~ FRANK RODS A~SOCt~ ¥iNDON TOTAL 0000710620 '~/26/0U ot20/00 90.00 1,065.00 -- i,~65.0C lgO.-UO- lgO.Oo 405.00 ~CS.OO 135.o0 135.00 lfiO.O3 i3370.17 33,30~.00 33,3G~.00 7,t~?5.UC J~ N t - C c O'-O 5~C ZhA:,'.FL ACCOUiJ N~JK,i FK 1c10 01-4199-3100 7~-?~0n-3100 ]~10 73o730o-310u lOlO lO10 !010 55-5g77-310o 1010 55-5000-3100 1010 55-5gB1-~100 0i-2~00-1097 1010 01-2~00-10~6 i019 1310 1GlO 01-2300-1105 1010 7~-7MOO-4230 ] 01 {) :,P-Cu2-Oi ,ENDOR I!,'VD I CE N,3. iNVOICE liP, rfP, [)ATE · ~ET~O~aOLIIA~ COU~:C!L · ,325 0 0009Z~ DUE HQLD DATE STAIdS 9126100 ENVi~' VE~;D~)R TOTAL' P b ~ C n A S E J U ,J CIIY OF F~ ~: A L A~OUI,T DESC~<IPTIJK 7,~23.00 JR,L-CLI 40931.0'0 ........... 25.94 07-!9-00 THRLJ (J8-17-00 DEPOT 37.'-/'4 07-1V-U0 THRU 0S-iT-O0 PARKS ]5.9S 07-!9-0C, TaRj 07-17-00 LleuO~ ~0.59 O7-1~-uo IngO fiS-17-O0 FlPi 43.d5 ' 'OT-19-UO THRU 3~-17-00 CITY 23.~2 07-~9-00 TdPd ~-17-00 STREETS 13.~4 07-19-00 TdRa 08-~7-00 U~TER ................................ 16.29 ' 07-!2-130' THRU ~5-'17-'3'0 SEWEF' vl2§100 9/2o/00 21o.25 JRNL-CD M t~4N~G~S~O .............. V~+~DOR -TOTA~L 21-O-.25 ............ '!34V0 000831 ~,303.25 08-03 SALAFIES 1,250.00 0~-00 9/26/00 9/26/00 10,2~3.25 JRNL-CD ...................................... MOUND FIRE DEPARIMENT VENDOR TOTAL 10283.25 -,~3-73F--~00719 ............................... 25~7~--D7-1~-~D 2~-Y,~-~%%-'FhEfT I SKIN 25.7F~ 07-19-00 221-6,~11 FLEET 1 SKIN 25.7? D7-19-90 2zl-6&]! FLEET 1 SKIN 7-7-.$4 07-!9-09-221-6,~?12-i:q_EET 2 FACK 77.34 07-19-00 221-6513 FLEET 3 MCCA 39.00 07-19-00 221-6S14 FLEET 4 HEIT -39.t)0- 07-%9-wJ~ 721-651~ 'PL[?T '5 3W.ug 07-19-00 221-6616 FLEET 6 mENK 39.00 07-19-~0 221-6517 FLEET 7 AL 39.00 t)7-'!9-00-'22T-6~i~ FLEET 8 HARD 39.00 07-19-00 221-6S19 FLEET 9 KIVI 39.00 07-19-06 22i-6~2b FL£.rT 10 GRA ~9.'o'o--- 07-1~-'~tO-?Zl--61:21' F't-E-ET %1 -'HEI 000522 9/26t00' 9/2~/0~ !5.00 u7-!9-0(' 22!-6~22 FLL[T 12 NEL 13.00 07-19-o0 221-6322 FLEET 12 NiL 13.00- 07'--19-00 2'21~22'F~EET 12 NEL 39.00 07-19-0fl 221-8385 FLEET 13 JAY 39.00 07-19-00 221-1152 FLEET 14 RAH 77.34-07-1V-U0-2~2-53~? F~E~T ~5 SuT 39.00 07-i9-U0 FLEET 16 JOHNSON 39.00 07-19-0C FLEET 17 HENKE JERRY $¥.U0-- U7-19-00 ~i'EE'T 1~ H~RgINA DAdO 39.U0 07-19-00 FLEET 19 KIVISTO SCOT 39.00 07-19-30 FLEET 20 GRADY DAN 5¥.00 ~7-19-~0 FL£LT 21HEITZ-FRANK 39.06 07-19-0[; FLEET 22 HEITZ DOHAL 3V.00 07-19-00 FLEET 23 AL 29.56 02-22-00 221-6~11 FLEET 1 SKIN 29.5~- O'~-22-~0 2dl-6~'11 FLEET 1 SKIN 29.55 0~-22-00 ?dl-6gll FLEET 1 SKIN ACCUUHT HU~.~bEA lblO 0!-4340-3720 01-4~40-3720 71-7130-372d 22-417n-372(.: 01-4320-3720 01-~2~0-3720 73-7300-372C ?$-7B00-3720 1010 22-4170-1390 22-4170-135C 22-e170-3190 lO1G 01-421:0-3220 73-7300-3220 73-7800-3220 01-4340-3220 81-~350-3220 01-4250-3950 01-4280-3950 75-7300-395U 73-7300-3950 7~-7800-3950 7b-7800-3950 01-4280-3950 ~1-4280-3950 0i-4230-395C 73-7360-395~ 78-7000-3950 01-4340-3950 01-4040-3950 01-4190-322~ 01-q2~0-3950 73-7320-3950 7~-7800-395~ 70-7500-3950 01-4280-3950 01-42~0-3950 0i-42~0-3950 73-7300-3950 lOlO '01-4280-3220 73-7300-3220 7b-TgO0-3220 PRE- AM ,,'F NPOR it;VOiCE PS[ HOLD N ~. lNVO1Cr_ Nf~.GR DAlE DATF STATUS P d k C H ,t 5 [ j g J i:: ,,~ A L C! TY OF '-',our:L; A',DUNT 3V.60 39.U0 39.00 39.00 39.~0 39.oC DE SCK I P T I :)t4 U~'-22-O0 721-0;13 FLfET $ hCCA 0~-22-Lr ?,~i-{~]Z. FLEET ~ HEll 0~-22-00 221-6~5 FLEE~ 5 JOHN 08-22-C0 22~-65t5 FLEET 6 HENK 05-22-U0 22~-6b~7 fLeET 7 AL 0~-22-Cc 22!-~/~1S FLEET g HARD 0~}-22-00 221-6519 FLLET ~ KIVI 0~-22-u0 221-~z20 FLEET 10 GRA 39.00 ~-22-~:0 221-6~:12 FLEET 11 13.00 0~-22-00 221-6722 FLEET 12 NEL 13.00 0E-22-00 221-6S22 FLEET 12 NEL .................. 13.00 O8-22-UO 221-6~22 ~LSET 12 NEL 39.00 08-22-u0 2~1-83S5 FLEET 13 JAY 39.00 U~-22-00 R21-11~2 FLEET 14 RAH ................. 8~6'6 0~-22-90 2E2-53~9 FLEET 15 SuT 39.00 O~-Z2-OO FuEET 1~ JOHNSON T~ ~9.~0 ~-22-00 FLEET 17 HENKE JE~RY 05-~2-D0 FLEET 17 KI¥]STO SCOT oF-~2-~O ~LELT ?~ 6~ADY DAN 39.00 08-~-00 FLEET 2~ ~EITZ DONALD 39.~0 08-22-00 FLEET 23 AL ;EXT£L C3~:~iU,ICATIONS, I;,C VEMDOR TOTAL 2i46.~3 3~00 301002 1,507.18 21.~9 .......... 3,916.~9 403.32 000~31 02.-00 ~2245-301-939 GENERAL o5-00 #0460-607-223 SIRENS O~-Ou ;1~;1~-601-~25 LI{~UOP STO O[-O0 ~ ~ ~ 0~,, -o0u-329 ~ATFR O~,-0¢ ;210:4-&07-~47 FIRE $TATI ................ 227;59 3g-~H) -:~0&7-~005-2~9 PAFTr'S ;OHtnERN SIAIEb PO,~EK CO vL~<D~R TOTAL v/26/00 o/2t/U0 V~:30K TOTAL 9/26/00 ~/26/00 v/go/Od %/2C/00 m~ ?SI-CU~.A C,2MPA;;Y ~43~23 zc,.55 05-00 =05fl~-5OL-332 STkEETS 144.55 02-00 :¢g64-50ci-g32 wSlFR lcc~SS u~-00 :~¥6~-593-~32 SE~ER 1,262.05 O~-OO ;0015-g02-034 LIFT STATI 35,.9o 0~-00 ~00C9-004-~35 SIGNALS m,aSU.92- J~NL-C~- ' - 4,991.22 U2-O0 .~TR. ETS LIGHTS 13~4~.1z, 123.60 hi X TAXAuLL 123.60 J~'~L-C{: 123.o0 1,173.74 JRNL-{D - 1,394.u0' WINE ACCOU;,T tqUt~ L~E R $1-~350-3920 01-qZt,0-3953 01-42~0-3950 73-7300-395G 73-7300-3950 73-7~0q-3955 7b-7~0-3950 01-~250-3950 01-4280-3950 01-~2&0-3950 73-7300-3950 7g-7800-3950 01-4340-3950 01-4040-3950 01-4190-3220 01-4280-3950 73-7300-3950 7~-73~9-3950 78-7300-3~50 01-42g0-3950 01-4280-3950 01-4280-3950 73-7300-3950 !010 01-4320-3710 01-4150-3710 7!-7100-37]C 73-7300-37!~ 2Z-4170-3710 01-4340-37!0 01-4280-3710 73-7300-3710 7~-7000-3710 78-7800-3710 01-4280-3710 1glo 01-4280-3710 1~10 71-71c0-9540 lC, 10 71-71U0-951P 1010 71-7100-9520 PRE A; o45622 14 P O R C ~ A S F J {.~ LJ -'-,: '; A L 4P-CuP-01 VENDOR IWVr)lCL DUE ttOLD Nho I,";¥OICL t~"':.;R 'OAT! DATE STATUS 043224 05.00 t-~I 5C£L L ~:;F 3U5 :,F'~-T AXA~LE 71-7100-9~50 ~/26t0u 9/2c/00 95.00 JRNL-C5 1/,10 320.00 L! L;UOR 71-7100-9510 9/26/00 g/2e/O0 526.00 JRi;L-CD 1010 344.45 ,,'] NE 71-7100-952L: 9/26/00 9/2 ~-/,,)0 344.45 JRNL-C3 1010 645623 40.50 wI::E 71-7100-0520 9/26/~0 9/26/00 4o.50 J~NL-CD 1010 -'HILL]PS ,/INF & 5PIP. IT5, ~ V~NbO~ T.r)TAL 3379.09 9/26/00 9/26/00 024.08 JP NL-C[, 71-7100-9550 1010 9/26/00 9/26/00 77.75 JRNL-CD lOlO .................................... i,e§5;-98 -C-t~ARi~TTE-$ ............................. 71-7100-9550 9/26/00 9/26/00 1,065.98 JRNL-CD lOlO ~tN~.ACL-E--DIST'PlFUTI-N6 .... ~£ND.',)R-TOTAt.: - 1767.81 ................................ =AuAv 09+769 3~.90 AUG SEPT OCT 2000 PEST CONTROL 71-7100-4200 .-. ¢~6/0~ ~/2o/00 -- 38.90- JR-NL-CD .......... lu!O ~LU';~ETT'S, INC VENDOR TOTAL g~11u 000911 ¥I~6t~:6 9/2oi00 3~;. 90 iO.UO PLEAA lO-i~-O0 H.~WKS, E,H[~LEY 01-4140-4110 l~;.uO PLEA/. 10-2~-00 DE~ORO, J:,_ANNE O1-414O-Atlg 20.00- J~NL-CG, lOlO LAW E'I~FJi(C'L~,E V: ..... k, TOTAL 074935-00 07o750-00 b707&2-OO ~7o9~7-0G ~771~3-00 ~/20/00 9126/00 ~/25/00 9/2c/00 ~/26/00 9126100 ?/2e/Ou 9/26/00 9/2~/00 0126100 2,o7o.01 LI~UO~ ~,~76.~1 JE:~L-{~ I&4.98 JRNL-C5 i, 35r~.73 L l ,~,JJO° 1.356.73 JE,'JL-C i) 99.99 FIX ',,~O u- T t,. X A 5 L E ~9.v9 J~NL-CD 2,932.08 LI ~:UJR 75.75 LI~UO~ 7~.75 JRNL-C9 232.50 7i-7100-951S 1GlO 71-7100-9520 1010 71-7100-0519 lulO 71-7100-9540 1010 71-7100-PS1U 1010 71-7100-9510 lOlv 71-7100-9520 PRE- '3955 :;C. INVOIC~ d~LIT¥,INE ,'~ SPI,,~,T_.c v:_','DO,< TOTAL ~l~ uOuB23 75.u0 ~EPAI~ SOCKET ~;Y ELEVATOR ~/2~/00 9/20/0C 75.U0 JqkL-CJ ..C. ELECTHIC, If,~C. vE'.:DDP TOTAL 75.~0 ~/26/00 9/20/00 Z46.37 JRNL-C:) ~ ~' 5' C-OL-LdS]Of~'S[HV'I¢bS,~- V-~NDOP ~TAL .... i&Z.~7 ..................... <4210 000920 24.~7 ~iILEAGL REIMbURSE~'ENT V/2'e/00 9/2m/uO 2~.~7 3R'NL-C~ ........ VENDUR TOTAL 24.47 Z7.00 hANDL] NO SPIC ];~AN -:,qHf<, JOPI L. ~z, 245 uOd82~ iGEVIE,~ I'I, 0dND CLINIC V£NDOR TOTAL 17.00 ~-u---75~9 5 ................................. 98;'72-- 9/26/00 9/2.t/30 95.72 JPNL-CD .... :75-~' -7.'b - - - -- ~75945 - - b~1or*EL ] NF_ PLAZA 54400 2208 21-/8 2232 .................. 7~. 0-?., --I-E-E ............................. 9/25/00 9'/26/00 70.08 JP,;'~L-C P .................... 9 l-zl-6- 1~ .............................. ~I26/00 ~/?r,/O0 91.16 JPNL-Cb v/26/00 9/26/00 165.44 JRNL-CD 5.94 9/26/00 5.~&- J~NL-C~J ............. VENDOR TOTAL 2,570.c4 10-00 LI:~L'u~: '~lkb/O0 9126100 2,57~.o4 Jr'NL-C[: VE'~DON IOTAL 2575.04 42.50 O~['~ 5PACC ~/26/00 9/26/00 42.00 JRNL-CD 31 .~5 REFLECTORS ~/2h/O0 9/26/00 31.95 JRNL-CD 47.93 VErdi CLf DFC~LS STOR[ REf;TAL SPAC ACCuUf;T NU"! J E R 01-4320-3d30 ~!-4230-3~I0 lOlO 01-4040-3340 lOlO 01-4230-3140 1010 71-7100-~550 lo10 71-7100-9550 1010 71-7100-9550 1010 71-7100-9550 1010 01-42~0-2310 1OlO 71-7100-3920 10]0 01-4020-4100 1010 22-4170-3500 lOtu 01-4340-3~10 !ClO INVOICE hUE ,HOLD INVOICE imBR DATE DATE STATJS 22~0 OF THE SEASON V[NDO~ TOIAL P b R C H A S ~ CiTY nF MC, Ut~ J 0 U ; ~ A L k~' OLh,T DESCRIPTIDN 47.93 vEHiCLE DECALS 47.93 J:,' NL-C D 170.4i ACCOUNT NU'IbER 01-4340-3~:20 lol0 SL 43t; 5~79,~ .......... 2~55 '~/26/00 9125100 2.56 Jr:NL-CD 01-4060-3500 1010 SOS-PRINTING .... VENDOR TOTAL- 2.56 ' ' 34445 001031 325.u0 10-00 DOG ~tE~,NEL FEES 325;00- ~RNL-CD - 01-4140-4270 1ClO 3PuPTING BREAD KEH,,ELS V~NDOR TOTAL 325.0B ~4460 10~999 3,000.00 PUMo FOR GAHNA GOAT GoASS v/26/00 9/~6/00 3,u00.00 JRNL-CD ST. LOUIS PAR~, CITY OF VENDOR TOTAL 3000.00 22-4170-5000 1010 545~0---5~62 ................................. Z4O.78---REPAIR-~E'Lt-'PU~P ......... 9126/00 9126100 240.7~ JRNL-CD 73-7300-4200 1010 S-T E-~ ~-E -Et_eC-T P. -t( -C O ........... ¥f,~DOR-YOT At ........ 24~0.78 54010 130797 134.45 TWO lIP, ES IS~'. 45`- JRNL-C-j 01-4340-3g10 1010 130900 417.57 TIRES AND TUBES .............. 9125/00--~f 2~ t00 ...... ~,'17 ,'57 j F~,,IL -%~ ........ 22-4170-2200 1010 134154 204.~8 TIRES (2) ................ 9t2~100 · o/25-/00 .... 20A;~B JRt;L-CU 01-4260-2310 1010 SUmURBAN T1RE COMPANY v~NDO~ TOTSL T473~ 226 9/26/00 912o/00 THE LAKER VENDOR TOTAL 756.90 13.10 O~-lO-oC ADVISORY COMr:I$SION 13.10 JNNL-CD 13.10 81-4350-3510 lOlO T473~.195 ~/26/00 0/20/00 - . !3.-it--09-02-90.-~UBL]-C ~[~RI~;6- 13.11 JPNL-CD 71-7t00-351U lulO :[ h4 --L-A kE-~/-P I ~ N m£ K ...... V~-H DUR TOTAL iS.ii ..................... T477U 174813 ........ -~ t2ot~)0 302.00 BEER KEGS 502.00 JRNL-CO' 71-7100-~530 1U10 203908 375.00 bEER 375~00-- JRNL-CD .......... 71-7100-9530 lOlO 204468 3c.00 MI 5CELLAN~OUS TAXAF;LE 3T,.u0- JRNL-CD " 71-7100-9550 ]UlO 71-7100-9530 FRE- A~ A~-CO2-O1 NO. INVOICE P d R C ti A S [ J (.; U ;-~ :J A L CITY OF H~UND IUVO1C£ hUE NOLO · ,~':, P DATE_. DATE .STATUS A~;OuP, T DESCRIDTI3~, ~/26/00 9/2~/00 4,6~9.45 J~NL-CJ 205151 17I.ZO M15CELt ANEuUS T AXAi~LE P/26/0S 9/P6/00 171.20 JPNL-CD g05152 4,905.35 Zog459 62.50 tqI%CLLLANEOU5 I AXAE'LE ~/26/0~ 9/26/00 ~2.50 3RNL-CU ~0~4o0 · - 5,388.90 DEE9 .... v/26100 g/25/dO 5,3Fg.90 JRNL-CD IHO~ DiSTmtSoTiN6 CONPAN V~NDgN TOTAL 15652.~9 Ta~05 12977 79.75 0~-11-00 ~LAk,~lhG MEETING ....................... 9/26t'00--9t20/f~ ....... 79.75- JqNL-CD ............. TIME SAVER OFF SITE SEC~E:',: VENDOk TOTAL 79.75 74825 04&O2A1 150.00 REPAIRS ~/26/00 9120/00 !5O.O0 JRNL-CD [4~3t 3421~6 ......................... 55.05----~tSC~LtAN~UUS WELDING -- 9t20t0~ -0/26t0~ - -- TCLL GAS & u:LbI;~G SJDFLY TC93U 1VS1522 T q£!iC~ER,}PLUS, 55.u5 HISCELLA~EOUS UELDING E(~UIPMEN 55.04 KISCELL~NEOUS $,~ELDING EeUIPMEN 1~5.14 ,,J--'-N L- C D TPt-STAI~ PU~P g CuNTDuL 14970 UOOR31 TWIN CITY oARAGE 149~,5 /7J313-0 ACCOUNT NUMBER lulO 71-7100-9550 1013 71-7190-95~D 71-7100-9550 1~10 71-7100-D53D 1GlO 01-4190-4200 1010 01-4095-3800 1010 01-4280-2310 73-7300-2310 78-7800-2310 1010 Vi~DC)k TOT:L 165.14 lCl.2g BLADES FOR W~OL CHIPPEH 01-4280-4~00 ~,/26/00 9/20/00 101.27 JRNL-C6 1010 I!,C VE',DOL T~TAL 101.25 9/26/00 9/26/00 240.00 JRNL-CD 10!0 t V~{~Ow IOiAL 240.00 g~.73 :i[PLAC[ ,126-/00 ~1~0t00-- ~e.-?3- JqNL-CD - 1910 DgO~ CO V[NDDF TOTAL &~.73 4.i4 4.14 OFF]C~ SUPPLIES 01-~090-720~ 4.14 uFFI££ 5UDPLIFS- 01-4140-~00 4.14 OFFICE 5UDPLI[5 01-41¥0-2200 4.14 ~FFIC[ SUPPLIES 01-4340-2200 - - 1.35 OF-FIC~ 5uDPLt~5 01-42~9-2200 !.~ OFFICE SUDPLIE5 7i-7~00-22O~ 2.~6 OFFICE %UOPLIES 73-730P-220u PAOE 18 P U R Cfi A S E 3 o u ~< N A L 4F-Co2-O1 CITY OF VENhOR INVOICE DUE COLD ~0. INVOICE t~-:t~R DATE D~TE STATUS AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT 2.o~ OFFICE SUPPLIES ¢.m5 OFFICE .......... ~/26/00 ~/2~/00 · - $6.Z3 --'JR~L~[W9 ......................... 257829-1 850.03 Pr~UJECTOP, LEkS 26'¢ ~5~-0 $5.~ OFFICE SdPPLI~S 270617-0 - 9t20t00 9/26t0fi 48.68 LAZOR LABELS ........ ~. tS-- Jq~,I_-%1) ................... 44.71 PROJECTION LAY, PS, ETC 4-~.71- ~r?NL-CI;- 267029-0 ............... 9126100 9/20/00 T~IN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY CO VEHDO~ TOTAL 1001.76 J5030 6635322 141.~4 VALVE AND EXTENSION v/26/00 9/26100 141.44 JRNL-CD 673514~ 149.73 TWIST TITE WIRE SEAL 9/26/00 9/2~/00 149.73 JRNL-CD V£NDOR TOTAL oS FILTER J 5t~J 2 ~0t03t .... 9f26/00-- 912o190' - Jt~ll[D ~; OPE~TiES VERDOR TOTAL 4524d 9lug 9/26/0u V]hIHAL~ONE INC x5690 253~9 - Vt2~tO0 ~t20/00 v/20/06 9/26/00 25.93 25566 ~/2+/00 25,~06 - ~t26t00 9t26t00 9/2~/90 25507 291.17 31.95 31.95 31.95 95.05 95 .~5 70.9~ 70.9~ 70.9~ 2!2.v4 212.94 228.95 225.95 i8g.93 la9.93 166.71 16~.71 23~.74 23b.74 ~6.~ ~.b~ -l~J-e O -U ALP,'J A P ARK I?,'G 10-00 hALt;UA PARKING 10-00 5XLPOA PARKING ' JqT:L-CD ..... NEXTEL RADIO NEXTEL ~A~I0 N?XT~L' RA~IO J~:4L-CD OE-09-O0 9LACKTOP JR~L-C'D 0~-10-00 ;,L ALKTOP JQNL-C9 0~-II-00 F,L ACKTOP J~,NL-C[: 0~-15-00 r, LACKTOP JF<NL-CD 05-16-U0 ~!L ACKTOP JR NL -C t; 700o~4 OB-15-00 '~IN';ETPI~TA CITY SHED 25~7i NUmbER 78-7~00-2200 0~-4060-210u 1010 22-4170-5000 1010 22-4170-2100 1010 01-4140-2100 1010 22-4170-2200 1010 73-7300-2300 1010 73-7300-2300 101~ 01-4280-4200 73-7300-4200 78-7800-4200 ]OlO 01-4280-3950 73-7300-395C 78-7800-395J 10lO 27-5800-2340 !010 27-5800-2340 1Gl0 27-5000-234G 1030 27-5800-2340 1Ol0 27-5800-2340 lOlO 73-7300-23~0 ~ ENDOP, NO. IhvC1CE 26382 26550 I ,";¥g ] CE DUE i~OLD DATE DATE :::, TATUS P U R C H A b E J 0 Lt q N A L CITY 9F ,-~.3,JNL~ A~'!O UNT DESCEIPTIDU 7a'O.t, 4 05-15-00 ,INNETRISTA CITY SHE[) 9/26/0L 9/26/Dg 1,561.6& JR;iL-CD 13~.&6 0S-16-00 bLACKTOP )/261GC 9/26/00 136.06 J~NL-CD 2C'g.3] ~,-21-O 0 ~LACKTOP 9/2~/00 9126100 209.31 JONL-CD 52.34 08-22-00 qLACKTOP 9126100 t,/26/00 52.~4 207.61 0 ~- 24- ,'.) 0 ~L AC!,"T OP v/26/C0 9/20/00 207.51 Jr~L-CD 26699 139.88 0~-25-00 BLACKTOP Y/26/60 9/26/00 139.~8 JRNL-CD 267~2 209.99 08-2 &-(,C ~LACKTOP 9/26/0u g/20/OO 209.99 JPNL-Cb 2695~ 13b.b6 05-29-00 BLACKTOP ~/26/00 9/26/00 ~3~.~6 JRNL-CD 270bd 954.27 0~-31-00 9LACKTOP y/26/0C 9/26/~0 954.27 JRNL-CD ~'r FdELLER g SdkS V~KDOR TOTAL 4526.01 ~7.23 K]SCELLANEOU5 97.24 HI bCELLANEDdS 203~3 ~5.20 CAH WASH 2ACE'S I'4C vE~;3OF, TOTAL 37C.90 IO~AL ALL VEN3URS 215,3~9.74 ACCOULT NdHFER 78-7~u0-2340 lelO 27-58o~-234o lblO 27-5800-2340 lulO 27-5800-2343 1OlD 27-5800-2340 ]OlO 27-5800-2346 1010 27-5g00-2340 lulO 27-5800-2340 1010 73-7300-2340 1cio 01-4280-2250 73-7300-2250 78-7800-2250 lOlO 22-4170-2200 1010 I I Engineering · Planning · Surveying 'FRA September 20, 2000 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Auditors Road Street Improvements SAP 145-108-02 MFRA #9968 Dear Kandis: Enclosed is Kusske Construction's Final Paymem Request for the subject project. The amount of this request is $5,216.11. We have reviewed the project and find that the work was completed in general accordance with the plans and specifications. It is our recommendation that the Contractor be paid in full for this project. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure s:\main :kMou09968 :\Correspondence\hanson9-20 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-maih mfra@mfra.com ~ 0 >>_ ~o ~0~ 0 9 o 0 Oobbbbobbbobbobbbbbbbbbobbbobbobo ~ ~ ooog~ g~ ~gggg gggg ~g oo 0000 000 ~g oog~ooooggoooggggooo* ooo ooo ~ oo 000000000000000000000000000000000 909990909000909099999990900009909 gg§oooggooo oooooo ooogg gggooooggooogg 000000 0000 000 000 Oboboobbbbb~obbbbbbobboobbbbbbb bobboobbbbbM~oobbbbb~bobbboo~boob 0 ~0~ > 0~0000000000000000~0000000~00000 ~ ~0 ~ ' bbbob~bbObbOboob~oo~oobbbb~bob bo 00000000000000000000000000000000000 ~ >~ o 90090009oo0oooo0oo00oooooooo0o~ooo0 ooo0oooooooooo0oooooooo0ooo0ooooooo 0 Z q' o bb 0 O0 0 g ? b b b o bb '~ Engineering · Planning r Surveying McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. September 20, 2000 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Norwood Lane Street and Utility Improvements Final Payment MFRA #8614 Dear Kandis: Enclosed is Machtemes' Final Payment Request for the subject project. The amount of this request is $7,595.14. We have reviewed the project and find that the work was completed in general accordance with the plans and specifications. It is our recommendation that the Contractor be paid in full for this project. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure s:\main:kMou08614:\Correspondence\hanson9-20 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-maih mfra@mfra.com ~ >~ o 09 ~ ~ 0~000000000000000 0000000~000000000 0000000.~.000000000 00000000~000~0~000 0~000000000000000 i,o o o o~oOOOooooOOOoO~O ooo ooo0000ooo8 ~0 ~ .~. o 00 00 o o o 0',oo ooo oo ooo~0o°ooo008°°° 0000000 ~g~go~o ooo ~ ~gg8°°° ooo 0000000 0 0000000 0000000 ~ ~g~ggg8 =o ~ ~ ooo~oooo ~ O0 oooooooo ~ · 09909009 oo~ooooo 00 0 o0~ 0.~ oo~- ~ ~ ~0~0~? o o 0 0~00oooo0o ~ ~ o ~0~0~000 ~ 0 ~0~~00 0 ~ ~ O~ oooo~ooooo ~ ~ o ~0-- >~o >0 RESOLUTION # 00- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT TO INSTALL ELECTRICAL SERVICE, AN UNDERGROUND SPRINKLER SYSTEM, AND ATTACH A LIGHT AND ELECTRICAL OUTLET TO AN EXISTING LIGHT POLE ON PUBLIC LANDS KNOWN AS DEVON COMMONS DOCK SITE # 41824 WHEREAS, the applicant Mark J. Smith, of 4665 Island View Drive, is requesting a public lands permit in order to install electrical service, an underground sprinkler system, and attach a light and electrical outlet to an existing light pole at dock site # 41824, and; WHEREAS, the existing light pole is in good condition and has been at this location since at least 1972, and; WHEREAS, the Dock and Commons Advisory Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommends Council approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby approve the public lands permit with the following condition: All electrical work on commons must be done by a qualified electrical contractor and be approved by the State Electrical Inspector. l~9of of the electrical inspection must be provided by the applicant to the C~ l~li[~ing Official. This public lands permit is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lot 16, Block 1, DEVON DRAFT CITY OF MOUND DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2000 Present were: Chair Jim Funk, Commissioners Mark Goldberg, Gerald Jones, Frank Ahrens, and Greg Eurich, and Council Representative Mark Hanus. Also present were Park Director Jim Fackler, and Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey. DISCUSS: PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT Mark J. Smith, 4665 Island View Drive Dock Site 41824, Devon Commons Park Director Fackler summarized the request for Pubic Lands Permit by Mark Smith to use an existing light pole to attach a light and electrical sockets. As the pole is in good condition and has been at this location since at least 1972, staff recommends approval with the condition that all electrical work be done by a qualified electrical contractor and be approved by the State Electrical Inspector. Motion made by Goldberg, seconded by Jones, to approve the staff recommendation to grant the public lands permit to Mark J. Smith, 4665 Island View Drive, Dock Site 41824, Devon Commons. Motion carried unanimously. CITY OF MOUND STAFF REPORT 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (6!2) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 DATE: August 10, 2000 MEETING DATES: August 17, Dock and Commons Commission (D&C) September 26, City Council TO: FROM: Dock and Commons Commission and Applicant Jon Sutherland, Building Official ~-~.¢- ~'~ ~ APPLICANT: Mark J. Smith 4665 Island View Drive LOCATION: DOCK SITE # 41824 DEVON COMMONS SUBJECT: PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT APPLICATION TO INSTALL ELECTRICAL OUTLET TO DOCK AND REINSTALL WIRING TO EXISTING LIGHT POLE Background: The applicant, Mark Smith, is seeking a Public Lands Permit as described in the attached application. The applicants request for an electrical outlet is similar to numerous other requests that have been approved in the past. The light pole appears to be in good condition and has been in this location since at least 1972. It has received previous approvals by the city. Comments and Recommendation: When there is an opportunity, it has been the direction of the city to remove light poles; for instance, if they have been abandoned, damaged due to a storm, or dilapidated. In most cases it is just as convenient and functional to have the light on private property. However, in this case the lamp post has a long history and it is in good condition. Staff recommends approval of the request for a light and outlet as requested with the condition as listed below. 1 ) All electrical work on commons must be done by a qualified electrical contractor and be approved by the State Electrical Inspector. Proof of the inspection must be provided by the applicant to the City Building Official. Js/rkj PUBLIC LAND PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 "~ DISTRIBUTION: ":~;:~'_i~B~LDING OFFICIAL · V' PARKS DIRECTOR DNR MCWD ~' PUBLIC WORKS DATE RECEIVED DOCK MEETING DATE CITY COUNCIL DATE (~ine): CONSTRUCTION ON PUBLIC LAND PERMIT- new construction. NO E: NO P£RMrr SHALL BE ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BOAT HOUSES OR OTHER BUILDINGS ON ?UBLIC LAND (City Code Section 320, Subd. 1). PUBLIC LAND MAINTENANCE PERMIT - to allow r~airs to an existing structure (City Code Section 320, Subd. 3). CONTINUATION OF STRUCTURE - to allow aa existiag encroachment to remaia ia aa "as is" condition (City Coc~ Section 320, SuM. 3). LAND ALTERATION - change ia shoreline, dxainage, slope, u'ees, vegetation, fill, etc. (City Code Section 320, Subd. 4). The structure or work you are requesting is an activity on publicly owned lands. Structures like boat houses, patios, sheds, etc. are aH NONCONFORMING USES. It· is the intent of the City to bring all these uses into conformance which means that those structures will at some time in the future have to be removed from the public lands. All permits are granted for a limited time and are non-transferable. Stairway construction must meet the State Building Code when the permit is for new construction, or a new permit is applied for due to change in dock site holder. Applicant Name /D~r~ ~, Address Phone (home) Abuttin~ Address Property Owner Legal Lot Description Subd. Public Name Property Dock Site # ConZractor Name Address Phone Block Shoreline Type ct~>s ~ VALUATION/PROPOSED COST OF PROJECT ('INCLUDING LABOR a MATERIALS): DESCRIBE REQUEST & PURPOSE: Date CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY [-"OR GINA ANDERSON OF LOT 16, BLOCK 1, DEVON HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Lot 16. Block 1. OEVON O- I COFFIN R GRONBERG, INC. tl~ ~,;,= v: the ~tote o~ ~ot~. 612~7~141 e ~er 12755 1 "=20' DATE 6/2/98 ~00 9~237 ~/ IIIIIII IIII CITY OF MOUND · ? '" M T W TH F - FOOTING ~ PLUMBING ROUGH-mN FRAMING ~ PLUMBING FINAL INSU~TION ~ MECHANICAL W~LBOARD ~ FIREP~CE AT ~ROAT PROGRESS ~ F]REP~CE FINAL FINAL ~ DEMOLITION PHONE # '~"7 '~-'~ 5'7C [] SITE INSPECTION [] GRADING/EXCAV. [] COMPLAINT [] FOLLOW-UP '~'"'~ i''~'r''' " / D~TOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR PECTION REQUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS Call for ~e~ ins~caon 24 hours in ~ance. Owner/Con,actor on ,~..~ ~ ~ -~ Yellow C~y/Sile.Notice [] WORK SATISFACTORY: PROCEED ~ PHOTO TAKEN [] CORRECT WORK & PROCEED [] CORRECT WORK. CALL FOR REINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING [] CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS. INSPECTOR WILL RETURN RESOLUTION ~6-99 'RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL PERMITS FOR PRIVATE STRUCTURES ON PUBLIC LANDS KNOWN AS DEVON COMMON "BATCH ~f¢3" DOCK SITES 41824, 42406, 42961, 43020, 43080, 43120, 43180, 43235, 43420, and 43450 WHEREAS, the City of Mound is in the process of updating the permits for structures located on public lands, and; WHEREAS, City Code Section 320 requires City Council approval by a four-fifths vote for Construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park or commons, and; WHEREAS, "Batch #9" details the private encroachments located at Dock Sites, and these encroachments have been inspected by the Building official and Dock Inspector accordin9 to the Procedure Manual, and; WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Commons Task Force to look at the process for dealing with structures on the commons (i.e. buildings, flagpoles, decks, etc.), and City staff is Qs thholding all action on these type of structures until the Council reviews the recommendation of the k force and gives staff further direction, and; WHEREAS, the Park and Open Space Commission has reviewed this Batch #9 and has recommend approval, with the conditions of approval as listed, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, to approve Public Land Permits for Batch #9, subject to the "conditions of approval." All conditions of approval must be completed within one (1) year of approval by the City Council or the dock license will be withheld until completion. These permits will expire five (5) years from the date of issuance and must be renewed with change in dock license holder. Batch #9 Public Land Permits DOCK SITE 41824 ABUTTING ADDRESS 4665 ISLAND VIEW DR MARK SMITH & GINA ANDERSON CONTACTED? YES ENCROACHMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEVON COMMON, CLASS C - ELECTRIC LIGHT APPROVE ELECTRIC LIGHT & OUTLET.' & OUTLET - PHONE REMOVE OR RELOCATE PHONE OUTLET ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY. Resolution ~6-g9 Batch ~ P. 3 i DOCK SITE 43420 43450 ABUTTING ADDRESS 4849 ISLAND VIEW DR STEPHEN HEWITT CONTACTED? YES ~ ISLAND VIEW DR MARK GOLDBERG CONTACTED? YES ENCROACHMENT CONDITIONS OF APPRQVAL DEVON COMMON, CLASS B - STAIRWAY (A) ON APPROVE AS IS, ACCEPTABLE CONDITION. HILLSIDE - STAIRWAY (B) ON RIP RAP APPROVE STAIRWAY TO BE INSTALLED AS A TRANSITION OVER THE RIP RAP. THE STAIRWAY SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO CODE, AS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL - RETAINING WALL APPROVE AS IS, ACCEPTABLE CONDITION. DEVON COMMON, CLASS C - STAIRWAY (A) ON APPROVE AS IS, ACCEPTABLE CONDITION. HILLSIDE - STAIRWAY (B) ON RIP RAP APPROVE STAIRWAY TO BE INSTALLED AS A TRANSITION OVER THE RIP RAP. THE STAIRWAY SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO CODE, AS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL - ELECTRIC LIGHT & OUTLET APPROVE PENDING ELECTRICAL INSPECTION.' All electrical work on public property is required by State law to be installed by a qualified licensed electrical contractor and inspected and approved by the State Electrical Inspector. The City Council must first approve of the proposed installation. A scaled site plan must be submitted showing in detail the location of all electrical services on the public land. All power supply to the abutting property must be properly disconnected until such work is approved by the City Council The applicant must, verify cr~sconnection with staff. The foregoing resolution was moved by CouncilmemberJessen and seconded Councilm ember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jenson, Jessen and Polston. Hanus was absent and excused. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: N one Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor by COMMONS MAINTENANCE PERMITS for Island View Br. Address Name Infringement on Commons 4609 IVD 4617 IVD 4625 IVD 4649 IVD 4665 IVD 4705 4711 IVD 4717 IVD 4729 IVD 4743 IVD 4747 IVD 4753 IVD 4763 IVD 4767 IVD 4771 IVD 4781 IVD 4805 IVD 4817 IVD 4833 IVD 4849 IVD 4909 IVD 4913 IVD 4921 IVD 4925 IVD 4931 IVD 4945 IVD 4949 IVD 4957 IVD Touba Ludden Haynes Nelson Walkup Erickson Vraspir Pierce Finn Sholden Zintnicks Kelly Weidenbach Soderman Carlson Huesman Zuhlke Kucera Stettin Lundeen McMillan Pixler Meil Wilson Buhr Harvey VanVlerah Norstrem Steps Steps Steps Storage house Walk, light pole, storage rack Retaining wall, steps Steps, retaining wall, lawn sprinkler enclosure Steps, guest house Playhouse, boathouse Steps Steps Retaining wall, landscaping Steps Steps, platform Steps Steps Steps, boathouse, retaining wall Steps, platform ? Porch, steps, walk Retaining wall Steps Steps, landscaping Steps, retaining wall Steps, maintenance house Steps Steps, boathouse Fence Flag pole .OUN' , :I ,'~ INT:~"'AZC £ ? ER~'iI'[ For ~ontinuzng the Present Use or ~ .~:,ructurc or Impr ment on Public Lands or Commons fTZ__-IZZ-f Do you have an imorovement or structure on Public Lands or Commons? if ,yes, list them: ~ - 1 ~-i&:~ T' t ~BUTTIi'~G LOT~ .~ ~_ ..BLOCK~-_/ SUBDIV t gas a permit iss:~e5 ~o authorize the construction of this improve- · ':en~ or s~:~c~ure? '? If yes, month and year: :~PPLICAi,[T [~ST iJRNISH ?HE FOL.IOWI],G: 1. Copy of permit issued to authorize construction. One plot p.lan drawn to scale showing dimensions of ~,' d'%A-'/' " - struoture/zm~rove~ent and location or same. / ~'~~~. One set of p!sns a"~5 specifications of sufficient clarity and detail to indicate the nature and extent of the structure or front a~5___ improvement. Show foundation plan, floor olan, side elevation, wall and roof section detail. ~. Photographs of existing struc~ure/imorovement. ~K C0'ff:I.ZS!ON R CO":,.'ir.' ~ATIOF: DATE U OXFORD LANE RESOLUTION # 00- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO LOT AREA TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFORMING ADDITION ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4856 DONALD DRIVE, P & Z CASE WHEREAS, the applicant, Greg Petrich, has requested a side yard setback variance to add an additional attached garage stall on property located at 4856 Donald Drive as indicated below: Proposed Required Variance Side yard 4.5 feet 6 feet 1.5 feet Lot Area 9969 sf 10,000 sf 31 sf ; and, WHEREAS, the property is located within the R-1 Single Family Residential District which requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet, a 30 feet front yard setback, and a 6 feet side yard for this lot of record; and, WHEREAS, an existing two stall garage exists on the property currently. The proposed single stall addition would allow a future dining room in the garage area while maintaining two stalls as shown on the August 19, 1988 survey. A 14 feet by 14 feet porch and 8 feet by 24 feet addition are also indicated but are not part of the owner's plans at this time; and, WHEREAS, the Building Official has confirmed the actual lot area with the surveyor to be 9,969 sf, and; WHEREAS, a reasonable sized garage addition could be built to conform to required sideyard setbacks while allowing for future improvements to the house; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended that the Council approve the variance as recommended by staff on a 5 to 3 vote; and, WHEREAS, this recommendation results in a denial of the applicants request for a reduced sideyard setback, and; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Motmd, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby approve a variance with the following conditions: a. The garage addition be not less than 6 feet from the property line. b. Hardcover requirements are met. c. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans be submitted for review and approval. 2. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated m the Hennepm County Property Information System: Lot 16 and parts of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 1, ARDEN MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 , FT Those present: Chair GeoffMichael; Commissioners: Orvin Burma, Jerry Clapsaddle, Becky Glister, Cklair Hasse, Michael Mueller, Bill Voss, Frank Weiland. Absent and excused: Council Liaison Bob Brown; Staff present: City Planner Loren Gordon, 'Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Recording Secretary Diana Mestad. The following public was present: Greg Petrich, 4856 Donald Drive. 1.1 Case #00-48: Variance, Greg Petrich, 4856 Donald Drive, Lot 16-19, Block 1, Arden, PID #24-117-24 44 0227. Clapsaddle requested that Staff include maps in future packets. The City Planner stated that this case involved a request to add an additional stall to an existing garage. The applicant is also planning to add a screen porch and extend the bedrooms in the future. The requested garage stall is the first phase of this project. The City Planner also stated that there is an above ground pool on the lot that does count as hardcover. The City Planner stated that the requested setback does not encroach on another home, but he does feel that the garage could work within the existing setback. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the request with the following conditions: 1. The garage addition be not less than 6 feet from the property line. 2. An updated hardcover sheet be submitted showing existing and proposed hardcover after the garage addition. 3. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans be submitted for review and approval. Weiland asked whether Staff was requesting approval of the whole project including the screen porch and proposed addition at this time. The City Planner stated that these projects are a long-term plan and Staff is only requesting approval of the garage at this time. Clapsaddle asked whether granting this variance would cause all the other projects to come before the Commission. The City Planner stated that this would not be required under the new streamlining. Mueller asked whether it was possible to approve all the projects at this time. Mueller asked what the setback would be if this property were on a fire lane. The City Planner stated that he thought the setback would then be 20 feet. Mueller stated that he understood that it was Staff's job to uphold the ordinances, but he wondered how granting this variance would negatively affect the neighborhood. The City Planner stated that he did not see a negative impact, but Staff did feel there were other options available. Weiland suggested that the applicant purchase the necessary land from the City as it was abutting a tax forfeit property. He further stated that the tax forfeit property was not useable parkland. Weiland asked whether the above ground pool located on the applicant's property had been permitted by the City. The City Building Official stated that the pool was not listed with the property in the City records and so was not permitted. The applicant confirmed that he did not have a permit for the pool. The City Building Official informed the applicant that he would need to get a permit for the pool and at that time the regulations regarding fencing and electrical would be considered. Weiland asked whether the pool would have to be taken down and then the permit applied for. The City Building Official stated the pool would not have to be taken down, but the applicant would pay a double fee for not applying for the permit beforehand. Mueller pointed out that the City may not be willing to sell the land to the applicant and further that what the applicant is asking for is a variance. Voss asked whether Staffhad offered the applicant the option of purchasing land from the City. The City Building Official stated that he did not know the history of the case, but could research it and bring the issue back to the Commission. He suggested that the variance could be approved according to Staff recommendation and then the City and the applicant could pursue the land purchase option. Weiland stated that he did not like this solution because it involved allowing a variance without trying to investigate the other opportunity. Mueller stated that the survey shows the garage at 28 x 24 and asked whether that was correct. The applicant stated it was correct, but that 6 feet is currently a mudroom located within the house. The applicant then distributed plans for the proposed changes to the Commission. Clapsaddle asked why the applicant could not push the garage back to stay within the existing setback. Mueller suggested approving all the projects so the applicant would not have to come back. He further stated that the streamlining would not cover an undersized lot. Clapsaddle stated that the drawing was not accurate to scale and so made approval of all the projects difficult. Mueller confirmed that Clapsaddle was suggesting that the garage stall be moved back 2 feet to remain within the setback. Clapsaddle confirmed that this was his suggestion. Voss questioned whether having the applicant buy the City's land would cause him to lose his status as a lot of record. Mueller stated that the applicant could request to retain his status. The City Planner stated that he had checked the lot area on the Hennepin County website and it was listed at 9,629 square feet. Mueller stated that in his experience the website is often wrong on the lot areas. The City Planner stated that he then checked the numbers and came up with 9,648.5 square feet, but that this would have to be confirmed by survey. The City Planner stated that the Nonconforming Section, New Development 9 discussed additions to nonconforming structures, but in this case, the house is conforming and if use of the parcel is also conforming, then the streamline option would apply. This would mean that the applicant would not need to return to the Commission for future projects. Mueller stated that the question was whether to grant the variance or require the applicant to make his lot conforming by buying the land from the City. Clapsaddle added that the option of pushing back or resizing the garage also existed. Mueller stated that in his opinion granting the variance would not have a negative impact. Burma stated that he did not have a problem recommending that the variance be granted because there would be no effect on the neighborhood in terms of privacy, appearance, or fire safety. MOTION, by Clapsaddle, seconded by Voss, to approve Staff recommendation with the conditions listed. Discussion: Mueller verified that what was being proposed was that the garage meet the 6 foot setback and that any conforming additions would not need to come back for variances. Burma suggested that since a hardcover sheet was distributed at the meeting, condition number 2 be revised to read "hardcover requirements are met." Clapsaddle and Voss accepted Burma's amendment. Chair Michael called the question. AYE S: 5 NAYS: 3 (Michael, Mueller, Weiland) Motion carried. 5-3. Mueller stated that the above ground pool on the property is movable and therefore is not a fixture of the real estate. The applicant asked for clarification on what he needed to do in order to build a 12-foot addition. The City Planner stated that he needed to either purchase land from the City or step back the addition. The applicant asked who he should contact to explore these options. The City Planner stated that the case would come before the City Council in two weeks and the decision made at that time would be final. The City Building Official told the applicant that if he was considering purchasing the land, he should call him. Weiland asked for confirmation that if the applicant were to purchase the land, he would not lose his lot of record status. The City Building Official stated that the applicant could apply to keep his lot of record status and that information would be supplied to him to further explain the process. Mueller told the applicant that he should call the City Building Official the next day and get more information about the process. PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: September 11, 2000 SUBJECT: Variance Request APPLICANT: Greg Petrich CASE NUMBER: 00-48 HKG FILE NUMBER: 00-5 LOCATION: 4856 Donald Drive ZONING: Residential District R- 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted a request to build an attached garage within a side yard setback. The variance request is as follows: Side yard setback Lot Area (existing) Proposed Required Variance 4.5 feet 6 feet 1.5 feet 9629 sq. ft 10,000 sq. ft. 371 sq. ft. The proposed garage is a 12 feet by 24 feet addition to the existing 28 feet by 24 feet attached two stall. The owner is considering converting some of the existing garage to living space but is not part of the project at this time. It is also staff's understanding that the 14 feet by 14 feet screened porch and the 8 feet by 24 feet addition shown on the survey are also not part of the garage project. A hardcover inventory is still pending at the time of this report and any approval would need to consider any overages. It appears that the property has roughly 26 percent existing hardcover. A garage addition and additional driveway would most likely increase the hardcover to the mid 30 percent range. Also, a 15 feet by 30 feet above ground pool is a new structure on the property that isn't indicated on the survey. A 12 feet addition to the garage would allow a 24 feet wide garage which is a very reasonable 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 Ii00-48 Variance Request - 4856 Donald Drive September 11, 2000 size. However, reducing it by 1.5 feet to leave a 22.5 feet width is still adequate for parking two vehicles. A future dining room could be planned to allow for an additional couple feet in the garage if needed. If an updated hardcover sheet can verify that the property will be below 40 percent, and the southwest comer can meet a 6 feet setback, staff can support a variance that would recognize the lot area. This was discussed with the applicant and staff has suggested this is our preferred alternative. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the request with the following conditions: 1. The garage addition be not less than 6 feet fi:om the property line. 2. An updated hardcover sheet be submitted showing existing and proposed hardcover after the garage addition. 3. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans be submitted for review and approval. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution: VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND 534'i Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472.0607, Fax: 47'2.0620 9' ~-1 '~ City Planner 5' t '-/- 0-~ City Engineer c~, 1-7 · OO Public Works Application Fee: $100.00 Case No. ~'t ~ RECEIVED DNR AUG ~ 0 ~7000 (~ND PLANNING & INS~ SUBJECT PROPERTY LEGAL DESC. PROPERTY OWNER Address Lot Block ~- t~ Subdivision ~t-~L~ rd PID# ZONING DISTRICT Name C"'~ ~' e _~ Address t..~ ~,_~--~ Phone R-1 R-lA R-2 (w) R-3 b-1 Pla~ B-2 B-3 APPLICANT Name (IF OTHER Address THAN Phone OWNER) (H) (W) (M) Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ~)~.yes, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. Revised 07-11-00 Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stodes, type of use, etc.): Vadance Application, P. 2 Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No ~). If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE ~rexiCting) Front Yard: ( N S E W ) Side Yard: ( N S Side Yard: ( N S E Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) Lakeside: ( N S E W ) : (NSEW) Street Frontage: Lot Size: Hardcover: ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ft. ft. t. ft. ft:' ff. ft. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. ff. sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes ~. No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? (~) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil too small ( ) drainage ( ) existing situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify Please describe: Revised 07-11-00 Variance Application, P. 3 Was the hardship described above created by the action of anYone having proper~ interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No/~,. If yes, explain: Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No ~J,~. If yes, explain: o Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a vadance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes (~i No (). if no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? 9. Comments: I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature Date Revised 07-11-00 uo~.~,I. PPV ~ ~" Certificate of Survey for Gregory J. Petrich in Lots 16-19, Block 1, ARDEN Hennepin County, Minnesota ~5.4a',~eos., .~.o' Arden .r..-..r $ ,< RECEIVED AUG ! O I hereby certify that this is a true and correct, of a surgey of the boundaries of ~ OUN ?LANNING & INSE representation Lot 16 and that part of Lots 17, 18 and 19 lying~ Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the Sout'h' line of-said Lot 17 distant 31.7 feet Westerly of tile Southeasterly corner of said Lot 17 to the Northeast corner of Lot 19, ail in Block 1, ARDEN, the ]ocation of all existing buildings, if any, thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed'garage. It does not purport to show any other im- provements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. 1 inch : 30 feet August 19;' 1988 Iron marker Scale: Date · 0 : Mark S. Gronberg MN. Lic. No. 12755 Engineers, land Surveyors. Planners Long,Lake, Minnesota CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY ADDRESS: I.-[~ ~ 0ot~A-t 0 0,~, ~ OWNER'S NAME: C r ~'¢,~ ~ ~-'i- (2, ~ ~ ~-~ LOT AREA ~C-~ ~C[ SQ. FT. X 30% = (for all lots) .............. I LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record*) ....... I ,.~c~ ~ I LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only) *Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. HOUSE '~ ~ ~' '2-~i X = ~' ~' TOTAL HOUSE DETACHED BLDGS X = (GARAGE/SHED) X = AREAS, SIDEWALKS, TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. x = X = ETC. X = TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ................... DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover TOTAL DECK .......................... OTHER DoO~ -O~JCL\ -~C) X [~ = C.~-O H 5-o TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) ............................... PREPARED BY ~, ~)~'~ ~- ~"~L DATE uo ~,I. PPV '~ L~ Certificate of Survey for Gregory J. Petrich in Lots 16-19, Block 1, ARDEN Hennepin County, Minnesota ')5. 40'meps ., -'~.o' Arden I I hereby certify that this is a true and correctX represenCation of a sur~ey of the boundaries of~ Lot 16 and that part of Lots 17, 18 and 19'lying ~ Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the Southx x gECEIVED UG I 0 1QQ MOUN ANNING & INSP. line of-said Lot 17 distant 31.7 feet Westerly of the Southeasterly corner of said Lot 17 to the Northeast corner of Lot 19, all in Block 1, ARDEN, the location of all existing buildings, if any, thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed'garage. It does not purport to show any other im- provements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG., INC. 1 inch : 30 feet August 19.i: 1988 Iron marker Scale: Date · o Mark S. Gronberg MN. Lic. No. 12755 Engineers, land Surveyors. Planners Long.Lake, Minnesota ('IIY ¢}F MOUNI) .~URVE¥ ON FII.E? ¥E5 / NO ixTi' Ol: RF.C¢)RI}? YES / YARI) I Ilq R I.N 'ti( IN FRONF N S E W ]:RONT N S E W SIi)E N S E W SIDE N S E W REAR N S F. W I.Agl! N S E W 'fOP OF BI.tIFF ZONINL; INFORMATION SIIEEI' ZONING DISYRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH: ~l 1OoOOO/~'~ B~ 7,500/0 Rig 6,000/40 B2 20,000/80 R2 6,000/40 83 lO,OOO/6O R2 14,000/80 R3 SEE ORD. 11 30,O00/100 REQIIIREI) J EXISTING/PROPOSED 15' 50' I0' ()R 30' EXISTING LOT SIZE: LOT WIDTIt: LOT DEPTH: VARIANCE GARAGE, SIIED ..... DL:TACIIlil) IHHI.I)IN(;S FRONT N S E W FRONI' N S E W SIDE N S E W SIDE N S E W REAR N S I? W i. AKE N S E W 4' OR 6' 4' OR 6' 4' 50' I0' OR 30' IIARIR'OVER ]0,% OR 40% {'¢}NF{)RMIN(;? YES / No / ? J ln': JD,XTED: J'hi~ /IJnilig JllJt~llllatiOII ~IIRcl ot~Jy SOllllllaliZt'] a J'llllJo. oJ tile tequirenlenl~ otlllint, d ill Ihe (:ily of ~Joolld ~oni.g Ordinance. For ftlf~ler information, contact Ihe City of Mound I'lanning l)cpaitmncnl al 472-O6(~). '~l.' ~v ;....~: .7 ' "~ 81'25 ~'~2~'' ~~ ~ · 0 ~ ..... ' .... ~ s s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a'= ~ -' 0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~ ~''' _. ~ ( r ~,,y,~:;C ~ ,o "'.~,.r DR ~ ~ E ~ ~ O ~ 'l~ "~ (25) I 0 ~ i ~ 0 PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. mia TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: September 25, 2000 SUBJECT: Variance Request APPLICANT: Ted Oare CASE NUMBER: 00-58 HKG FILE NUMBER: 00-5 LOCATION: 1801 Resthaven Lane ZONING: Residential District R-lA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted a request to rebuild house that is fire damaged. The variance request is as follows: Existing Required Variance Side yard setback 7.7 feet 20 feet 12.3 feet The setback fi.om Sunset Landing is a required 20 feet as it is a public way. It doesn't appear that the oppommity exists to reorient the house on the property or modify it to meet this setback minimum. Staff would support a variance to recognize this setback. The owner is also requesting a variance to the Regulatory Flood Elevation Standard (RFPE) of 933.0 feet for Lake Minnetonka. The current lowest floor elevation in the house is 932.3 feet. Floodplain Regulations stipulate that "No variance shall allow a use prohibited in a district or permit a lower degree of protection than the RFPE. A variance shall not be granted for a residential structure to allow the construction of the basement or lowest floor, if there is no basement, below the RFPE." Because the fire damaged more than 50% of the assessed building value of the home, valued at $100,000, the building must meet code requirements (setbacks, flood elevation standards). The proposed work to the structure is estimated at $141,000 according to the building permit 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 p. 2 gO0-50 Variance Request- 1801 Resthaven Lane September 25, 2000 application received. Bottom line is, the house will need to be elevated to be at or above 933.0 feet. This standard is not varianceable. The City jeopardizes its eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program if these standards are not upheld. Additionally, the property owner may not be eligible for emergency funds if a reconstructed house not meeting the RFPE is flooded. As difficult of a situation as this is for the property owner, it is in his best interest, and the City's, to elevate the house. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the sideyard setback variance of 12.3 feet. 123 NoFth Third Street, Suite 100, Mirmeapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 08/28/'00 21:46 F.~ CITY OF MOUND OO3 VARIANP-F APPI leATltlN - ' CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound; MN 55364 Phone: 472-0607, Fax: 472-0620 Application Fee: $100.00 -(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) Planning Commission Datek.;~I ~:. ~ :L/-' Z--.. Distribution: ~/Z~,/O01~/~O C,,~anner ' Ci~ ~gineer ~ ~=~ P~K PROPER~ Lot // .. LEGAL Block / ZONING DISTRICT PROPER~ Name Case No. ~0 --~-~'c~~. Piat~ g~/~ B-2 B-3 APPLICANT Name (IF OTHER Address THAN Phone OWNER) (H) (W) (M) Has an application ever b~e~ made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes.,. ~([ no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolu~;i6rfs. /~,,,~ied description of propo~s~d construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): o8/28/oo . _.2j._.: _4_7... E--~ ~_..c_.!_.~ OF ~OU~D Variance Application, P. Z 3. Do the existing structures comply wit~ ~ll ama, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No ,C'~. If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe raason for variance request, i.e. setback, lot aKea, etc.): , "'T" ,~ . ', . ...f.t · ' . . . .. · , ' / ;'' -' ' ' - .... SI~f'RAOKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE (or Front Yard: ( N S,.E~W ) ft. ft. ff. Side Yard: ( ,~,~/V~ ) ~ ' ft. /Z,'~,~"/"o,~ /0 '~'" ff. Side Yard: ~q~WW ) ff. 'ff. '" ft. Rear Yard: ) rE' ff. ft. Lakeside: ( R' S E W ) ff. ff. ff. : (NSEW) lt. ff. ff. Street Frontage: ff. ft. ft. Lot Size: sq ff sq ft sq ft Hardcover: sq ft sq ff sq ff Does..,~e present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is Iocated'~ Yes/~, No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use: ' / - o Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) too small ( ) drainage ( ) existing situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other:, specify 08/28/00 Z1:47 ~ uuo Was the hardship described above created by the action of a~ne having property interests in the land zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), NO,(,'~. If yes, explain: after the / , 7. Was,~e hardship created, by any other man-made chan~e, such as fl~e relocaaon of a road? Yes ,~ No (). if yes, explain: , .. _ ,:.... I 8. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a vadance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes,~-0, No (). if no, list some other properties which are similarly affected? I ced~'y that ali of the ai~¥e ~r~tement~ and the statements contained in any required papem or plans to be submitl~d herewith a~ t~e and a~..uvate. I consent to the ent~/in or upon the promises d~.~...fil~d in this appli~tion by any authorize! official of th~ Ci~of Mound for ~ purpose of in$1~ing, or of pc~l~ng, maintaining and removing such notices as ~ ~efil~/~! by law. Applicant's Signature Date Comments for the Variance Application ou, ,n ~ale ]97.3. We moved Lure rko propmy !. YES A bmidinS poe-mi: ~'as ;ahem ': ' . 2. R4oair Firs damaged home to orynal conditiondno rateratton$ will be made to ~e existing stru~nure. See enclosed ".¢¢o$e of repag, rs". 3. NO. i '~a.; LnI~rraed fi'om fi'f' mty inspoctioa N'ottce §-25-00 that requirena~=t ~o Sunset Landing requJr~aent iz 20 fee~ and ttmt ~, Iower floor love;, ia ye.'5' close m rain/mum floor cl=v~oa of 933 comptmnce ~5*Z the s~back wh~-n k was consmactcd. Tke set hack reqtaremer.: was chang,~d k 1982. The q_,esti,:: of fie, or ,-,!ovation was menUon=d m 1973 whan. ,.~.= home was builL To mi," knowl~dg¢ -it was cem.~lied with as lite b',:'ilding pm'air ~anr~.d md the ce~ilic.a;: of occu,c~u;cy issu=i. 4. See kern ~ 3 above, 5. The exterior oft.he home exits :May with no changes to be made. built on pilings mci to chang= the size of the exterior of the home or lower floor ~ex"~I wcuM be cost ¢rolaibidve. 6. NO 7. YES 7he zo.,,xug ordizanee was changed after thc cr/~nal buiidmg obtained ~d ~e home conmvaeted. 8. YES ~u*. ;he pmpci'ty n~t door winch is pr.es:nt!y ay. der a va:-ianc= of the setba, k from Svmset Landing ,.nd also a variance :o ;;sc Sunset Landing as thc drivcw~ty far ~gr~ss and ,gross to the prop~rt-y. 9~ Th< home was buff: in 1.~73 - 1974 w~lh a bailding permil issued by th: titS' of Mound. Ne ~miar.~:s were reGm.md or reque~ect. The mterio~ of our home had fir= d.a~age. Thc mai~ damage, was caused- by smoice that rexl. uires rim: ~1,,c interior of the hem, be gutted to the smd walls and rebuih with ~w insuialion and sheetrock. Ttte exbarior win rema/.~_ as k exists with the ex-=option of being rv~amtcd. If you ~.ock .ar the hr;me today d~e oniy eVader, ce of dama§r, ia '..hrc¢ wmctows bo~ded up ~ ';hz result of' Cna fi~man break/rig th.-m~ to put our the fit'.. We have lived in the home sLnce~ it wa comrrazred, irt 197,t. We l-.,ave never had =y rnoisrare problem in our lower level. The lake level 1.as never b:en anywk=, nero or lower floor level or on our yar~. .~£F -., OC, RECEIVED $c~embe. x 13, 20oo Lir4iltom Ccr, stmction 06!I 10e~ A~e. N. Plymoath, IV~ .~5441 It.e: Lot 1 l, Block I°-, Shadywotxt l~olm We surveyed the house at I$01 Re~ I.~v~ RoM at 9]Z3 feet. The ord~'~, hlSh w-~ter mark for L,.k~ ele';atiora are m mean ~a level Sincerel~', Coffin & C<.onber$. Inc. Mark S. I~ronb~rl~ P.E. & L$ $EP-07-88 81:29 PM Tom M~¢k 612 $?9 1566 P. 01 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGIzNCY STANDARD FLOOD IIAZARD DETERMINATION I. LENDER NAME AND ADDRESS MACK MORTGAGE 7767 ELM CREEK BLVD, SUITE 300 MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 REQUESTER: DALE NELSON 3. LENDER ID. NO. 4. LOAN IDENTIFIER Sea Tho Attached Instructions SECTION I - LOAN INFORMATION 2. COLLATEE. AL (BUtldlttg/Mobii¢ Home/Per$on~tl Property) PROPERTY ADDRESS (Legal Description may bc attached) Submitted Addre#s lg01 RESTHAVEN LANE MOUND. MN 55364- 001 SECTION II O. MB. No ]067-0264 Expires C~tob~ 31, 2001 AMOUNT OF FLOOD INSURANCE REQUIRED A, NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMMUNITY JURISDICTION 1. NFIP Community Name 2. County(ins) 3. Stale 4. NFIP Commnnity Number MOUND, CITY OF HENNEPIN COUNTY MN 270176 B. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) DATA AFFECTING BUILDING/MOBII.E IlO.ME i. NFIP Map Number or Comnl,tfity. Pane[ Number 2. NFIP Map Panel (Community name, il'not the same Is "A") Effective/I~,evised Dale 3. I.OMA/I. OMR 4. Flood 7.,n · No NFIP Map 270 ] 760005 B 09/29/1978 C Y~ Date C. FEDERAl. FLOOD INSURANCE AVAII.ABII.ITY (Chec~ allthat apply) I. (X) Federal Flood Insurance Is available (community participates in NFIP). (X) Regular Program ( } Emergency Program of NFIP l. ( )Fcdcral Flood Insurance is not available because thc cotnmunlty Is not participntiug in thc NFIP. 3. ( ) Building/Mobile ttomc is in a Coastal Barrier Resources Area (CBRA), Federal Flood Insurance may not be available. CBRA designation date: D. DETERMINATION IS BUILDING/MOBILE HOME IN SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONES CONTAINING THE LETTERS "A" OR "V")? If yes, flood insurance is required by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. YES ~ N O If no, flood insurance is not required by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. E. COMMENTS (Optional): Flood Zone: Areas of minimal flooding. Areas determinod lo be outside 500 year flood plain. General: Certified Address: 1801 RESTHAVEN LN. MOUND, MN 55364.1310 Determination No. Account ID Borrower: TED OARE Census Tract/BNA: 5357252 Regular Pga. Entry Date: 09/2911978 BFE: MSA: (1 of 1) 162368 Dot Ref Id: State/County Code: l'hi~ dctcnninalion is based on ex,'tmining d~e NFIP map, and an)' Fedentl Emerg, cncy Management Agency revisions to it, and any other inforrnalion needed to locate the building/mobile home on the NFIP map. F. PREPARER'S INFORMATION NAME. ADDRESS. TEI.EPHONE NUMBER. (Ifother than Lender) ~/~~ GE Capital Residential Connections Corporation 7125 West Jefferson Avenue, Suite 300 Lukewood, CO 80235 800 - 57~ - 4460 YE.MA F'ORIM 111-93. DATE OF DETERMINATION 00/07/2000 08:17 AM Tom M(~k ~i~ ~ l~ L r.~ t..ul,~ l KUL ~ IKUt; 1 UKI~ MANAUEMENT POI,ICY AN~ OPEP..ATI,, Page 9 of 9 or if no headng is held, the amendments, if any, shall be incorporat into the foregoing Management Policy and Operating Procedures for t following three (3) year term commencing March 1, 1998 and distributed to affected municipalities and agencies, This review procedure shall be repeated every three (3) years. HEADWATERS CONTROL STRUCT-U'R.E DISCHARGE ZONES A2qD ALLOWABLE DISCHA.RGE RATES MARCH l, 1995 - MARCH 1, 1998 93L0 i 930.5 I I ZON'Z-? t I ZONE-I M.4X33{t~ CRF. F_~ CAPACITY I ZON'~4 I,~ CFS ~ ZONE-,~ BA~'~ }"r. ow A~PHO~ L~ C~S I ZO~ NO DI~ 9~8.5 ~ ~Y ~ ~Y AUG. ~. ~. NOV. I 150 C~ CAPACI'I-f A. LOWEST ELEVATION ON OLD GRAY'S BAY DAM - 928.6 B. ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL (O.H,W.) - 929.4 C. TOP OF SPILLWAY - 930,0 D. RECORD HIGH WATER- 930.5 E, PROJECTED REGIONAL FLOOD - 931,5 NOTE: APPROX. ICE-OUT DATE -APRIL 15 APPROX, ICE-IN DATE - NOVEMBER 30 http ://ww~v.mirmehahacreek,org/Publications/public/headwater$.htra 9119/00Z7~ $EP-21-00 08:18 AM Tom M~k 61~ ~79 1566 P.05 Harrisons Bay Lake Minnetonka 1999 Report Card C- #Juekah t'n, et ([~l~l Watmhed Di~ldrl Lake Data: I ~) Sampling Site: ~ Concentrated Inflow LHR 01 DNR I.D. #27-139P UTM Easting 448642 · Concentrated Outflow Surface Area 211Acrc$ UTM Northing 497§640 IVlaximum Depth 46 Feet Water Quality Grade C- ~ Direct Tribulan/ Watershed o.1 o o.1 0,2 ~8 Lake Minnetonka Elevation History 100 Year Flnod (.931 ~ 932 028' Runout {928.6} ~22 - - ~"-XJ~--- Monthly Low 920 , , , , , r , , 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1860 1970 1980 1990 2000 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 1999 Hydrologic Data Report Wenck APR 2000 Figure AM-11 $EP-21--00 08: 19 AFl Tom Mc~ck 612 3?9 1566 I-I:L)b['{AL I:MI::HG/.-NC¥ MANAGEMENT AGEN(.:Y See The Attached I O.M.B. NO. 3067-0264 STANDARD FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATION Instruclion$ Expires October 31, 2001 SECTION I. LOAN INFORMATION '--- 1. LENDER NAME AND ADDP. Ets$ 2. UOLLAt ~htAL (Bull~llng/MobJl~ Hom~/Per~ona! WfOp~f~y) ['W,~PEI.{'T 'Y AUL)RES~ ...... '--' Mack Mortgaqe {J. egal Description may be attached) 7767 Elm Creek Blvd ~300 1801 RESTHAVEN LN '--Maple Grove, MN 55369 MOUND, MN 55364 Company: Mack Mortgage Borrowe~: Oare, Ted Attn: Dale Nelson P.04 Pagc I afl LENDEr IL-). NU. 4. LOAN IDEN~'IFIER 5. AMOUNt Of I LOOU INSUKANCE HE(.JUIW. ED $ SECTION [1 A. NA~ tONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFiP)COMMUN, I y JURI~DICIION 1. NJ-IH CommunltYName 2. County(,es) 13. State MOUND, CITY OF 1 1. NHP Map Number or (;ommun,ty-Panel Numbe~ t2. NPIP Map P.~ne, I=ll~cl,vel 13.LOMA/LOMJ~ 14. F,oo0/.one (Community Name. if not the same as 'A") Revised Date 2'/0176 0005B 09/29/78 ['-']~oo ~,~. j c C. I-EDERAL {-LOOD INSURANCE AVAILABILITY (Check ail tha! apply) NPIP (;ommunily Number 270176 2.r-] Federal Flood insurance is not available because c~mmunity Is not participating in the NFIP ~.r-'] Building/Mobile Home is in a Coastal Darrier Resources Area (CB,~A) or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA), Fe0eral Floocl Insurance may not be available. CBRAJOPA designation date: D. DETERMiNATiON IS BUILDING/MOBILE HOME IN SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONES CONTAINING THE LETTERS "A" OR "V")? ['-] YES ~ NO If yes. flood insurance Is required by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. If ne, flood insurance is not required by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. T~IS FLOOD DET~I~AT~O~ I~ PROVIDED TO THE '~ER P~SU~T TO THE ~D DISASTER PROTECTION ACT. IT SMO~ NOT BE *~jgD FOR ~ OT~ER P~POSE. This determination is based on examining the NFIP map, any nagement Agency revislona to It, and any other information needed to locate the building/mobile F, PREPAEER'$ INFORMATION I.'~'. ,.-, .:.,.',~,'/ ".'~ NAMi=. ADDRESS5, TELEPHONE NUMBER (If other than Lend, r/ - '"' DAii:. (..)P Dk. TEHMiNA'AuN ~.;,..~:~:,,'~r' ................ 9/18/00 at 4:24 pm CT First.. American Flood Data Serv£¢e~..~ 11902 Burnet Road % ""~'~"~9" ~ FloodCart#: 0009403851 Austin, TX 78758 ,'. - 1-800-447-1772 ~/' ~"[" I, hMA Form ~1-113. OCT ~ MMC:SJS'5.~ .... SEP-21-00 88:28 AM Tom M~k 612 3?9 1566 P.05 EVAULATION AS TO THE 933.00 ELEVATION. FLOOD PLAIN EVAULATION tt appears from the documentation presented to me that: -A lowest floor elevation of 933.00 has been established as a zoning ordinance. -Flood Plain ordinances exist. (I only received a few pages) FINDINGS: The elevation established by FEMA and thc State (DNR) is 932.00 and the city of Mound has increased the elevation to 933,00. The property is not located in a Flood Hazard Area and per FEMA and DNR is not under their jurisdiction. SOURCES: Conversation with Sajata Banrejee, National Hazard Program Specialist FEMA Region V. (9-18-2000) Phone (312)408-5358 FEMA only requires that that property is at Flood Level. In this case 931.00. The state and/or city may have additional requirements. Conversation with Obi Slum State Coordinator, Department of National Resources. (9- 18-2000) (651) 296-0444 In addition to FEMA's requirement the state set a 'free board' of one (1) foot. 931.00 flood level plus 1.00 = 932.00 (state requirement) In addition to the state the municipality may increase the elevation and Mound must have an additional one (1)foot requirement, FEMA (requirement flood level) State (additional level) Total (state requirement) Mound (additional over state) Total Mound requirement 931.00 1.00 932.00 1.00 933.00 Mr. Slum also stated that the DNR and FEMA do not have any jurisdiction over the property as the property is in flood zone "C", which is not in a Flood Hazard Area. Flood Hazard Areas are in zones containing the letters "A" or '¥". (See Standard Flood Hazard Determinations from I. First American Flood Data Services and I1. GE Capital Residential Connections Corporation). Per Mr. Slum this is up to the city only and FEMA and DNR do not have to be notified. Kennedy ~ rave I1 470 hllsb.~' Center 200 South Sixth $tvcct Minnca~lis Mb/~5~02 (612~ 357.~300 ~kph~n~ (612) 337-9310 fi~ May 1 a. 1999 ]on Sutherlund Building Official Caty of Mound 5~ 1 Mavwood Road Mound, MN 5536a Re: Variance to Section 300' 15 subd. a F. of Mound Code Dear .[on: You havc recently asked whether a variance may bc ~anted to the requirements contained in the above-referenced code provision. The referenced provision requires that thc lowest floor elevation be at or above thc R. FPE: and that an "~sland" extend i 5 fcct from thc structure in all ditecbons. Sccuon 300:15 subd. 7 provides the answer to your inqum,.'. That section prohibits variances · *'h~ch would allow the lowest floor of a residential structure ~o be below thc RFPE. A variance may be ~anted for other types of structures, and to the island requirement of Subdivision 4. Of course. ',,aria.rices may be granted only ff the conditions required for approval have been satisfied. Those conditions are found generally m the zoning regulations as well as in Section 300'15. I hope that this response is adequate. Please advise if you need fttrtber assistance on this matter. Respectfully yours. gak Enclosures John Cameron Loren Gordon IBD-~ G2C~G.~ MU22O-5 IH-~ Z0/Z0'd Zg~-I 0I£62££Z19+ ~1:11 R R,,,~ I .r, fl SENT BY: DNR METRO; DNtR WA TERS DATE: 4/12/99 4-12-99 9:04AM; 6127727573 => ; #2 / 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA Office Memorandum TO.' FROM: PHONE: SUBJECT: Jori Sutherland, City of Mound Ceil Strauss, Area Hydrologist 651-772-7914 FAX: 651-772-7977 Case #97-39, Robert Steele, 23xx Driftwood Lane, Mound I recommend denial of the current request. Mr. Steele references the 2 letters I sent in 1997 and calls the first a form letter. It was not a form letter; it was a denial recommendation based on the facts I had available. My follow up letter (12126197) gave more detail after viewing the site, but Mr. Steele is misinterpreting my letter if he believes I am supportive of the proposal. I stated that we would not insist that the proposal be denied just on the fact that the lots are contiguous nonconforming lots under the same ownership. There are other reasons besides the contiguous nonconforming lots issue to deny this request. Based on the survey i received 4/2/99, there is net filling in the floodplain. When t visitecl the site earlier, i said I had no objection to filling in a few of the holes that caused tripping, but I object to net filling in the floodplain intended to transform an unbuildable lot into a buildable lot. '1',... Watershed District's rule that one-inch of material may be placed as a one-time privilege is intended to allow smoothing of an area being landscaped, not as a way to get around their basic requirement that there be no net filling in the floodplain. The proposed grading does not meet the city's floodplain regulation requirement to have the ground within15 feet (from all directions of the house) at the 100 year elevation or higher on either side of the house, or at the lakeside corners. The city's ordinance does not allow a various to be given for a lesser degree of flood protection than that required by the ordinance. Thanks. Please call me if you have any questions. C~ Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Jim Hafner l'l~t ef Survey for Theodore Oare Lot !l, ~lock l?, Shady~ood Point Nennepin County, ~lnnesota // Certificate o£ Survey: Z hereby certiPY that t.hts is a true anJ ccrroct reprec~nt~%ion of s.urvey o£ the boundaries of Lot ll, 9lock 12, Sha~y~'ood ?oint. Yt does not ouroort to sho~ improve,.nents or encroachment.~ except a oro~oced loca- tion of a ~rooosed ~ld~n'~. Seale: 1" = 50' Date : 7-31-73 o : Iron. marker . Gordon ,%. Coffin iu'~,'. :.~F. ~,064 Land ,'iurveyor and Planner Long Lake, Minnesota CH'Y OF MOUND - ZONING INFORMATION SHEET SURVEY ON FILE? YES / NO LOT OF RECORD? YES / NO YARD ' I IIOUSE ......... FRONT FRONT SIDE SIDE REAR LAKE TOP OF BLUFF DIREX.'rlON N S E W N S E W N S E W N S E W N S E W N S E W ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH: R1 R2 R3 RE~Un~D 10,000/60 B1 9,500/0 6,000/40~. B2 20,000/80 6,000/40 B3 10,000/60 14,000/80 SB~ ORD. I1 30,000/100 EXISTING/PROPOSED 50' 10' OR 30' EXISTING LOT SIZE: LOT WIDTH: LOT DEPTH: VARIANCE GARAGE, SilED ..... DETACllED BUILDINGS FRONT N S E W FRONT N S E W SIDE N S E W SIDE N S E W REAR N S E W LAKE N S E W TOP OF BLUFF liARDCOVER 30% OR 40% CONFORMINC~. YES I NO / ? ] BY: 4' OR 6' 4' OR 6' 50' 10' OR 30' DATED: This Zoning Information Sheel only summarizcs a portion of thc requirements outlined in the City of Mound Zoning Ordinance. For further information, contact Iht City of Mound (6) ~fi~ESTONIiA SENIOR CITIZENS FOUNDATION A le~e~ to four September 7, 2000 Kandis Hanson Mound City Manager Mayor Pat Meisel Mound City Council Members Andrea Ahrens, Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker Dear City Manager, Mayor and City Council Members, We are writing this letter of request for help with our new senior center that is being constructed in Mound. Could you please consider the following: Jo Reimbursement for ponding expenses Waiver of Permit Fees Inclusion of our new parking lot in Mound's city snow removal program We realize how generous the City of Mound has already been with helping secure the funding from the CDBG funds and other m-kind services and are deeply appreciative of this generosity. However, we are now trying to close the gap for the funding of the new senior center and are in a position of asking for all the help we can get to finalize this project. The center will be a valuable asset for not only today's seniqr population, but for many generations of elderly in the future. Our hope has been that our entire community will feel the pride of accomplishment with its completion next year. With ~fit~de for this consideration, Sharon Cook President Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation Og-OB-OO 11:07 Fro~-KEHNEDY A GRAVEN +61Z33?9310 T-?gg P.DZ/03 F-D18 To: M~or and City Counc~ Subjecc Westonka Senior Citizen's Foundation Requests By letter dated SepTember 7, 2000, Sharon Cook, the Presidcm of The Wesmuka Senior Citizen's Poundauon, has requested that The City assist thc Foundation by reducing certain expenses that thc Foundahon would otherwise face in connmztion with thc consu'uction and operation of th~ new semor center. A copy of the let-mr is attached. The lct'tcr sacks assisumce in Throe toms: "1. Reimburs~mem ~br ponaing expenses 2. Waiver of Pem~it Fees 3. Inclusion of our new parking lot m Mound's city snow removal program." An analysis of the economic impact of r. he r~uests is underway and will be provided to you by the September 13 meeting. However, the following observations may be of guidance. Reimbursement for ~oond/ng expenses. The preliminary pla~ requires T.h~ Foundauon To construct, at its expense, thc stormwarer holding pond. Maintenance expenses will be rcs'ponsib/hty of the City. The Foundation's engineering firm has been COnTacTed and asked to provide, with the consem of The Foundauon, a cost eslimate for the consu'uction of the pond, The pond, as currently designed is of sufficiem raze to handle me stormwater from the semor center. ts recommended that no ~cision be made on this request until cost est/mates have been obtained and reviewea. Waiver of Permit Fees. Very preliminary calculations show That uhe building permit fee will be $6,643; and plan check fee will be $3,814 and ~he state surcharge will be $797. The surcharge cannot be wMvea. Includon of new parkin~ lot in Mound's city snow removaI grogram. Thc reference ia probably m the CBD program, which has an uncertain future. Among the objectives of that program is to induce landowners in the downtown area to put Their lots in the prograrn so that other businesses ~n the downtown ama could use the excess parking capacity. The pro.m"um COSTS were Then assessed back against downtown businesses participating in the program with a crcclit for excess p~king spaces put into the program. .although the requesTs are unusu',fl, the coqncil could conclude some or all o~ them have merit based upon the e~traordinary nature of the project. Should That be the conclusion, it will be imporumt for the Council to cm'~fully azticulaw, the reasons lbr its acuon; and be aware that others may be inclined to ~ .~mflar requests in the future. ATTACHMENT A Legal Description of Property owned by the City of Mound for use as storm water pond in connection with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit gOO-199: Auditor's Subdivision No. 170, Lot 13, Hennepin County, Minnesota Property ID# 24-117-24 23 0001 C:\WrNDOWS\TEMP~SW attachment A. doc STORMWATER FACILITY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This maintenance agreement is made this 26th day of September, 2000, by and between the City of Mound, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, hereinafter referred to as "MCWD," to provide for the maintenance of the stormwater facilities constructed pursuant to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit application number 00-199 applied for by the Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant." WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied for a permit form the MCWD pursuant to MCWD Rule B, application attached hereto as Attachment 1; and WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of this agreement is legally described in Attachment A to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, MCWD Rule B provides, "A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures and all other stormwater facilities. This maintenance agreement shall specify methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District's Maintenance Agreement Form." NOW, THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties 1. City shall sample the stormwater ponds monthly for one full year when there is outflow from the ponds. Samples shall be analyzed for total suspended solids, total phosphorus, dissolved phosphorus, and total nitrogen. The pond level shall be recorded weekly. If the total phosphorus concentration limit of 0.4 milligrams per liter is exceeded for a period of three months, the facility shall not accept any additional compost and shall take reasonable steps such as pond dredging or chemical treatment to rem the total phosphorus level to 0.4 mg/L or lower. A report summarizing monitoring and maintenance activities and results shall be provided to MCWD at the end of the monitoring period. 2. City shall inspect the stormwater retention and treatment basins(s) at a minimum of once a year to determine if the basin's retention and treatment characteristics are adequate. A storage treatment basin will be considered inadequate if sediment has decreased the wet storage volume by ¥2 of its original design volume. Based on this inspection, if the stormwater basin(s) is identified for sediment cleanout, Applicant shall restore the basin(s) to its original design contours within one year of the inspection date. 3. City shall inspect the grit chambers, sump catch basins, sump manholes, outlet structures, culverts, outfall structures or other stormwater facilities for the project in the spring and fall of each year. Applicant shall remove all sediment and debris during the inspections such that the stormwater facilities operate as designed and permitted. 4. Violation of the inspection and/or maintenance provisions of this Agreement is a violation of the MCWD permit for the project for which the MCWD may take action against City. C:\WINDOWS\TEMP~W maint agreement draft - no B.doc 5. This Agreement is binding on the City and the City representatives, heirs, successors and/or assigns. IN WITNESS WEHREOF, the parties hereto execute this Maintenance Agreement. Date: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF ) SS. Applicant The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ 2OO__, by day of Date: Notary Public MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF ) SS. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of , 200__, by , , on behalf of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed district of the State of Minnesota. C:\WINDOWS\TEMP~SW maim ag~-ement dra~ - no B.doc Notary Public ATTACHMENT B STORMWATER FACILITY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This maintenance agreement is made this 26th day of September, 2000, by and between the City of Mound, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, hereinafter referred to as "MCWD," to provide for the maintenance of the stormwater facilities constructed pursuant to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit application number 00-199 applied for by the Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant." WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied for a permit form the MCWD pursuant to MCWD Rule B, application attached hereto as Attachment 1; and WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of this agreement is legally described in Attachment A to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, MCWD Rule B provides, "A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures and all other stormwater facilities. This maintenance agreement shall specify methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District's Maintenance Agreement Form." NOW, THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties 1. City shall sample the stormwater ponds monthly for one full year when there is outflow from the ponds. Samples shall be analyzed for total suspended solids, total phosphorus, dissolved phosphorus, and total nitrogen. The pond level shall be recorded weekly. If the total phosphorus concentration limit of 0.4 milligrams per liter is exceeded for a period of three months, the facility shall not accept any additional compost and shall take reasonable steps such as pond dredging or chemical treatment to return the total phosphorus level to 0.4 mg/L or lower. A report summarizing monitoring and maintenance activities and results shall be provided to MCWD at the end of the monitoring period. 2. City shall inspect the stormwater retention and treatment basins(s) at a minimum of once a year to determine if the basin's retention and treatment characteristics are adequate. A storage treatment basin will be considered inadequate if sediment has decreased the wet storage volume by V2 of its original design volume. Based on this inspection, if the stormwater basin(s) is identified for sediment cleanout, Applicant shall restore the basin(s) to its original design contours within one year of the inspection date. 3. City shall inspect the grit chambers, sump catch basins, sump manholes, outlet structures, culverts, outfall structures or other stormwater facilities for the project in the spring and fall of each year. Applicant shall remove all sediment and debris during the inspections such that the stormwater facilities operate as designed and permitted. 4. Violation of the inspection and/or maintenance provisions of this Agreement is a violation of the MCWD permit for the project for which the MCWD may take action against City. CSWINDOWSWEMP~SW maint agre~-nent draft,doc 5. This Agreement is binding on the City and the City representatives, heirs, successors and/or assigns. IN WITNESS WEHREOF, the parties hereto execute this Maintenance Agreement. Date: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF ) SS. Applicant The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 200__, by ... day of Date: Notary Public MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of , 200___, by , , on behalf of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed district of the State of Minnesota. C:\WINDOWS\TEMI~SW maim ago'merit d~at~.floc Notary Public DECLARATION THIS DECLARATION ("Declaration") is made as of the 26th of September, 2000, by the City of Mound ("Declarant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of real property within the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, platted and legally described as shown in Attachment "A" and non one other than Declarant has any right, title or interest in the Property; and, WHEREAS, the Property includes land available for the construction of a storm water pond as proposed by the Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation and to which Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit #00-199 applies; and WHEREAS, Declarant desires to subject the Property to certain conditions and restrictions imposed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a condition to issuance of Permit #00-199 for the mutual benefit of the owners of the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant makes this Declaration and hereby declares that this Declaration shall constitutes covenants to run with the Property, and further declares that the Property shall be owned, used, occupied, and conveyed subject to the covenants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens set forth in this Declaration, all of which shall be binding upon all persons owning or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property, and their heirs, successors, personal representatives, and assigns. 1. Non-phosphorus Fertilizer. The use of fertilizers containing phosphorus is prohibited on the Property. Only fertilizers which do not contain phosphorus may be applied thereupon. 2. Limitation on Impervious Surfaces. Upon any Lot comprising the Property, there shall be maintained a minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) pervious surfaces, and no more than twenty-five percent (25%) pervious surfaces. 3. Wetland Buffer. The wetland buffer surrounding the stormwater pond facility, measuring 16.5 feet in width at all points surrounding the wetlands as delineated on the site plan for the Property attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment A, shall be maintained by Declarant in perpetuity free from mowing or other vegetative disturbance, fertilizer application, yard or other waste disposal, the placement of structures or any other alteration that impedes the function of the buffer in protecting the quality of water in the wetland or buffering flows into the wetland. 4. Stormwater Facility Maintenance. The terms of Attachment B incorporated herein, shall apply to the stormwater management facilities indicated on Attachment A. 5. Stormwater Facility Modifications. Thc City reserves the right to modify the stormwater £acility, with appropriate Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit approvals, approved by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit #00-199 in the event that the site could accommodate additional storm water facility needs for the surrounding area. 6. The recitals set forth above are expressly incorporated herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument the day and year set forth. Declarant: By: Pat Misel, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 26th day of September, 2000, by Notary Public CONSENT AND SUBORDINATION The City of Mound, Minnesota, owner of the property, hereby consents to recording the attached Declaration and agrees that its fights in the property affected by the Declaration shall be subordinated thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Mound, Minnesota, has caused the Consent and Subordination to be executed this 26t" day of September, 2000. By: Pat Misel, Mayor Notary Public Mound Advisory Planning Commission September 25, 2000 DRAFT Summary of Discussion on Case No. 00-58: Variance, Ted Oare, 1801 Resthaven Lane, Lot 11. Block 12, Shadywood Point, PID #13-117-24 14 0016. Chairperson Michael stated that he had spoken with the City Planner, Loren Gordon, about this case and they discussed the fact that the City Building Official, Jon Sutherland, had a better handle on this case. Council Liaison Brown stated that a decision in this case could change the City Code and that he felt the City Planner's input was necessary. Commission Mueller asked for clarification on whether the City Planner felt it was unnecessary to be present for this case. Chairperson Michael stated that he thought the City Planner had something else that he needed to do. The City Building Official stated the City Planner would not be present, but that he was prepared to handle the discussion on this case. The City Building Official stated that the fire damage to the building on this property was greater than 50 percent of the assessed market value and that rebuilding it would require the new structure to meet the current code or the property owner could choose to apply for a variance. He further stated that the house, in its original footprint, does not meet the current 20-foot setback requirement to Sunset. Across the street from this property, a newly constructed house was required to meet the 20-foot setback. In reference to the property owner's request for a variance to the Regulatory Flood Elevation Standard (RFPE), the City Building Official stated that the floodplain regulations stipulate "No variance shall allow a use prohibited in a district or permit a lower degree of protection than the RFPE. A variance shall not be granted for a residential structure to allow the construction of the basement or lowest floor below the RFPE." Staff cannot act on this request and is not asking the Planning Commission to do so. The City Building Official stated that these fire cases are some of the most difficult, and that included in the packet is a letter fi'om the City Attorney and one from the DNR referencing similar cases. The City Building Official stated that Staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend approval of the side yard setback variance of 12.3 feet. Council Liaison Brown stated that most cases of this type involve the entire structure being burnt to the ground whereas in this case, it is only the interior of the structure that is damaged. The applicant in not asking to make the structure larger or different from the original. In reference to the regulations from the State Free Board, Brown stated that the flood plain on Lake Minnetonka is 931 and that this is a 100-year plain. He stated that page 18 of the packet showed that the building in question is not in the flood plain. He further questioned why the City is adding an additional one-foot over the amount required by the state and the federal government. Brown stated that these were questions he was hoping the City Planner would answer. The City Building Official stated that he was not sure the City Planner could have answered these questions and that Staff would attempt to investigate these before the Council meeting. Council Liaison Brown stated that page 17 of the packet showed that the highest water level is 930.5, which is lower than the state's 100-year requirement. He also stated that no change is being made to the existing variance and so this should be part of the streamline plan. Commissioner Mueller stated that he agreed with Brown and that he felt it was the job of the City Planner to deal with issues regarding Codes. He stated that pages 15 and 16 of the packet dealing with the flood plain is information received from the applicant and are filled out by a company in Tennessee that is paid by the lender. This company does not look at the actual property in question. He further stated that the level at one time was 933.5 and was brought down to 933. He felt it was necessary to get the research done by the parties that specified the 933 in order to make an informed decision on this. Mueller also stated that perhaps the DNR had no jurisdiction in this matter. The City Building Official stated that the shoreland ordinances require all variance cases in the shoreland zone be sent to the DNR. Council Liaison Brown stated that the similar cases cited involved rebuilding the houses and changing the original footprint, but that the property in question was build 25 years ago and would remain in its original footprint. He stated that he had gotten involved in this case because the Mound Plan set the requirement over what the state and federal government mandated. The City Building Official again pointed out the ordinance requiring the house to meet code if greater than 50 percent of the assessed value was destroyed by fire. He further stated that the streamlining provisions in the zoning ordinance do not apply in this case due to the fact that the ordinance has a minimum building elevation. The City Building Official stated that the Standard Flood Hazard Determination document on page 18 of the packet was incorrect in stating this building was outside the flood plain. Council Liaison Brown stated that he felt the City Building Official was giving false information in that according to the FEMA map, the house was not within the flood plain of either the federal requirement of 931 or the state requirement of 932. The City Building Official stated that the FEMA map requires 931, but that the Mound City Ordinance requires a two-foot free board. In order to protect the City's flood insurance program, the City must enforce the flood plain overlay. Commissioner Mueller stated that he felt the ordinance requiring a structure be brought to code if'~$ 50 percent is destroyed is a good one in most cases. He also stated that the ordinance would not allow the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on the flood plain issue. Commission Glister asked what number is being referred to in regards to the City's eligibility in the flood insurance program. The City Building Official stated that this refers to all the numbers including 931 and 933. Commissioner Mueller requested a copy of the Code in question. The Building Official provided the city ordinance to The Commission. Commissioner Glister stated that she did not want the City flood insurance program put into jeopardy. Commissioner Burma pointed out that page 8 of the packet clearly states that the Planning Commission has no jurisdiction over the 933 requirement and that this is not the variance being requested tonight. The City Building Official explained that the applicant applied for a variance to the flood elevation standard, but he advised them not to do so as this was not varianceable. It is okay for the Commission to discuss this, but the code section as he understands, is not varianceable. Commissioner Burma stated that whether or not action was taken in this case on the flood elevation standard, it was necessary to address this issue. Commissioner Weiland stated that he remembered this discussion in the past, but could not remember why the extra foot was added. He questioned why the variance requested was 12.3 feet and not the 10 feet as he was calculating. The City Building Official explained the issue. Commissioner Mueller confirmed fi.om reading the Code that it was the City of Mound that established the 933 number and not the state or the federal government. The City Building Official stated that the federal government gives a model ordinance and that the staff and engineers in the local jurisdiction advise on the elevation, or amount of freeboard. Commissioner Weiland stated that he remembered in the past that part of the determination of the number involved using the highest lake level of the three lakes (Dutch Lake) and adding to that number. He felt there were additional reasons that this number was used, but could not recall them. Commissioner Mueller stated that there was nothing the Commission could do for the applicant on this issue and that the issue was the side yard setback. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Glister, to recommend Council approval of the side yard setback variance of 12.3 feet. Discussion ~'~ ~ Mr. Ted Oare, 1801 Resthaven Lane, the applicant in this case addressed the Commission. He stated that the documents regarding the flood hazard determination are valid in that a lot of information is looked at and the companies that provide these are liable for any mistakes that are made. He further stated that Mr. Sims from the DNR has told him that his property is in flood zone C, which is not in the flood plain and, therefore, Mr. Oare feels that this ordinance should not affect him. The City Building Official stated that a portion of this lot was in fact in the flood plain where the lot met the lake. Council Liaison Brown agreed that part of the lot was in the flood plain, but the structure was not. The City Building Official stated that the ordinance is specific as to the lowest floor plan elevation and this building is currently below the regulation. He stated that is was not possible to adhere to only one section of an ordinance, but rather that the whole ordinance needed to be followed. He stated that this has been reviewed with the City Planner, the City Engineer, and the City Attorney and he was not aware of any variances being granted in the past. The applicant asked what the starting elevation was on the other houses that were rebuilt. The City Building Official stated that he did not have the information without research. Council Liaison Brown stated that while the house does not meet Mound's standard of 933, it is above both the 931 and 932 mandated by the federal government and the state. The City Building Official stated that the whole ordinance is applicable including the City's standard of 933. Chairperson Michael stated that this was not the proper format to discuss this as there was no City Planner, City Engineer, or City Attorney present and specifically that the Commission had not been asked to decide this issue by Staff. He further stated that the issue needed to be decided by the City Council. The applicant pointed out that it would cost him $40,000 to meet the ordinance. He also stated that in his discussions with the DNR, they told him that they had no jurisdiction over this. Commissioner Mueller explained to the applicant that the Planning Commission could not help him with this issue, but that the City Council would be able to make a decision. Chairperson Michael called the question. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Motion carried. Council Liaison Brown asked Chairperson Michael whether the Commission would like him to recommend to Council that this should come back to the Planning Commission so the ordinance could be reviewed. Chairperson Michael stated that he would recommend that the City Council table this issue as there was not enough time to give hard thought to the issue before making a decision. Council Liaison Brown stated that if the City Planner and City Attorney were available to answer questions, he did not want to further inconvenience the applicant. Commissioner Mueller stated that he wished to discuss this further with the applicant after the meeting. Commissioner Burma stated that he recommended that Council Liaison Brown find out how much leeway is allowed and that Council direct the Planning Commission to consider the issue of what the free board mark should be. Chairperson Michael stated that the Planning Commission would also need the support of the City Engineer in making this determination. Minnesota Rule 6120.5700 Page 1 of 2 Minnesota Rules, Table of Chamers Table o ~' contents For Chapter 612{) 6120.5700 MINIMUM FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT STANDARDS FOR LOCAL ZONING ORDINANCES. Subpart 1. In general. The standards contained in this part apply to the amendment or creation of local floodplain zoning ordinances. To provide for comprehensive floodplain management, supplemental measures as contained in part 6120.5900 shall be enacted consistent with these standards. These standards and criteria are considered to provide only a minimum degree of flood protection for floodplain developments. Local governmental units may enact local floodplain regulations which exceed these standards. Subp. 2. Minimum mapping standard. Ail mapping used to delineate floodplain zoning districts shall include the following properly identified regulatory districts: floodplains, floodways, and flood fringe areas. Where adequate information is available the limits of the area subject to inundation by floods larger than the regional flood, as provided in part 6120.5600, subpart 3, shall be designated for public information purposes. Local ordinances may superimpose the floodplain zoning districts on the prior official zoning map or the ordinance may adopt, by reference, a supplemental official map providing the supplemental map is approved by the commissioner. The floodplain limits on the zoning map shall correspond to the actual area subject to inundation, not street or property lines, unless use of the latter would include all areas subject to inundation. Subp. 3. Delineation of the floodplain. Delineation: A. The delineation of the floodplain shall be based on the flood protection elevation as set forth in subpart 5. B. Procedures for floodplain determination shall conform to technical standards established in part 6120.5600, subparts 2 and 4. Each local floodplain zoning ordinance must include a floodplain map conforming to the standards established in subpart 2. C. In special instances and upon approval of the commissioner, the use of other techniques such as maps indicating limits of past flooding, detailed soil maps, and/or aerial photographic interpretation may initially serve as a basis for the delineation of floodplains for regulatory purposes provided that: (1) the affected floodplains are generally undeveloped; (2) the associated text of the zoning ordinance http://www.revisor, le.~.state.mn.us/arule/6120/5700.html 9/21/00 Minnesota Rule 6120.5700 Page 2 of 2 provides for a special permit use procedure to determine the effects of proposed construction upon flood stages and flood flows and to establish the flood protection elevation; and (3) the local unit of government has initiated a program to ultimately obtain regional flood data. D. Where a conflict exists between the floodplain limits illustrated on the official zoning map and actual field conditions, the flood elevations shall be the governing factor in locating the regulatory floodplain limits. Subp. 4. Delineation of the floodway. Local government floodplain zoning ordinances shall designate a floodway. Exceptions may be allowed by the commissioner for those conditions listed in subpart 3, item C. A portion of the floodplain, outside of the immediate channel of a watercourse, shall be selected and designated as the floodway by a local governmental unit upon approval of the commissioner. The selection must be based on an evaluation of the flood hazard for the area which may be involved or affected by such designation and must conform to the following standards: A. The limits of the floodway shall be designated so that permissible encroachments on the floodplain will not cause an increase in stage of the regional flood of more than 0.5 feet in any one reach or for the cumulative effect of several reaches of a watercourse. If the increase in flood stage will materially increase the flood damage potential, the commissioner may require that such increases be less than 0.5 feet. The commissioner may authorize increases greater than 0.5 feet where studies show that further increases in flood stages will not materially increase the flood damage potential. B. The limits of the floodway shall be based on a uniform degree of encroachment for a significant reach on both sides of a watercourse. Variances from this part may be authorized by the commissioner when topography, existing development patterns, and comprehensive land use plans justify a modified approach. C. The floodway shall be determined consistent with minimum standards for technical hydrologic and hydraulic techniques and mapping standards contained in parts 6120.5600, subpart 4 and 6120.5700, subpart 2. Subp. 5. Flood protection elevations. The flood protection elevations shall correspond to a point not less than one foot above the water surface profile associated with the regional flood plus any increases in flood stages attributable to encroachments on the floodplain established under subpart item A. The flood protection elevations shall be clearly lettered at identifiable positions on the official zoning district map consistent with the water surface profile of the~ regional flood, or the profile shall be attached to and made/ partSTAT of AUTH:the official MS s 104.05 zoning district map. ~~ Currenr as of 05/20/97 http ://www.revisor. leg.state.mn.us/arule/6120/5700.h~ Minnesota Rule 6120.5600 Page 1 of 2 Minnesota Rules, Table of Chapters Table of contents For Chapter 6120 6120. 5600 TECHNICAL STANDA/~DS A/qD REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOODPLAIN EVA~UAT ION. Subpart 1. Scope. Except as otherwise provided herein, or~ as new hydrologic and hydraulic techniques of nationwide scope and acceptance are developed and deemed acceptable by the commissioner, any federal, state, or local agency, any of their consultants, or any private consultants involved in the establishment and/or implementation of floodplain management studies or programs in Minnesota shall comply with technical standards prescribed in all applicable sections of these standards and criteria. Subp. 2. Flood frequency techniques for delineation of floodplain. The regional flood shall serve as the basis for delineation of the floodplain and floodway for regulatory purposes. The basic method of flood frequency analysis in the determination of regional flood flows shall be the log, Pearson Type III distribution (with log, normal as a special case) as described in the Federal Water Resources Council Bulletin 15, A Uniform Technique for Determining Flood Flow Frequencies, December 1967. In those instances where inadequate stream flow data exists to allow use of the method outlined in the preceding paragraph, the commissioner may use or authorize use of other acceptable hydrologic methods or techniques. Subp. 3. Determination of extreme flooding events. Whenever the commissioner finds that sufficient technical information is available to estimate the magnitude of floods larger than the regional flood (such as the standard project flood) this information shall be made available by the commissioner to the local unit of government for use by the public as general information. Subp. 4. Standards for technical hydrologic and hydraulic techniques in flood hazard evaluation. In order to provide uniformity in the analysis of flood hazards and the effects of various artificial and natural obstructions to flood flows within floodplain areas the commissioner will adopt and require use of a uniform system for the analysis of technical factors including: A. minimum required survey data needed to provide adequate vertical and horizontal ground control elevations and distances for the channel of a stream or river and the adjoining floodplain area; B. referencing of bench marks used for vertical control data; and C. procedures for computation of water surface profiles and analysis of backwater effects in floodplain areas. http ://www.revisor. leg.state.mn.us/arule/6120/5600.html 9/21/00 Minnesota Rule 6120.5600 Page 2 of 2 STAT AUTH: MS s 104.05 Current as of 05/20/97 http ://www.revisor. leg. state .mn. us/amle/6120/5600 .html 9/21/00 m~e'~s ~e t~s~ ~ban U.5 reel ~= c,:,m~ssm~e- ~av au~onz~ mcrezse~ ~e~er tbs- 0 ~ ~ w~r¢ ¢~&ks show ~ba~ :urthet mcr~ses m flaod sm~ ,~,. ....... · " . ' B. ~:¢ limi~ cf the r!oo~w~y sM~ be ba~d on a ~zmform degr;¢ eactoazhmem for a sigmficant reac~ o~ both. s4des ~f ~ watercourse. [mm.thi~ part may be author~ee ~ [~e cemm~moaer wh,n topography. ¢evel.opment patterns, and compreheas~v~ land u~¢ pians justify. ~ mooifie~ approach. · C. The floodway 'shall be dctemmed coasis~em ~'ith minimm starter's ~or [echmcal b~drolo~c and hydraufic r~-,iqu~s and · an~rds cuntatned in parts 612¢.56~, s~bpart a.a~ 6i20;57~0. s'aomx 2. Subp. 5. F~ pmt~ti~ elevatl~ ~e fl~d 'protection eltvations correspond :o a mint not less than one ft~t aNwe ~h~ ~atcr surface associat~ w~th :ge r,~o~[ t!o~ plus any m~eas~ i~ fl~d staffe~ attrieu[zbl~ to encroac~ata on the t!ood~lam ps,aol;sn~ ~.,aer subpa:, a, ,tern A. The fio~ protection elevations shall bc cle~ly lct;¢~ at i~cntiiiabte posiuo~) on :he offic;~ zom=g ~istnct map comistent '~i~ ~e ~'a~r surface oroHle o:' rezio=M flood, or th: profile shoe be at:~h~d to and ma,l~ p~r '>f ~e offlci, ai ooo SuPport t. Cenifica;i~ (~ eomptNn~. No ,ac~t flood plain !and shall be xcueied or us~ ~ud ac bail.~in8 here~ter erected, attere~, or move~' shali occ~Piea untii, the 'applicant tub~ ~ ~e. ippropnate loom olficir~ a~~ c~tification by a re~srered professional en~n~r, l~d saD'e, er. er qm%lified perso~ d~st~lated by thc 1~ $cverm8 b~)' ,.hat the 'finished fil building flor ele~itio~ or otM: goo& protection m~asur~ .~re in cornpha~¢ ~ith a,¢roprtate flo~ plain zonmg provisions and other Eo~ plain regulalion~.' Su=p 2. 'Removal of l~s from a fl~ ~n dmm~. ~: ~th¢* ia~d, Iy,n~ outside th~ flco¢ tam d~tric[ or u~e~ 20~ conu-ol . - .; - .. * D ~ ~ '. .. '1 , wh;~h m~¢~ thc sma~rds o, pa~t 6.0.~, ~abp~t 6, ~t,ms ~. sab~t¢m t D are constructed anti operative. Sub=. 3. Permlt~l ~ ~thin t~ fl--'ay m ~tw~a l~ets, L~cal zo~lg ~r~inances may desi~at~ s~nfied uses ~ pemitted, er s~m~ ~rm~t ~ca provided, such us~ a.vc a Iow flood ~mage pct~aual ant will net ~a~e~ailv obstruct fl~d flows or iact-~e velociti~ or st~ges of use rcgio~ flood. ~cw,v=t, ,as~ ~inat.am likely to cause pcilutioa Mimq~ti Smmt~ 1969. sectio~ !15.01., ~re ptoh~ba~d an!e~ ,deq.~ate safe,frs ~ov~ by the state wa~er poliu~oa ~ontrot agency ate provided. All o~er mos are prokibited including storage m;,aa,, wki~ if suNect to flo¢~8 may exploaive,, or m~y be ~unous :o haman, unreal, or plant life. Pcrmiue~ uses mat not be d~tNmeu~ ro ~e a~s pemittsd 'm adjoimng 8istcic~. The follo~g ~s may be permitt,~ within we flyway or ~twe~n levees: A. U~s ha~ng a iow ~od ~ma~ potmttal indudma z~cSraml user; re~eanoaal m~, p~a8 [ots, loading are~, ~torage yar~s, ~r¢ort l~dmg amps. c~nain s~d ~d gravel operalionsl ~ater mntFol st~gl~es,, aaviaatie~ faci!itie,:, and ot~¢r o~¢n space uses. Fax Nora 7671 September 7, 2000 Kandis Hanson Mound City Manager Mayor Pat Meisel Mound City Council Members Andrea Ahrens, Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker Dear City Manager, Mayor and City Council Members, We are writing this letter of request for help with our new senior center that is being constructe, m Mound. CouMyou please consider the following: Reimbursement for ponding expenses Waiver of Permit Fees h~clusion of our new parking lot in Mound's city snow removal program We realize how generous the City t~ Mound has already been with helping secure the finding fi'om the CDBG fimcls ami other m-kind services and are deeply appreciative oft his generosity. However, we are now tsvi.g to close the gap for the funding of the new senior center and are in a position of asking.for all the help we can get to finalize this project. The center will be a valuable asset for not only today's senior population, but for many generations of elderly in the .fi~tm'e. Our hope hax t~een that our e.t~re communi(}, will.feel the pride of accomplishment with its completion next year. With ~de for this co~tsideration, Sharon Cook President Westonka Senior Citizens ];bundation To: Mayor and City Council Subject: Westonka Senior Citizen's Foundation Requests By letter dated September 7, 2000, Sharon Cook, the President of the Westonka Sea:flor Citizen's Foundauon, has requested that the City assist the Foundation by reducing certain expenses that the Foundation would otherwise face in connection with the construction and operation otthe new semor center. A copy of the letter is attached. The letter seeks assisumce in three forms: "1. Reimbursement for pondmg expenses 2. Waiver of Pernut Fees 3. Inclusion of our new parking lot m Mound's city snow removal program." An analysis of the economtc impact of the requests is underway and will be provided to you by the September 13 meeting. However, the following observations may be of guidance. Reimbursement for ponding expenses. The preliminary plat requires the Foundation to consu-uct, at its expense, the stormwater holding pond. Maiateaance expenses will be fide responsibility of the City. The Foundation's engineering tlrm has been contacted and asked to provide, with the consent of the Foundauon, a cost esfimaxe for the construction of the pond, The pond, as currently designed is ~)f sufficient size to hancUe the stormwater from the senior center. It is recommended that no decision be made on this request until cost estimates have been obtained and reviewed. Waiver of Permit Fees. Yerv preUminar¥ calculatioas show that r.he building permit fee will be $6,643; and plan check fee will be $3,814 and the sta~e surcharge will be $797. The surcharge cannot be waive& Inclusion of new parking lot in Mound's city snow removal proe~'am. The refereace is probably to the CBD program, which bas an uncertain ~ture. Among the objectives of that program is to induce landowners in the dowmown area to put their lots in the program so that other businesses an the downtown area could use the excess parking capacity. The pro_m"am costs were then assessed back against downtown businesses paniOPating in the program with a credit for excess parking spaces put into the program. Although the requests are unusual, the council could conclude some or all cfi them have mere based upon the extraorflinary nature of the project. Should that be the conclusion, it will be important for the Council to carefully articulaxe the reasons for its acnon; and be aware that others may be inclined to make aimilar requests ia the future. SEP-1S-2000 16:~1 HENNEPIN CTYASSESSOR 612 348 8751 P.01/01 FAX TRANSMISSION <HENNE?I~ COUNTY ASSESSOR> <A-2103 GOVERNMENT CENTER> <Minneapolis, MN 5,5487> <(612) 348-8590> Fax:. <(612) 348-8751> To: Francene Clark Fax #: 472-0620 From: Ray Shudy Subject: Tax Estimate Date: September 15, 2000 Pages: 1 COMMENTS: Per your request for an estimate of taxes for the proposed Senior Center if it w~re taxable. Based on your estimate of value for the improvements at $1,500,000 and a developed site value of $300,000, totaling $1,800,000, I estimate the taxes to be in the range of $75,000 based on the Pay 2000 tax rates. TOTRI.- P. 81 C,~xY~ O~ Municipal'offices 77Ol County Road 110 West Minnetrista, MN 55364-9552 20 September 2000 Kandis Hanson City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Amended outdoor storage agreement Kandis: Enclosed are two copies of the proposed final draft of the amended outdoor storage agreement between the City of Mound and the City of Minnetrista. The Minnetrista City Council approved this amended version of the agreement at their 9/18/00 meeting. This document includes the changes as recommended by the Mound City Attorney and a change as recommended by the League Attorney. I hope you find this document acceptable. If so, please have appropriate people sign and send both copies back to me for City signature. I will then return a fully signed copy to you for file. Please let me know if you need anything further. Sincerely, ~l~m~iruikshank Cit)/Administrator G:\Tim~LETTER SWIOUN D.doc OFFICE 612-446 - 1660 DRAFT JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE CITIES OF MINNETRISTA AND MOUND, MINNESOTA TO OPERATE AN OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA STATEMENT OF INTENT REGARDING AGREEMENT The City of Mound is fully developed and is limited in finding areas to operate an outdoor storage area for public works activities, and the City of Minnetrista is a developing community which has a 13 acre parcel located at 7701 County Road 110 West, containing the Minnetrista City Hall, Minnetrista Public Works Building/Materials Storage Site, and the Waconia Ridgeview Paramedics Building, and has ample space to allow the City of Mound to share a portion of the Minnetrista Public Works Storage Site. The political leaders of the communities have met and have determined that it is in the best interests of both Cites to enter into an agreement to jointly develop and operate the outdoor storage area for public works materials in the City of Minnetrista in the area shown on Exhibit A which is attached to this Agreement. It is the intent of this Agreement to set forth the duties and responsibilities of each of the parties and to broadly outline the method of operation. It is the understanding of the communities that after the area is established and has operated for a period of time, it may be necessary for the communities to more closely detail or modify the provisions contained in this Agreement. Both of the Cities and their City Councils pledge to work in a joint effort to resolve any problems which may come up in the operation of the facility. AGREEMENT The City of Minnetrista, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Minnetrista", and the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Mound", are governmental units having power to construct and operate outdoor storage facilities to carry out their responsibility for maintaining streets and public utilities within their corporation boundaries. I. - General Purpose The general purpose of this Agreement is to provide a method whereby Minnetrista and Mound can jointly plan, control, and construct an outdoor storage area for the storage of public works materials utilized by the Cities in maintaining their streets and public utilities. II. - Expansion of Facility This Agreement is between Minnetrista and Mound, but nothing shall preclude the parties from mutually agreeing to expand the facility for other governmental agencies if it is deemed in the best interest of both parties to do so. DRAFT III. - Operating Commission The Minnetrista Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk-Treasurer and the Mound Mayor and City Manager shall be the Operating Commission to operate the facility. It is anticipated that the administrative officers of the communities will be able to work out most of the day-to-day operating problems, but if there is a need to include the elected officials, the Mayors of the two communities shall join with the administrative officers in an effort to resolve any problems. Contracts and purchases by the Commission, if any, must conform to the requirements applicable to contracts and provisions of the City of Minnetrista. It is understood by both parties that their City Councils will have ultimate control over any amendment to the Agreement or to any change in funding or contract details. IV. - Storage Area The parties hereby agree that the area set forth in Exhibit A shall be set aside as a joint outdoor storage area for public works materials. Each member municipality shall have the general area outlined on Exhibit A which shows the area where their materials will be stored and the area for which that municipality shall be responsible to maintain and use good housekeeping practices in operating this public facility. It is further understood that the parties will segregate their materials and there will not be a commingling of the materials. The types of materials which it is anticipated the parties will store and use for their street and utility departments will include but will not be limited to the following: sand fill; Class 5 gravel; binder rock; winter mix; sealcoat aggregate; rip rapping material; wall rock; sand; and materials removed from trenches which must be stored in an area where they can be dried out before being reused for future street repairs or other utility purposes. (The parties may want to expand this provision to limit or define what can be on the site.) Hazardous waste will not be allowed on site. Bituminous waste and street sweepings may be temporarily stockpiled at this site provided they are completely removed twice annually. The size of the temporary stockpile is not to exceed a 100 foot by 100 foot area. In addition, jointly, the cities will remove material from the south bank of the storage area and use this material to create a berm on the east and north side of the storage area, as shown in attached diagram. This berm will be created after the existing bituminous waste pile is completely removed, which is anticipated by spring 2002. Lastly, the cities will jointly improve the storm water pond in accordance with MCWD requirements. V. - Feasibility Report The firm of McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. has prepared a Feasibility Report dated January, 1994, which lays out various options for the Minnetrista/Mound storage area. DRAFT The parties hereby agree that as a part of said Feasibility Report, the engineers laid out preliminary cost estimates and work which would be required on the site. The following alternate work is hereby agreed to as set forth in Alternate 2 and outlined on page 10 of the Feasibility Report and is hereby selected as the work that the parties have agreed should be done on the site, and the cost will be paid from any grants awarded for the project or 100% of the costs will be paid by Mound (estimated at $114,000). The work set forth in Alternate B and outlined on page 11 of the Feasibility Report requiring a complete reconstruction of the access road is agreed to by the parties, and the costs of said road reconstruction will be paid from any grants awarded for the project or 50% of the costs will be paid by each of the parties (estimated at $31,700), but in no event shall this cost exceed $35,000. Minnetrista shall be responsible for maintaining the access road and shall pay 100% of the cost of said maintenance. VI. - Cost Sharing The initial improvements consisting of work outlined in Alternate 2 and Alternate B shall be shared by Minnetrista and Mound on the following basis: Mound - 100% of Alternate 2 or as paid for by any grant. Mound and Minnetrista - 50% each of Alternate B or as paid for by any grant. 2. Future improvement and maintenance of the site outline in Exhibit A shall be shared by Minnetrista and Mound on a 50/50 basis for the first five years after this Agreement becomes effective. After the initial five-year period, the parties agree that there will be a review of the operation and the cost distribution. The growth possibilities for Minnetrista and other factors may determine how the site is being utilized, and if it is necessary to change the cost sharing arrangement. Nothing contained in the original Agreement implies that it will be necessary to change cost sharing arrangements for the operation of the site, but the parties to the Agreement desire to have this provision included, which will allow for a reopening and renegotiation on cost distribution. Either party may in the future suggest that additional improvements be made on the site, and both parties shall then commence discussion through their Operating Commission and report to the City Councils on suggested improvements. The improvements shall not be made without the mutual consent of both parties and agreement by both parties as to how the improvements are to be paid for. It may be that in the operation, one member may want to make improvements on their portion of the site at their sole expense, and said work shall be permitted after the planned improvements have been discussed with the other party to this Agreement to 3 DRAFT determine that the improvement will not adversely affect the site from an environmental or operating standpoint. Liability insurance and other necessary insurance coverage for the operation of the site shall be acquired by each City for its own operations. Indemnification a. Indemnification of Minnetrista by Mound. It is further agreed that Minnetrista shall not be responsible or liable to Mound or to any other person or persons whomsoever for claims, damages, action, or cause of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the performance of any work or part thereof by Mound as provided for herein; and Mound further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense, and indemnify and hold harmless Minnetrista from any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance hereunder by Mound. bo Indemnification of Mound by Minnetrista. It is further agreed that Mound shall not be responsible or liable to Minnetrista or to any other person or persons whomsoever for claims, damages, action, or cause of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the performance of any work or part thereof by Minnetrista as provided for herein; and Minnetrista further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense, and indemnify and hold harmless, Mound from any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance hereunder by Minnetrista. Application of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of the limitations or liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. It is understood by the parties that each party remains individually responsible for its employees and agents who are on the site. It is a further finding of this Agreement that when Minnetrista and/or Mound employees or agents are working in the area described in Exhibit A or utilizing common areas to get to or from the area, said member shall be responsible for the acts of their employees or agents, and there is not an intent to have joint liability for acts taking place on the jointly operated site. (It is intended 4 by this provision that one City shall not be responsible for the negligent acts of an employee of the other City.) VII. - Duration a. Each member agrees to be bound by the terms of this Agreement until December 31,2014, and shall be continued thereafter unless either party gives the other party two years notice of cancellation of the agreement. The parties agree that a two year notice requirement is necessary so that the parties may find individual solutions to this storage problem. b. This Agreement may be terminated prior to December 31, 2014, by the consent of both parties. VIII. - Dissolution Upon dissolution of the Agreement, all personal property of the Cities jointly being used on the premises shall be sold and the proceeds thereof, together with monies on hand in any Operating Account, shall be distributed to Minnetrista and Mound in the proportion to which they have contributed to the costs of operating the site. IX. - Effective Date This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon filing of a certified copy of the Resolution of each City Council approving the Agreement with the City Administrator/Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Minnetrista. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound, Minnesota, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 412 and Section 471.59. CITY OF MINNETRISTA CITY OF MOUND By By Its Mayor Its Mayor By Its City Administrator By Its City Manager G:\Tim\OrdContAgmt\Moundstorageagreefinal 1 .doc CITY OF MINNETRISTA ADMINISTRATION MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Tim Cruikshank, Administrator May 8, 2000 Continued storage agreement discussion At the April 10, 2000 work session, the Council received information to assist with the discussion regarding the outdoor storage agreement'with Mound. At this meeting the Council requested options on how to proceed with this agreement. One option is to amend the current agreement to reflect what is occurring today. Attached is a copy of the agreement with some proposed changes to address this. Another option the Council wanted to look at was terminating the agreement. Attached is a memorandum from Tom Radio discussing this option. For reference I have also included a copy of the feasibility report for this project from 1994. In regard to the recycled asphalt pile, Robin has checked with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency who has again stated that recycled asphalt is not a potential pollution source, but a letter has not been forthcoming. To be safe, there is an option to haul this material to Midwest Asphalt Corporation in Medina who will take it free of charge. They recycle it and use it for road base. According to Tom Radio, this is a much safer way of getting rid of this material. There are approximately 22,000 tons or roughly 550 loads. The proposal would be to complete this project, in conjunction with Mound, over time. No new material would be allowed at the Minnetrista Public Works site in the future. F:~ADMI N\TIMWIEMOS~storageagreement.doc JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MINNETRISTA AND MOUND, MINNESOTA TO OPERATE AN OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA STATEMENT OF INTENT REGARDING AGREEMENT The State of Minnesota has created a Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation Committee to encourage Cities and Counties to share services to more effectively provide services for their local governments. The City of Mound is fully developed and is limited in finding areas to operate an outdoor storage area for public works activities, and the City of Minnetrista is a developing community which has a 13 acre parcel located at 7701 County Road 110 West, containing the Minnetrista City Hall, Minnetrista Public Works Building/Materials Storage Site, and the Waconia Ridgeview Paramedics Building, and has ample space to allow the City of Mound to share a portion of the Minnetrista Public Works Storage Site. The political leaders of the communities have met and have determined that it is in the best interests of both Cites to enter into an agreement to jointly develop and operate the outdoor storage area for public works materials in the City of Minnetrista in the area shown on Exhibit A which is attached to this Agreement. It is the intent of this Agreement to set forth the duties and responsibilities of each of the parties and to broadly outline the method of operation. It is the understanding of the communities that after the area is established and has operated for a period of time, .it may be necessary for the communities to more closely detail or modify the provisions contained in this Agreement. Both of the Cities and their City Councils pledge to work in a joint effort to resolve any problems which may come up in the operation of the facility. AGREEMENT The City of Minnetrista, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Minnetrista", and the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Mound", are governmental units having power to construct and operate outdoor storage facilities to carry out their responsibility for maintaining streets and public utilities within their corporation boundaries. I. - General Purpose The general purpose of this Agreement is to provide a method whereby Minnetrista and Mound can jointly plan, control, and construct an outdoor storage area for the storage of public works materials utilized by the Cities in maintaining their streets and public utilities. II. - Expansion of Facility This Agreement is between Minnetrista and Mound, but nothing shall preclude the parties from mutually agreeing to expand the facility for other governmental agencies if it is deemed in the best interest of both parties to do so. III. - Operating Commission The Minnetrista Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk-Treasurer and the Mound Mayor and City Manager shall be the Operating Commission to operate the facility. It is anticipated that the administrative officers of the communities will be able to work out most of the day to day operating problems, but if there is a need to include the elected officials, the Mayors of the two communities shall join with the administrative officers in an effort to resolve any problems. It is understood by both parties that their City Councils will have ultimate control over any amendment to the Agreement or to any change in funding or contract details. IV. - Storage Area The parties hereby agree that the area set forth in Exhibit A shall be set aside as a joint outdoor storage area for public works materials. Each member municipality shall have the general area outlined on Exhibit A which shows the area where their materials will be stored and the area for which that municipality shall be responsible to maintain and use good housekeeping practices in operating this public facility. It is further understood that the parties will segregate their materials and there will not be a commingling of the materials. It is furthcr understood that Mound will own and havc a piccc of cquipmcnt which will consist of a Ioadcr which shall rcmain on thc sitc at all timcs. Mound will bc rcsponsiblc for all maintcnancc, insurancc, and othcr costs for said piccc of cquipmcnt. If Minnctrista dcsircs to usc thc Ocluipmcnt, a rental arrangcmcnt sh~ll bc agrccd upon which shall bc at ratcs consistcnt with currcnt markct ratcs to rcnt thc samc or similar cquipmcnt. The types of materials which it is anticipated the parties will store and use for their street and utility departments will include but will not be limited to the following: sand fill; Class 5 gravel; binder rock; winter mix; sealcoat aggregate; rip rapping material; wall rock; sand; street swccping material; and materials removed from trenches which must be stored in an area where they can be dried out before being reused for future street repairs or other utility purposes. (The parties may want to expand this provision to limit or define what can be on the site.) Hazardous waste will not be allowed on site. A writtcn opcrating policy will bc prcparod and agrcod to by thc administrativc staffs of thc parties covering operations on thc sitc. Any disputcs ovcr opcrsting policics shall bc rcfcrrcd to thc City Councils for rcsolution, and if thcy are unablc to agrcc, thc dispute shall bc submittcd for mcdiation or as a final rcsolution it may bc rcfcrrcd for arbitration. V. - Feasibility Report The firm of McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. has prepared a Feasibility Report dated January, 1994, which lays out various options for the Minnetrista/Mound storage area. The parties hereby agree that as a part of said Feasibility Report, the engineers laid out preliminary cost estimates and work which would be required on the site. The following alternate work is hereby agreed to as set forth in Alternate 2 and outlined on page 10 of the Feasibility Report and is hereby selected as the work that the parties have agreed should be done on the site, and the cost will be paid from any grants awarded for the project or 100% of the costs will be paid by Mound (estimated at $114,000). The work set forth in Alternate B and outlined on page 11 of the Feasibility Report requiring a complete reconstruction of the access road is agreed to by the parties, and the costs of said road reconstruction will be paid from any grants awarded for the project or 50% of the costs will be paid by each of the parties (estimated at $31,700), but in no event shall this cost exceed $35,000. Minnetrista shall be responsible for maintaining the access road and shall pay 100% of the cost of said maintenance. VI. - Cost Sharing Ao The initial improvements consisting of work outlined in Alternate 2 and Alternate B shall be shared by Minnetrista and Mound on the following basis: Mound - 100% of Alternate 2 or as paid for by any grant. Mound and Minnetrista - 50% each of Alternate B or as paid for by any grant. Future improvement and maintenance of the site outline in Exhibit A shall be shared by Minnetrista and Mound on a 50~50 basis for the first five years after this Agreement becomes effective. After the initial five year period, the parties agree that there will be a review of the operation and the cost distribution. The growth possibilities for Minnetrista and other factors may determine how the site is being utilized, and if it is necessary to change the cost sharing arrangement. Nothing contained in the original Agreement implies that it will be necessary to change cost sharing arrangements for the operation of the site, but the parties to the Agreement desire to have this provision included, which will allow for a reopening and renegotiation on cost distribution. Minnetrista shall be responsible for maintaining the compost site and Mound shall share 50% of the cost of said maintenance. Nothing contained in this subsection shall preclude the parties working out an operating policy for the compost site which may be agreed to by the administrative staffs of the parties. Co Do Either party may in the future suggest that additional improvements be made on the site, and both parties shall then commence discussion through their Operating Commission and report to the City Councils on suggested improvements. The improvements shall not be made without the mutual consent of both parties and agreement by both parties as to how the improvements are to be paid for. It may be that in the operation, one member may want to make improvements on their portion of the site at their sole expense, and said work shall be permitted after the planned improvements have been discussed with the other party to this Agreement to determine that the improvement will not adversely affect the site from an environmental or operating standpoint. Thc cost of opcration a Ioadcr which is dccmcd advisablc by thc partics to b¢ rctaincd on thc sitc shall bs paid by Mound. Scc $cction IV abov¢ rcgarding usc or rcntal by Minnctrista. (a) Liability insurance and other necessary insurance coverage for the operation of the site shall be kept in force by Minnetrista. (b) Indemnification of Minnetrista by Mound. It is further agreed that Minnetrista shall not be responsible or liable to Mound or to any other person or persons whomsoever for claims, damages, action, or cause of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the performance of any work or part thereof by Mound as provided for herein; and Mound further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense, and indemnify and hold harmless Minnetrista from any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance hereunder by Mound. (c) Indemnification of Mound by Minnetrista. It is further agreed that Mound shall not be responsible or liable to Minnetrista or to any other person or persons whomsoever for claims, damages, action, or cause of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the performance of any work or part thereof by Minnetrista as provided for herein; and Minnetrista further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense, and indemnify and hold harmless, Mound from any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance hereunder by Minnetrista. (d) Application of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of the limitations or liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. (e) It is understood by the parties that each party remains individually responsible for its employees and agents who are on the site. It is a further finding of this Agreement that when Minnetrista and/or Mound employees or agents are working in the area described in Exhibit A or utilizing common areas to get to or from the area, said member shall be responsible for the acts of their employees or agents, and there is not an intent to have joint liability for acts taking place on the jointly operated site. (It is intended by this provision that one City shall not be responsible for the negligent acts of an employee of the other City.) (a) (b) VII. - Mediation and Arbitration Either Minnetrista or Mound, being aggrieved by the determination of the Operating Commission or any other matter which leads to a dispute between the parties, agrees that they will work cooperatively to attempt to resolve said disagreement. If the parties cannot resolve a dispute, they agree to consult and work with a mediator to attempt to resolve the problem. If after 30 days it is impossible for the parties to agree after mediation, either party being aggrieved may ask the Operating Commission for the matter to be resolved through arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall be established and shall consist of three persons; on to be appointed by Minnetrista and one to be appointed by Mound and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. In the event the two persons so selected do not appoint a third person within fifteen (15) days after their appointment, then the Chief Judge of the Hennepin County District Court shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either or both of the two earlier selected, the third person to serve on the Board of Arbitration. The third person selected shall not be a resident of either Minnetrista or Mound. The arbiters' expenses and fees, together with the other expenses, not including attorneys' fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be divided equally between Minnetrista and Mound. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Ace, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes. VIII. - Duration Each member agrees to be bound by the terms of this Agreement until December 31,2014, and shall be continued thereafter unless either party gives the other party two years' notice of cancellation of the agreement. The parties agree that a two year notice requirement is necessary so that the parties may find individual solutions to this storage problem. This Agreement may be terminated prior to December 31, 2014, by the consent of both parties. IX. - Dissolution Upon dissolution of the Agreement, all personal property of the Cities jointly being used on the premises shall be sold and the proceeds thereof, together with monies on hand in any Operating Account, shall be distributed to Minnetrista and Mound in the proportion to which they are then contributing to the costs of operating the site. X. - Effective Date This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon filing of a certified copy of the Resolution of each City Council approving the Agreement with the City AdministratodClerk-Treasurer of the City of Minnetrista. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities of Minr~etrista and Mound, Minnesota, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 412 and Section 471.59. CITY OF MINNETRISTA By Its Mayor By Its City Administrator CITY Of MOUND By Its Mayor By Its City Manager CITY OF MINNETRISTA, CITY OF MOUND OUTDOOR STORACE OPERATING AGREEMENT Pursuant to thc Joint Powors Agreoment bctwcc~ thc City of Mound and thc City of Minnotrista, as it pertains to public works outdoor storagc, both administrativc staffs h~vc met and idc, ntifiod issucs to bc contained within an opcrating agrocmont for both citics to follow. Thc following arc thc issucs that havc been idcntifiod and arc considcrcd to bc part of this Oporating Agrcemcnt: Compost Site. As thc Joint Powcrs Agrccrnent indicatcs, thc City of Mound and thc City of Minnctrista arc to bc rcsponsiblc for maintaining thc sitc and both citics shall sharc 50% of thc cost of said maintcnancc. Each city will bc rcsponsiblc for turning thc compost material by an opcrator in a front end Ioador. Upon occupancy of thc sitc bY thc City of Mound ~nd thc City of Minnctrista, each city will altcmatc months bcginning with Minnctrista, Mound, Minnc-trista, Mound, ctc. Oaragc for Front End Loadcr. The City of Mound will considor n garr~gc for thc front end loader which is to bc owncd by thc City of Mound. Mound will storc its Ioadcr in this garagc which will bc nothing morc thr~n a "Lcstc-r" typc building with somc insulation. No othcr improvcments will bc rcquirod. Mound will only bc allowcd access to thc building sincc its Ioador will bc in it. Loadcr Maintenancc. Thc Ioadcr, which will be owned by thc City of Mound, is not intcnded for Minnctrista's usc. Minnctrista will havc thcir own Ioadcr for usc at thc sitc whcn ncccssary. Unlcss thcrc is an cmcrgency, Minnctrista will not bc using Mound's loader and thcrc, forc will not have any maintcnancc cxpcnscs with regard to that loader. Fucl. Minnctrista will continuc to providc fuel at thc sitc. Mound will sh~re in the usc of that fucl and will pay for thc cost of thc fuc, I bascd upon its ussgc by Mound. It will bc thc rcsponsibility of Mound and Minnctrista to rccord thc usagc of thc fucl in a book that will bc providod at thc sitc. Catc. A gatc will bc placed ncar thc cxisting Minnctrista public works building and will have a "cattlc" typc fencc to keep unauthorizcd pcrsonncl from gctting into thc sitc. Thorc should bc a minimum of 12 kcys providcd to thc City of Mound for its usc. Minnctrista will also havc kcys to thc sitc. O. I lazardous Wastc. I lazardous wastc will not bc allowod into thc site. 7. Othcr. Thc sitc will not be used for any othcr activity cxccpt for public works /oSo outdoor storagc and compost ,,-aatcrial. T~,is Oporating ^grocmcnt is hcrcby approved nnd accoptcd by thc undorsigncd rcprcsontativcs of thc City of Minnctrista and thc City of Mound and will romain in off, eot pursuant to thc "Duration" provision of thc Joint Powors ^grccmcnt. City of Minnctrista Dy Its City Administrator/Clcrk-Trcas City of Mound By Its City Managor By By Its Public Works Supcrintcndcnt Its Public Works Supcrintcndcr~t Datc Datc F:/ADMINrrlMIOrdcontagmt/Moundstorageagree.wpd Thorns J. Rodio TKndio~hlnsh~whw.com ^pti) 20, 20~0. VIA FACSII~IILE Timothy Cruikshank City Administrdtor Municipal Office~ 7701 County Road 110 West Mmetrista, MN 55364 Cooperative Agrc~nncnt Between the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound to Operate an Outdoor Storage Area Our File No.: 754603 De, at Tim: At your rcques% 1 analyzed the consequences of terminating the above-referenced cotlLt'~tCl;. In my opinion, thc City could not uailatm-ally terminate xhe contract w/thout being found in breach of the contract and liable for any damages that Mound might claim arising out of that breach. Given thc duration, of the contrac~ fl~ invesl~entby Mound, and the potent/al for substantial claimed damag-es arising from the'br,.~eh of the agr~ment., that alternative does not seem particularly attractive or useful. As a more acceptable alternative, I would sa. gge~t the following way of proceeding. In the Statement of Intqxt, the parties agreed that ~ thc arc~ had ~ established and operated for a period of time it might be. necessary for the communities to more closely detail or modify the agreement. Thee is also a mediation/arbitration provision to de. al with any dispute. Given those provi~ions, I would then recommend the following procedure: Minnctrism recommends to thc 0pcrating Commission, through its representatives, suggested changes which would address and alle',-iate Minnctrista's conch'ns. Minnetrista, thxough its representatives through the Operating Commission, should insist that the changes be made. ? 2 ORDINANCE NO. -2000 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE DISPLAY OF VEHICLES AND CONTENTS FOR SALE AT CERTAIN LOCATIONS. The City of Mound does ordain: Section 700:30 of the Mound Code of Ordinances is amended by adding the following new subdivision and renumbering succeeding subdivisions: 700:30 Subd. 7. Parking to Display Vehicle or Property for Sale. No vehicle shall be parked on any street, city-owned parking lot, parking lot participating in the CBD parking program, or other public property for the purpose of displaying it, or any property contained on or in it, for sale. No person shall park, nor shall the land owner allow to be parked, more than one vehicle on private property, whether residential, commercial, industrial, or other in the City for the purpose of such display. This restriction does not apply to businesses holding licenses or permits from the City that allow such display. ATTEST: Pat Meisel-Mayor Fran Clark-City Clerk Page 1 of 1 KandisHanson From: To: Sent: Attach: Subject: "Glenda Spiotta" <gspiotta(~minnehahacreek. org> <kandishanson@msn.com> Thursday, September 14, 2000 4:12 PM MSG00001.TXT; Fact Sheet. doc; PAC Solicitation-KO Attendees.doc; PAC Solicitation-Not KO attendees.doc; PAC_KO attendees.doc; PAC not KO attendee.doc FW. PAC participation with MCWD Hydraulic ~. Hydrologic & pollution loading project ..... Original Message ..... From: Glenda Spiotta [SMTP:gspiotta@minnehahacreek.org] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 4:09 PM To: 'kandishanson~msn.com' Subject: PAC participation with MCWD Hydraulic & Hydrologic & pollution loading project Kandis: Here is the fact sheet that should give you a quick background on the project and to help you ascertain whether Mound would like to have PAC involvement. Please call after your return from the ICMA conference. Thanks. Glenda 09/14/2000 HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC AND POLLUTANT LOADING MODEL OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED Fact Sheet 8/9/00 The Project The Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has hired a team of consultants to develop and implement an integrated district-wide hydrologic and pollutant data system. The objective is to develop a data management system for the entire watershed that would allow the District to track changes in the watershed and determine the resultant impacts to the District's water resources. The program will be patterned after the approach used to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) for pollutant loading to water bodies as outlined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. It is estimated that the entire project will take three years. There are six work areas envisioned to accomplish this project: Watershed Data Collection & Geographic Information System (GIS) Construction; Hydraulic and Hydrologic Modeling (H/H); Public Involvement; TMDL Modeling; TMDL Implementation and Groundwater Analysis. Project Management The Project Manager is the District's Technician, Jim Hafner. Jim will be assisted by the District's Engineer, Mike Panzer. Cecilio Olivier is the consultant project manager. Cecilio is a principal with Emmons & Olivier Resources, located in Lake Elmo, MN. The consulting team includes CH2MHill & North American Wetland Engineering (TMDL modeling & implementation); Lynch Associates (public involvement); Kelton Barr Engineering (Groundwater and Hydologic Modeling Assistance) and ETG, Inc. (Digital Imaging). Watershed Data Collection & GIS Construction Water resources data for the upper and lower watershed will be collected. Existing geographic information system (GIS) data sets will be compiled and integrated into ArcView GIS. A GIS system will be constructed for this project. The first version of the system will contain the existing datasets and custom applications. The final version of the system will be constructed during the modeling and implementation portions of the project and updated as modeling information becomes available. Hydrologic Modelincl Lower Watershed The MCWD wants to use hydraulic/hydrologic modeling of the lower watershed as an opportunity to accomplish the following: identification of flood profiles and elevations along Minnehaha Creek consistent with the Federal Emergency Management Act C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5~5OP~FYJ\Fact Sheet.doc (FEMA) floodplain requirements; assessment of runoff water quality into Minnehaha Creek and other major lakes and water bodies; assessment of recreational stream flows at Minnehaha Creek and stream flow base during dry years which will impact plants and animals within the stream corridor; identify ways to better manage flows within the Creek and to understand the role of infiltration as a best management practice (BMP) for stormwater management. The H/H modeling of the Lower Watershed will be performed using state-of-the art hydrologic modeling for the Minnehaha Creek corridor. The specific hydraulic/hydrologic model(s) to be used will be determined with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) input. The final model will contain useful flood information that could be easily used and updated by cities for FEMA purposes. Upper Watershed The MCWD wants to use H/H modeling of the upper watershed as an opportunity to accomplish the following: identification of flood profiles along specific tributaries to Lake Minnetonka; assessment of current and future runoff water quality into Lake Minnetonka and other major lakes, water bodies and creeks in the upper watershed; determine impact of future land use and urbanization on the volume and quality of runoff to Lake Minnetonka; assessment of current and future management of Lake Minnetonka water levels under wet and dry conditions; identification of best management practices and system improvements to maintain future flood levels as existing flood levels; identification and control of erosion-prone areas in the main creek tributaries to Lake Minnetonka and identification of the role of natural wetland complexes in providing flood storage, volume retention and pollutant removal. The preparation of the H/H watershed model for the upper watershed will be incorporated into the TMDL component of this study. A pilot Hydrologic/Hydraulic study including state-of-the-art hydrologic modeling will be performed on a "parallel track" for the Painters Creek subwatershed or the Gleason Creek subwatershed. The purpose of this accelerated pilot study is to provide modeling results within 8-9 months from the start of the project instead of the 15-18 months that it would take to perform the H/H modeling of the complete upper and lower watersheds. Public Involvement The Public Involvement Component is a collaborative process that promotes stakeholder understanding, involvement and support throughout the entire project. designed to meet the following key objectives: It is · Maintain and enhance MCWD's working relationships · Capture stakeholder interest and involvement · Develop and enhance stakeholder understanding · Progressively integrate city, county and state resources C:\WlNDOWS\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5~A5OP2/FYJ\Fact Sheet.doc A comprehensive and well-defined community process minimizes conflict. The stakeholder participation for this project is comprehensive and includes: regional teams, a project advisory committee, a technical advisory committee and regional source groups. A Regional Team Approach The Upper (Lake Minnetonka) and Lower Watershed (Minnehaha Creek) are divided into "Regional Teams." These Teams are developed based upon similar land uses, such as: housing densities, lot sizes, open space, recreational uses, transportation, commercial and industrial uses and infrastructure. These Teams are the foundation for the public participation process. The Teams are comprised of representatives from the District's local governments, regional, state and federal agencies and citizens. Their role is to help identify pollutants, sources of pollution and to develop a process to involve point source and non-point source stakeholders in the development of a wasteload reduction plan. They engage those stakeholders in definition of the problems, enhance education regarding pollutants and facilitate their involvement in the development of options and the development of a wasteload reduction plan. Lower Watershed Team 'l--Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Minneapolis, Edina and Richfield Team 2--Hopkins and Minnetonka Upper Watershed Team Team Team Team Team Team Team 3--Plymouth, Wayzata, Woodland and Deephaven 4--Medina, Long Lake and Orono 5--Tonka Bay, Excelsior, Greenwood and Shorewood 6--Mound, Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach 7--Victoria, Chanhassen, Laketown Township and Waconia Township 8--Watertown Township, Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius 9--Independence and Maple Plain A Project Advisory Committee This committee is comprised of representatives from each of the Regional Teams, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and MCWD representatives. The Advisory Committee will have 12-15 members. Members of the Advisory Committee were recommended in the one-on-one meetings with member cities, townships and counties that initiated this project. C:\WlNDOWS\Temporary Intemet Files\Content. lE5V~5OF~FYJ~Fact Sheet.doc The role of the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) is to oversee the entire project, monitor the activities of the Regional Teams and TAC, provide strategic assistance and identify community partners to participate in the Regional Teams and Source Groups. A Technical Advisory Committee The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is comprised of some technical representatives from local, regional, state and federal agencies and representatives from MCWD. There will be 18-20 members on the TAC. The role of the TAC is to review data prepared by the consultants, make recommendations regarding data collection and interpretation and to provide input to the Advisory Committee. A Source Work Group Once the point and non-point source pollutants and polluting entities are identified, each Regional Team will select a group of 8-12 representatives from identified polluting entities to participate in a Source Work Group. The role of the Source Work Group is to become informed regarding pollution sources, generate options and make recommendations to its designated Regional Team regarding inclusion in an implementation plan. TMDL Modeling Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) will be developed for both the Lower and Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed. TMDLs will be developed for: fecal coliform, phosphorus, turbidity, chloride and ammonia. These parameters will be subject to review by the TAC. Water quality and water quantity information will be compiled from existing District databases. Additional data required for TMDL development will be collected from local agencies. A report for both the Upper and Lower Watersheds will be completed. The final report will provide the following: numeric targets and descriptions of water quality standards; watershed characterization and source assessment; modeling approach and application; TMDL and TMDL Allocation scenarios; an implementation and follow-up monitoring plan. TMDL Implementation Plan The TMDL Implementation Plan will be a synergy of model outputs from the Hydraulic and Hydrologic Model and TMDL and the public involvement process. An Implementation Plan will be prepared for the Lower Watershed and one will be prepared for the Upper Watershed. It is anticipated that the Plan may result in changes to MCWD°s Water Management Plan and Rules. The basic components of this plan for the Lower and Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed include: developing point and nonpoint source pollution reduction projects and best management practices (BMPs) which can be integrated into a TMDL C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5~,5OF4fFYJ\Fact Sheet.doc implementation plan; formulating source groups focused on wasteload reduction from various point and non-point sources; working with the District and the source groups on waste load reduction plans; developing working relationships that capture the energy and local expertise of source groups and communication with stakeholders, agencies and the public about water quality improvement efforts. Groundwater Analysis Analysis of groundwater will include both groundwater quality and groundwater quantity. Groundwater data that is available from the District and other sources will be compiled. Groundwater data sets and other electronic data will be incorporated into the District's GIS system as well as into the Hydrologic and Hydraulic model. Website An interactive GIS website will be developed. It will have links to the database and GIS layer files used in the hydrologic and TMDL modeling. Public domain or MCWD-owned information will be accessible by communities, developers and other interested parties. C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Intemet Files\Content. lE5~A5Ol=j'FYJ\Fact Sheet.doc August 14, 2000 Thank you for attending the kickoff meeting for the District's Hydrologic & Hydraulic Study and Pollutant Loading Modeling Project. We appreciate your interest and ongoing involvement in this project as we move forward. Some attendees suggested that it would be helpful to have a "fact sheet" to summarize the project which would be used as a reference during the three-year project. We have attached that fact sheet. In addition, if you have not recommended someone from your "region" to participate on the Project Advisory Committee (the steering committee), please consider some one at this time. The PAC will be comprised of representatives from each of the Regional Teams, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), the District's Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and MCWD representatives. An ideal candidate would be a professional, public official or dedicated volunteer who is familiar and comfortable with strategic planning, is active in the community and who can join us for approximately four meetings annually for the next three years. The following are the Regional Teams. The communities included in the specific team were chosen due to similar land use. Lower Watershed Team 1--Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Minneapolis, Edina and Richfield Team 2--Hopkins and Minnetonka Upper Watershed Team Team Team Team Team Team Team 3--Plymouth, Wayzata, Woodland and Deephaven 4--Medina, Long Lake and Orono 5--Tonka Bay, Excelsior, Greenwood and Shorewood 6--Mound, Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach 7--Victoria, Chanhassen, Laketown Township and Waconia Township 8--Watertown Township, Minnetrista and St. Bonifacius 9--Independence and Maple Plain Please call my office and leave the name and contact information for someone you believe should be considered for the PAC. Feel free to self-nominate as well. Please provide the name(s) no later than Monday, August 21. We would like to plan our first PAC meeting for early September. I look forward to hearing from you. I can be reached at 952-471-0590, extension 282. Sincerely yours, Jim Hafner Senior Technician CITY OF MOUND DRAFT ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR CITY COUNCIL BACKGROUND: The Mound City Council makes the following findings: 1. The confidence that the community has in its public institutions is directly related to the standards followed by the elected officials. 2. Not only is it important that elected officials act ethically in their public lives; but it is equally important that they establish and follow clear principles and guidelines to guide them in their actions. 3. The existence and adherence to such guidelines can result in a high level of public trust and acceptance in the actions of elected officials. 4. For the foregoing masons, the City Council has adopted the following Ethics Guidelines, to be observed and followed by the City Council. ETHICS GUIDELINES 1. No Council member shall misuse the office to secure special privileges or exemptions for such person or any other person. 2. No Council member shall directly of indirectly receive or agree to receive or solicit, any compensation, gift, reward or gratuity in payment for the performance of his or her official duties except as may be provided by law. 3. No Council member shall enter into any contract with the City that is prohibited by law. Any public official who has a proprietary interest in an entity doing business with the City shall make known that interest in writing to the City Council and the City Clerk. 4. Any Council member who in the discharge of said member's duties would be required to take an action or make a decision which would substantially affect such official's financial interest or those of a business with which such official is associated (except as the City's representative), unless the effect on such official is no greater than on any other citizens or other members of such official's business classification, profession, or occupation, shall take the following actions: a. A written statement shall be prepared which will include the name, address, office held, action presenting the potential conflict of interest, the nature of the fmancial interest, the person notified of the potential conflict of interest, the member's signature and the date; b. Said member shall deliver copies of the statement to the City Clerk; DRAFT c. ff a potential conflict presents itself and there is insufficient time to comply with the provisions of clauses "a" and "b" of this section, the member shall verbally inform the City Clerk of the potential conflict. The member shall then file a written statement with the City Clerk within one week after the potential conflict presents itself which statement shall state the reason for the delay. 5. A Council member must not act as an agent or attorney for another before the City Council or a board or commission in a matter where a conflict of interest exists or may exist. 6. A Council member may accept compensation or expense reimbursement for the performance of the member's public duties as Council member only from the sources listed below. a. Compensation and expenses paid by the City. b. Compensation and expenses from other employment, if the person happens to conduct public business while being paid for the other employment and if the other employment does not interfere with, influence, or compromise the person's public position, and c. Compensation and expenses paid by another governmental agency or municipal association to a Council member who serves as a City representative for that agency, but only if the City does not also pay the person for the same activity. 7. A Council member must not use public money, time, personnel, facilities, or equipment for private gain or political campaign activities except when: a. the use is required or authorized by law, or b. the use is no greater than that allowed for the general public. This paragraph does not prohibit correspondence at any time to individual residents in response to the resident's specific inquiries, or general surveys of residents that are conducted before the time of filing for candidacy for elective office. 8. It is important to public confidence in the operation of government that decisions of the City Council (unless subject to certain specific exceptions) be made in pubhc, following discussion among members also taking place in public. For that reason, the following guidelines will be followed by Council members: a. At any gathering that is attended by a majority of the Council ( unless such gathering has been duly noticed as a meeting of the Council), the members will refrain from participating in any discussion, either between themselves, or others in attendance at the gathering, involving matters that are pending, or are likely to come before the Council. b. At any special meeting of the Council, the members will refrain from engaging in discussion or taking action on any matter which was not contained on, or reasonably related to, the items in the meeting notice. JBD-I85381 v2 2 M U220-1 DRAFT c. The Council will, from time to time, and at the recommendation of the City Manager, conduct study sessions to familiarize new members and update other members with the requirements of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. 9. While openness is an important cornerstone of good government, it is occasionally necessary to limit disclosure of certain types of data that may come into the hands of Council members. For that reason, Council members will become familiar with the requirements of the Minnesota Data Practices Act, and will seek advice prior to disclosing data in their possession that might be considered as not public. Further, a Council member must not disclose information received, discussed, or decided in conference with the City Attomey that is protected by the attomey/client privilege, un]ess a majority of the Council has authorized that disclosure. DISCLOSURES: Within 30 days after taking the oath of office, each Council member must file a report with the City Clerk, on a form prepared by the clerk, which contains the information specified below for the preceding year. Subsequently, each person must file a supplemental report on the first day of February of each year in office and within 30 days after any change in information provided under paragraph 5. The information must be for the individual, the individual's spouse, all minor children (collectively referred to below as "person"). a. A business entity in which the person is an officer, director, member, or employee, and the position held. b. A business entity in which the person has an ownership interest, either legal or equitable, greater than 50%. Sources of income, compensation, fees, or commissions that are received from employment, for services rendered, or from pensions, except the employment of minor children. d. Non-profit organizations in which the person serves on the governing body, and the position held, except if serving in that capacity as the City's representative. e. Real property within the City owned by the person or in which the person has a beneficial interest and that has an assessed valuation in excess of $20,000. The person's homestead need not be included. The term "business entity" includes any business, proprietorship, finn, partnership, person in representative or fiduciary capacity, association, venture, trust or corporation. HEARING: The council may hold a hearing after receiving a written complaint questioning adherence to these principles or alleging a conflict of interest or failure to file a required disclosure statement, or on the Council's own volition. At the hearing, the person accursed must have the opportunity to be heard. A hearing will be held only if the City Council determines (1) upon advice of the City Attorney, designee or other attomey appointed by the Council, that the allegations, if proven, could reasonably be found to rise to the level of a violation of these principles or to the level of a legally-recognized JBD- 185381 v2 3 M U220-1 DRAFT conflict of interest, and (2) that the complaint has been lodged in good faith and not for impermissible purposes such as delay. If after the hearing, the council f'mds that a conflict of interest, failure to file a required disclosure, or violation of these principles does exist, the Council may take whatever action it deems appropriate, including referring the matter for criminal prosecution, imposing a civil penalty not exceeding $2,000 per violation, directing an official not to participate in a decision. A council member or member must not participate in a decision ff the council prohibits the participation. JBD-185381v2 4 M U220- l Vhai Exactly Does Ethical Leadership Mean These Days? ~hn Hawkins, president and founder of Leadership Edge Inc~, helps universiiy ~.~, lo~organ~_a~onaJ leaders across Amerk~ wres~ wilh lhe issue -term leade~hip in today's chaotic organ~ and oofporalion~ 3nsortium: Is the American public generally trusting of individu- s who put themselves forward as ethical leaders? Hawkins: I believe that the public is confused by and suspicious of those Jividuals that put themselves forward as ethical leaders be they polilJdans, ~rporate CEOs or nonpm~ executives. We are confused as we try to under- and what "ethical" means in America anymore. One of the sources of this )nfusion lies in the example of self-proclaimed "ethical leaders" who have ~.lf-destructed because of moral and ethical failure. Their failure fuels our :spicion of any other leaders that make the claim of ethical leadership. 'hat has caused us to become so cynical about our 3ntemporary leaders? Hawkins: A major source of our cynicism comes from the belief that Jr leaders regard us as naive and therefore try to fool us rather than lead ~. Instead of leading the people to own and solve adaptive challenges in eir communities and businesses, many of our leaders want us to believe at our work is to elect them so that they can solve our problems for us. ~th in political and corporate contexts, we have been duped too many ;es by leaders who say they want to solve our problems for us. But at a deeper level, we are cynical about our leaders because we real- 9 that our leaders are a reflection of what we as a nation have become. are trained in our families, communities and schools and are us. The misguided leadership and ethical confusion that we see of our leaders forces us to confront our own misguided and unethi- ~1 ways. It is much easier to cynically critique our leaders than it is to ~ceme the kind of people that will foster and require ethical leadership. Community Links is published by the Community Policing Consortium, a training and technical assistance partnership of five of the leading police organizations in the United States. The Consortium is committed to the advancement of community policing nationwide and encourages city and county government officials, community activists, and crime prevention and civic group leaders to partner with law enforcement in community policing initiatives. Repmductlon Rights Rein of any part of C~mmun~ Unks is encouraged by We Community Policing Consortium unless othenese i~cateq. P=nts of v~w or ~n~ons and do not necessarily represent the official poalion or policies d rte U.S. Department ot duatice. t~l~lons Staff 1~l'ault, I:M~caions Manager Lisa Lee Hoctm'~n, Associate Editor ~ephanie Francis, ProD'am Assistant Tom Rhat~an, NSA ProD'am Director Mote Information is Available To learn more at,out Consortium pubticab'ons, how to submit an a,'lide, request writers gu~lines, add your name to our maling list or send us information on ~ upcoming event, contact us at: The Communit7 Policing consortium. 1726 M St. N.W.. Suite 80 I. Washington. DC 20036. Toll Roe: 800.833.3085 · Fax: 202.833.9295 · E-mail: nsa~ul3~commun~/poliong.org What qualities are required of an ethical leader? Hawkins: It is my belief that an ethical leader must have a philosophical or theologi- cal basis from which he or she derives his or her understanding of ethics. Without this basis, one's practice of ethical behavior will be constantly changing as a result of chang- ing circumstances and personal preferences. i~. ' It can be likened to building a house on a ~ reinforced foundation or building it on shifting sand. Those who do the hard work of building their ethical behavior upon philosophically or theologically derived moral absolutes are like the house built upon the reinforced foundation. Secondly, for a leader to be trustworthy, he or she must possess character, competence and commitment. Character is the combination of moral qualities by which a person is judged apart from intellect and talent. It is the alignment of one's speech and actions with one's core beliefs about reality, life and truth. More simply, character has to do with one's demonstration of virtue. Leaders must prove themselves competent in positively and effective- ly leading people to accomplish significant tasks that are tied to com- pelling visions. In their book, The Leadership Challenge, authors James Kouzes and Barry Posner put forward five basic leadership competencies that they gleaned from interviewing hundreds of organizational leaders. These five competencies are: Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way and Encouraging the Heart. Along with these five competencies, I would add Maintaining Accountability, and Maintaining Personal Perspective and Balance. Proficiency in all these competencies, along with others specific to par- tlcular contexts, is a minimum requirement for any organizational leader. Finally, trustworthy leaders must make strong commitments to their organizations, their constituents, their values and to the work of leadership. Without commitment, the character and competence of the leader remains disengaged. With commitment, the leader's character and competence are engaged in a specific place with a specific purpose to accomplish. What suggestions can you offer to those individuals who seek to win the trust and respect of their constituents? Hawkins: For those who desire to be moral and credible leaders, they must demonstrate virtuous leadership in speech and actions, pub- licly and privately, 24 hours a day. No leader will ever become a spotless moral paragon. And yet, each must be committed to doing what it takes to do what is right. What a leader does in private does matter and will ultimately establish or undermine the credibility of his or her influence. The motivation of the leader must be the message of his or her entire life rather than the method by which that person hides his or her secrets. Individuals aspiring to be moral leaders must also recognize that the test of time is compelling; it builds patience, and in some, a rich humility. Time proves both the value of one's virtues and the consistency with which they are displayed. Time is the acid test that determines the credi- bility and morality of any leader. In establishing one's trustworthiness, the current fad of ropes courses and executive retreats are no substi- tutes for months and years of daily collaboration. Working with others in the trenches over time is the context in which the leader's virtue is proven and his or her patience and humility are forged. Another suggestion is to forgo the pursuit of media exposure; it is of limited value in putting forward and establishing one's (Pnntim -Innr - 1 Ethical Leadership (Continued from page 3) virtue. Establishment of moral authority comes from building a credible reputation in a relatively small culture. From this culture there is the chance of mu~plied influence as one's reputation becomes legendary. Ultimately, it is futile to attempt building one's moral authority in front of the camera. This is why, though rarely in front of television cameras, Mother Teresa was internationally known as a virtuous leader, whereas many of our U.S. politicians spend an entire campaign and millions of dollars in failed media attempts to establish their moral credibility. Finally, every principled leader will encounter at least a few times when he or she must choose '~o die right rather than live wrong." Ethical leadership cannot be separated from hard and costly choices. Leaders must keep clearly in mind the ethical boundaries that they will not violate, no matter the cost. In the course of one's career, there will most likely be several occasions in which the leader must choose to take his or her personal losses and walk away from an ethically com- promised endeavor. It is tragic and destructive when a leader holds on to a position or to personal gain at the expense of his or her integrity. For more information, contact John Hawkins, President, Leadership Edge Inc., RO. Box 51657, Durham, NC 27717. Phone: 919.493.6607 Fax: 919.493.5135 E-Mail: jhawkins~lead-edge.com Website: www. lead-edge.com Thoughts on ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR CITY COUNCIL From: Mark Hanus Councilmember It will be difficult to do this in writing but I will do my best. After all this, we will have to have a face to face debate anyway. I am not ruling out supporting this policy, but I question its real value. Those who make claims of impropriety or conflict of interest will make those claims whether this policy is in place or not. What it does do is put the public officials at risk if they simply forget something on one of their annual filings. Now, on to specific points. Ethics Guidelines Number 3. I need a clear defmition of what is "propriety" and what is not. The public will define this anyway that suits them depending on what side of the official they are on. Number 7, the paragraph following 7.b. This includes surveys that were conducted by the city. Does this mean that a survey conducted prior to a filing date can be used, but a survey conducted after the filing can not? This should address surveys that are conducted for the benefit of a candidate, not a survey that was conducted in the course of business of the city. The way this paragraph is written misses what I think it is intended to do and results in a pointless restriction. It also denies an incumbent the ability to use public information that a non-incumbent has freedom to use. Number 8 a. This has trouble all over and is unacceptable in its proposed form. Just because a majority of the council is at the same place, I'm not allowed to discuss an issue with a constituent? This is getting ridiculous. I have a number of thoughts but this is the wrong forum to express them. It will get too long. Number 9 The second line should read: ...necessary to limit disclosure of certain types of information that comes into the hands of Council... Disclosures This section is a mess. Again, those who make claims of impropriety or conflict of interest will make those claims whether disclosures are made or not. But one little mistake and there are people that will be all over us. There is a chance for error every year at filing time. a. This line should apply only to a business entity that is located in the city. Otherwise it's no ones business. IfI want to disclose where I work I can, but its not required and for the sake of my livelihood, I have the right to keep my place of business private as long as I cant affect it by my actions on the Council. b. This should apply only to businesses in the city as well for the same reasons. Also, why limit it to 50%. Why not 45%, 30%, or 2%? If I have the ability to affect my income or holdings by my action on the Council, It doesn't matter what percentage I hold. It is a conflict of interest. Missing letter c. This is out of the question. Its not any one's business where my employment income comes from, where my retirement resides, whether I'm on public assistance, get alimony or food stamps, unless it is in Mound and can be affected by my decisions on the Council. I would soundly reject any attempt to pry more into my personal family life than is done today. d. This is ok but it must include membership as well. Why only list it if you are on the governing body. Why not disclose common memberships as well? You are just as susceptible to bias in decisions as a member as you would be as a board member. This only brushes the surface and needs much more debate and discussion. Overall, I don't like the idea because I don't see much benefit in Mound. It only adds risk of forgetting something or mis-interpreting something. Even if the member correctly interprets the policy, its open to mis-interpretation by the public who will read it any way they want. Remember, recently we had a Mayor from six years ago interpreting a code differently than ever before. It was even different that he interpreted it when he was Mayor. Any policy needs to be near iron clad with little to no chance for interpretation or it will become more trouble than its worth. If it is adopted in some form, why not apply it to our commissions? Also any candidates for office or commission applicant should made a disclosure prior to interviews. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION SEPTEMBER t4, 2000 Present were: Commissioners Peter Meyer, Norman Domholt, John Beise, Tom Casey; and City Council Representative Leah Weycker. Also present were Park Director Jim Fackler, and Secretary Kristine Kitzman. Chair Beise called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 10. 2000 POSC MINUTES Motion made by Meyer, seconded by Casey to approve the minutes of the August 10, 2000 Park and Open Space Commission (POSC) meeting, as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 2. AGENDA CHANGES The agenda was approved with the following amendments: 2. 3. 4. Item #5 will be delayed until the neighborhood has an opportunity to do their presentation. Item ~ will be delayed as well. Add Item #6a, Discuss: Working Relationship between DCAC and City Council Add Item ~b, Report by Commissioner Meyer 3. REVIEW: MINOR SUBDIVISION - PARK DEDICATION FEE FOR 6301 LYNWOOD BLVD. Park Director Fackler reported on the minor subdivision request by Donald Carlson at 6301 Lynwood Blvd. Motion made by Casey, seconded by Weycker to recommend that the City Staff and City Council review and apply the Ordinance regarding park dedication fees. Motion carried unanimously. 4. DISCUSS: SOCCER FIELD NEEDS This item delayed to a later meeting. 5. DISCUSS: SAFE PLAY AREA AT WOLNER FIELD This item delayed to a later meeting. Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission September 14, 2000 6. UPDATE: PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS ON HADDORFF FIELD Chair Beise stated that this election was lost by 95 votes. Councilmember Weycker added that it did pass in Division 6. Commissioner Casey added that he was concerned that the City Council put the second question on the ballot, which put undue influence on question number one, which was against the Field of Dreams legislation. He noted this had been a formal complaint filed before the election in August, and the County Attorney's office has sent a letter stating that they are investigating this complaint. Casey felt that voters should be concerned by the legality and morality of a City Council action to kill a petition that they did not agree with. 6a. DISCUSS: WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POSAC & CITY COUNCIL Chair Beise requested that the City Council find time to meet together with the Park and Open Space Advisory Commission again before the end of the year. Councilmember Weycker stated a meeting could be held for an hour before a regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Chair Beise stated he is very disgusted and offended at what the City Council did with regard to the applicants to the Park Commission. Commissioner Domholt also added that there has been no direction from the City Council regarding parks, and he believes they have no trust in this Commission. He suggested the City Council has been blowing off the Park Commission for some time now. Commissioner Casey then discussed the "commission appreciation night" that has been set up, as it is clearly a political move by the City Council, especially in light of the discussion and lack of support from the Council. Casey suggested to all Commissioners that they hang in there and wait to see what changes take place over the next couple of months. Commissioner Beise stated that the dinner was more for the City Staff than the Council, and it is important that the commissions do support staff, even if it means giving the Council some political points. Discussion took place by all regarding the latest City Council meeting, and the generally negative feeling by all members of the Park Commission regarding the treatment received by the Council. Councilmember Weycker passed on several quotes from the City Council meeting that were not reflected in the minutes, and pointed out that the minutes do not reflect the actual 2 Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission September 14, 2000 feeling of the meeting, that the City Council is looking to add people to the Park Commission who are not in support of parks the way this Commission is. Motion made by Beise, seconded by Domholt to recommend that the open Commission seat be a new term, rather than filling the seat left by Christina Cooper, as that term expires at the end of the year. Motion carried unanimously. 6b. REPORT BY COMMISSIONER MEYER Commissioner Meyer presented this week's Lakeshore News, with an article regarding the City of Minnetonka which is going to donate $200,000 to the school district to upgrade sports fields. Also, the Legion, VFW, or some similar organization was also going to donate to the same cause. There was an entire page regarding the skate parks in the area as well. Meyer presented some additional articles about different events in various Minneapolis parks for the Commission to use as ideas for events in Mound. Chair Beise recommended that all Commissioners attend the budget meeting on October 16, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. 7. POSC OCTOBER AGENDA The Commission requests a round table meeting between the City Council and the Park Commission dealing with interaction between these two entities. The meeting will take place at 8:00 p.m. on October 12, 2000, after a 30 minute regular meeting. Commissioner Casey questioned the wisdom of holding this type of meeting before the elections are held, as it may be moot in four months. Chair Beise replied that not all the Council seats are going to be open, and some may be re-elected, so it is important to work with them now, as well as in four months. 8. SEPTEMBER CALENDAR 9. FOR YOUR INFORMATION 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. HRA Minutes & City Council Minutes August 22, 2000 Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Minutes August 17, 2000 Planning Commission Minutes August 14, 2000 Resolution #89-139 7MN Shade Tree Advocate Clues to Small Town Survival What Exactly Does Ethical Leadership Mean These Days? 3 Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission September 14, 2000 10. REPORTS: a. City Council Representative Councilmember Weycker stated that most of what she had to say took place earlier in the meeting. She reported the Swenson Park motion was passed and advised that she is not running for Council again this year. b. Park Director Park Director Fackler stated that most of his issues were also discussed earlier in the meeting. The Jaycees have been approached to see if they will help in repairing the planter with their name on it in front of the City Hall. Councilmember Weycker asked why there are a couple trees in Mound Bay Park are dying. Park Director Fackler stated that he does not think they are dying, just losing their leaves early as the fall has been so dry. Motion made by Weycker, seconded by Domholt to adjoum the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 4 BOARD MEMBERS Douglas E. Babcock Chair, Tonka Bay Bert Foster Vice Chair, Deephaven Eugene Partyka Secretary, Minnetrista Craig Nelson Treasurer, Spring Park Andrea Ahrens Mound Bob Ambrose Wayzata Kent Dahlen Minnetonka Beach Craig Eggers Victoria Tom Gilman Excelsior Greg Kitchak Minnetonka Lili McMillan Orono Tom Skramstad Shorewood Herb J. Suerth Woodland !,heldon Wert Greenwood 50% Recycled Content 20% Post Consumer Waste LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD, · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 612/745-0789 - FAX 612/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR September 12, 2000 TO: FROM: LMCD Mayors and Council Members LMCD Member Cities LMCD Board of Directors Interested Parties Bert Foster, LMCD Vice Chairman Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director SUBJECT: Update on Proposal for Adding Two Water Patrol Deputies for 2001 Boating Season In the attached letter, dated 7/24/00, the LMCD brought to your attention a proposal for a way to increase Hennepin County Shedfrs Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka, for the 2001 boating season, by two full-time Deputies. We requested feedback from the LMCD member cities, by R/15/00, on two questions relating to this proposal. These were: 1) whether the member cities would support an increase of Water Patrol presence for the 2001 boating season, and 2) whether the member cities would be willing to share in some of the costs for it. Overwhelmingly, the member cities have indicated that they support an increase in Water Patrol presence on Lake Uinnetonka. Many cities indicated a willingness to share some of the cost and two cities had some concems regarding cost shadng. The comments received from these two member cities included: 1) Lake Uinnetonka is a regional amenity and that that increased presence of Water Patrol should be funded at Hennepin County level, and 2) there is a need to provide justification for increased Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka. A meeting was held at the Hennepin County Shedff's Water Patrol Headquarters on Thursday, 8/24/00, to discuss the proposal, to review and address the feedback received from LMCD member cities, and to further define the details of the proposal. There was a wide range of local and regional representation at this meeting, including: · Hennepin County Commissioner Penny Steele · Tom Church, Principal Assistant to Hennepin County Commissioner Mary Tambornino · Orono Mayor Gabdel Jabbour, Shorewood Mayor Woody Love, and Spring Park Mayor Jerry Rockvam · Four staff members of Hennepin County Sheriff's Office · Four staff members from LMCD member cities · LMCD Directors Foster and McUillan, and LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck After significant discussion, three key points were identified that justify the need for increased Water presence. They include: 1. A cultural chancre of boating activities on Lake Minnetonka. The boats are larger, are driven in a manner that make larger waves, and are sometimes ddven by people who do not know the rules of the road and courteous operation. There seems to be an increase in aggressive operation on some boats of all sizes with a disregard for the law and their effect Web Page Address: http://wwvv.winternet.com/-Imcd/ E-mail Address: Imcd@winternet.com LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT on others. This cultural change has resulted in increased concems by the public, including dpadan owners and watercraft operators. This has resulted in a reduced quality of the experience of those that recreate on Lake Minnetonka. The group felt that this situation could be improved by increased Water Patrol presence by having increased patrol hours. 2. Siqnificantlv reduce patrol hours due to increased coml~lexitv of 13rocessinq violators. A BWI arrest, that used to take a Deputy off patrol for an hour to process the offender, now can take four to six hours. The increased processing time results from laws created to protect the dghts of the public and has affected cdminal investigations. Arrests on the water, which are more difficult than land, now take much more time, which results in fewer actual patrol hours. The end result is less visible presence of the Water Patrol on the Lake. 3. The need to Drel3are for the Special Del~utv liti.qation currently at the Minnesota State Sul~reme Court. Historically, the Water Patrol. has supplemented their full-time, licensed Deputies with 30 volunteer special deputies. These special deputies man patrol boats, make stops, and issue tickets. They average approximately 250 hours of volunteer time per year; however, their authority to "investigate" has been challenged in court and is currently at the Minnesota Supreme Court. If the ruling goes against the Water Patrol, there will be a serious reduction in Water Patrol presence on the Lake. The group felt that the increase of two licensed paid Deputies would Be at least some protection in the case of an adverse ruling. In the case of a favorable ruling, the two new deputies would have the needed effect of increased patrol hours. ushe group decided to try to establish a two-year funding commitment, for $100,000 per year, to be ed exclusively for two additional Water Patrol Deputies to patrol Lake Uinnetonka beginning in the 2001 boating season. None of these funds have been voted upon, but the proposed breakdown is as follows: · 50% from Hennepin County. · 30% from the LMCD Member Cities. · 20% from the LMCD "Save the Lake" Fund (Pdvate contributions resulting from LMCD solicitation letters). The LMCD member cities would need to fund the proposed $30,000 through voluntary contributions for 2001. For 2002, it could be funded either through voluntary contributions or by adjusting the LMCD levy to its member cities in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.635. The increased levy would require adoption of a resolution by % of the member cities (11 of 14). Details of how much each member city would be levied, using the LMCD formula outlined in Minnesota Statutes 103B.635, is detailed in the attached spreadsheet. We are asking each city to add the amount shown on the attached spreadsheet to their 2001 budget. If the other sources of revenue do not become available, the LMCD will rethink the plan and be back to each group. Please feel free to call the LMCD Executive Director if you have questions. mr-"0 BOARD MEMBERS Douglas E. Babcock Chair, Tonka Bay Bert Foster Vice Chair, Deephaven Eugene Partyka Secretary, Minnetrista Craig Nelson Treasurer, Spring Park Andrea Ahrens Mound Bob Ambrose Wayz.~ta Kent Dahlen Minnetonka Beach Craig Eggers Victoria Tom Gilman Excelsior Greg Kitchak Minnetonka Lili McMillan Orono Tom Skramstad Shorewood Herb J. Suerth Woodland Sheldon Wert Greenwood 50% Recycled Content 20% Posl Consumer Waste LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD. · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 612/745-0789 · FAX 612/745-9085 Gregory S, Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR July 24, 2000 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LMCD Mayors and Councilmembers LMCD Member Cities Interested Parties Douglas Babcock, LMCD Chairman Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director Increase in Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka During the past year, the LMCD Board of Directors, the LMCD member cities, other agencies and interested parties, have been reviewing Lake Minnetonka's activity levels and changes in usage patterns. Notable changes have occurred in the area of charter boat licensing, specifically the increase to our maximum allowed number of full liquor licenses; and in area of increased size and scope of weekend anchoring at the north side of Big Island, including numerous, large, semi-organized events for which no LMCD Special Event permit was obtained. The Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Division was especially concerned about the lack of Public Safety access to the Big Island area during these weekend timeframes. While some action has been taken by the District to help achieve a better balance for alt users and uses, like adding marked navigation lanes to the Big Island area, there still are a number of concerns being discussed by agencies and the public at large. The current concerns all have brought forward a common thread, the need for increased law enforcement presence on the Lake, particularly during the summer season. Those of us familiar with the current state of enforcement on the Lake can easily conclude that the current levels and types of enforcement provided by the Water Patrol are of high quality and are very cost effective, especially when recognizing the volunteer Special Deputy program. But, we can also see that increasing full- time enforcement levels by during the summer months would do a great deal to improve the consistency of enforcement and the quality of experience for all aspects of lake use. At the June 28th regular meeting of the LMCD Board of Directors, a presentation was made by Orono Mayor Gabdel Jabbour proposing the need to explore additional Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka. A suggested course of action was to increase the presence by two full time Deputies, for five months, for the 200t boating season. After significant discussion, the attached LMCD Resolution 99 was adopted by the LMCD at this meeting. Two objectives are established in LMCD Resolution 99. They include: 1) the LMCD believes that a supplemental law enforcement program, partially funded by the LMCD, the member cities, and the private sector is needed and would be beneficial to Lake Minnetonka, and 2) the LMCD would agree to be the lead agency.in this type of endeavor. Web Page Address: http://www.winternet.com/-Imcd/ E-mail Address: Imcd@winternet.com LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT This proposal and resolution was carried forward to the Mayors meeting on June 30th, which included a wide range of local, regional and state representation. Representation included State Senator Gert Olson, State Representative Barb Sykora, Hennepin County Commissioner Penny Steele, a representative of Hennepin County Commissioner Mary Tambomino, and a number of Mayors from the Lake Minnetonka communities. The general consensus of those present at this meeting believed the idea made good sense and that it should be considered for the 2001 boating season. It was also agreed that any increase in enforcement should be in addition to maintaining the levels of funding and enforcement currently provided by the Water Patrol. In no way was any new program to shift the current levels and funding of enforcement from Hennepin County to the Cities. To keep the momentum moving forward on this proposal and to assist the cities with 2001 budget planning, the LMCD would like feedback from its member communities on it by Tuesday, August 15th. Specifically, we are looking for whether the member cities would support an increase of Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka for the 2001 boating season and whether they are willing to share in the costs for it. Possible funding mechanisms for the member cities to consider include voluntary contributions or by adjusting the maximum the LMCD can levy to its member cities in Minnesota Statutes 103B.635 by adoption of a resolution of % of the member cities (10 of 14 cities). It is estimated that the total costs for the. increased presence of the Water Patrol for the 2001 boating season would be approximately $100,000. The share of the costs for each individual city would be determined using the existing LMCD levy formula. If a majority of cities were in support this proposal, the LMCD would create and lead a task force to formulate and finalize the details of this program. It would be our intent to present the results of the task force to all the member cities for approval before requesting any specific funding amounts for 2001. Please feel free to call LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck if you have questions or concerns regarding this proposal. Your timely response is greatly appreciated! LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT. RESOLUTION 99 RESOLUTION TO INCREASE HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S WATER PATROL PRESENCE ON LAKE MINNETONKA WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board (LMCD) of Directors received public testimony and discussed the need for increased public safety on Lake Minnetonka at its June 28, 2000 Regular meeting; and WHEREAS, the LMCD Board of Directors discussed the idea of increasing the presence of Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Deputies by two during the 2001 boating season for five months; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol, working through a joint and cooperative agreement with the LMCD that is renewed annually, is authorized to enforce the provisions of the LMCD ordinances by the issuance of citations and such other means as permitted by state law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: The LMCD believes that a supplemental law enfomement program, partially funded by each the LMCD, the member cities, and the pdvate sector is needed and would be beneficial to Lake Minnetonka. Adopted the 28· day of June, 2000. The LMCD would agree to be the lead agency in this type of endeavor. A'FI'EST: Douglas Babcock, Chair TO:. FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ) Please forward Lake Area Mayors Mayor ~abfiel J&bbour L~ from the LMCD Reg~g Illcrcased Wazer Patrol Presence on Lake Mi~etonka A letter came out from tim LMCD to ~iI m~mbe~ cities today ~~ ~ for He~ Co~ S~ s W~ Pa~l pr~c~ on L~ Mi~on~. ~ Ic~ ~ ~ ~sp~e ~yon' m~6~ o= J~ 30, It ~ v~- ~~t ~t, ~ you acw ~ p~o~, h it cl~ tete ~s~ ~olves b. 53% ~ ~ ~e LMCD mem~ dxies. ~ven a proj~ coat of $100,0~, ~ L~ .~ Ci~es wo~jo~y ~e $33,000 ~ ~st ~you ~ve ~y ~esfio~ reg~ing ~e pm~L pl~e ~ not h~i~m ~ ~i · ,'i grOG 0 2 2000 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT August 18, 2000 TO: FROM: SUJECT: Board of Directors Greg Nybeck, Executive Director Update on increase of Water Patrol presence on Lake Minntonka from member cities At the 6/28/00 Regular meeting, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board of Directors received a presentation from Orono Mayor Gabriel Jabbour regarding the need to explore additional Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka for the 2001 boating season. The proposed course of action was to increase presence on Lake Minnetonka by two full-time Deputies, for five months, at a cost of approximately $100,000. The LMCD Board suppoded the proposal from Mayor Jabbour and adopted LMCD Resolution 99 at the 6/28/00 meeting. This proposal was also discussed at the 6/30/00 Mayors meeting, with a general consensus that it made sense and should be considered for the 2001 boating season. The attached letter from Chair Babcock, dated 7/24/00, was forwarded to the member cities asking for feedback from them on the proposal. Specifically, the letter asks whether the member cities would support ' an increase of Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka for the 2001 boating season and whether they are willing to share in the costs for it. The letter requested feedback to the District office by Tuesday, 8/15/00. The attached follow-up letter, dated 7125100, was also forwarded to the member cities from Mayor Jabbour on the proposal. Because the 8/15/00 deadline for comments from the member cities has come and gone, staff would like to update the Board on feedback received. Wdtten feedback was received from the Cities of Excelsior, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, Mound, and Wayzata. Additionally, verbal feedback was received from the Cities of Greenwood, Orono, and Spring Park. Staff has attached a copy of the letters received, for your review, from the member cities that have provided wdtten feedback. Based on the feedback received, staff believes the majodty of the member cities, that have provided feedback, support increased Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka for the 2001 boating season. Staff is not clear on the position of the City of Mound on this issue. With regards to whether they are willing to share in the costs of the proposal, there are mixed responses from the member cities. The Cities of Greenwood, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, and Wayzata have indicated that they would be willing to share in the costs of this proposal. The Cities of Excelsior, Minnetdsta, and Mound have indicated that they would not be willing to share in the costs of this proposal. Prior to the 8~23~00 Regular meeting, staff will attempt to get feedback from the member cities that have not responded to the proposal. Staff believes the Board needs to discuss what direction the District would like to take this proposal based on the feedback received from the member cities. August $, 2000 Crreg Nybeck Executive Director Lake Mirmetonka Conservation District 18338 Mirmetonka Boulevard Deepl~aven, Mim~esota 55331 CITY OF .EXCELSIOR 339THIRD STREET EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 TEL: 952-474-5233 FAX: 952-474-6300 Dear Greg: On August 8, the Excelsior City Council reviewed the LMCD's and Mayor Gabriel Jabbour's proposals regarding an increased law enforcement program on Lake Minnetonka. The Council endorsed an LMCD-led effort to develop an increased law enforcement program on Lake Mirmetonka, and supported the idea of creating a task force or comm.ittee to do so. The Comacil also stated that it would not support the notion that murficipalities around Lake Mirmetonka should pay anytl~g toward an increased presence of the Hermepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol on the lake. It believed that Hermepin County should pay to meet its obligation for the increased need to provide law enforcement services. Council did not want to "mix budgets" with the County's and others' revenues for what would appear to be the new required level of Water Patrol services. Please call if you would like clarification or elaboration on the Council's action. Sincerely, C on City iv~ager AUG 1 0 2000 AUG 15 2000 [?i CITY O1' THE VILLAGE OF MINNETON~ BEACH RESOLUTION 2000-23 Resolution to Support the LMCD's Request To Increase Hennepia Couat~ SherifFs Water Patrol Presence on Lake Minnetonka Pursuant to duc call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City ofthe Vill~e ofMinner~onka Beaclg Minnesota was held on the 14t~ day' of August 2000. The following members were proem: Mayor Mike Bloom, Council Members Cra.sob, Mathews, and Treasurer Salvog. Council Member l.~ff introduoed the following resvlution a~d mov~ its adOlmOn: Whereas, the LMCD believes that a supplemental law enforcement program, partially funded by each, the LMCD, th~ member cities, and the private sec:or is needed and ' would be beneficial to Lake Minnet. onka; and Now, therefore, be it resolved that the City Council of the Village of Mi~n~n~ Beach does hereby support the LMCD's request to ir~rease the pre.-ncc of I~m-~epin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Deputies by obtaining additional fuming fi-om the member cities, as well as o~her sources, provided that the addifonal deputies are drdicated mlely to Lake Minnetonk~ The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member O-'asch and, upon vote being taken thereon, tim following voted in favor tJmreof: Gasch, Left, Mathews. The following voted againsX or absudned: None. Wherempon thc resolution was d~lared ~ly pass~ and adopted this 14th day of August 200~. ATTEST: Bloom, Mayor Mar/lyn Rcgni~r, .City Clerk Date Municipal i3ffices 7701 County Road II() We, sl -_ Minnclri$1a, MN 55364~-9552 11 -Aug-O0 Greg Nybeck, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 18338 Minnetonka Boulevard Deephaven, MN 55391 RE: Funding for increased water patrol on Lake Minnetonka Greg: As we discussed on the phone Tuesday, 8/8/00, the Minnetrista City Council is not supportive of Lake Area cities paying for most of the cost of increased patrol time on Lake Minnetonka, as referenced in your 7124/00 letter. Because Lake Minnetonka is a regional amenity and used by people from the greater area, there was Council support for Hennepin County to fund this proposed increase in patrol time. Please let me know if you need anything further. City Administrator · CITY OF MOUND MEMO S341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOOND, MINNESOTA ,55354.1687 (612'/472-0800 FAX (612) 472-0S~ DATE: TO: FRONh Aura,st 9, 2000 Douglas Babcock, LMCD Chairman Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director Mayor Pat Meisel Mound City Council Members Kandiz Hamon, City Manager Increased Water Patrol on Lake Minnetonk~ AX ifs August 8, 2000 meeting, the Mound City Council cons//ered LMCD Re,solution 99 requesting LMCD member cities to subsidize the cost of two ad&tional patrol officers for Lake Minnetonlca, in the z.motm: of $100,000.00. Members voted to no! support the reso!utiou. ~oint gl. It is the opinion of the Council that any hacrease i~ pmbl~ ~efl d~y by c~er boa~ ~d ~qucr eo~pfion on e~r ~ may ~ dkecfly ~n~oIl~ by LMCD. ~ ~e ~ce~g ~ency, LMCD ~y ~ol ~e q~fi~ ~d ~e of ope~fion ~ no ~e~e ~ law e~or~mem cos~ to member cities. Viol~o~ coati be ~essed ~ough ~e ~c~g cobols. Shoed ~e~ ~mme~ o~o~ ~ some way ~e~ ~e n~d for mo~ police preens, ~o~ ~o~h to ~e ~ee ~ ~e fo~ of~gher fen. It is not ~e role of~ Ci~ of Mo~d ~ ~bsi~ pfiva~ b~s ~ ~s ~er. point #2. It is the opinion ofttm City of Mound Council that this proposal is the result of a recent litigation that has reduced ~e ~ur. hotity of water patrol volunteers. That outcome i~ not the responsibility of local municipalities; that is a Hennepin County problem. Point #3, Over ~he years, Lake Minnetonka mmaicipali~ies have been subjected to maudz, tes for more accesses and more parking. These mandates have increased parking congestion and have otherwise squeezed the City of Mound, with no accompanying '. means of relief. This, too, is a regional problem, that lus be~ made the burden of ".a, Page: Dat~: Subj: Two August 9, 2000 Increased Water Patrol on Lake Minnetonka locality. It is the opinion of the Council that those agencies that place requ~ements on municipali~es should bear the burden of the impacts. Point ~4. It is a fact that cities surrounding Lake Minnetonka pay a greater share of the tax used te regulate Lake Minnetonka already. It is the opinion ofth~ Council that marketing schemes that draw consumers from well outside the Mound area should be funded by the users (i.e., licensing fees or surcharges) which, in tam, will ftmd the cost of increased water patrol. Licensing requirements could, in fact, require hired marine patrol as a condition of permit approval. LMCD member cities should not be expected to pay for increased law enforcement for these types of lake activities. Point #5. If this hacrease were to pass by majority vote of the LMCD membership, the City of Monad has two rema/rdn8 concerns. 1) It ks critical th.a~ Ge twa additional officers be dedicated to Lake Minnetonka and *,hat them are assurances that existing water patrol on Lake Minnetonka not be rotated to other locations. 2) An alert that LMCD's 33% participation in th/s program will result in a loss of services lo member cities otherwise provided by those same dollam For these ~'easons, the City of Mound is opposed to supporting LMCD Resolution 99. Should you have further question or wish further discussion, you are invited to contact the C[B' Manag~ or visit with Council Members at a regularty scheduled meeting. Cc~ City of Tonka Bay City of Dcephaven City of Minnetrism City of Spring Park City of Wayzata City of M/maetonka Beach City of Victoria CiD' of Excelsior City. of Minnetonka City of Orono City of Shorewood City of Woodland City of Greenwood 2000 "Au{~-."].8-O0 08: 35A PoOl 4901 Manilou Road, Tonka Bey, Minnesota 55331 (952) 474.7994 MAYOR Duug Kolter Guy Sa~niar dol3n Sene~c~l ducld Mcw~ Julia ADMINISTRATOR Robert July 28, 2000 Mr. Greg Nybeck, Exec. Dir. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District '~ 8338 Minnetonka Blvd. Deephaven MN 55331-3232 Dear Greg: At their regular meeting of July 25, 2000, the Tonka Bay City Council agreed to support the LMCD's proposal to add additional police protection on Lake Minnetonka and to contribute financially, We look forward to hearing from you as plans tm add the add!tional officers become better defined. if after reviewing this you have any questions, please contact me at 474-7994. Sincerely, Robert Rys u City Administrator R$:ctl Fax (952) 474-6538 · E-mall: cltyoflonkabay~aol.cr~m City 01' Wayzata 600 Ricc Strccl F. as! Wayz. ata, MN 55391-1799 Hennepin County Board of Commissioners A2400 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240 Dear Commissioners: Council Members: J'( OhCl'I AlllJlr(ls(2 I,~}byn ( Amh'cw I lumplu'cy .Ioscph Mc('arlhy City Manager: Allan Orscn · , ~; . i(~ ~,U~ 2 5 2000 I am writing on behalf of the Wayzata City Council to request your support for County assistance to address a critical safety issue on Lake Minnetonka. At its August 8th meeting, the Wayzata City Council discussed the Lake Mirmetonka Conservation District's (LMCD) request for LMCD member cities to subsidize the cost of two additional water patrol officers for Lake Mirmetonka. Although further details and clarification is needed from the LMCD before the Wayzata City Council can make a formal decision, the Council reco~wfizes the need for additional water patrol staffing in response to the emerging public safety issue on Lake Minnetonka. The Wayzata Council is very concerned about the impact of the court's recent decision to limit the enforcement authority of the volunteer water patrol deputies. We all know fi-om experience that for many people rules and regulations are only as good as the perceived level of enforcement. Thus, if enforcement efforts decrease while boat traffic continues to increase, the concern is that the public's safety on Lake Minnetonka will become more at risk. The Wayzata City Council understands that public safety on Lake Minnetonka is currently the primary responsibility of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol. We also feel that the financial impact fi-om the increased traffic from boaters who live off of Lake Minnetonka should not be paid by an increased burden on the tax base of the cities surrounding Lake Minnetonka. However, we also realize the complexity of financing public safety services on Lake Minnetonka. Thus, the Wayzata City Council is willing, in the spirit of intergovernmental cooperation, to consider a one-year financial contribution for two additional water patrol deputies as long as the County Board commits to alternative long-term financial solutions that will reduce the burden on the general Lake Mirmetonka area tax base for future funding increases. One long-term suggestion to consider would be to foll(~w the policy at the Hcrmepin County parks where there is no fee for using the lake for swimming/fishing or using the trails, slides, swings, etc. but there is a fee to park your car. Similarly, LMCD member cities could require a Hennepin County park permit in order to park a boat trailer near a Lake Mirmetonka public landing. Unlike County parks where County employees enforce the permit requirements, local police departments could be responsible for enforcing the permit requirements. The purpose of a City/County partnership would be to generate a Phone: 952-473-0234 Fax: 952-404-5318 e-mail: city~wayzata.org home page: www. wayzata.org ~/~ fair, reasonable and efficient source of revenue that could be used by the County to offset the increased costs of additional water patrol officers on Lake Minnetonka~ Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to call me at 375-0336. Barry Petit Mayor, City of Wayzata Cc: Douglass Babcock, LMCD Chairman Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director LMCD member cities State Senator Martha Robertson State Representative Ron Abrahms AUG 25 2000 HENNEPIN DATE: TO: Fi OM: SUBJECT: September 14, 2000 Commissioners Clerk of the Board Judy Chumley, Deputy MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS - 2000-2001 ANNUAL LIST Ag required under the Open Appointment policy, attached is the Annual List of Member-At-Large Appointments that terms are due to expire. Vacancies are due to be announced shortly, with a closin9 date of December 31, 2000, and interviews to take place sometime in January, 2001. Please note that the Watershed District Boards will not be part of this annual round, as they are the exception and will be annognced later. Attach: cc: Sandy Vargas, County Administrator Melissa Booth, County Administration (4 copies) Kay Mitchell, Clerk of the Board Dulcie Hagedorn, Planning & Development Richard Zierdt, Executive Director, CASH BD Mark Lee, Community Health Jim Mara, Community Health Pat O'Connor, Taxpayer Svs David Hough, County Attorney Charles Brown, Library Cindy Ahrens, Library Harvey Linder, Family & Children Svs Barb Goodwin, Family & Children Svs Phil Eckhert, Environmental Svs Joel Settles, Envionmental Svs Rafe Viscasillas, Human Resources Luanne Laurents, Human Resources Don Koverman, Director County Extension Service 1525 Glenwood Ave No Minneapolis, MN 55405 z--/O?O MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS 2000-2001 ANNUAL LIST - Page 2 Douglas Bryant, Superintendent Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District 12615 County Rd 9 Plymouth, MN 55441 Linda Ziegler Suburban Henn. Regional Park Board 12615 County Rd 9 Plymouth, MN 55441 Mental Health Association of MN 2021 E. Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN 55413 Citizens League 708 South 3rd Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55415 H. C. League of Women Voters 81 So. 9=h Street, Suite 335 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Ronald Harnack, Water & Soil Resources Bd Louis Smith, Esq., M'haha Creek Paul Haik, Esq., Nine Mile Creek; Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Bruce Malkerson, Lower Minnesota Watershed District Various Municipalities (Watershed Districts) (Judy Nally, City Golden Valley) (City of Eden Prairie Mgr.) & Joyce Provo World Web (H.C.) - Stephanie McNamara Carolyn Marinan, Public Affairs Carol Arnold, Public Affairs Laurie Kleven, Public Affairs NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners will hold a public hearing on October 10, 2000, at 2:00 p.m. for the purpose of adopting amendments to Ordinance Number Two, Solid Waste Management Ordinance for Hermepin.County. The meeting will be before the General Govemrnent Committee of the County Board in Room A2400 of the Hermepin County Government Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487. Information related to this public hearing is on file with the Clerk of the County Board. Requests for additional information can be directed to the Solid Waste Div/sion, Department of Environmental Services at 348-6570. Ordinance Number Two Solid Waste Management Ordinance For Hennepin County. Executive Summary Ordinance Number Two, Solid Waste Management Ordinance for Hennepin County is being revised in accordance with Mirmesota Statute 473.811, which specifies that the county have an Ordinance that embodies the State Solid Waste Rules. Provisions of this statute require periodic revision of the county ordinance. Ordinance Number Two was last amended in 1983; therefore, we are recommending that the entire ordinance be repealed and replaced with new language. During the past seventeen years there have been numerous changes in both the solid waste industry and state solid waste regulations that need to be addressed in a revised Ordinance Number Two. Background The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards for operation of solid waste facilities and establish standards for the disposal of solid waste in Hennepin County. Hennepin County currently licenses nine solid Waste facilities. County staff also investigate complaints relating to the illegal disposal of solid waste. The ordinance sets forth: A. License requirements for the desig'n, construction and operation of a solid waste hcility. B. Procedures for inspection of solid svaste facilities and enforcement of this Ordinance and violations and penalties for noncompliance. C. Insurance and performance bond requirements. D. Requirements preventing illegal dumping. E. Requirements establishing procedures to close open dumps. Ordinances Changes Specific changes include: A. Definitional changes have been made to keep them consistent with state rules. B. Facility. specific requirements have been modified to conform with M?CA Rules. He The scope of the ordinance has been increased. Facilities currently regulated include Sanitary. Landfills, Demolition Landfills, Transfer Stations, Resource Recovery. Facilities and Waste T2e Collection Centers. Additional facilities to be regulated in accordance with state rules include Compost Facilities, Land Application Sites, Processing Facilities, Qualified Cleanfill Landfills and Wood Waste Facilities. Standard licensing conditions have been incorporated into the ordinance. Additional licensing requirements including a fire protection plan, liner control plan and vermin control plans have been added to ensure protection of public health. Ail solid waste transfer operations must be conducted inside a building. Existing outdoor facilities would have two years, fi.om the time the ordinance was adopted, to comply with this requirement. Annual license renewals would be approved at the departmental level and only new facility licenses would go before the County Board. A~tration and enforcement standards have been update to be consistent with Ordinance Number Seven (Hazardous Waste Ordinance). ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADOPTED BY THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA JULY 17, 1976 AMENDED ON APRIL 8, 1980 AMENDED ON AUGUST 2, 1983 IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 473.811 TABLE OF CONTENTS ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 1.00 .2.0 3.0 0 4.00 5.0 6.00 7.00 8.00 SECTION ITEM PAGE GENERAL PROVISIONS .............................................................. 1.01 Administrative Procedures ...... , .................................................. 1 1.02 Admiaistration ........................................................................... 1 1.03 Definitions .................................................................................. ! 1.04 Compliance ................................................................................ 6 1.05 Conditions .................................................................................. 7 1.06 False Information ....................................................................... 7 1.07 Prohibitions ................................................................................ 7 2.00 STANDARDS FOR HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION .......................... 8 2.01 Standards Adopted ..................................................................... 8 2.02 State Rules As Read ................................................................... 9 LICENSING ..................................................................................... 9 3.01 License or Permit Required ....................................................... 9 3.02 Licensing Not Exclusive ............................................................ 9 3.03 Fees ............................................................................................ 10 3.04 License Term ............................................................................. ! 0 3.05 License or Permit Application ................................................... 10 3.06 Incomplete or Non-Conforming Application ............................. 11 3.07 Standard Licensing Conditions .................................................. 11 3.08 Renewal ...................................................................................... 13 3.09 Denial ......................................................................................... 13 3.10 Performance Bonds .................................................................... 14 3.11 Insurance .................................................................................... 14 COMPOST FACILITIES ............................................................... 15 4.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 15 4.02 Design and Construction Requirements ..................................... 15 4.03 Operating Requirements ............................................................ 15 4.04 Exemptions ................................................................................ 15 4.05 Compliance ................................................................................ 15 LAND APPLICATION SITES .......................................... 15 5.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 16 5.02 Operating Requirements ............................................................ 16 LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES ................................................... 16 6.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 16 6.02 Design and Construction Requirements ..................................... 16 6.03 operating Requirements ............................................................ ! 6 6.04 Exemptions ................................................................................ ! 7 PROCESSING FACILITIES ......................................................... 17 7.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 17 7.02 Design and Construction Requirements ..................................... 17 7.03 operating Requirements ............................................................ 18 SOLID WASTE STORAGE ........................................................... 18 4o7-C 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 8.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 18 8.02 Design and Operation Requirements ......................................... 18 TRANSFER FACILITIES .............................................................. 18 9.01 General Requirements ................................................................ 18 9.02 Design and Construction Requirements ..................................... 18 9.03 Operating Requirements ............................................................ 18 WASTE TIRE FACILITIES ........................ : ................................. 18 10.01 Design and Construction Requirements ................................... 18 10.02 Operating Requirements .......................................................... ! 8 WOOD WASTE FACILITIES ....................................................... 19 11.01 General Requirements .............................................................. 19 11.02 Operating Requirements .......................................................... 19 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ............................. 19 12.01 Duties and Department ............................................................ 19 12.02 Right of Entry .......................................................................... 20 12.03 Orders and Notices ................................................................... 20 12.04 Compliance .............................................................................. 20 12.05 Inspection ................................................................................. 21 12.06 Financial Assurance ................................................................. 21 12.07 Revocation of License .............................................................. 22 12.08 Suspension of License .............................................................. 22 12.09 Summary of Suspension of License ......................................... 22 12.10 Hearings ................................................................................... 23 TERMINATION OF OPERATION .............................................. 25 VIOLATIONS AND PENALITIES ............................................... 25 14.01 Misdemeanor ............................................................................ 25 14.02 Aiding and Abetting ................................................................. 25 14.03 Injunctive Relief. ...................................................................... 25 14.04 Civil Action or Cost as Special Tax ....... : ................................. 26 14.05 Citation Authority .................................................................... 26 14.06 Penalty Provisions ................... .. ................................................ 26 MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS .................................... 26 15.01 Waivers or Modifications ........................................................ 26 15.02 Agency Approval ..................................................................... 26 15.03 Closure/Post-Closure ............................................................... 26 EFFECTIVE DATE ........................................................................ 27 SEVERABILITY ............................................................................. 27 PROVISIONS ARE CUMULATIVE ............................................ 28 ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Purpose: The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards for disposal of solid waste within Hennepin County and the operation of solid waste facilities in Hennepin CounW, Minnesota, in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 473.811.. To accomplish this purpose, the ordinance sets forth: A. license requirements for the establishment and operation of a solid waste facility; B. design and construction requirements for solid waste facilities; C. insurance and performance bond requirements; D. solid waste facility operating requirements; E. requirements preventing illegal dumping; F. requirements establishing procedures to close open dumps; G. procedures for inspection of solid waste facilities and enforcement of this ordinance; and H. violations and penalties for noncompliance. 1.00 GENERAL PROVISIONS 1.01 Administrative Procedures. Provisions of the Hennepin County Administrative Procedures Ordinance that are not covered by this ordinance and do not conflict with provisions of this ordinance shall apply as if fully set forth herein. 1.02 Administration. This ordinance shall be administered by the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. The term "Department" where used in this ordinance and the Hennepin County Administrative Procedures Ordinance, shall mean the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. 1.03 Definitions. The following words and phrases, when used in this ordinance, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, shall have thc meaning ascribed to them in this section. A. "Backyard Compost Site" means a site used to compost vegetative food scraps, garden wastes, weeds, lawn cuttings, leaves and prunings from a single family household, apartment building, or a single commercial office, by an owner occupant, or lessee of the property. B. "Closure" means actions to prevent or minimize the threat to public health and the environment posed by a closed Solid Waste Facility including removing contaminated equipment, removing liners, applying Co Do Eo Fo Ho Mo final cover, grading and seeding final cover, installing monitoring devices, constructing ground water and surface water diversion structures, and installing gas control systems, as necessary. "Clean Fill" means uncontaminated natural earthen material such as soil, sand, and gravel. "Collection" when refen-ing to solid waste, means the aggregation of solid waste from the place at which.it is generated and includes all activities up to the time the waste is delivered to a solid waste facility. "Compostable Material" means any material that is primarily organic and can be putrefied. "Composting" means the controlled biological decomposition and management of selected solid waste to produce an innocuous, humus product-like material, which can be used as a soil conditioner. "Composting Facility" means a site used to compost or co-compost Solid Waste, including all structures or processing equipment used to control drainage, collect and treat leachate, and storage areas for the incoming waste, the final product and residuals resulting from the composting process. "Construction Debris" means waste building materials, packaging, and rubble resulting from construction, remodeling, repair, and demolition of building and roads. "County" means Hennepin County, Minnesota. "County Board" means the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. "Demolition Debris" means solid waste resulting from the demolition of buildings, roads, and other structures including but not limited to concrete, brick, bituminous concrete, untreated wood, masonry, glass, trees, rock and plastic building parts, and other waste materials which have been approved in writing by the Department. Demolition debris does not include asbestos wastes. "Demolition Landfill" means a facility used to dispose of construction debris and/or demolition debris in or on the land. "Department" means the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. "Disposal or Dispose" means the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking, or placing of any solid waste into or on any land or water so that the solid waste or any constituent thereof may enter the environment or be emitted into the air, or discharged into any waters, including ground waters. Po Uo Wo Ko "Hazardous Waste" means any refuse, sludge, or other waste materials or combinations of refuse, sludge, or other waste materials in solid, semi- solid, liquid, or contained gaseous form which because of its quantity, concentration, or chemical, physical or infectious characteristics may (a) cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness; or (b) pose substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, or disposed of, or otherwise managed. Categories of hazardous waste materials include but not limited to explosives, flammables, oxidizers, poisons, irritants and corrosives. Hazardous waste does not include source, special nuclear, or by-product materials as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. "Industrial Solid Waste Landfill" means a facility used to dispose of industrial solid waste in or on the land. "Industrial Solid Waste" means solid waste resulting fi-om an industrial, manufacturing, service, or commercial activity that is managed as a separate waste stream. "Inert Material" means a material that normally displays no chemical activity except under special or extreme conditions to include uncompostable material remaining in a compost system after decomposition. "Land Disposal Facility" means a facility used to dispose of solid waste in or on the land. Land disposal facilities include but are not limited to municipal solid waste landfills, demolition landfills, industrial landfills, and qualified clean fill landfills. "Land Application" means the landspreading or placement of waste or waste by-products on or incorporation of them into the soil surface. "Land Application Site" means a site used for land application. "Landspreading" means the placement of waste or waste by-products on or incorporation of them into the soil surface. "Licensee" means the person who has been given written authority by the County Board or Department to carry out any of the activities for which a license is required under the provision of this ordinance. "Major Modification" means a proposed change in a licensed solid waste facility that requires County Board Approval. The criteria are stated in Section 3.08 item B. "MPCA" means the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, its agents or representatives. AA. BB. CC. DD. EE. FF. GG. II. "MPCA Rules" means Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Solid Waste Management Rules. "Municipal Solid Waste" means garbage, refuse and other solid waste from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities. "Municipal Solid Waste Landfill" means a site used for the disposal of municipal solid waste in or on the land. "Nonconforming Solid Waste Disposal Site or Facility" means a public or private solid waste disposal site or facility that does not hold a current license by the County and a current permit fi:om the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. "Open Dump" means a land disposal site at which solid waste is disposed of in a manner that does not protect the environment, is susceptible to open burning and is exposed to the elements, flies, rodents, and scavengers. "Operator" means the person or persons responsible for the operation of a solid waste facility. "Person" means any human being, any municipality or other governmental or political subdivision or other public agency, any public or private corporation, any partnership, finn, association, or other organization, any receiver, trustee, assignee, agent, or other legal representative of any of the foregoing, or any other legal entity, but does not include the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. "Petroleum Contaminated Soil" means excavated soil, which because of its petroleum content must be treated or disposed of according to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency guidelines. "Postclosure" means actions taken for the care, maintenance, and monitoring of a Solid Waste Facility after closure that will prevent, mitigate, or minimize the threat posed to public health and the environment posed by the closed Solid Waste Facility. This process continues until it is determined by the County to be no longer necessary. "Processing" means the treatment of solid waste after collection and before disposal. Processing includes but is not limited to reduction, separation, exchange, resource recovery, physical, chemical, or biological modification. "Processing Facility" means a site used to process solid waste. "Public Nuisance" means the creation of acts or conditions that unreasonably annoy, injure, or endanger the safety, health, comfort, or repose of any number of members, of the public. LL. MMo OO. PP. QQ. SS. TT. "Putrescible Material" means solid waste which is capable of becoming rotten and which may reach a foul state of decay or decomposition. "Qualified Clean Fill" means uncontaminated concrete, brick, or inert materials, less than eighteen (18) inches in any dimension approved for beneficial use by the Department and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. "Qualified Clean Fill Landffil" means utilization of qualified clean fill for a beneficial land use project. "Shoreland" means land located within the following distances from the ordinary high water elevation of public waters: (a) land within 1,000 feet from the normal high watermark of a lake, pond, reservoir, impoundment, or flowage; and (b) land within 300 feet of a river or stream or the landward side of flood plain delineated by ordinance on such a river or stream, whichever is greater. "Salvaging" means the controlled and authorized removal of waste materials fi.om a licensed solid waste facility. "Sewage Sludge" means the solids and associated liquids in municipal wastewater, which are encountered and concentrated by a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Sewage sludge does not include incinerated residues and grit, scum, or screening removed from other solids during treatment. "Sludge" means any solid, semisolid, or liquid waste generated from a commercial, or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air contaminant treatment facility, or any other waste having similar characteristics and effects. "Solid Waste" means garbage, refuse, sludge fi'om a water supply treatment plant or air contaminant treatment facility, and other discarded waste materials and sludges, in solid, semi-solid, liquid or contained gaseous form, resulting from industrial, commercial, construction, demolition, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include hazardous waste; animal waste used as fertilizer; earthen fill, boulders, rock; sewage sludge; solid or dissolved material in domestic sewage or other common pollutants in water resources, such as slit, dissolved or suspended solids in industrial waste water effluents or discharges which are point sources, subject to permits under Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, dissolved materials in irrigation remm flows; or source, special nuclear, or by-product material as defined by The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. "Solid Waste Facility" means a facility used for processing or disposal of solid waste in Hennepin County. Solid waste facilities include but are not limited to compost facilities, land disposal facilities, transfer facilities, processing facilities, waste tire facilities, and land application sites. "Solid Waste Storage" means the holding of solid waste for more than 48 hours in quantities equal to or greater than ten cubic yards. "Transfer Facility" means an intermediate solid waste facility in which solid waste collected from any source is temporarily deposited to await transportation to another solid waste facility. "Unprocessed Waste" means municipal solid waste that has been certified as unprocessible by the Department, or municipal solid waste that has been transferred to a Land Disposal Facility from a Processing Facility where it has been certified as unprocessible by the operator and no other Processing Facility in the metropolitan area is capable of processing the municipal solid waste. "Waste" means solid waste, sewage sludge, and hazardous waste. "Waste Tire" means any tire that is no longer suitable for its original intended purpose because of wear, damage, or defect, or has been discarded. ZZ. "Waste Tire Facility" means a solid waste facility where more than 500 waste tires or an equivalent amount of tire derived products are collected, deposited, stored, or processed. The temporary storage of waste tires or tire derived products at the site of final use does not make the site a waste tire facility. AAA. "Waste-to-Energy Facility" means a facility where solid waste is converted to energy. BBB. "Wood Waste" means chemically untreated wood pieces. Such materials may include but are not limited to trees, stumps, untreated lumber, and untreated wood pallets. Wood waste does not include wood pieces or particles containing or treated with chemical additives, glue, resin, or chemical preservatives. CCC. "Wood Waste Site" means a location where wood waste is processed. DDD. "Yard Waste" means the garden wastes, leaves, lawn cuttings, weeds, prunings, shrubs, and tree waste generated at residential or commercial properties. Compliance. No person shall cause or permit the disposal, or processing of solid waste, or construct or operate solid waste facilities, except in full compliance with the provisions of this ordinance, including but not limited to all provisions requiring full disclosure of information regarding such disposal, or processing. 1.05 Conditions. The Department may impose conditions on any license, permit or variance as deemed necessary to monitor the operation and ensure the public health and safety. Violation of any condition imposed by the County on a license, permit, or variance shall be deemed a violation of thi 0rdin nee and uhject to the penalty provisions set forth in this ordinance. 1.06 False Information. Omission of any information or submission of false information may be deemed a violation of this ordinance or may be deemed a violation of Minnesota statutes. 1.07 Prohibitions. Ao Unprocessed municipal solid waste. No facility required to be licensed by this ordinance may accept unprocessed municipal solid waste for final disposal in violation of Minn. Stat. § 473.848, Subdivisions 1 and 5. Solid waste facilities shall maintain records accessible to County representatives documenting compliance with the provisions of this subsection and pursuant to Section 3.07 subsections N and O of this ordinance. Conditions governing disposal or processing shall not apply to solid waste or its residue which is properly transported out of Minnesota for disposal or processing unless flow control is authorized at the federal level. Bo Shoreland. No person shall authorize or allow the filling or trenching of any solid waste facility within the shoreland or wetlands of land under his or her control as owner, leasee, or otherwise. C. Open Dumps. No person shall operate an open dump. Waste placed in open dumps or illegally disposed of shall be collected and transported to a licensed solid waste facility for proper disposal by the property owner or other person(s) determined by the Department to be responsible for the illegal activity. The responsible person shall notify the Department at least 48 hours prior to commencement of excavation/removal activity at the subject site. A receipt or other documentation approved by the Department, which indicates satisfactory and legal disposal of the subject solid waste shall be submitted to the Department no later than 14 days after disposal. o Open dumps may submit a closure plan to the Department for approval. Closure plans shall be in compliance with MPCA rules and any other requirement deemed necessary by the Department. Effective means must be taken, if necessary to control flies, rodents, and other insects, or vermin. Implementation of a water-monitoring program may be required by the Department based on the open dump's potential to adversely affect the public's health and the environment. Any required water-monitoring program shall be in accordance with MPCA rules, guidelines, procedures and policies. Plans to protect the ground and surface water shall be approved by the Department prior to implementation. Surface water must be diverted around and away from the open dump. Remove all containerized liquids, hazardous waste, and other items specified by the Department for proper processing or disposal. Recyclable materials shall be removed and processed if feasible. The owner of the property on which the open dump is located, shall place on record an instrument with the Hennepin County Recorder, in a form prescribed by the Department placing the public on notice of the existence and location of the open dump and of the obligations placed upon parties holding an interest in the property and the restrictions which may affect the use of the property. Waiver. The Department may waive any of the closure requirements of this ordinance, provided such waiver does not violate Department rules or create a Public Nuisance. 2.00 2.01 2.02 STANDARDS FOR HEALTH, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION Standards Adopted. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 375.51 Subd. 3, the County includes by reference cun'ent Minn. Rules 7001.3050 subp. 3 item A, 7035.0300 to 7035.2885, 7037.0100 to 7037.3700, 9220.0110 to 9220.0300 and 9220.0450 to 9220.0510, inclusive, relating to solid waste, petroleum soil contaminated soil management and waste tire management, respectively, along with new rules or updated version of the rules promulgated after adoption of this ordinance, and any updated versions of such rules as further adopted after adoption of this ordinance. Such standards include such other Minn. Rules as identified in respective facility section in the remainder of this ordinance. Failure to list or reference a specific state rule or updated rule shall not invalidate its application in relationship to this ordinance. State Rules As Read. The above State Rules are hereby modified to be read in this ordinance as follows: Ao Wherever the terms "Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, .... MPCA," or "Agency," appear in these adopted Rules, they shall be held to mean the "Department." Bo Wherever the terms "Director' or "Commissioner" appear in these adopted Rules, they shall be held to mean the "Department." Co When referring to any solid waste facility except a land application site and a qualified clean fill landfill, wherever the terms "permit," "permitee," "permitting," or "permitted" appear in these adopted Rules, they shall be held to mean "1i¢¢n~¢, .... li¢¢m¢¢, .... licensing," or"li¢cnscd." Do Wherever the terms "Minnesota" or "State of Minnesota" appear in these adopted Rules, they shall be held to mean "Hennepin County." go Wherever the term "Minnesota Waste Management Board" or "Board" appears in these adopted Rules, it shall be held to mean the "Department." Fo Wherever the term "Chair" appears in these adopted Rules, it shall be held to mean the "Department." 3.00 Licensing 3.01 License or Permit Required. A solid waste facility license, fi:om the County Board or Department is required to establish, operate, or maintain a compost facility, land disposal facility, processing facility, solid waste storage facility, transfer facility, waste tire facility and a wood waste facility. A permit is required, from the County Board or the Department to establish, operate or maintain a land application site or a qualified clean fill landfill. Unless otherwise provided by this ordinance, no person shall, within Hennepin County: Ao Dispose of solid waste except at a solid waste facility licensed or permitted by the County Board or the Department; Bo Allow property or land under his or her control to be used for disposal of solid waste unless licensed or permitted by the County Board or the Department to do so; A solid waste facility shall be licensed or permitted until closure is complete as approved by the Department; Do If a solid waste facility can be classified as more than one of the types defined by this ordinance, the facility shall be licensed according to its primary function as determined by the Department. Requirements for the additional solid waste facility types shall also be satisfied. 3.02 Licensing Not Exclusive. The obtaining of a solid waste facility license or permit shall not be deemed to exclude the necessity of obtaining other appropriate licenses or permits except as expressly provided herein. Compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall not relieve any person of the need to comply with any and all other applicable rules, regulations, and laws. 9 3.03 Co The County Board shall by resolution establish fees, including fees for the initial license, permit, and renewal of licenses for facilities. The County Board, by resolution, establishes such other fees as may be necessary for the administration of this ordinance. Fees for new licenses and permits are due upon submittal of an application for a license or permit to the Department. Fees for the renewal of licenses are due thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the current license. As used herein, fees include license fees, permit fees, application fees, and such other fees as may be prescribed by the County Board. 3.04 License Term. Unless otherwise provided by the County Board, each license granted pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance shall be non-transferable and shall be for a period of not more than one year. The license year for solid waste facilities shall be fi.om July 1 through June 30. 3.05 License or Permit Application. Ao Applications for license, permits or license renewals shall be submitted to the Department, on forms provided by the Department. Applicants shall provide all information as required for the administration of this ordinance. B. The application for a solid waste facility license or permit shall include: A copy of the applicant's MPCA application materials: if the applicant has received a permit-by-rule from the MPC& application requirements provided in Minn. Rule 7035.1800 (Permit Application and Required Plans) shall be submitted to the Department. The initial application for licensing a solid waste facil/_ty shall include the documentation required by Minn. Rules 7035.2625 through 7035.2655 (Closure, Closure Procedures, Postclosure Care and Use of Property). The documentation shall establish financial' assurance for the closure and postclosure of the solid waste facility, including funding procedures, a description of the funding method, and the value of the funding which assures that closure and postclosure activities of the solid waste facility will take place. o A Fire Protection Plan: The plan shall be a formal written plan, approved by the Fire Chief of the fire protection agency responsible for the solid waste facility. The plan shall detail procedures for fire protection, including fire suppression 10 3.06 equipment, the number of facility employees available to respond to a fire, training of employees, and other information as required by the Fire Chief. A Litter Control Plan: The plan shall be a formal written plan, approved by the Department detailing what measures will be taken to prevent and remediate the effects of waste material that is scattered on or off-site. A Vermin Control Plan: The plan shall be a formal written plan, approved by the Department detailing how vermin will be controlled on-site. A Odor Conlxol Plan: The plan shall be a formal written plan, approved by the Department outlining how odors will be controlled on-site. Municipal Approval: The applicant shall provide written proof that the local municipal government where the proposed solid waste facility is to be situated has considered and authorized establishment of the facility. o Property Identification Number: The property identification number (PID) of the parcel or parcels where the licensed or permitted activity actually take place. Applicants for a solid waste facility license shall not commence any construction or operation until the initial license application has been approved by the County. Incomplete or Non-Conforming Application. If an application for a solid waste facility license, permit or license renewal is not complete or otherwise does not conform with the requirements set forth in this ordinance, the Department shall advise the applicant in writing of the reasons for non-acceptance within sixty (60) days of the application receipt. The Department may request that the applicant resubmit, modify or otherwise alter the application. The applicant shall comply with such requests within the time specified by the department. 3.07 Standard Licensing Conditions. Solid waste facilities must comply with the following conditions: Operations shall be in conformance with all requirements of the MPCA permit and all applicable ordinances, statutes, rules and regulations. Subsequent disposal of municipal solid waste shall be at a solid waste facility(ies) for which all applicable state, county, and municipal 11 permits(s)/hcense(s) have been issued. Upon request by the Department, the he,nsec shall provide all said copies ofpermits(s)/license(s). Co The County shall set capacity limits on the facility, taking into account site location, size of the facility, surrounding properties, hydrology, site facilities and waste type. Do Source-separated recyclables shall not be accepted except for recycling or transfer to a recycler unless it is determined that no other person is willing to accept the recyclable materials as provided in Minn. Stat. § 115A.95. go Operational hours for all licensed facilities shall be approved by the Department. Fo The licensee shall notify the department at least 60 days prior to implementing any major modifications. Go Licensee shall immediately notify the Department of all hazardous, infectious, or radioactive materials delivered to licensee's solid waste facility. A "Waste Inspection/Incident Report" shall be completed and sent to the Department within 48 hours of discovery of the waste. The "Waste Inspection/Incident Report" is available and shall be provided by the DeparUuent upon request. H. The required license fee shall be paid before the license is issued. A performance bond or letter of credit consistent with written County policy shall be submitted before the license is issued. Jo Proof of insurance consistent with written County policy shall be provided before the license is issued. The County policy is available and shall be provided by the Department upon request. Ko The licensee shall enact and comply with the Fire Control Plan, Litter Control Plan, and the Odor Control Plan, as approved by the Department. Lo A copy of the MPCA annual report shall be submitted with all requested information provided. Mo Copies of all inspection reports received fi.om state and local agencies shall be submitted to the Department. Ne Repons shall be submitted on Department approved forms, which indicate the amount of waste brought in by date, hauler, origin of waste by county, Hennepin County Vehicle ID Number (if available), amount and type of products removed fi.om waste, and the amount of outgoing materials and their ultimate destination. Oo The County shall be permitted to access business records and the licensee shall fully cooperate with all County requests for documents. A business 12 3.08 3.09 record includes but is not limited to a memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form. Pe Thc County shall be pcnnittcd to access and inspect all areas of the solid waste facility, including but not limited to vehicles, containers, and storage areas. The Department shall have discretion to impose additional requirements in order to protect public health and safety. Renewal. Each hcense granted shall expire annually at midnight on June 30th, unless otherwise provided by the County Board. The Department shall mail an annual license renewal notice to all licensees by March 1 st. Applications for license renewal shall be made in writing to the Department by April 1st. Failure to apply for a license renewal by April 1st, shall serve as intent to begin closure of the solid waste facility at the end of the current year. Applications for license modification or license renewal received after April 1 st, shall be considered late and subject to a late application fee. Bo An application for renewal shall include any changes in the information submitted in the last approved license application. Major modifications planned for the new licensing period must also be noted in the information submitted to the Department. The Department shall use the following criteria to determine major modifications: 1. Potential for significant environmental and/or public health impact. 2. Change in the type(s) or quantity(ies) of waste accepted. Change in the waste management method or addition of a new waste management method used at a site or solid waste facility. Failure to submit such information is grounds for revocation or for denial of license renewal by the Department. If there are no changes, this fact shall be stated in the renewal application. Facility license renewal applications shall be subject to approval of the Department. If the Department does not act on a facility license renewal application, which is complete and submitted on time, the current license shall continue in force until action is taken. Denial. Failure by the County to act on an initial solid waste facility application within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of receipt of a completed application, shall constitute grounds for the applicant to request a heating. The request for a hearing shall be governed by Section 12.10 of this ordinance. Failure to act shall be construed as denial without prejudice. 13 3.10 Performance Bonds. Unless otherwise provided by the County Board and/or the Department, issuance of a solid waste facility license, pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance, shall be contingent upon the applicant furnishing to the Department a bond or letter of credit naming the County as the obligee with sufficient sureties duly licensed and authorized to transact corporate surety business in the State of Minnesota as sureties. The mount of the bond or letter of. credit shall be set by the Department according to the following formula: A Estimated cost, submitted by the applicant and approved by the Department, for a third party contractor, unrelated to the applicant or to Hennepin County, to properly dispose of the maximum inventory of solid wastes that will be on-site at any one time, and to decontaminate the facility and all equipment in the facility, or dispose of any equipment that cannot be decontaminated, and to perform any other activities necessary to ensure that the facility does not pose a threat to human health or the environment. Bo And an additional thirty (30) percent of such unanticipated expenses and administrative costs that the County might incur. The condition of such bond or letter of credit shall be that, if the principal fails to obey any of the requirements or do any of the acts required by this ordinance, an order or notice issued by the Department, or conditions of the license in the operation of the site or facility; or if for any reason ceases to operate or abandons the site or facility, and the County determines that chemical analysis and/or testing and remediation are required to restore the site or facility to the condition and requirements as provided by the ordinance, notice, order, or license, the principal and the sureties on its bond shall pay for any and all expenses required for chemical testing and to remedy the failure of the principal to comply with the terms of the ordinance, orders or notices of the Department, or conditions of the license; and that the principal and its sureties will indemnify and save the County harmless from all losses, costs and charges that may occur to the County because of any default of the principal under the terms of his or her license to operate and the ordinance of the County. In the event the County is required to expend monies or expend any labor or material to restore the site or facility to the condition or requirements as provided by this ordinance, order or notice by the Department, or license, the principal and the sureties shall reimburse the County for any and all expenses incurred to remedy the failure of the principal to comply with the terms of this ordinance, orders or notices of the Department or conditions of the license. The applicant may satisfy the requirements of this section by demonstrating that they pass a financial test as specified in Minn. Rule 7035.2750, the terms of which will be set on a case by case basis by the Department. For facilities permitted by the Agency or having interim status, or otherwise required by the Agency to establish financial assurance for closure or corrective action, the license applicant in lieu of the above shall submit to the Department for review satisfactory evidence of compliance with the Agency's financial assurance requirements As specified in Minn. Rules 7035.2695. 3.11 Insurance. Unless otherwise provided by the County Board and/or the Department, issuance of a license or permit to a facility shall be contingent upon the applicant furnishing to the County a certificate of insurance showing that the applicant maintains the following minimum coverages: 14 A commercial general liability insurance policy covering all premises and operations with limits of not less than $1,000,000 for personal injuries arising from one occurrence, $1,000,000 for damages aris/ng from death and/or total bodily injuries arising from one occurrence and $1,000,000 for property damage arising fi.om one occun'ence or a combined single limit thereof, with a $2,000,000 annual aggregate. Bo An automobile liability insurance policy, if applicable, with limits of $1,000,000 per accident for death or bodily injury and/or damages to any one person, $1,000,000 for total bodily injuries and/or damages arising from any one accident and with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for property damage. Workers compensation coverage at the statutory limits (or written confirmation that the applicant is a qualified self-insured or is otherwise exempt under Minn. Statute § 176.041.). 4.00 COMPOST FACILITIES 4.01 General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for a compost facility shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655 (Facility General Technical Requirements) 4.02 Design and Construction Requirements. Compost facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2836. 4.03 Operating Requirements. Compost facilities shall be operated in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2836 Subp. 3 (Yard Waste Compost Facilities), 7035.2836 Subp. 5 (Solid Waste Compost Facilities). 4.04 Exemptions. Backyard compost sites and compost sites that accept less than 200 cubic yard of yard waste per year shall be exempt from Section 4.00 of this ordinance if the following criteria are met: mo Operations at the site shall not create a public nuisance or any conditions that adversely affect the environment or public health. Bo Operations at the site shall not violate state or local laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations. 4.05 Compliance. Failure to comply with the requirements ofthis section is a violation of this ordinance and is subject to penalties and enforcement actions provided in Section 14.00 of this ordinance. 15 5.00 LAND APPLICATION SITES 5.01 General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for a solid waste land application site shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655 (Facility General Technical Requirements) and Minn. Rules 7037.0100 through 7037.3700 (Petroleum Contaminated Soil Management), which are hereby adopted by reference as part of this ordinance. 5.02 Operating Requirements. Operations on a land application Site shall be in accordance with Departmental instructions. Applicants shall submit operating plans to the Department for approval. 6.00 LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES 6.01 General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for solid waste land disposal facilities shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655 (Facility General Technical Requirements) 6.02 Design and Construction Requirements. Land disposal facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2815 (Municipal Land Disposal Facilities), 7035.2825 (Demolition Debris Land Disposal Facilities), and 7035.1590 through 7035.2500 (Industrial Solid Waste Land Disposal Facility Abandonment). Pursuant to Minn. Rules 7035.2825 subp. 10, a hydrogeologic survey is required, unless a risk assessment determines that a hydrogeologic survey is not needed. 6.03 Operating Requirements. Land disposal facilities shall be operated in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2815 (Municipal Solid Waste Land Disposal Facilities), 7035.2825 (Demolition Debris Land Disposal Facilities), and 7035.1590 through 7035.2500 (Industrial SoIid Waste Land Disposal Facility Requirements). In addition, the following operating requirements apply: Putrescible material, which has reached a foul state of decay or decomposition, shall be immediately covered and compacted. Bo Industrial solid waste shall be disposed of in accordance with the current "MPCA Industrial Waste Management Plan". Written permission must be obtained from the Department prior to co-disposal and segregated disposal of applicable waste. Salvaging shall be allowed only when approved in writing by the Department. D. Animal feeding within the site is prohibited. go Paper, plastic, cardboard, cans, bottles, tires, appliances, vehicles, or other materials not specifically defined as construction or demolition debris in subsection 1.03, items H and K, shall not be deposited in a demolition landfill. 16 7.00 7.01 7.02 Exemptions. A qualified cleanfill landfill shall be considered exempt fi-om Section 6.00 of this ordinance if all of the following criteria are met: A. It is a qualified clean fill landfill as defined by subsection 1.03 item PP. Bo Application for a "qualified clean fill landfill" shall be reviewed and approved by the Department before initiation of fill activities.. Operations of the "qualified clean fill landfill" are in accordance with Departmental instructions. Applicants will receive operating instructions upon approval of the initial application Do Qualified clean fill landfills exempted under subsection 6.04 item A shall comply with the following provisions unless specifically waived by the Department; 1. The site shall be managed to eliminate any potential hazards to the environment and surrounding populations. 2. Only clean fill or qualified clean fill as defined in subsection 1.03 items C and OO shall be deposited on the site. 3. Two (2) feet of final cover shall be applied to the site within one- month termination of the fill. 4. The site shall have a slope of 2 to 25 percent to promote surface water drainage. Vegetation shall be established on site upon application of final cover material. If the site is terminated during the winter months, vegetation shall be established immediately the subsequent spring after termination of filling. 6. All qualified clean fill landfills shall comply with all applicable State, County and local rules and regulation. 7. The qualified clean fill landfill shall not be open for general public PROCESSING FACILITIES General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for processing facilities shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655. Design and Construction Requirements. Processing facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2855 (Solid Waste Storage Standards), and 7035.2875 (Refuse-Derived Fuel Facilities). 17 7.03 8.00 8.01 Operating Requirements. Processing facilities shall be operated in accordance with Minn. Rules (Sohd Waste Storage Standards), and 7035.2875 (Refuse- Derived Fuel Facilities). SOLID WASTE STORAGE General Requirements. Solid waste storage shall be in compliance with Minn. Rule 7035.2855. Design and Operational Requirements. Solid waste storage shall be in accordance with Minn. Rule 7035.2855 Subp. 3. 9.00 9.01 9.02 9.03 10.00 10.01 10.02 TRANSFER FACILITIES General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for Transfer facilities shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655. Design and Construction Requirements. Transfer facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Minn. Rule 7035.2865 (Solid Waste Transfer Facilities). Operating Requirements. Transfer facilities shall be operated in accordance with Minn. Rule 7035.2865 Subp. 4 (Solid Waste Transfer Facilities). In addition, the following operating requirements apply: Unloading and loading of solid waste shall be done inside an enclosed structure. Facilities currently operating outside of an enclosed structure shall provide the Department with plans, within 120 days of adoption of this ordinance by the County Board, to enclose the structure within two years All solid waste from vehicles shall be unloaded completely within the structure. If there is insufficient capacity within the facility to completely unload a vehicle, the vehicle shall not be unloaded until there is adequate space for proper unloading procedures within the structure. Solid waste transfer facilities shall be equipped with a scale and all solid waste transactions shall be weighed, recorded and submitted to the Department. WASTE TIRE FACILITIES Design and Construction Requirements. Waste tire facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Minn. Rules 9220.0100 through 9220.0935. Operating Requirements. Waste tire facilities shall be operated in accordance with Minn. Rules 9220.0100 through 9220.0935. In addition, the following operating requirements apply: 18 Ao Persons who produce or otherwise accumulate waste tires in the course of their business shall keep records concerning their waste tire management. Such records shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: 1. the volume of waste tires generated; identification of transporters, disposers, and processors utilized by said person or their agents. dates and quantities of waste tire shipments, disposal or processing. Documentation verifying the proper management of such waste tires and such other information or data requested by the Department shall be maintained to ensure the proper management of waste tires. 11.00 11.01 11.02 12.00 12.01 WOOD WASTE FACILITIES General Requirements. The general requirements and standards for a wood waste facility shall be in accordance with Minn. Rules 7035.2525 through 7035.2655. Operating Requirements. Wood waste facilities shall be operated in accordance with the following operating requirements: Ao A sign shall be posted at the entrance of the facility, stating the hours of operation and acceptable materials. B. The facility shall have sufficient security to control access to the site. Unacceptable materials left at the facility shall be removed and properly disposed of within a reasonable time period of discovery. D. The licensee shall maintain the site so that it is free of litter. Prior to beginning operations the licensee shall submit a Fire Protection Plan that has been approved by the local Fire Marshall of the Fire Protection Agency responsible for the solid waste facility. The plan shall detail procedures for fire protection, including fire suppression equipment, prescribed fire lanes and fire breaks, the number of facility employees available to respond to a fire, training of employees and other information required by the local Fire Marshall. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Duties of the Department. The Department shall be responsible for the administration and enforcement of this ordinance. The Department's duties shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 19 12.02 12.03 12.04 Receive and review facility license, permit or license renewal applications, recommend action on initial facility license applications for facility licenses issued by the County Board, issue facility license renewals, issue facility permits. Inspect solid waste facilities as provided in this ordinance and investigate complaints of violations of this ordinance. Recommend that legal proceedings ,be initiated by the County to compel compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. Advise, consult, and cooperate with other governmental agencies in the furtherance of this ordinance. Evaluate proposals, collect data, and make recommendations on processing methods which impact waste streams and licensing of waste facilities Right of Entry. Whenever necessary to perform an inspection to enforce any of the provisions of this ordinance, or whenever the Department has reasonable cause to believe that solid waste exists in any building or upon any premises, the Department or its authorized agent may enter such building or premises at all reasonable times to inspect the same or to perform any duty imposed upon the Department by this ordinance, provided that if such building or premises be occupied, the authorized agent shall first present proper credentials and demand entry; and if such building or premises be unoccupied, the Department shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other persons having charge or control of the building or premises and demand entry. If such entry is refused, the Department shall have recourse to every remedy provided by law to secure entry including, but not limited to, administrative search warrants. Orders and Notices. Whenever the Department or its authorized representatives shall find in any building or on any premises solid waste whether at a site or facility for which a license or permit has been granted by the County or where no such license or permit has been issued, the Department shall issue such orders as may be necessary for the enforcement of this ordinance governing and safeguarding the health, welfare and safety of the public. Compliance. Any person within the County who shall store, deposit, keep, accumulate, process, treat, reclaim, dispose of, or otherwise handle, process, or dispose of solid waste in violation of this ordinance, or who shall permit such solid waste to exist on premise(s) under his or her control or who shall fail to take immediate action to abate the existence of the solid waste when ordered or notified to do so by the Department shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Any order or notice issued or served by the Department shall be complied with by the owner, operator, occupant, or other person responsible for the condition or violation to which the order or notice pertains. Every order or notice shall set forth a time limit for compliance depending upon the nature of the solid waste and the danger created by the violation. In cases of immediate danger to the health, welfare and 20 safety of the public, immediate compliance shall be required. Such compliance shall be by both owner(s) and occupant(s). 12.05 Inspection. Inspection and evaluation of solid waste facilities, or other sites where the Department has reason to believe solid wastes have been present shall be made by the Department to ensure compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. The owner, operator, or occupant shall be provided with written notice of any deficiencies, recommendations for their correction and the date by which the corrections shall be accomplished. The, owner, operator, or occupant shall allow the Department or its authorized agent access for the purposes of making such inspections as may be necessary to determine compliance with the requirements of this ordinance. The owner, operator, or occupant shall provide requested samples of waste, free of charge, to the Department to allow for appropriate tests. The owner, operator, or occupant also shall allow the Department, fi'ce of charge, to take samples and do tests, as appropriate, of soils, surface waters, ground waters, air, raw materials, products, or other material or residual present at, or emanating from the site, if such samples and tests will demonstrate whether the owner, operator, or occupant is in compliance with this ordinance. Because it is not always manifest to the eye or other senses that solid waste or constituents of solid waste are present, the Department shall not be required to have overt or obvious reason to believe a violation has occurred or that solid waste or constituents indicating mismanagement of solid waste are present to take samples of wastes and other materials, as described, and do tests and monitoring as required via appropriate methods and instrumentation. The Depaxhnent need only have reasonable belief that solid waste has been present at the site to take samples and do tests. The owner, operator, or occupant shall allow free access at reasonable times to inspect and copy, at a reasonable cost all business records related to an owner's, operator's, or occupant's processing and disposal of solid waste. The owner, operator, or occupant shall allow the Department to record and document its findings in any reasonable and appropriate manner including, but not limited to, notes, photographs, photocopies, readouts from analytical instruments, videotapes, audio recordings, and computer storage systems or other electronic media. When requested by the Department, photocopies of records shall be provided at a reasonable cost. 12.06 Financial Assurance. Whenever the Department has reasonable cause to believe that solid waste has been mismanaged by a person upon any premises, the Department may require that person to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Hennepin County the availability of adequate financial resources for cleanup as described in Minn. Rules 7035.2695. When a facility site becomes tax delinquent the Department may order its owner, operator, or occupant to provide financial assurance in the form ora bond or letter of credit naming the County as obligee with sufficient sureties duly licensed and authorized to transact corporate surety business in the State of Minnesota as sureties. The amount of the bond or letter of credit shall be set by the Department according to the following formula: Estimated cost, for a third party contractor, unrelated to the owner or operator or to Hennepin County, to dispose of the solid wastes on-site and to decontaminate the site, and to perform any other activities 21 necessary to ensure that the site does not pose a threat to human health or the environment; 12.07 12.08 12.09 2. And an additional thirty (30) percent to cover unanticipated costs and administrative costs that the County might incur. Revocation of License. Any license issued by the Department or the County Board pursuant to this ordinance may be revoked by the issuer for a serious, deliberate, or repeated violation of any provision of this ordinance that threatens the public health and safety and/or the environment. Revocation shall not occur earlier than ten (10) calendar days, exclusive of the day of service, a~er written notice of revocation has been served on the licensee. Such written notice shall contain the effective date of revocation, the nature of the violation or violations constituting the basis for the revocation, and the facts which support the conclusion that a violation or violations have occurred, and a statement that if the licensee desires a hearing they may, within ten (10) calendar days, exclusive of the day of service, file a written request with the Department. Failure within 10 days of notice to request a hearing shall allow revocation. If a hearing is requested, the revocation shall be stayed pending the outcome of the hearing and issuance of the Department order identifying the outcome of the hearing. Suspension of License. Any license required under this ordinance may be suspended for not longer than sixty.(60) days by the issuer for violation of any provision of this ordinance. Suspension shall not occur earlier than ten (10) calendar days, exclusive of the day of service, after written notice of suspension has been served on the licensee. Such written notice shall contain the effective date of suspension, the nature of the violation or violations constituting the basis for the suspension, the facts which support the conclusion that a violation or violations have occurred and a statement that, if the licensee desires a hearing they may, within ten (10) calendar days, exclusive of thc day of service, file a written request with the Department. Failure within ten days of the notice to request a hearing, shall allow revocation. If a hearing is requested, the suspension shall be stayed pending outcome of the hearing and issuance of the Department order identifying the outcome of the hearing. Summary Suspension of License. If the Department finds an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare requires emergency action and incorporates a finding to that effect in its order, a summary suspension of a license may be ordered by the Department upon notification of the County Attorney's Office and the County Board. Written notices of such summary suspensions shall be served personally on the licensee or by registered or certified mail to the licensee at the address designated in the license application. The written notice in such cases shall state the date of the suspension, the nature of the violation or violations requiring emergency action, and facts supporting said conclusion statement that, if the licensee desires a hearing they may file a written request with the Department within 10 days. 22 Co Failure to request a hearing shall constitute a suspension of the hcense. Ifa hearing is requested, a heating will be held as soon as possible and following the hearing a Department order identifying the outcome of the hearing shall be issued. The Department review shall be conducted pursuant to Section 1~2.10 o£ this orclhaance. Upon written notification fi.om the licensee that all the violations for which the summary suspension was invoked have been corrected, the Department shall re-inspect the site, facility, or activity within a reasonable length of time, but in no case more than three (3) working days after receipt of the notice fi.om the licensee. If the Department finds on such re-inspection that the violation or violations constituting the grounds for suspension have been corrected, the Department shall immediately terminate the suspension by written notice to the licensee and the County Board. If a hearing is requested, the summary suspension shall not be stayed pending the outcome of the hearing. 12.10 Hearings. Whenever a hearing is requested in regard to an application, renewal, suspension or revocation of a license, the procedure shall be governed by the following: Ao Hearing Officer. The hearing shall be before an impartial hearing officer who shall conduct the hearing on behalf of the County Board. The Depamnent shall ascertain the availability and timeliness of scheduling the hearing through the Office of Administrative Hearings and schedule the hearings. If it is determined that a prompt heating is not readily available through the Office of Administrative Hearings, the Department shall appoint an individual to act as the hearing officer, prescribe the duties of the hearing officer and schedule the hearing. Pre-hearing and Heating Notice. The Department shall schedule and provide notice of the date, time and place of the pre-hearing conference and hearing. The pre-heating conference shall be held at least three (3) weeks prior to the hearing. The hearing shall be held no later than forty- five (45) calendar days after receipt of the request for hearing or by mutual agreement of the parties subject to scheduling by the Office of Administrative Hearings, or the heating officer. Procedure. The pre-hearing conference and hearing shall be conducted in the following manner: The pre-hearing conference shall define the issues, schedule the exchange of witness lists and documentary evidence, seek agreement on the authenticity of documents and relevant testimonial evidence, determine whether intended evidence is 23 cumulative and repetitive, and consider all other matters that will assist in a fair and expeditious hearing. o Each party shall exchange all other relevant information and documentary evidence discovered after the pre-hearing conference at least one (1) week prior to the hearing date. Such information shall include all evidence intended for intrc.,~uction at the hearing and includes but is not limited to the following: exhibits; statements; reports; witness lists including a description of the facts and opinions to which each is expected to testify; photographs; slides; demonstrative evidence. Evidence not exchanged in accordance with this provision will not be considered in the hearing unless good cause is shown to the hearing officer. The hearing shall be public and be tape-recorded or at the discretion of the hearing officer, be recorded by a court reporter. 4. All witnesses shall testify under oath or affirmation. Hearings shall be informal and the strict rules of evidence as applied in the courts shall not apply. Irrelevant, immaterial and repetitious evidence shall be excluded. The Department shall have the burden of proof through clear and convincing evidence. o The Department, licensee or applicant, and additional parties as determined by the hearing officer shall present evidence in that order. Each party shall have the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of the other party. The hearing officer may examine witnesses. o Failure of an applicant or licensee to appear at the hearing shall result in a waiver of the right to a hearing. The hearing officer shall issue a report containing written findings of fact and conclusions based upon the evidence presented at the heating and shall submit the same to the County Board. 10. Each party adversely affected may submit written exceptions and present argument to the County Board. The Department may sumit exceptions and arguments to the rebuttal. 11. The County Board shall consider the report of the hearing officer as soon as possible and may adopt or modify the report and take action, reject the report of the hearing officer, or remand for further hearing. The parties shall be notified of the action of the County Board within thirty (30) calendar days following its determination. 24 Appeal of a decision by the County Board shall be made to the District Court within thirty (30) calendar days following the decision of the Board. The scope of review of the District Court shall be governed by Minn. Statute §14.69. Filin§ ~ appeal does not stay enforcement of the County Board decision. 13.00 TERMINATION OF OPERATION Any person, who for any reason, plans or terminates operations at a site, must remove all solid waste and materials contaminated with solid waste prior to final termination of operations. Termination of operations may include the sale of an operation to a new entity, the simple shutdown of a business or site, which is then not operated, or the relinquishing of lease or rental rights to a property. This removal from the site must be accomplished in full compliance with this ordinance. Materials remaining on the site of a terminated operation shall be considered waste materials. The continued storage of solid wastes on the site of a tenninating operation shall be done in compliance with section 8.00 solid waste storage facility rules in this ordinance. 14.00 VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES 14.01 Misdemeanor. Any person who willfully or negligently fails to comply with the provisions of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor. A separate offense shall be deemed committed upon each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. 14.02 Aiding and Abetting. As set forth in Minn. Statue § 609.05, a person is criminally liable for a crime committed by another if the person intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures the other to commit the crime. A person liable for such crime is also liable for any other crime committed in pursuance of the intended crime if reasonably foreseeable by the person as a probable consequence of committing or attempting to commit the crime intended. A person who intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures another to commit a crime and thereafter abandons that purpose and makes a reasonable effort to prevent the commission of the crime prior to its commission is not liable if the crime is thereafter committed. A person liable under this section may be charged with and convicted of the crime although the person who directly committed it has not been convicted, or has been convicted of some other degree of the crime or of some other crime based on the same act, or if the person is a juvenile who has not been found delinquent for the act. For purposes of this section, a crime also includes an act committed by a juvenile that would be a crime if committed by an adult. 14.03 Injunctive Relief. In the event of a violation or condition constituting an eminent or substantial endangerment to the environment, the County may institute appropriate actions or proceedings, including requesting injunctive relief to prevent, restrain, correct or abate such violations or threatened violations. 25 14.04 Civil Action or Cost as Special Tax. If a person fails to comply with the provisions of th/s ordinance, the County may recover costs incurred for corrective action in a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction or, at the discretion of the County Board, the costs may be certified to the County Auditor as a special. tax assessment against real property pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.811 subd. 5c. 14.05 Citation Authority. Citations may be issued by the Department pursuant to Section V. of the Ordinance Number 1 County Licenses, Procedures-Criminal Penalty. 14.06 Penalty Provisions. Existing Solid Waste Facility License Renewal. Facilities not submitting applications for license renewal by August 31, and continuing to operate may receive a citation for failure to submit application for license renewal. Bo Embargo. The Department may embargo and forbid the removal, transport, disposal, treatment or use of any material which is or is suspected to be a solid waste and which is being mismanaged or which the Department has reason to suspect is being or will be managed in violation of this ordinance. The Department shall place a tag to indicate the embargo on the suspect material. No person shall remove the tag or remove, transport, dispose, treat, or use such embargoed material except as authorized by the Department. Such action by the Department shall not be considered to impute ownership of the material or management responsibility upon the County. 15.00 MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS 15.01 Waivers or Modifications. The County Board may waive or modify the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance by reducing or waiving certain requirements when such requirements are shown to be clearly unnecessary or impractical. The County Board may establish additional requirements necessary to reduce risk of harm to persons, property, or the environment based on the individual characteristics of the license application site. 15.02 Agency Approval. No modification or waiver may be granted if it would result in noncompliance with Minn. Rules 7035, 7037, and 9220 unless such modification or waiver has been approved or granted by the Agency. 15.03 Closure/Post-Closure. For facilities permitted by the agency, amendments to the facility closure/post-closure plans and the extensions to the closure/post-closure period shall be granted by the Department only where said amendments or extensions have been approved by the agency. 26 16.00 EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon passage by the County Board. This ordlnance shall not be construed to hold the Department or the County of Hermepin or any officer or employee thereof responsible for any damage to persons or property by reason of the inspection or re-inspection authorized herein provided; or by reason of the approval or disapproval of equipment or licensing herein; nor for any action in connection with the inspection or control of solid waste or related business records or in connection with any other official duties. 17.00 SEVERABILITY The provisions of this ordinance shall be severable in accordance with the following: Ao Validity of Provisions. If any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge any provision of this ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect the validity of any of the other provisions of this ordinance not specifically included in said judgment. Application to Site or Facility. If any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge invalid the application of any provision of this ordinance to a particular structure, site, facility or operation, such judgment shall not affect the application of said provision to any other structure, site, facility or operation not specifically included in said judgment or action. (The remainder of this page was intentionally left blank) 27 18.00 PROVISIONS ARE CUMU'LATWE The provisions of this ordinance are cumulative to all other laws, ordinances and regulations heretofore passed, or which may be passed hereafter, covering any subject matter in this ordinance. Passed by the Board of County Commissioners of Hermepin County this ,2000. day of Board COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chair of the County Board Attest: Deputy/Clerk of the County APPROVED: Assistant County Attorney 28 Metropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future September 15, 2000 Francene Clark, Clerk/Acting City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364-1687 Dear Ms. Clark: I am pleased to announce *.hat Caren Dewar has agreed *`o accept the position of Community Development Director at the Metropolitan Council, effective October 1, 2000. She has submitted her resignation from the Council policy board to the Governor's Office, effective today, September 15, 2000. It has been a pleasure working with Caren as a member of the Metropolitan Council as she has played a key role in creating a more activist Metropolitan Council and in implementing the Ventura Administration's Big Plan for healthy, vital communities and a competitive region. Caren has been active in urban planning and development issues for 20 years. In 1996, she founded Dewar & Associates to promote public/private investment and public participation in redevelopment initiatives. Her most recent accomplishments include leading Midtown Community Works, a public/private partnership facilitating redevelopment along the Lake Street/Midtown Greenway Corridor, and developing the new Minneapolis YWCA and Urban Sports Center. As the Council's new Community Development Director, Caren has the unique opportunity to carry out the Smart Growth initiatives that she helped develop as a Council member. In addition, her urban planning and development expertise along with her public/private partnership experience will be well suited to advancing the Council's Smart Growth agenda. The governor's office has announced that Caren's vacancy in the sixth district will be published in the State Register on October 2, 2000. with the application deadline being October 24, 2000, and an appointment expected soon thereafter. In the interim, Council members Matthew Ramadan and Carol Kummer will serve the residents of this district, which includes Minneapolis, Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. Beginning October 1, Caren can be reached at 651-602-1306. Please feel free to call her. I took forward to having Caren continue to work with you to achieve the goals that I believe we all share, of ensuring the Twin Cities region remains one of the best places to love, work, raise and family and grow a business. Ted Mondale Chair, Metropolitan Council 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626 (651 ) 602-1000 Fax 602-1550 An Equal Opportunity Employer TDD/TTY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 602-1888 Mary Liz Holberg State Representative District 37B Dakota and Scott Counties Minnesota House of Representatives Kandis Hanson City of Mound Administrator 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 September 15, 2000 Dear Kandis: SUBJECT: Town Hall Meetings on Metropolitan Council Operations and Performance The Metropolitan Subcommittee of the Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee will be conducting a series of Town Hall meetings this fall. The meetings are intended to provide an opportunity for citizens and local government officials to testify about the need for, effectiveness of, and possible modifications to the Metropolitan Council's structure and responsibilities. The information gained will be used to build a base for use by the Legislature. The meeting schedule and locations, include: September 27 October 5 October 12 October 18 October 26 November 1 Vadnais Heights Fire Hall, 3595 Arcade Avenue, 7 p.m. Woodbury City Council Chambers, 8301 Valley Creek Road, 7 p.m. Anoka County Board Room, 2100 3ra Avenue N., 7:30 p.m. Prior Lake City Council Chambers, 16776 Fish Point Road, 7 p.m. Lakeville City Council Chambers, 20195 Holyoke Avenue, 7 p.m. Plymouth Community Center Ballroom, 14800 34th Avenue, 7 p.m. Each hearing will include a brief explanation of the current statutory authority for the Council and of several bills which were introduced during the last session. We will then take testimony from the members of the audience. Due to time constraints, priority will be given to individuals who sign up to speak prior to the meeting. Please contact Blair Tremere, Committee Administrator, at 651-296-5376, if you have any questions, or if you would like to testify. I look forward to hearing your comments. If you are unable to attend please feel free to contact me at anytime. Sincerely, Representative Mary Liz Holberg, Chair Metropolitan Council and Agencies Subcommittee 12195 Upper 167th Street, Lakeviile, Minnesota 55044 State Office Building, 100 Constitution Ave., St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1298 FAX (651) 296-7189 'I-FY (651) 296-9896 email: rep.maryliz.holberg@house.leg.state.mn.us ~'~ t ~3 NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE (612) 435-8723 (651) 296-6926 _ennepin County : , ............... An ~ Opportuni~ Empleser September 15, 2000 Ms. Kandis Hanson, Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: Fair Housing Dear Ms. Hanson: As a recipient of funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), particularly Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funds, Hennepin County and its subrecipients are required to affirmatively further fair housing. Part of this requirement includes conducting an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice to identify barriers to housing choice by members of protected classes and to identify action steps to address these barriers. Hennepin County completed its first analysis in 1995 and is now preparing to update this work. To do this, Hennepin County has joined together with all other CDBG entitlement jurisdictions in the metro area in a regional analysis of impediments to fair housing. It is our hope that a regional approach to this process, encouraged by the Department of HUD, will help us to better address issues related to fair housing in both the public and private sectors in a systematic way. To assist in this process, Hennepin County and the other entitlement jurisdictions, through the Metropolitan Council, issued a Request for Proposals in June and selected the Legal Services Advocacy Project (LSAP), a division of Mid-Minnesota Legal Assistance. LSAP will collaborate with the Urban Coalition, the Institute on Race and Poverty and the Wilder Research Center in the research and design of the project. They will also provide opportunities for input from other community groups and agencies with an interest in fair housing issues, as well as members of protected classes who are most directly affected by fair housing issues. The Metropolitan Council, through Metro HRA, will help coordinate the project and facilitate ongoing communication between the jurisdictions and the project partners. The project will be completed by the end of this year. If you have any questions about the scope of the project or would like to know more about the process, you can contact Mark Hendrickson, Office of Planning and Development (952-541-7084) or Regina Wagner at LSAP (651-222-3749, ex 107). Sincerely, Gary L. Cu~ngham, loirector cc: Fran Clark Office Of Planning & Development Development Planning Unit 10709 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 260 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55305 (612) 541-7080 FAX:(612) 541-7090 TDD/TTY:(612) 541-7981 Recycled Pat~' w E S~T 0 N K.A Healthy Community Westonka Healthy Comm!~nltyConaborative Collaborative Agenda - Sept. 15, 7:15 - 9:00 mm. Mound City Hnll 1. Social Coffee, tea, rolls, fruit and juice start at 7:15 2. Introductions 7:30 3. Additions or Changes to the Agenda / Minutes 4. ,announcements (5 min.) · The City of Minnetrista will help our effort to build a permanant skatepark. A check for $4000 from Cheryl Fisher, Mayor of Minnetrista was presented to some of the kids involved in the planning and building of the skate park. · We need to set a Finance and Operations Work Group meeting to complete the budget. Please let Leah know what times will work for you. 5. 'Whe County-Wide Adolescent Health Promotion Plan"- Brigid Riley, Senior Adolescent Health Promotion Specialist, Hennepin County, Community Health Dept, Health Promotion Division. (20 min.) Brigid Riley has been at our Collaborative before. She will present a plan that they have been working on related to adolescent health. 6. Surprise Student "Welcome Back to School" follow up event- Carol Olson (15 min.) Carol will talk about the successful event held Sep. 5, 2000. We will brain storm ideas for a follow up event that could span all of our work groups and our strategic planning goals. 7. Recommendation from the Health Work Group - Carol Olson (15 ruin,) The Health Work Group has researched purchasing light boxes that aid peaple affected by S.A.D. (Seasonal Affective Disorder) The manufacture is willing to sell the Collaborative the light boxes at a discounted price. "If there be shy truer measure of a person th~n by what he/she does, it must be by what he/She gives." - Robert South Health Carol Olson, Patricia Anderson, Tami Schafer Beaty, Sandy Olstad, Lois Van Dyke, Edith Travers, Carolyn Schmidt, Mary Goode, Jeanette Metz The Health Work Group continues to monitor the progress of the Health Advocate Outreach Project. The Health work group is researching light boxes for Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD's) and ways that we can give information to the public about this mental health issue that affects about 20% of our population. Youth Activities Sandy Rauschendorfer-temp chair, Chris Valerius, Sue Cathers, Jean Ann Thayer, Patsy Kiesow Mayor Cheryl Fischer and the Minnetrista City Council presented a check for $4,000 to Ryan Stoll and Derick Hostleter for the skatepark. The after school activity bus has started. The Youth center is still in need of an adult employee. Presbyterian Homes is looking to have our kids volunteer at their location on Tuesdays. The youth group will talk about this. Parenting Sandy Wing, Sandy Olstad, Jeanne Stortz, Bill Erickson The Parent Group is looking for speakers for the community parent information. Community Margaret Holste, Cathy Bailey, Cheryl Fischer, Edith Travers The Community Work Group will be meeting soon. PRAVIedia Jeanne Stortz, Lisa Whalen, Anne Wilbur, Carol Olson The Resource Directory has arrived. We will have copies at the meeting. "Westonka students are: respected, accepted, trusted, appreciated, loved, encouraged". The "surprise" welcome back for the Westonka students was a great success. We will talk about ideas to follow through on the message. Finance and Operations Mike Looby, Len Harrell, Margaret Holste, Craig Anderson, Patricia Anderson The Finance and Operations work group needs to meet. We will set a date at the WI-ICC meeting. Executive · Carol Olson, Jeanne Stortz, Margaret Holste, Sandy Wing, Sandy Raushendorfer, Sue Cathers, Mike Looby There was no need for the Executive work group to meet this month. Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative Minutes · August 18, 2000 Present: Patricia Anderson, John Braland, Sue Cathers, Bill Erickson, Cheryl Fisher, Mary Goode, Patsy Kiesow, Mike Looby, Jeanette Metz, Tony Mills, Carol Olson, Sandy Olstad, Carolyn Schmidt, Jeanne Stortz, Edith Travers, Leah Weycker, Sandy Wing, Guests: Brian Powers, Mark Brekke Additions or Changes to the Agenda or Minutes: Sue Cathers would like to add discussion on the Mound Tobacco Free Future. Sandy Wing would also like to add a small request. Recommendation from the Executive Work Group on sponsoring a player for the Slamma Bamma Jammers: Mike Looby explained this community event with the Harlem Ambassadors. This celebrity basketball game will be held on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2000. The Ambassadors will be playing the Westonka Slamma Bamma Jammers. The executive work group is recommending the we sponsor a player for the event with the proceeds going towards student scholarships. The Collaborative would receive 10 tickets that we could raffle off to our members, recognition in the newspaper and promotional materials, and sponsorship of a player. Jeanette Metz made a motion to be a sponsor of the event and have a player on the team that won't get hurt. Sandy Wing seconded the motion. As a friendly amendment, Patricia asked what level of sponsorship this was. It was agreed that the motion covered the $250 level of sponsorship. Motion Passed. We discussed who may be willing to be a player for the WHCC. Pastor John had been recommended and Tony Mills appeared to be the tall guy in the room. Tony agreed that he could play. He will check the date on his calendar. Announcements: Carol Olson covered the Surprise Welcome Back to school that the PR/Media work group is planning. We need volunteers to be at all the school entrances to hand out pens to the students and personally welcome back each student. All the volunteers and staff will have t-shirts that say Westonka Students are loved, respected, appreciated, accepted, encouraged and trusted. The same message will be on the pens. Due to the tight time line, the Executive work group has agreed that the PR/Media work group could spend this money which was left over from the last budget year. This project fits in with our strategic planning goals of building community pride. Patricia made a motion' to all be on board for the Welcome Back. Sandy Olstad seconded the motion. Motion Passed. Recommendation from Executive Work Group on new Governance Agreement: The Executive work group recommends approval of the governance agreement. The agreement will not be finalized until all the mandated partners sign the document. Some of the major changes would be that we do need to buy additional insurance for the Collaborative members. We also needed to have a specific number of members required to conduct business spelled out for quorum guidelines. We are bound by open meeting laws w[~;ell require meelitlg notices ifa quorum 0fthe members would be together discussing business. Five will be our quorum. We are also bound by the data privacy act. What constitutes a member was discussed. Cunently our structure document, which will now be considered our bylaxvs, states that a member can vote after attending three meetings. We will add a reference to the membership definitiou. Membership requirements of other collaboratives were discussed. We can change our bylaws if the group wants to change the membership requirements. Carolyn Schmidt noticed that the medical communiW was missing from the additional members section. We will add that.' Patricia made the inotion to accept the governance agreement as amended. John Braland seconded the motion. Motion Passed. Add On: Sue Cathers asked for volunteers to do a phone bank for the Tobacco Free Future group. A sign up sheet was passed around. Sandy Wing talked about the Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) advisor.council needing ~ne~nbers. It only requires a commitment of five meetings a year. Brian Powetw - ltow a Commm~iO' Can Support People with Depression: Brian Powers with Mou,d Psychological Sen, ices gave an ovemiew of Wpes of depression and effects of beliefs, emotions, behavior and learned helplessness. Depression needs medication. Some ways to prevent depression are talking about our feelings and leRing people know that it is okay to talk about their feelings. Feelings are okay but be aware of the line be~een expressing feelings and violence. Youth need to know that it is okay to talk about feelings but not act out in expressing feelings. If you offer to listen to a depressed person and they don't talk, keep listening. Keep your a~s open. Don't smother and don't push away, but be there. We need to accept that stone one is depressed and don't say "no, your.just having a bad day." Mark Brekke added other things to help depressed people: tell them you love them, shame is one of the bars that add to the cage of depression, Love also means accepting- "1 love you even though..." Mark felt there was a need for a place for our youth to hang out. It would also be helpful to have a phone number to call for help when the youth would want to talk. Adjournment Che~! Fischer made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Sandy Olstad seconded the motion. Motion Passed. CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT Aug. 2000 66.67% GENERAL FUND Taxes Business Licenses Non-Business Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Court Fines Other Revenue Transfers from Other Funds Charges to Other Departments Aug. 2000 YTD PERCENT BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED 1,344,330 0 702,444 (641,886) 52.25% 4,210 0 3,505 (705) 83.25% 116,200 14,855 115,486 (714) 99.39% 963,800 0 492,032 (471,768) 51.05% 85,700 19,151 82,073 (3,627) 95.77% 100,000 12,227 76,856 (23,144) 76.86% 63,500 1,145 18,109 (45,391) 28.52% 47,500 0 0 (47,500) 0.00% 13,000 1,638 9,912 (3,088) 76.25% TOTAL REVENUE 2.738,240 49,016 1,500,417 (1,237,823) 54.79% FIRE FUND RECYCLING FUND LIQUOR FUND WATER FUND SEWER FUND CEMETERY FUND DOCK FUND 377,470 13,843 291,190 (86,280) 77.14% 115,600 7,200 97,134 (18,466) 84.03% 1,750,000 177,753 1,221,202 (528,798) 69.78% 500,000 42,311 293,392 (206,608) 58.68% 960,000 82,674 653,026 (306,974) 68.02% 6,200 0 2,930 (3,270) 47.26% 86,000 41 68,422 (17,578) 79.56% 09114/2000 rev00 Gino CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT Aug. 2000 66.67% GENERAL FUND Council Promotions Cable TV City Manager/Clerk Elections Assessing Finance Computer Legal Police Civil Defense Planning/Inspections Streets City Property Parks Summer Recreation Contingencies Transfers Aug. 2000 YTD BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE 77.620 4000 26 000 198 750 12 450 68 000 175 400 22 100 146 980 1,049,650 12,150 208,250 485,990 76,890 2O8,05O 39,570 106,780 166,120 PERCENT VARIANCE EXPENDED 15,771 66,194 11,426 85.28% 0 4,000 0 100.00% 18,515 18,931 7,069 72.81% 17,075 132,734 66,016 66.78% 477 794 11,656 6.38% 22 71,318 (3,318) 104.88% 13,302 117,266 58,134 66.86% 88 5,600 16,500 25.34% 8,678 72,428 74,552 49.28% 66,456 683,170 366,480 65.09% 4,531 7,587 4,563 62.44% 17,433 153,253 54,997 73.59% 39,163 360,166 125,824 74.11% 6,347 53,717 23,173-~ ~' 69.86% 17,424 159,389 48,661 76.61% 0 0 39,570 0.00% 75 650 106,130 0.61% 13,844 110,747 55,373 66.67% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 3,084,750 239,201 2,017,944 1,066,806 65.42% Area Fire Service Fund 411,520 TIF 1-2 0 Recycling Fund 124,980 Liquor Fund 238,920 Water Fund 441,360 Sewer Fund 939,410 Cemetery Fund 8,190 Dock Fund 80,640 7,867 206,197 205,323 50.11% 101,842 385,436 (385,436) 870 66,619 58,361. 53.30% 19,402 170,464 68,456 71.35% 33,254 269,759 171,601 61.12% 89,804 573,824 365,586 61.08% 1,214 4,194 3,996 51.21% 3,232 49,749 30,891 61.69% Exp-00 09/14/2000 Gino General Fund $1,048,525 CDBG 1,756 Area Fire Protection Services 282,661 MSA 41,679 Sealcoat (34,839) PW Facility 90,833 Capital Improvement 308,307 CDB 4,066 Commerce Place TIF 167,254 Downtown TIF 1-2 (581,040) Grant Revolving 5,794 Co Rd 15 7,783 Recycling 93,516 Liquor Store 403,753 Water 795,514 Sewer 697,990 Cemetery 3,770 Dock 256,331 Fire Relief (59,007) HRA 1,891 Note: The above schedule shows the combined cash and investment balances by fund for the months indicated as recorded in the General Ledger. The balances do not reflect receivable, payables, authorized transfers, encumbered funds, or dedicated/reserved resources, etc. Only some accrued transactions are reflected. Investment income will be distributed to the funds at the end of the year and is not included. A long and complete process is followed to record all transactions, before we close the books, at the end of the year. In addition, the audit from the independent auditor is performed and an official Comprahensive Report will be presented to the City Council and made available to interested parties. In no way this schedule is intended to represent balances of funds available for spending. 09/14/2000 CashReportCouncil Gino REVISED 9-20-00 Starting October 2, 2000 Mound residents can take their leaves, yard waste, and brush to the new compost site located in Minnetrista. The address is 4275 Creekview Circle. This is 1 mile east of County Road 92 on State Highway 7, or 3 miles west of County Road 44 on State Highway 7. The hours and days of operation are Monday thru Saturday 9am. to 6pm. and Sunday lpm. to 6pm. The compost site will close for the season on December 1, 2000 and reopen on April 1, 2001. If you any question please call the City of Mound at 952-472-0603. AMM FAX lie Sept. 11-15, 2000 Page 881 Of 801 Association Hetropolitan Hunicipalities Metropolitan Council member resigns Dewar steps down to become director of community development Caren Dewar has resigned as a member of the Metro- politan Council to assume the position as director of the Metropolitan Council's Commu- nity Development Division. Dewar's district included portions of Minneapolis and the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. Her resignation is dates and interview schedules Policy Meeting is set for Nov. 9 The AMM's Policy Adoption Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, Nov. 9. This is the membership's opportunity to debate and approve the AMM's policy platform for the 2001 Legisla- tive Session. More meeting details will be mailed to you. effective Sept. 15, 2000. She chaired the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities and Land Use and Housing Advisory committees. The governor's office is in the process of appointing a re- placement. Details as to filing should be available soon. Dewar is replacing Tom McEIveen, who resigned to accept the position as director of Public Policy for the Builders Association of the Twin Cities. Dewar begins work in her new position on Oct. 1, 2000. Mayors' Housing Task continues work The Mayors' Housing Task Force will meet on Tuesday, Sept. 26 at the League of Minnesota Cities Building. The task force will discuss reports from the work groups on funding and partnerships, design and management, land use and public awareness. The work group reports will include recommendations and findings. For example, the funding and partnerships work group has learned that between 35 and 40 percent of the households using section 8 are 62 years of age or older. The minutes of the work groups are posted on the Metro- politan Council's web site (http:// www.metrocouncil.org). A final report is expected in October. New Council chairs are announced d-~lM.N'tws Far is foxed to ail AMM city managers and administrators, legislative con toots and Board members. Please share this fax with your mayors, councilmembers and staff to keep them abreast of impor- tant metro city issues. 145 University Avenue West St. Paul, .~I.~' 55105-2044 Phone: (651) 215-4000 Fax: (651) 281-1299 E-mail: amm~amm145, org Two new chairs have been appointed by Met Council Chair Ted Mondale to fill the vacancies left by Caren Dewar's resignation. Matthew Ramadan of Minneapolis will become the chair of the Livable Commu- nities Committee and Carolyn Rodriguez of Apple Valley will become chair of the Land Use and Housing Committee. In addition, Marc Hugunin of Grant will replace Ramadan as first vice-chair of the Metropolitan Council. 2888 1S:3S:Z? Qia Fax AMM FAX Sept. 18-22, 2000 -} A odation of etropolitan unicipalitie Meeting Reminders LMC/AMM METRO REGIONAL MEETING mfoime is running short to register rthe LMC/AMM Metro Re- gional Meeting, which will be held on Thursday, Sept. 28 from 3-8:30 p.m., at the Sheraton Four Points Hotel in Minneapolis. The cost to attend is $35. The agenda includes a Metropolitan Council panel discussion and web services available from the LMC and AMM If you would like to attend, please contact Cathy Dovidio at 651-281- 1250 by noon on Monday, Sept. 25. You can also visit the LMC's website (http://www. lmnc.org) and complete a registration form on-line, or you can fax your completed registration form to the LMC at (651-281-1296). SLUC SMART GROVVTH PRESENTATION The Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUC) is sponsoring a panel discussion entitled, "Smart Growth: A View from the Hobby Farm;" on Wednesday, Sept. 27 from 11:30 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the DoubleTree Airport Hotel. Panelists include: Dean Barkley (Minnesota Planning), Tom Salkowski (Wdght County), and Betsy Wergin (Sherburne County). The cost to attend this program is $30 for members and $40 for nonmembers. To register, please call Pat Amst at 612-474-3302 by Friday, Sept. 22. House committee hearings on Metropolitan Council set ReP. Mary Liz Holberg (R- ,Lakeville), chair of the Metropoli- tan Subcommittee of the Local Gov- ernment and Metropolitan Affairs Committee, has announced a series of hearings. The six headngs are sched- uled as follows: Wednesdi~, Sent 27 7 O m Vadnais Heights Fire House (3595 Arcade Ave.) Thursdi~b, Oct 5 7 p m Woodbury Council Chambers (8301 Valley Creek Rd.) Thursd~qb, Oct 12 7'30 o m Anoka County Board Room (2100 Third Ave. N.) Wednesd~q~V Oct 18 7 o m Prior Lake Council Chambers (16776 Fish Point Rd.) Thursday, Oct 26 7 p m Lakeville Council Chambers (20195 Holyoke Ave.) Wednesda,v Nov 1 7 p m Plymouth Community Ctr. Ballroom (14800 34th Ave.) The agenda for the meetings includes a presentation on current law regarding the Met Council and an update on the 1999-2000 legislative proposals related tothe Met Council. The public will have the opportunity to comment about the need for, effective- ness of and possible modifications to the Met Council's structure and respon- sibilities. If you would like to testify please call Blair Tremere at 651-296- 5376. BATC study identifies affordability issues The Builders Association of the Twin Cities (BATC) has released its study, "Fees, Infrastructure, Costs and Density.' The study, which examines development regulations and fees in four metropolitan area growing cities, finds that: · Infrastructure and regulatory costs decline as housing density increases. · Local zoning and subdivision regulations prevent communities from using land efficiently and providing enough life-cycle housing through 2020. · Regulations increase housing costs. In the study, BATC also issues a call to action that includes the follow- ing: · The wide variations in fees charged by cities suggest a need for an accountability of actual costs cities incur. · As the state and the Metropolitan Council plan and implement smart growth strategies they must account for local regulations. · All housing must meet market demands. Builders must continue to work with policy makers to efficiently meet the demands of the housing market. The study notes that the call to action is based on voluntary actions by all stakeholders. A copy of the study is available on the BATC website (http:// www. batconline.org). A summary of the study is also included in the Parade of Homes Magazine. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-o620 WEBSITE ADDRESS www. cltyo rmounc, com prmted on recycled paper VOL. No. HI-NOTP- Oc'T'OE [r - zooo PRESZI:)ENTS MESSAGE Dear Members, On Saturday September 2, 2000 many memories went up in smoke. Three houses and a garage were burned on the futur~ senior centee propeety. The Mound Volunteer Fire Department did a terrific job. Two*of the houses had been owned by two of our senioes 0ong ago). They had been neighbors for years. One of the seniors brought her son. He had learned to drive on Bush Road next to their home. When the smoke was cleared, the bull dozers pushed the buent eemnants into the basement. One of our seniors who had raised four children in the house remarked, "My clothes lines are still there.' On a happier note, we had the geound breaking for the new 6illespie Center at noon on Wednesday, September 13tk. Marillyn Byrnes, President DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2000 DRAFT Those present: Chair Geoff Michael; Commissioners: Orvin Burma, Jerry Clapsaddle, Becky Glister, Cklair Hasse, Michael Mueller, Bill Voss, Frank Weiland. Absent and excused: Council Liaison Bob Brown; Staffpresent: City Planner Loren Gordon, Building Official Jon Sutherland, and Recording Secretary Diana Mestad. The following public was present: Greg Petrich, 4856 Donald Drive. Chair Michael welcomed the public and called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1.0 MINUTES - APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 14, 2000, MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Voss requested the following changes: Case #00-41 - the vote on the Motion should be 5-0; Case #00-39 - the vote on the Motion should be 5-0; and Case #00-40 - the vote on the Motion should be 5-0. MOTION, by Weiland, seconded by Hasse, to approve the Minutes of the August 14, 2000, Planning Commission meeting as amended above. Motion carried 8-0. BOARD OF APPEALS: 1.1 Case #00-48: Variance, Greg Petrich, 4856 Donald Drive, Lot 16-19, Block 1, Arden, PID #24-117-24 44 0227. Clapsaddle requested that Staff include maps in future packets. The City Planner stated that this case involved a request to add an additional stall to an existing garage. The applicant is also planning to add a screen porch and extend the bedrooms in the future. The requested garage stall is the first phase of this project. The City Planner also stated that there is an above ground pool on the lot that does count as hardcover. The City Planner stated that the requested setback does not encroach on another home, but he does feel that the garage could work within the existing setback. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the request with the following conditions: 1. The garage addition be not less than 6 feet from the property line. Mound Planning Commission Minutes. September 11. 2000 DRAFI An updated hardcover sheet be submitted showing existing and proposed hardcover after the garage addition. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans be submitted for review and approval. Weiland asked whether Staff was requesting approval of the whole project including the screen porch and proposed addition at this time. The City Planner stated that these projects are a long- term plan and Staff is only requesting approval of the garage at this time. Clapsaddle asked whether granting this variance would cause all the other projects to come before the Commission. The City Planner stated that this would not be required under the new streamlining. Mueller asked whether it was possible to approve all the projects at this time. Mueller asked what the setback would be if this property were on a fire lane. The City Planner stated that he thought the setback would then be 20 feet. Mueller stated that he understood that it was Staff's job to uphold the ordinances, but he wondered how granting this variance would negatively affect the neighborhood. The City Planner stated that he did not see a negative impact, but Staff did feel there were other options available. Weiland suggested that the applicant purchase the necessary land from the City as it was abutting a tax forfeit property. He further stated that the tax forfeit property was not useable parkland. Weiland asked whether the above ground pool located on the applicant's property had been permitted by the City. The City Building Official stated that the pool was not listed with the property in the City records and so was not permitted. The applicant confirmed that he did not have a permit for the pool. The City Building Official informed the applicant that he would need to get a permit for the pool and at that time the regulations regarding fencing and electrical would be considered. Weiland asked whether the pool would have to be taken down and then the permit applied for. The City Building Official stated the pool would not have to be taken down, but the applicant would pay a double fee for not applying for the permit beforehand. Mueller pointed out that the City may not be willing to sell the land to the applicant and further that what the applicant is asking for is a variance. Voss asked whether Staff had offered the applicant the option of purchasing land from the City. The City Building Official stated that he did not know the history of the case, but could research it and bring the issue back to the Commission. He suggested that the variance could be approved 2 according to Staff recommendation and then the City and the applicant could pursue the land purchase option. Weiland stated that he did not like this solution because it involved allowing a variance without trying to investigate the other opportunity. Mueller stated that the survey shows the garage at 28 x 24 and asked whether that was correct. The applicant stated it was correct, but that 6 feet is currently a mudroom located within the house. The applicant then distributed plans for the proposed changes to the Commission. Clapsaddle asked why the applicant could not push the garage back to stay within the existing setback. Mueller suggested approving all the projects so the applicant would not have to come back. He further stated that the streamlining would not cover an undersized lot. Clapsaddle stated that the drawing was not accurate to scale and so made approval of all the projects difficult. Mueller confirmed that Clapsaddle was suggesting that the garage stall be moved back 2 feet to remain within the setback. Clapsaddle confirmed that this was his suggestion. Voss questioned whether having the applicant buy the City's land would cause him to lose his status as a lot of record. Mueller stated that the applicant could request to retain his status. The City Planner stated that he had checked the lot area on the Hennepin County website and it was listed at 9,629 square feet. Mueller stated that in his experience the website is often wrong on the lot areas. The City Planner stated that he then checked the numbers and came up with 9,648.5 square feet, but that this would have to be confirmed by survey. The City Planner stated that the Nonconforming Section, New Development 9 discussed additions to nonconforming structures, but in this case, the house is conforming and if use of the parcel is also conforming, then the streamline option would apply. This would mean that the applicant would not need to return to the Commission for future projects. Mueller stated that the question was whether to grant the variance or require the applicant to make his lot conforming by buying the land fi.om the City. Clapsaddle added that the option of pushing back or resizing the garage also existed. Mueller stated that in his opinion granting the variance would not have a negative impact. 3 Mound Planning Commission Minutes, September 11, 2000 DRAFT Burma stated that he did not have a problem recommending that the variance be granted because there would be no effect on the neighborhood in terms of privacy, appearance, or fire safety. MOTION, by Clapsaddle, seconded by Voss, to approve Staff recommendation with the conditions listed. Discussion: Mueller verified that what was being proposed was that the garage meet the 6 foot setback and that any conforming additions would not need to come back for variances. Burma suggested that since a hardcover sheet was distributed at the meeting, condition number 2 be revised to read "hardcover requirements are met." Clapsaddle and Voss accepted Burma's amendment. Chair Michael called the question. AYES: 5 NAYS: 3 (Michael, Mueller, Weiland) Motion carried. 5-3. Mueller stated that the above ground pool on the property is movable and therefore is not a fixture of the real estate. The applicant asked for clarification on what he needed to do in order to build a 12-foot addition. The City Planner stated that he needed to either purchase land from the City or step back the addition. The applicant asked who he should contact to explore these options. The City Planner stated that the case would come before the City Council in two weeks and the decision made at that time would be final. The City Building Official told the applicant that if he was considering purchasing the land, he should call him. Weiland asked for confirmation that if the applicant were to purchase the land, he would not lose his lot of record status. The City Building Official stated that the applicant could apply to keep his lot of record status and that information would be supplied to him to further explain the process. Mueller told the applicant that he should call the City Building Official the next day and get more information about the process. 4 1.2 Mound Planning Commission Minutes, September 11, 2000 MISCELLANEOUS: A. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2000. B. DRAFT HRA MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2000. C. DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2000. D. FYI - POLICY ON APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS TO ADVISORY COMMISSIONS. DRAFT E. FYI - HOW FAIR ARE YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS? Mueller stated that he felt all the Commissioners should read this handout. He stated that he is concerned that people are being told what to say or not to say and that this handout states that all evidence needs to be listened to. He further stated that he felt that people should be allowed to speak for more than 3 minutes. Glister added that she felt that cases should be continued when necessary. Michael stated that continuances are difficult because Staff has time limits on when items need to be decided. Chair Michael stated that he did not feel that there had been any disservice to the public as far as the Planning Commission was concerned. Glister suggested that Commissioners should not argue with one another, but rather have everyone state their point and then make a decision. Clapsaddle stated that he felt the discussions were an important part of the decision process. The City Planner stated that this information had been included because the City Manager has been trying to improve how the meetings are mn by all the Boards and Commissions. Chair Michael stated that he felt the City Manager should attend the Planning Commission meetings so that she could see how they are mn. F. FYI - CLUES TO SMALL TOWN SURVIVAL. G. FYI--WHAT EXACTLY DOES ETHICAL LEADERSHIP MEAN. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Clapsaddle to adjourn the meeting. MOTION CARRIED: 8-0. Mound Planning Commission Minutes, September 11, 2000 Chair Michael adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. DRAFT Chair Michael