The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-04-24PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 24, 2001 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in 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. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTES: APRIL 10, 2001 REGULAR MEETING *B. APPROVE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS *C. APPROVE LICENSES AND PERMITS DUE THROUGH APRIL 2001 *D. APPROVE RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR 2001 SEAL COAT PROJECT: PEARSON BROTHERS, INC OF LORETTO, MN *E. APPROVE MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY *F. SET SPECIAL MEETING RETREAT WITH LYNN AND ASSOCIATES: 5/2 *G. APPROVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT TO PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION 1. GENE HOSTETLER 2. RON MOTYKA *H. APPROVE RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSHIP OF STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUNDS PAGE 6603-6605 66O6-6623 6624 6625-6628 6629-6639 6640-6644 6645-6665 6666-6669 *I. PLANNING COMMISSION 1. BRENSHELL HOMES 4646 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE CASE #01-05: MINOR SUBDIVISION STEVE CORL 4225 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD CASE #01-09: VARIANCE 6670-6689 6690-6710 PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 9. 10. 11. *J. APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR DISPOSAL BETWEEN SOUTHERN MINNESOTA COMPOST AND THE CITY OF MOUND COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER.) PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ACTION ON RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO WESTEDGE BOULEVARD AND CERTAIN RETAINING WALLS IN THE CITY OF MOUND 1. RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS 2. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 3. RESOLUTION ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR WESTEDGE BOULEVARD ONLY ACTION ON RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMEND DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 C. ACTION INCREASING FEES FOR LIQUOR LICENSES CONSIDERATION/ACTION ON 2001 BONDING PROJECTS ACTION ON AGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUND & MOUND HRA ACTION ON RESOLUTION AMENDING 2001 FEE SCHEDULE CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATES CONSIDERATION OF MOUND OPEN SPACE AND ADVISORY COMMISSION RESOLUTION REGARDING APPOINTMENTS TO ADVISORY COMMISSIONS INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS mo B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. LMC Friday Fax LMCD communications AMM Bill Tracking Report Index Mound Police Department monthly report: March 2001 Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative communications LMCC communications Financial reports: March 2001 Final report on Woodland Point litigation Letter praising passage of cat ordinance 6711-6712 6713-6745 6746-6773 6774-6778 6779-6782 6783-6786 6787-6799 6800-6801 6802-6803 6804-6807 6808-6819 6820-6846 6847-6848 6849-6853 6854-6857 6858-6860 6861-6896 6897 PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 12. ADJOURN This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. More current meeting may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: www. cityofmound, com. COUNCIL BRIEFING April 24, 2001 //5.A.1. Resolution Ordering Improvement Under Chapter 429, since these proceedings have' been commenced by council action, not abutting property owners, this resolution must be adopted by an affirmative vote of at least 4/5 of all the members of the council, making it critical that all members be present for this meeting. Also, plans were ordered at an earlier meeting, as the council considered road improvements as they related to the Langdon Bay project. The adoption of these resolutions, with the exception of the one ordering advertisement of bids, are simple housekeeping issues. Chapter 429 requires their adoption. #5.C. Increasing Fees for Liquor Licenses A number of liquor related fees are either set or capped by the State. The City of Mound has not met those caps in several instances, making it time to get in step with the State limits and those fees charged by our neighboring cities. Be assured, I know what I am doing here, in the event you hear from businesses or the gossip mill, otherwise. (I am referring to my opposition out there.) If the room contains dissenters who insist this isn't right or that I don't know what I am doing, be confident that I do. The Acting City Clerk has confirmed all the regulations, as I perceived them. See the State rules contained. Thanks! #7. Agreement Between City and HRA Certain work to be done at Indian Knoll, to be performed by City staff and with City equipment, must be spelled out in a formal agreement between the City and the liRA. That is because the two are independent agencies, making it necessary to define the areas of responsibility and liability. #8. 2001 Fee Schedule As promised, we continue to do the research needed to increase fees to levels representative of the times. For the most part, comparables have come from the 1999 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities study, making the proposed fees on the conservative side, but indicative of today's market. Be reminded, the 2001 Budget was based on increase fees and depends on their approval. //9. Planning; Commission Meeting Dates Planning Commission members saw their way to moving their meeting to Monday's of off-city Council meeting weeks, taking some of the pressure off staff and a great deal of pressure off the copy machine. However, doing so does not resolve the balance of the problem. If you recall, Planning Commission public hearings that take place on Monday nights short the publication requirement by one day. Keeping the City legal requires case processing and publications to take place three to four weeks in advance of the public hearing date, thus adding weeks to the time it takes for our customers to receive their approvals from the City. Does the Council wish to deal further with this matter? #11. Resolution Regarding Appointments This resolution has not been distributed to all of the Commissions, as requested. Staff is looking for Council direction as to how to how to respond to the Park and Open Space Commission on this matter. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 10, 2001 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, April 10, 2001, at 7:30 p.m., in the council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Councilmembers Present: Acting Mayor Hanus, Councilmembers Bob Brown, Kim Anderson, Peter Meyer. Councilmembers Absent: Mayor Meisel. Also Present: Acting City Attorney, Daniel Greensweig; City Manager, Kandis Hanson; Acting City Clerk, Bonnie Ritter; Fire Chief, Greg Pederson; City Planner, Bruce Chamberlain; Police Chief, Len Harrell; Bill and Dorothy Netka, Lorrie Ham. *Consent Agenda: Ail items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by a roll ca//vote. There wi//be no separate discussion of these items un/ess a Counci/member or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. Open Meeting and Pled.qe of Allegiance The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Hanus at 7:33 p.m., and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 2. Approve Aqenda MOTION by Brown, seconded by Meyer to approve the agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3. Consent A.qenda Meyer would like to pull item C frOm the consent agenda. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Meyer to approve the consent agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. ~ B. C. D. Approve minutes of MarCh 27, 2001, regular Council meeting. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $160,509.44. Remove ~ RESOLUTION NO, 01-32: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FORM OF THE LEASE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH ZlONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF, -6603- Mound City Council Minutes - April 10, 2001 3c. Cancel Public Hearin.q for Proposed Amendments to Water and Sewer Ordinances. Meyer would like to go through the public hearing process. He believes that it's part of good, open government to hold the hearing. City Manager Hanson explained that the changes don't impact rates as much as area charges for developments that are hooking into the city sewer and water system. Acting City Clerk Ritter informed the Council that she has contacted the League of' Minnesota Cities about the requirement for a hearing, and the response from them and their counsel was that a hearing is not needed for sewer and water rate and hook-up fee changes. MOTION by Meyer to hold the public hearing for sewer and water rate ordinance changes. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Anderson to approve the cancellation of a public hearing for proposed amendments to sewer and water ordinances. Ayes: Hanus, Brown, Anderson. Nayes: Meyer.. Motion carried. Meyer wanted it noted for the record that he is opposed to canceling the hearing because he feels the Council would be bypassing public input. 4. Comments and Su.q,qestions from Citizens Present None were offered. 5. Annual Reports Fire Chief, Greg Pederson, presented his annual report to the Council. 6. Action on Proposed Ordinance Amendments City Manager Hanson apologized to the Council for not having the proposed ordinance amendments included in their packets. Chief Harrell informed the Council that he has received input from other similar cities, from his sergeants and CSO and from Building Official Jon Sutherland regarding possible amendments to the subject ordinances. These ordinances cover nuisances - abatement, exterior storage, etc. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus, to table action on these amendments, with the zoning ordinance amendments being referred to the Planning Commission for their recommendations, and the nuisance ordinance to come before them at a later meeting. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 7. Executive Session: Law Suit by Polston, et al. From 8:07 p.m., to 8:18 p.m., the Council was in executive Session with the HRA. Acting Mayor Hanus reconvened the council meeting at 8:19 p.m., stating that the purpose of said session was to update and receive information from the attorney representing the City. -6604- Mound City Council Minutes -Apd110, 2001 8. Information/Miscellaneous A. LMC Friday Fax B. Westonka Schools communication C. LMCD communication D. Westonka Senior Center newsletter E. AMM Bill Tracking Report F. Article: Grocery wine bill corked G. Maxfax H. FYI: 2000 census data I. Suburban Hennepin Quarterly Newsletter J. FYI: Community Development Director position profile 9. Adiourn MOTION by Brown, seconded by Anderson to adjourn at 8:21 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Acting City Clerk Acting Mayor Hanus -6605- PAGE AP-C02-O1 VENDOR ..... NO.'" I'NVO'~'CE~'MBR AO050 102379 INVOICE DUE HOLD DA'TE DATE "ST~Tg/S 4/24/0i 4/24/01 ....... A'SDO"~5DO"'EIC~ & 'MEYERS'LL-'VENOOR TUTA'L P U'R C H A SE JOURNAL CITY OF MOUND AO150 ALEX -~0'300 '2010546 ~"-AMERICAN'TEST' CENTER A0403 010403 AM'O U:NT -"~DtES£R~I PT I'O'N ....... A C'C'OUNT NUMB E~ 3,000.00 THRU'03-.31-01 AUDIT 71-7100-3130 3,0-00;00 THR'U'O'3~3'I-01 AUDIT 73-730-0-3130 6,000.00 JRN~-CD '01( 6000.;00' AO06~ 3299 7A.55 POLICING DECALS 01-41,~0-'5000 4'/2~/01 4/24/01 7~,55 .... ~RNL~CD ~Ol( ADVANCED GRAPHIX INC VENDOR TOTAL 74.55 1784 1,007.18 COMPRESSOR SER¥I(E 22-4170-3820 4/24/01 4/24/01 1,007.1,8 JRNL-C'D 101( AIR APPARATUS, INC. VENDOR TOTAL 1007.18 ................ ~:5';00 "IN'$PECTION BUCKET TRUCK ...... 01~'2-80-~200- 4/24/01 4/24/0'1 435.00 JRNL~CD 101 VENDOR TO'TA'L 435;0'0 -'B-A~B'L'E'R''$ MUFFL'ER' S'~O'P ~EN~OR TOTAL B0549 21083300 ~372'6800 BELLBOY CORPORATION VENDOR TOTAL 78.00 EMBROIDER LOGO 01-4280-2240 ..... 42';'09 EMBRO"IDE~-EOGO .................. 73~73'00-"22~0 4~.00 EMBROIDER LOGO 78-7800-2240 4/24/01 412~/:01 162.00 JRNL~CD 101; ASPEN EMBROIDERY & DESIGN VENDOR TOTAL 162.00 7'O,40''GENE,R~TO':R'":TRA~E'R 70~4'0 JRNL~CD 78'~'7800~ 2300- 101 70;'~0 631.05 LIQUOR ~3-~;.9.5::-.,J:RNL-~CD ........ 71-7100-9510 ...... t'0'1 31.52 ~SALT AND CUPS 71-7100 .... 3I;"5~' 2RNL~-CD ............ 662.57 B0580 201164 ~?,22 THF i5 GALLONS . :'0!..4280"2250 37.2~ TNF 15 GA:LLON$ :7~:~7~00~2250 S7,23 TH F'" %5 GALLONS 78;7800;-2~50 4/24/01 4/24/01 111.67 JRNL-CD lO1 CLARK ~ OIE '~OMPAN'Y ' VEND:OR-TOTAL l'lI ;~7 : "'~'¥ .... T/~''' ~ : ' · 31 ;66 0~-.01' 'G A~'R BX"GE' pI'CKOP 7'3;'7300=37 50 3~.67 03-01 GARBAGE PICKUP 78-7800-3750 4/24/01 4/24/01 94.99 JRNL-CD 101 1008~87 67,;0~ ~ 2~4170-3750 -6606- VENDOR INVOICE lO 0 8~ 0 ~ 0 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L CITY OF MOUND DUE HOLD DATE STAT'US AMOUNT-: !D'~${R'~;P %"I O~ = AE'¢ OUNT 78,90 03~01 :'GARBAGE PICKUP 7'8-;'9'0 JR'NL~C'D 10084165 17.76 03-01 GARBAGE PICKUP 71-7100-3750 BLACKOWIAK A,ND SON VENDOR TOTAL 258,66 B0747 PO7MNO27Z301 630.00 CJDN CONNECTING CHARGE, ETC. 4/24/0Z 4/24/01 630.00 JRNL-CD BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APP~EHE VENDOR TOTAL 6~30.00 4/24/0~ 4/24/0Z 220.~0 JRNL-CD CA~N:ER'S~ CON~S%:RD CT I ON P UBLI ' ~ EN DOR TOT AL 2'2 O; ~ : C08i~: 0~0~24 56.83 LATE F~EE 01-4090-~100 320,i3 MCM'A/M~C A CONFERENCE 0[~4040~'~I~0 i38.43 COMPUTER 01-4090-4175 170.38 COMPUTER 01-4095-4175 ~ 21~'95 ~NTE:RNET SERVICE 0~0~0~4~0 !9,95 INTERNET SERVICE ~i ;'95 I N:T:ERN E~ SERVICE 21.95 INTERNET SERVICE 0!-4090-4130 21.95 INTERNET SERVICE 01-4190-4130 CAPITAL ONE VENDOR TOTAL I444.84 co~ 0~,~0 ~6~.~, 0~-0~ 9~-,~-~09~ ~HO, E SERV~ ~-~00-~ 010410 183.29 04-01, 952-472-3555 PHONE SERV 22-4~70-3220 ~L 'O~O~lO , 17;:9~ '04~'05 ~:52-472'0646 PHONE SERVI 01-4340-3220 ~jl CITIZENS COMMUNICIATION5 VENDOR TOTAL 405.74 -6607- AP-C02-O1 VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD .... NOi INVOICE NMBR DATE DATE STATUS' 61395083 4/24/0I 4/24/01 COCA COLA BOTTLING-MIDWEST VENDOR TOTAL C1020 010501 4/24/01 4/24/01 CONCO, INCORPORATED VENDOR TOTAL CliO4 010405 4/24/01 4/24/01 CHADWICK AND MERTZ, P.A VENDOR TOTAL 01172 3~4'055 4/24/01 4/24/01 O-ANK'O EMERGENCY 'E~UIPMENT VENDOR TOTAL D1200 131084 130186 4124/01 4/2~/01'' 4/24/01 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY CITY OF MOUND AMO-DNT DESCRIPTION 139.80 MIX I39'~B0 JRNL~CD 231.48 453.23 05-01 PRINCIPLE TRUE VALUE 508.61 05~'0i INTEREST TRUE VALUE 961.84 JRNL-CD 961.84 3,368.40 03-01 PROFESSIONA'L SERVICES 3,368.40 JRNL-CD 3368.40 9'3;69 A~R P'AK~ AND'DIAPHRAM 93.6'9 JRNL-CD 93 1,456.75 BEER ~,'4'56,75 JRN'L~CD 4124101 VENDOR TOTAL 1969.20 D~2.50 G24437600002 4/24/0t 4/24/01 DEPT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS VENDOR TOTAL ,' D'1280"~0~028~67 4124101 4124101 '-DI'A~OND-WOGEL PAINTS ~ENDOR TOTA'L D1300 033717 ......... 4'/24/Ol- ~ E1420 770911 ..... 4/24/0Z 4124101 512.45 BEER 512.45 JRNL~'CD 22.0.00 03'-08'01 GOV EMER6 CONFERENCE 220.00 JRNL~CD 220.00 537;'72" -PAINT 5~7.72 JRNL-CD 53'7;7~ ...... 5.8i NAME PLATE 5;81 ~RNL'~D DIXCO ENGRAVING VENDOR TOTAL 5.81 378.00 BEER A75638 AccOUNT NU'HBE[ 7Z_7~00-9540 -- ' 101( 55-5881 0 55~5881-~ £0 101 01-4110-3120 101 22~4170 ~'38'2 O' 101 71.7100-9530 -101 73._7100-9530 01-,4t40-4110 103 ,0t~ z, 2 80 ~':'236'0 102 O1.AOZO-~JO0 i0 71-7100-9530 10 4124/01 '4/24/01 ~7B.,00 JRNL-C.D 7,1- 7100'-9530 10 71-7100'9530 76.'00 BEER 10 76.00 'JRNL~CD . , -6608- 0 ' PAGE 4 P'U R C~H A S E J 0 0 R N .A ,L AP-COZ-01 CITY OF MOUND · VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD 0"]:= 412~.~0~ 412410~ 8~6~00 JR~L~CD ~01( 9UIPMENT SUPPLY INC VENDOR TOTAL 876.00 ~- 4/24/01 4/2,~01 , E~Z 'R~EC'Y'C'EI"N'G-'IN'C VENDOR'-TOTA[ F1635 105 4/24/01 4/2'4/01 -'7'752'5~0~-~' D3'a:0~-' ['U RBS IDE'~R'[CY EEaNG ...................... 7 0 a-42'T0 a~0 U 7,525;00 : jRNL-CD 1011 75~Z5 20~0 900.00 FIT TEST CITY FIRE ~IGHTERS 22-4170-4100 900.'00 JRNL~CD loll FIT TEST INC G1750 601036 VENDOR TOTAL 900.00 4/24/01 30.28 04-03-01 UNIFORMS 01-4280-2240 30.28 04-03-01 UNIFORMS 73-7300-2240 ~0.2'8 04-03~01 'UNIFORMS 78-7500~22'40 16'03 04-03~01 MATS 01-4280-2250 t6.03 04-03-01 MATS 73-7300-2250 I6.'04 04-03-0~ MA~S 78-7800-2250 4/24/01 138.94 JRNL-CO 10! 588527 43.'16 -O'3~20aOi'MATS 22-4170a~230 4/24/01 4/24/01 43.16 JRNL-CD 101 588526 42.'69 03~'20~0~ MATS '01-4340~'2330 4/24/01 4/24/01 42.69 JRNL-CD 101 607291 1'09.51 O'~IO~OI 'M'AT5 01-4320--~210 4/24/01 4/24/01 109.51 ~RNL-C.D lO1 613'5'05 ' 32.15 04~I7~Oi'M-A'TS 4/24/01 4/24/01 32.15 JRNL-CD -71~7100~%210 101 607290 ....... 25'~,84 '-:04-,i~-O~"DNIF'ORMS 25~8~ 04-10-O1 UNIFORMS 25.84 04-10-01 UNIFORMS %~;I~ 04~-I0~'0'1 MATS 14.14 04-10-01 MATS 14.15 04-10-01 MATS 4/24/01 "4/24/0] 119.95 ~JRNL~£D' 01~4280='22~ 0 73'7300-2240 78-7800-2240 0%~-~'280-'22~50 73-7300-2250 78-7800-2250 1'01 601038 41.50 04-03'01 MATS 22-4170-2230 412410'1 4124101 41.50 JRNL~CD .... 101 601037 41.84 04-03-01 MATS 01-4340-2330 4/24~01 4/24Z0% ~1.84' ~RNL'CD 101 G g K SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL 569.74 G176i 9574 1,416.60 THRU 02-17-01 WELL ANALYSIS 55-5883-3100 4/24/01 4/24/01 1,416.60 JRNL-CD lOl 9626 2,198.00 WESTEDGE IMPROVEMENT BOND 01-4110-3100 4/24/01 4/24/01 2,198.00 JRNL-CD lO1 -6609- AP-C02'"O1 CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD ..... NO ;-"~"IN VOi~'~C E - 'NM Btq DATE ..... DA'T"E ~' '~ T-AT U'S 'A'M 0~NT DES-CH I P-r I D'N ~.CCO'UNT N-DMB'E ~ GME 'CONSULTANTS INC VENDOR TOTAL 36~.60 G1833 82~ 170.00 TEST FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 0~-4320-3800 4/24/0i 4/24/01 [70.00 JRNL-CD GENERAL SPRINKLER EORPORA~ VENDOR TOTAL ~70.0:0 G'I890'0-['0~33[ 7D';'60" '02~0~ AND '03;-01 VATER 22-4~70-220'0 4/24/0[ 4/24t01 70.60 JRNL-CD G~EN:~O~""'ING'~E~O'OD ........... VEND'OR TOTAL '~ ' TOL6-O G1905 ............. ~.O~SZO 29.60 03=O~.LOCATES 7'3-7300-3~5 2'9 .' 60 0~3 ';'0' ~ "LOCATES .... 78-7 800-3i25- 4/24/01 4/24/01 59.20 JRNL-CD lOl( ~'--"~'E~'-~S'T~T'E-"0~N'E-C'~'LL~' I'NC VEN'D~R TOTAL 59'~0 ........... G~97~ ~6D127 96~.~2 WINE ~1~7100.9520 360831 404.64 WINE 7i-7~00-9520 101( 3:&~191 ~02~68 WINE 71-7100-9520 ................................ ~-/~'~7'0 I' 4 / 24/0'1 '~'02 ~ 6'8 JRNE~C D 364055 438.56 LI ~UOR 7Z-7100-9510 i01~ ~G~G~$ CO',O~ER ~ :COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL 2.2:07,~0 G[990 0~04~[ 6.46 RE[HBURSE PHOTO DEVELOPZNG ~2-4170-4[00 4/24/0[ 4/24/0~ 6.46 JRNL-CD [0~ GU'$~A'FSON~ BRUCE 'VEN~D:O;~ TO'TAL 6..46 ' ;;~H~0--2'2'0'7 ~017';I'8'' B'ROOH ~OR-SWEEPER~-ETC. 4/~4/0[ 4/~/0[ 4,017.[8 JRNL-CD H2061 DM54508 25.00 5 EONT. CHARGE 73-7300-2260 ' DH558~5 ' ' ·: '~5;'~0:0 5 C;~:N,T, CHARGE 73-7300-2260 HAWKINS, INCORPORATED VENDOR TOTAL 50.00 =.: '::~ .' .: .. ' -6610- VENDOR INVOICE DUE,HOLD 3-~28 23.75 'TUBE, ETC. 0i1'~320-2310 4/24/01 4/24/0~ 2~.75 'JRNL;CD 10] 30429 386.64 BROOM FOR SKIDSTER 01-4280-2310 4/2~/01 4/24/01 '386.6~ JRNE-CD ......... 10] ~0431 ·69.85 NE~ BROOM 01-4280-2310 4z24/0~ 4/24/'Ol 69.85 'JRNL~CD lOJ 30439 4/24/01 4/24/01 280.20 NEW BROOM ~8'0,'2~ ' JRNL-CD 01-4280-2310 30536 39.23 NEW SWEEPER 01-4280-2310 · 4/24/01 4/2~/01 39.23 JRNL-CD 10~ 30554 188.62 NEW BROOM 01-4280-2310 '' 4'/2~/01 '4/24/01 I8.8.62-2RNL~CD ....... 10~ HECKSEL MACHINE SHOP H2090 50211 HEFNER~ AL H2135 21037228 VENDOR TOTAL 1090.79 10.33 REPAIR LOCK SOUTH ENTRANCE 01-4280-2330 10.33 REPAIR LOCK SOUTH ENTRANCE 73-7300-2330 ~'.34" 'RE'P'A'I'R LOCK SOUtH"ENTRANCE '7~7800~330 4/24/01 4/24/01 ~1.00 JRNL-CD 10: VENDOR 'TOTAL 3I;~00 31.34 03-01 NETWORK SERVICES ' 31.~ JR~Nb~CD HENN£P{N CTY. INFO TECH VENDOR TOTAL 31.34 ~ ~ H2139 010402 26.47 REPAIR KING MI~ 4/24/01 4/24/01 26.47 JRNL-CD HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF VENDOR ~TOTAL 26.4T 01-4095-3800 01-4140-3950 010~09 4/2~/01 4/24101 58.75 -MA'I'"LTN6 LABELS"INFO MEETING 58.75 JRNL-CD 55;5877'3 10. --'H'EI~NE"P'I'N -'COUNTY-TREASURER ~VENDOR TOTAL H2221 0IP6213060 HERCUL IFT H2295 41225 ~'/2/-+/01 4124101 VENDOR TOTAL 4/24101 4/24/0~ ~. :.. HYDRAULIC SPECIALTY COMPAN VENDOR TOTAL ~ 4/24/0~ 4124/01 -]NTErR~TL ASSN FIRE CHIEF'S VENDOR TOTAL 58.'75 12.77 FITTING 01-4280-2310 12~77 JRNL~CD 10 12.77 447.02 MOTOR 01-4280-2310 4~7o02 JRNL-CD 10 447.02 '170,00 '20'O~-MrE'MB'E'RSH~P'DUE-S 22~-~170":~I30 170.00 JRNL-CD 10 170;00 -6611 - .AP-C02-O1 VENDOR .... -'NO'~ "I-NV O'I-CE' IqMBR INVOICE DUE HOLD D'A 3' E DA T E "S-TATUS ..... 'AMOUNT' 708 8 I S'LAND PARK S'KE'LL¥ J2480 03,0403 CITY OF MOUND DESCRIPTTON ..... ':ACC'OUNT-NUMBET 207,66 03~16~'01'PS RETURN LINE 01'4190-3110 4/24/01 4/24/01 207.66 JRNL-CD 01I 6~;'86 ''RE:P:LA'~E"~'::gO~NT~$ 73-73'0'0-~z0"' 4/24/01 4/24/01 6B.86 JRNL-CD 101( 27;'99 OI'['"C'HANGE 0i~4190._.3110 4/24/01 4/24/01 27.99 JRNL-CD lOl{ VE'ND.ORT'OT"AL - 3~04';53. 111,53 CLOTHING.AL:LOWA~CE 7,00 PA~'K'ING 25.95 PUBLICATION 4/24/01 4/24/01 144.48 JRNL-CD JAMES FACKLER VENDOR TOTAL ~4.4~48 0:1~43~-2240 01-4340-4~30 101{ ' J'2579 1'23'93'56 940',00 LI~UO'R 71~7100_9510 4/24/01 4/24/01 940.00 JRNL-CD 101~ 1239]-57' 3~2~'6';?0 'WINE ....................... 71-?1'00-9520' .~: ~/2~t01 4/24101 ~,205.~0 JRNL-CD 101~ ..~ 124239'2 BSB;'72"LI'~g'O~ 71'7'~00-9'510 4/24/01 4/24/01 868.72 JRNL-CD 10t{ ........... 12423'93' '5:~8j90' ~'T'NE .... 71~7100_95,20- 4/2~/01 4/2~/01 5~.B.90 JR'NL~CD 16-9";"70 ~INE 7i~7100;.95~0 4/24/01 4/24/01 169.70 JRNL-CD 101( ............. I2~25'9'4 ;~"-JOHNSON BROTHERS'-LI'~UO-R i ....... YENDOR TOTAL ..... J2582 010510 4/24/01 4/24/0t !!:'JOHNSON~'~HY'~LI$ VENDOR T'OTA-~ J2610 '010328 JUBILEE FOODS VENDOR TOTAL K2699 36989~B ~ 4/24/03. 4/2~/01 2.38.71 05-01 PRINCIPLE TRUE VALU.E '~-30;~'0' '05'~-'O-i-INTE'RESTTR'UE'VALOE 669.11 JRNL-CD 55~5881- J 55-588%-ozlO 101( 49.~2 COUNCIL COOKIES 01-4020-43.20 69.3~ JRNL'-CD 1'03. ( 49.32 ~.,08i5.'08 02-03. REDEVELOPMENT AREA #1 55'5880-33-00 1,086.08 JRNL-CD 101( KENNEDY & GRAVEN VENDOR TOTAL 10B6.08 - 412-4/03, 4/24/01 20 O0 ....~ . ., JRNL~CD 3-03.( -6612- Ap~:C02-.O1 : ' CITY O.F MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD NO,'i-=~-Nt/'O~ICE~ NMBR 'DAI'E DA-TE ~ST'ATUS :AMOUNt'-D~SCRI?TION ~ ACCOUNT' ~NUMBE~ L'2B22 ~'~9'6-579 37; 57' EAR-PEuGs ~.s~ E~R ~LU6S 37.57 EAR PLVGS 78-7800-2250 1~99787 87,52 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPL :-- ...... 87 ;'5~ M'I SCEL L ANEOUS ' S UPPE~E S 87.5~ MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 78-7800-2250 &/24/01 4/24/01 262.55 JRNL-CD %01~ ~498880 6~,29 PENETRATING OIL 0~-~280-2250 62.20 PENE:TRATING OIL 6'2;20 PEN~TR~ATI'NG-O'I[ 7B"7800~225-0 ' 4/24/0i 4/24/01 ~86.60 JRNL-CD 101~ ~ [ VENDOR T'OT~'L 561~86 ~ L2851 ~-275~00 02-01-01 THRU 02-01~02 LIQUOR ~1~7100'3610 ~Z2~/O'I ~/24Z0I ~275; 0'0 JRNL'~'C:D 1'0i; 010409 1,000.,00 SEWER CLAIM DAHL~UIST, JUNE ~B'TBO0~3610 6326 2,95B.34 02-01-01 TO 02-01-02 1ST ~TR 01-4020-3610 114.66 02-01-01 TO 02-01-02 1ST ~TR 01-4150-3610 1,183.33 02-01-01 TO 02-01-02 1ST ~TR 01-4190-3610 8,852.08 02-01-01 TO 02-01-02 1ST ~TR 71-7100 3610 6,467.06 02-01-01 TO 02-01-02 1ST ~TR 73-7300-3610 ~ 0~0424 59.9~ 02-0~-0~ THRU 02-0~-02 2ND ~TR 0~-4020-3600 I.%~ 48.3~ 02-0~-0~ THRU 02-0~-02 2ND ~TR 0~-4040-3600 2~ · :02:~0i~0~ THRU 02~01-02 2ND;eTR 0i,41~0-3600 T ~35.28 02-0~-0~ THRU 02-0~-02 2ND ~TR ~ 3~700.87 02-0~0~ THRU 02-0~-02 2ND ~TR ~ ; ' '~ND ~;TR 73,73:00~.3600 -6613- PAGE 9 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R AP-C02-O.1. CITY OF MOUND N A L VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD ...... NO;' INVOICE'NM'BR" DKTE DATE S'TA'TiD S AMO:UNT DESCRIPTION - 4/24101 4/24/01 B,963.25 JRNL-CD ' LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS T* VENDOR TOTAL 68177.75 -:L"~92'6"0'2'0692 :53;'04 -'F~ETER ELEMENT, ETC. 4/24/01 ~/24/01 53,04 JRNL-CD ;..'LONG'LAKE-POWER EQUIPMENT VEN"DOR TUTAL 53.'0'~ L2930 5-314277 5.96 LUBE FILTER 5-314396A 1.5 · 22 COH~R~:SSOR .... ~'1Z4101 ~1~1'0~ ~5;'Z~- ~R'N'L~CD' 5-3~4396-B 15.21 COMPRESSOR 5-3~4402 5.53 BRAKE LINES =' .... 41~4101 '4'12410~ 5;53 JRNL~CD ~ 5-313378 63.37 FLOOR DRY 5-31~394 11~.00 ~5~CCA 4/24/01 4'~4/01 1I~;0'0 ~RN'L~CD LOWELL'5 AUTOMOTIVE/ZIT¢O~ VENDOR TOTAL 221.29 .,' M30~O ~010401 ~5~ 03~0t PROFESSZONAL SERVICE5 ,~ 4/~4101 4/~24/0~ 251~'00 ~.R'NL'~:CD ASSOCIA~ VENDOR TOTAL 4/2~/~1 4/2~/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 ACCOUNT NUMBE~ 101~ 01-4280-_ 101( MADDEN. FRANK AND 251.00 ~L~ 01-4280-2310 ..... 73-73.00-2250 78-7800-2250 1~i~ 01-4280-2310 ..... 10-i( 22-4170-2200 1'0I~ 22-~170-2200 101' 01"4110-3100 1~1t 270~g;95 .... BEER ...... ?i~7100~-9.5~0 2,04~,-95 JRN.L-CD %011 9'0B';"40 BE~R 908.40 JRNL-CD ........... 71'~7100'' 0 101' K='?V-!-?' ':D'['$-T"R I:BUT OR ..... : ' V END 0 R "T OT A L 2'9:4;9; 35 : :M~080:35:0=~4 290'~0:03-0~ 200~ SEAL COAT P~OJECT 0['4280,3~00 36035 195.30 03-0~ P~LICAN POINT ~NGZNEERIN 0~-2300-~02~ 36036 907,50 03.01 WESTEDGE RD ENGINEERING 30-~280-3t00 ~60 ~7 180.00 03-01 ~ESTEDGE EXTENSION 30-4280-3100 45,09 - 03;0~ PRECINCT ~:MAPS -6614- AP-C02-01 VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD NO;'IN'VOI'CE NMBR ~'DATE DATE STATUS P U R £ )4 '~ S E J 0 U R N k L CITY O'F MOUND AMOUNT DESCRIP-[ I ON ACCOUNT: NUMBEF 36039 ' 4/24/01 4/24/01 4'5.00 03~01 P/I MISC ENGINEERING 01'4190-3100 45.00 JRNL-CD 10%( 360 ~+0 4/24101 4/24/01 360 ~1 4/24/01 4/24101 90,0;0 03~01 P/Z MISC ENGINEERING 01'4i90"~3100 90.00 JRNL'CD 101:( 'i,743.00 03;01' STREETS MISC ENGINEER lNG 1,743.00 JRNL-CD 01-4280~3100 101( 36042'A 67.50 4/24/01 4/24/01 67,50 360~2'B 67,50 4/24/01 4/24/01 67.50 36043 462,:0'0 4/24/01 4/24/01 462,00 36044 909~50' 4/24/01 4/24/01 909.50 03'01 WATER MISC ENG'INEER'I:NG 73~7300~3100 JRNL-CD 101( 03--0i SEWER MISC ENGINEERING JRNL-CD 03,0i PARKS' MISC ENGINEERIN!G - JRNL'"CD 03~01 STORM WATER UTILITY EN'GI JRNL-CD 78'7800'3100 101( 01~4340'3~00 101 75'7500-3100 101 3:6045 155.40' 03-01 LOST LAKE REHABILITATION 55'5882~3100 4/24/01 4/24/01 155.40 JRNL-CD 101( 3~0~6 45,00 0'3~'0~1 MCES 'PROGRAM ENGIN'EERING 78;7800'3100 4/24/01 4/24/01 45.00 JRNL-CD 101( $604? .... 45:;00 :"03;:01 ~:546 D:ENBIGH MORIARITY 01-2300'1121 4/:24/01 4/24/~01 45,00JRNL'CD 101( 36'0~'8 88',00 03~01 B'ECKER PROPERTY ENGINEER 01'2300~1098 4/24/01 4/24/01 88.00 JRNL-CD ~ 101( 36049 ...... ~2~:;:00 ::;0'3~0E ;METRO P:LAINS'EN:GIN:EERING '- 01'2300;I096 4/24/01 4/24/01 427~00 jRNL~CD .101'( 360'50 I~'39'5;0'0 :'03~O~'CTY' RD'IS REALIGNMENT 55~5~877'3100' 4/24/01 4/2~/01 1,395.00 JRNL-CD 101( 560-5~ 90'~:00 TIP Di:S~TRI CT 55 ~5'880'~ 3'~00 4/24/01 4/24/01 90.00 JRNL-CD ~36052 180,00 03~'01 COAST TO-C'O~ST DISTRICT 4/24/01 4/24/01 180.00 JRNL-CD 3605) 370;'20 :03~01 03'01L:ANGDO:N BAY' P:R:0PER 0I~:2300~i095 4/24/01 4/24/01 370.20 JRNL-CD 101( 3605& i3'5;00 '03~-0~ EANGD'ON WOOD ENGINEERING 01~2300~i109 4/24/01 4/24/01 135.00 JRNL-CD 101~ 3~0'55 4'5';00 0I~2300~1117 4/24/01 4/24/01 45.00 JRNL~CD_ 101! 36056 285,30 0'3-~'0~ CODDON-CASES 0I~2300~1116 -6615- PAGE 11 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD :NO ;"':'t~'VO-ICE: 'RM'BR--:'"D-ATE, 'DATE'- :'STATUS TA~M OUST' ~"g'ES~R'I FT'ION : : :~CCO'UNT' 36057 45.00 03-OZ LIF'T STATION ENGINEERING 55-5883- 4/24/01 4/24/01 45.00 JRNL-CD 360 :SS ~ ~ 5, g'g g ] -O ~ W ES T E D G E E XTEN S I 0 N ~ 0 ~ 428 O ~ 36059 420.30 03-01 PALM~UIST ENGINEERING 01-2300-1119 4/24/01 4/24/01 420.30 JRNL-CD ~ ...... ,:' ~ .......... ...... 180;00 :0'~0~ EXCEL ENGER'GY MISC ENGIN 55'~B80.~00 ~36~60 ~i2~101 4i2~/0~ i~0.00 JRNL~CD . ~i~ 36061 ~, 4/24/01 4/24/0i 36063 375.30 03-01 ISLANDVIEW ENGINEERING 01-2300-1120 375.30 JRNL-CD lOli &,:208,:50 03.~0~ :SKATE pA~ ENGINEERING 55'5:880-3:~,00 ,208.50 JRNL-CD lOi! 540.00 03-01 RETA]N[NG WALL REPLACE 01-4280-3].00 4/24/01 4/24/01 540.00 JRNL-CD :7: ....... T:" ~': : : : ~6064 0.]"0~ DO[K MAP SURVEY E~N'GINEER 81-4350-31:00 '~ ~' '472,4/0~ 4~24/01 :90~00: jRNL;CD MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCI~ VENDOR TOTAL 11257.70 : ":::' ::2~;2::?0!0:;~[60-: ": 05:'~1) ~ ~ :WA'STE:WA T ER ........ : 7B:~'78:0 :'::: ]ioi, M3171 010310 M3206 16884MB M3328 010411 MN FIRE 390.il WINTER MIX 73-7300-2340 ....... ~ : , : : "': :: i:o 170.00 REGISTRATION PEDERSON, GREG 22-4170-4110 4/24/0i 4/24/01 170.00 JRNL-CD lOl~ SERV CERTIFICATN · VENDOR TOTAL 200.00 -6616- i !- M3~'90 0103'3I -:PA.GE 12 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L 'AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD ~-----'NO";"' I'N~7OICE~'NMBR DATE ~ DATE"' S'TATgS .... AMOt~NT"-DESCRI'P-TTON ......... AC:COUNT NDRBE~ . ' 5,14~8~75 '03'01 SAIZKRIE'S 22-4170~139-0 670.00 03-01 DRILLS 22-43.70-1380 3.,250.00 03-01 MAINTENANCE 22-4170-1380 4/2410~. 4/24/01 7 ~'0 (58-~ 7'5 JRN'L-CD '1'01~ MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT VENDO~ TOTAL 7068.75 P3957 1641300 13.51 SWIVEL 13.51 SWIVEL I3~51: 'S~IVE[ 4/24/01 4/24/01 40.53 JRNL-CD 01-4280-2250 73-7300-2250 78~'7800~225~' 101~ ~6430'11 4/2410~ 4124101 I23.33' F~UT'ERS,-ETC. ~-4280-~2250 123.33 FILTERS, ETC. 73-7300-2250 ~23.32 FILTERS, ETC. ?8-7800-2250 359;98 JRNL~CD .... 10~, PAM COMPANIES VENDOR TOTAL 410.51 P4000 65578747 3.18.88 MIX 71-7100-9540 4/24/01 4/24/01 118.88 JRNL-CD 101. PEPSI-COLA COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL 118~B8 - P'40'21"8070'0'2 863'~'5'5 WINE 71-7100-9520 4/24/01 4/24/01 863.55 JRNL-CD 101 4/24/01 4124101 625.25 JRNL-CD 71-'7100~-9510 ' 1'01 7'1'0367 4/24/01 4/24/01 663;30 .... WIN~ .... 71'7100;9520 66B.50 JRNL-CD 101 710368 ............. 98~0 MIX 4/24/01 4/24/01 98.00 JRNL-CD 7t;'7~0'0';'954~' 101 P4038 41087 SPIRITS, '~'VENDOR TOTA-L ~/24~.01" 47~4'/'01 2255.30 808.8B CIGARETTES 71-7100-9550 -808;88 -JRNL~CD ~01 414~3 623.t7 CIGARETTES 71-7100-9550 4/~4/01 4~2~/0I 623.'17 JRNL~CD 101 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING VENDOR TOTAL 1432.05 P4105 02518691-002 47.20 02-26-01 MAINTENANCE CLASStFIE 01-4340-3510 4/24/01 4/24/01 47.20 JRNL-CD 101 02518691-003 47.20 03-05-01 MAINTENANCE CLASSIFIE 01-4340-3510 4/24/01 4/24/01 47.20 JRNL-CD IO1 PRESS AND NEWS PUBLICATION VENDOR TOTAL 94.40 ~4'17I- 94-6~0'1~00 817.'52 'LI'~UOR 71-7100~9510 -6617- PAGE 13 AP-C02-O1 ' VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD -'NO'J--INUOICE'NMBR DATE DATE' STATUS 4/24/0i 4/2.4/D1 947903=00 4/24/01 4/24/01 947~56~00 948121-00 94§635-00 4/24/01 4124/0'1 4124101 4124101 41241.01 PURCHASE' JOURNAL CITY OF MOUND AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 817.52 JRNL-CD ].,412.98 WINE 1,412.98 JRNL-CD 2,315.22 LIQUOR 2,315,-22 ~RNL~Cg ~,170.23 LIQUOR 1,170.23 JRNL-CD 74~50 LIQUOR ?4.50 J'RNL-CD 950429-00 210.35 MIX 4/24/0]. 4/24/01 210.35 JRNL-CD 950503'~00 2,437.?3 LIQUOR 4/24/01 4/24~0~ 2,437~73 JRNL-CD 950686-00 219.63 WINE 4/24/01 4/24/0~ 219.63 JRNL-CD QUALITY.WI. NE & S~IRITS VENDOR TOTAL 8858.16 ,,~,~'R~68I"R030I~6~ 22.'~5 0'3-3i-0i AIR AND OXYGEN 22~-4~70-2'200 ~,,,,, 4/24/01 4/24~0i 22.45 JRNL-CD lOi( '"REYNOLDS-'WELDING' SU~PEY' CO '~ENDOR "TOT:AL ....... R~99 OlO~12 561.73 ~IRE COPIER 0t~4)20-3820 .~.,' ~'7'24V'0'I' ~72 ~7~0~ ....... 5'5I%7'3 JRNE~CD '' %OlC ~' R.C. ELECTRIC, INC. VENDOR TOTAL 561.73 7~:9.~0 0~5~0~ :THRU ~03-~5-0i, CUMBER 0~'~3~0- 1,156.26 02-~5-01 THRU 03-~5-01, FIRE S 2~-4170-3720 i,247.98 02-15-0i THRU 03-1.5-01, HAYWO0 01-4320-3720 .... ' .............. ~/2'/i/01~ ~ RELIANT ENERGY VENDOR TOTAL ~},; R4241 010310 4/24/01 4/24/01 ~CCO-UNT'-N UMB:E lOll 71.7100_~ 71-7100-9510 101~ 71-7100-9510 71-7100-9510 101( 71-7100-9540 101( 71-7100-9510 101( 71-7100-9520 101( 559,41 02"1'~.01 T:MRU.03-1:5~'O~, WATER 73-7300-'37'2.0 559.'41 ~2-1§-~1 ~T'HRU 03'15~01~ SEWER 7B~TBO0-'372.0 ~T7'0';"62 .......... TOI( 55?0.62 1.255.00 HEALTH ASSESSMENTS 22.4Z?0~3Z40 1,25:5.00 JRNL-CD 101( ~j RIDGEVIEW BUSINESS HEALTH VENDOR TOTAL 1255.00 ~ &/2~/O1 4/24/01 90.2'0 JR. NL-CD '7l'7100'~9-550 101( .... R 0 N'" S -t'CE"COMP A'NY ......................... V EN DOR' TOT'A L -6618- I P~GE P U R C H A $ E J 0 U R N A L APSE02'-01 CITY OF MOUND. vE%oR INvoicEDUE HOLD --T:'NO;':~-'~NVO]'~E ~NMBiR DATE' DATE 'STRATUS ;:AMOUNT" I)E'S-CRIPT ION '" ACCOUNT-: NUMBEI 4/24/01 4/24/01 163.00 JRNL-CD 1011 !D V EN DO R 'T'OT.~E ......... ~63'~ : S4~85 ~104J. 2 8D~O0 REGISTRAITON PLANNING CONFEREN 0~.-4190-/+~.10 SHOREWOOD, CITY OF VENDOR TOTAL 80.00 S4390 0~0424 2,638~49 0.$~0~L LIQUOR RENTAL SPACE .! ] .............. 4/24/0]. 4/24/01 '2,638.49 jRNL~ED .~.~ SHORELINE PLAZA VENDOR TOTAL 2638.49 ~ 71,'025~06 T'REMOVET"TRI:M~"?REES CAMBR~Di~E - 4/24/01 4/24J01 1,025~00 JRNL-CD ~-~i ........... 3-29-5 ~65.9 REMoVE'TREE 01~4320~5'300 4/24/01 4/24/01 465.94 JRNL-CD 101~ ~ 5:~0':~612742 253,~6 INITIAL C~LL REPOR' $ 01-4140-2120 i;~ SOS PRINTING VENDOR TOTAL 253.26 =, :8,~gO~o~ j~NL'CD lO1 -.~t SOUTHWEST METRO DRUG TASK# VENDOR TOTAL 8400.00 S4508 NB665358 10.00 CERTIFICATION AIR TANK 22-4170-4100 54635 035120/03512 S UR.¥ [:V ~Li N~ 292.05 BATTERY 01-4140-2270 4/24/01 4/24/01 292.05 JRNL-CD 10~ 54~5600~3~00 4/24/0~ 4/24/01 164.26 JRNL-CD -6619- PAGE 15 AP'C02-O1 PURCHASE JOURNAL CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD ..... NO.-'INVOI'CE'~NMBR DA'TE DA'TE B'TATbS AMOUNT 'DES'CRIP'TION ........... A~C~COUNT NUMBEF T~770 I91575 ....... 2'22908 2229'09 2235?8 4/24/01 4/24/01 4124101 4124/01 270;'00 BEER 270.00 JRNL-CD 3;013;'~!5 ...... BEER 3,,013.45 JRNL-CD 7]J;7100'953 O- ' ' 01( 7t~7100-. ~0 101( 513J8'0 "BEER 71_7100~9530 4/24/01 4/24/01 513.80 JRNL-CD 101( 223 579" 4/24/01 4/24/01 .. T-HORPE"':DISTRIBUTI'NG COMPAN 'VENDOR'TOTAL 07! T4831 382766 4/24/01 4/24/01 ............ ~5--;"]JO 'M I,S ~ELiE'A NE:OU S -' 4/24/01 4./24/01 25.10 .JRN:L-CD TOLL GAS B WELDING SUPPLY VENDOR TOTAL T4945 010331 3;'~0'~-.90 BEER 3,404.90 JRNL-CD 72'27V25 ......... 71'7100-9550 10 71-7100-95'30 101( 39.98 NOZZLE'S, ~ETC. 39.98 "JRN'L~CD 39.98 156.94 O3'Di-O1 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS ~.46 0~'01-01 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 3'5 ;'76 03~01-01' M I $C'EL'LANEOU'S" ITEM S 35.76 03-01-01 MISCELLANEOUS ITEM5 35.76 03-Ol-O1 MISCELLANEOUS ITEM5 01-4280- 2310 101( 01-4340-2200 01-4280-2200 01~4280-2250 73-7300-2250 78-7800-2250 11.28 03-01-01 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 01-4280-2300 33.04 03-01-01 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 78'7800-2300 4/24,/01 4/2.4~01 297828-0 16.02 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4040-2100 .... D1~4'090~2100 ~6.02 MZSC'EL:LANEOUs ~F~I'CE SUPP:L'I:ES 01-414-0-2100 16.02 M;$C~LL'A:NEOUS' OF~I. CE SUPPLIE.5 01.~190~2100 16;"0~ MTSCI~ANE'O'~$'~'FFTCE S~PP~I'E'S 0'I~3~'0~2'100 295377-0 295518-~0 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/24/01 4/2'4/01-412'4101 5.34 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4280-2100 5.34 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 71-7100-2100 8~02 M~SCELLANEous OFFICE SUPPLIES 78-7800-2100 106~81 JR'NL-CD 101~ 160.79 PAPER, INKJET CARTRIDGES, ETC 22-4170-2100 160.79 JRNL-CD 101( 3,86 APPLICATION FORMS 71-710,0-2100 10.23 DATAB.I:NDERS 01~4070-3500 I4.0'9 ~RNt=CD 'lO'I( -6620- ,16 P.'g02-01 VENDOR ....... N0'~' '"I N VOICE TNM BR 29 8-iYO 2~ O' 297 ? 9 O- 0 298410-0 298192-0 298408-:0 ; P U R C H A S]E J 0 U R N A L ', CITY OF MOUND INVOICE DUE HOLD ".DATE DATE S'T ATU'S ..... AMOUNT DE$CRIPTIUN ................. ACC'O UNT NUM'BI ' 6.08' MISCEELANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 0~-4'0'~0-2100 6.08 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4090-2100 6.08 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4I~0-2100 6~O'B .... MI~:C'E[.LANEDUS OFFI C~ 'SUPP['I~S ' ' 01-419;0'~'210 O 6.08 MISCELLANEOUS OFKIC'E'DUPPLI;ES 01-4340-2'100 2.03 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4280-21g0 .... ~.03 MI SCELLANE'~S 0 FF I'CE-3U PPL IES 7I;7100; 2i-0'0 3.03 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 73-7300-2100 3.02 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 78-7800-2100 4Z24/01 4/24/01 185.~2 FILES, INK JET CARTRIDGES 22-4170-2100 z~/24/01 4/24/01 185 ;'42 JRNL-CD 10 59.64 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4040-2100 4/24/01 4'/24/01 59 ,'6~4 JRNL-CD 110 a/24/01 4/24/01 .......................... '/¢/24/1)1 - 4/2~/0'I ...... ~TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY CO VENDOR TOTAL U5102 010427 4/24/01 4/24/01 U N'I'T-E'D' 'P ROPER T I E S VENDOR TOTAL V5242 C10312 INC V IRTUALPHONE W5630 4206 4.75 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4040-2100 4,75 MI'SCEL LANE OUS" 0 FF I CE SUPPLIES 0i- &'0'90- 2J]O 0 4.75 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4140-2100 4.75 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4190-2100 4 . 75 ' ' M't'SC E'L'L A N E 00 S 'OFF'IC :E S'U P PL'IE S "01- 4 340 - 2100 1.58 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-42B0-2100 1.58 Mt$CELLA:NEOUS OFFICE 5UP:PLI'ES 71-7100-2100 ' 2 . 37" MI'S"C'EL C"A NEU U 5 UFF'I C'E Sg P'PUI E'S 73 ~'73'00= ? 1 O' 0 2.36 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 78-7800-2100 31.64 JRNL-CD 10 20.57 COMPUTER DISKS O!-~190~' 2100 20.57 COMPUTER DISKS 01-434:,0-2100 ' 6 ;'BB ..... C'OMPUTER "DI S'KS .... 01'~ 28'0~2 I'O 0 6.86 COMPUTER DISKS 73-7300-2100 6.85 COMPUTER DISKS 78-7800-2100 ~1%7~ '~:':~R'NL~:C D 1 O 660.6'1 31.95 04-01 BALBOA PARKING 01-4280-4200 31.95 04-01 BALBOA PARKING 73-7300-4200 95.~'5 JRNL-CD 10 4124101 42~7 4/24/01 95;B5 57.14 ~HONE BATTERY 01-4340-3220 ~/24/0i 4/2~/'01 57~4 ~RNL~CD lC VENDOR TOTAL 57.14 325.50 03-20-01 FORCEMAIN REPAIR 78-7800-380C 4/24/01 325.50 JRNL-CD 1~ 1~161..00 03-18-01 REPAIR WATERMAIN 73-7300-380( 4¢24/01 1,16i.~0 ~RNL-CD lC -6621 - AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD NO~";'I'NVO~"CE"NMBR' 'DATE : DATE ':'~STATUS A-M'OUNT D'E'S~R~'PTI:~'N ~ ....... ACCOUNT 'NUM'BE~ 20 S i : ' ' · 93,00:03.~:01~,01 DUG :O.UT DRAIN DiTcH .0i-4280-4200· 4209 1,040.00 03-05-0~ REPAIR SEWER LINE 78-7800. 0 ~::' ~s~ 4225-B 553.75 03-01 SNO~ PLOWING 40-6000-4200 ........... ;T .............. ~53'; 75 :URN~E~'CD: ................. lO:ii UIDMER INC VENDOR :TOTAL W5670 45623 120.00 04-07-01 TOW 4124/01 4/24/01 120.00 JRNL-CD ~s,~,~5:: :l:oi, i~ o4--o:?-0~ Tow WILLIAMS TOWING VENDOR TOTAL 221.18 22-4170-4100 101, 0~- 4140-~4240 1~1 ............................ :" 6'~3:;~8'0' CPU ......... 73~7'300 z~ / 241:ig:i 4/2470.1 643.80 JRNL-CD ¢ EN'D'O R 'TOT AL 6~-3 ,'80 X5695 010331 657.01 03-01 #2245-301-939 01-4320-3710 ~"0~; ~3 ..... 03'~I '~ '~ 2 '18 ~4' ~4-'07'~ ~'~7 2'2'~'-4'17~';'3:710 183.11 03~01 ¢0047-005-229 0~-4340-3710 102~88 03-01 ~0864~508-832 01-4280-3710 : :; ;:: :1:0~2 T' :: . 78~78:0:0~t0: :'" ':: : ::;;~.~;~ 7'8~:~:~'o o b~806.93 0~-01 ~05~2-505-000-001 01-4280-~710 4/24/01 4/2~/01 11~169.~8 JRNL-CD 101 30.85 LIQUID CAR WASH 73-7300-2250 30.84 LI@UID CAR WASH 78-7800-2250 Z6704 010412 296.44 MINNEAPOLIS COLE DIRECTORY 01-4140-2100 4/24/0JL 4/24/01 296.44 JRNL-CD 101 2-0-o -6622- PAGE lB P U R C,H-~ 5 E J 0 U R N A L AP~C02~O1 CITY OF MOUND VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD ...... ~'0:;-' I'N~CE -'NMBR ' .'-D'ATE ' 'DATE S-TA'TUS ~MOUNT -DE'S~RI'PTION ' AC'COUNT NUMB~ 4/24/01 4/24/01 6.00~00 JRflL-CD 101( iKLUND TREE RECYCLING VENDOR TOTAL 600.00 ~I7 010'424 19,481.5'5 SQUA'D'EAR 4/24/01 4/24/01 19,4B~.55 JRN.L-CD ~GMAC HINKLEY CME'VRELET VENDOR TOTAL Z6841 0039786-IN 706.90 MEMBER DECALS 22-4170-3500 ~/2~/01 4/24/0I DECAL MINNESOTA VENDOR TOTAL Z6848 010~2~ ~/24/0~ ~/24/01 INFORMATION POLICY ANALYSI VENDOR TOTAL 'Z68'50 "0~041~ 4/24/01 4/24/01 706.90 7.00 PUBLICATION ?.00 JRNL-CD ?.0~ ?0.00 WARRANT, FIND PAID 70.00 JRNL-CD 01-4040-4170 101( 01-2300'000'0 loll ..'-~ASHI~NGTO'N ~OUNTY VENDOR TOTAL TOTAL ALL VENDORS 70'.00 284,474.03 -6623- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com To: City Council From: Bonnie Ritter Re: License approval The following licenses are up for renewal. The license period is May 1, 2001, through April 30, 2002. Approval is contingent upon all required forms, fees, insurance, etc., being submitted. Restaurant Al & Alma's Super Club American Legion Post 398 Domino's Pizza Happy Garden Hardee's House of Moy Lake Minnetonka Bowl Scotty B's Subway Sandwiches VFW Post 5113 Uncharted Grounds Tree Removal D.J.'s Stump Removal Ray's Services Above Ground & Beyond Games of Skill American Legion Post 398 VFW Post 5113 Pool Tables VFW Post 5113 Lake Minnetonka Bowl Bowlin,q Lake Minnetonka Bowl Amusement Device (iuke boxes) American Legion Post 398 VFW Post 5113 prlnted on recycled paper -6624- April 19, 2001 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound 2001 Seal Coat Program MFRA #6173 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Enclosed is a tabulation of the bids received on Wednesday, April 18, 2001, for the 2001 Seal Coat Program. Three bids were received with the Iow bid of $46,319.30 submitted by Pearson Brothers of Loretto. The other bid amounts were $50,210 and $53,515. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $53,980. Pearson Brothers is a newer company in the seal coat business. We have checked their performance record in other municipalities and find them capable of performing the work. We also requested a price from the contractors to furnish the Class C aggregate as Alternative A. The City can not provide the aggregate for the price of $10.75 per ton quoted by Pearson Brothers; therefore we recommend that Pearson Brothers be awarded a contract in the amount of $62,121, which includes Alternate A. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. VerY truly yours, John Cameron, City Engineer JC:prY Enclosure s:~main:XMou06173:\Correspondenc¢~nayor4-19 -6625- rj -6626- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 0'1- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR 2001 SEALCOATING PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2001 Sealcoating Project in the City of Mound, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Allied Blacktop 10503 89th Avenue N. Maple Grove, MN 55369 Alternate A: Total: $53,515.00 20,580.00 $74,095.00 Astech Corp. PO Box 1025 St. Cloud, MN 56302 Alternate A: Total: $50,210.00 13,230.00 $63,440.00 Pearson Brothers, Inc. 240 St. Johns Street PO Box 334 Loretto, MN 55357-0334 Alternate A: Total: $46,319.30 15,802.50 $62,121.80 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Pearson Brothers, Inc. of Loretto, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mound, Minnesota: The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Pearson Brothers, inc., of Loretto, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Mound for the 2001 Sealcoating Project, according to the plans and specifications therfore approved by the city council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, 'except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. -6627- Resolution No. 01- The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember by Councilmember and seconded The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: Acting City Clerk -6628- Hennepin County Employer April 16, 2001 Ms. Joyce Nelson City Of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1687 Dear Ms. Nelson: Enclosed are two originals of the 2001 Municipal Recycling Grant Agreement between Hennepin County and the City Of Mound and a Substitute Form W-9. Please complete the Substitute Fonr~ W-9 mad have both Agreements signed by an authorized official and return all the documents to me by April 27. I will return an original to you for your records after the Agreement is fully executed. Your payment should be processed and mailed to you by the end of May. If you have any questions, please call me at (612) 348-5893. Sincerely, Daniel Ruiz r' Sr. Planning Analyst Enclosures - 3 Department of Environmental Services 417 North Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397 (612) 348-6509 FAX:(612) 348-8532 Environmental Info Line:(612) 348-6500 Recycled Paper -6629- Contract No: A06641 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as the "County", through its Department of Environmental Services, 417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397, and the CITY OF MOUND hereinafter referred to as the "City", 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364. WITNEssETH: WHEREAS, the County Board, by Resolution No. 99-8-532, on the 3rd day of August 1999, authorized funding for Municipal Recycling Programs from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2004, and WHEREAS, said Recycling Program is consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.02 and 115A.03, as amended by the Laws of Minnesota 1992, Chapter 685, and Minnesota Statutes 473.8011; the Office of Environmental Assistance Solid Waste Management Development Guide/Policy Plan;. Hermepin County's Solid Waste Master Plan; and Hennepin County's Residential Recycling Funding Policy. NOW THEREFORE, the County and the City agree as follows: I. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED The City will operate its recycling program as more fully described in the Grant Application that was submitted by the City and kept on file with the County. In addition to the services as:referred to above, the Oty agrees: On an annual basis, the City must demonstrate that the average pounds of recyclables collected from households participating in their curbside residential recycling program must equal or surpass the 1999 base year figure. The base year figure is determined by dividing total pounds of recyclables collected in 1999 by the total number of households participating in the curbs/de recycling program in 1999. Failure to achieve this annual goal will result in the requirement that a plan be submitted for Hennepin County approval that specifies the efforts the City will undertake to increase the recycling percentage within 90 days of the submittal of the mumcipal year-end report b. At a minimum, the City shall collect the following materials at curbside: 2. 3. 4. 5. Newspaper and advertising supplements; Corrugated cardboard; Clear, brown, and green glass food and beverage containers; Metal food and beverage cans; All plastic bottles with a neck except bottles that previously contained hazardous materials or motor oil; and Magazines and catalogs. The City must estimate its participation rate in the cUrbside recycling program during the month of October. Methodology for measuring participation must be approved by the County prior to execution of a grant agreement. Page 1 of 8 -6630- The City shall submit on forms provided by the County, a Final 2001 Report by February 15, 2002. All SCORE funds accepted from the County shall be used for waste reduction and recycling capital and operating expenses in the year granted; the City Shall not retain any SCORE funds in excess of actual program expenses. The City may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees, or any other method for that portion of the costs of its recycling program that is funded by County grant funds. The City shall establish a separate accounting mechanism, such as a project number, activity number, cost center or fund that will separate recycling revenues and expenditures from all other municipal act/v/ties, including solid waste and yard waste activities. Recycling and waste reduction activities, revenues and expenditures are subject to audit by the County. If the City does not contract for curbside services, the City will receive SCORE funds provided that at least ninety percent (90%) of the SCORE funds are credited back to residents and the City meets all minimum program requirements. The additional ten percent (10%) of SCORE funds may be used for City administrative and promotional expenses. II. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT This Agreement shall commence on january 1,2001, and terminate on December 31,2001. m. METHOD OF COMPENSATION The County will disWibute SCORE funds tothe cities only to the extent the County has received such funds from the State of Minnesota. The City wilt receive SCORE funds per the formula below: No. :ofHouseholds Serviced Curbside by City Total No. of Households Serviced Curbside in County X Total SCORE Revenue ReCeived by County from State of Minnesota SCORE Funds = DistribUted to City The County shall pay the City an amoUnt not-to-exceed Thirty thousand and nin~ dollars ($30,009). This amount is based upon previous SCORE fund amounts received by the County. Under no circumstances will the County's obligation of SCORE monies distribution exceed the City's proportion of SCORE revenues received by the County. The grant paYment will be forwarded after the County Board receives and approves a Municipal Recycling Grant Agreement signed by an authorized official. Page 2 of 8 -6631 - IV. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its officials, officers, agents, volunteers, and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of the City, its subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the performance of the services required by this contract, and against all loss by reason of the failure of the City to perform fully, in any respect, all obligations under this contract. In order to protect the City and those listed above under the indemnification provisions, the City agrees at all times during the term of this Agreement and beyond such term when so required, to have and keep in force insurance, either under a self-insurance program or insurance policies as follows: Limits Commercial General Liability with the following coverages. Contractual Liability coverage must be included. General Aggregate Products-Completed Operations Aggregate Personal and Advertising Injury Each Occurrence - Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage Fire Damage - Any One Fire $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $100,000 Automobile Liability covering owned, non-owned, and hired automobiles or "Any Auto": Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage - Each Occurrence Statutory c. Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: 1) Workers' Compensation Statutory 2) Employers' Liability Bodily Injury by: Accident - Each Accident Disease - Policy Limit Disease - Each Employee $100,000 $500,000 $100,000 An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability coverages is an acceptable method to provide the required insurance limits. The above establishes minimum insurance requirements. It is the sole responsibility of the City to determine the need for and to procure additional coverage that may be needed in connection with this Agreement. If the City does not have a self-insurance program, the City shall not commence work until the City has obtained the required insurance and filed with the County an acceptable certificate of insurance. The certificate shall: ao Name Hennepin County as certificate holder and as an additional insured for all liability coverage (except Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability). Pa~e 3 of 8 -6632- b. List any exceptions to the insurance requirements. c. Be amended to: 1) Show that Hennepin County will receive thirty (30) days written notice in the event of cancellation, non-renewal, or material change in any described policies; and 2) Delete the wording: "endeavor to" and "but failure to provide such written notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives". ~ The City shall require that each of its subcontractors, while performing services in the operation of the City's recycling program, have and keep in force insurance as follows: Limits Commercial General Liability to include the following coverage and limits of insurance. Contractual Liability coverage must be included. General Aggregate Products-Completed Operations Aggregate Personal and Advertising Injury Each Occurrence - Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage Fire Damage - Any One Fire Automobile Liability covering owned, non-owned, and hired automobiles or "Any Auto": $l,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $100,000 Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage -Each Occurrence Workers' Compensation including Employers' Liability. $1,000,000 1) Workers' Compensation If the Contractor is based outside the State of Minnesota, coverage must apply to Minnesota laws. Statutory 2) Employers' Liability. Bodily Injury by: Accident - Each Accident Disease - Policy Limit Disease - Each Employee $100,000 $500,000 $100~000 An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability coverage is an acceptable method to provide the required insurance limits. A certificate of insurance naming the City as certificate holder and as an additional insured shall be filed with the City prior to commencement of operations. Pace 4 of 8 -6633- V. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The City shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the services herein. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-parmers between the parties hereto or as constituting the City as the agent, representative, or employee of the County for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The City is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. The City represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the City or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the City under this Agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the County, and shall not be considered employees of the County. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Minnesota Economic Security Law or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the City, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the County. The City shall defend, indemnify, and hold the County, its officials, officers, agents, volunteers, and employees harmless from any and all such claims irrespective of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the County, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Re-employment Compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement benefits. VI. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The City agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal statutes, regulations, and ordinances pertaining to solid waste management and recycling in force or hereafter enacted including, but not limited to, the applicable provisions in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 115A. VII. NON DISCRIMINATION - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION The City and its contractors shall follow the City's Affirmative Action policy against discrimination. Hennepin County shall follow its Affirmative Action policy against discrimination VIII. DATA PRIVACY The City, its officers, agents, owners, parmers, employees, volunteers or subcontractors agree to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 1.3, and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations and order relating to data privacy or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended. The City agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the County, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from the City's officers', agents', owners', parmers', employees', volunteers', assignees' or subcontractors' unlawful disclosure and/or use of such protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. IX. RECORD AVAILABILITY The City agrees that the County, the State Auditor, or any of their duly author/zed representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the City and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. Such ~.o~ ~ ~F8 -6634-' materials shall be maintained and such access and rights shall be in force and effect during the period of the contract and for six (6) years after its termination or cancellation per MN Statute 16C.05 sub. 5. X. MERGER AND MODIFICATION It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the part/es relating to the subj eot matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. XI. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govem all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this contract and the legal relations between the herein parties and performance under it. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder will be those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the herein parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this contract is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected. XII. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the specified effective date of termination. In addition, the County shall have the right to terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days written notice if the City's performance is not timely or is substantially unsatisfactory or if the City has violated any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the above, the City shall not be relieved of liability to the County for damages sustained by the County by virtue of any breach of the Agreement by the City. The County may withhold any payment to the City for the purpose set forth until such time as the exact amount of damages due the County from the City is · determined. In the event the County does not receive any SCORE funds, this Agreement will be terminated upon written notice by the County. XIII. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION In order to coordinate the service of the City with the activities of the Department of Environmental Services' so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, Carl Michaud, Solid Waste & Recycling program Manager, will manage this Agreement on behalf of the County and will serve as liaison betWeen the' county and the City. XIV. CONTINUATION OF OBLIGATION The obligation and/or warranties of the city and the county shall survive the performance and cancellation or termination of this agreement. Page 6 of 8 -6635- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as to this ~ day of ,2001. Approved as to form and execution: COUNTY OF I:IENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA Assistant County Attorney By: Date: Date: Mike Opat Chair of Its County Board Date: · , p. F_~iro mental Services Attest: Date: ~'~-'~/~"'~'"'-d~"/ Date: Assistant / County Administrator Deputy / Clerk of the County Board Approved as to execution: City Attorney Date: CITY OF MOUND STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Title: Date: CHECK ONE: Charter And: Title: Date: Option A Option B __ Page 7 of 8 -6636- This page is intentionally left blank Page 8 of 8 -6637- HC 573 (5/2000) Hennepin County Contract No. Hennepin County General Accounting A-1301 Government Center 300 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55487-0131 SUBSTITUTE FORM W-9 IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION - PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY This form was developed to comply with Intemal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and Minnesota statute and to assist Hennepin County in paying providers and vendors for their goods and services. You, as a payee, are required by law to provide us, .as payor, your correct Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). If you are an individual, your TIN is your Social Security Number. The TIN for a business is its Employer Identification Number. This information will only be shared with the IRS. The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act classifies the Social Secudty Number as private. Unless otherwise provided by law, the home address is also private. Questions may be directed to 612-348-8314. Failure to respond to this request can result in IRS-mandated withholding on future payments as well as other penalties. Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN): Provider Name and Remittance Address: NOTE: Name must match your social security card if you are an individual or sole proprietor. All other businesses must use the name that was used when your Employer identification Number was applied for. 41-6005396 City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound. Mn. 55364 Certification: Under penalties of perjury, I certify that: (1) The number shown on this form is my correct taxpayer identification number, and the name shown is the correct corresponding name. (2) I am subject to 1099 reporting unless one of the following is checked: [~[ Government Entity. [] Tax Exempt Organization. [] Corporation that does not provide medical services or billing/collection for medical services. [] Other (please specify): (3) I am not subject to backup withholding because: (a) I am exempt from backup withholding, or (b) I have not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service that I am subject to backup withholding as a result of a failure to report all interest or dividends, or (c) the IRS has notified me that I am no longer subject to backup withholding. Certification Instructions: You must cross out item 3 above if you have been notified by the IRS that you are currently subject to backup withholding because of underreporting of interest or dividends on your tax return. Please Name Printed: Gino Businaro Title: Finance Director, Tres. Sign Here Signature ~.~---.~ .f~__ ,~ ~.~;:~'.~~--~:~ Phone:( 952)472-0608 Date: 4/17/01 Please complete the Affirmative Action section on the reverse side. -6638- HC 573 (5/2000) (Back) HENNEPIN COUNTY CONTRACTOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (AA) CLASSIFICATION Note: This information is used internally by Hennepin County for recordkeeping purposes to monitor participation in county contracting. : the contractor named is an individual, please circle the individual's appropriate AA code. For businesses, please circle the code, or if owned by more than one individual, base the code on the majority owneCs classification. Each business may have only one code. Questions may be directed to 612-348-4096. Certified Small All Other Minority/Business Categories Businesses* Businesses Black (Not of Hispanic Origin) All persons having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. Hispanic All persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American descent or other Spanish culture or odgin, regardless of race. Asian or Pacific Islanders All persons having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian Sub- continent or the Pacific Islands, including for example, China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands and Samoa. Male S23 Male M23 Female S33 Female M33 Male S24 Male M24 Female S34 Female M34 Male S25 Male M25 Female S35 Female M35 American Indian or Alaskan Native Ail persons having origins in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintain tribal identification through tdbal affiliation or recognition. Male S26 Male M26 Female S36 Female M36 ucasian (Not of Hispanic Origin) All persons with origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa or the Middle East, who are not of Hispanic odgin. Male S22 Male M22 Female S17 Female M17 Disabled Caucasian Male includes Caucasian males who have a physical impairment that limits one or more major life activities, has a record or such impairment or is regarded as having such an impairment. Disabled individuals in minority or female categories shoUld be classified under that category. M27 Publicly Held Company Stock is traded on the open market. Mll Non-profit Entity M13 Government Entity GOV *Hennepin County, in collaboration with other jurisdictions,.certifies eligible small businesses. While certification is"not necessary to do business with the county, only certified businesses can be counted toward small business enterprise (SBE) utilization goal attainment. Certification also boosts market exposure and qualifies businesses to access SBE Program Services. Please contact the SBE Program Service Representative at 612-348-2531 if you need assistance in determination of the certification status of a business, or visit the Central Certification (CERT) Program's web site at: www.impactcorp.com/ca rF -6639- Lynn & Associates March 23, 2001 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Proposal For Services - Council Roles and Expectations INTRODUCTION: Citizens are demanding more from their public service agencies. The City of Mound is no exception to the growing trend of Cities looking for ways to be more effective and responsive to their customers. A primary objective for the City is to maintain a high level of professionalism at Council meetings. The image City Council communicates to the public needs to be positive and reflect the needs of the City. As the City Council Members are the primary leaders of the City, staff and others look to the Council for leadership and direction. With two new members on board, it can be very beneficial to review the aspects of leadership and decorum that each Council Member must have in order to be successful at his/her responsibilities. Leadership Development is an on-going process. Communication styles, leadership styles, roles and responsibilities, as well as how the Council works together needs to be discussed. Expectations need to be clear and realistic. Lynn & Associates, a management consulting co_mpany that focuses on leadership development and team building issues, proposes to continue to assist The City of Mound by facilitating a Leadership Retreat. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: The general goal of this proposal is to assist the new Council in becoming a stronger and more effective team. The Council needs to assess their current level of functioning and decide as a group, what changes to make. 5435 Wedgewood Drive, Shorewood, MN 55331 phone: 952.474.2139 fax: 952.474.3738 e-mail: Lynnconslt@aol.com -6640- Specific Objectives of this proposal include: · Meet individually with each Council Member and the City Manager to discuss issues, expectations, and concerns. · Review the roles and responsibilities of Council Members, the Mayor, the City Manager, Staff, citizens, the business owners and key stakeholders in Mound. Do a self-assessment of Council behaviors and actions (pre-retreat) to help clarify expectations and appropriate roles at the half-day retreat. The self- assessment tool is based on the 10 Habits of Highly Effective Councils. More information on this self-assessment can be found in Appendix B. METHOD OF IMPLEMENTATION: Dr. James J. Lynn, will perform the services in this proposal with the assistance of Ms. Lisa Lynn, MA, LP. The implementation steps are as follows. 1. Review and sign this Letter of Agreement. Lynn & Associates will prepare an interview guide to include a role/responsibility matrix and "10 Habits of Highly Effective Councils" self-examination handout. Lynn & Associates will meet individually for an hour with each Council Member and the City Manager to elicit expectations, concerns, and review the pre-reading materials and the self-assessment handout. Council members will complete the self-assessment and send it directly to Lynn & Associates for scoring. 4. Lynn & Associates will score the 10 Habits handout prior to the retreat. The Council and City Manager will meet offsite for a special retreat to review the 10 Habits handout responses, the role responsibility matrix, and resolve differences in expectations/roles. The meeting could be a dinner evening meeting at the Lafayette Club (private room). Note: as this consultant is a member of the Lafayette Club, no meeting room expenses are charged, only meals. A brief summary report will be prepared with actions the Council agreed on. These recommendations should be formally adopted by the Council at a later meeting. -6641 - BENEFITS OF THIS APPROACH: The following benefits should accrue as a result of this initiative. Council Member's expectations will be clearer and more realistic The 10 Habits self-assessment will be educational and help clarify Council issues The Council should function more effectively in the future, stay in control and end meetings earlier (reduce midnight or 1AM endings which will greatly reduce financial costs for the City). The public will see a professional group of Council Members who are on task, who get the job done, and do it by respecting the public and each other. TIMELINE AND FEES: This proposal can be implemented within two weeks of acceptance. The fee for designing the pre-work, doing the individual interviews, and facilitating the half-day retreat is $2,500.00. This is a special rate for cities based on over 18 hours of consulting time in the tasks needed to complete this project. Direct expenses associated with the project, such as meals, and materials are billed additionally at cost. The invoice for the project will be billed upon completion of the retreat and submission of the Summary Report. Respectfully submitted, Accepted by, JAMES J. LYNN, Ed.D. Consultant MS. Kandis Hanson City Manager JJ:l Enclosure -6642- Appendix A Sample Agenda for the four-hour training session on clarifying roles/expectations 5:OO 5:30 7:45 8:00 9:00 - 5:30 - 7:45 - 8:00 - 9:00 - 9:20 Dinner: review agenda and list expectations Review the 10 Habits Assessment Results - Discuss the Councils scores - Reach consensus on how the Council will operate in the future Break Complete the Role/Responsibility Matrix Summarize Actions/Recommendations -6643- Appendix B Habits of Highly Effective Councils The following areas of Council functioning are measured with this tool. The Council uses a strategic profile to stay on track and to create a compelling future for the City of Mound. The Council recognizes the responsibility of coming together as a governing body to exercise authority and act as a Council to fulfill its' purpose. The Council exhibits rational decision making skills. The Council demonstrates interpersonal skills to respectfully listen and confront each other. The functions and specific responsibilities of the Council are clearly understood by Council Members. The performance and behaviors of the Mayor and Council members are consistent with their functional roles. The Council receives feedback well on policy implementations and outcomes. The Council performs well in various areas such as goal setting, exploration/analysis, formal Council meetings, and community relations. The Council functions well as a team, meeting others' expectations. The Council seeks and uses feedback from staff, residents, business owners, and key stakeholders of Mound. The Council wants to be as effective as possible in order to meet or exceed the expectations of those who elected them. ~6644- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 13, 2001 TO: FROM: RE: Mayor/City Council ~ ~A~acRkecl;rm~ePn~'oDni~;~t~/Mem~ers. At the April 12, 2001 POSAC meeting the commission held interviews for one new member. In attendance were the applicants Gene Hostetler and Tom Casey. Absent was applicant Keith Johnson. Mr. Hostetler interviewed and Mr. Casey declined. Upon reviewing the applicants the POSAC with Mr. Casey removing himself from the vote has selected Mr. Hostetler to be recommended to the City Council for appointment. The POSAC also confirmed that the prior recommendation of Ron Motyka is still their selection for the second appointment. cc: Kandis Hanson, City Manager attachment: Exert POSAC April 12, 2001 Draft Minutes. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: f952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound corn MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor/City Council r~~ FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Directo SUBJECT: Interviews for POSAC Vacancy DATE: March 15. 2001 On the April l? Park and Open Space Advisory Commission meeting interviews will be held for the vacancies. The meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers and will be the first item on the agenda to be heard. Enclosed are the applications we received. Your attendance will be appreciated by the POSAC staff. CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com March 15, 2001 Ref: Appointment for Park and Open Space Advisory Commission. Dear Applicant, To updated you on your application for appointment to the Park & Open Space Advisory Commission (POSAC) interviews will be on April 12, 2001 at 7:30pm in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers. If there are any questions you would like me to respond to please feel free to contact me at 952-472-0611. /Park Dl~ctor cc: Kandis Hanson, city Manager Mayor/City Council POSAC CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX 1612) 472-0620 March 15, 2001 Ron Motyka 1545 Bluebird Lane Mound, MN. 55364 Ref: Appointment for Park and Open Space Advisory Commission. Dear Mr. Motyka, To keep you updated on the position for the POSAC that you made application for the City Council at their meeting on January 23, 2001 discussed this item. They have requested staff to seek a minimum of three applicants for the position. In order to meet the City Council direction staff has re-advertise the position and have scheduled interviews for the POSAC April 12, 2001 meeting. You will not be required to re-interview. Your application and related POSAC minutes will be retained for consideration for the appointment. If there are any questions you would like me to respond to please feel free to contact me at 952-472-0611. V Park Director cc: Kandis Hanson, City Manager Mayor/City Council POSAC (-6648- January 8, 2001 To: Kandis Hanson and Mound City Council (via fax only: 472-0620) From: Tom Cazey (472-1099) Re: Application for Re-appointment to the City of Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission I'm not aware of any resolution requiring me to submit an application for re-appointment to the City of Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission. Even if such resolution does exist, it has been completely ignored by the City of Mound's long-established practice since at least the beginning of my tenure (1989), if not earlier. The City's actual policy and practice is that current commissioners are automat~ca!ly re-appointed if they express a desire for re-appointment before the end of their term of appointment. I'm sure you understand that one of the objects of this policy is to ensure that appointments are not unduly influenced by changes in city politics. With this City policy in mind, I expressed my request for re-appointment via a fax transmit=al to you before the end of the 2000. (This was acknowledged by Jim Fackler on the record at the December 8, 2000 Park Commission meeting.) As you are aware, I was a TEAM MOUND candidate for mayor and lost the election by 230 votes out of approximately 5,000 votes cast. TEAM MOUND candidates for City Council, Kim Anderson and Pete Meyer, ~ere elected to the City Council. It is not coincidental that, for the first time in 12 years, I must submit a formal application for re-appointment to a advisory commission that I have faithfully served for those 12'years. There is precedent for my concern. Political retribution was exacted on Bill Darling, a former Park Commissioner who ran for Mayor. After the election, the Park Commission was reduced in size by the City Council so t_hat Mr. Darling could not be re-appointed as a Commissioner. Consequently, I have no choice other than to submit the enclosed 2-page application u~d~r protest. Thank you for your consideration. -6649- 0~?01/01 09:$4 FA~ 1 9~2 4?2 4771 THOMAS E. CASEY ~02 APPLICANT INPORHATION VOLUNTEER BO~J~DS/COM~ITTEES/COM~/SSION8 Date: January 8, 2001 N~e of Board: City of Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission Personal Information: Name: Tom Casey Address: 2854 Cambridge Lane, Mound Telephone: 472-1099 (work) place of Employment: self-employed Please describe wo=k, volunteer, or life experience that you have that would prepare you for being a m-~er of this =ommission. I have been a member of the City of Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission since 1989 a/~d received Certificates of Appreciation from the City Council at the end of each rerun. During my tenure, I initiated Mound's Nature Conservation Area Drogram. I also served as Chair and Vice-Chair for several years. From 1995-2000, I was board member of the Minnesota Land Trust, West Metro Chapter. our board played a large part in the establishment of Gale Woods as part of the Hennepin Parks system. (The Minnesota Land Trust holds a conservation easement on the property.) In fact, it was at a land trust board meeting in the Mound Depot that the Gale family was introduced to the Minnesota Land Trust! What skills and abilities do you have that would be helpful in doing the work of this commission? I'm a practicing attorney in the area of land use, real estate, environmental law, etc. I understand subdivision laws (including park dedication requirements), tax-forfeit land procedures (to avoid loss of potential park land), conservation easements, and procedures to initiate bond referendums (to finance additional Dark land). I also uauderstand the legal requirements for comprehensive planning under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. As a former Chair of the Park Commission, I understand parliamentary procedures necessary to ensure an efficient and orderly meeting. -1- -6650- With what ~ou know about this area, what ~o ~ou see as the t~ree most Si~l~ificant issues this commission will I believe that the Park Commission, as a whole, needs to set forth their issues; it should not just be one person's issues. With the spirit of consensus-building in mind, I offer the following thoughts in no particular order of priority: Education of park commissioner%: With the recent high turnover of park commissioners, it is important that com2~issioners be fully inf:rmed of the depth and breath of their functions. Examples include: the budget process, legal framework, comprehensive plans and the park planning process, etc. Improve relationships: Improve the working relationships with City Council, city staff, other commissions, etc. pertaining to park planning, the budget process, and as other issues arise. Strengthen the function of the City Council liaison to the Park Commission. Involve the community: Improvements in the park and open space system are doomed to mediocrity (at. best) unless the community is involved with our parks. What one or two contributions 4o you think you would make, in the short term (first few months} an~ in the long term (after a year). In the short term, I can contribute (in conjunction with city staff and others) background knowledge and expertise in the education of new commissioners. In the long term, I can contribute what I have always. done: the dedication and drive to never give up on our parks and our kids. Please fully ~isolose any potential ¢o~flicts of interest you ~ay have serving on this boar4. I do not have any potential or actual conflictm of interest at this time. I will disclose any potential or actual conflicts of interest if they arise. P.S. - Please include my 1/8/01 cover letter as part of this application. -2- -6651 - APPLICANT INFORMATION VOLUNTEER BOARDS/COMMITTEES/CO~,DdlSSIONS (Please use black ink or type.) Date: ,o/ ~too Name of Board: Pa,~lCs Personal Igo~at~n: Address: I q~q Telephone: Home: Place of Employment: work: "]6~-- 75o. q- Please describe work, volunteer, or life experience that you have had that would prepare you for being a member of this board/committee/commission. What skills and abilities do you have that would be helpful in doing the work of this board/committee/commission? -6652- With what you know about this area, what do you see as the three most significant issues this board/committee/commission will need to address in the next 2 years? What one or two contributions do you ttfink you would make, in the short term (first few months) and in the long term (after a year)? i. Please fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest you may have serving on this board? ~ o~0,~'7' ~,~q*--' oL t~,,~ / ' Please return by 4:30 p.m., ¢¢..,t~T,...,,'L~_6653_~ (~o,-..'¢(' ( to: City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 APPI,ICANT INFORMATION VOLL~'TEER BOARDS/COMM'ITTir E.~COMMiSSiONS I'Pl=a_~: .,~ bl~:k mk or ?er~onal l~ormaao=:~ / .~ 1. Plea~ describe work. voh.mtee;. ~':r ::f~ experience :hal you have had ~t would p~p~e you for be~8 a member of :h:~ bo~'cO~Ucc,'~:c~ia.ion. 2. W~t ~il~ aad abilities d,~ ~ou h~vc tha~ ~'ould ~ help~l in doing ~e work oft~s bo~comm~e~commissi,;n? ' With what you knnw about ~?,b'arca. what do y,')'z se.e a, t~ th~e most this ~d,"co~ine¢/~ommissi,an *'ill n~¢.2 1c add,=ss m nbc nc~ 2 yc~s? Please return by 4..!0 p.m ........... to: -6655- q\ lt)l~ I() ,k,L .. City Manager City of IN~und 5341 Ma) wood Road Mound, MIq 55364 ¥¥,4 £ n: tl 0 APPLICAaNT INFOR?vtATION VOLUNTEER BOARDS/COMMI-TIEES/CO~SSIONS (Please use black ink or type.) Name'of Board: e~ 1~ ~-~ A~"~ Personal Information: Address: Telephone: Home: q~'Z- ~TZ' ~'~ Work: Place of Employment: 1.- Please describe work, voluntem-, or life experience that you have had that would prepare -'?' y°ii for being a member °fthis board/committee/commission. 2. ~m s~ls ~d abilities do you Mve ~at world be help~ N dong ~e work offs bo~W~mmi~commlssion? 3. With what you know about this area, what do you see as the three most sign.ifica,nt issues this board./c0n;-'nittee/commission will need to address La the next 2 years7 What one or two contributions do you think you would make, in the short term (first few months) and in the long term (after a year)? Please fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest you may have serving on this board? Please return by 4:30 p.m., City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, .MN 55364 -6657- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL 12, 200'1 Present: Chair John Beise, Commissioners Tom Casey, Derrick Hentz, Norman Domholdt, and City Council Representative Peter Meyer. Also present: Mayor Pat Meisel, Council Member Klm Anderson, Park Director Jim Fackler, and Secretary Sue Schwalbe. Citizens present: Gene Hostetler, Roxann Palm, Mary Hughes, and Gary Motyka. Chair Beise called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 8, 2001 POSC MINUTES Commissioner Casey requested the discussion from the POSAC March 8, 2001 meeting under Item 2b Appointment Changes, Klm Anderson's discussion be inserted verbatim. City Council Member Klm Anderson stated "Well you know its just kind of an awkward situation that had kind of been placed in. Bob Brown did call me after Mr. Wilsey was appointed just because of the interview for that was interesting to say the least actually but then we did get on to the resolution change and you know it is no secret that we felt that the reason why. It was a good program it has been working for how many years now. We really felt that it was really planned just to oust Tom Casey because currently well as it stood before it would have required a 4/5 council vote to remove anybody from their commission seat. So with this new plan it requires a 3/5 vote and Bob had mentioned that you know it just would never happen and 4/5 wasn't good enough to get rid of anybody and he just kind of bantered about you know why the change was taking place and I just said well you can tell you want that if Tom Casey gets ousted against the park and open space recommendation than I will smell a rat. And he said well we do want to get rid of Tom Casey. So I mean he really made no secret so its kind of like we know. It's not too hard to interpret that they know where they want to go, they know what they need to do to get to where they want to go. Tom Casey isn't the only person that they do want to get rid of according to Mr. Brown because I only had the conversation with him. And I do know that the axe is going to fall on two other people in the future. I don't know when their seats are up but I mean it is a predetermined thought process here and basically this whole thing as I see it has just been kind of a scheme to get basically a 3/5 vote and that is not too hard to do. You know where a 4/5 vote would be substantially more difficult. My argument with that was that if somebody truly was bad it shouldn't be too hard to get a 4/5 vote if somebody bad wants them in there. So that was the conversation. You know do with it as you will. But I think it is bad politics basically. I think you know it would be very easy for a council to -6658- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 kind of get together their little group and kind of work with the turnover and kind of pick who they want and like of stack their deck or whatever. That's just a little bit of the background information from the phone conversation." MOTION by Casey, seconded by Meyer to approve the minutes of the March 8, 2001, Park and Open Space Advisory Commission (POSAC) meetings as presented and amended. MOTION carried unanimously. 2. AGENDA CHANGES Chair Beise tabled Item #5 to the May 10, 2001 Meeting as Loren Gordon cannot attend tonight's meeting. 3. INTERVIEW PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION CANDIDATES. Chair Beise stated there is a choice before the Commission being a one-person or two-person ballot. The Commission can interview the three candidates and vote for one position. Mr. Motyka is not required to interview at this time as he was previously recommended. Commissioner Casey chose to waive his interview. Chair Beise explained the interview process to all present candidates. Gene Hostetler was the only candidate present and was interviewed. Commissioner Taylor questioned Hostetler's commercial property ownership. Hostetler commented he would be happy to forfeit his property for a bike trial. 4. RECEIVE INPUT ON CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR 2002 FROM GENERAL PUBLIC. No comments from citizens present. 5. DISCUSS: PARK DEVELOPMENT/DEDICATION FEES (CITYPLANNER LOREN GORDON WILL ATTEND MEETING) Tabled to May 10, 2001 Meeting. -6659- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 6. DISCUSS: PARKS/BEACH RECREATION PROGRAMS Roxann Palm, the Recreational Coordinator from Westonka, explained the 2001 Westonka Recreation Program including Lifeguards, Summer Fun in the Park, Sand Volleyball League (new), and Youth Tripsters. Please note the volleyball teams need to be registered to form roosters. Mary Hughes, the new Community Education Supervisor, explained the Music in the Park and the Farmer's Market program. The times for the Farmer's Market have been changed. Ms. Hughes thanked the City for donating $1,500.00 for the Music in the Park Program; however, still $1,400.00 in the red. The fees will hopefully be donated from local businesses and "passing the hat" at the events. The Youth Tripsters are all self-sufficient. Ms. Hughes distributed Summer In The Park Schedule and Farmers Market Schedules to the Commission. Commissioner Taylor questioned the procedure for negotiating the contracts for the Farmers Markets. Ms. Hughes explained they are limited to approximately 12 participants and that it is a very popular program. The charge this year is $60.00 per registration. A report will be furnished to the Commission at the end of the season. Park Director Fackler explained the Lifeguard Beach Program changes coming this year due to costs not covered by the budget. Mound Bay Park is the only park covered at this time. Chair Beise requested staff to put numbers together from the past five years for the Lifeguard Program. Fackler explained that in the budget the Commission will have current as well as the past two years. This is a bottom line type budget. City Council Representative Meyer welcomed Mary and Roxann. The Commission looks forward to working with the two of you. 7. REVIEW: MAPS FOR PARK DISTRICTS Chair Beise is in agreement with using voting districts. This is a new program for Mound and his looking forward to information from Gordon as to how other communities set/plan this type of system. Would like to see this item on the agenda at each meeting. Fackler checked with the Police Department (Amy Christensen) they have no materials or districts. Commissioner Domholdt agrees with the lines and likes the number of districts. The districts should be named and not numbered. Each of these sections has a notable park. Would like discussion as to names of parks or numbers. -6660- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 All commissioners agreed to the idea of names for park districts. Commissioner Casey suggested the public should be invited to name these districts for involvement. Chair Beise believes it would be more standardized to keep with the names of the larger parks in a particular area. A district naming contest is would be too costly and too timely. Commissioner Domholdt does not feel prepared to discuss this item until the information is received from Gordon. City Council Representative Meyer explained in July 2001 the City will be hiring a Community Development Coordinator who should be helpful in contributing in this program. Chair Beise listed items that need to be accomplished. Naming the program, naming the parks, etc. and looks forward to Gordon being at the next meeting. Commissioner Domholdt requested completing a mission statement and a name for this project at the May 2001 meeting. Six districts is a very good number. 8.DISCUSS' CITY COUNCIL'S REQUEST TO HAVE THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHING A POLICIY FOR NAMING OF PARK FACILITIES REDUCED TO ONE PAGE. Fackler stated the City Council is looking at this is a policy not an ordinance. They are looking for help in shortening the verbiage. CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING THE NAME OF PARK FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA The purpose for these criteria is to establish a procedure for the naming and approving of Park and Recreation Facilities with the City of Mound. Contributor. This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location. The name should fit the neighborhood. A Famous American or Prominent Citizen. Recognition shall not be considered until termination of service or death. -6661 - Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 Occasion. A special event in history. Service. An individual living or dead who has significantly served the community above and beyond the call of duty. CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING THE FACILITIES WITH THE PARK AND MEMORIALS FOR THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA. FACILITIES WITHIN THE PARK Facilities within a park can be named for an individual or organization who has donated funds for the construction of the facility or has contributed service to the community. Examples of such facilities would include: Athletic Fields Tennis Courts Swim Pools Ice Arena Golf Course Buildings Wild Life Area The percentage of donation should be 50% of the estimated cost of the facility when new, not including cost of the land. If an individual has contributed at least 10 years of service to recreation in the City and a period of at least two years has passed from the termination of service or the death of the individual whichever comes first, then the Park and Open Space Advisory Commission may consider the renaming of a facility within a Park. MEMORIALS An individual or organization may wish to recognize a deceased city resident by means of a visible, physical item such as: a plaque, living memorial or art object display in a public recreation facility. In order to accomplish this memorial the donor must provide for the cost of the object plus installation. A portion of future maintenance can be considered as part of the installation cost. ONTINUATIONOF ITEM #3 OUTCOME OF BALLOTS. Chair Beise stated Mr. Motyka has already been recommended to the City Council. The position to vote on is Mr. Casey's. There are three (3) applicants for that position. Commissioner Casey chose not to interview so that he can evaluate the other candidates. Casey requested information from City Manager Kandis Hanson to have city attorney determine if there is a conflict of interest to vote for oneself. -6662- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12, 2001 Commissioner Hentz believes Motyka has been recommended to the City Council and would like to vote on the remaining three candidates. Chair Beise stated the Commission took a stand as to Mr. Casey not having to reapply for his position. Does not agree with interviewing a sitting commissioner. The Commission only interviewed for the position felt was open. Since that time, the City Council has adopted a new Resolution and it is retroactive. The City Council did not deny Motyka they simply did not look at any recommendation. City Council Representative Meyer indicated that Motyka's recommendation was not brought in front of the City Council. Commissioners Domholdt and Taylor would like to stand by the previous recommendation for Motyka. MOTION by Casey seconded by Hentz to open up the balloting for two seats. Ayes: CASEY, HENTZ, MEYER. Nays: DOMHOLDT, TAYLOR, BEISE MOTION split and fails. Fackler explained the balloting to the Commission. Vote for one commissioner. Mr. Motyka has been stricken and vote for two has been stricken. Commissioner Casey recedes himself from the vote. VOTE: Tom Casey = 2 votes Gene Hostettler = 3 votes 9. REVIEW MAY AGENDA City Planner Gordon has been moved to May. Park District Discussion add to May Fackler explained the budget process to the Commission. The park director presents recommendations for capital outlay, etc. and the budget based that experience. -6663- Mound Advisory Park and Open Space Commission April 12,2001 REPORTS City Council Representative Peter Meyer · Island Park Hall. The city will provide bonding at some time soon for water tower, retaining walls, IP Hall restoration, etc. · The post office is on hold. Park Director Jim Fackler · Island Park hall improvements. · Swenson Park equipment has been received. · Full-time position maintenance person has been hired. 2/3 of this position is replacing a seasonal position. · Donation of $895.00 toward the toys at Swenson Park from the VFW or the Legion. Commissioner Taylor formally apologized for missing the first three meetings as she was trying to attend the first meeting when slipped, dislocated, and fractured her foot. MOTION by Domholdt seconded by Taylor to adjourn meeting at 10:15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. -6664- CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING THE NAME OF PARK FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA The purpose for these criteria is to establish a procedure for the naming and approving of Park and Recreation Facilities with the City of Mound. Contributor. This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location. The name should fit the neighborhood. A Famous American or Prominent Citizen. Recognition shall not be considered until termination of service or death. Occasion. A special event in history. Service. An individual living or dead who has significantly served the community above and beyond the call of duty. CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING THE FACILITIES WITH THE PARK AND MEMORIALS FOR THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA. FACILITIES WITHIN THE PARK Facilities within a park can be named for an individual or organization who has donated funds for the construction of the facility or has contributed service to the community. Examples of such facilities would include: Athletic Fields Tennis Courts Swim Pools Ice Arena Golf Course Buildings Wild Life Area The percentage of donation should be 50% of the estimated cost of the facility when new, not including cost of the land. If an individual has contributed at least 10 years of service to recreation in the City and a period of at least two years has passed from the termination of service or the death of the individual whichever comes first, then the Park and Open Space Advisory Commission may consider the renaming of a facility within a Park. MEMORIALS An individual or organization may wish to recognize a deceased city resident by means of a visible, physical item such as: a plaque, living memorial or art object display in a public recreation facility. In order to accomplish this memorial the donor must provide for the cost of the object plus installation. A portion of future maintenance can be considered as part of the installation cost. -6665- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSHIP OF :STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUNDS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, did on February 12, 1991, adopt resolution No. 91-30, entitled "Resolution Authorizing City Sponsorship in State Grant-In-Aid Snowmobile Trail Funds"; and WHEREAS, the Department of Natural Resources is requesting that the City again reaffirm its sponsorship of the State Grant-In-Aid Snowmobile Trail Funds; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Trails Association has requested the City of Mound to sponsor grant-in-aid snowmobile trails through the Minnesota Trails Assistance Program; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for the Minnesota Trail Assistance Program on behalf of the Southwest Trails Association; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to execute and approve contractual agreements for this grant. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember by Councilmember and seconded The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this day of ,2001. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor -6666- AUSu~t 8. 2000 ..... RF~OLUTION NO. 00-73' RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSltlP Or STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBH.E TRAIL FUNDS WI~REAS, the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, did on February 12, 1991., adopted Resolution No. 91-30 entitled, "Resolution Authorizing City Sponsorship in State Grant-In-Aid Snowmobile Trail Funds"; and WltEREAS, the Department of Natural Resources is requesting that the City again reaffirm its sponsorship of the State grant-in-aid snowmobile trail funds; and WI~.REAS, the Southwest Trails Association have. requested the City of Mound sponsor grantxin'aid snOWmobile trails through the Minnesota Trails Assistance Program. NOW, TI~.~ORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, is willing to act as a sponsoring unit of government in applying to the State of Minnesota for the grant-in-aid funds for snowmobile trails that will be maintained by: the Southwest Trails Association. BE IT FURTH2ER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is authorized to to the Department of Natural Resources for the Minnesota Trail Assistance Program behalf of the Southwest Trails Association; and The City Manager ad Finance Director are hereby authorized to execute approve contractual agreements for this. grant. '. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Brown and by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, rown Hanus and Weycker. The following Couneilmembers voted in the negative: none. Mayor Meisel was absent and excused. Attest: City Clerk Acting Mayor .: -6667- 23 February 12, 1991 Specialty Lines: (1) League of MN. Cities Insurance Trust thru N.S.R.S. (2) Transcontinental Insurance Co. (CNA) thru John Crowther (3) League of MN. Cities Insurance Trust thru E.B.A. (4) Capitol Indemnity (5) Health Special Risk He then offered to reduce his agency's commission by 20%, or $2,200 reducing the total premium to $160,658. Ahrens moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #91-29 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE POLICIES, PREMIUMS AND COMPANIES AS SUBMITTED BY MR. EARL BAILEY, R. L. YOUNGDAHL & ASSOCIATES FOR THE 1991 INSURANCE PROGRAM The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT There were none. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPONSORSHIP OF STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUND~ Doug Swanson and Dick Meredith of the Southwest Trail Association were present. Bill Kullberg, President of the State Snowmobile Association was also present and explained that the 147 miles of trail is groomed, maintained and repaired solely with volunteer help. In return, the Minnesota DNR reimburses them for time and materials. That money is used for maintenance and fuel to operate 2 groomers. They are requesting that Mound be the sponsor city for the Southwest Trail Association. Mound would be the vehicle through which they would receive State grant-in-aid funds. Ahrens moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #91-30 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSHIP OF STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAIL FUNDS The vote was unanimously, in favor. Motion carried. -6668- 1~ DEPAE~MENT OF NATUIIAL II~SOUIICIS MINNESOTA 'ASSISTANCE PROGRAM REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT SNOWMOBILE AND CROSS-COUNTRY SKI Sponsor Period covered by this statement: A. Administration B. Acquisition 'C. Construction D. Relocation E. Facilities $ F. Map Printing $ G. Grooming H. Liability Insuranc~ Trail/Ama Name ~' TO: · L/g J. ~g 4. Mnount and Ye~ of Grant Expenditures to Date (Including this Request) Baianc~ L~ft in Account (Accomplishm~ts) Numl~r of miles Constructed to Date Number of Bridges Number of Parking Ar~as 70. ,~ 7_. Sub-Total A thru F ,2.% Zoo ,/ Sub-Total F and G Any Bids Required? Original Signatures on All Copies'?. Signed Work Shgts and Grooming Logs? Invoices for Purchases and Services over $i00.00 State Cost 65% $ (Accomplishments) Numlc~r of Miles Maintained ('Fhis Reimbursement Only) Trail Width Miles Traveled by Grooming Equipment I hereby c~rtify that the materials and/or services shown on attached invoices have been delivered, that this is my only original invoice and is correct and just, and that no part of same has been paid. County Signature - Title Auditor/Clerk Date~ Date INVOICE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT BY: Regional Supervisor A~a Trails & Waterways Supervisor Date -6669- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 01- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR TFIE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4646 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 2, AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 12, 13, 14, AND 15, BLOCK 3, DEVON PID #30-117-23-22-0010 AND #30-117-23-22-0011 P & Z CASE # 01-05 WHEREAS, the applicant, Brenshell Homes, has requested a minor subdivision to create two buildable single-family lots on the property located at 4646 Island View Drive; and, WttEREAS, the property has an existing single-family residence which would be removed for the two proposed homes. The property is fairly steep in areas, with a total of 35 feet of fall from north to south. Storm water runoff from this and other properties to Island View Drive has caused problems with the storm sewer system in the past; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA Zoning District that requires a 6,000 square feet lot area, 20 feet front yard setbacks, and 10 feet side yard setbacks for non lots of record; and, and lot 40 feet WHEREAS, the preliminary plat indicates proposed lot 1 would have 10,142 square feet 2 would have 12,650 square feet of lot area. Lot widths exceed the district minimums of along improved Island View Drive; and, WHEREAS, the minor subdivision would reclassify the proposed parcels to non-lots of record, subjecting them to all applicable zoning provisions; and, WHEREAS, as proposed hardcover for each lot would be under the 30% maximum for non-lots of record; and, WHEREAS, the parcels will utilize the existing driveway as a common access point along Putnam Place (vacated and unvacated portions). An easement for access purposes is needed to ensure proposed lot 1 can cross through lot 2; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended unanimous approval of the minor subdivision as recommended by Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: The City does hereby grant a minor subdivision of the property pursuant to Section 330:20, Subdivision 1.B with the following conditions: Update the property boundaries to include the south ½ of Putnam Place. Provide a driveway easement over the easterly parcel running in favor of the westerly parcel. The easement agreements shall note the driveway is the responsibility of the owner for that portion lying on unvacated Putnam Place. If access to utilities is needed, it will be the responsibility of the property owner to replace the driveway. -6670- Co Limit the hardcover on each parcel to 30%. Provide an easement over property south of vacated Putnam Place to preserve the slope and vegetation. Exceptions to the easement could include' allowances for grading and site work to prevent erosion. The easement should be reviewed and approved by Staff prior to recording. Pay park dedication fees as established by City Council resolution 10% land value or $500/unit. Provide drainage and utility easements along all lot lines and a permanent easement for street and utility purposes for Island View Drive as constructed and shown on the survey. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan to be approved by the City Engineer at time of building permit application. Include curb along south side of private driveway with catch basin and storm sewer line connected by City system. The new sanitary sewer and water service either by installed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow or performance bond. This Minor Subdivision is granted for the following new legally described property as described in Attachment A. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution and easements with Hennepin County and paying all costs for such recording. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember by Councilmember and seconded The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: ADOPTED APRIL 24, 2001 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: City Clerk -6671 - DRAFT EXCERPT OF MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY APRIL 9, 2001 CASE #01;05 MINOR SUBDIVISION BRENSHELL HOMES 4646 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE Planner Gordon introduced the item. The parcel is located in the R1A zoning district. The applicant wishes to split the existing lot into 2 buildable lots. The driveway offPutnam Place will remain as the common access drive because of the steep grade. The proposed lots meet area minimums of 6,000. The hardcover area is below the maximum 30%. The reason this case was not on the agenda for last meeting was because of the Putnam Place driveway access. An alley runs through the lot called known as Putnam Place. The plat shows the alley was vacated. Mr. Stokes contended the east portion was still public right of way and the drive serving the existing house was on the non-vacated portion. Because of drainage issues, staff suggests curb be put in on south side of the drive with a storm sewer system privately owned maintained by property owner to insure the drainage gets to Island View Drive as it should. An easement is needed for the driveway in addition to an easement over the south half of Lot 1. It is essential that the slope be protect and that development bee kept off of it. Park dedication fees would be collected for the additional lot. City Engineer Cameron indicates grade be maintained at no steeper than 3:1 and minimize the impact on trees by the grading activity. The property owners wants to work with Cameron on a retaining wall to solve the problem. This solution appears reasonable. Discussion Commissioner Mueller was concerned that this area was in a bluff and was assured that it did not meet criteria for a bluff. Mueller then observed that the property across the street continued the appearance of a bluff. Planner Gordon said that, because the street was already in place and divides the area it was considered a pre-existing condition. Mueller inquired how the intent of the ordinance would impact this. Gordon stated that he didn't think we wold want to start regulating the lakeside portions of the ordinance in cases like this. Mueller asked about the project that was considered about a year ago that was similar. Gordon said it didn't qualify as a bluff. The grade is 22%, not at 30%. Commissioner Voss asked if we had ever required sanitary sewer service be installed or guaranteed before? Gordon stated that we had and it was to protect the intent of the project in case the property owner doesn't finish. Voss wanted to know why there was no financial guarantee for removal of the home. Gordon said is was a good question. The home straddles both lot lines and construction can't begin until the home is gone. We can include removal as part of the requirements. Voss further inquired why require installation of sanitary sewer and water when it's obviously needed, but not require removal. Gordon said that, if the second house is never built the money will be there to complete the installation. -6672- Tom Stokes of Brenshell Homes asked to put verbage in the requirement that a building permit can't be issued until the storm sewer and removal of house is done. It is our intent to build both and it will be under his control throughout the process. If you drive by the site there is 10 or 12 mature tress on the comer and seems to be a mistake to take them out for grading. There are various places between there that it makes more sense to bring bottom up rather than top down, thereby achieving the same thing and still leaving the trees in place. Regarding the Putnam Place issue, at the bottom line it didn't make sense to vacate the access to this property. It was found by legal counsel that it hadn't been vacated intentionally. We can collect 40 % or better of the water, keep mature trees, and address the slope at the same time. Commission Burma asked why all of Putnam Place was vacated except the rectangular area on the east portion of the lot. Stokes said there is an access manhole in that portion. Burma inquired if the city will be responsible for maintenance? Gordon said that Cameron wanted that to be addressed in an agreement and asks that the portion at the point have dedicated easements for street. Mueller asked why there were no surface requirements for the driveway, ie. concrete. Gordon said that the ordinance requires that it must be surfaced Weiland wants a performance bond as part of the requirements. MOTION by Commissioner Voss, seconded by Commissioner Mueller, to approve recommendation including items #1-6 from Planner Gordon's memo and Engineer Cameron's requirements #2-4. Include the requirement that property owners will repair/maintain the private drive if access by the city is required for maintenance. MOTION CARRIED unanimously. -6673- PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: April 9, 2001 SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision APPLICANT: Brenshell Homes CASE NUMBER: 01-05 HKG FILE NUMBER: 01-05 LOCATION: 4646 Island View Drive ZONING: R- lA Single Family Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant has submitted an application for a minor subdivision to create two buildable lots. The parcel is comprised of two parcels and has an existing home. It is located at the "comer" at the east end of Island View Drive. The property is currently a lot of record with an existing residence. Access is from the east side of the property along vacated/unvacated Putnam Place. From the north property line, the topography drops 35 feet to meet the curb on Island View Drive. The proposal creates 2 lots, Lot 1 at 10,142 square feet and 97 feet of frontage on Island View, and Lot 2 12,650 square feet with over 120 feet of frontage on Island View. The existing home would be removed to allow the new homes to be built. Hardcover calculations indicate each lot can meet 30% impervious surface limits. The survey indicated that the property boundary doesn't include the eastern 50 feet of platted Putnam Place. A copy of the original 1952 Island Park Resolution is provided indicating all but the north ½ adjacent to lots 16 and 17 was vacated. City plat maps show that the entire length was vacated. The preliminary plat will need to be updated to include the south ½ as part of the property. DISCUSSION: With the resolution of that unvacated portion of Putnam Place, staff is comfortable with the proposed driveway location. The existing home has its drive in the same 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6674- p. 2 Ecklund Minor Subdivision April 9, 2001 location, so it is logical that it remain. Drainage from the property to Island View Drive has been a problem in the past. The City Engineer is recommending the installation of driveway curbing a private storm sewer to reduce the water volume along the street. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the minor subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Update the property boundaries to include the south 92 of Putnam Place. 2. Provide a driveway easement over the easterly parcel running in favor of the westerly parcel. 3. Limit the hardcover on each parcel to 30%. 4. Provide an easement over property south of vacated Putnam Place to preserve the slope and vegetation. Exceptions to the easement could include allowances for grading and site work to prevent erosion. The easement should be reviewed and approved by Staff prior to recording. 5. Pay park dedication fees as established by City Council resolution 10% land value or $500/unit. 6. All recommendations as contained in the City Engineer's report. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Mirmeapolis, M/rmesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6675- PLANNING REPORT NAR 0 7 2001 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: March 12, 2001 SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision APPLICANT: Brenshell Homes CASE NUMBERS: 01-05 HKG FILE NUMBER: 01-05 LOCATION: 4646 Island View Drive ZONING: R-lA Single Family Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant has submitted an application for a minor subdivision to create two buildable lots. The parcel is comprised of to parcels and has an existing home. It is located on the north side of the "curve" on the east end of Island View. The proposal creates 2 lots, Lot 1 at 10,142 square feet and 97 feet of frontage on Island View, and Lot 2 12,650 square feet with over 120 feet of frontage on Island View. The existing home would be removed to allow the new homes to be built, generally on either side of its location. Hardcover calculations indicate each lot can meet 30% impervious surface limits. The survey indicated that the property boundary doesn't include the eastern 50 feet of platted Putnam Place. City plat maps and Hermepin County records show that the entire length was vacated. If is tree and standard vacation procedure was followed, the property boundary should include the south ½ of Putnam Place on both east and west ends. As shown, the access drive for the two parcels is located on the north ½. Records of easements with the adjacent property owner are not provided. The applicant contends the east 50 feet was not vacated. Staff has asked that records be provided to support this claim. DISCUSSION: The driveway location is an important element of this subdivision because it provides a single access point for both parcels. The existing home has its drive in the same location, so it is logical to leave it here if ownership issues can be addressed. Moving the driveway south will create other problems with grade (over 25% slope) and increased runoff to 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6676- Palrnquist Minor Subdivision and Variance March 12, 2001 the storm sewer intake on the curve. This intake has been a problem for the City and residential lakeshore properties to the south. Oftentimes, it backs up from accumulating leaves, some erosion, and sand from winter road treatments. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the minor subdivision with the following conditions: 1. If Pumam Place has been vacated as City and Hennepin County records indicate, the applicant needs to secure title or use of the north ½ for use of the driveway. Additional easements may be needed for the adjacent neighbors service connections which run through this area. 2. Provide a driveway easement over the easterly parcel running in favor of the westerly parcel. 3. Limit the hardcover on each parcel to 30%. 4. Provide an easement over the south ½ of the property to preserve the slope and vegetation and limit any construction or grading. 5. Pay park dedication fees as established by City Council resolution 10% land value or $500/unit. 6. All recommendations as contained in the City Engineer's report. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6677- Engineering ,* Planning ~ Surveying HAR 0 7 2001 ME M 0 R A ND UM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: March 6, 2001 Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning John Cameron, City Enginee~ City of Mound Minor Subdivision - Ecklund/Brenshell Homes Case #01-05 MFRA #13197 As requested, we have reviewed the proposed minor subdivision of the Ecklund property and have the following comments and recommendations: Comments There are a number of ownership issues that need to be clarified, including the status of Putman Place right-of-way east between the subject property and Island View Drive. The plan shows this area of Putman Place was not vacated and is intended to be used as access to the proposed subdivision; however the Hennepin County Half Section maps indicate all of Putman Place was vacated. If this is the situation, then the existing home at 4640 Island View Drive probably owns the north half of Putman Place. The City's watermain and hydrant are located in the southerly portion of this right-of-way, which limits where the driveway can be located. The survey submitted with the application shows only tentative house locations and elevations; therefore a final grading and drainage plan will be required when application is made for a building permit. 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-marl: mfra@mfra, com -6678 Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning March 6, 2001 Page 2 o The steep, unmaintained slope on this property at the south edge along Island View Drive has caused erosion problems in the past, which has affected the City's catch basin and storm sewer system. The addition of considerable hard cover will undoubtly add to the problem. We suggest one solution would be to include curb along the south side of the proposed driveway. The storm sewer in Island View Drive would need to be extended to a catch basin constructed in curb line of the private driveway. This storm sewer should be private and maintained by the property owners. The existing catch basin in Island View Drive also needs to be replaced; therefore the City would need to cooperate with the applicant in this matter. When this storm sewer is installed, the steep slope on Lots 1 and 2 should be regarded to a maximum of 3:1, which will allow this area to be maintained and eliminate the present erosion problem. The City utility records indicate that the only usable sewer and water services are the ones currently connected to the existing house. Therefore, one additional sanitary sewer and one water service will need to be installed from the City mains located in vacated Putman Place. Recommendations We recommend the following conditions become a part of the subdivision approval: 1. Determine status of "vacated" Putman Place and how the private driveway will access Island View Drive. 2. Provide drainage and utility easements along all lot lines and a permanent easement for street and utility purposes for Island View Drive as constructed and shown on the survey. 3. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan to be approved by the City Engineer at time of building permit application. 4. Include curb along south side of private driveway with catch basin and storm sewer line connected to City system. 5. The new sanitary sewer and water service either be installed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow or performance bond. cc: Loren Gordon, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. s:\main:\Mou 13197:\Correspondence~sutherland3-6 -6679- Application for , MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0607, Fax: 472-0620 F£B 0 5 ' Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: ~2~ __- PAID Distribution: ~/D'/ Ci~ Planner ~//~/0/ DNR ~//~/~ j Public Works ~/~/~/ Pa~s C~Y OF MOL~ND ~/~/~/ Ci~ Engin~r ~//~/~/ O~er~ Case No. C~')/- .:~ ~' Application Fee: Escrow Deposit: Deficient Unit Charges? Delinquent Taxes? $75.00 Si,000 VARIANCE REQUIRED? Please type or print the following Information: ~ISTING Lot ~.>i~-~:~':','i~ ~ I~ -4~ -J ~ '. ' .-~ ~ Plat~ DESCRIPTION Subdivision PI~ ZONiN~ DISTRICT Circle: R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 APPLICANT The appli~nt is: -.. OWNER Name (if other than Phone (H). ENGINEER Addr~s Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ( . nr"n~01~ If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. This application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, or an explanatign g~ven why this is not the case. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Revised 07-13-00 Revised 07-13-00 -6680- Date o I ~ o~ ~:~'~ PRELIMINARY PLA T I ~1 ?1 ,,,~'~"~:~ DEVELOPI~NT PLAN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LOCAT~ / l~l-~ ~l ~~~'~'~ ALTA Ph -6681- Feb-15-Oi 03:56P Brenshell Homes 9524958121 P-02 X W: HOMK , P.O. Box 12~ Mound, MN &'~.X64 Phone (952) 49~-900! / Fax (952) 495-~121 Thomas Stokes cellular (612) ~21-1141 February 15, City of Mound John Sutherland 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: 4646 Island View Dear John, Please find the enclosed copy of the letter I have received from Waldron La~,' Offices. ,-ks you may be aware there has been some confusion as to the ownership ora few pie shaped pieces of property that is included in our subdivision request. Mr. Waldron has been retained by the sellers to clear the title. Please forward a copy of this letter to The City Attorney so he can contact Mr. Waldron with any questions he may have. It's my understanding that these title issues will be cleared up within the next 75 days. Ptease call me with any questions you might have. Sincerely yours, Thomas A. Stokes -6682- 952495812 1 612 4'1'1 8859 P.03 WALORON LAW O tCES, LTD. T~.L.~.PUGN f~ (9~1~ F:larusry 8, 2001 websil~ w w,~.la,~yera.c.om/w&~dfon TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: eerttncate or Title No. 20T'/63 Part of Lots 1 amd 3, Brock 2, Devon 464~ Island View Drive, Mound P.I.D. No. 30-1 I']-23 22 0010 The uncler~ir,,n~d i~ in th~ prcr.~ of clearing title to the abo,~:--de~cribed property. Tr~e prol:~r'{y described in ~e above Certifie,.a~ of Title bas been combinccl with property r~w owned by David and Sandra Ecklunti m the above tax parcel for many y~ars. Thercfo, r,e, although ~c l!ck:lunds do not have cl~ar title to this property, titey and O:cir predecessors in interest have been pa},tng thc taxes on it for quite some tirr~. T~re ha~ been ma activity on th~ above Certificate for over 35 ye. an and I am tn. formed the owners of record ar, now deceased. Since all of the affected property is tor~ns property, I am working closely with thc Hertnepin County Examiner of Titles Oft'ice to unravel this matter and decide upon the t>cst =,nd most exr~idou$ manner of clearing title. Once this decision is made, which I an~l¢ipate ~o be in thc next week or ao, the pro. ss of actually cleating tt~ title tlxrough the Examiaer of Titles Offic~ may take thirty to sixty days. Very truly yours, Joh~ B, Waldron Real Pnaper~ I;aw Specialist, r~nified by the Mtnnmota $~e Bar ,~a~x::lation -6683- ':- ~operry In.formation Search by Property ID Result page Page 1 of 2 Search By: r ID !~ldress Actd~ Name Property ID: 3011723220011 Property Information Search Result (The property information database is updated at the beginning of each month.) Parcel Data for Taxes Payable 2000 Property ID: 30-117-23 22 0011 ~ Property Address: 85 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Municipality Name: MOUND School Dist: 277 Watershed: 3 Sewer Dist: Construction Year: Parcel Size: IRREGULAR Owner Name: DAVID L ECKLUND ETAL Taxpayer Name & Address: DAVID L ECKLUND 4646 ISLAND VIEW DR MOUND MN 55364 Most Current Sales Information Sales prices are reported as listed on the Certificate of Real Estate Value and are not warranted to represent arms-length transactions. NO SALE INFORMATION ON FILE FOR THIS PROPERTY. Tax Parcel Description Lot: Addition Name: Block: 002 DEVON Metes & Bounds: LOT 2 AND W 2 FT OF LOT 1 AND THE E 18 FT OF LOT 3 EX ROAD INCL ADJ 112 OF STREET VACATED Value and Tax Summary for Taxes Payable 2000 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 1999 Estimated Market Value: Limited Market V~lue: Taxable Market Value: Total Improvement Amount: Total Net Tax: Total Specials: Solid Waste Fee: Total Tax: 3,800 3,700 3,700 60.58 .68 61.26 latt'p://www2.co.hcrmc"pin-'~;-us/pins/IdSrchRes.- 6684- 7/2612000 l~rop~ ~uforma~on Sca'ch by Property ID Kesult page ~',~e ~ ot ~ Property Information Detail for Taxes Payable 2000 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 1999 Values: Land Market Building Market Machinery Market Total Market: Land Limited Building Limited Total Limited: Qualifying Improvements Classifications: Property Type Homestead Status Relative Homestead Agricultural Exempt Status 3,800 3,800 3,700 3,700 VACANT LAND - RESIDENTIAL HOME~D YES 561 Questions or problems with this database search should be directed to Don.KopetC, co.hennepin.mn.us Hennepin County is providing this information as a public service. Please send comments on our Web Site to Henn.NetC, co.hennepin.mn.us or use our Feedback Form ~ Copyright © 1998 Hennepin County http://wwm2.co.hennep~-nv"-us/pins/IdSrehRes.s- 6685- 7/26/2000 Hennepin County, Minnesota This information is to be used for reference purposes only. Henneoin C~unty does not guarantee We accuracy of t~e material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or rmsreoresenta~Jon of Wis infon"natJon or its derfvativea, if map discrepancies are founc~, please contact ~qe Hennepin County Surveyors Office at (512) 34~-3131. The quality of t~he display may be influenced hy your screen size and resolution setting, and is best viewed at 800x600 so. eh resolution. This application requires Intemet Explorer 3.02 or Netscaoe 2.01 or later versien for proper operation Copyright © 2000 I-Iennepin County http://www3.co.henne..Jesrimap.dll?name=Henn'_--~B~_'_d=FindAVALUE=301172322001 712612000 f,;r David h. Eck~lund in Blocks 2 and 3, Devon Henne?In C~nt)-~ Ylnl1~Sot~ l .t ..... ~.~a' ...',r -,. .... , , L ~ .. ~: , ~ ~.~ ~ ~, · --~ ~ .~ ~ · ~ ~,. - .... ~. ~A~O' ..~ fiaa~ o f S . I hereby ceftin,- tk~ tbis is a t~e amd corre~ sen~t~on cf a sa~'ey of the ~undaries cf: Par 1: Lot 12 except the Westerly 15 feet ti'..~r~-,cf'; L~t~. lq, l&, and 15, Block 3 of Devon and t'-.,.~t par~ of the North half of the. ~ .adjoining vacated Pu%~.~. p~ lying between tko . e~n~ions across it of t~ D, sL line cf the W,:st !~ feet of ~t ~, [.lock 3, ~vcn, and the F~st Zinc o" r/.t ~5, ~id Blo,k 3, ~md ~ar 2: All. of Lot 2; tP~t part of 7~t 3 l[.~n~. Easterly of a line dra~n ~r~!le! ~ith the ~st line of s~id lot f~m a :mint in the North lJn~ or said let disSent'IS feet W~s% from the }~orth~est co,er of ~t 2, ?lock 2: ~at ~art. of. ~t i l~nr W~s~%r!y of a line dra~ ~!lel wi~h the West l~ne of s,id io~ from a ~int in the North line of said lot dis~nt 2 feet ~st from the ~'crtheast eorncr of ~t 2, sa~d block; and that ~rt of the South half og ~t~.n Place vacat~-d l~nr... .. hetu'een the ex+~ns~ons of the Uest line of said part of ~t 3 ~nd the ~s% l~ne of s~:[d n':rt r.f ~t l, all in Blcck 2 of ~von~ and of the !o~tion of all buil~ingr t>e~c~. It does not ou~r% to show o~aer imo~ve- men~ or encroaching. For o~oses cf this s~'ey, th~ ove'rkge-In Block 2 has ~6n distribu~d prooortto~ly ~t~een a~ the lots. Land ~urve.vor and Planner Long IAke, P,_~nnesota : 1" = E~te : 6-16-75 o : Imon m~ rker '-6687- On- ×---~ I--'0 ' t-- D 13.o 0 ~ >m D r~ 0 o 1~ 1,.- o £ON O0 -6688- ~- < X 13:: < I- W X z o ~.~ £1 o ~6689 " CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 01- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4225 WILSHIRE BLVD, PORTIONS OF LOT A, THE FIRST REARRANGEMENT OF PltF~LPS ISLAND PARK FIRST DIVISION PID #19-117-23-12-0003 P & Z CASE # 01-03 AND #01-09 '~ WltEREAS, the applicant, Steven and Sharon Corl, have requested variances for additions to their home located at 4225 Wilshire Blvd. The requested variances are as follows;' Existing/Proposed Required Variance Front yard setback 11.3 feet /3.3feet Lakeside setback - channel 21.4 feet Lakeside setback 29.8 feet 20 feet 16.7 feet 50 feet 28.6 feet 50 feet 30.2 feet and, WHEREAS, the proposed variances are needed for the following projects: an 8 feet by 32.5 feet second story (including remodeling of 29 feet by 32 feet area), an additional garage stall, a 4.5 feet by 8 feet entry, and a 10 feet by 19 feet porch; and, WFrEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-1A Zoning District that requires a 6,000 square feet lot area, 20 feet front yard setbacks, and 10 feet side yard setbacks for non lots of record; and, WHEREAS, The lowest floor elevation of the house is 932.0 feet which is below the Regulatory Flood Elevation Standard (RFPE) of 933.0 feet for Lake Minnetonka. Because the improvements are valued at more than 50% of the building value, the lowest floor would be required to meet the 933.0 feet RFPE minimum; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended approval of the variances as recommended by Staff. NOW, TI:IEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant the variance requests with the following conditions: The lowest floor be elevated to meet or exceed the minimum regulatory flood protection elevation of 933.0 feet. The second floor addition meet a 20 feet front yard setback and maintain the existing channel setback. The second story above the garage addition be removed and designed with a hip roof. The 15 feet "island" provision for flood protection not be required for the area where the garage addition is proposed. The parcel be limited to 40% impervious surface. -6690- The City does hereby grant the variances based on the following findings: a. The lakeside variances do not increase the existing setbacks. b. The front yard setback reduction will provide additional enclosed parking and storage area not currently available and will not be detrimental to the street comdor. c. The proposed additions will increase the livability of the residence. d. The variances are the mimmum needed to accomplish the proposed construction. e. Granting the variance would not detriment the purposes of this Ordinance. 3. This variance is granted for the following new legally described property: THAT PART OF LOT A, THE FIRST REARRANGEMENT OF PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST DIVISION, LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE RUNNING EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM A POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 648.5 FEET NORTHERLY FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution and easements with Hennepin County and paying all costs for such recording. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember by Councilmember and seconded The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: ADOPTED APRIL 24, 2001 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: City Clerk -6691 - DC~ UC -6692- DRAFT EXCERPT OF MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY APRIL 9, 2001 CASE #01-09 VARIANCE STEVEN CORL 4225 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD Plaffner Gordon introduced the case. The property owner would like to do some work to their house and need some variances. They plan to add a front entry, 3 season porch on east, second stall on the garage and a second level above the garage addition. Variance issues include the elevation of the lowest floor. The garage floor and family room are at 932 feet and 933 is required if the work is more than 50% of the current house value. Also at issue is the front yard setback, currently at 11.3 feet. The new addition would bring it down to 3.8 feet. This is a unique parcel and severely impacted by the lakeshore setback. The garage addition with the second story is the only variance that is more encroaching than it is today. It is tricky because of the 932 elevation. Porch and entry maintain existing setbacks. The second story addition was more difficult. He thought that the commission should look at the front yard setback (from 11 to 3 feet) and the 15 feet from the retaining wall. It's usually not a good move to burden the setbacks. He feels that the addition should be cut back to maintain setback. The realtor was looking at some other options like putting a hip roof. Discussion Voss wanted the bulk issue explained. Gordon indicated that 2 stories of a house 3 feet from your lot line is too much. The garage is barely visible by the retaining wall, but a second story will be right in your face. Three feet off the property line is not acceptable. Sutherland reminded the commission about the bulk issue on Ridgewood. It canyonized the area. He asked Gordon what his feeling was on Mr. Clark's proposal of a hip roof?. Gordon said that the hip roof does reduce the bulk. They still need to be sensitive on the front yard setbacks. Sutherland said another option might be a room and attic truss on the first story. That would capture a room on the second story but be in compliance with Gordon's recommendation. They could combine a room and attic truss and hip roof to decrease the bulk. Clark stated that they intend to raise elevation to 933, and could make the second story addition a shed roof. Burma wanted to know what would happen when a snowplow comes over the bridge and snow flies into the house and what hardship criteria are we dealing with? Gordon said that a single car garage would be one hardship. Weiland inquired as to how far it was from the west edge of the house to the water's edge to the west? Gordon said it wouldn't be any worse than it is now. Voss wanted to know how they arrive at the value of the house. Gordon indicated that it was based on the county assessor's fair market value. That's the only fair way we can do it over the whole city and it's stated in the code. Sutherland said that, from the new addition, the curb is 21 feet. He didn't think that it would be an issue. He asked Gordon if he was okay with the garage addition. Gordon said that he was. Sutherland wanted to know if the hip roof on the second floor was okay. Gordon objected because there was still too much bulk. Sutherland went on to specify that a hip end would capture a room above the garage. -6693- Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2001 DR 4:T MOTION'by Commissioner Mueller, seconded by Commissioner Clapsaddle, to recommend approval subject to recommendations 1, 3 and 4 outlined in City Planner's April 9, 2001 memo and allow a second story addition over the existing structure. MOTION CARRIED. Voting in favor were: Michael, Mueller, Burma, Clapsaddle, Voss, Glister, Weiland and Councilmember Anderson. Voting against was: Hasse. -6694- PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: April 9, 2000 SUBJECT: Variance Request APPLICANT: Steve and Sharon Corl CASE NUMBER: 01-09 HKG FILE NUMBER: 01-5 LOCATION: 4225 Wilshire Blvd. ZONING: Residential District R- 1A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted a request for three additions to an existing residence. They include a 29 feet by 32 feet second story addition, an 8 feet by 32 feet first floor garage addition, a 4.5 feet by 8 feet entry, and a 10 feet by 19 feet three season porch. The variance requests are as follows: Existing/Proposed Required Variance Front yard setback Lakeside setback Lakeside setback 11.3 feet / 3.3 feet 20 feet 16.7 feet 21.4 feet 50 feet 28.6 feet 29.8 feet 50 feet 30.2 feet The property is on the southeast side of the Black Lake Channel Bridge. The parcel is a triangular peninsula extending into Spring Park Bay. With current code restrictions on lakeside setbacks, the parcel is virtually undevelopable. The residence predates these standards and is considered a nonconforming structure. The proposed improvements will reduce the front yard setback by 8 feet to 3.3 feet. The actual bridge abutment is further back within the right-of-way and space of about 14 feet separates it from the proposed addition. The road surface is about 8 feet higher than the current garage floor and is about the same height as the second story floor. At one time the house had a two stall (wide) garage but half of it has since been converted to living space. As proposed, the 8 feet by 32 feet garage addition would provide room for two stalls with room for storage of boats and other recreational equipment. The applicant wishes to match the existing floor elevation of 932.0 feet. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6695- p. 2 #01-09 Variance Request - 4225 Wilshire Blvd. April 9, 2001 The proposed porch and entry additions maintain existing lakeside setbacks of 21.4 and 29.4 feet respectively. There is not currently a deck or porch. The lowest floor elevation of the house is 932.0 feet which is below the Regulatory Flood Elevation Standard (RFPE) of 933.0 feet for Lake Minnetonka. Additional improvements to the house may be permitted if they are below 50% of the value of the building. Hennepin County estimates the market value of the residence at $83,500. The proposed improvements are estimated at $125,000 or about 150% of the current home value. If the improvements were less than 50% of the market value, the lowest floor would not need to meet the 933 feet flood elevation. Because they are more than 50%, the 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." DISCUSSION: There are a number of issues present with this case that complicate the request, the first of which is the minimum floor elevation which needs to be elevated to 933.0 if the project is to proceed. Because there is not a variance process available to allow the proposed construction to proceed without elevating the lowest floor, the applicant will need to plan this into the project. If this is not feasible, the applicant will need to substantially revise the plans which could include additions that would be only 50% of the building market value. Assuming the floor is elevated, setbacks are the second item. Staff would concur with maintaining the existing 21.4 feet channel and 29.8 feet Spring Park Bay setbacks. Because the property does not have a porch, the request seems reasonable. The second story addition is more problematic as it would add considerable bulk to the front yard. Unlike the garage addition, which will be mostly obscured by the bridge abutment, the additional 900 square feet of building and roofline is aesthetically detrimental to the public right-of-way. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the request with the following conditions: 1. The lowest floor be elevated to meet or exceed the minimum regulatory flood protection elevation of 933.0 feet. 2. The second floor addition meet a 20 feet front yard setback and maintain the existing channel setback. 3. The 15 feet "island" provision for flood protection not be required for the area where the garage addition is proposed. 4. The parcel be limited to 40% impervious surface. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -6696- VAh~IAN~i::: APq-~LI~A I IUN CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone:.472-0607, Fax: 472-0620 P dD $100.00 OFFICE USE ONLY) ~lanning Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution: cit Planner, Ci~ Engineer, Public Wo~s, Case No. Other Other SUBJECT PROPERTY LEGAL DESC. PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) Address 4225 Wilshire Blvd Lot That part of Lot A Block Subdivision The first rearr, of Phelps Island Park First Division PID# 19-117-23-12-0003 ZONING DISTRICT R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B-1 Pla¢ E-2 B-3 Name Steven & Sharon Corl Address 4225 Wilshire Blvd. Phone (W)471-8800 Steve (H) 472-4553 (W)471-9051 Sharon fM). Name Address Phone (H) .... (W) (M) 1. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, (X) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stodes, type of use, etc.): A, 8' x 32.6' Two Story Addition B. Entry Addition Approximately 4.5' x 8' C. One Story Porch Addition Approximately 10' x 19' Atso See Attachment 0 '? 2001 -6697- V~riance Applic~on, P. 2 Do the existing structures comply with alrarea, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No 00. If no, specify each nomconforming use (describe reason for vadance request, i.e. setback, lot area, etc.): See Attachment o SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE (or existing) Front Yard: ! N S~E(~ 20' ft. 3.3 ft. 16 .-7 ft. Side Yard: ( N(,_~E,,_,W ) 50' ft. 29.8 ft. 30.2 ft. Side Yard: ( N~'S ~ ) 50' ft. ft. ft. Rear Yard: ((~PS E W ) 50 ' ft. 21.4 ft. 28.6 ft. Lakeside: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. ft. : (NSEW) ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: 60 ' ft. 192 ft. ft. Lot Size: 6,000 sq ft 13,600 sq ft sq ft Hardcoven 5.400 sq ft 4,964 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 (X), No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevem its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) too small ( ) drainage (X) existing situation ( ) too shallow (X) shape (X) other:, specify Please describe: See Attachment -6698- Was the hardship described above created by the ac'don of anyone having property interests in the Jand after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No t~). If yes, explain: Was the hardship cceated by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No (X). If yes, explain: The road was widened when the bridge was built in 1984. Several feet of right- of-way were taken. Prior to this we allowed to maintain and use the right-of- way taken in 1984. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar onty to the property described in this petition? Yes (X), No (). If no, list some other properties which are similarly affe~ed? 9. Comments: See Attachment 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 offidal 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 ,~-~_¢C~- )i~.., ~.~._. Date Date ~'~-¢/ -6699- CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIO__US SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPER'FY ADDRESS: 4225 Wilshire Blvd. OWNER'S NAME: Steve Cot1 ' I LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 30% = (for all lots) .............. ~ LOT AREA 13,600 SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record*) ....... I 5,440 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 350:1 225,Subd. 6. B. 1, (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. LENGTH WIDTH HOUSE X = Proposed Garage ~dd. 8 X 32.6 = Proposed Porch X = SQFT 1,844 261 170 TOTAL HOUSE ......................... ,I:jYE'FAjC/F~f~IjZ)/IjB~-~)~ ~Rock Walls X = 17, ~(~/~l;(/~E~/gi~i~l~ /.5~ Edge X : 11 TOTAL DETACHED E~LDGS ................. DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, Propm~_d F)riv~ ETC. Concrete Curb DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. opening between boards) wi~h a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover OTHER X : 1,940 X : 180 X : 438 38 TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC ................... X = X = X = TOTAL DECK ........................... X = X 2,340 28 2,596 TOTAL OTHER ......................... TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE UNDER / OVER (indicate difference) ............................... PREPARED BY Coffin & Gronberg DATE 4,964 I 476 I 2/27/01 . -6700- IN OF CERTIFICATE OF STEVE LOT A, THE FIRST SURVEY CORL FOR REARRANGEMENT PHELPS ISLAND PARK FIRST DIVISION HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 0 W (9317) d CHANNEL ..... f ............... 931- (~4.0 37.1 E×ISTING (933.6) 10.0 21.g PROPOSED FLOOR HOUSE L~vEL GARAGE FLOOR =(932.0) 443.9 BLACKTOP DRIVE 1.8 (934.o) 'PROPOSED ADDITION . LAKE 929.4 CONTOUR LINE MINNETONKA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES · That part of Lot A, The First Rearrangement of Phelps Island Park First Division, lying Northerly of a line running Easterly at right angles from a point in the Westerly line thereof a distance of 648.5 feet Northerly from the Southwest corner thereof. (904.6)' denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, the location of all visible "hardcover", and the proposed location of three proposed additions thereon. It does riot purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. NOTE · For purposes of this survey, the Westerly line of Lot A, the first Rearrangement of Phelps Island Park First Division, was determined by offsetting the centerline of travel by ,33 feet. I~eby certify that lhis survey was prepared by me or under my ~rect super- vision, and Ih(it lam a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under laws of the State of Minnesota· Merk S. Gronberg Mirlnesolq Lice~$c"Flurnt,cr 127,55 MAR 0 7 2001 DATE I 2-6-01 ,JOB NO. 01-043 Il~gean ~ :~acsa ~'$~n -. CHANNEL MAINTENANCE AND EROSION CONTROL EASEMENT (reserved for valuation and tax data} ) ) ) STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON': $ EXEMPT (reserved for recordinq data) Date: , 1996. For valuable consideration, Steven M. Corl and Sharon E. Corl, husband and wife, Grantors, hereby convey and warrant to the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Grantee, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, for channel maintenance and erosion control purposes, the real propertY in Hennepin County, Minnesota described on the reverse side of this document. St eve'~lq--~[. Corl ~ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Sh%ron E. Corl The foregoing was acknowledged before me this ,/? ~/~ day of L~)O~7-'-~.~j , 1996, by Steven M. Corl and Sharon E. Corl, husband and wife. Grantors. f~'A NOTA,'~ PUBUP.,-MINN _E~:~I'A Notary Public ~ Accepted: Assistant County Administrator 'This Instrument was drafted by: nepin County Dept. of Public Works Estate Section 320 Washington Ave. S. Hopkins, MN 55343 Date Tax Statements for the real property described in this instrument should be sent to' -6704- A permanent easement for channel maintenance and erosion control purposes over all that part of the following described tract: All that part of Lot A, in the First Rearrangement of Phelps Island Park First Division described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Westerly line of said Lot 648.50 feet Northerly from the Southwest corner thereof; thence at a right angle to the Easterly line of said lot; thence Northerly and Northwesterly along the Easterly and Northerly line of said lot to the Northwesterly corner of said lot; thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said lot to the point of beginning, according to the .plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said county, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point in the Westerly line. of .said Lot A distant 816.50 feet northerly of the Southwest corner thereof (which is approximately 6 feet southerly of the ordinary high water elevation of 929.4); thence run Easterly at a right angle to said Westerly line a distance of 150 feet more or less to the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka and there Lernri~ting. -6705- 67O6 If >//Vo/.gA//V//-v' -6707- Attachment: 2. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration, etc. a. Eight feet (8) is proposed to be added to the west side of the existing garage to allow the accommodation of two cars in the garage. The existing garage is 18' wide x 32.6 feet long. The proposed garage is 26' wide. A second story is proposed above the existing garage and proposed garage addition. b. The front entry is now recessed. The proposed entry will extend out 4.5 feet with a 2' overhang (approximately 4.5' x 8'). This proposed location is existing concrete steps and sidewalk. c. A three season porch is proposed on the north east comer of the house approximately 10' x 19'. 3. Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Etc. a. The street side (W) 11.3' to required 20' b. Lakeside (S) 29.8' to required 50' c. Lakeside (Iq) 21.4' to required 50' The new additions will not encroach any further towards the lake than the existing structure. 5. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? The property is a three sided peninsula surrounded by the lake on two sides. The house was built in 1952 to code without a two car garage. The current setbacks from the lake did not apply in 1952. The bridge and wall were constructed in 1984. The property line is approximately 10 1/2 feet from the wall and, in all probability, the wall will always be there. It very nicely separates our property from the public -6708- The proposals for our property are not obstructive to the property across the channel. (Survey and elevation enclosed). The existing shape and size of the property especially in relation to the lake and the street are unique physical characteristics. 9. Comments This property does not abut any other property. The variances would not adversely affect water quality or adversely impact fish or wild life and would be in harmony with the general spirit of the City's zoning ordinance. -Atp-tactical ~diffie-dlty 'e'xi~-ts-becaus-eofthe'sLze and-shape-ofd'~l~- Granting the requested variances will not set a precedem, nor confer any special privilege denied to others in the same zone. It would also afford the property owner reasonable use of this unique piece of property. -6709- FRONT N S E W ~...: FRONT N S E W N S E w 4' OR 6' N S E W 4'OR6' N S E W 4' N S E W 50' 10' OR 30' HARDCOVER 30% OR 40% CONFORMING7 YES NO ? lB,': IDA'FEI): Ti,is Zoning Infnlmation Sheet only summarizes a portion of tile requirements oullh- {~/] {'j - ,,f Mound Yoni,~le Ordimmce. Fo, further b,fi,rnlatio,. ('m~tact II,e ('by of Mouml :. - - " CITY OF MOUND - ZONING INFDRMATION SItEET SIDE SIDE Ko~pKEoF BLUFF SURVEY ON FILE.'? YES I NO LOT OF RECORD.'? YES / NO llOUSE ......... 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 15' LAKE N s E W 50' TOP OF BLUFF 10' OR ZONING DISTRICT. LOT SIZE/WIDTH: B1 7,500/0 B2 20,000/80 R2 6,000/40 B3 10,000/60 R2 14,000/80 R3 SEE ORD. I1 30,000/100 EXISTING LOT SIZE: LOT WIDTlt: LOT DEPTI-I: GARAGE, SliED ..... DETACHED BUILDINGS AG RE~2ME~NT-FOR DISPOSAL BETWEEN SOUTHERN MINNZSOTA COMPOST AND THE CITY OF MOUND This agreement is made and entered into by Thc City of Mound. hereinto referred to as the City, and .Southern Minnesota Compost, hcrcinto referred tv as SMC. Section 1 - TERM t..)t,', xtiREEMENT Thi~ agreement will commence April 1, 2001, and shall expire December 1, 2001, Section 2 - AREA TQ BE SERVED SMC will accepted delivered, compnstable yardwaste material, without charge, from private (i.¢., non-~ommerc[aD residents of the City of Mound provided the material is prepared and dcllvcrcd to the facility in a manner reasonably acceptable to SMC and the City. Section -~Y-~2-O~MPO S TAB LE MATERIALS_ The following are examples of the matcrials that will be accepted at thc yardwaste composting facility' at no ch~rgc to residents of the City o.r Mound: Grass/Lawn Clippings Garden Waste Leaves Weeds Mil Foil Items may he added to or deleted from this list as agreed between thc parties or required by law, Section 4 - ~ For thc operation of accepting material from residents or' lhe £:i~y of Motlnd, the City will pay $10,000.00 up front to cover 2.500 cubic yards of material brought in by residents of thc City of Mound. SMC ~hall keep records of all yardage that is brought into the facility by reaiclcnts of thc City. Section 5 CANCELL.aiTION AND TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement for a material breach of the Agreement by thc other party after givin8 writt,n notice of breach and allowing the other party thirty (30) days to correct the breach to the satisfaction of the complaining party. Except as provided in the paragraph above, this Agreement may be cancelled by either party only atter thirty (30) day negotiation period and ninety (90) days notice to the other party. -6711- Section 6 - APt'I..I.C_'_Xt~ . : ~..AW Thi-~ agrecmrnt is enicred into. and governed by. la',.v; of the grate of Mlinne~ota. Section 7 - ENTII~,E ..\(JRE~ This Agreement shall c,'.n,,tilute the entire Agreement between the paroles and any prior understanding or rcprc.,~.'ntatlut~ 0£ ~ny kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon cithvr p~tly except tu the extent incorporated in this Agreement. In witness whereof, the p,,rtics hereto executed thi~ agreement on the __ , :2001. clay of CITY OF MOLIND SMC Mike Guillemette Southern Minnesota Compost -6712- CITY OF MOUND 534-1 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com CITY OF MOUND NOTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the council chambers of city hall at approximately 7:30 p.m., on April 24, 2001, to consider the making of an improvement on Westedge Boulevard, from Hennepin County Road 15 south approximately ¼ mile to Woodedge Road, and for improvement of certain retaining walls throughout the city, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.011 to 429.111. The estimated cost for the improvement is $713,900. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Acting City Clerk Published in The Laker on the 7t" and 14th days of April, 2001. Affidavit of Mailing Improvement Hearing State of Minnesota ) County of Hennepin) City of Mound ) Bonnie Ritter, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a United States Citizen, over 21 years of age, and the Acting City Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota. On April 2, 2001, acting on behalf of said city, I deposited in the United States Post Office at Mound, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of improvement hearing, enclosed in envelopes, with postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses appearing opposite their respective names: Name Address Alfred and Lois A. Sage 6351 Mary Ann E. Sells 2218 Phillip Mitchum/Colleen Hentges 2232 Corey & Mary Jo Huson ~ 2246 Bart & Sandra Roeglin 2260 Richard & Barbara Roberts 2274 LeRoy Alwin ~1000 R.H. Development 4009 Troy Hicks & Rebecca McHugo 2255 Gary Strand 2355 Lynwood Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Westedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Westedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 VVestedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 VVestedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Westedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Robin Lane, Mound, MN 55364 Heritage Hills Dr., Bloomington, MN 55437 Westedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 Westedge Blvd., Mound, MN 55364 There is delivery service by United States mail between the place of mailing and the places so addressed. Bonnie Ritter Acting City Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of April, 2001. Notary Public -6714- Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that h,- is an authorized agent and employee of th~ publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A.) The newspaper has complied with all the requirements constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed Hearing On Improvement Westedge Blvd. which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for 2 successive weeks. It was first published Saturday the 7th day of April 20 0,1 and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday, the 14tPday of April 20 Ol; Authorized Agent Suscribed and sworn to me on this 14 day of Ap~ i 1 ,20 01. I- Notary Public ~ ~e~ NOTARYPUBLIC-MINNE$OTA ~ (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space: $15.00 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above ma~er: $15.00. (3) Rate actually charged for above ma~er: $7.73 per inch. Each additional successive week: $5.62. -6715- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OF WESTEDGE BOULEVARD AND CERTAIN RETAINING WALLS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 27th day of March, 2001, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed improvement of Westedge Boulevard from Hennepin County Road 15 to Woodedge Road, and for improvement of certain retaining walls throughout the City; and WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 24th day of April, 2001, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted March 27, 2001. 3. McCombs Frank Roos Associates, inc. is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The City Council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of the tax exempt bond. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Councilmember and seconded by The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this 24th day of April, 2001. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor -6716- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OF WESTEDGE BOULEVARD AND CERTAIN RETAINING WALLS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution passed by the Council on April 24, 2001, the city engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Westedge Boulevard from Hennepin CountY Road 15 to Woodedge Road, and for improvement of certain retaining walls throughout the City, and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mound, Minnesota, that such plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember : The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this 24th day of April, 2001. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor -6717- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WESTEDGE BOULEVARD WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the Council on April 24, 2001, the city engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Westedge Boulevard from Hennepin County Road 15 to Woodedge Road, and WHEREAS, said plans and specifications were approved by resolution on April 24, 2001, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mound, Minnesota, that the City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper and the Construction Bulletin, an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, shall specify the work to be, done, shall state that bids will be opened at 11:00 a.m., on May 30, 2001, and that the responsibility of the bidders will be considered by the City Council at approximately 7:30 p.m. on June 12, 2001 in the council chambers of city hall, Mound, Minnesota.i Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the council on the issue of responsibility. No bidswill be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a.cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the clerk for five percent of the amount of such bid. The foregoing resolution was moved by CO, uncilmember Councilmember and seconded by The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negatiVe: Adopted by the City Council the 24th day of April, 2001. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor -6718- Engineering o Planning · Surveying March 21,2001 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Addendum to Feasibility Report Street Improvements West Edge Boulevard MFRA #7827 and #13215 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we are herein submitting an Addendum to the Feasibility Report previously prepared for the street improvements on West Edge Boulevard. This addendum is for replacement of City maintained retaining walls, located throughout the community. If you have any questions or need additional information on anything in this addendum or the original report, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure s:kmain Nvlou 13 215 :\Correspondence\mayor3-21 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-mai/: mfra@mfra, com -6719- Io\~(° Addendum to Feasibility Report for West Edge Boulevard Street Improvements Retaining Wall Replacement When the majority of the City streets were improved in the late 1970's, a large number of retaining wails were constructed as part of the street improvement to minimize the impact on private property. Many o£these walls have deteriorated to the point where they need to be completely replaced. The City has determined it would be in the best public interest to undertake a larger scale project of replacing these wails rather then keep doing emergency repairs. A survey conducted by City staff has determined there are approximately 20,000 square feet of old timber and stone retaining walls that need replacement. As has been recent practice; these wails would be replaced with modular concrete block type walls. The majority of the walls are located within the City street right-of-way and would be reconstructed in the same general location. The following is an estimated cost of the total project: Retaining Wall Replacement - 20,000 square feet ~ $20.00/SF Contingencies (5 percent) Total Estimated Construction Cost · Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, and Administrative Cost (20 percent) Total Estimated Project Cost $ 400,000 $ 20,000 $ 420,000 $ .... 84,000 $ 504,000 For bonding purposes, it has been suggested by the City's Bond Counsel that the Retaining Wall Replacement Project be combined with the West Edge Boulevard Street Improvement. This would result in a total estimated cost for the two projects of approximately $714,000. Approximately $178,000 of the West Edge project is proposed for special assessment to benefiting properties, which falls well within the 20 percept requirement the City must meet in order to issue improvement bonds without holding a special election. s :knain:kM ou 13 215 :\Reportsh-eportadden dum3 -21 EHLERS & ASSOC IATES INC To: From: Subject: Date: Kandis Hanson, City Manager Jim Prosser Funding for Retaining Wall Replacement March 8,2001 The Mound City staff has identified a need to fund the replacement of retaining walls located throughout the community. The retaining walls are deteriorating and many pose a collapse risk. Some walls have been replaced by the City in the recent past. The cost for the wall replacement has been born by the general fund. However the general fund is not in position to continue to fund the replacement on this emergency approach basis. The staffhas estimated the replacement cost at $500,000 to $1,000,000. More exact cost estimates were expected to be prepared this summer. The financing of the West Edge Boulevard improvement provides a unique opportunity to fund the retaining wall replacement. It is possible to include the wall replacement cost in the West Edge Special Assessment-project. Based on the level of assessment being paid by Rottlund Homes, the City could fund up to $660,000 of additional public improvements, such as the wall replacement, from the public benefit portion of the special assessment project. Increasing the public benefit portion of the special assessment would increase the City's debt levy. This impact is estimated to be about $1.50 per $10,000 of additional debt service for a house valued at $100,000. As an example, if the City were to finance $500,000 of wall replacement over a 15 year term, the increase in taxes would approximate $75. Because this issue and opportunity have not received significant review by the City we would recommend that the matter receive additional review prior to the Council authorization to seek bids for bond sale. Some of the issues to be reviewed include: What are the estimated costs of retaining wall replacement? Who should pay for the replacement? Is it possible to assess a portion or all of the cost to property owners? What are the funding alternatives? These issues do not need to be fully resolved prior to authorizing the bond bids, but it would be useful to develop a general approach to determining how the issues will be resolved. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113-1105 651.697.8503 fax 651.697.8555 jim@ehlers-inc.com -6721- APR, 18,2001 6:12PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES N0,1995 P, 3 of N~ound Projected Taxlm ~ct of Proposed Levy Increases 02/15/01 Levy Increase Taxable Net Tax Capacity Tax Rate Increase Residential Homestead Commercial/ Industrial MarketValue $60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 I00,000 150.000 200,000 $50,000 75,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 General Fund Levy $100,000 $7,742,487 0.012916 Est Annual Tax $7.75 9.04 10.67 12.80 14.93 25.59 36.24 Increase* $15.50 23.25 31,00 46.50 68,45 90.41 Prepared by Ehlers and Associates, Inc. -6722- Taximp00.123 FEASIBILITY REPORT STREET IMPROVEMENTS WEST EDGE BOULEVARD FROM COUNTY ROAD 15 TO WOODEDGE ROAD I hereby certify that I am a duly Registered Engineer under the laws ofxthe State of Minnesota. Date ~ o o~s~P ]~ M~nnesota Reg. No. 10206 -6723- Engineering · Planning · Surveying ~Mc ASSOCiatEbsFeranes, inckRAoos September 26, 2000 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Feasibility Report Street Improvements West Edge Boulevard M-FRA #7827 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we are herein submitting a Feasibility Report for proposed street improvements on West Edge Boulevard from County Road 15 south to Woodedge Road. If you have any questions or need additional information on anything in this report, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Sincerely, John Cameron JC:pry -6724- 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 612/476-6010 · fax 612/476-8532 e-mail: mfra@mfra, corn Existing Conditions West Edge Boulevard is an existing gravel road, which runs south from Hennepin County Road 15 on the boundary line between the Cities of Mound and Minnetrista. The gravel road is approximately 24 feet wide and is generally centered in the existing 66-foot wide right-of-way, except for the southerly portion. The southerly 500 feet of the road is a approximately two feet off center towards the Mound side. Approximately 150 feet north of Woodedge Road the existing road starts curving into Minnetrista, which results in the entire road being shifted west as this intersection is reached. Additional right-of-way was dedicated for the northwest comer of the Woodedge intersection when Minnetrista approved the plat of Woodview Estates. Between Woodedge Road and Dakota Rail the gravel road is located entirely within the platted right-of-way of"Lake View Acres" in Minnetrista. South of Dakota Rail, West Edge Boulevard passes through an unplatted parcel of which there is no official dedicated right-of-way. The road then curves back to the east so that the south 120 feet-q: of the gravel portion is located entirely in the City of Mound, at which point it connects to the improved section of West Edge Boulevard. Future development of the unplatted property south of Dakota Rail will necessitate the improvement of the remainder of the gravel portion of West Edge Boulevard located within Minnetrista. General The Mound City Council has ordered this feasibility report for that portion of West Edge Boulevard, which extends from Hennepin County Road 15 south approximately 1/4 mile to Woodedge Road. This study became necessary after the preliminary approval of a proposed residential subdivision for the 26 acre Rex Alwin property which abuts the south 1/8 mile of West Edge Boulevard on the east side.The remainder of the east side is already platted and occupied by six single family homes. The entire west side of the street lies within the City of Minnetrista and has been platted into large rural lots, two of which front on the street and have homes built on them. Numerous attempts have been made in the past to improve this street, but due to a number of circumstances no improvements have ever been done. -6725- easements can be acquired to grade onto private property. The Mound side of the street in this area is within the proposed plat and can be graded, thus eliminating the need for a retaining wall. A short section of retaining wall may also be necessary on the Mound side in front of Lots 2 and 3 in the Anderson One Plat. This slope rises sharply to approximately nine feet above the street and is also wooded and brushy. It cannot be graded properly without an easement to work on private property. Grading The proposed grading will be held to a minimum. The existing, steep approach from West Edge Boulevard to County Road 15 will be improved somewhat to provide a flatter area at the stop sign. We are limited as to how much can be done at this intersection by the existing driveway to the first home on the east side of the street. The street grade heading south will still be in the area of 12 percent to 13 percent which is well above the maximum desired. It is proposed to lower the hill at the southerly end to gain better sight distance, but again we will be limited to something less than desirable by the existing driveway to the home on the Minnetrista side. As previously mentioned, the high bank at the right-of-way will also affect how much the hill can be lowered. Street Section As previously mentioned, we are proposing a width of 30 feet as measured back to back of curb. The cost estimates for this proposed project include an alternate using a rural section on tile Minnetrista side of the street. Curb will still be required at the southerly end for approximately 250 feet since there is not enough room to construct a ditch. The concrete curb and gutter proposed is Mn/DOT type B618. Concrete apron are proposed for all the driveways at the new curb line. The typical street section is included with this report. -6726- Storm Sewer With the addition of curb and gutter, storm sewer and catch basins will become a necessity. The drainage area affected by this construction includes not only the property fronting the street but also a portion of County Road 15 East of West Edge Boulevard and the property along the south side at County Road 15. At the present time all this area drains south along the east side of West Edge Boulevard to the point where a culvert crosses from the wetland in Minnetrista. It then follows a drainage swale through the Alwin property, across the parcel to the south and ultimately discharges to the railroad ditch. The proposed plat of Langdon Bay has a stormwater pond proposed in the area of this swale, which will need to be sized to not only accommodate runoff from the new subdivision, but the discharge from the Minnetrista wetland and also the new storm sewer within West Edge Boulevard. Cost The estimated cost of the street construction as previously described with concrete curb and gutter on both sides is $209,900. The estimated costs are based on 2000 construction costs and do not include any costs for easement acquisition. It does include ten percent contingencies and 25 percent for engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative cost. Also included is the estimated cost for the alternate design with curb and gutter on the Mound side and a rural section on the Minnetrista side. A detailed breakdown of the costs are attached to this report. /1 $sessm en ts It has been the City's policy to assess most o'fthe cost of any street improvement to the benefiting properties. When the large reconstruction projects were done in the late 70's and early 80's, the City contributed one mil, which calculated out to approximately one and one-half percent of the total cost of the project. On this particular project, the construction costs are much higher than for a normal residential street. The street is wider, the section is heavier, and additional grading is required to improve design defects. For these reasons, we are suggesting a City share of 15 percent of the -6727- Revised 2/20/01 project cost. Hennepin County normally will contribute to projects such as this based on their drainage contribution. For estimating purposes, we have shown their contribution as one percent or $2,100. After drainage calculations are completed and plans are done, we can approach Hermepin County for their participation. Using the previously discussed criteria, the following is an example of how this project could be assessed to the six Mound property owners and the developer of the Alwin property based on the agreement with the City of Minnetrista to provide curb on both sides, except at the area of the wetlands. With Curb on Both Sides Total estimated project cost Hennepin County share 1% City of Mound share (14%) Amount to be assessed Developer of Alwin property 75% Six Mound parcels (10%) Cost per existing Mound parcel (5 parcels at full amount) (1 parcel at one-half amount) Conclusions and Recommendations $ 209,900 $ 2,100 $ 29,386 $ 157,425 $ 20,990 $ 3,816 $ 1,908 It is the opinion of the Engineer that the proposed improvement is technically feasible and can best be accomplished as described herein. -6728- Revised 2/20/01 ESTIMATED COST WEST EDGE BOULEVARD (CURB AND GUTTER BOTH SIDES) ITEM QUANTITY ESTIMATED UNIT PRICE Clearing and Grubbing Common Excavation 3,000 C.Y. Subgrade Excavation 600 C.Y. Granular Borrow 600 C.Y. Geotextile Fabric 1,200 S.Y. Aggregate Base C1.5 100% Crushed Quarry Rock 2,800 TONS Bituminous Base Course 450 TONS Bituminous Wear Course 325 TONS Concrete Curb and Gutter 03618) 2,450 L.F. Concrete Driveway Aprons 420 S.F. Driveway Restoration 3 00 S.Y. Adjust Gate Valve 1 EACH Adjust Manhole 4 EACH Adjust Hydrant and Gate Valve 2 EACH Block Retaining Walls 1000 S.F. Silt Fence 1,500 L.F. 12" RCP Storm Sewer 100 L.F. 15" RCP Storm Sewer 100 L.F. 18" RCP Storm Sewer 500 L.F. 21" RCP Storm Sewer 110 L.F. 12" RCP Apron with Riprap 1 EACH 21" RCP Apron with Riprap 1 EACH Catch Basin Manhole 6 EACH Catch Basin 1 EACH 4" Drain Tile 600 L.F. Sod and Black Dirt 1,100 S.Y. Seed 1-1/4 ACRES TOTAL LUMP SUM $ 3,000 $ 4.00/CY 12,000 5.00/CY 3,000 10.00/CY 6,000 1.20/SY 1,440 9.00/TN 25,200 28.00/TN 12,600 32.00/TN 10,400 8.00/LF 19,600 5.00/SF 2,100 15.00/SY 4,500 150.00/EA 150 200.00/EA 800 300.00/EA 600 12.00/SF 12,000 1.50/LF 2,250 15.00/SF 1,500 20.00/LF 2,000 22.00/LF 11,000 28.00/LF 3,080 350.00/EA 350 500.00/EA 500 1,200/EA 7,200 1,000.00/EA 1,000 5.00/LF 3,000 5.00/SY 5,500 1,500/AC 1,875 SUBTOTAL CONTINGENCIES (10%) TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL & ADMINISTRATIVE COST TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 1522645 $ 15,255 $ 167,900 $ 42,000 $ 209,900 -6729- ESTIMATED COST WEST EDGE BOULEVARD (ALTERNATE A- CURB AND GUTTER ON MOUND SIDE) ESTIMATED ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE Clearing and Grabbing Common Excavation 3,000 C.Y. Subgrade Excavation 600 C.Y. Granular Borrow 600 C.Y. Geotextile Fabric 1,200 S.Y. Aggregate Base C1.5 100% Crushed Quarry Rock 2,800 TONS Bituminous Base Course 450 TONS Bituminous Wear Course 325 TONS Concrete Curb and Gutter (B618) 1,450 L.F. Concrete Driveway Aprons 360 S.F. Driveway Restoration 300 S.Y. Adjust Gate Valve 1 EACH Adjust Manhole 4 EACH Adjust Hydrant and Gate Valve 2 EACH Block Retaining Wails 1000 S.F. Silt Fence 1,500 L.F. 12" RCP Storm Sewer 100 L.F. 15" RCP Storm Sewer 100 L.F. 18" RCP Storm Sewer 500 L.F. 21" RCP Storm Sewer 110 L.F. 12" RCP Apron with Riprap 1 EACH 21" RCP Apron with Riprap 1 EACH Catch Basin Manhole 5 EACH 4" Drain Tile 600 L.F. Sod and Black Dirt 700 S.Y. Seed 1.25 ACRES TOTAL LUMP SUM $ 3,000 4.00/CY 12,000 5.00/CY 3,000 10.00/CY 6,000 1.20/SY 1,440 9.00/TN 25,200 28.00/TN 12,600 32.00/TN 10,400 8.00/LF 11,600 5.00/SF 1,800 15.00/SY 4,500 150.00/EA 150 200.00/EA 800 300.00/EA 600 12.00/SF 12,000 1.50/LF 2,250 15.00/SF 1,500 20.00/LF 2,000 22.00/LF 11,000 28.00/LF 3,080 350.00FEA 350 500.00/EA 500 1,200/EA 6,000 5.00/LF 3,000 5.00/SY 3,500 1,500/AC 1,875 SUBTOTAL CONTINGENCIES (10%) TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL & ADMINISTRATIVE COST TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 140,145 $,,, 14~055 $ 154,200 $ 38~600 $ 192,800 s :\main:\mou07827Xreports\engineerreport9-22 -6730- ~ 4' MAX. o~ '2' MIN.:- B618 CONCRETE / CURB & GUTTER ' STREET CENTERLINE 33' ,., 15' _~4' MAX~I ~ ~GRADE · 1 1/2" MNDOT 2331, TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR 2" MNDOT 2331, TYPE 31 BIT. BASE 10" CLASS V 100% CRUSHED QUARRY ROCK CEOTEXTILE FABRIC IF NECESSARY APPROVED SUBGRADE TYPICAL STREET SECTION WITH CURB & GUTTER BOTH SIDES NO SCALE ~ STREET CENTERLINE ,., = 33' = 33' = "'z I 4' MAX. I 15' 12' , 3' I , ~ GRAIL o ~ ~ SHOULDER CONCRE~ / I ~~OT 2331, T~E 41 BIT. ~AR ~ FINISHED GR~E CURB ~ GUT~R ' ~ I 2" MNDOT 23~1, ~E 31 BIT. BASE [ 10" CLASS V 100% CRUSHED QUARRY ROCK GEO~X~LE FABRIC IF NECESSARY APPROVED SUBGRADE ALTERNATE A TYPICAL STREET SECTION WITH CURB & GUTTER ON MOUND SIDE RURAL SECTION ON MINNETRISTA SIDE NO SCALE Wed Edge Bh'd, CONSENT AND WAIVER AGREEMENT DRAFT 4/18/00 THIS AGREEMENT made this DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., DEVELOPMENT"), and THE CITY OF (hereinafter" MOUND"). WITNESSETH: __ day of ., 2001 by and between RH a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter "RH MOUND, a Minnesota municipal corporation and WHEREAS, RH DEVELOPMENT is the owner of "Langdon Bay", (the "Development") WHEREAS, it is the desire of RH DEVELOPMENT that MOUND undertake certain assessable improvements ("Improvements") which are required in furtherance of the Development through a city project ("Improvement Project"); and WHEREAS, on or about August 8, 2000, the Mound City Council approved a preliminary plat for the Development subject to certain requirements and conditions including the funding of a part of the cost of the Improvement Project; and WHEREAS, RH DEVELOPMENT wishes MOUND to undertake the Improvement Project and to levy 75% percent of the cost of the Improvement Project against the individual lots that constitute the Development as hereinafter provided; and WHEREAS, MOUND is willing to construct the Improvement Project in accordance with the request by the RH DEVELOPMENT provided the assurances and covenants hereinafter stated are made by RH DEVELOPMENT to ensure that MOUND will have valid and collectable special assessments as they relate to the Development to finance the cost of the Improvement Project; and WHEREAS, were it not for the assurances and covenants hereinafter contained, MOUND would not construct the Improvement Project. NOW, THEREFORE, on the basis of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter provided, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. RH DEVELOPMENT hereby petition for the undertaking of the Improvement Project consisting generally of the elements contained in the attached Exhibit A ("Improvement Plan"). 2. RH DEVELOPMENT represent and warrant that it is currently the owner of 100 percent of the Development; and that it has the full legal power and authority to encumber the Development as herein provided, and that as of the date hereof, RH DEVELOPMENT has fee simple absolute title in the Development which is not subject to any liens, interests or JBD-195356vl MU200-85 -6732- encumbrances, except as listed on the attached Exhibit B ("Encumbrances"). 3. RH DEVELOPMENT requests that 75 percent of the cost of the Improvement Project be assessed equally against all of the separate lots in the Development. 4. RH DEVELOPMENT for itself waives notice of hearing and hearing pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.031, on the Improvement Project, and the notice of hearing and hearing on the special assessments levied to finance the Improvement Project pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.061 and specifically requests that as to it, the Improvement Project be undertaken and special assessments be levied against the Development therefor without hearings. 5. RH DEVELOPMENT for itself waives the right to appeal the levy of special assessments in accordance with this Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.081, or reapportionment thereof upon land division pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.071, Subd. 3, or otherwise; and further specifically agrees with respect to such special assessments against the Development or reapportionment that: a) Any requirements of Minn. Stat. Chapter 429 with which MOUND does not comply are hereby waived by RH DEVELOPMENT; b) The increase in fair market value of each individual lot, and of the Development as a whole resulting from the Improvements will be in an amount at least equal to the total cost of the Improvement Project assessed to that lot or the Development, and that such increase in fair market value is a special benefit to that lot and the Development; c) Assessment of 75 percent of the cost of the Improvement Project against the Property as outlined above is reasonable, fair and equitable and there are not other properties against which such costs should be assessed; and d) RH DEVELOPMENT for itself specifically waives notice and the right to appeal reapportionment of such special assessments upon land division pursuant to Minn. Stat. 8429.071, Subd. 3. 6. RH DEVELOPMENT understands that it is the intention of MOUND to provide for the payment of such special assessments in 10 annual installments commencing in 2002. Provided however, that the assessment against each parcel shall be paid in full prior to and as a condition of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for such parcel. 7. RH DEVELOPMENT understands that in the event that the portion of the Improvement Costs to be assessed against other properties outside of the Development is reduced by a court of law to less that 10% of the Project Costs, that it will pay 80% of the amount of such reduction within 30 days of receipt of a request for payment by the City. 8. The covenants, waivers and agreements contained in this Agreement shall bind the successors and assigns of RH DEVELOPMENT and shall mn with the Development and the individual lots therein and bind all successors in interest thereof. It is the intent of the parties hereto that this Agreement be in a form which is recordable among the land records of Hennepin JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 -6733- County, Minnesota and they agree to make any changes to this Agreement which may be necessary to effect the recording and filing of this Agreement against the title of the Development. 9. This Agreement shall terminate upon the final payment of all special assessments levied against the Development regarding the Improvement and MOUND shall execute and deliver such documents, in recordable form, as are necessary to extinguish the rights hereunder. 10. Notwithstanding any other provisions herein to the contrary, MOUND may not enter into the contracts for the Improvement Project until the RH DEVELOPMENT have each been given 15 days to review and object to the costs thereof, but only if the bid amount exceeds the estimated cost by at least 120%. 11. MOUND will let no contract for the Improvement Project if such objection is made until and unless such objection is subsequently withdrawn. 12. Absent the written consent of both RH DEVELOPMENT and MOUND, no part of the Improvement Project described in Exhibit A can be removed in awarding the contracts. JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 -6734- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands the day and year first above written. THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA By: Its City Manager By: Its Mayor RH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC By: Its By: Its ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ., 2001, by and respectively, the City Manager and Mayor of the City of Mound, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was , 2001, JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 acknowledged by before me this day of and -6735- behalf of the corporation. respectively, the of RI~ Development Company, Inc., and a Minnesota corporation, on Notary Public This Instrument Was Drafted By: KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED (JBD) 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612-337-9300 JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 -6736- EXHIBIT A Description of Improvement Project [To be completed before execution] JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 -6737- EXHIBIT B Permitted Encumbrances [To be completed prior to execution] JBD-195356v3 MU200-85 -6738- Engineering ,, Planning ,~ Surveying April 19, 2001 Ms. Barbara Moeller, District Technician Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Gray Freshwater Center 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior, Minnesota 55331-9578 SUBJECT: City of Mound West Edge Boulevard Street Reconstruction MFRA #07827 Dear BaA: The City of Mound will be reconstructing West Edge Boulevard from Hennepin County Road 15 south approximately 1/4 mile to provide access for the new Rottlund Homes De~?elopment-Landgon Bay. The stormwater management plan previously submitted by R. H. Development and approved by MCWD (Permit No. 00-342) for the Rottlund Development, provided for the subwatershed which included the major portion of West Edge Boulevard. The outlet flows from DNR wetland 27-952 was also accommodated in the Rottlund Pond design. Enclosed is an application for a stormwater management Permit. Also included with the application are the following attachments: · Two sets of Construction Plans, one set full size and one set reduced to 11" x 17," · Two drawings, (full sized and reduced) one with existing subwatersheds and one delineating subwatersheds contributing runoff from offsite and the proposed on-site, · Final grading plan of Rottlund Development which delineates existing condition and proposed p°nding, · '.Hennepin County Soils map, ' ' -' ' ' ~ ,~: Stormwater runoff Volume and rate analySes for 1, 10and 100 Year stOrm:events for both existing and proposed conditiOns, ' ~' '· ' Hydrologic and water quality computations used to design stormwater management facilities on the Rottlund Development, 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 ° fax 763/476-8532 e-mail: mfra@mfra.com -6739- Ms. Barbara Moeller April 19, 2001 Page 2 · Hydraulic computation used to design storm sewer system for West Edge Boulevard, · Data for DNR protected wetland No. 27-952 identified as LA4 in Minnetrista Stormwater Management Plan, · Geotechnical Soil Borings, · Mailing List for all properties located within 600 feet of proposed project. If this permit needs Board approval, the City of Mound would appreciate being placed on the first available agenda. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:rth cc: Kandis Hanson, City Manager, City of Mound -6740- COMBINED JOINT NOTIFICATION FORM - WATER RESOURCE APPLICATION appl Use this form to notify/apply to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), their engineering consultants, the DNR, and the Hennepin Conservation District of a proposed water/wetland project or wOrk which may fall within their jurisdiction. These agencies should advise you of their jurisdiction or permit requirements within 10 days. Fill out this form completely and mail a copy, with plan, maps, etc.., to the MCWD, Gray Freshwater Center, Navarre, 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 37, Excelsior, MN 55331. Keep a copy for your records. YOU MUST OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED AUTHORIZATIONS BEFORE BEGINNING WORK. 1. Applicant's Name (Last, First, M.I.) Phone No. City of .Mound 952-472-0600 Address (Street, RFD, Box Ct, City, State, Zip) 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Mlq 55364 2. Location of proposed project (Attach drawing w/directions to site): C~eUNTY SW~ S~T~?[q(s)SEC?JON(s)TO,SHIP(s) RA2~4~E(s) Lot, Block, Subdivision nn AD~E~..4 .qR 15 N/A PROJECT ~Tm1/4 CITY: Mound and Minnetrista 3. LENGTH OF SHORE AFFECTED (in feet): N/A VOLUME OF3~gg:OR EXCAVATION (Cubic yards): AREA FILLED OR EXCAVATED IS 1 o 9 Acres, OR Square Feet. 3000 CY 4. TYPE OF PERMIT BEING APPLIED FOR: (Check al! that apply): [] STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN [] FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION [-]SHORELINE IMPROVEMENT [-]STORM SEWER OUTFALLS a.[]mPRAP b.E~SANDBLANKET F']ICE RIDGE REMOVAL c.[--]RETAINING WALL [--IBRIDGE & CULVERT CROSSINGS OTHER (DESCRIBE) Street Recon.qtruetion [] WETLAND ALTERATION [] EXCAVATION (DREDGING) a.E] WILDLIFE bJ-] NAVIGATION c.E] BIOENGINEERING 4a.APPLICANT~SREPRESENTA~VE:~ic~sedC~ntract~r~Enginee~e~...)~n~udename~address&ph~nenumber. McCombs Frank RoosAssociates, Inc. Attention: John Cameron 15050 - 23rd Avenue North~ Plymouth~ MN 55447 763-476-6010 5. PROJECT PURPOSE(whyisthisprojectnee~d-whatbenefimwillitprovide?) To reconstruct existing gravel road with all weather bituminous surface to provide access for new single family subdivision 6. ALTERNATIVES (describe any other sites or methods that could be used to achieve the purpose of your project while avoiding or ~ minimizing water/wetland impacts. Attach additional sheets, if needed. None 7. DATES: Proposed start of activity: June 2001 Proposed completion: (Identify any completed work on attached drawin$) 8. NAMES & ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS (Attach list if more) See attached. October 2001 9. PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED (R) OR APPLIED FOR (A) FROM: A DNR__ A COUNTY R CITY ~ MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ARMY cORPs OF ENGR I hereby notify the recipients of this form of the project proposed herein and request I be advised of any permits or other determinations concerning this project that I must obtain. I understand that proceeding with work before all required authorizations are obtained may be ;ub[ect to Federal, State and/or local administrative, civil and/or criminal penalties. ~ ~~.~..,__~ April 17, 2001 ~gnamre of Person Proposing Project or Age.nj Date -6741 - applb INSTRUCTIONS - PLEASE READ CAREFULLY A copy of this form, with copies of all plans, drawings, etc.., should be sent to each agency indicated below. Please check the appropriate spaces below to show everywhere you are sending this form. Remember to keep a copy for your records. Iq/A The LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNIT (LGU) city, county or water management organization Iq/A The SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT __ HENNEPIN SWCD __ CARVER SWCD X MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (MDNR) Regional Office N/A US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (ACOE) at: Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District - ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth St. East, St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 Note: The above agencies may provide a copy of your completed form to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). MPCA water quality issues may apply to your proposed project. ATTENTION (From USDA):.Any activity including drainage, dredging, filling, leveling or other manipulations, including maintenance, may affect a landuser's eligibility for USDA benefits under the 1985 Food Security Act as amended. Check with your local USDA office to request and complete Form AD-1026 prior to initiating activity. IMPORTANT: Some agencies, including the Corps of Engineers and the MDNR accept this form as a permit application form. If you wish this form to constitute an application to the Corps and/or MDNR for any necessary permits for your projects please carefully read the following information and sign where indicated. Application is hereby made for a permit to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activity or I am acting as the duly authorized agent of the ~.tpplicant. Signature of Applicant Date /Signature of~Agent D'ate Note: The application must be signed by the person who desired to undertake the proposed activity (Applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorize agent if the information requested below is provi, ded. Agent's Name & Title: Agent's Address: 15050 McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Att: John Cameron, City Engineer - 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, FiN 55447 Agent's Telephone: (763) 476-6010 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. -6742- INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -6743- Works Park Dept. Aggregate Pile ,I/: City of Mound 5~OO1 Seal Coat Program Sealcoat /x / FA-3 Modified Class A :,, : FA-2 Class C N S 1000 0 1000 Feet 0 C c~ ........ !:¥ EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC To: From: Subject: Date: Kandis Hanson Jim Prosser TIF Plan Modification April 18,2001 Attached is the Modification to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. The modification is requested for the following reasons: Changes in rules relating to the administration of TIF districts have occurred since the district was first established. These changes impact how the City must document budget items relating to district expenses. A bill currently under consideration at the State Capitol would require certain changes in how TIF proceeds are reported and used. Proposed changes would accommodate these changes if enacted. Generally, the 1. o substantive changes in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 include: To expand the budget for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 to include interest earnings, inter-fund loans and inter-fund transfers as tax increment funds; To clarify budgets for previous bond refunding amounts; To clarify duration; To clarify the amount of interfund loans transfers of tax increments to be authorized; and Explicitly authorize the use of tax increments for Development District project expenditures. LEADERS N PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113-1105 651.697.8503 fax 651.697.8555 jirn@ehlers-inc.com -6746- PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Mound, Minnesota, (the "City") has proposed to adopt a Modification to the Development Program (the "Development Program Modification") for Development District No. 1 and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Tax Increment Plan Modification" or together with the Development Program Modification, the "Modifications") for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 and has submitted the Modifications to the City Planning Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Modifications to determine their conformity with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Modifications conform with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Dated: April 23, 2001 ATTEST: Chair Secretary -6747- HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ADOPTING MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 THEREIN. WHEREAS, it has been proposed by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Mound (the "HRA") and the City of Mound (the "City") that the HRA adopt the Modification to the Development Program (the "Development Program Modification") for Development District No. 1 and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Tax Increment Plan Modification" or together with the Development Program Modification, the "Modifications") for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 therein (the "District"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.179, inclusive, as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Modifications and presented for the Board's consideration; and The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") of the City has heretofore established Development District No. 1 and adopted the Development Program therefor and established Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 therein (the "District") and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the HRA that the City adopt a Modification to the Development Program (the "Development Program Modification") and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Tax Increment Plan Modification" or together with the Development Program Modification, the "Modifications"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes,469.001 through 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.179, inclusive as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Modifications, and presented for the Council's consideration. WHEREAS, the HRA has investigated the facts relating to the Modifications and has caused the Modifications to be prepared; and WHEREAS, the HRA has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption of the Modifications. The HRA has also requested the City Planning Commission to provide for review of and written comment on Modifications and that the Council schedule a public hearing on the Modifications upon published notice as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows: 1. The HRA hereby reaffirms that the District as modified herein is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10 (a)(1). and finds that the Modifications conform in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the Sate of Minnesota which is already built up and that the adoption of the propose Modifications will help provide employment opportunities in the State and in the preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the City and the State because it will discourage commerce and industry from moving their operations to another state or municipality and thereby serves a public propose. -6748- 2. The HRA further finds that the Modifications will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs for the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project area by private enterprise in that the intent is to provide only that public assistance necessary to make the private developments financially feasible. 3. Conditioned upon the approval thereof by the City Council following its public hearing thereon, the Modifications, as presented to the HRA on this date, are hereby approved, established and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. 4. Upon approval of the Modifications by the City Council, the staff, the HRA's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Board for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. Approval of the Modifications does not constitute approval of any project or a Development Agreement with any developer. 5. Upon approval of the Modifications by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Modifications to the Hennepin County Auditor. 6. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Modifications to the Hennepin County Auditor. Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Mound this 24th day of April, 2001. ATTEST: Chair Secretary -6749- CITY OF MOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Council member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 THEREIN. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Mound, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") of the City has heretofore established Development District No. 1 and adopted the Development Program therefor and established Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 therein (the "District") and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the HRA that the City adopt a Modification to the Development Program (the "Development Program Modification") and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Tax Increment Plan Modification" or together with the Development Program Modification, the "Modifications"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes,469.001 through 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.179, inclusive as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Modifications, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The Council has investigated the facts related to the Modifications and has caused the Modifications to be prepared. 1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed Modifications, including, but not limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 277 having taxing jurisdiction over the property in the District, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. The City is not modifying the boundaries of Development District No. 1. 1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries nor term of the District. Section 2. Findings for the Tax Increment Plan Modification 2.01. The Council hereby reaffirms the original findings for the District, namely that the when the District was established, it was established as a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10 (a)(1). In addition, the City makes the following findings: (a) The Tax Increment Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for development or redevelopment of the City as a whole. The reason for supporting this finding is that the Tax Increment Plan Modification will generally complement and serve to implement policies -6750- adopted in the City's comprehensive plan. (b) The Tax Increment Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Development District No. 1 by private enterprise. The reason for supporting this finding is that the development activities are necessary so that development and redevelopment by private enterprise can occur within Development District No. 1. (c) The development and redevelopment efforts, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and therefor the use if tax increment financing is deemed necessary. Section 3. Public Purpose 3.01. The adoption of the Modifications conform in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the State which is already built up, to provide employment opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose. Section 4. Approval and Adoption of the Modifications; Filing. 4.01. The Modifications are hereby approved, and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. Approval of the Modifications does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer. 4.02. The staff of the City are authorized to file the Modifications with the Hennepin County Auditor. 4.03. The staffofthe City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further modifications, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member , and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Dated: April 24, 2001 ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk (Seal) -6751 - Ehlers and Associates Tax Increment Financing District Overview City of Mound Tax Increment Financing District No. 1.1 The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Modification to Tax Increment Financing Plan for TIF District No. 1-1. More detailed information on each of these topics can be found in the TIF Plan. Proposed Action: Adoption of the Modification to Tax Increment Financing District Plan · Add transfers and interfund loan authorization to budget. · Authorization of the TIF Plan budget and bring the plan into compliance with the State Auditor's current requirements. · Clarify expiration date. · Increase budgeted expenditures. · Clarify and explicitly authorize pooling of increments. Type of TIF Districts: District Nos. 1-1: Redevelopment Properties: See map in Plan of the boundaries of the Project area and Tax Increment Financing District. Maximum duration: 25 years from receipt of first tax increment. First increment received in 1985. The District will expire 12/31/2010 Estimated tax increment: Annual Increment: $ 173,218 (P2000) Total for Life of District: $4,609,774 (through P2010) -6752- TIF' District Overview Proposed uses for Districts The District No. 1-1 Plan contains the following total budget: Land/building acquisition ........... $2,634,761 Soil/Site Improvements ................ 500,000 Public Utilities ....................... 500,000 Streets and Sidewalks ................. 500,000 Parking ............................. 500,000 Relocation .......................... 160,000 Bond Interest ...................... 2,546,213 Bond discount ........................ 20,000 Loan Interest ........................ 300,000 Development district improvements ...........0 *Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ....... 460,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS ........ $8,120,974 **ADDITIONAL FINANCING AUTHORIZATIONS Interfund Loans ................... $7,500,000 Transfers ......................... 7,500,000 Bond Principal ..................... 2,125,000 Refunding Bonds ................... 2,125,000 * Administration limited to 10% **Required by the State Auditor for reporting forms Form of financing: Indebtedness up to $2,125,000 through bonds and other internal financing. Authorizes total increment to be obligated to either bonds or developer pay-as-you-go notes. Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified. Paqe Z -6753- MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 (redevelopment district) City of Mound Hennepin County State of Minnesota Adopted on: Modification No. 1 on: Public Hearing on Modification No 2: Modifications Adopted: May 21, 1984 August 12, 1985 April 24, 2001 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 Phone: (651) 697-8500 Fax: (651) 697-8555 E-mail: info~ehlers-inc.com Web Site: www.ehlers-inc.com -6754- TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) SECTION I MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. I ............................................................ I- 1 Foreword ............................................................... I-1 Findings ................................................................ I-1 Definitions .............................................................. I- 1 Statutory Authority ........................................................ I-2 Statement of and Finding Public Purpose ...................................... I-3 Statement of Objectives .................................................... I-4 Statement of Public Facilities and Costs to be Financed ........................... I-5 Funding of Developments and Redevelopments ................................. I-5 Environmental Controls .................................................... I-5 Proposed Reuse of Property ................................................. I-5 Open Space to be Created .................................................. I-5 Administration and Maintenance of Development District No. 1 .................... I-5 Rehabilitation ............................................................ I-5 Relocation ............................................................... I-6 Parcels to Be Acquired or May Be Acquired in Whole or in Part Within Development District No. 1 ........................................................... I-6 Modification of the Development Program and/or Development District No. 1 ......... I-6 Boundaries of Development District No. 1 ..................................... I-6 EXHIBITI-A - BOUNDARY MAP OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 ........................ I-A SECTION H MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 ............................. II- 1 Introduction ............................................................ II-1 Findings ............................................................... II-1 Development Program Overview ............................................ II-2 Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 .......... II-2 Property to be Acquired ................................................... II-2 Uses of Funds ........................................................... II-2 Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness ..................................... II-4 Duration of the District ................................................... II-5 -6755- SECTION I City of Mound, Minnesota Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 1 Foreword April 24, 2001 The following text represents a modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 1 and a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. The modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plans represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Development Plan for Development District No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. The following modifications are intended to update the original Development Program for Development District No. 1 according to the content below. These modifications are intended to supplement the existing Development Program. Generally, the substantive changes include modifying the budget of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 of Development District No. 1 as specified below. For further information, a review of the Development Program for Development District No. 1, adopted in 1983, and most recently modified on December 4, 1999 is recommended. It is available from the City Clerk at the City of Mound. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Development District No. 1. Findings The original and modified Development Program for Development District No. 1 set forth the applicable findings for the establishment and modification of Development District No. 1. The current modification does not require that the City Council adopt new findings, however, the City Council confirms all previous findings establishing and modifying Development District No. 1. (as modified April 24, 2001) Definitions The terms defined below shall, for purposes of this Development Program, have the meanings herein specified, unless the context otherwise specifically requires. "City" means the City of Mound. "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Mound. "County" means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota. "County Board" means the County Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota. City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. 1 I-1 -6756- "Development District" means the property within Development District No. 1, as described in the Development Program. "Development Program" means this Development Program for Development District No. 1, as initially proposed, and as it shall be modified. "EDA Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 through 469.1081. "Municipal Development District Act" means Minnesota Statutes, 469.124 to 469.134, inclusive, as amended. "Public Costs" means the costs set forth in Sections 2.7 and 2.8 of the Tax Increment Financing Plan, and any other costs eligible to be financed by Tax Increments under the TIF Act or the Municipal Development District Act. "Public Improvements" means the public improvements described in the Development Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment Bonds" means any tax increment bonds or notes issued by the City to finance the Public Costs as stated in the Development Program for Development District No. 1 and in the Tax Increment Financing Plan, and any obligations issued to refund such bonds. "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 479.174 through 479.179, inclusive, as amended. "Tax Increment Financing District" means any tax increment financing district presently established or to be established in the future in Development District No. 1. "Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1" means the tax increment district, as adopted on July 24, 1984. "Tax Increment Financing Plan" or "Plan" means the Plan adopted by the City Council for any Tax Increment Financing District. Subsection 1-1. Statutory Authority_ The City established Development District No. 1 pursuant to the Municipal Development District Act. It is authorized that the City will administer the Development District No. 1 and and Tax Increment Financing Districts established within Development District No. 1. Within the Development District, the City has created two tax increment district and may create one or more tax increment financing districts established pursuant to the Tax Increment Act to finance the public improvements and other activities proposed for the Development District. The public improvements may be initially financed from other City sources, including the use of improvement bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or loans from other City funds, which sources the City may reimburse from tax increment proceeds derived from tax increment districts established or to be created with the Development District. City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. 1 I-2 -6757- Additional tax increment districts may be created at such time as will enable the City to capture the increase in taxable value of private improvements to be constructed with the Development District. Subsection 1-2. Statement of and Finding of Public Purpose In recent months, the City of Mound has been reviewing the future development of the community. This review has defined several important roles for the City of Mound. Facilitating development activities that are compatible with overall community development objectives of the City. · Removing the physical and economic barriers to development. · Providing the infrastructure needed to support development. · Providing sites for future development. The City intends to use the powers allowed under the Municipal Development District Act to fill these roles, to promote development and redevelopment throughout the City, and to pool resources in order to reduce financial barriers to providing decent housing, development and redevelopment opportunities. The City has found that there is a need for development and redevelopment within the Development District based upon the following conditions: The Development District contains numerous parcels containing buildings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout, and a combination of these and other factors is detrimental to the safety, health, morals or welfare of the community. The Development District suffers from a lack of necessary streets, utilities and site improvements essential to preparing and making sites available for meaningful development. The Development District requires active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound commerce through government action for the purpose of preventing mergence and continuation of blight and the occurrence of conditions requiring redevelopment 4. The Development District contains vacant, unused, underused and inappropriately used land. Therefore, the City created a program for improving the Development District to provide impetus for private development and redevelopment, to provide decent housing to residents, to maintain and increase employment, to provide infrastructure to serve citizens and employees of the City, to utilize existing land for potential redevelopment and to provide other facilities as are outlined in the Development Program. City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. 1 I-3 -6758- The City has also determined that proposed developments to be assisted by the City would not occur solely through private investment in the foreseeable future. The City finds that the welfare of the City, as well as the State of Minnesota, requires active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce to carry out its stated public purpose objectives. The City has also determined that the tax increment financing plans to be included herein will be consistent with the Development Program, and that the tax increment financing plans will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Development District by private enterprise. Subsection 1-3. Statement of Objectives The City Council determines that it is necessary, desirable and in the public interest to establish, designate, development and administer Development District No. 1. The City determines that the establishment of Development District No. 1 will provide the City with the ability to achieve certain public purpose objectives not otherwise obtainable in the foreseeable future without City intervention in the normal development process. The City seeks to achieve the following program objectives: To promote land use and development that is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; to encourage new commercial development to strengthen the tax base, provide additional employment opportunities and expand the services available to Mound residents; to promote development which will help revers declining valuation trends of commercial property; 4. to acquire and remove buildings that are obsolete, inefficient or under utilized; to provide appropriate qualitites of land in suitable locations for the expansions of existing businesses; 6. to provide adequate infrastructure to serve both new and existing development; to provide the necessary framework for the expansion of redevelopment efforts by private enterprise; and to remove existing deficiencies in the pedestrian and vehicular elements of the transportation system. Subsection 1-4. Statement of Public Facilities and Costs to Be Financed The preceding objectives will be promoted by providing improvements and opportunities within the Development District which may include various types of site improvements, land acquisition, redevelopment, demolition, relocation, parking, street, sewer, water and other public improvements. City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. I I-4 -6759- Subsection 1-5. Funding of Developments and Redevelopments To implement the established objectives, the City plans to utilize a number of public and private financing tools. Funding of the necessary activities and improvements in the Development District are expected to be accomplished through, and are not limited to, tax increment financing, special assessments, state aid for road construction, proceeds from the sale of property, and federal and state grants. Any public facilities within the Development District will be financially feasible and compatible with longer range development plans. Any acquisition of property for the public improvements will be to provide the impetus for private development within the Development District. Subsection 1-6. Environmental Controls It is presently anticipated that the proposed development under the Development Program in the Development District will not present major environmental problems. Prior to development and substantial financing of the public costs associated with the project, the City or the developer will have secured the necessary review of the Project by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and any other state, federal, or local agencies and received the necessary permits or approvals from the affected agencies at the federal, state, or local levels of government, if such review and approval are identified as necessary by the City. Subsection 1-7. Proposed Reuse of Property The public improvements needed to bring about the new development may include site improvements such as soil correction, utility work, and general improvements. Subsection 1-8. Open Space to Be Created Any open space within the Development District will be created in accordance with the zoning and ordinances of Mound. Subsection 1-9. Administration and Maintenance of Development District No. 1 Maintenance and operation of Development District No. 1 will be the responsibility of the City Clerk. Each year, the administrator of Development District No. 1 will submit to the City Council the maintenance and operation budget for the following year. The administrator of Development District No. 1 will administer the Development District pursuant to the provision of Section 469.131 of the Development District Act; provided, however, that such powers may only be exercised at the direction of the City Council. No action taken by the administrator of the Development District pursuant to the above-mentioned powers shall be effective without authorization by the City Council. Subsection 1-10. Rehabilitation Owners of properties within the Development District will be encouraged to rehabilitate their properties to conform with the applicable state and local codes and ordinances, as well as any design City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. 1 I-5 -6760- standards. Owners of properties who purchase property within the Development District from the City may be required to rehabilitate their properties as a condition of sale of land. The City will provide such rehabilitation assistance as may be available from federal, state or local sources. Subsection 1-11. Relocation The City accepts as binding their obligation under federal, state, and local law for relocation and will administer relocation services for families, individuals, and businesses to be displaced by public action if such services are requested or necessary. Prior to the approval of the City of any development or redevelopment plan, it shall be satisfied that there is a feasible method for the temporary relocation of families to be displaced from the Development District and that there are available or will be provided, in the Development District or in other areas not less desirable in regard to public utilities and public commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families displaced from the project areas, decent, safe and sanitary dwellings equal in number of such displaced families. If relocation is necessary, provisions will be made in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 117.50 through 117.56, inclusive. Subsection 1-12. Parcels to Be Acquired or May Be Acquired in Whole or in Part Within Development District No. 1 The City may acquire any parcels located in the Development District. Subsection 1-13. Modification of the Development Program and/or Development District No. 1 The Development Program for Development District No. 1 may be modified in accordance with the Municipal Development District Act. Subsection 1-14. Boundaries of Development District No. 1 The boundaries of Development District No. 1 are not being changed and continue to include the corporate limits of the City of Mound. City of Mound Modification to the Development Program for Development Project and Development District No. 1 I-6 -6761 - EXHIBIT I-A BOUNDARY MAP OF MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 -6762- -6763- SECTION H City of Mound, Minnesota Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 April 24, 2001 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1-1. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project and Development District No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1-1. The purchase of land and upgrade of public utilities was financed through tax increments to facilitate the redevelopment of structural deficient properties and correct land use problems in the downtown area. The redevelopment began in 1984 and was completed in 1985. The first tax increment was received in 1985. The original plan for Tax Increment District No. 1-1 is being modified to clarify the budget and to comply with the current requirements of the Office of the State Auditor. The duration of the tax increment district is being clarified in the modification, therefore, there are no additional fiscal implications to the taxing jurisdictions. The budget is being modified to explicitly authorize repayment of refunding of bonds, loans from other city funds, and transfer amounts for the project area expenses, which may be interpreted as a budget increase, which requires a public hearing. Generally, the substantive changes in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 include: 1. To expand the budget for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 to include interest earnings, inter-fund loans and inter-fund transfers as tax increment funds; 2. To clarify budgets for previous bond refunding amounts; 3. To clarify duration; 4. To clarify the amount of interfund loans transfers of tax increments to be authorized; and 5. Explicitly authorize the use of tax increments for Development District project expenditures. The following modifications are intended to serve as additions to the original tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 according to the content below and are not contemplated to replace any sections unless specified. A copy of the full tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 is on file with the City Administrator of the City of Mound. Findings The original and modified Development Plan Development District No. 1 set forth the applicable findings for the establishment and modification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. The current modification does not require that the City Council adopt new findings, however, the City Council confirms all previous findings establishing and modifying Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. City of Mound Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 II-1 -6764- (As modified on April 24, 2001) Development Program Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within District No. 1-1 may be acquired by the City or HRA and is further described in this Plan. 2. Relocation - Complete relocation services are available pursuant to M.$., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the City or HRA may sell to a developer selected properties that they may acquire within District No. 1-1 or may lease land or facilities to a developer. The City or HRA may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public streets work within District No. 1-1. Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-! The District boundaries are not changing. A map of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1, located within Development District No. 1, can be found on page I-A (in Section I) of this document. Property_ To Be Acquired The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within District No. 1-1 or Development District No. 1 including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City or HRA only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. 2. The following are conditions under which properties not designated to be acquired may be acquired: The City or HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this tax increment financing plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Uses of Funds This section authorizes the use of increments from Tax Increment District No. 1-1 to be used for costs authorized and incurred in Development District No. 1 or any costs authorized and incurred in other Tax Increment District located within Development District No. 1. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limits. City of Mound Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 II-2 -6765- The following is an estimate of public costs including all modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1. A modified estimated cost breakdown of costs associated with financing Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 is as follows: Uses May 21, August 12, Proposed Totals of 1984 1985 April 24, including Funds Original Modification 2001 the April 24, Budget Modification 2001 Modification Land Acquisition Site Improvements Public Utilities Parking Streets and sidewalks Relocation Bond interest payments Loan interest payments Bond Discount Development district public improvements Administration costs Total Cost Bond principal payments Refunded bond principal Interfund loan Transfers $873,900 $375,000 $1,385,861 $2,634,761 $0 $225,000 $275,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $160,000 $0 $0 $160,000 $2,147,250 $398,963 $0 $2,546,213 $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 $0 $2,531,071 $87,ooo so $3,268,150 $3,530,034 $1,375,000 $750,000 ($2,531,071) $0 $373,000 $460,000 $1,322,790 $8,120,974 $0 $2,125,000 $2,125,000 $2,125,000 $7,500,000 $7,500,000 $7,500,000 $7,500,000 It is the intention of the City to use increments in excess of what is needed for debt service herein and to pay towards any other project expenses within Development District No. 1, including shortfalls of other Tax Increment Districts. Estimated costs associated with District No. 1-1 are subject to change among categories without a modification to this Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. It is the intention of the City to use increments in excess of what is needed for debt City of Mound Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 1I-3 -6766- service herein and to pay towards any other project expenses within Development District No. 1. Subsection 2-1. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness Site improvement costs, acquisition, relocation, and site preparation costs and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds has been and will continue to be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City or HRA reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Modification to the Development Program and the Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer and invest- ment income, to pay for the estimated public costs. The City reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the Plan. In 1985 the City issued bonds totaling $2,125,000, a portion which was refunded in 1993 to take advantage of declining interest rates. Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed $2,125,000 without a modification to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. The City reserves the right to refund any bonds to the extent allowed by law without additional modifications to this Plan. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The City may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan through loans from funds of the City or HRA or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible activities paid for by the developer. The estimated sources of funds for District No. 1-1 are contained in the table below. Sources May 21, August 12, Proposed Totals of 1984 1985 April 24, including Funds Original Modification 2001 the April 24, Budget Modification 2001 Modification Tax Increments $4,254,818 $3,284,406 $0 $7,539,224 Interest on invested funds $0 $245,628 ($200,628) $45,000 Land Payments $536,750 $0 $0 $536,750 Total Cost $4,791,568 $3,530,034 ($200,628) $8,120,974 Bond proceeds $1,375,000 $750,000 $0 $2,125,000 Refunding bond proceeds $2,125,000 $2,125,000 Loans $7,500,000 $7,500,000 Transfers $7,500,000 $7,500,000 City of Mound Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 II-4 -6767- Duration of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. l(b), the duration of District No. 1-1 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the City. The date of receipt by the City of Mound of the first tax increment was in 1985. Thus, it is estimated that District No. 1-1, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate December 31, 2010, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify District No. 1-1 prior to the legally required date. City of Mound Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 II-5 -6768- March 23, 2001 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC BY FAX AND BY REGULAR MAIL Jean Beirbaum Taxpayers Services Department A-600 Hennepin County Government Center 300 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55487 Mary Landberg, School Board Clerk Westonka School District No.277 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A Mound, MN 55364 Re: The City of Mound and the Mound's ("City") proposed modification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1, within Development District No. I and the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan. The City of Mound will be considering the adoption of the modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1, a redevelopment tax increment financing district (the "District"), located within Development District No. I, at a public hearing to be held at City Hall, City of Mound, on April 24, 2001 at approximately 7:30 A redevelopment district has a maximum life of 25 years of tax increment (or a shorter period as determined by the City Council). Enclosed please find one copy of the proposed modified Plan for the District. The proposed Modifications are to facilitate budget modifications. The location of the District can be seen on the map as found in the enclosed Plan. The Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act at Minnesota Statues, Section 469.175, Subdivision 2 and 4, requires that prior to the holding of a public hearing on the adoption or modification of a tax increment financing plan, the HRA must provide an opportunity to the members of the affected county and school boards to review the fiscal and economic implications of the proposed modified or new tax increment financing plan 30 days from the transmittal of the enclosed fiscal implications or until the County or School Boards have presented written comment on the proposal, whichever is less. This modification does not create any new Tax Increment Financing Districts and does not increase the geographic size of any Tax Increment Financing District, therefore there are no additional fiscal implications that affect taxing jurisdictions. We invite you to attend the public hearing to be held by the City Council on April 24, 2001, beginning at approximately 7:30 P.M., or to direct any comments or questions that you may have to the City of Mound at 952-472-0610, or to me at 651-697-8504. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Equal Opportunity Employer Charter Member of the National Association of Independent Public Finance Advisors 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 -6769- fax 651.697.8555 www. ehlers-inc.com March 23, 2001 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration in reviewing the enclosed proposal. Sincerely, EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Financial Advisor Acting for and on behalf of the City of Mound, Minnesota Enc. cc: Bonnie Ritter, City of Mound Kandis Hanson, City of Mound Gino Businaro, City of Mound John Dean, Kennedy and Graven, Chartered -6770- Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department A-600 Hennepin County Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0060 April 16, 2001 Shelly Eldridge Financial Advisor Ehlers & Associates, inc. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113-1105 Re: Mound Modification to TIF District No. 1-1 Dear Ms. Eldridge: Enclosed is a report from Richard P. Johnson, Hennepin County Deputy Administrator, to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, concerning the proposed Mound Modification to TIF District No. 1-1. Please arrange to have the report entered into the record of the public hearing of the Mound City Council on Tuesday, April 24, 2001, to reflect the input of Hennepin County, as provided by Minnesots Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 2. If you have any questions about this information, please call me at 612-348-5076. Sincerely, Jean M. Bierbaum, Senior Administrative AsSistant Financial Analysis and Support Division Cc Kandis Hanson, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound MN 55364-1687 RevuMMoundTIFl-1 Mod4242001JTransmittalLetter An EquaI Opportunity Employer - 6771 - Recycled Paper Memo DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 16, 2001 Board of Commissioners .~, Richard P. Johnson, Deputy Administrator Modification to Tax Increment Financing District/No. 1-1 for the City of Mound Hearing Scheduled: Tuesday, April 24, 2001, at 7:30 p.m., Mound City Hall. History: Mound Redevelopment TIF District No. 1-1 was created on 7/24/84. The Town Square TIF District has generated $2,878,979.65 of tax increment through tax payable year 2000, and will be decertified on 12/31/2010. Proposed ModificatiOn: The TIF District cannot be geographically enlarged. The Modification clarifies the decertification date and authorizes payment of bonds, loans from other city funds and transfer of revenue for the Development District project area. The Modification proposal states: "This section authorizes the use of increments from Tax Increment District No. 1-1 to be used for costs authorized and incurred in Development District No. I or any costs authorized and incurred in other Tax Increment District located within Development District No. 1." The City of Mound created redevelopment TIF District No. 1-2 on 12/14/99. The Modification to TIF District No. 1-1 authorizes transfer of tax increment to TIF District No. 1-2 for its project expenses. ~preadsheets included in the Plan identify the Uses and Sources of Funds as follows: 5/21/84 8/12/85 4/24/01 Uses of Funds Budqet Modification Modification Total Land Acquisition $873,900 $375,000 $1,385,861 $2,634,761 Site Improvements 0 225,000 275,000 500,000 Public Utilities 0 0 500,000 500,000 Parking 500,000 500,000 Streets/Sidewalks 500,000 500,000 Relocation 160,000 0 0 160,000 Bond Interest Payments 2,147,250 398,963 0 2,546,213 Loan Interest Payments 0 0 300,000 300,000 Bond Discount 0 0 20,000 20,000 Dev. Dist. Public Impvt 0 2,531,071 (2,531,071) 0 Administration 87 000 0 373 000 460 000 Total Uses of Funds $3,268,150 5/21/84 Sources of Funds Budget Tax Increment $4,254,818 Interest on Invested Funds 0 Land Payments 536,750 Total Sources of Funds $4,791,568 $3,530,034 $1,322,790 $8,120,974 8/12/85 4/24/01 Modification Modification Total $3,284,406 $0 *$7,539,224 245,628 (200,628) 45,000 0 0 536 750 $3,530,034 ($200,628) $8,120,974 Note: Tax Increment Revenue generated through 12/31/2000 is $2,878,979.65. -6772- April 16, 2001 Board of Commissioners Modification to Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District.No. 1-1 for the City of Mound Page 2 Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact on Hennepin County will depend on the amount of TIF revenue generated by TIF District No. 1-1 that is transferred to TIF District No. 1-2. That amount is an unknown factor at this time. However, if TIF District No. 1-1 were to be decertified when all of its own debt obligations have been met, the increased tax revenue generated by the new development in the TIF District would be returned to the general tax rolls sooner. If tax increment revenue generated by TIF District No. 1-1, but not needed for its own debt obligations, is "pooled" with TIF District No. 1-2, there could be as much as a ten-year delay before Mound, Hennepin County and School District No. 277 tax levies benefit from the tax capacity increases within this TIF District. SUMMARY The Modification Plan does not identify the amount of TIF District No. 1-1 tax increment revenue that will be transferred to TIF District No. 1-2, nor does it identify the intended uses of the funds when they have been transferred. While this Modification is essentially technical in nature, it does not identify uses for tax increment that are consistent with the preference of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners for use of Tax increment Financing, as identified in Resolution 92-10-917R1, adopted 10/27/92. A copy of this report will be sent to the City of Mound with a request that it be entered into the public record of the Mound City Council public hearing on Tuesday, April 24, 2001, to reflect the County's position on this proposal. RevuMoundTIF 1-1 Mod4242001J -6773- CITY OF MOUND ,.5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING To Whom It May Concern: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on April 24, 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota. Purpose for said public hearing is to consider raising license fees for retail liquor licenses. Such licenses include 3.2 Malt Liquor (on-sale and off-sale), On-sale Intoxicating Liquor to Clubs, and Off-sale Intoxicating Liquor. Any persons that wish to be heard with reference to said license fees, will be heard at this pubic hearing. 6774 Notice sent on 3/19/01 to: Al and Alma's Supper Club 5201 Piper Road Mound, MN 55364 American Legion #398 2333 Wilshire Blvd. Mound MN 55364 VFW Post #5113 2544 Commerce Blvd. Mound MN 55364 Mound Lanes 2346 Cypress Lane Mound MN 55364 By The Way Snackshop 4801 Shoreline Drive Mound MN 55364 Mainstreet Market & Expresso 2242 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 PDQ Store #292 5550 Three Points Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Superamerica #~194 5337 Shoreline Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 -6775- Proposed license fee increases are as follows: Alcoholic Beveraqes; Expire June 3¢ 810:15 3.2 beer license investigation fee 3.2 beer off-sale 3.2 beer on-sale 3.2 'beer on-sate temporary 800:45 Set-ups (+State charges $150 for Consumption & Display Permit 800:20 Liquor license investigation fee 800:00 800:15 800:15 Liquor on-sale Liquor on-sale/cabaret Wine on-sale Investigation fee Club license Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership 200 or less: 201-500: 501-1,000: 1,001 -2,000: 2,001-4,000: 4,001-6,000: more than 6,000: 2000 $500/app. $50/yr. $300~r. $15+3/day $200/yr. $500/app $4500/yr. $4500/yr. $500/yr. $500/app $150 2001 $500/investigation $150/yr. $500/yr. $50/day $300/yr. $500/app in state. Actual, up to $1000 outstate $4500/yr. $45001yr. $500/yr. $500/investigation Up to $300 Up to $500 Up to $650 Up to $800 Up to $1,000 Up to $2,000 Up to $3,000 800:15 Sundayliquor $200~r. $200/yr. -6776- Minnesota Statutes 2000, 340A.408 Page 1 of 2 Minnesota Statutes 2000, Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 340A 340A.408 Retail license fees. Subdivision 1. 3.2 ~ercent malt liquor. (a) The license fee for an on-sale and off-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license is the fee set by the county or city issuing the license. (b) One-half of the license fee received by a county for a retail license to sell 3.2 percent malt liquor within any town in the county shall be paid to the town board where the business is located. Subd. 2. Intoxicating liquor; on-sale. (a) The license fee for a retail on-sale intoxicating liquor license is the fee set by the city or county issuing the license subject to the limitations imposed under this subdivision. The license fee is intended to cover the costs of issuing and inspecting and other directly related costs of enforcement. (b) The annual license fee for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license issued by a municipality to a club must be no greater than: (1) $300 for a club with under 200 members; (2) $500 for a club with between 201 and 500 members; (3) $650 for a club with between 501 and 1,000 members; (4) $800 for a club with between 1,001 and 2,000 members; (5) $1,000 for a club with between 2,001 and 4,000 members; (6) $2,000 for a club with between 4,001 and 6,000 members; or (7) $3,000 for a club with over 6,000 members. (c) The license fee for the issuance of a wine license may not exceed one-half of the license fee charged for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license, or $2,000, whichever is less. (d) The town board of a town in which an on-sale establishment has been licensed by a county may impose an additional license fee on each such establishment in an amount not to exceed 20 p~rcent of the county license fee. Subd. 3. Intoxicating liquor; off-sale. (a) The annual license fee for an off-sale intoxicating liquor license issued by a city, when combined with any occupation tax imposed by the city, may not exceed the following limits: (1) $1,000 for cities of the first class; (2) $200 for cities over 10,000 other than cities of the ttp://www.rev~sor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/3 Al -6777- 03/05/2001 Minnesota Statutes 2000, 340A.408 Page 2 of 2 first class; (3) $150 for cities of between 5,000 and 10,000 population; and (4) $100 for cities with less than 5,000 population. (b) The annual license fee for an off-sale intoxicating liquor license issued by a county or town shall not exceed $500. Subd. 3a. Fee increases; notice, hearing. No city, town, or county shall increase the fee for a liquor license governed by subdivision 1, 2, or 3, except after notice and hearing on the proposed increase. Notice of the proposed increase must be mailed to all affected licensees at least 30 days before the date set for the hearing. This subdivision supersedes any inconsistent provision of law or charter. Subd. 4. Lake Superior, St. Croix river, and Mississippi river tour boats; common carriers. (a) The annual license fee for licensing of Lake Superior, St. Croix river, and Mississippi river tour boats under section 340A.404, subdivision 8, shall be $1,000. The commissioner shall transmit one-half of this fee to the governing body of the city that is the home port of the tour boat or to the county in which the home port is located if the home port is outside a city. (b) The annual license fee for common carriers licensed under section 340A.407 is: (1) $50 for 3.2 percent malt liquor, and $20 for a duplicate license; and (2) $200 for intoxicating liquor, and $20 for a duplicate license. Subd. 5. Refunds. A pro rata share of an annual license fee for a retail license to sell intoxicating or 3.2 percent malt liquor, either on-sale or off-sale, may be refunded to the licensee or to the licensee's estate if: (1) the business ceases to operate because of destruction or damage; (2) the licensee dies; (3) the business ceases to be lawful for a reason other than a license revocation; or (4) the licensee ceases to carry on the licensed business under the license. HIST: 1985 c 305 art 6 s 8; 1987 c 152 art 1 s 1; 1989 c 104 s 1; 1991 c 249 s 11,31; 1992 c 486 s 8; 1992 c 513 art 3 s 59; 1996 c 418 s 7 Copyright 2000 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. http://www, revi sor.leg, state, mn.us/stats/340A/2 ~7~'8 2 0 I051 00! z 0~3~ ~'~ o~o ~ o~ '~ o ~ .~ g m d -6779- <~ -6780- -6781 - CITY OF MOUND DATE: April 19, 2001 TO: Pat Meisel, Mayor ~ Kandis Hanson, city Manage~ ~J FROM: Jim Fackler, Parks Director ~ ~ RE: Island Park Shop & Hall Improvements, 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PARK MAINTENANCE SHOP; > Addition of > Landscaping, 3,664 sqft ..................... $ 238,160.00 Sod ............................ 1,500.00 Shrubs ......................... 1,500.00 Trees .......................... 5,000.00 Retaining Walls ................ 20,000.00 > Asphalt Driveways .......................... 25,000.00 > Fence ................................ 2,000.00 > Design ~ Engineeri~ .... ~ .... ~ .... ~ ....... 73,290.00 Sub Total $ 366,450.00 ISLAND PARK HALL; > Electrical ................................. $ 14,190.00 > Exterior Windows & Doors ................... 28,600.00 > Rough Plumbing ............................. 8,100.00 > Heat/AC ............................... ~ .... 48,030.00 > Roofing .................................... 12,400.00 > Exterior Painting .......................... 6,160.00 > Design & Engineering ....................... 29,370.00 > Interior Restoration ........................ 110,000.00 > Design & Engineering ....................... 56,870.00 > Contingency ................................ 28,430.00 Sub Total $ 342,150.00 TOTAL $ 708,600.00 l~-6782-Yc'ed.a.er AGENCY AGREEMENT PURCHASE OF SERVICES 4/20/01 TIIIS AGREEMENT, entered into as of this day of April, 2001, by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Mound, Minnesota, a body public and corporate, (hereinafter called "I-IKA"), and City of Mound, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called "Mound"), WITNESSETH: WI:rEREAS, the HRA desires to engage Mound to render certain personnel, equipment and assistance in connection with the activities and projects of the. HRA; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein set forth, the HRA and Mound do hereby agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services to be Supplied by Mound: Mound shall furnish to the HRA all necessary personnel and equipment required by the HRA and as called for by the HRA to undertake and complete the scope of activities described on the attached Exhibit A, together with such other services as the City Manager and Executive Director shall from time to time determine. Personnel and equipment will be scheduled to avoid conflict with other City work. It is understood that all personnel and equipment furnished the HRA under this Agreement shall be and remain the employees and equipment of Mound at all times during the furnishing of services; and Mound shall be solely responsible for all compensation, and all insurance coverages, and for any damage or injury caused by its employees or equipment while performing services hereunder. 2. Time of Performance; Duration of Agreement: This agreement shall commence; as of the date of execution, and shall continue until January 1, 2002, and shall continue thereafter on a year-to-year basis unless and until terminated by either party hereto by 30-day written notice to the other party. 3. Compensation to Mound: HRA shall pay Mound for all Services furnished to the HRA Such payments shall be made monthly for all Services furnished by Mound during the previous month, and shall be made within thirty (30)days after .receipt by the HRA of a statement from Mound for the. month for which payment is to be made.. The amount to be paid by the HRA to Mound for services shall be the total hours of Services actually rendered each month to the HRA by each employee of Mound times the Hourly Rate for each such employee, said Hourly Rate to be determined as follows: (i)The Hourly Rate shall be the Total Annual Compensation of that employee divided by the Base Hours for that employee; (ii)The Base Hours shall be the minimum number of hours to be worked by each Mound employee as established fi'om time to time by Mound, less the hours included for paid vacations and holidays; (iii)Total Annual Compensation shall be the annual compensation for such employees as established by Mound from time to time, plus Mound's contribution for health, life, and disability insurance, and Mound's contribution for retirement and other benefits; (iv)No charges, over and above the Hourly Rate, shall be-made to or payable by the HRA for overtime work of Mound employees except such overtime as is approved in advance by the HRA. -6783- 4. For Equipment. There shall be no additional charge for equipment used by Mound personnel in eormeetion wkh performing the services. 5. Notices and Demands: All notices or demands required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given when delivered personally to any office of the party to which notice is being given, or when deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope with registered or certified mail postage prepaid thereon addressed to the parties at the following addresses: To HRA: 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 To Mound: 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Such addresses may be changed by either party upon notice to the other party given as herein provided. 5. Affirmative Action: The HRA agrees to submit a signed statement signifying that the HRA fully intends to comply with the standards of equal employment and. anti-discrimination as cited in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended. 131 WITNESS WItEREOF, the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City of Mound have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Its Executive Director By Its Board Chairperson CITY OF MOUND By Its Mayor By Its City Manager JBD-196266vl MU220-2 -6784- EXHIBIT a COMPOST .... BUSH REMOVAL... DIRT PILE... CONCRETE PADS ..... BARRELS... FIRE HYDRANT FLAG... SIGN POSTS & POST POUNDER.. BENCHES... WE NEED APPROXIMATELY SIX (6) DUMP TRUCK LOADS TO FILL IN AND LEVEL OUT AREAS THAT WE REMOVE WOODEN TIMBER STEPS FROM. WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY THIRTY (30) BUSHES THAT WE NEED YOUR ASSISTANCE IN REMOVING FROM THE GROUND. IN THE PAST WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO DIG THEM OUT BY HAND, WITHOUT MUCH SUCCESS. WE HAVE a MOUND OF DIRT THAT NEEDS TO BE LEVELED OUT IN THE AREA IT IS NOW LOCATED IN. IN THE PARKING LOT, WE HAVE ABOUT TEN (10) CONCRETE PADS THAT ARE USED TO STOP CARS FROM PARKING TOO FAR FORWARD IN THEIR ASSIGNED PARKING SPOTS. WE NEED THESE PADS STRAIGHTENED OUT, AND WE ARE UNABLE TO DO THIS BY HAND. WE COULD ALSO USE 12 NEW PADS FOR PARKING SPOTS THAT DON'T HAVE ANY. WE WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN THREE (3) FIFTY-FIVE (55) GALLON BARRELS FROM YOU FOR THE PURPOSE OF STORING A SAND AND SALT MIX TO USE FOR THE NORTH DRIVEWAY, FRONT AND REAR SIDEWALKS DURING THE WINTER MONTHS. WE WOULD LIKE TO OB,FAIN A FIRE HYDRANT FLAG TO USE ON OUR BULDING FIRE HYDRANT SENSOR SO WE CAN IDENTIFY ITS LOCATION DURING THE WINTER MONTHS SO AS NOT TO PILE SNOW ON IT. WHEN IT IS COVERED OUR FIRE ALARM SYSTEM GOES IN-OPERATIVE ON OUR ALARM BOARD. WE NEED TO REPLACE ALL OF THE PARKING LOT SIGNS THAT IDENTIFY WHERE EACH RESIDENT IS TO PARK THEIR VEHICLES. ADDITIONALLY, THE NEW POSTS AND SIGNS NEED TO BE HIGHER BECAUSE SNOW COVERS THEM DURING THE WINTER. ADDITIONALLY, WE NEED TO INSTALL NEW SIGNS INFORMING PEOPLE THAT THIS LOT IS A CONTROL~D LOT AND PARKING IS FOR RESIDENTS ONLY. I WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN THE POSTS (6-FOOTERS) AND THE USE OF A POST POUNDER TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. WE NEED 30 POSTS TO ACCOMPLISH THIS TASK. WE WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN THREE (3) BENCHES OF THE TYPE THAT WE NOW HAVE. I WOULD INSTALL THESE MYSELF. -6785- EXHIBIT A - PAGE 2 STUCCO PAINT SCAFFOLDING. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN SOME SCAFFOLDING FROM YOU THAT I CAN UTILIZE FOR STUCCO AND PAINT WORK? ALSO, WE NEED TO OBTAIN SOME WARNING LIGHT FRAMES AND TAPE TO BLOCK OFF WORK AREAS. PIANO.. COULD WE OBTAIN YOUR HELP IN LIFTING AN EXTREMELY HEAVY PIANO INTO A DUMPSTER THAT IS BEING DELIVERED? LANDSCAPING..I AM IN THE PROCESS OF TEARING DOWN SOME RETAINING WALLS AND WANT TO KNOW IF YOU COULD HELP LEVEL THE GROUND WITH ONE OF YOUR PIECES OF EQUIPMENT? WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO PURCHASE BUSHES THROUGH YOU? FRONT AREA CONCRETE.. THE FRONT SIDEWALK AREA, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS GOING TO NEED REPLACEMENT SOON. WE HAVE OLDER PEOPLE BEGINNING TO STUMBLE AND TRIP ON THE SIDEWALK AREA. WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH YOUR OFFICES TO GET THE SIDEWALK AREA REPLACED AT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE. NORTH DRIVEWAY.. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DO TO THIS AREA TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE AND TO MAKE IT EASIER TO GET THE DUMPSTERS OUT FOR PICKUP? IT IS A BEAR TO GET THE TRASH OUT FOR PICKUP DURING THE WINTER. OLD APPLIANCES..? PARKING LOT LIGHTING.. WE FEEL THAT WE NEED BETTER LIGHTING IN THE PARKING LOT ON THE NORTH-EAST END OF THE LOT, AND WOULD LIKE TO GET A NEW LIGHT INSTALLED. PARKING LOT & NORTH DRIVEWAY.. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAVE THESE TWO (2) AREAS SWEPT DOWN FOR US? DRAINAGE NEAR GARDEN.. COULD YOU ONCE AGAIN TRENCH & LEVEL THIS AREA OUT SO WE CAN GET PROPER DRAINAGE AND RUN-OFF IN THIS AREA. ALL MOISTURE FROM THE PARKING LOT AND BACK AREA GROUNDS DRAINS INTO THIS AREA AND IS SUPPOSED TO DRAIN INTO THE WOODED AREA ADJACENT TO 'THE GARDEN. -6786- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: Fees shall be hereby established. In the event of a conflict between this schedule and the City Code, the fee schedule shall prevail. An application or code provision may require payment of fees for consultation with experts, professionals or other qualified persons or for other matters, which may result in the imposition of a fee greater than listed in this fee schedule. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES & CHARGES 400:20 Returned check Assessment search Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance Duplicate meeting tapes Minutes ' Copies Notary (set by State) Duplicate license/permit Recycling container purchase Recycling container replacement 2000 2001 $20/check $25/check $20/search $20/search $3O $5 each $20 N/C $3Aape $.25/page $.25/page $.25/page $.25/page $2 each $1 each $10 each $7 each atcost N/C atcost AMUSEMENT & COMMERCIAL RECREATION Arcades: Expire Dec. 31st 405:00 Arcade Permit Amusements: (Set by State)EXpire APril 30 410:10 Amusement Devices $200/mach/yr.$100/mach/yr. $35/mach/yr. $15/Iocation + $15/machine Billiards & Bowlin,q: Expire April 30th 420:05 Billiard and pool tables Bowling $10/table/yr. $20/table/yr. $10/alley/yr. $20/alley/yr. -6787- RESOLUTION NO. 01- Carnivals, Shows, Entertainment: 482:10 Circus, show, game or concert Indoor show Outdoor show -one day -one week 2000 $5/show $5 $10 2001 $100/day $100/day -one month -one year Tentshows Dance Hall: 450:60 Public dance or live music Fireworks: Permit fee Fortune Tellers: Expire January 31st 465:05 Permit Fee Games of Skill: Expire April 30th 468:10 Permit Fee Parades: 472:00 Parade $25 $50 $1 O/day $200/yr. $25/day N/C N/C $25/yr. N/C $100/day $300~r. $100/day $50/yr. BUSINESS AND MISCELLANEOUS Alcoholic Beverages: Expire June 30th 810:15 3.2 beer license investigation fee 3.2 beer off-sale 3.2 beer on-sale 3.2 beer on-sale temporary 800:45 Set-ups (+State charges $150 for Consumption & Display Permit 800:20 Liquor license investigation fee $500/app. $50/yr. $300/yr. $15+3/day $200/yr. $500/app $500/investigation $150/yr. $500/yr. $50/day $300/yr. $500/app in state. Actual, up to $1000 outstate 2 -6788- RESOLUTION NO. 01- Alcoholic Beverages - continued 800:00 Liquor on-sale Liquor on-sale/cabaret 800:15 Wine on-sale Investigation fee 800:15 Club license Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership 200 or less: 201-500: 501-1,000: 1,001 -2,000: 2,001-4,000: 4,001-6,000: more than 6,000: 2000 2001 $4500/yr. $4500/yr. $500/yr. $500/app $150 $4500/yr. $4500/yr. $500/yr. $500/investigation Up to $300 Up to $500 Up to $650 Up to $800 Up to $1,000 Up to $2,000 Up to $3,000 800:15 Sunday liquor $200~r. $200~r. 445:10 451:30 Commissary Dinner Dancing annual prorated $5/yr. $750/yr. $100/month $300 minimum Charitable Gamblinq: Investigation fee (set by State) $200 Car Wash: Expire January 31 st 430:00 Coin operated Automatic, drive-through Automatic, conveyor $50/yr. $100/yr. $75/yr. $100/yr. $100/yr. $100/yr. Ci,qarettes: Now governed by the County. Garba.qe Collection: 490:25 Permit Fee $100/yr. $300~r. Peddlers & Solicitors: (Need permit from Henn. County before City can issue) 485:15 Transient memhants, Peddler, Hawker One day $10 $30 One week $25 $50 One month $75 $75 One year $150 $200 3 -6789- RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2000 2001 Restaurants & Cafes: Expire April 30th 480:00 Restaurants and caf~ permits Taxicabs: Expire January 31 484:10 First vehicle Additional vehicles $10/yr. $15/yr. $10 ea/yr. $50Nr. $25~ehicle/yr. See above BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION Buildinq Permit: 330:20 Building Permits Fire suppression Inspection fees: Plan check fees: See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table 1-A + surcharge See 1997 UBC, Sect. 107, Table I-A + surcharge 315:20 Trailers Occupancy permit $24 $100 315:35 Appeal to applicant $20 $50 311:00 Heating, air conditioning & ventilation Contract prices Gas piping Mechanical & gas piping $20 min. or 1% of contract price, whichever is greater $5 for up to 3 openings $1 for each additional opening 300:20 Wrecking permit Minor building $5 Minor building to be replaced on same site $2 Single family wood frame $15 Duplex $20 Multiple dwelling: l~t two units $20 Each addn'l unit $2 $5O $5O $150 $200 $200 $250 Industrial,commercial,institutional: Total cost of wrecking at $6 for each $500 or fraction thereof of the market value of such work. 4 -6790- RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2000 2001 Gas burners: Not exceeding 99,999 BTU $10 100,000 - 199,999 BTU $15 200,000 - 399,999 BTU $30 400,000 - 599,999 BTU $44 600,000 - 999,999 BTU $60 Install/remove flammable & combustible liquids and LP tanks Tank not buried enclosed 500 gallons or less $10 Over 500 gallons $15 Tank buried or enclosed $25 Removal of combustible/ flammable liquid tank $15 Removal of storage tanks of above/below ground liquid gas $15 Plumbin,q Permits: 310:00 Permit Fee $20 Per fixture fee $8 Per rough-in only $8 Per 100 feet of pipe or fraction thereof $5 Per 100 feet of repair or fraction $3 Outside sewer and/or water inspection $20 Private water well inspection $20 310:40 Additional inspections $5 $25 $10 $10 $8 $5 $25 $25 $10 Wells: 305:00 Wells - per drilling or deepening $5 $65 Building Relocation: Moving permit fee: standard bldg, not on State or County Highway: $50 $150 Moving permit fee: minor bldg, not on State or County Highway: $10 $100 Moving permit fee: On State or County Highways: No fee, but required evidence of insurance and refundable $250 cash. Holding up, raising or moving on the same lot Work costing up to $500 $15 $75 Additional fee for ea $200 of work over $500 $3 $5 5 -6791 - RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2000 2001 CEMETERY FEES Adult grave - resident $350 Adult grave - non-resident $650 Baby grave or cremains -resident $175 Baby grave or cremains -non-resident $375 Ash burial- resident $0 Ash burial - non-resident $0 Locate $0 $600 $850 $25O $35O $3OO $4OO A~ualcost DOCKS: Expire December 31st. 437:25 Late dock license application fee on or after March 1st Additional late fees, per month, starting April 437:25 Straight docks L, T docks U or special size docks Sailboat mooring Shared dock Senior citizen dock: 65 and over Senior citizen dock: shared with other senior Non-senior dock: sharing with senior LMCD charges 437:10 Temporary boat docking fee: Up to 21 days: 435:35 Commercial Boat - Expire April 1st First boat: Additional Boat: 437:00 Shared dock application Filed after March Ist $20 $10 $150/yr. $200/yr. $235/yr. $150/yr. $35/yr. % of base fee % of base fee % of base fee Actual charge $15/day $15/yr. $10 ea/yr. $25 6 -6792- RESOLUTION NO, 01- 2000 2001 FIRE SERVICES: Fire report (MFD Report) 225:27 Burning Permit N/C $10 $2O $10 PARKS & RECREATION: Depot rental - residents Depot rental - non-residents Key deposit City Hall room rentals $75/day $150/day $400 $75/day $75/day PUBLIC GATHERING: Park use fee: commercial events: N/C $150/day POLICE SERVICES Administrative: Accident Report $5 Police report: up to 5 single-sided pgs $5 Addn'l pages, same report $.25 ea. Drivers license check: non-resident $5 Photographs: cost + reproduction,Film $25 Audio Cassette $10 Video Cassette $25 Dept. computer check $10 Dept. computer check/page $.25 Dept. computer check/hr, computer $50 Finger printing: resident: N/C Non-resident: $5/card Permit to Carry $0 False Alarm $0 $10 $25 N/C $1 O/card $10 7 -6793- RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2000 2001 Animals: Expire April 30th 455:05 Dog/cat license: 2-year, neutered or spayed, with proof $20 After April of odd year: Dog/cat license: 2-year un-neutered or spayed $30 After April of odd year: Duplicate Tag: $1 Kennel Fee: per day $13 $25 $12.50 $35 $17.50 $5 $15 456:75 Commercial Kennel: $50/yr. Late application: on or after May 10 + $1 $150/yr. $1 475:80 Redemption of impounded animal First impound in current year with current license: $2O $5O First impound in current year without current license: $45 $75 2nd impound w/i year/licensed $55 $65neutered $75 un-neutered 2nd impound w/i year/no license $80 $9O 3rd impound with current license $55 $8O 3rd impound without license $80 $105 ...plus license purchase if needed, plus kennel fees... 8 -6794- RESOLUTION NO. 01- EXCAVATION & LAND RECLAMATION 2000 460:15 Grading plan review fees : *50 cu. yards or less $0 '51-100 cu. yards $15 '101-1,000 cu. yards $22 '1,001-10,000 cu. yards $30 '10,001-100,000 cu yards First 10,000 cu. yards $30 Additional for ea 10,000 cu. yards or fraction thereof $15 '100,001-200,000 cu. yards First 100,000 cu. yards $165 Additional for ea 10,000 cu. yards or fraction thereof $9 '200,001 or more First 200,000 cu. yards $255 Additional for ea 10,00 cu. yards : or fraction thereof $4.50 Additional plan review, due to changes, ~ additions, or revisions to approve , plans: Minimum % hour: $15 Per hour $30 GRADING PERMIT FEES: *50 cu. yards or less $15 '51-100 cu. yards $22 '101-1,000 cu. yards First 1,000 cu. yards $22.50 Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: $10.50 '1,001-10,000 cu. yards First 1,000 cu. yards $117 Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: $9 '10,001-100,000 cu. yards First 1,000 cu. yards $198 Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: $40.50 '101,000 cu. yards or more ~ First 1,000 cu. yards $562.50 Additional for ea. 100 cu. yds. or fraction thereof: $22.50 $30/hr. 2001 After hours inspection:Minimum charge (2 hrs) Re-inspection fees assessed under Provision of chapter 305 (g) (UBC)' $30/hr. Inspection for which no fee is specified: $30/hr. (Minimum chg. % hr.) Fee for authorizing additional grading under valid permit: Difference between original and entire project. 9 -6795- RESOLUTION NO. 01- SPECIAL CONTRACTOR LICENSES Heatinq, AC, Ventilation: Contractor registration: Tree Sur.qeon: Expires April 1st 488:05 Tree surgeon (removal & treatment) Street Excavation: 605:15 Street excavation: 2000 PUBLIC WORKS FEES $15/yr. $30/yr. Unpaved street $30 Macadam $35 Concrete or bade $40 SUBDIVISION & ZONING FEES 350:475 Fence Permit $25 350:530 Zoning Variance $100 350:525 Conditional Use Permit $250 350:755 Vacation $250 350:1100 Wetlands Permit $100 350:520 Zoning Amendment $250 Planned Unit Development $1,700 Site Plan Review $0 Preliminary Plat $200 Final Plat $150 Minor Subdivision: Lot split $75 Per lot over 2 lots $10 Park Dedication Fee: $500 or 10% Escrow deposit - small proj. app. $1,000 ?? Escrow deposit -large proj. app. $??? 365:05 Sign Permit: 1st 100 sq.ft, of area $12 Ea. Addn'l 50 sq. ft. $6 Maximum Fee: $100 Sign alteration fee: Structural - alteration, up to the 1st $1,000 $12 Each add'l $1000 or fraction $6 Temporary Sign Permit $0 Special Use Permit $250 2001 $50/yr. $30~r. $100+$500 deposit $100+$500 deposit $100+$500 deposit $25 $200 $350 $350 $350 $350 $1,700 $350 $350+$15/Iot $350+$15/Iot $250 $15 $1,000 $5,000 $5O $6 $150 $50 $6 $25 $250 10 -6796- RESOLUTION NO. 01- UTILITIES Water: 610:15 610:25 610:35 610:40 610:40 610:60 610:45 610:65 610:45 610:45 Water Connection (at hook-up) Minimum Connection Fee Service Contract Violation Water Meter Water Meter Test Remote Meter Water Turn-on Water Service connection deposit Plumber Violation Water availability charge Water gallonage rates Service Charge User fee New Account Charge On/Off at curb box Meter Installation Meter Removal Reconnection Fee Sprinkler System 2 inch 4 inch 6 inch 8 inch 10 inch 12 inch Corporate cock Curb stop Stationary rod Sewer: 310:05 600:55 600:45 Master plumber registration Sewer connection: per connection Availability charge (not connected) Availability charge Connection to sewer, but not water Late fee penalty 2000 $4/front ft. ea. $240 $35/upon turn-on $100/meter $1 O/test $20/upgrade $35/event $100/violation $125/occasion $1.45/mo/account $1.25/1,000 gals. $10 $35 $17.50 $17.50 $35 $3/mo $4/mo $6/mo $15/mo $25/mo $33/mo $12.46/connection $26.40/connection $15/connection $15/yr. $9.04/front ft. $40/qtr $125/occasion $46/50/qtr. !0% additional 2001 $115/meter $50~est $50/yr. 11 -6797- EESOLUTION NO. 01- 2000 2001 Treatment rates: Residential: 10,000 gals or less $40 minimum/qtr Over 10,000 gals/I,000 gals. $ 2.50 Minimum quarterly charge $40 Note: The above minimum applies to each single family dwelling or apartment which is in accordance with existing sewer department policy. Commercial, Industrial & Multi-unit Dwellings: 3,000 gals or less Over 3,000 gals/I,000 gals. Minimum monthly charge/unit Availability charge per dwelling $13.35 min/mo. $ 2.50 $13.35 $40.00 Note: The sewer rate shall be based on the actual corresponding water Usage. 600:55 Sewer Permit per connection $7.50 Storm Sewer: Single-Family or Two-family Residential Cemeteries Parks and Railroads Public and Private Schools/Institutional Use Multi-family Residential Uses Commercial/Industrial/VVarehouse Use Churches $4.89/Iot/quarter $2.00/acre/month $6.1 O/acre/month $10.20/acre/month $24.50/acre/month $41.1 O/acre/month $10.20/acre/month Miscellaneous Fees: A miscellaneous fee shall be paid by the applicant for land use application expenses which the City incurs in regard to the review and processing of that application, and which exceeds the application fee. Such expenses may include, but are not limited to, direct City payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants or professionals acting as an agent of the City, the cost of printing, mailing and supplies. Such miscellaneous fees shall come due immediately upon notification by the City. The City shall provide, upon request of the applicant, a breakdown of the various expenses incurred by the City. The City may withhold any final action on a land use application and/or rescind prior 12 -6798- RESOLUTION NO, 01- actions until all miscellaneous fees are paid in full. The City may request additional deposits if deemed necessary. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this day of ,2001. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor 13 -6799- DRAFT EXCERPT OF MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY APRIL 9, 2001 3.2 2001 PC MEETING SCHEDULE Discussion Voss said Monday's were hard for him. Glister, Mueller, Weiland, Burma and Michael prefer Monday's. Sutherland indicated that the City Council will be forced to make a decision but we should give our opinion since we approved the work rules. Glister said that moving to alternate weeks would add 1 week to the process. Sutherland said that not every month would be the same. In May, the meetings alternate all by themselves. The schedule gets shifted as the calendar flip flops. The biggest issue was the stafftime. Clapsaddle inquired as to the possibility of making the submittal date a few days earlier so the publication date isn't a problem. The consensus was to alternate Mondays and reset application times. -6800- Planning Commission Work Schedule S MTWT F S Janua~ 123456 7 8 9 10111213 14151617181920 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 May 1 2345 6 (Z)~ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 200~J23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 September 30 .1 204 5 6 7 8 9 1,~0~12 13 1415 16~18 19 20 21 22 23 242~J20 27 28 29 2001 SMTWT F S February 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91o 11121314 15 16 17 18192021 22 23 24 25262728 June 1 2 3(~5 6 7 8 9 10 1_~1 ~r~13 141516 172~5 ~...j 20 212223 24 __27 282930 October ~16 17 18 19 2O 21 22~24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 SMT, WT F S March 1 23 45678910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 July 1(~)3 4 5 6 7 8 9~11 12 13 14 20 22 232,~25 26 27 28 29 30 31 November 12130 406 7 8 9 181J~)~ 21 22 23 24 25 261_2JJ 28 29 30 SMTWT F April 1 23456 8 9 10 11 12 13' 15 16 17 18 19 20: 220]~25 26 27: 29 30 August 1 2 3 5(~7 8 910' 12 13J~15 16 17 19(~) 21 22 23 24: 26 27._~ 29 30 31 December 320~4 5 6, 9 10~12 13 14 ~ 1611~ 19 20 21 ; 23 24 25 26 27 28; -6801 - PARK COMMISSION RESOLUTION REGARDING APPOINTMENTS TO ADVISORY COMMISSIONS WHEREAS, prior to January 23, 2001, City Council Resolution 89-139 (adopted on October 24, 1989) clearlystated that a "vacancy" on a city advisory commission "... occurs when a term expires and the commissioner holding that term does not desire reappointment" or "when a commissioner resigns his/her position prior to the term expiring"; WHEREAS, from October 24, 1989 to January 23, 2001, the City of Mound advisory commissions and the Mound City Council have consistently followed the language of Resolution 89-139 in so far as they conducted competitive interviews of prospective candidates only when a "vacancy" existed, as legally defined; WHEREAS, on January 23, 2001, the Mound City Attorney agreed with the legal interpretation of "vacancy," as defined above; WHEREAS, the current Mound City Code already allows advisory commissioners to be removed by a 4/5 vote of the city Council, thereby alleviating any potential problem with "dead wood" or "lifetime appointments"; WHEREAS, late in the evening on January 23, 2001, the Mound City Council voted 3-2 to substantially change Resolution 89-139, whereby a "vacancy" occurs on a city advisory commission when the commissioner's term expires, thus requiring every sitting commissioner to compete with other candidates for reappointment to his/her seat at the expiration of his/her term; WHEREAS, the proposed change in the definition of "vacancy" (adopted by the City Council on January 23, 2001) was not contained in the City Council "packet," whereby Mound citizens (other than John Beise, Tom Casey, and perhaps one other audience member) had no opportunity to consider and provide comments to the specific proposed change; WHEREAS, the proposed change in the definition of "vacancy" (adopted by the City Council on January 23, 2001) was not submitted to any of the advisory commissions for their review and recommendation; WHEREAS, the NEGATIVE RESULTS of the change in the definition of "vacancy" in Resolution 89-139 are: (1) (2) reappointments are subject to political retaliation (e.g. Bill Darling, 1996 candidate for mayor); a city council can change the majority of advisory -6802- (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) commissioners within 13 months (assuming 3-year staggered terms); "institutional long-term memory" and the opportunity to educate new commissioners (and new city council members) will be lost by more rapid turnover of commissioners; more rapid turnover may also result in the discontinuity of programs; natural attrition of advisory commissioners is already high, at least for the Park Commission and Open Space Advisory Commission; a commissioner's decision is more likely to be affected by whether the majority of the City Council agrees with the decision; and the City of Mound has reverted to the "Spoils System" after any city election (i.e. "political" appointments are awarded to supporters). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mound Park and Open Space Advisory Commission recommends: 1. That the definition of "vacancy" in Resolution 89-139 be restored to the definition which existed prior to January 23, 2001; 2. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded immediately to other city advisory commissions for their recommendations and to the Mound City Council for its review and adoption; and 3. That, until paragraph 2 above can be completed, no interviews or decisions pertaining to advisory commissioners seeking reappointment shall occur. The foregoing Resolution was moved by Casey and seconded by Meyer. The following commissioners voted in the affirmative: Casey, Domholt, Hentz, and Meyer. The following commissioners voted in the negative: Beise. Dated: February 8, 2001. -2- -6803- Rpr 86 2881 15:48:44 Via Fax -> Rdmiuis~ra~or FRIDAYFAX A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Page 881 Of 882 Number 14 April 6, 2001 House adopts budget targets On Thursday, The House Ways & Means Committee adopted a resolu- tion setting budget targets for broad state budget policy areas. The budget outline adopted by the committee is roughly equivalent to the overall spending target established by the governor. Both the House and the governor agree the overall increase in state spending increases should not exceed 5.3 percent, or 5552 mil- lion, for the biennial budget that begins July 1. The adopted targets are far from a final House budget, and they do not specify any redistribution of resources within each broad spending category. ~h the overall targets of the governor and House are roughly similar, the House redirects money among individual spending areas of the state budget. The most notable change from the governor's proposed budget is additional funding for K-12 education and higher education spending. These increases appear to come at the expense of state agency funding, health and human service programs, economic devel- opment spending, and transporta- tion finance. In his budget proposal, the governor targeted roughly $8.47 billion over two years for K-12 education finance, which translates into $104.7 million, or 1.3 percent, more than the base- line 2002-2003 estimates for K-12 spending that include adjustment for growth in school enrollment. The House responded to the criticisms of education advocates by propos- ~ing $250 million more for education than the governor. For higher educa- tion programs, the House targets recommend spending $65.6 million more than the governor's budget. Next week, the Senate will unveil their spending targets. Based on the price of government resolution adopted by the Senate in March and other comments by Senate leader- ship, it appears that, compared to the governor and House, the Senate will commit approximately twice the resources to spending increases. In addition to spending increases, the governor, House, and Senate will have to settle their disagreements on tax cuts and tax relief. The gov- ernor has proposed a series of tax changes that will increase property tax aids and credits by approximately $1.14 billion. In the budget targets adopted on Thursday, the House has indicated they will propose a package of property tax changes that would add up to about $1.2 billion. Due to their likely higher level of support for spending increases, the Senate will probably propose smaller property tax reductions. Update on PERA funding deficiency As this edition of the Friday Fax is being compiled, the Legislative Commission on Pensions & Retire- ment is considering an amendment that would address the PERA funding deficiency. The amendment does not include any state appropria- tion or transfer of TRA resources, which was supported bythe League. The amendment would increase employer contributions by .375 per- cent on Jan. 1, 2002; and by .25 percent on Jan. 1, 2003. Employee contributions would be increased by identical amounts. The amendment would make several plan modifications including pro-rated service credit for part-time employees, an extension of the amortization target date to 2031, and an elimination of mortality gain and loss transfers from the active fund. We expect the Commission will adopt this amendment or something similar. See next week's C/ties Bulletin for an update. OSA TIF beginning/end of time bill heard Pre-'90 bills to be heard Monday On Wednesday, the Senate Property Tax Budget Division heard SF 2164, introduced by Sens. Hottinger, Scheid, Pogemiller, Samuelson, and Kierlin. Sen. Hottinger presented and described the specifics of the bill. Essentially, the bill provides that the Office of the State Auditor's (OSA) authority to make non-compliance findings is limited to the time period beginning June 30, 1995, and forward. The bill would also require the OSA to conduct any final review of decertified districts within a three- year timeframe. Bill Conners, director~of the OSA's TIF Division, stated that the OSA neither opposes nor supports the bill. Conners reminded committee members that the OSA did not request TIF enforcement authority and, thus, would do whatever the Legislature determines is appropri- ate. Mr. Conners identified some areas of technical concern, most of which, he thought, could be easily remedied. Probably the most notable issue Mr. Conners raised is the existence of certain sections of rt,~,,avr yth League of Minnesota Cities Intergovernmental Relations team. For more information on city legislative issues, contact any. e _ (6s:j 2s -680Z4-oo 92s-]:22 ~pr 86 Z001 1S:~9:39 ~ia Fax -> ~dmini~trator Pa~e 882 Of 882 FRIDAYFAX APRIL 6, 2001 -- P,~=E 2 the 'FIF laws that seem to require looking at the life of the district in order to provide meaningful informa- tion (e.g., administrative expenses.) The League is in the process of developing language to address the vast majority of the OSA's concerns. This Monday, April 9, at 5 pm., the Senate Property Tax Budget Division will take up the pre-'90 TIF bills-- SF 73 introduced by Sen. Rest and SF 1798 introduced by Sen. Scheid. The League is scheduled to testify in opposition to the bills on behalf of various city and development authority representatives. 0.08 DWI threshold bill gets snagged in Senate In a surprise move, the Senate State Government, Economic Development & Judiciary Finance Division last evening rejected a bill that would have lowered the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) thresh- old for a driving while impaired (DWI) offense. The bill had appeared to be on a fast track for passage. Itwas expected that SF 118 (Foley, DFL-Coon Rapids) and its compan- ion, HF 51 (Goodno, R-Moorhead), would move forward this session. Before adjourning last year, Congress passed a 0.08 DWI bill that included a measure tying states' adoption of the 0.08 threshold to highway funding. If Minnesota fails to adopt the lower threshold, the state stands to lose $70 million in federal high- way funds by 2007. Opponents of the bill expressed an unwillingness to allow Congress to exert influence on state policies by withholding funds. Others raised concerns about local and state costs relating to enforcement, prosecu- tion, and supervision--especially if the measure were to be implemented in concurrence with a felony DWI law. The bill has received support in several committees in both the House and Senate. Sen. Foley, the bill's chief author, hopes to find a way to revive the bill. Photo cops bill blocked in House A bill that would have allowed cities to install cameras at intersections to record red-light runners failed in the House Transportation Committee yesterday. The bill, HF 633 (Biernat, DFL-Minneapolis)/SF 1017 (Ter- williger, R-Edina), had narrowly passed out of three Senate commit- tees and was headed for debate on the Senate floor. It was handily defeated in its first hearing in the House. The bill's proponents argued the cameras would be a deterrent for chronic offenders and would help prevent accidents. Opponents of the bill raised concerns about privacy, camera reliability, and the concept of issuing tickets based on a photo instead of the presence of a live crime witness. H F 633 failed on a vote of 13 to 4, effectively ending debate on the issue for the session. Keg registration bill res u sc itatio n attem pied Yesterday the House Crime Preven- tion Committee did its part to revive HF 58, introduced by Rep. Mary Jo McGuire (DFL-Falcon Heights) but now chief-authored by former co- author Rep. Steve Dehler (R-St Joseph). The keg registration bill was heard on March 29 in the House Commerce Committee and re-referred to the Crime Prevention Committee--meaning that the bill technically did not survive the first committee deadline of March 30. HF 58 now travels to the House Rules & Administration Committee, chaired by Rep. Tim Pawlenty (R-Eagan) where the decision regarding whether the bill will make it to the House Floor will be deter- mined. The Senate companion, SF 389, introduced by Sen. Don Betzold (DFL-Fridley) must be heard by Wednesday, April 11 in order to meet the second committee dead- line. At this point, the Senate Com- merce Committee has not scheduled a hearing for the bill. E,~OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST }Safety and Loss Control Workshops The LMCIT annual spring Safety and Loss Control Workshops offer trmtnlng for municipal s[aff and will be presented throughout the sate, This one-day workshop focuses on practical steps cities can Lake to reduce losses, Including the cost of losses that do occur, visit our web site for more details and Lo register: w~m~:lm¢tt.lmne.org. -6805- ~pr 13 2081 14~26:19 Via Fax -) ~d~iuis~ra~or Pa~e 801 0£ 882 FRIDAYFAX A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Number 15 April 13, 2001 Second deadline passes Wednesday evening marked the official end of policy committee activity and the beginning of the budget and tax phase of the 2001 legislative session. Policy bills that did not meet the Wednesday committee deadline are techni- cally dead for the session. The Legislature and the governor will now have approximately five weeks to arrive at compromises on the overall state budget for the next two-year period as well as on tax reforms and rebates--not to mention the hundreds of policy bills that await floor action. Several housekeeping bills introduced on behalf of the LMC have already been signed into law. The governor signed the competitive bid threshold bill into law as Chapter 5. This bill conformed special assessment projects and day labor contracts to the increases made last year. Also signed into law is Chapter 13, which allows cities and townships to make limited credit card purchases for public purposes, and also provides authority to counties and cities to use electronic funds transfer technology when accepting and making payments. What lives (not necessarily an exhaustive list) Seasonal weight restrictions Salt storage restrictions Pre-1990 tax increment financing restrictions OSA beginning/end of time limitations TIF/abatement elimination Miscellaneous TI F general and special legislation EMS special taxing district creation DES/DTED Agency reorganization Redevelopment grant funding Drin kin g water a nd wastewater fu nd in g Local road and bridge funding Salary cap increase Gift law exception allowing local officials to accept food or beverage at national or international conferences Nonconformity ordinances codified Public works delay clauses prohibited Housing Works Coalition legislation for increased state funding for housing production Legislation to apply redistricting principles to local redistricting Sales and property tax exemptions to qualified nonprofits for development or redevelopment of Iow- income housing Telecommunications catalyst grants Connected Community matching grants Municipal consent Felony DWI Emergency Medical Services special taxing districts CriMNet Racial profiling Constitutional amendment to dedicate motor vehicle sales tax (MVST) to the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund Quiet zones at railroad crossings Age certificates What's "dead" for the session The House Government Operations Committee de- feated an amendment offered by Rep. Harry Mares (R-White Bear Lake) to address the PERA funding deficiency on a 13-4 vote. The Mares amendment was the product of the work of the Legislative Commission on Pensions & Retirement and included unspecified employer and employee contribution increases, plan modifications, and language for an unspecified state appropriation. The same Senate language was ap- proved during a Tuesday hearing of the State & Local Government Committee. The wine In grocery stores bill was withdrawn by House author, Rep. Barb Sykora (R-Excelsior), after presenting the bill to the House Commerce Committee on March 29, apparently due to the bill falling a few votes short of the number necessary for approval. The bill that would have required beer keg Identifica- tion was heard in the House Commerce Committee on March 29 and re-referred to the Crime Prevention Committee. The bill did not receive any hearings in the Senate. Since the bill did not pass out of all policy committees in one body, it was technically dead on March 29. However, the Crime Prevention Committee heard the bill on April 5 and sent it to the Rules & Admin- istration Committee to determine whether it would make it to the House Floor. Even if that was to happen, the Senate companion failed to meet the second committee deadline yesterday. The massage therapists state registration legislation, HF 401 (Abeler, R-Anoka)/SF 616 (Lourey, DFL-Kerrick), was introduced in both the House and Senate once again this year and referred to the Health Committees, but did not receive a hearing in either body. For more information on city legislative issues, contact any mA"~h~ ~e League of Minnesota Cities Intergovernmental Relations team, (651) ~81'-_¥~¥~",-_00) 925-1122 2881 14~27;11 Via Fax -~ 8d~i~i~trator Page 80~ Of flO~ FRIDAYFAX 13, 2001 ~ PAGE 2 SF 1000 (Stevens, R-Mora)/HF 2135 (Anderson, R-Buffalo Township)--the bill that would prohibit the sale of property acquired by eminent domain for a five-year period--was heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee and in the House Local Government & Metropolitan Affairs Committee. The bill was withdrawn by the authors for further examination and discussion over the interim. SF 1084 (Or'field, DFL-Minneapolis), would impose additional requirements on grantors of business subsidies, including an administrative review process. The bill was withdrawn from consideration by the author during a hearing in the Senate Jobs, Housing & Commu- nity Development Committee. A provision that originally appeared in legislation dealing with lavcful gambling that would have removed local authority to approve premises permit renewals for lawful gambling organizations was deleted in an author's amendment prior to initial hearings on the underlying legislation in both the House and Senate. Elections bills aimed at tightening voter registration requirements and making changes to voter fraud penal- ties have not been heard in the Senate. Legislation that would have required cities, school districts, and counties to hold local elections only in odd-numbered years was held in the House Elections Subcommittee for interim study. It is still uncertain whether state funding will be available to help local government purchase electronic precinct counter equipment for polling places. The Ventura Administration's Big Plan for telecommuni- cations restructuring fell victim to determined resis- tance by the Minnesota Telephone Association and the Minnesota Association for Rural Telecommunications. As a result, the League's efforts to make changes to current law to clarify local authority to provide telecom- munications services were stymied. LMC legislation to clarify local zoning authority for placement and location of wireless telecommunications facilities in public rights of way also failed to get a hearing. No changes to local cable franchising authority were mad e by the deadline. Committees in both the House and Senate rejected a bill that would have lowered the blood alcohol concentra- tion (BAC) threshold for a driving while impaired (DWI) offense to 0.08. The bill had appeared to be on a fast track for passage. It was defeated last week in the Senate State Government, Economic Development & Judiciary Finance Division and again this Monday in the House Transportation Finance Committee. Opponents of the bill expressed an unwillingness to allow Congress to exert influence over state policies by withholding funds. Others raised concern about local and state costs relating to enforcement, prosecution and supervision, especially if the measure were to be implemented in concurrence with a felony DWI law. A bill that would have allowed cities to install cameras at Intersections to record red-light runners failed in the House Transportation Committee last week. The bill, HF 633 (Biernat, DFL-Minneapolis)/SF 1017 (Terwilliger, R-Edina), had narrowly passed out of three Senate committees and was headed for debate on the Senate floor. It was handily defeated in its first hearing in the House. The bill's proponents argued the cameras would be a deterrent for chronic offenders and would help prevent accidents. Opponents of the bill raised concerns about privacy, camera reliability, and the concept of issuing tickets based on a photo instead of the presence of a live crime witness. Remember, the Legislature is scheduled to meet until May 21. Even items that are technically dead for the session could be resurrected. Local Impact Subcommittee to meet next week The Local Impact Subcommittee of the Senate Transportation Committee plans to meet next Friday. The Subcommittee will hear proposals addressing local requests for assistance with public utilities relocation costs resulting from Mn/DOT projects. Chaired by Sen. Satveer Chaudhary (DFL-Fridley), the subcommittee will make recommendations to the full Transportation Committee. Legislators would like to find a consistent way to respond to a growing number of municipalities involved in large, regional Mn/DOT projects that face disproportionate or unbearable public utilities relocation costs. The meeting will begin at 8 a.m., Friday, April 20 in Room 125 of the Capitol. -6807- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIREC?OR. AGENDA 7:00 PM, Wednesday, April 11, 2001 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster READING OF MINUTES-3/28/01 LMCD Regular Board Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) CONSENT AGENDA- Consent Agenda items identified with a (*) will be approved in one motion unless a Board member request discussion of any item, in which case the item Will be removed from the consent agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS · Donald and Loretta Mann, variance application from LMCD Code for dock length requirements. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration City of Minnetonka Beach, new multiple dock license application to reconfigure a non- conforming BSU at its Cross Point Road Site, Dock Site #10. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/Or Consideration Wayzata Marine, Inc., variance application from LMCD Code to continue a 6/14/00 temporary variance granted by the LMCD Board. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration LAKE USE & RECREATION A) Review of information regarding the sale of fuel from a service boat to customers around the Lake; B) Discussion on the use of Lord Fletchers of the Lake as a Port of Call for 2001 Charter Boats with Liquor Licenses; C) Update on Sheriff's Office Water Patrol Proposal for the 2001 Boating Season; D) Discussion of 4/5/01 staff memo that provides an overview of goals and objectives for the Lake Minnetonka Wetlands Task Force; E) (*) 2001 Liquor Licenses, consideration of renewal Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor license applications for the charter boat, Lady of the Lake; -6808- 6. 7. 8. 9. F) 2001 Liquor License, consideration of renewal Non. IntoXicating Malt Liquor license' -application for the charter boat, Barefoot Bay; G) Additional Business; WATER STRUCTURES A) Ordinance Amendment, First reading of an ordinance relating to ski jumps,-amending LMCD Code Section 2.12, Subd. 12; B) Staff Update on docking issues between two abutting non-conforming facilities (possible need to amend LMCD Code Section 2.015); C) (*) Curly's Minnetonka Marina, staff recommends approval of the 2001 renewal, without change, multiple dock license application received on 3/0/01; D) Additional Business; FINANCIAL A) Aud it of vouchers (4/1/01 - 4/15/01 ); B) (*) February financial summary and balance sheet; C) Additional Business; ADMINISTRATION A) (*) LMCIT Liability Insurance, staff recommends that the LMCD Board do not.waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04; B) Additional Business; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT SAVE THELAKE EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 10.ADJOURNMENT -6809- DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 .PM, Wednesday, March 28, 2001 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER Chair Foster called the meeting to order at 7:19 p,m. ROLL Members present:Bert Foster, Deephaven; Tom Skramstad, Shorewood; Lili McUillan, Orono; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Margaret Davis, Minnetrista; Craig Eggers, Victoria; Tom Seuntjens, Uinnetonka Beach; Herb Suerth, Woodland, Sheldon Wert, Greenwood. Also present: Charles LeFevere~ LMCD Counsel; Greg Nybeck, Executive Director; Judd Harper, Administrative Technician. - Members absent: Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka. CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster Foster announced ~!~at the first Executive Director for the District, Frank Mixa, had recently passed away. Foster believed it would, be appropriai~::to recognize Mr. Mixa's service to Lake Minnetonka by preparing a resolution for review by the Board the 4/11/01 Regu!~..r.. Board meeting and to honor him at the 2002 "Save the Lake" Banquet Dinner. The Board concurred'~i.th the recommendations of Foster and directed staff to follow up on them. READING OF MINUTES- 3/14/01 Regular Board Meeting Seuntjens stated that on the vote approving the Minutes from the 2/28101 Regular Board Meeting, he voted in favor of approving them rather than abstaining his vote. He recommended that'this be clarified. Weft clarified that he abstained his vote on the motion referred to by Seuntjen.s. He recommended that this be clarified. MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Babcock seconded to approve the minutes of the 3/14/01 Regular Board meeting as amended. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda. ]'here were no comments from the public on subjects not on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA- Consent agenda items identified with a (*) will be approved in one motion unless a Board member requests discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda. edYert moved, Skramstad seconded to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Items for pproval included: lC, City of Mound, staff recommends the Board approve the 2001 renewal, without change, multiple ock license applicati(~n received on 11/20/00; 1D, City of MOund, stall'recommends Board approval of recommendation from George Hoff to extend the LMCD deadline for court approval of the six variances granted in the Woodland Point Development from 4/2/01 to 4126101; Pelican Point HOA, staff recommends the Board approve the 2001 renewal, without -6810- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page 2 ange, multiple dock license application received on 2J6/01; and 6A, Minutes from the 2/21/01 "Save the Lake" Advisory Committee. WATER STRUCTURES A. Hennepin County Environmental Services, consideration 2001 new multiple dock license, with minor change, application to reconfigure a 65 Boat Storage Unit (BSU) non-conforming multiple dock facility on Spring Park Bay. Foster asked staff to provide an overview on the proposed applications and the history of this site. Nybeck made the following comments: · The multiple dock site where the changes are proposed is considered a legal-nonconforming multiple dock facility with 65 BSU's, which further breaks down to 40 for transient use and 25' for ovemight storage use. It previously was approved for a special density license; however, this was rescinded a few years ago when it came to the attention of the District that ovemight storage BSU's were tied to riparian properties on the north side of County Road 15. This is prohibited by Code and the Board decided to grandfather ovemight storage BSU's at the multiple dock facility at 25. A site plan was submitted by Hennepin County this past winter and staff recommended they submit a minor change application because changes were being proposed. The applicant has subsequently submitted a minor change application and two points were raised in the staff memo that needed to'be addressed. First, an increase in dock length from 70' to 88' at dock sites 1 and 2 has been proposed which cannot be approved utilizing a minor change application. He reported that Hennepin County has agreed to reduce dock length at dOCk sites 1 and 2 back to 70'. Second, staff queStioned-whether there was a conversion of use issue because the number, of dock sites for overnight storage appeared to be increasing by one. He reported that Hennepin County was not proposing to increase dock sites for overnight storage BSU's and that the approved §ite plan'had been wrong for some years. The approved and proposed site plans are confusing because the lines in the water are the extension of the side lines of 24 dock sites, not the docks that are installed in the water. There is a need to clean up the approved dock site plan to show docks installed in the water and not extension lines of the 24 dock sites. Staff recommended that this' be placed as a condition Of any Board approval for the 2000 boating season. Foster clarified that this is a situation where the owner of the shoreline does not place the docks out themselves. Instead, they define shore spaces and allow other parties to Place the dock out themselves within these shore spaces. He asked the applicant if it would create Hennepin County an excessive hardship if the Board required a new site Plan to be submitted that addresses the points raised by staff. Mr. Mike Brandt, speaking on behalf of the applicant, stated that it would not, provided the Board allows them sufficient time to rework the proposed site plan. Babcock concurred with staff that he would like to see a site plan. with dock lengths and BSU designations, mainly for inspection purposes. He questioned whether the proposed side setback on the east-side of dock site 1, 15.5', complies with Code because it should be doubled. LeFevere stated that the proposed site Setback would comply'with COde becauSe this site is grandfathered from the doubling of side setback requirements. weft asked for clarification On who owns the land at the site in question and who uses the 25 overnight storage BSU's, -6811- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page 3 Babcock stated that approximately 1,100' of shoreline was deeded to Hennepin County back sometime in the 1940%, with the proposed site having approximately 650' deeded to Del Otero subdivision on the north side of County Road 15 for access to the lake. The District licenses the multiple dock at this site and has rescinded a previously granted special density license because it was tied to these riparian properties, If the Board applied the 1:50' General Rule at this sites, they would have only been allowed 13 overnight storage BSU's. A compromise was struck a few years ago to grandfather the ovemight storage BSU's that were licensed prior to rescinding the special density license, 25. Hennepin County and the Del Otero residents determine distribution of the 25 overnight storage BSU's. McMillan stated the problem that has occurred at this site is that single family homes have become multi-family sites. MOTION: Wed moved, Suerth seconded to approve the new multiple dock license application, with minor change, application by Hennepin County Environmental Services for the 2001 boating season, subject to the reducing dock length at dock sites 1 and 2 from 88' to 70', and subject to the applicant submitting a revised site plan by 6/1/01 addressing the points raised by the Board and staff. Suerth asked for clarification from the applicant for 88' dock lengths at dock sites 1 and 2. Brandt stated Hennepin County restricts dock lengths at 70' for private residences and 88' for multiple dwellings. The docks being proposed at dock sites 1 and 2 are proposed to be changed from pdvate residence to multiple dwellings. VOTE: 'Motion carded unanimously. ~B. Boat Works Corporation, consideration of 2001 renewal, without change, multiple dock license application. Foster asked staff to provide background on this agenda item. Harper stated that the applicant has an approved special density license, granted on 9/27/89, for 80 BSU's on 1,134' of continuous shoreline. Public amenities were approved with this special density license, and were amended by the Board on 8/9/95. A condition of their 2000 multiple dock license was to review and update public amenities for this facility by the end of the 2000 boating season. The applicant has taken the steps to review and update their approved public amenities and staff has forwarded this for review by the Board in conjunction with their 2001 renewal, without change, multiple dock license application. Nybeck stated that questions were raised regarding approved public amenities at this facility when changes were made to the conversion of use section in the Code. Staff made this a condition of their 2000 multiple dock license application, and Code requires a minimum of 28.5 public amenity points for this multiple dock facility. Babcock stated that he would like a minimum number of people served per season for the proposed public amenity to provide free charter boat trips each season. He would like this reported by the applicant each season. Mr, Todd Nelson, speaking on behalf for the applicant, stated approximately 200 people were served dudng the 2000 season when the owner of the facility donated his boat. In 2001, this will be better documented with a letter to be submitted by the groups taking advantage of this proposed public amenity. LeFevere stated the Code already requires this proposed public amenity to provide 100 people per season. -6812- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Babcock asked for clarification on the proposed observation deck. Page 4 Nelson stated that the observation deck is on top of the building, noting that it closes around 11:00 p.m. MOTION: McMillan moved, Seuntjens seconded to approve the 2001 renewal, without change, application submitted by Boat Works Corporation, and to update their approved public amenities as outlined in the letter submitted by the applicant. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. E. Ordinance Amendment, First reading of an ordinance amending definition of dock use areas and docks. Foster asked LeFevere for justification on the need for this Code amendment. LeFevere stated staff is currently addressing a situation where a bridge is proposed over a channel to an island. There has been some confusion on whether the proposed bridge would fall within the jurisdiction of the District and this would cladfy that. MOTION: Babcock moved, Weft seconded to approved first reading of the ordinance amendment as submitted, to waive second and third readings, and to adopt it. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. G. Additional Business. Babcock stated that he would like to cladfy the record that if non-conforming structures exist for the City.of Mound, they are not being recognized as part of the Board approval under consent agenda. Foster stated that he believed the District has not waived its rights to enforce District ordinances if non-conforming structures exist. He believed the District is on a program with the City of Mound to gather additional information in the future to address their multiple dock facility, Eggers arrived at 7:45 p.m. LAKE USE & RECREATION - A. 2001 Liquor Licenses, consideration of renewal Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor license applications for the charter boats, Holiday Fair and Holiday Fair II. Foster asked staff to provide background on this agenda item. Harper stated that the charter boats, Holiday ~Fair and Holiday· Fair II, have submitted renewal wine and beer applications for the 2001 season. These :apPlications have been processed, with background investigations conducted and ports of call authorized. The City of Spring Park has authorized the Minnetonka Mist as a port of call for both charter boats, with Lord Ftetchers of the Lake authorized for Holiday Fair I1: Them is another Charter boat that has also proposed Lord Fletchers of :the Lake as a port of call and he questioned whether the BOard wants to authorize Lord Fletchers of the Lake as a port of call without restrictions. Both charter boats that have Proposed to use this location as a port of call are relatively small. -6813- Lake Uinnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 200'1 Page 5 The Board discussed the use of Lord Fletchers of Lake as a port of call, questioning how it would impact boat traffic in Coffee Cove Channel and the channel in front of Lord Fletchers of the Lake. The Board discussed the letter received from Lord Fletchers of the Lake that would restrict the hours that Holiday Fair II could use the facility as a port of call to Monday through Friday to 6:30 p.m. There was discussion on whether the Board should adopt restrictions similar to those proposed by Lord Ftetchers of the Lake. The Board stated that they needed staff to gather additional facts to make a decision on whether Lord Fletchers of the Lake should be authorized as a port of call. Specifically, the Board was looking for additional information on size and capacity of the boat, and Lord Fletchers position on embarkation and debarkation from their docks. Nybeck recommended that the Board approved new wine and beer licenses for the 2001 season for both charter boats, authorizing Minnetonka Mist as a port of call. The authorization of Lord Fletchers as a port of call could then be diScussed at the 4/11/01 Regular Board meeting. MOTION: Skramstad moved, Babcock seconded to approve 2001 wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor license applications for Holiday Fair and Holiday Fair II, with Minnetonka Mist as an authorized port of call, and to direct staff to provide additional information for review by the Board at the 4/11/01 Regular meeting on the use of Lord Fletchers of the Lake as a port of call. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. B. Review of informatiOn regarding the sale of fuel from a service boat to customers around the Lake. Foster stated that the petitiOners had nOt finaliZed the collection of information the Board requested at the 3114/0t Regular Board .meeting. He added that this agenda item WOuld be brought for review at a future Regular Board meeting. C. Update on Sheriffs Office Water Patrol Proposal for the 2001 Boating Season. Foster stated that two additional cities have agreed to voluntarily participate in this proposal, including Shorewood for two years and Spring Park for one year. He complimented the efforts of Skramstad and noted that this bdngs the number of member cities that have committed to the proposal for 2001 up to 12. A visit is planned with the Victoda City council sometime in APdl, with additional funding information to be forwarded to Minnetonka sometime in the near future. Plans are currently being finalized with Hennepin County officials on the staffing of this proposal for 2001. D. Additional Business. FoSter stated that he had recently met with City of Minnetrista officials, Minetrista residents, and other governmental agency officials to discuss the proposed Upland Farms project. He diScussed whether the DistdCt would declare jurisdiction for the docking aspect of the project and the likelihood of a multiple dock license application being denied. He expressed concern about prop dredging in S!x Mile Creek and the implications it could have on water quality on Halsteads Bay. To address environmental ~ncems in Six Mile Creek and other areas of the lake, he believed the DiStrict could zone the water surface for non-motorized watercraft. He entertained comments or feedback frOm the Board on this possible management t°°l, The Board made the following comments: · The District coUld regulate the water surface areas around the lake, including Six Mile Creek, utilizing a management tool similar to establishing "quiet waters" areas. The Board discussed the reluctance of the Distdct to zone the lake for water surface use unless it is absolutely necessary. -6814- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page 6 · There is a need to identify other tributaries around the lake where circumstances similar to Six Mile Creek might exist. The proposed project at Upland Farms might meet the criteria of the Code; however, there are environmental concems about how it would impact water quality on Halsteads Bay. · The impact that dredging and boat traffic would have on current use of Six Mile Creek, primarily canoes and kayaks. There have to be other similar situations in the State of Minnesota and around the United States. · The impact that this management tool would have on the few existing properties in Six Mile Creek that already have a dock in the water. There was discussion on the high use of personal watercrafts currently in Six Mile Creek. · The developer of Upland Farms is preparing a voluntary Environmental Assessment Worksheet, with the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) not determined at this time. · The concept of claiming jurisdiction and the idea that the District could still utilize this type of a management tool by claiming jurisdiction at the mouth of the tributary leading into Lake Minnetonka. · The Board asked LeFevere whether the Board would be accused of being arbitrary and capricious if a management tool, such as lake zoning that does not allow for motor boats, were implemented. LeFevere stated that the Board could be characterized as being arbitrary by Upland Farms because there has not been discussion of this management tool pdor to the Upland Farms being brought to the attention of the Board. Scientific evidence from experts of the various agencies that could address things, such as how the proposed project would, impact phosphorous dispersion from this stream, would be essential. The developer has claimed that the wetland does not take up phosphorous as a wetland normally would because it is so loaded with phosphorous. Babcock stated that he would like to put this issue in the context of work that has already been done by the Board on the protection of wetlands. Two examples include how to engage with the MCWD dudng dredging projects and the establishment of the 125% rules for sites with meandering shoreline through wetlands. This is another possible management tool to preserve wetlands on the lake and he believed it medted further discussion by the Board. Wert stated that the concept of establishing non-motorized areas around the lake to protect wetlands was prompted by the proposed Upland Farms project, but was not proposed for the purpose of stopping that project. He suggested that the Board should consider this on a lakewide basis. Suerth recommended that a Task Force be established to further discuss the concept of establishing non-motorized areas around the lake. He suggested that this Task Force should identify the possible areas around the lake that might be best candidates for this management tool. . Seuntjens stated that the establishment of non-motorized zones around the lake would be complicated and that he would need additional time to review it prior to supporting it. He expressed concern about taking away the rights and privileges that residents around the lake might think they have. He stated that he needed additional inform-ation in order for him to make a decision on whether he supported the concept. McMillan concurred with the comments made by Seuntjens. There are environmental concerns associated with the proposed Upland Farms project and she encouraged the Board to allow the RAW process to be completed because this will be a good resource of information. She expressed concern about how dredging Six Mile Creek might change the current recreational use that was created by nature and how this might add another layer of enforcement. Wert concurred that there is a need to get the process going, possibly utilizing a Task Force. -6815- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page 7 Skramstad stated that although he might support the concept of further zoning of the lake for non-motorized areas, he did not want to further restrict additional areas of the lake unless it is determined to be absolutely necessary, Foster stated the whole purpose of bringing this concept up was to encourage Board discussion about whether it might address some environmental problems. He believed the consensus of the Board was to direct staff to look at the flowing waters leading into Lake Minnetonka, to place this on a future Board agenda, and to look at the possibility of unintended consequences. LeFevere stated that if this ever goes to trial, it would be based on the testimony of the experts. He cautioned the Board about basing this decision on preservation of wetlands without information on this subject from the experts. He recommended that a Task Force be established with members having expertise on these issues to assist the Board. Babcock stated that he would like to provide staff direction on how to proceed from this meeting. The consensus of the Board was to direct staff to establish a Task Force to discuss the issues outlined by the Board on the preservation of wetlands. FINANCIAL A. Audit of vouchers (3/16/01 - 3/31/01) Skramstad reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment as submitted. MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Davis seconded to approve the audit of vouchers as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. B. January financial summary and balance sheet. Skramstad reviewed the January financial summary and balance sheet, noting there would be some adjustments after the 2000 LMCD Audit is completed in the near future. Nybeck stated that a draft version has just been received in the Distdct office and that it should be presented to Board at the 4/25/01 Regular meeting. The Board discussed the monthly financial summary balance sheets and whether they should be reviewed and accepted by the Board, or whether they should be provided as mainly an informational item. MOTION: Skramstad moved, McMillan seconded to accept the January financial summary and balance sheet as submitted. VOTE: Ayes (8), Nayes (1, Seuntjens); motion carried. The Board directed staff to place monthly balance sheets on future agendas as a consent agenda item, C. Additional Business. There was no additional business. -6816- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE A. Nextel Communications, review of quotation received to improve communications for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Season. Foster stated that the quotation in the handout folders was an informational item that needed to be further defined by staff. This will be brought back for Board review at a Regular meeting in the near future. · B. Additional Business. There was no additional business. 5. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Nybeck reported on the following: · Meeting dates of 4/3/01 and 4/17/01 have been established for the annual mandatory training meetings for 2001 Liquor licensee for-charter boats on Lake Uinnetonka. The meetings will begin at 10:00 a.m. and are Scheduled at the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office Water Patrol Headquarters in Spring Park. · The mandatory EAW documents for the proposed projects at Excel Marina and Tonka Bay Sales have been forwarded to the EQB for publication in the EQB Monitor on 4/3/01. Unless unexpected negative comments are received from parties reviewing these documents, the Board could review the applications that have been tabled as early as the first regularly scheduled meeting in May. · He would be out of the office on vacation the week of 4/9/01 through 4/1'3/01. SAVE THE LAKE B, Additional Business. There was no additional business. 7. ADMINISTRATION A. Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for part-time Administrative Clerk Jan Briner, Nybeck stated that a performance review had just been completed for Jan Briner, part-time Administrative Clerk for the District. Her anniversary date with the District is 3/10/92, with an overall grade of above ,average cOmmunicated to Bdner for the period of 3/13/00 through 3/12/01. He stated that Briner is an asset to the District and he recommended a'-4.1% adjustment to her hourly rate from $12.10 to $12.60, retroactive to 3/10/01. MOTION: Babcock moved, Skramstad seconded to approve a compensation adjuStment for part-time Administrative Clerk Jan Briner from $12.10 to $12.60 per hour, retroactive to 3/10/01. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Babcock complimented the performance of Jan Bdner with the District in her position. In his dealing with her over the years, he stated she has always been professional and friendly. He concurred with Nybeck that she is an asset to the District. B. Consideration of proposal received regarding District computer operations, -6817- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting March 28, 2001 Page 9 Foster stated that he has been recommending upgrades to the Distdct computer operations for some time, with Foster Computer Consulting making recommendations on improvements. Some of these include improved network wiring, a new Dell computer that would allow for proper back-up of files, and improved e-mail capabilities. Babcock stated that he would like further research into server prices. He added he what like staff to further define the final deliverables of this project, to define the scope of work and when the engagement would end, and to bring this back to the next Board meeting. Foster stated that he would prefer not to wait for the next meeting and proceed accordingly. Babcock stated that his preference was to receive a proposal from a second potential contractor and to better clarify scope of work on both proposals. Skramstad stated he believed the District computers are currently working adequately and that a delay of a month to get the information recommended by Babcock would not be detrimental to the process. He indicated that he had a potential contractor to submit a second proposal on the project. The consensus of the Board was to send this agenda item back to staff and to further define this project, including scope of work and a proposal from a second contractor. C. Additional Business. There was no additional business. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. 9. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjoumed at 9:10 p.m. Albert Foster, Chairman Lili McMillan, Secretary -6818- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE AGENDA 8:30 A.M., Friday, April 13, 2001 LMCD Office 18338 Uinnetonka Blvd., Deephaven 1. Introductions and Welcome; 2. Review of Minutes from the 2J9/00 meeting; 3. Update on 2001 Lake Minnetonka Weevil Surveys and Augmentation Studies; 4, Discussion on the use of LMA and other volunteers to inspect watercraft'at public accesses in 2001; 5, Discussion on improved signage at Lake Minnetonka public accesses; 6. Agency Reports: 7. Area wide lake association reports; 8. Old business; 9, New business; 10. Adjournment; -6819- I : : : : : : : : · ' ' : : : : :tO 0 N Z.-- ~,, o ~o ~- ~-~'~ o~ 0 -6820- 0 0 0 o -6821 - -6822- 0 0 '0 CD 0 -6823- _j 0n OD. O~ oo ~:0 ~0 ~ ~ i~00,~o = ~ o X X > ~ ~ E ~ ~ 0 · - =~ ~ E ~ ~ ~< '-- > ~ ~ 0 -- , · -= ~ ~2 =~ ~.-~ ~ '- --= '- ~ ~ ~ o ~ =~= ' ~~ ~ ~=o~ "- ~ ~R O~E ='-~ '- · - i "- o-~~= ~~ o.-o < ~ ~ 0 ~ o · -- ~ -6824- 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ X X X X ~ X X X X < ~ > = E >~ ~ E __ ~ C N -6825- 0 -6826- 0 0 0:3 "~ ~) 0 0 rO OID- m ~ = = * o~- ~ .~ 0 ~ E~'~ _ =.~.~ o ~ ~ ~ '= E > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ .-'-~ ~-'- ~o oE~mm ~ 0 0 00 ~ 0 0 ~og~ ~o o 0 -6827- 0 0 -6828- 0 -6829- 0 o -6830- 0 co -6831- -6832- 0 0 0 -6833- o -6834- 0 0 0 -6835- o -6836- 0 0 0 -6837- 0 0 (D ~D -6838- 0 -6839- o -6840- .a ,- o ~o ,- o ,_ u) ,_ ~ ,_1:o 0 03~3. 03 I:Z. 0'~~ I~. 0 0 ~ o-, o-~ o ~,~ ~,~- ~ o~. u) (~ 1~ 1~ 1;~ ~) 0 (D o o .... ~m (1)0 ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~.° o~ ~_ ¢- r -om E -c~ E o m ,~,~ '~ om~9 .-E ~ om -- ~o ~ ~o~ ~~ oo ~' ~ ~ o · ~ ~ ~ 0 o ~ 0 ~ ~- o= > ~~ ~ o ~ 8 ~ ~'~ E ~ c ~i~ o ~ ~ : '-- ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ,~ -6841 - 0 -6842- -6843- -6844- 0 -6845- 0 0 0 -6846- LEN HARRELL Chief of Police TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Kandis Hanson. Chief Len Harrell Monthly Report for March, 200.1 STA,TISTICqS The police departlnent responded to. 503 calls for service during the month. of March. ~.Ther. e were 22 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included I 'criminal sexual conduct, 1 '~obbery, 3 burglary, and 17 larcenies. There were 49 Part II offenses rel~,~ged. ~e offenses 4 child abuse, 2 criminalidamage toproperty, 3 nar¢~ics, ~: 'liquor-law violations, 5. DUI's, 3 s'nnple assaul~ 7 domestics ($ with assaults), 6 harassment, and 11 other offenses. The. patrOl: division issued. 77, adUlt citations.' and 6 juvenile citations, Parking Violations aecount~dfor aa additional 94 tickets. Warnings-were issued to: 44 individuals for a varietY:of violations. There. were~2adUlts, felo~sand 15 ~lts~and I2 juveniles, arrested for misdemeanOrs~ ~There were 8 ~meanor adult warrant arrests and 2 juvenile. The department:assisted, in 19 vehicle accents. There were 21 medical agencies on 13 eight occasions. -6847- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - March, 2001 II. INVESTIGATIONS The Investigators worked on 7 child protection issues and 2 criminal sexual conduct cases in March. These nine cases accounted for 36 hours of investigative time. Other cases included robbery, burglary, assault, theft, absenting, tampering with auto, domestic assault, vulnerable adult, damage to property, harassment, forgery, terroristic threats, and hit and mn accident. Formal complaints were issued for gross misdemeanor DWI, domestic assault, driving after revocation, theft, animal neglect, and snowmobile studs. III. PERSONNEL/STAFFING The department used approximately 93 hours of overtime during the month of March. Officers used 38 hours of comp-time, 89 hours of sick time, t2 holidays, and 170 hours of vacation. Officers earned 29 hours of comp time. Officer Buetow is no longer with the department. IV. TRAINING One officer attended EMT training, two attended the Governor's Conference on Emergency Preparedness, one day of DARE training, canine narcotics school, the department shoot, and DATAmax. V. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER No report available VI. RESERVES The reserves donated 57 hours to the community in March. -6848- WestonkA Healthy Comm~jnlty Collaborative Agenda. April 20, ~2001, 7:15 - 9:00 a~m. Mound City Hall 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 (15 min.) 5. Discussion on-~g Deci~on Resources (20 min.) ~. The Parent Education group would like to discuss using Decision Resources to survey our area parents on what type of parenting information they would like to receive and how they would like to receive it. We could use part of the Allies for Change grant money to fund ~this. 5. Sue Hebroff, Pyramid Family Project (20 Sue will tell us about the Pyramid Family Project that focuses on f~m~ly funationiag as well as addressing the students needs. "What one has to do usually Can be done." Eleanor Roosevelt Any comments or questions, call Leah Weycker, Collaborative Coordinator, at 952-491-8058 or WeyckerL~westonka.kl2.mn.us -6849- Target Greup Updates Health Carol Olson, Patricia AnderSon, Sandy Olstad, Carolyn Schmidt, Mary Goode, Jeanette Metz, Mark BreVe ~ The Health Group is working On the final report for the Health Advocate are also reviewing the Pyramid Family Project that we have funded fOr t~ ~V~'~ Youth Activities Sandy Rauschendorfer-temp chair, Chris Valerius, Sue Cathers, Jean Ann Thayer, Patsy Kiesow The skate park task force is still waiting for confirmation on the site next to the Mound Police Department. The City is going to do soil tests to determine if the park can be in that location. We are planning a logo design contest using the name Zero Gravity. Once a logo is developed, We will start concentrating on fund raising for the skate park. We hope to have many contacts and donations to start the process with a good base of suppo..~. The Youth Activities Group is working on getting referrals for the NYP~ projects for the Second year. Parenting · Sandy Wing, Sandy Olstad, Jea-ue Stortz, Bill Erickson The Parenting Group has new brochures for parent education. They are lool~ng at hiring Decision Resources to do a survey of parents and how we c~ b&st get informatiOn to them. Community- ' ', ' Margaret Holste, CathY'Bailey, Cheryl Fischer, Edith Travers A survey was' sent out to all the Collaborative members and to other stake holders in the community. Leah is working with a graduate student volUnteer t° c0~pi]~ ~he surVeys and develop a final report with recommendations on how to proceed with hum~ services planning. Communications Jeanne Stortz, Lisa Whalen, Anne Wilbur, Carol Olson We are working on a comr~uuications plan that uses the skate park as a sample project. Finance and Operations Len Harrell, Margaret Holste, Craig Anderson, Patricia Anderson The budget for next year is done including all the requests from the work groups. We will bring back a final budget for the wH~C to app~0V~: Executive Carol Olson, Jeanne Stortz~ Margaret Holste, Sandy Wing, Sandy Raushendorfer The Executive GrOup went over the Sta~te an'd County rePort that is due in APril. We also discussed the structure of the WHCC and the Alliance for Families and Children in HennePin County, the group that combines all Hennepin County collaboratives. -6850- Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative ~ Minutes . March 16, 2001 Present: Pa~ricia Anderson, Bill Erickson, Mary Goode, Len I-Iarrell, Margaret Holste, Carol Olson, Sandy Olstad, Sandy Raushendorfer, John Rogers, Carolyn Sehmidt, Jeanne StoRz, Edith Travers, Leah Weycker, Sandy Wing Guests: Beth Fagen- Storefront Group, Rich Zierdt- CASH Additions or Changes to the Agenda or Minutes: There were no changes. Announcements: There is a discussion on new research and recommendations that suggests that health is influenced by more than personal behavior and access to health care. The discussion is sponsored by "Business for Social Responsibility". Wednesday, March 21, 3:00-5:00 pm. The Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs We need to thank Rick Euteneuer, manager of Dundee Nursery for the donation of 1,500 seed packets. We passed around a thank you for everyone to sign. The seeds will be used for school staff and others that help build a healthy community. We will be sending out a survey to evaluate the pilot project that we are doing with Hennepin County. Look for it in the mail within the next week and please send it back. It will help us evaluate the project. We need to submit an application for the Parent Mobilization Grant from the Alliance. The ideas so far are: 1. A cart to hold brochures and other parent information, it would be mobile and travel to different events. 2. A professional survey to fred out what and how parents would like to receive information. 3. A sign that would be in a key, visible location in the downtown area. 4. Stipends for parents to attend collaborative meetings and target group meetings and a budget for child care during those meeting times. 5. Start up for a Family Life First initiative in our area. We asked if there any other ideas that we need to hear about? Sandy Wing will call about one. Leah will write something up to receive the $13,000. Jeanne Storm announced that she is moving out of the area and the next collaborative meeting will be her last. Jeanne was one of the founding members of the Westonka Helping Youth group which later became the Collaborative. Margaret Holste announced that she has tickets for the WeCAN prayer breakfast. Our featured speaker, Rich Zert, talked about CASH- Community Action' in Suburban Hennepin, CASH was established in 1985 to address issues of poverty. He talked about the stereotypes of poverty and how they have to be broken. Right now, the fastest growing group in poverty is the elderly. The 1970's retirement accounts can't keep up with todays economy. Most people, including seniors, are only two paychecks away form poverty. The Mound / Westonka area is entrenched with poverty. The income disparity is very extreme in our area. This makes it more difficult for the families of poverty in our area. One of the programs CASH does is -6851 - peer advocacy. One person talking to 3 or.4 .families and identifying the barriers for them to break out of poverty. Some examples are chemical abuse, attitude, depression etc. The family needs to break the cycle. We all have to get toge~er to get ideas on addressing poverty. · Rich will be participating in the Collaborativei He can bring a lot to the table and looks forward to working our families. We had a time to brainstorm ideas on the Spring Message project. Lenny Harrell came up with the gummi worm message to the students "you have wormed your way into our hearts". We will also repeat the message from the Welcome back to school - Westonka Students are loved, respected, appreciated, accepted, encouraged, and trusted. Patricia AndersOn had a display of seed packets that were donated by Dundee NurSery. The seeds will be distributed to all the school staff and others that help to raise healthy families. We could put the seeds in teachers mail boxeS. We discussed the message we will put on the seed packets. "Thank you for growing healthy families". People signed up for being at different school entrances to hand out gummi worms. Jeanne Stortz made a motion to adjo~rn and Patricia Anderson seconded the motion. Passed. -6852- April 12, 2001 2450 Wilshire Blvd. Suite D Mound, MN 55364 952-491-8058 Fax 952-491-8043 WeyckerL@ Westonka. k12.mn.us Kandis Hanson Mound City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 After School Activity Bus Community Hero Card Family Support Programs Health Advocate Outreach Parenting Support Police Chaplaincy Resource Directory Summer School Bus Student Retreats Dear Kandis, The skate park task force is proceeding with fundraising for the skate park. We are planing a logo contest that will be promoted through out the schools. The name we are using is "Zero Gravity". I wanted to let you know about this name and if Zero Gravity will be acceptable for the City. We are hoping that the site on Maywood Road will work and that the City will eventually own the skate park. The name appears to be available in our early searches on the internet and we hope to register the name with the State. If you have any problem with this name, please let me know as soon as possible. Sincerel~'~ Youth Center Youth Connections Seeking to strengthen and connect our community in healthy creative ways. -6853- Vol. 8 No. 8 · Spring 2001 2001 COMMISSIONERS Deephaven · Dennis Stanga, At Large · James R. Olds, Chairperson Charlie Thomson Greenwood Jeff Sagal Gene Alstatt Independence · Jim Smith, Treasurer Gene Cook Long Lake James Benson Bob Hardin Loretto John Reynolds Tom Vogt Medina Carolyn Smith Ann Thies Minnetonka Beach Leonard MacKinnon Bobble Abdo Minnetrista George Zenanko Jason Landry Orono · Tim Pattrin, Secretary Bob Sansevere St, Bonlfaclus Randy Debner Mike Laberdie Shorewood · Jeffrey Foust, At Large Scott Zerby Spring Park Tom Scanlon · Bruce Williamson, Vice Chair Tonka Bay .William LaBelle · Mary Ellen Wells, at large Victoria Jerry Bohn Woodland Tom Newberry Ann Duff · Executive Committee DEEPHAVEN EXCELSIOR GREENWOOD ORONO ST. BONIFACIUS LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION SPRING PARK OFFICE/STUDIO: 952.47] .7125 · FAX 471.915] Web www. lmcc-tv, org EMAIL LMCC@LMCC-T~/ORG Mediacom Reports High Speed Internet Availability In December, Mediacom cable company invited the public, on two evenings, to the LMCC Studio to a demonstration of Mediacom's new high speed cable modem internet service and digital video product. They also demonstrated the products at the LMCC January Commission meeting. Bill Jensen, Mediacom's General Manager, reported to the Commission that, "In the Lake Minnetonka area we should, by the end of this week (January 19) have everything fully two-way acti- vated. What I mean by that is that our cable modems will work in all the repre- sentative communities here." Welcome to new LMCC Commissioners Jeff Sagal George Zenanko Jason Lanclry Randy Debner Tom Scanlon ~/illlam LaBelle Gene ~statt LMCC Channel Line-Up Channel 8--Government Access. Channel 19--Eclucational Access Channel 20--Community Announcements Channel 2 l--Public Access Producer of the Quarter Kathleen Made The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission would like to recognize Kathleen Marie for her continuing contribution to pro- gramming at the LMCC. Kathleen has been active in community television for close to l 0 years. She has volunteered many production hours to such non- profit groups as the Lake Minnetonka Association, Hennepin Count), Parks, Our Lady of the Lake Church, and Toastmasters. She has hosted city parades and-produced her own talk show series "Lake Country Currents". Most recently, Kathleen Hosted the "Holiday on the Lake 2000 - Livel" Congratulations, Kathleen, and thank you for your support of community tel- evision programming in the Lake Minnetonka Area. INDEPENDENCE LONG LAKE LORETTO MEDINA MINNETONKA BEACH SHORE~/OOD SPRING PARK TONKA BAY VICTORIA WOODLAND Mound residents may also use the studio. -6854- M INNETRISTA FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR's ESK.., The beginning of the year might be a good time to take the opportunity to reflect on the value of community televi- sion channels to local communities. In the seventeen years of having been associated with community cable televi- sion I have witnessed some very rewarding outcomes of providing chan- nels and studio production facilities to local residents and organizations to pro- duce programming. To share just a few observations may Congratulations to the following graduates of the November and January sessions of production classes held at LMCC: Rob Stein Michael ~/ear Usa Tempel Allen Rogers Drew Anderson Tim Spangrud Mike Piepkorn ~udio Hours ~am until 1 Opm Monday through Thursday, 9am until 7pm on Friday 9am until 2pm on .Saturday. Production Class Schedule The spring production class will be held Wednesdays in March. Classes will meet March 7~, 14th, 21~ and 28~ from 6:30 until 8:30 pm. As always, in addition to the aforementioned schedule, the LMCC will attempt to work with groups by scheduling separate sessions for organizations that may not be aDle to take advantage of our regularly scheduled classes. The LMCC will also endeavor to accommodate individuals who may want to learn about edit- ing, for example, for a specific project with a deadline that won't allow for our normal course of classes. If you are interested in taking television pro- duction classes, contact John at 952.471.7125 STAFF Sally Koenecke Administrator John Weaver John Peterson Studio Manager Studio Assistant Sue Paurus Actministrative Assistant Jonathan Shank Production Assistant LAKE MINNETONIfUI~ COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 4071 SUNSET DRIVE · PO. BOX 385 · SPRING PARK, MN _55384 give residents a better understanding of what community television is about. Basically, what it is about is providing opportunity for expression. So how does that happen? Someone has an idea, takes a production workshop and produces a TV program which has the potential of being watched by over 12,000 households. One familiar scenario at the LMCC tele- vision studio is parents or teachers who have produced their student's sports event, concert, play, recital, etc. The benefit: The youth see themselves and their friends on TV doing positive things and they see that the community values what they do. They're becoming role models for younger children in the corn- munity. It's reported that they have pizza parties at their homes to watch "their game". Another scenario is non-profit orgar tions using the studio to inform area residents of their services. A specific example is the Lake Minnetonka Association producing programs on water quality. The benefit: education to the community on our immediate envi- ronment, something we can do some- thing about. Thanks to all the community television producers who help the community value its citizens, educate, inform and entertain by producing their show and having it aired on a local channel. Sally Koenecke STUDIO NEWS The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission wet- comes John Paterson as the newest addition to the LMCC staff to John Weaver the position of full time studio assistant. John_joins John ~Z/eaver and Jonathan Shank in the mission of helping you bring your video production to life. Last December the LMCC held the second annual Holiday on the Lake 2000--LIVE! This year, Kathleen Marie hosted three musical groups along with Santa Claus and Michael Ireland (of Mike's Minnesota Musings) who read his holiday essay Christmas in Trafalgar Square. The musical groups, The Grandview Guys and Gals and the St. John's Children's Choirs, both under the direction of Sue Rabago, provided the holiday entertainment. The StringbeansmJo Schubert and Roger Cuthbertson not only provided their own special kind of holiday entertainment but they both helped out on camera along with $1ndi Dossett, Ell Ehlebracht, Laura Thles and Nate Reinltz. The Alliance for Community Media is solicit- ing entries for the Hometown Video Festival competition. The entry deadline is February 16th so if you're interested in entering, and I would encourage all who have produced a show in the calendar year 2000 to enter, you can obtain entry forms and information from John Weaver at the LMCC studio--call 952.471.7125 soon. Also watch for announcements of the LMCC Volunteer Recognition Program coming this spring. The LMCC Production Talent Bank contin- ues to grow but there's always room for more talent so if you are interested in work- ing on the productions of others, please call us at 952.471.7125 to add your name tc list. The Access Development Committee is still looking for members of the LMCC communi- ties to help promote and develop public assess television in the Lake Minnetonka Area. We would like the input of as many access producers and just plain residents as possible. If you are interested, call the studio at 952.471.7125. I'd also like to solicit producer's program announcements and write-ups for publica- tion in the LMCC newsletter, You can fax your contributions to the LMCC at 952.471.9151 or if you need more informa- tion, as always, call John at 952.471.7125. Producers and Productions This quarter's producers of note include Ell £hlebracht who is in the midst of producing Mound-~C/estonka Hockey and Jack Neveaux who has been busy providing us with coverage of Orono School Board Meetings, is now covering Orono Hockey too. And Michael Ireland continues with his production, Mike's Minnesota Musings. Recent production class grads Joe Struyk and Zach Dltter are each working on their own productions. Joe will have his first episode of American Cities cablecast by ~. ,~ time you read this. John ~,/eaver -6855- Vol. 8 No. 7 · Winter 2000 2000 COMMISSIONERS Deephaven Dale Moe · Dennis Stanga, At Large Excelsior · James R. Olds, Chairperson Charlie Thomson Greenwood Julie Ekelund Independence *Jim Smith, Treasurer Gene Cook Long Lake James Benson Bob Hardin Loretto John Reynolds Tom Vogt Medina Ann Thies Minnetonka Beach Leonard MacKinnon Bobble ADdo Mlnnetrista Delores Jeanetta Orono · Tim Pattrin, Secretary Bob Sansevere St. Bonlfacius Mike Laberdie Shorewood *Jeffrey Foust, At Large Scott Zerby Spring Park Joanna Widmer · Bruce Williamson, Vice Chair Tonka Bay Judd Mowry · Mary Ellen ~'ells,at large Victoria Jerry Bohn Woodland Tom Newberry Ann Duff · Executive Committee DEEPHAVEN EXCELSIOR GREENWOOD ORONO ST. BONIFACIUS LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION SPRING PARK OFFICE/STUDIO: 952.471.7125 · FAX 471.9151 Web vvww. lmcc-tv, org EMAIL LMCC@LMCC-TM. ORG Upgrade Nears Completion Mediacom is in the final phase of com- pleting the cable system upgrade to fiber optic cable. It is scheduled to be com- plete, according to the franchise agree- ment, by December 3 l, 2000. New channels, better reception, and intemet access will be benefits of the upgraded system. 21 Holiday on the Lake Live Dec. 6, 2000 on channel 21 LMCC Studio's Open House 7-gpm Producer Who's Who Jim KlobuChar ' : 'Mlchaellreland Thanks from the LMCc The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission would like to thank Michael Ireland for his continuing production "Mike's Minnesota Musings". Michael puts a good deal of work into his production and has been able to attract many interesting guests--Dan Wooding and Jim Klobuchar to name just two. LMCC Channel Line-Up The' Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission provides programming of interest to Lake Minnetonka Area residents on the following four channels: Channel 8--Government Access. Channel 19--Educational Access Channel 20--Community Announcements Channel 21--Public Access INDEPENDENCE LONG LAKE LORETTO MEDINA MINNETONKA BEACH SHOREWOOD SPRING PARK TONKA BAY VICTQRIA V(/OODLAND MOUnd ie$iden(s ma~ als6 8~~ the studioL. -6856- MINNETRISTA FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR's ESK... The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Chairperson, Colleen Krisko, stepped down as Chair in August due to a move from the area. The LMCC is appreciative of the leadership and dedication Colleen brought to the Commission, especially her enthusiasm for ensuring good cable service to the residents of the LMCC member cities, The newly elected offi- ~ MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 4071 SUNSET DRIVE · RO. BOX 385 · SPRING PARK, MN 55384 cers are Chairperson - Jim Olds, Vice- Chairperson - Bruce WIIIlamson, Secretary - Tim Pattrin, and At-large - Mary Ellen Wells. The LMCC welcomes the City of Loretto as a member of the Commission approved at a special meeting in September. The Commission extends an invitation to all Loretto and Mound resi- dents and non-profit organizations to utilize the LMCC Television Studio in Spring Park. Any resident or non-profit organization may use the studio free of charge to produce television programs of interest to the resident or organiza- tion. Mound contracts with the LMCC to allow Mound residents use of the LMCC studio. The LMCC assists cable subscribe in resolving complaints with the cabl~ operator, Mediacom. If subscribers have problems with their cable they should call the cable operator to report the problem. If the problem is not resolved the LMCC can assist in resolving the issue. Commision meetings are held every third Tuesday of the month and are open to the public. The meetings are also videotaped and replayed on Channel 21. Congratulations to the following gratuates of the summer-fall session of production classes held at LMCC: Cary Smith Joe Struyk Zach Ditter Mary GiDson Bill Vesel · tudio Hours ~ until 1 Opm Monday through Thursday, yam until 7pm on Friday 9am until 2pm on Saturday. Carl Hawkinson Matthew Ditter Dirk Kteinheksel Caleb Thorson Production Class Schedule Asyou read this, the autumn production class is now in session through the month of November and registration is open for the w~nter session scheduled for January. in January, the LMCC classes will move from Thursday to ~/ednesday. As before, classes will be held evenings from 6:30 until 8:30. As always, in addition to the aforementioned schedule, the LMCC will attempt to work with groups by scheduling separate sessions for organizations that may not be able to take advantage of our regularly scheduled classes. The LMCC will also endeavor to accommodate individuals who may want to learn about editing, for a specific proJect with a deadline that doesn't allow for our normal course of classes. If you are interested in taking television produc- tion dasses, contact John at 952.471.7125. Congrltulallonl Ir!an Congratulations to LMCC Studio Assistant Brian Kable for his first place award in the Timbuktu compe- tition sponsored by the southwest Minnesota news- 'er The Leader. The theme of the competition was .:resting travel photos and articles. Brian's first place finish in competition won him an Epson digital cam- era. STUDIO John Weaver New equipment is the subject of this edition of studio news. The LMCC is investing in areas tl~at will make the produc- tion of your shows easier and more profes- sional looking. We are in the process of adding A-B roll editing capability to the Trinity edit suite (the studio control room). For those of you unfa- miliar with the term, A-B roll editing allows producers to use two playback decks to edit their programs. They will allow the use of the Trinit~s effec[s when transitioning between taped segments--something that is not pos- sible without the upgrade. Another addition to the LMCC equip- ment stable is the new 24 channel Mackie audio mixer in the control room. This will allow the use of up to 20 mics for the studio productions and has added equalization capability to further enhance sound quality. The LMCC is also planning to add enhanced software to our automated system in playback as well as a small non-linear edit system. LH¢¢ STAFF Sally Koenecke John Weaver Brian Kahle Studio Manager Studio Assistant Sue Paurus Administrative Assistant Chet WIIberg, Jonathan Shank Production Assistants NEWS The LMCC Production Talent Bank continues to grow but there's always room for more talent so if you are interested in working on the productions of others, or if you need more information, as always, call John at 952.471.7125. I'd also like to solicit pr0duce/s program announcements and write-ups for publica- tion in the LMCC newsletter. You can fax your contributions to the LMCC at 952.471.9151 Producers and Productions This quarter's producers of note include Michael Ireland for his continuing produc- tion of Mike's Minnesota Musings-- especially his recent interview with local author and former columnist Jim Klobuchar. Eli Ehlebracl~t is in the midst of pro- ducing Mound-Westonka Football and Patty. Miller is producing Mound. Westonka Soccer. Watch for Eli to contin- ue producing Mound-Westonka Hockey as well. Meanwhile in Orono, Jack Neveaux who has been busy providing us with coverage of Orono School Board Meetings, will continue with that project and add Orono Hockey to his list soon. Speaking of productions in the works, the LMCC is working on its second annual production of Holiday on the Lake-- Uve! Several people and groups have expressed interest in performing and helping us out for the production that will air live on Wednesday, December 6. Even if you don't want to perform or help, you are still wel- come to drop by the studio between 6 and 9pm (the show starts at 7) to join us for some live TM. For more information, call ~ at 952.471.7125. -6857- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT March 2001 2~.00% March 2001 Y'rD BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND Council 81,320 9,035 26,475 Promotions 4,000 0 0 Cable TV 48,000 0 0 City Manager/Clerk 229,430 10,309 35,677 Elections 2,300 97 97 Assessing 73,450 9 12 Finance 196,830 14,671 43,656 Computer 18,950 993 14,564 Legal 118,980 10,761 21,706 Police 1,125,850 120,335 281,077 Civil Defense 6,950 789 1,440 Planning/Inspections 261,980 25,963 55,984 Streets 496,120 46,365 145,231 City Property 80,440 37,933 51,233 Parks 247,740 21,813 47,690 Summer Recreation 42,260 39,570 0 Contingencies 25,000 0 654 Transfers 206,740 15.847 47.541 VARIANCE 54,845 4,000 48,000 193,753 2,203 73,438 153,174 4,386 97.274 844.773 5 510 205 996 350 889 29 207 200 050 42.260 24.346 159.199 PERCENT 32.56% O.00% O.00% 15.55% 4.22% 0.02% 22.18% 76.85% 18.24% 24.97% 20.72% 21.37% 29.27% 63.69% 19.25% 0.00% 2.62% 23.00% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 3,266,340 354,490 773.037 2,493,303 Area Fire Service Fund TIF 1-2 Recycling Fund Liquor Fund Water Fund Storm Water Sewer Fund Cemetery Fund Dock Fund 415,850 40,507 93,267 322,583 22.43% 0 22,108 159,170 (159,170) t35,480 915 18,025 117,455 13.30% 551,450 21,888 75,681 475,769 13.72% 478,620 46,298 131,831 346,789 27.54% 712,000 95 947 711,053 0.13% 948,210 77,348 229,374 718,836 24.19% 7,500 373 1,377 6,123 18.36% 144,620 32,475 33,705 110,915 23.31% Exp-00 04/13/2001 Gino -6858- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT March 2001 25.00% GENERALFUND Taxes Business Licenses Non-Business Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Court Fines Other Revenue Transfers from Other Funds Charges to Other Departments March 2001 YTD BUDGET REVENUE ~ 1,429,370 0 0 4,340 1,045 2,125 160,920 5,394 23,004 970,380 0 38,466 132,750 737 19,289 100,000 7,670 14,789 142,400 1,590 61,004 153,000 0 0 12.500 1.024 3.534 VARIANCE (1,429,370) (2,215) (137,916) (931,914) (113,461) (85,211) (81,396) (163,o0o) (8.966) PERCENT 0.00% 48.96% 14.30% 3.96% 14.53% 14.79% 42.84% 0.00% 28.27% TOTAL REVENUE 3.105.660 17,460 162,211 (2.943.449) 5,22% FIRE FUND RECYCLING FUND LIQUOR FUND WATER FUND sToRNI WATER UTILITY SEWER FUND CEMETERY FUND DOCK FUND 403,270 46,580' 117,577 (285,693) 121,880 244 13,748 (108,132) 1,900,000 136,526 378,545 (1,521,455) 510,000 2,798 72,429 (437,571) 101,000 3,409 12,380 (88,620) 990,000 17,794 179,527 (810 ?73) 6,250 0 400 (5,850) 81,350 13,554 78,390 (2,960) 29.16% 11.28% 19.92% 14.20% 12.26% 18.13% 6.40% 96.36% 04/1312001 rev01 Gino -6859- z z z z ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -6860- h A RTERED 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www, kennedy-graven.com KAREN R. COLE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9212 email: kcole~kennedy-graven.com April 19, 2001 Mayor Meisel and Members of the City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Bailey et al. v. Lien et al. Court File No.: MC97-15540 Our File No.: BE295-34 Dear Mayor and Council Members: This is, I hope, my last report to you on the Woodland Point litigation. The Woodland Point Litigation Most of you are very familiar with the Woodland Point litigation. A short summary of the litigation follows for the benefit of the new council members who may not have followed it. The case was brought to apportion fights and responsibilities as to the Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons among four groups: the_ abutting landowners, the inlanders, the City and the public. The litigation was an outgrowth of an earlier case, Flack v. City of Mound, that was brought by six lm~downers on Wawonaissa Common against the City. in that case, the Court determined that the abutting landowners owned segments of the Common in front of their houses, but that the inlanders had some kind of interest, akin to an easement to some type, to use the Common. The Flack Court held that the City and the public did not have any interest in the parts of the Common at issue in that suit (the six segments of the Common adjoining the homes of the six plaintiffs). The Flack Court suggested that a new suit involving all the landowners in Woodland Point would be needed to really resolve everyone's interests in the entire Commons. The Bailey v. Lien et al. suit was brought in response to that suggestion. The suit was brought in the name of all the inlanders against all the abutting landowners and the City, and addressed rights as to Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons. K_RC- 196400v 1 BE295-34 -6861 - Mayor and Council Members April 19, 2001 Page 2 The Settlement Process After the suit was brought, there were extensive efforts to settle it. Judge Lange appointed a retired judge to assist in settlement discussions among the parties. After extensive efforts, the settlement process bogged down. The inlanders brought a motion asking Judge Lange to resolve a'number of the issues in an attempt to move the case forward. As a result, the Judge made a number of critical decisions. First, he decided that because the Commons were private commons and there was insufficient evidence of widespread and sustained use by the public, the public as a whole (and therefore the City) does not have rights to use the Commons, except for Canary Beach which the Judge ruled is public. The Judge also found that the abutting landowners own the segments of Commons in front of their homes, but that the inlander homeowners in the Woodland Point subdivision have some rights akin to an easement of some type to use the Commons. The Judge said that further proceedings would be needed to determine the exact nature of the inlanders' rights. That ruling sparked another intensive round of settlement discussions. Those discussions were spearheaded by several landowners. Members of the City Council also played a key role. The discussions focused in particular on dock rights. It was eventually determined that the abutters docks would no longer be part of the City's program, and that the City would construct multiple slip docks at the street ends for use by the inlanders. The initial draft of the Settlement Agreement was prepared by Mark Hanus. After further additional discussions, key landowners and the City Council agreed to it. The Settlement Agreement was then taken to all of the landowners in the Subdivision, and virtually all of them signed it. The Judge's approval of the Settlement Agreement was needed because all of the landowners had not signed the Agreement. In spring 2000, the Judge held a hearing to determine whether or not he should approve the Agreement. A few landowners who opposed the Agreement came to the hearing and presented evidence on their objections. The hearing focused on a dock in the lagoon off Bluebird Lane South, and on several landowners' interest in eliminating the dock at Woodland Road. Eventually, the Judge approved the Settlement Agreement, contingent on approval of variances by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). The LMCD's Role Variances from the LMCD were needed because the strips of the Commons at the street ends were not wide enough for the multiple-slip docks under the LMCD's rules. Navigational easements were also needed to allow enough room for boats to maneuver in and out of the inner- most dock slips. Extensive discussions with the LMCD took place in 2000 culminating in KRC- 196400v 1 BE295-34 -6862- Mayor and Council Members 'April 19, 2001 Page 3 approval by LMCD of the needed variances. As a condition of the variances, the LMCD imposed a number of requirements, which it required to be included in the Settlement Agreement as modified by the Judge. Specifically, the LMCD required that the following language be included in the Agreement: The City of Mound shall not assign, transfer or otherwise divest itself of any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement, or transfer, sell or convey its interests in the street end easements which are created by the Agreement, and any attempted assignment or transfer in violation of this section shall result in forfeiture of the right to maintain shared docks at the street ends After approval of the variances by LMCD, the Judge needed to approve the Settlement Agreement one last time, pursuant to his prior order. We also asked the Judge to make several additional changes to the Agreement, based on issues that had arisen after his preliminary approval. The Last Hearing The last hearing was held on April 2, 2001. At that hearing, we asked the Court to make several changes to the Agreement: · To adopt the conditions imposed by the LMCD as part of the Agreement; · To clarify how the asphalt walkway at the end of Woodland Lane would be handled (since Mike Gardner had raised issues as to it); and · To clarify that the City may maintain and replace all utilities in the Commons. At the hearing, the inlanders' attorney also asked for a change to clarify that the parties to the Agreement may enforce it. Mike Gardner asked for several changes as well. Those proposed changes were not accepted by the Judge, except for one change requiring the City to remove the asphalt pathway near Woodland Lane when that asphalt is degraded. I revised the Settlement Agreement to reflect the changes the Judge said he would accept. On April 10, 2001, the Judge signed the Agreement. A copy of the Order signed by the Judge with the Settlement Agreement and attached Exhibits is attached. The City's Responsibilities Under the Settlement Agreement Exhibit C to the Judge's Order is the Settlement Agreement as modified by the Judge. The City has a number of responsibilities under the Settlement Agreement. These responsibilities are summarized below. KRC-196400vl BE295-34 -6863- Mayor and Council Members April 19, 2001 Page 4 The City will no longer administer its dock program as to the property on the Commons, except as to the street ends. The City has an easement at the street ends to construct multi-slip docks. There will be seven docks: · one 2-boat · one 4-boat · one 4-boat · one 4-boat · one 4-boat · one 2-boat · one 2-boat dock at Gull Lane dock at Finch Lane dock at Eagle Lane dock at Dove Lane dock at Bluebird Lane North dock at Woodland Road, and dock at Bluebird Lane South. Diagrams of these docks (except for the Bluebird Lane South dock) are attached to the Settlement Agreement. Slips at the docks will be available for use by the inlanders and, if not all taken by inlanders, by members of the public. The City will be responsible for maintenance and replacement of the docks. The City will also construct stairs at four locations (Bluebird Lane North, Dove Lane, Eagle Lane and Woodland Road) which are needed to provide access to the multiple-slip docks. The Agreement specified fees to be paid by the abutters to be applied to the costs of stairs construction. The Agreement indicates that the City will not be responsible for dealing with future disputes between the Woodland Point residents as to access to the Commons, trespassing or other features of the Agreement, but that any such disputes are to be resolved through the Court or mediation by the landowners. The purpose of this provision is to keep the City out of disputes among the landowners and to put the burden on the landowners to resolve these issues themselves. Lastly, the Agreement must be filed with the Hennepin County Recorder and Registrar of Titles, and must be mailed to the owners of all parcels in the subdivision.. We worked with the supervisor for the abstract and Torrens offices to assure that we will be able to file the document against all the parcels at minimal cost. The letters to the landowners will be ready to send out next week. If you have any questions about the Agreement, please let-me know. Very truly yours, KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED Karen R. Cole KRC/cm Enclosure cc: Robert Weisbrod (LMCIT 11019873) John Dean KRC- 196400v 1 BE295-34 -6864- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Blaine Bailey and Molly Bailey, et al., Petitioners, V. Robert M. Lien and Carol L. Lien, et al., Respondents. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. MC97-15540 ORDER The above entitled matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Steven Z. Lange, one of the Judges of this Court, on April 2, 2001 pursuant to the motion of the City of Mound to obtain approval of a settlement herein. Barbara Ross, Esq., appeared on behalf of petitioners. Marc Simpson, Esq., appeared on behalf of certain of the answering respondents collectively referred to as the Wawonaissa Abutters; KRC- 194124v3 BE295-34 -6865- Karen R. Cole, Esq. appeared on behalf of respondent City of Mound. Upon all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, the arguments of counsel, and the Court being fully advised in the premises, the Court makes the following: ORDER 1. The property affected and bound by this Order are the parcels listed in Exhibit A attached to this Order (collectively referred' to as the Property). 2. The Settlement Agreement (attached as Exhibit B) is hereby APPROVED, subject to the following modifications. a. Paragraph 4 is modified to read as follows: No more slips may be provided at any one location than are specified above, nor may fewer slips than specified be provided unless there is insufficient demand for slips by Woodland Point residents. These docks will be configured as straight docks. Th~.~ ..w.~.~^~'~ ..~.~,..~~;~a ~.c~ ,-~..~. .... boats maintain zetSackz A diagram of the dock at Gull Lane is attached as Exhibit 2; a diagram of the docks at Finch Lane, Eagle Lane and Bluebird Lane North is attached as Exhibit 3; a diagram of the dock at Dove Lane is attached as Exhibit 4; and a diagram of the dock at Woodland Road is attached as Exhibit 5. In the event that any slip becomes unusable because of climatic or water level changes, the City is not obligated to provide additional dockage or provide alternative sites. Paragraph 10 is modified to read as follows: 10. Docks for the year 2999 2001 boating season will be assigned first to Woodland Point residents who paid a dock fee in 1999. Woodland Point residents who applied in 1999 but were not awarded a dock will get second priority for the year 2990 2001 boating season. The City will assign the remaining multiple dock slips in the year 2999 2001 and in following years with the following priorities: 1 st Woodland Point non-abutters- 2nd Woodland Point non-abutters who want a second slip 3rd Non-Woodland Point Mound residents. KRC- 194124v3 BE295-34 2 -6866- Persons who have been assigned slips will have priority in following years. c. Paragraph 18 is modified to read as follows: 18. The abutting properties will no longer be included in the City of Mound's shoreline count. The City will only count Canary Beach and the street ends in its total count. The abutters will no longer be part of the City's dock program in any way and will not pay any fee to the City. Abutters are permitted to maintain docks on their respective segments as defined in paragraph 1, consistent with the City's rights under paragraph 27 ..and consistent with requirements imposed by the LMCD as a condition for the grant of variances for construction of the multiple slip docks. d. Paragraph 19 is modified to read as follows: 19. ~ ,~ .... ~ r ........ +~ +~ + .... ~* ~"~+;~ ~' The walkway at Woodland Road will remain as it is until it is degraded to the point where it must be replaced, at which time the City will remove the asphalt ~d place black di~ ~d seeds at the location, without doing landscaping. At that time, petitioners will pay to place a sign at this location to delineate the walkway. e. Paragraph 36 is modified to read as follows: 36. All disputes arising out of this Settlement Agreement, unless privately mediated, shall be brought before the Court under the caption for MC97- 15540. 'The parties to this Agreement have the right to enforce this Agreement notwithstanding the rights of the LMCD under paragraph 37(e). f. A new paragraph (paragraph 3a) is added to read as follows: 3a. The City may retain, utilize, maintain and replace utilities presently located in Wawonaissa and Waurika Corrfmons, including storm and sanitary sewer pipe, manholes, water lines and hydrants. Conditions imposed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). 3. The Settlement Agreement is further modified in the following way in order to comply with requirements imposed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) as a KKC-194124v3 3 BE295-34 -6867- condition for the grant of variances needed for the construction of the multiple slip docks at street ends: The Settlement Agreement, as modified herein by the Court, is binding on all parties, their successors, heirs and assigns, and the Property, and runs with the Property, and provides permanent restrictions on utilization of the Property as follows: Non-abutters shall not place or maintain a dock, nor store or moor any boats at the commons, other than as provided in the Settlement Agreement at the shared docks at the Street Ends. Properties adjacent to the street ends at Finch Lane, Eagle Lane, Bluebird Lane North and Gull Lane (Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 4, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3; Lot 4, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 6; Lot 4, Block 5; and Lot 1, Block 1), shall not place or maintain any structure, including, without limitation, a dock or store boats or any other watercraft closer than twenty (20) feet to the extension of the street end boundary nearest their Property, and hereby grant a navigational easement over the same area for the purpose of allowing ingress and egress to the shared docks adjacent to the Property described in this subparagraph. Properties adjacent to the street end of Dove Lane (Lot 1, Block 4; Lot 4, Block 3), shall not place or maintain any structure, including, without limitation, a dock or store boats or any other watercraft closer than ten (10) feet to the extension of the street end boundary nearest their Property, and hereby grant a navigational easement over the same area for the purpose of allowing ingress and egress to the shared docks adjacent to the Property described in this subparagraph. The City of Mound shall not assign, transfer or otherwise divest itself of any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement, or transfer, sell or convey its interests in the street end easements which are created by the Agreement, and any attempted assignment or transfer in violation of this section shall result in forfeiture of the right to maintain shared docks at the street ends. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is considered a benefited party and may enforce subparagraphs 3(b) - (d) of this Order. - f. For purposes of paragraph 3, the following definitions apply: Abutters Owners of parcels in the Woodland Point subdivision that are listed in Exhibit 6 attached to this Agreement. ii. Commons Property Property included in Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons as shown on the plat for Woodland Point subdivision. KRC- 194124v3 BE295-34 4 -6868- iii. Non-abutters Persons owning private property in Woodland Point subdivision other than Abutters. iv. Street Ends The portions of Waurika and Wawonaissa Commons located between the street boundaries of Finch Lane, Eagle Lane, Bluebird Lane North, Gull Lane, Dove Lane and Woodland Road extended to Lake Minnetonka. 4. The Settlement Agreement as modified b.y this Order ("the Modified Settlement Agreement") is attached as Exhibit C. 5. All disputes arising out of the Modified Settlement Agreement, unless privately mediated, shall be brought before this Court under this caption. 6. The Court directs that the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles, shall file this Order with the Modified Settlement Agreement (Exhibit C) against the Property, specifically against each Certificate of Title affected. The Registrar shall charge $19.50 for the first memorial and shall make no charge for any additional memorials. 7. Copies of this Order shall be sent to counsel for the represented parties and to the Dated: April ~, 2001. pro se parties which shall be proper service for all purposes. This document was approved by the Court A proposed order was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 KRC KRC-194124v3 BE295-34 -6869- EXHIBIT A To the Court's Order Parcels Affected and Bound By the Court's Order The following parcels in the Woodland Point Subdivision, City of Mound, Minnesota are affected and bound by the Court's Order. The torrens parcels are identified by listing the certifi cate number. Lot 1 Block 1 Lot 2 Block 1 Lot 3 Block 1 Lot 4 Block 1 Lot 5 Block 1 Lot 6 Block 1 Lot 7, Block 1 Lot 8, Block 1 Lot 9, Block 1 Lot 10, Block 1 Lot 11, Block 1 Lot 12, Block 1 Lot 13, Block 1 Lot 14, Block 1 Lot 15, Block 1 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 7 Lot 8, Lot 9, Lot 10, Lot 11. Lot 12. Lot 13. Lot 14. Lot 15. Lot 16. Lot 17, Lot 18, Lot 19, Block 2 Block 2 Block ~ Block Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block~' Block 2 Block'~ Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Block 2 Torrens, Certificate No. 809001 Torrens, Certificate No. 807575 .Torrens, Certificate No. 677773 -6870- Lot 1 Block 3I Lot2 Block 3~ Lot 3 Block 3. Lot 4 Block 3 Lot 5 Block 3 Lot 6 Block 3 Lot 7 Block 3~ Lot 8 Block 3 ! Lot 9 Bloc~ Lot 10, Block 3 Lot 11, Block 3 Lot 12, Block 3 Lot 13. Block 3 Lot 14. Block 3 Lot 15. Block 3 Lot 16. Block 3 Lot 17. Block 3 Lot 18. Block 3 Lot 19. Block~ Lot 20. Block 3~ Lot 21. Block 3] Lot 22. Block 3 Lot 23. Block 3 Lot 24, Block 3 Lot 1, Block 4 Lot 2, Block 4 Lot 3, Block 4 Lot 4, Block 4 Lot 5, Block 4 Lot 6, Block 4 Lot 7, Block 4~ Lot 8, Block.,4..J Lot 9, Block 4 Lot 10, Block4 Lot 11, Block 4 Lot 12, Block 4 Lot 13, Block-4'I Lot 14 Block,,~J Lot 15 Block4 Lot 16 Block4 Lot 17 Block4--'~. Lot 18 Block,.~l Lot 19 Block4 Lot 20 Block 4 Lot21 Block 4 Torrens, Certificate No. 784485 .Torrens, Certificate No. 822303 Torrens, Certificate No. 7492 t 9 .Torrens, CertificateNo. 548485 Torrens, Certificate No. 569899 Torrens, Certificate No. 475654 ,Torrens, CertificateNo 468592 2 -6871 - Lot 22, Block 4 Lot 23, Block 4 Lot 24, Block 4 Lot 25, Block 4 Southwesterly half of Lot 26, Block 4, Northerly half of Lot 26, Block :T"--- Lot 27, Block 4 Lot 1, Block 5 Lot 2, Block 5 Lot 3, Block 5 Lot 4, Block 5 Lot 5, Block 5 Lot 6, Block 5 Lot 7, Block 5 Lot 8, Block 5 Lot 9, Block 5 Lot 10, Block 5 Lot 11, Block 5 Lot 12, Block 5 Lot 13, Block 5 Lot 14, Block 5 Lot 15, Block 5 Lot 16, Block 5 Lot 17, Block 5 Lot 18, Block 5~ Lot 19, Block 5 Lot 20, Block 5~ Lot 21, Bloct~SJ Lot 22, Block 5~ Lot 23, Block"5] Lot 24, Block~ Lot 25, Block.~ Lot 26, Block 5 Lot 27, Block 5 Lot 28, Block 5 Lot 29, Block 5 Lot 30, Block 5 Lot 1, Block 6 Lot 2, Block 6 Lot 3, Block 6 Lot 4, Block 6 Lot 5, Block 6 Lot 6, Block 6 Lot 7, Block 6 Torrens, Certificate No. 694139 Torrens, CertificateNo. 842055 ,Torrens, Certificate No. 802185 Torrens, Certificate No. 703000 Torrens, Certificate No. 733766 · Torrens, Certificate No. 612547 3 -6872- Lot 8, Block 6 Lot 9, Block 6 Lot 10, Block 6~ Lot 11, Block 6.~ Lot 12, Block~,~ Lot 13 Block.~J. Lot 14. Block 6 Lot 15 Block6 Lot 16 Block6 Lot 17 Block6 Lot 18 Block6 Lot 19 Block6 Lot 20 Bloclc 6 Lot 21, Block 6 Lot 22, Block 6 Lot 23, Block 6 Northerly 20 feet of Lot 24, Block 6~ That part of Lot 24 lying southerly the northerly 20 feet thereof, Block 6~J Lot 25, Block 6 Lot 26, Block'~i Lot 27, Block 6_~ Lot 28, Block 6 Lot 29.,. Block 6 Lot 30, Block 6 Lot 31, Block 6 Lot 32, Block 6 .Torrens, CertificateNo. 1030298 Torrens, Certificate No. 519901 Torrens, Certificate No. 665184 Torrens, Certificate No. 519901 Torrens, Certificate No. 665 t 84 Torrens, Certificate 1030298 Lot 1, Block 7~ Lot 2, Block 7 Lot 3, Block 7 Lot 4, Block 7 Lot 5, Block 7 Lot 6, Block 7 Lot 7, Block 7 Lot 8, Block 7 Lot 9, Block 7 Lot 10, Block 7 Lot 11, Block 7 Lot 12, Block 7 Lot 13. Block 7 Lot 14. Block 7 Lot 15~ Block 7 Lot 16. Block7 Lot 17. Block 7 Lot 18. Block 7 Torrens, Certificate No. 842841 4 -6873- Lot 19, Block 7 Lot 20, Block 7 Lot 21, Block 7 Lot 22, Block 7 Lot 23, Block 7 Lot 24, Block 7 Lot 1, Block 8 Lot 2, Block 8 Lot 3, Block 8 Lot 4, Block 8 Lot 5, Block 8 Lot 6, Block 8 Lot 7, Block 8 Lot 8, Block 8 Lot 9, Block 8 Lot 10, Block 8 Lot 11, Block 8 Lot 12, Block 8 Lot 13, Block 8 Lot 14, Block 8 Lot 15, Block 8 Lot 16, Block 8 Lot 17, Block 8 Lot 18, Block 8 Lot 19, Block 8 Lot 20, Block 8 Lot 21, Block 8 Lot 22, Block 8 Lot 23, Block 8 Lot 24, Block 8 Lot 1, Block 9 Lot 2, Block 9 Lot 3, Block 9 Lot 4, Block 9 'Lot 5, Block 9 Lot 6, Block 9 Lot 7, Block 9 Lot 8, Block 9 Lot 9, Block 9 Lot 10, Block 9 Lot 11, Block 9 Lot 12, Block 9 Lot 13, Block 9 Lot 14, Block 9 5 -6874- Lot 15 Lot 16 Lot 17 Lot 18 Lot 19 Lot 20 Lot 21 Lot 22, Lot 23, Lot 24, Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9 Block 9~ Block~ Lot 1, Block 10I Lot 2, Block ~ North ½ of L~ 3, Block 10 Southwesterly ½ df Lot 3, Block 10 Lot 4, Block 10, Lot 5, Block 10 Lot 7, Block 10 Lot 8, Block 10 Lot 9, Block 10 Lot 10, Lot 11, Lot 12, Lot 13, Lot 14, Lot 15, Lot 16, Lot 17, Lot 18, Lot 19, Lot 20, Lot 21, Lot 22, Lot 23, Lot 24, Lot 1, Block Lot 2 Block Lot 3 Block Lot 4 Block Lot 5 Block Lot 6 Block Lot 7 Block Lot 8 Block Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 10 Block 1'~ Block 1~ BlockT0l Block 1~ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Lot 9 Block 11 Lot 10, Block 11 Torrens, Certificate No. 766266 Torrens, Certificate No. 626365 Torrens, Certificate No. 816740 ,Torrens, Certificate No. 671534 Torrens, Certificate No. 754097 6 -6875- Lot 11, Block 11 Lot 12, Block 11 Lot 13, Block 1,~ Lot 14, Block 111 Lot 15. Block 1~ Lot 16. Block 11 Lot 17. Block 11 Lot 18. Block 11 Lot 19. Block 11 Lot 20. Block 11 Lot 21. Block 11 SouthwesterlyhalfofLot 22, Block_III . Northeasterly half of Lot 22, Block 11 Lot 23, Block 11 Lot 24, Block 11 Lot 1, Block 12 Lot2, Block 12 Lot 3, Block 12 Lot 4, Block 12 Lot 5, Block 12 Lot 6, Block 12 Lot 7, Block 12 Lot 8, Block 12~ Lot 9, Block 12 [ Lot 10, Block l~j Lot 11, Block 12 Lot 12, Block 1,~2 Lot 13, Block 12 Lot 14, Block 12 Lot 15, Block 12 Lot 16, Block 12 Lot 17, Block 12 Lot 18, Block 12 Lot 19, Block 12 Lot 20, Block 12 Lot 21, Block 12 Lot 22, Block 12 Lot 23, Block 12 Lot 24, Block 12 Torrens Certificate No. 8330981/2 Torrens Certificate No. 718060 Torrens, Certificate No. 824852 .Torrens, Certificate No. 779135 Torrens, CertificateNo. 730873 Torrens, Certificate No. 603013 146143 7 -6876- EXHIBIT B To Court's Order SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Bailey et al. v. Lien et al. Hermepin Count), Court File No. MC97-t 5540 The parties to thJ. s litigaSon agree as follows: Property interests '1. Owners of the adjoining parcels have fee simple title to segments of Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons. The boundaries of each segment are lines that extend from the side lines of the adjoining parcel. The parts of the Commons that adjoin planed streets are owned in fee simple by the fee simple owners of the adjoining .streets according to the normal rules for determining fee ownership of planed streets as'sun-n'narized in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement. C~nary Beach is the portion of Waurika Common thru was delineated by the Court in its partial summary judgment ruling dated March .3, 1999. Canary Beach has been dedicated to the public tN'ough common law dedication and is subject to control by the 'Cily for parkland purposes. The public holds a perpetual exclusive easement for beach, park and dockage purposes in Canary Beach. All property owners in the Woodland Point. subdivision have an easement as to Wawonaissa Commons and Waurika Cram-nons as those Commons are delineated on the 1906 Plat of Woodland Point. This Agreement describes the easement rights of the City and of all property owners in the Woodland Point subdivision over the Commons. The City has an easement in the segments of the Commons at street ends for purposes of the multiple slip docks described in this Agreement; the boundaries of each such segment are lines that extend from the outer boundaries of the street to the lakeshore. Except for Canary Beach (where the public's easement is exclusive), the easements to use the Commons set forth in this Seulement Agreement are perpetual, non-exclusive easements appurtenant to all parcels in Woodland Point - abuuing parcels and inland parcels as the case ma), be. These easements s~persede the easements in the Commons for private streets and avenues dedicated in the 1906 Plm of Woodland Point. Multiple slip docks to be provided by the CiD, The City will, through its dock fund, pay ]00% of the cost of new multiple slip docks at street ends in Woodland Point. This will consist of: one 2 - boat dock m Gull Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Pinch Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Eagle Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Dove Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Bluebird Lane North; one 2 - boat dock at Woodland Road; and one 2 - boat dock at Bluebird Lane South. KRC-165779v7 BE295-34 -6877- 10. 11. b~o more slips may be provided m any one locardon than are specified above: nor m~y fewer slips th~ spesi~d be provided unless there is insu~c{~nt dem~d for slips by ~oodl~d Poim residents. These docks ~ilt b~ co~gur~d as stmigh~ docks. The docks des{Bnmed for four boats will have dNiders [n order to separm~ the two bores on tither side. Boats on th~ Woodland Ro~d flock will b~ losatsd on on~ side only {n ord=r to maintain setbacks. In the evem thru ~y slip becomes ~usabte because of climatic or wmer level ch~ges, ~¢ CiW is no~ obligmed to proxdde additional dockage or provide ahemadve sites. The City will provide a maximum of 22 Bom Storage Units ("BSUs"), but not less than 22 BSUs unless there is insufficient demand., for the non-abutting residents in the future as outlined herein under The City's blanket Lake Mirmetonka Conservation District ("LMCD") license. ' The parties agree that they will use their best efforts and will cooperate to obtain any approvals that may be needed from LMCD for construction of the multiple slip docks. The City will install and remove its docks each year. The City will be responsible for all maintenance or replacement of its docks in 'the future, at its discretion. The CiD' will administer a dock program for the multiple slip docks referred to in paragraph 4. This will include, but will not be limited to collecting fees, sending mailings and notices, and maintaining records and waiting lists. Docks for the year 2000 boating season will be assigned first to Woodland Point residents who paid a dock fee in 1999. Woodland Point residents who applied in 1999 but were not awarded a dock will get second priority for the year 2000 boating season. The City will assign the remaining multiple dock slips in the >,ear 2000 and in following years with the following priorities: . · 2nd 3rd Woodland Point nOn-abutters Woodland Point non-abutters who want a second slip Non-Woodland Point Mound residents. Persons who ha+e been assigned slips vdll have priority in following years. Any Woodland Point residents using the multiple docks who are assigned a second slip will pay a second full'dock fee. Notwithstanding paragraph 10, Woodland PoLnt residents with a second slip will not be reassigned a second slip for any season in which demand can not otherwise be met for primary slips. KRC- 165779v7 B£295-34 2 -6878- 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. All multiple dock slip holders will be assigned slips at the location closest to their homes to the extent possible. (This could result in slip holders being moved from year to >,ear as applicants change0 Multiple dock slip fees will be the same as fees for multiple dock slips throughout the rest of the City. These fees are currently $150 per slip, plus the LMCD boat fee. In the event that a Woodland Point resident applies for a .slip on a multiple slip dock in Woodland Point and that dock has a slip assigned to a non-Woodland Point resident, the non-Woodland Point resident will be assigned a slip outside Woodland Point at the first opportunity but that resident will not be moved until a new location becomes available. There will be no access to the Commons via Gull Lane due to topographic conditions. All such access will be only from Finch Lane or further west to the Commons leading up to the Cull Lane dock, except for those property owners between Gull Lane and Fi'nch Lane who may access the .Commons directly from their property. Any non-Woodland Point residents who are assigned slips on the multiple docks must access them through the street end and not across the Commons. Because there is no access via Gull Lane, slips on the Gull Lane dock may not be assigned to an>, non- Woodland Point resident. It is recommended that the non-abutting slip holders walk to their sites. It is further recommended that their guests park at the slip holder's homes. The abutting properties will no longer be included in the City of Mound's shoreline count. The City .wi]] only count Canary Beach and the street ends in its total count. The abutters will no longer be part of the City's dock program in any way and will not pay any fee to the City. Abutters are permitted to maintain docks on their respective segments as defined in paragraph 1, consistent with the City's rights under paragraph 27. It is expected that the LMCD will honor the fee rifle and that no LMCD license will be required from the abutters. Wood]and Road will have a 12-foot wide unimproved walkway centered on the road for access to the two-boat multiple dock. All non-abutters will remove their existing docks, lifts, and other dock related hardware from the water and easement (Commons and street, ends) by' December 1, 1999, or they will forfeit their slips for the following year. During winter months, the multiple slip docks will be stored on the Commons at the street ends or, if necessary because of topography or snow removal needs, as close to the street ends as possible. The dock at Bluebird Lane South will remain installed year round unless conditions, as determined bY the CID,, require removal for personal Safety, protection of the dock itself, or other reasons not realized at this time. KRC- 165779v7 BE295-34 3 -6879- 22. It is understood that the City will not be doing any dredging' in the vicinity of Bluebird Lane South. 23. 24. 25. 26. Aighm 27. 28. Claims 29. Owners of the Hillier property (1551 Canary Lane) that abuts Canao, Beach are ~sured a dock location on the frontage of thru property at the west end of the Canary Beach proper0,, provided Gm the boat/dock complex does not encroach beyond the Beach's west property line. The City will construct stairs at Bluebird Lane North, Dove Lane, Eagle Lane and Woodland Road. Abuners w/2l pay a one-time fee of $300 per household for stairs construction. The multiple slip users will pa>, a $50 per year per slip surcharge for five years only. The City will pa), the remaining costs from the dock fund. After five years, the surcharge will end and the Cky will be responsible for future maintenance. Dock fees paid by any abutting property owner in Woodland Point for the 1999 season wilt be credited toward the one time stair charge. The balance due will be billed. Alt rules and regulations as revised over time and published each year by the City thru apply to other Mound multiple slip docks will apply to the multiple slip docks in Woodland Point except as stated above. to regulate and use Commons The City wilt retain regulatory control over \Vawonaissa and Waurika Commons only to the extent k has authority over other private lakeshore in the City. Any disputes between neighbors on access, trespassing, or other negotiated agreements between the parties are to be explored.and resolved in civil proceedings or mediation rather than through the City. All residents of Woodland Point have an easement to access the Commons at street ends and to traverse the Commons close to the lakeshore. Neither abuners nor non-abutters may obstruct the walkway. Absolutely no motorized vehicles will be allowed, and there will be foot traffic only. Guests should be accompanied by a Woodland Point resident. The Cky will not exercise authority in these civil matters. Any d.ispmes between neighbors on access, trespassing, or other negotiated agreements between the parties are to be explored and resolved in civil proceedings or mediation rather than through the CID'. Given Up In exchange for benefits under this Agreement, the parties agree to give up their rights to bring claims set out in or relating to the complaint and answers in this case, and agree to give up all claims which, could 'have been raised relating to Wawonaissa or Waurika Commons. ICRC- 165779v7 BE295-3.~ 4 -6880- lmerpre%afion; enforcement and notice of this Agreemen~ 30. This Agreement is the complete agreement of the parties relating to this action. This means that no party ma), re]), on prior conversations or statements in interpreting this Agreement. 3]. This Agreement will run with the land. This means that the agreement v,,il] bind all .persons with an interest in the Commons in the future. 32. This Agreement is contingent on receiving any approvals that ma>, be needed from LMCD or other government bodies for ins`[alla'cion of the multiple, slip docks. This Agreement ma), be executed in counterparts. This means '[hat it is not negessan., for each part>, to sign the same cop>, of the Agreement, but that parties ma>, sign separate copies of the Agreement. 34. A cop>, of this Agreement and Order will be mailed to the owners of all parcels in Woodland Poim using the addresses that are maintained by the city', or county assessor. Certified copies of this Agreement and Order will be filed with the Hemaepin County Recorder and Registrar of Titles against ail parcels in Woodland Point. 35. It is understood that the prior ruling of the Court is of no legal effect, and that this Agreement controls. City of Mound · By: Pat Meisel Its: Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA · ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )' The foregoing ,19 of said City. instrument was acknowledged before· me this day of __ by Pat Meise], Mayor of the City of Mound, Minnesota on behalf N o'cary Public KRC-165779v7 BE295-3~ 5 -6881 - EXHIBIT 1 TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SEGMENT OF WAWONAISSA COMMON AD,,IACENT TO' South t/2 of Woodland Road North 1/2 of Woodland Road SEGMENT OF WAURIKA COMMON AD,IACENT TO' West 1/2 of Bluebird Lane East 1/2 of Bluebird Lane West 1/2 of Canary Lane East 1/2 of Canary Lane West 1/2 of Dove Lane East 1/2 of Dove Lane West 1/2 of Eagle Lane East 1/2 of'Eagle Lane West 1/2 of Finch Lane East 1/2"of Finch Lane West 30' of Gull Lane LOT IN WOODLAND POLNT TO WHICH IT IS 'APPURTENANT Lot 24, Block ? Lot 18, Block 6 LOT IN WOODLAND POINT ; TO WHICH IT IS APPURTENANT Lot 1, Block 6 Lot 4, Block 5 Lot 1, Block 5 Lot 4, Block 4 Lot 1, Block 4 Lot 4, Block 3 Lot 1, Block 3 Lot 4, Block 2 Lot 1, Block 2 Lot 4, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 1 1529726.01 -6882- EXHIBIT C To Court's Order SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT As Modified by Court Order Bailey et al. v. Lien et al. Hennepin County Court File No. MC97-15540 The parties to this litigation agree as follows: Property interests Owners of the adjoining parcels have fee simple title to segments of Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons. The boundaries of each segment are lines that extend from the side lines of the adjoining parcel. The parts of the Commons that adjoin platted streets are owned in fee simple by the fee simple owners of the adjoining streets according to the normal rules for determining fee ownership of platted streets as summarized in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement. Canary Beach is the portion of Waurika Common that was delineated by the Court in its partial summary judgment ruling dated March 3, 1999. Canary Beach has been dedicated to the public through common law dedication and is subject to control by the City for parkland purposes. The public holds a perpetual exclusive easement for beach, park and dockage purposes in Canary Beach. All property owners in the Woodland Point subdivision have an easement as to Wawonaissa Commons and Waurika Commons as those Commons are delineated on the 1906 Plat of Woodland Point. This Agreement describes the easement rights of the City and of all property owners in the Woodland Point subdivision over the Commons. The City has an easement in the segments of the Commons at street ends for purposes of the multiple slip docks described in this Agreement; the boundaries of each such segment are lines that extend from the outer boundaries of the street to the lakeshore. Except for Canary Beach (where the public's easement is exclusive), the easements to use the Commons set forth in this Settlement Agreement are perpetual, non-exclusive easements appurtenant to all parcels in Woodland Point - abutting parcels and inland parcels as the case may be. These easements supersede the easements in the Commons for private streets and avenues dedicated in the 1906 Plat of Woodland Point. ga. The City may retain, utilize, maintain and replace utilities presently located in Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons, including storm and sanitary sewer pipe, manholes, water lines and hydrants. Multiple slip docks to be provided by the City The City will, through its dock fund, pay 100% of the cost of new multiple slip docks at street ends in Woodland Point. This will consist of: one 2 - boat dock at Gull Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Finch Lane; KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 1 -6883- o o 10. one 4 - boat dock at Eagle Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Dove Lane; one 4 - boat dock at Bluebird Lane North; one 2 - boat dock at Woodland Road; and one 2 - boat dock at Bluebird Lane South. No more slips may be provided at any one location than are specified above, nor may fewer slips than specified be provided unless there is insufficient demand for slips by Woodland Point residents. These docks will be configured as straight docks. A diagram of the dock at Gull Lane is attached as Exhibit 2; a diagram of the docks at Finch Lane, Eagle Lane and Bluebird Lane North is attached as Exhibit 3; a diagram of' the dock at Dove Lane is attached as Exhibit 4; and a diagram of the dock at Woodland Road is attached as Exhibit 5. In the event that any slip becomes unusable because of climatic or water level changes, the City is not obligated to provide additional dockage or provide alternative sites. The City will provide a maximum of 22 Boat Storage Units ("BSUs"), but not less than 22 BSUs unless there is insufficient demand, for the non-abutting residents in the future as outlined herein under the City's blanket Lake Minnetonka Conservation District ("LMCD") license. The parties agree that they will use their best efforts and will cooperate to obtain any approvals that may be needed from LMCD for construction of the multiple slip docks. The City will install and remove its docks each year. The City will be responsible for all maintenance or replacement of its docks in the future, at its discretion. The City will administer a dock program for the multiple slip docks referred to in paragraph 4. This will include, but will not be limited to collecting fees, sending mailings and notices, and maintaining records and waiting lists. Docks for the year 2001 boating season will be assigned first to Woodland Point residents who paid a dock fee in 1999. Woodland Point residents who applied in 1999 but were not awarded a dock will get second priority for the year 2001 boating season. The City will assign the remaining multiple dock slips in the year 2001 and in following years with the following priorities: l st 2nd 3rd Woodland Point non-abutters Woodland Point non-abutters who want a second slip Non-Woodland Point Mound residents. Persons who have been assigned slips will have priority in following years. KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 -6884- 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Any Woodland Point residents using the multiple docks who are assigned a second slip will pay a second full dock fee. Notwithstanding paragraph 10, Woodland Point residents with a second slip will not be reassigned a second slip for any season in which demand can not otherwise be met for primary slips. All multiple dock slip holders will be assigned slips at the location closest to their homes to the extent possible. (This could result in slip holders being moved from year to year as applicants change.) Multiple dock slip fees will be the same as fees for multiple dock slips throughout the rest of the City. These fees are currently $150 per slip, plus the LMCD boat fee. In the event that a Woodland Point resident applies for a slip on a multiple slip dock in Woodland Point and that dock has a slip assigned to a non-Woodland Point resident, the non-Woodland Point resident will be assigned a slip outside Woodland Point at the first opportunity but that resident will not be moved until a new location becomes available. There will be no access to the Commons via Gull Lane due to topographic conditions. All such access will be only from Finch Lane or further west to the Commons leading up to the Gull Lane dock, except for those property owners between Gull Lane and Finch Lane who may access the Commons directly from their property. Any non-Woodland Point residents who are assigned slips on the multiple docks must access them through the street end and not across the Commons. Because there is no access via Gull Lane, slips on the Gull Lane dock may not be assigned to any non- Woodland Point resident. It is recommended that the non-abutting slip holders walk to their sites. It is further recommended that their guests park at the Slip holder's homes. The abutting properties will no longer be included in the City of Mound's shoreline count. The City will only count Canary Beach and the street ends in its total count. The abutters will no longer be part of the City's dock program in any way and will not pay any fee to the City. Abutters are permitted to maintain docks on their respective segments as defined in paragraph 1, consistent with the City's rights under paragraph 27 and consistent with requirements imposed by the LMCD.as a condition for the grant of variances for construction of the multiple slip docks. The walkway at Woodland Road will remain as it is until it is degraded to the point where it must be replaced, at which time the City will remove the asphalt and place black dirt and seeds at the location, without doing landscaping. At that time, petitioners will pay to place a sign at this location to delineate the walkway. All non-abutters will remove their existing docks, lifts, and other dock related hardware from the water and easement (Commons and street ends) by December 1, 1999, or they will forfeit their slips for the following year. KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 3 -6885- 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Rights 27. 28. During winter months, the multiple slip docks will be stored on the Commons at the street ends or, if necessary because of topography or snow removal needs, as close to the street ends as possible. The dock at Bluebird Lane South will remain installed year round unless conditions, as determined by the City, require removal for personal safety, protection of the dock itself, or other reasons not realized at this time. It is understood that the City will not be doing any dredging in the vicinity of Bluebird Lane South. Owners of the Hillier property (1551 Canary Lane) that abuts Canary Beach are assured a dock location on the frontage of that property at the west end of the Canary Beach property, provided that the boat/dock complex does not encroach beyond the Beach's west property line. The City will construct stairs at Bluebird Lane North, Dove Lane, Eagle Lane and Woodland Road. Abutters will pay a one-time fee of $300 per household for stairs construction. The multiple slip users will pay a $50 per year per slip surcharge for five years only. The City will pay the remaining costs from the dock fund. After five years, the surcharge will end and the City will be responsible for future maintenance. Dock fees paid by any abutting property owner in Woodland Point for the 1999 season will be credited toward the one time stair charge. The balance due will be billed. All rules and regulations as revised over time and published each year by the City that apply to other Mound multiple slip docks will apply to the multiple slip docks in Woodland Point except as stated above. to regulate and use Commons The City will retain regulatory control over Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons only to the extent it has authority over other private lakeshore in the City. Any disputes between neighbors on access, trespassing, or other negotiated agreements between the parties are to be explored and resolved in civil proceedings or mediation rather than through the City. All residents of Woodland Point have an easement to access the Commons at street ends and to traverse the Commons close to the lakeshore. Neither abutters nor non-abutters may obstruct the walkway. Absolutely no motorized vehicles will be allowed, and there will be foot traffic only. Guests should be accompanied by a Woodland Point resident. The City will not exercise authority in these civil matters. Any disputes between neighbors on access, trespassing, or other negotiated agreements between the parties are to be explored and resolved in civil proceedings or mediation rather than through the City. KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 4 -6886- Claims Given Up 29. In exchange for benefits under this Agreement, the parties agree to give up their rights to bring claims set out in or relating to the complaint and answers in this case, and agree to give up all claims which could have been raised relating to Wawonaissa or Waurika Commons. Interpretation, enforcement and notice of this Agreement 30. This Agreement is the complete agreement of the parties relating to this action. This means that no party may rely on prior conversations or statements in interpreting this Agreement. 31. This Agreement will run with the land. This means that the agreement will bind all persons with an interest in the Commons in the future. 32. This Agreement is contingent on receiving any approvals that may be needed from LMCD or other government bodies for installation of the multiple slip docks. 33. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. This means that it is not necessary for each party to sign the same copy of the Agreement, but that parties may sign separate copies of the Agreement. 34. A copy of this Agreement and Order will be mailed to the owners of all parcels in Woodland Point using the addresses that are maintained by the city or county assessor. Certified copies of this Agreement and Order will be filed with the Hennepin County Recorder and Registrar of Titles against all parcels in Woodland Point. 35. It is understood that the prior ruling of the Court is of no legal effect, and that this Agreement controls. 36. All disputes arising out of this Settlement Agreement, unless privately mediated, shall be brought before the Court under the caption for MC97-15540. The parties to this Agreement have the right to enforce this Agreement notwithstanding the rights of the LMCD under paragraph 37(e). Conditions imposed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). 37. The Settlement Agreement is modified in the following way in order to comply with requirements imposed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) as a condition for the grant of variances needed for the construction of the multiple slip docks at street ends: The Settlement Agreement, as modified herein by the Court, is binding on all parties, their successors, heirs and assigns, and the Property, and runs with the Property, and provides permanent restrictions on utilization of the Property as follows: KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 5 -6887- bo Co Non-abutters shall not place or maintain a dock, nor store or moor any boats at the commons, other than as provided in the Settlement Agreement at the shared docks at the Street Ends. Properties adjacent to the street ends at Finch Lane, Eagle Lane, Bluebird Lane North and Gull Lane (Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 4, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3; Lot 4, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 6; Lot 4, Block 5; and Lot 1, Block 1), shall not place or maintain any structure, including, without limitation, a dock or store boats or any other watercraft closer than twenty (20) feet to the extension of the street end boundary nearest their Property, and hereby grant a navigational easement over the same area for the purpose of allowing ingress and egress to the shared docks adjacent to the Property described in this subparagraph. Properties adjacent to the street end of Dove Lane (Lot 1, Block 4; Lot 4, Block 3), shall not place or maintain any structure, including, without limitation, a dock or store boats or any other watercraft closer than ten (10) feet to the extension of the street end boundary nearest their Property, and hereby grant a navigational easement over the same area for the purpose of allowing ingress and egress to the shared docks adjacent to the Property described in this subparagraph. The City of Mound shall not assign, transfer or otherwise divest itself of any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement, or transfer, sell or convey its interests in the street end easements which are created by the Agreement, and any attempted assignment or transfer in violation of this section shall result in forfeiture of the right to maintain shared docks at the street ends. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is considered a benefited party and may enforce subparagraphs 37(b) -(d) of this Order. For purposes of paragraph 37, the following definitions apply: Abutters Owners of parcels in the Woodland Point subdivision that are listed in Exhibit 6 attached to this Agreement. ii. Commons Property Property included in Wawonaissa and Waurika Commons as shown on the plat for Woodland Point subdivision. iii. Non-abutters Persons owning private property in Woodland Point subdivision other than Abutters. KRC- 194125v3 BE295-34 6 -6888- iv. Street Ends The portions of Waurika and Wawonaissa Commons located between the street boundaries of Finch Lane, Eagle Lane, Bluebird Lane North, Gull Lane, Dove Lane and Woodland Road extended to Lake Minnetonka. This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 KRC KRC-194125v3 BE295-34 7 -6889- EXI-IIBIT 1 TO SETTLEMiENT AGREEMENT SEGMENT OF WAWONAISSA . COMMON ADJACENT TO: South 1/2 of Woodland Road North 1/2 of Woodland Road SE GMENT OF WAURiK. A. COMMON ADJACENT TO: West 1/2 of Bluebird Lane East t/2 of Bluebird Lane West 1/2 of Canary Lane East 1/2 of Ca_nary Lane West t/2 of Dove Lane East t/2 of Dove Lane West I/2 of Eagle Lane East 1/2 of Eagle Lan~ West 1/2 of Finch L~e East 1/2'of Finch Lane West 30' of Gull La.ne LOT LN WOODLAND POINT TO WHICH tT IS APPURTENANT Lot 24, Block 7 Lot lO, Block 6 LOT Ex/wOODLAND POENT : TO WHICH IT IS APPURTENANT Lot 1, Block 6 Lot 4, Block 5 Lot 1, Block 5 Lot 4, Block 4 Lot I, Block 4 Lot 4, Block 3 Los i, Block 3 Lot 4, Block 2 Lot 1, Block 2 Loc 4, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 1 EXt-IIBIT 2 TO SETTLEM]ENT AGREEMENT 1 lo'x zq' -6891 - EXHI]3IT 3 TO SETTLEM2ENT AGREE~LENT Z. lo'x zq~ -6892- EXHIBIT 4 TO SETTLEMZNT AGREEMENT : g I 1 1 l l I I I -6893- EXI--IT'BIT 5 TO SETTLEM3&NT AGKEEM'ENT ! t___~ I 1 1 ! i I I -6894- EXHIBIT 6 TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Abutters for purposes of paragraph 3 of the Court's Order and paragraph 37 of the Modified Settlement Agreement are owners of the following parcels in the Woodland Point Subdivision, City of Mound, Minnesota: Lot 1, Block 1 Lot 2, Block 1 Lot ~ ~, Block 1 Lot 4, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 2 Lot 2, Block 2 Lot 3, Block 2 Lot 4, Block 2 Lot 1, Block 3 Lot 2, Block 3 Lot 3, Block 3 Lot 4, Block 3 Lot 1, Block 4 Lot 2, Block 4 Lot 3, Block 4 Lot 4, Block 4 Lot 1, Block 5 Lot 2, Block 5 Lot 3, Block 5 Lot 4, Block 5 Lot 1, Block 6 Lot 2, Block 6 Lot 3, Block 6 Lot 4, Block 6 Lot 5, Block 6 Lot 6, Block 6' Lot 7, Block 6 Lot 8, Block 6 Lot 9, Block 6 Lot 10, Block 6 Lot 11, Block 6 Lot 12, Block 6 Lot 13, Block 6 KRC-194621vl BE295-34 1 -6895- Lot 14, Block 6 Lot l_fi, Block 6 Lot 16, Block 6 Lo'~ 17, Block 6 Lot 18, Block 6 Lot 15, Block 7 Lot 16, Block 7 Lot 17, Block 7 Lot 18, Block 7 Lot 19, Block 7 Lot 20, Block 7 Lot 21, Block 7 Lot 22, Block 7 Lot 23, Block 7 Lot 24, Block 7 KRC-194621 vl BE295-34 2 -6896- City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 To whom it may concern, Thank you for passing the ordinance on cats. I saw some very fortunate individual criticizing you in the local paper. He has never seen a stray cat or picked a pile of cat poop. Well, I have cats wandering all over my neighborhood. I have to spend about an hour every week picking up piles of dog and cat poop before I can mow my grass, and I don't have any outdoor pets. It's disgusting. Thank you for trying to get the situation under control. Sincerely, Dawn Hetrick 3213 ^mhurst Lane Mound, MN 55364 -6897-