The URL can be used to link to this page

86-09-16 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1986 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. Approve Minutes of the August 26, 1986, Regular Meeting Pg. 1797-1807 2. DISCUSSION: Recreational Vehicle Storage pg. 1608-1815 3. C~SE ~86-~09: Final Plat Approval, Cobblestone Cove (Cooks Bay Estates) pg. 1816-1826 4. CASE {86-5R5: Ned & Karen Podany, 6165 and 6167 Sinclair Road, Lots 1 & 2, Block 17, The Highlands, PID #23-117-24 34 0067 REQUEST:Side Yard Setback Variance for Existing Detached Garage 5. C~$E #86-~6~ H. E. Wolner, 2660 Lakewood Lane, Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G, PID #24-117-24 24 0017 Pg. 1 827-1 852 Pg. 1853-1859 REQUEST: Variance to Code Section 23.407 Approval of Grading Plan at 5377 Shoreline Blvd., for Balboa Corporation Pg. 1860-1862 Approval of Payment Request #3 - Lynwood Blvd. & Tuxedo Blvd. Project- Preferred Paving- $79,801.43 Pg. 1863-1874 Resolution Releasing Certain Tax Forfeit Lands to Hennepin County for Public Auction and Certifying the Special Assessments Pg. 1875-1876 9. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Release in the City of Mound vs. Sander and Company 10. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present 11. Proposed Checklist for Referendum on Public Works Facility (Checklist to be handed out Tuesday evening.) 12. Resolution Ordering the Abatement of Unsanitary, Unsafe, and Hazardous Conditions Existing at 5516 Lynwood Blvd. in the City of Mound and Authorizing and Directing the Mayor and City Manager to Enter an Order with Respect to this Hazardous and Dangerous Building Pg. 1877-1884 Pg. 1885-1899 Page 17 95 13. Presentation of Proposed 1987 Budget 14. Payment of Bills 15. ~FORMATION/MISCELLANEOU$ Mark Wednesday, October 8, 1986, 7:30 P.M., City Hall, on your calendar. We have scheduled a meeting with Maxfield Research Group to review the draft report of the market analysis on Lost Lake. The meeting notice will be placed in The Laker and interested persons will be invited to attend. We would specifically like the Planning Commission and City Council to attend. We will not request any action on the report as there will probably be some suggestions and comments that may have to be added to the report or will require further investigation. Bo Letter and information from Hennepin County Parks regarding a boat tour of Lake Minnetonka in relation to public access to the Lake. Tour will be held Saturday, September 20 from 10:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M., beginning at A1 & Alma's. Please advise if you want to attend. Ce August 25, 1986, Planning Commission Minutes August 1986 Monthly Reports as prepared by Department Heads. pg. 1900-1914 Pg. 1915-1922 Pg. 1923-1924 Pg. 1925-1954 Page 1796 126 .August 26, 1966 MiI~'uTES- MOUND cITY coUNCIL- REGULAR AUGUST 26, 1986 met in Hennepin countY, F~innesOta, at 7:30 p.M. in the The City Council of Mound, August 26, 196'6' regular session on TuesdaY, council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said CitY- councilmembers phyliis Also Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, d steve Smith- clerk Shukl e, Jessen, Gary paulsen, RuSS peterson an Jr., City · rson and Jim Larson, City present were City Manager Edward J' & Water · Mark Koegler, Hoff, Fran clark, City Attorneys curt pea Sewer street superintendent GenO ested citizenS: Engineer John Cameron, City Planner superintendent Greg Skinner, Thomas Bergquist' Consultant Derick Dahlen, and the following inter Barbara Baukner, steve coddOn, Peggy Bryant, o,Brian and the Douglas Eaton, Jim Bedell, Sally Armitage, Nancy presentatives: Claude DeSantO, Milton Seeman, following Contel re Haugen, cheryl Grand- in Martin Weinstein, Gary Mayor polston opened the meeting and welcomed the people attendance' there will ~ 12 has been withdrawn, and The Mayor stated that item be several items added at the end of the Agenda- ~ were ~presented for considerati°n' The Minutes on page 120 of the MinuteS, 2nd ' · Attorney pointed ~ted that ~. ,,The C~tY ._~ ~ch leSS -. ~.v Attorney .st_z] should rea~.,~_ 7hiS sect~O~ /"~-~ should The ~fi~ the sente~t would ma~_~,, The rest o~ ~ut tha~ ~~ the curre~ - restrictive u~" --~+~ to apprO~e_u~ ~e deleteO. _,oonded b~ ~inutep ~' vote was amende~ - B~a · there was anyone PU sked_~f.~in~ a delxnq~ ._~ ~.he publlC nu~i~Council reg~t]~d the pu~*~ The May°r.°P~%~eitO addr~%%~ The ~ayor present Wnfl~s'~o one respu~,~- . . The City Manager reported that $1,235'39' 127 The VOte was Unanimous/ly in favor. NOtion carried. · - GO VC The Clty Planner explained S 0 Was installed in August 26, 1986 Peterson moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #86_96 RESOLUTION TO AppRovE THE DELINQUENT UTILITy BILLS IN THE AHOUNT OF $1,235..~9 AND AUTHORIZING TH ~ERV~Cv . .... E STAFF ~ rv~ 'I'HO~E ACCOgET~TM ~HgTOFF ~ATER that'since a new Storm Sewer system Three Points BZvd. the easements on these iots are no longer needed, but that the Engineer is recommending that the OWner dedicate 5 foot drainage easements alOng the proposed new lot lines of the two parcels being Created from Lots 5, 6, and y. He further reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacation. Paulsen moved and Jessen seconded the foZlow~ng resolution: . RE~OLUT~oN ~86_97 RESOLUTioN VACATING C~RTA~N UTiLiTy AND ' DRAINAGE EASE~fENTs OVER, UNDER AND THROUGH LOTS 5 AND 6 BLOCK ~ REPLAT OF HARR~SO~ S~ORE~ ' The vote was UnanimouSly ~n favor. _ MOtion carried. Planner explained that Mr. COddon has acquired additional property (now has a totaz of 3 lots) and wou~d like to Subdivide the 3 lots ~nto 2, but because of the shaZlowlness of the Zots needs front Yard setback variances. The Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval. Paulsen moved and Paterson Seconded the follow2ng resolution: RESOLUTioN ~86_98 RESOLUT~oIt TO CONCUR W~TH THE PLAN~ING COHHI~ION TO APPROVE FRO~T ~ARD ~ETRACK VARIANCEs FOR LOT~ 5, REPLAT OF HARRISON 22 0050/00~1/00~2 (~3XX T~R~E POINTS BLVD.) p & Z CAS~ ~86_~31 The Vote ~a~ U~ani~ou~ly in ~avo~. 128 ugust 26, a9%6 , e following resolutiOn: _ ^ seconded th .,~ THE pLAI-"HI-N~t __~ and Fet=rson _.. ~n coNCUR 532 -~rriea' - -or. ~otiOn u~ ~ - ~ the packet his 1..ether ~n page 1675 in d ~n~_~ counuy ~", ~aulsen seconded the pollo peterson moved aha r --~,, ~O AppROVE ~oq-117-2 --nCK RESOLUTION ~ S~-I --o,n0%9Yuu _ ~ pLO~ ' ' ~ ~D P~-~ ~- ~ND 500 the above ~tem be added CounC'~Imember pau~sen asked that The counC~ a~reed- · the proposed reSOlUte°ri' #11 ~n .~a ~essen and smithv°t~n~ na~. MotiOn The vote ~as 3 ~n favor ~" carried' -~- . September 50, ~.h to set _~der t~e ._ ~v j~ssen~ _ ~ uublX~_~ ~ eslOe ~.. ~n favu-- F~Ul~ ~ q:50 r. - ~ocateu ~ -,as subd~V~. 00~5/00%6' . carried' U N · -~ce is -,,est for a ~ . ~. the requ_~ to all°W~mmisSi( _ lainea ~'%~ be exP~J[~-Planning ~ planner e~P~uildin~ ~-~ and tn= - allOW ~-~ond flou- .. AUgust 26, 1986 recommended approval Upon th survey be Submitted e condition that a registered land the south Showing the existing Structure ?£ feet from line. Property line and 20 feet minimum to the east Property Paulsen moved and Smith Seconded the following resolution: RESOLUT~o~ ~86_101 RESOLUT~o~ TO CONcuR ~I~TH COMN~SS~O~ TO RECOGI~z THE PL~IIN~N NONCONFoRH~t~G 12 -- 1, gOODL~IID CK ~ LOTS 1 X]ST~G u107 (1 ee .... : POZ~z n~ _ 1 ~ND 12 The VOge ~as Unanimously in favor. recomme.~ _ Der · ~O ~ ~ Va ' ~1~ . CommiSSion,_ to 26 x 26 ~Sent an ~lance fo g Comm~sslo ' "~ recom~ .... ~ouc. ~_ ~d asked ~.~ ~_a 2~ x 2~ _ n .... dessert ~OVed and Peterso~' Seconded the RESOLUTiO~ d86-102 ~ESOLUT~OH TO CONcuR · u, BLo '~K V~ -0 ~pp 1 1 CE 2, ~V~ T~e VO~e Was unanimously in favor. NO~on c · T&e City P~an ~' CommiSSion ~ esp~lne -cuerson moved and Smi~ ~-uvax. q e~ ~nd that the P~ann~n RESOLUT~o~ ~86_10~ "Seconded the fO~owing r ~ g ~ R~SOLUT~o.. _ eso~ut~on: The VO~e ~a unan~m°us~y ~n favor, · z 130 August 26, s _ . ~, 2. BLOCK 1~ AVALON, J~ID ~1q-117- ? ' C AI':D FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANC~ The City Planner explained the request and what the Planning Commission recommended for approval. Jack Cook was present and requested that the Council allow him to build a 20 x 24 foot garage. The Council followed the Planning Commission recommendation. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~86-104 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 3 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK AND 12.5 FOOT STREET FRONT SETBACK FOR LOT 2, BLOCK 1, AVALON, PID #19-117-23 24 0002, (4452 DENBIGH RD.), P & Z CASE .~$6-538 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ......... · ~nu STV_NDRR. C S ! C C ' - !0 { - - - C Z G U'''''~Tv';'n ~_nT ~. ~TRUCTURE: SIDE YARD SETBACK The City Planner explained the request and the Planning Commission's recommendation- Smith moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #86-105 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOGNIZE AN EXISTING UNDERSIZED PARCEL FOR LOT 6, BLOCK 19, SHADY¥~'OOD POINT, PID #13-117-24 12 0092, (5032 CRESTVIEW RD.) p & Z CASE #86-539 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The Mayor asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. Doug Eaton & Jim Bedell spoke against the Exterior Storage Ordinance Amendment that was adopted at the last Council Meeting because of the restrictions in it and the cost involved in obtaining a Special Use Permit. The Council explained that the amendment made the ordinance less restrictive than it had been, allowing storage in the side yard and front yard if the setbacks are met. I o/ 131 .. August 26, 1986 The Council asked the City Manager to put this item back on the Agenda for the next meeting to allow more public input. Mr. Eaton complained again about a derelict car being towed from his property several weeks ago. r · C G The City Engineer explained that this has been approve the Mound HRA and now needs Council approval. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #86-106 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #4 FOR LYNWOOD BLVD. & COMMERCE PLACE IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,100.00 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The City Engineer explained that this project is finished and recommended final payment. MOTION made by Paul.sen, seconded by Jessen to approve the final payment request of B & D Underground for the Beachwood Pond Project in the amount of $1,107.29. The vote was uanimously in favOr. Motion carried. EXTENSION OF RECYCLING CONTRAC~ The City Manager explained that this contract with Beermann Services expires on September 5, 1986. The recommendation is to extend the contract to December 31, 1986, adding an additional $100.00 per month to the cost for the curbside pickup. Smith moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #86-107 RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE RECYLCING CONTRACT WITH BEERMANN SERVICES UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 1986, FOR AN ADDITIONAL $100.00 PER MONTH FOR CURBSIDE PICKUP The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PJ3BLIC WORKS FFlCILIT¥ The City Manager explained the background. Brad Lemberg, Bonestroo Associates, explained what had been deleted to reduce the cost of the building. With the reductions the cost is now $1.5 million. / fo2.. 132 August 26, 1986 The Council discussed the reductions, site selection, costs,etc. Polston moved and Peterson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~86-108 RESOLUTION DETERMINII~G THE NEED TO CONSTRUCT A NEW PUBLIC ~!ORK$ FACILITY AND TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO PAY FOR THE SAME AND CALLING AN ELECTION amount not to exceed $1,500,000. Date of election November 4, 1986. The question shall be: ,'Shall the City of Mound issue General Obligation Bonds in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 for the purpose of providing money for the construction and equipping of a new public works facility?" Councilmember Smith moved the following amendment: that the amount not exceed $950,000. Motion died for lack of~a second. The vote was 3 in favor with Paulsen and Smith voting nay. Motion carried. The Council instructed the City Manager to prepare a check list of items that need to be put into a fact sheet handout for the public. _ U ~OTION made by Paulsen, seconded by Jessen to authorize up to $400.00 be spent from the Cable T.V. Franchise Fee in order to have Cable Consultant, Tom Creighton, come out and address specific questions that the Committee has with regard to the Franchise Ordinance and other aspects of cable T.V. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. S 4 U C S V S C MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Peterson to authorize the issuance of a Public Dance Permit (fee waived), a Set-Up Permit (fee waived) and a Charitable Beer Permit to the Mound Police Reserves for September 12 and 13, 1986. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. .TAXICAB LICENSE MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Paulsen to approve 4 taxicab licenses to Bill Alexander for GRA~CABS at 5571 Shoreline Blvd., contingent upon all licensing requirments in Chapter 38, Part D of the City Code relating to taxicabs, being met before licenses are issued. The vote was unanimously in favor, l.:otion carried. 133 August 26, 1986 DISCUSSION: SPORTS COMPLEX - LIONS ~ Mayor Polston stated that the Lions Club has contacted him and told him that they are considering purchasing some property in Mound which they would like to give to the City for a sports complex, consisting of baseball and softball fields, etc. MOTION made by Peterson, seconded by Paulsen asking that the Mayor and the City Manager follow-up on this project and if anything materializes it would come back to the Council for review. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PAYMENT OF BILL~ The bills were presented for consideration. MOTION made by Paulsen, seconded by Peterson to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list, in the amount of $161,916.46, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIAl. ASSESSMENTS MOTION made by Polston, seconded by Paulsen to set September 30, 1986, at ?:30 P.M. for the following public hearings: CBD Parking Maintenance, Unpaid Clean-Up Charges, Unpaid Weed and Grass Cutting Charges, BoardingLUfnOf Hazardous Structure Charges, Unpaid Capping of Sewer e Charges, Delinquent Sewer & Water Charges, Unpaid Tree Removal Charges, and Extension of Sewer & Water Lines. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. LYNWOOD BLVD. & TUXEDO BLVD. PROJECT EXTENSION OF TIME TO MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Paulsen to approve the request for an extension of time to complete the Lynwood Blvd. & Tuxedo Blvd. Project from the original date of September 1, 1986 to October 1, 1986. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED EASEMENT VACATION - LO~ 27 BLOCK 1~ DEVON HOTION made by Paulsen, seconded by Jessen to set September 30, 1986, at 7:30 P.M. for a public hearing on a proposed easement vacation for Lot 2, Block 15, Devon, PID ~25-117-24 11 0047. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MI.SCELLANEOU~ Ae July 1986 Financial Report as prepared by John Norman, Finance Director. 134 August 2_6, 1966 B. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting - August 11, 1986. C. Minutes of the Cable T.V. Advisory Committee Meeting - July 24, 1986. D. Ind. School Dist. #277 Minutes - August 11, 1986. E. Press Release re: Rex's participation in U.S.P.C.A. Regional Field Trials and upcoming National Field Trials in Baton Rouge, LA. F. Regional Transit Board Meeting - September 10, 1986, 7:00 P.M., at the Minnetonka City Hall, 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. G. Notice from the Department of Natural Resources regarding the Minnesota State Statutes and local restrictions on boat use on public waters within Minnesota. ~XECUTIVE SESSION: CONTEL The Council went into Executive Session at 10:10 P.M. to discuss the Continental Telephone issue. They returned at 11:10 P.M. The City Attorney explained that the City's Consultant, Derick Dahlen had given Contel 21 questions to answer after the meeting last November. So far only 3 questions have been answered and without the answers to the remaining questions, Mr. Dahlen cannot give the Council a recommendation. The Council discussed the problem with Contel and they assured the Council that they would cooperate with Mr. Dahlen and have Mr. Kroitz answer the remaining questions. Mr. Dahlen stated that if these questions are answered he would be able to give the Council a recommendation as to whether it would be financially feasible to acquire the phone company. MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Paulsen setting September 10, 1986, for a public hearing to solicit input from the citizens on putting 2 questions on the November ballot. One, asking if the City should be authorized to acquire or condemn the present telephone system within the City limits of the City of Mound, and two, asking if the City of Mound should be authorized to construct and operate a telephone system within the City of Mound? Be it further moved that the City Council is directing Mr. Dahlen to meet with Contel representatives and acquire the answers to the additional questions in order for him to complete his analysis and provide the Council with his recommendation at that meeting. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 135 August 26, 1986 MOTION made by Paulsen, seconded by Jessen to adjourn at 11:50 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager Fran C. Clark, CMC, City Clerk BILLS ........ AUGUST 26, 1986 Computer Run dated Computer Run dated 8/21/86 8/21/86 Batch 864081 Batch 864082 132,816.85 26,667.59 159,484.44 B & D Underground Lyman Lumber Century Mfg Androc Co. Final Beachwood Bldg Supplies-Cemetery Timer Switch Weed-One 1986 State Fire Chiefs Conference--2 Registr. SuperAmerica July gasoline Henn Co. Register of Deeds Filing Fee 1,107.29 137.84 13.23 106.00 190.00 957.66 10.00 2,432.02 TOTAL BI LLS 161,916.46 OLD ORDINANCE CITY OF HOUND (92) Recreation Equipment - Play apparatus such as swing sets.and slldes, sandboxes, poles for nets, unoccupied boats and trailers not exceeding twenty feet in length, picnic tables, lawn chairs, barbecue stands, and slmilar equipment or structures but not including tree houses, sw~mmlng pools, play houses exceeding twenty-five square feet of floor area, or sheds utilized for storage of equipment. 23.7o2 Exterior Storage In residential districts, all materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following: laundry drying and're.creatlonal equipment, construction an~:landscaping materials and equipment cgrren1~ly (within a period of thlrl~y-six (36) hours) being used on.'the, pre~ises, off-street parking of licensed and operative passenger automobil:es and pick-up trucks. Boats and unoccupied trailers are permissible if stored in l:he rear yard more than ten (lO) feel: from the property llne. Existing uses shall comply with this provision within twel.ve (12) months following enactmeht of this Ordinance. In all districts, the City may require a Conditional ,Use Permit for any exterior storage if it is demonstrated that such storage is a hazard to the public health, safety, convenience, morals, or has'a depreciating effect upon nearby property values, or impairs scenic views, or con- stitutes threat to living amenities. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY CODE, SECTION 23.301 (92) DEFINITION OF RECREATION EQUIPMENT AND SECTION 23.702 RELATING TO EXTERIOR STORAGE THE CITY OF MOUND DOES ORDAIN: Section 23.301 (92), relating to the definition of ,,Recreation Equipment" is amended to read as follows: (92) Recreation EquiPment - Play apparatus such as swing' sets and slides, sandboxes, poles for nets, picnic tables, lawn chairs, barbecue stands, and similar equipment or structures but not including tree houses, swimming pools, play houses exceeding twenty-five square feet of floor area, or sheds utilized for storage of equipment. Recreation equipment shall also include recreation vehic'les not exceeding thirty (30) feet in length including but not limited to boats, boat trailers, travel trailers and self-contained motor homes. Section 23.702, Exterior Storage, is amended to read as follows: 23.702 Exterior Storag~ In residential districts, all materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following: laundry drying and recreational equipment, see definition (921, construction and landscaping materials and equipment currently (within a period of thirty-six (36) hours) being used on the premises, off-street parking of licensed and operative passenger automobiles and pick-up trucks. Storage of recreational vehicles including but not limited to boats, boat trailers, travel trailers and self-contained motor homes is permissable subject to the following conditions: 1. Such equipment shall be stored on private property in yard areas excluding the front yard setback area. 2. Stored equipment shall be registered to, leased to or rented to the owner or renter of the property. 3. Stored equipment shall be limited to no more than four (4) recreational vehicles. ATTEST: Stored equipment shall not exceed thirty (30) feet in length. Existing uses shall comply with this provision within twelve (12) months following enactment of this Ordinance. In all districts, the City may require a Conditional Use Permit for any exterior storage if it is demonstrated that such storage is a hazard to the publio health, safety, convenience, morals, or has a depreciating effect upon nearby propert.y values, or impairs scenic views, or constitutes threat to living amenitie, s. Mayor City Clerk Adopted by the City Council August 12, 1986 Published in The Laker, September 2, 1986 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553-1950 TO: City Council and StafF. FROM: Mark Koegler, City Planne~ DATE: September 9, 1986 SUBJECT: Recreational Vehicle Storage In order to determine how other co~munities regulate recreational vehicle storage, I contacted the cities of Shorewood, Tonka Bay, Orono, Wayzata, Minnetrista, Chanhassen and White Bear Lake. Copies of the ordinances for O~oao and Chanhassen are enclosed. The following is a summary of the findings: Tonka Bay - Tonka Bay requires that all recreational vehicles be currently licensed. Properly licensed vehicles can be stored anywhere on the property, ~nh~ f~ot setback is observed from all public right-Or-.way. All provided an .... ~r~ .................. ~ .... -, ....... ....... · . noalicensed vehicles are removed under the czty s abandoned vehzcle ordinance. Tonka Bay indicated that they receive numerous complaints about boat storage. Shorewood - Shorewood recently approved an ofdinance requiring that recreational vehicles be stored within the buildable a_r~a_~_f_~a_~o~_ with two exceptions: 1. Storage is allowed within five ~.eet o~ th,~. p¢operty line in side and rear yards. 2. One piece of recreational equip:neat is allowed to be stored in the ---~ driveway of a residential lot providing that a 15 foot setback is observed from the pave~ portion of the public street. White Bear Lake - White Bear Lake re,quires that all recreational equipment be stored in side or rear yards. Wayzata - Wayzata cont,.Dis recreational vehicles through its off-$t~eet. ~ ~oarking requirements. Boats, travel trailers, motor h~nes .~.r] ~[sh nous.'{ can not b~. ~toce] ;~:}re than 72 hours on a piece of prop=~rty ual:;',~-~ ?laced within a side or teac yard. 'Chanhassen - Chanhassea is co~idering an ordinance fe~diring storage in rear or side yards, behind the fro~t yard setback line. The ordinance limits the number o~. vehicles to two for lots less tha,-] o~%e acre in size. Orono - Orono allows storable of c,~.cceational equipne,lt less than 20 feet in 1-~gth in rear yards providing that a 10 foot setback is observed fra~ all property lines. Rec~aational equipment la~'~:a~ tl~n 20 feet in length must be stored within a building or fully screened. Minnetrista - Minnetrista imposes two s~ts of standards, one loc "rural" lots and the other for "urban" lots. Within the urban area which includes 75% of Minnetrista's housing units, boats, ~,m~lers an~ snowmobiles can be stored in front yards providing that they are surrounded by five to six foot hig'h screening. Recreational vehicles can also be stored in rear yards without screening. In the rural area, equipment cae be stored subject to front, side a,~ rear setback provisions. Orono S 10.60 odorous or solid matter of such quality and quantity as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Subd. 7. Vibration. Any use creating periodic earth- shaking vibrations, such .as may be created from a drop forge shall be prohibited if such vibrations are perceptible beyond the lot line of the site on which the use is located. The standard shall not apply to vibrations created during the process of construction. Subd. 8. Glare or Heat. Any use requiring an operation producing an intense heat or light transmission shall be performed with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from being detectable at the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall be diffused or directed away from "R" Districts and public streets. Subd. 9. Explosives.~ Any use requiring the storage, utilization or manufacturing of products which could decompose by detonation shall be located not less than 400 feet from any "R" District line. Subd. 10. Screening Required. required in residential zones where: Screening shall be A. Any off-street parking area which contains more than four parking spaces and is within 30 feet of an adjoining residential lot line, and, B. Where the driveway to a parking area of more than six parking spaces is within 15 feet of an adjoining residential lot line. Subd. 11. Screening, Type of. The screening required herein shall consist of a solid fence or wall at least 50% open, not less than four feet nor more than five feet in height but shall not extend within 15 feet of any street or driveway opening onto a street. The screening shall be placed along the property lines or in case of screening along a street, 15 feet from the street right- of-way with landscaping (trees, shrubs, grass and other planting) between the screening and the pavement. A louvered fence shall be considered solid if it blocks direct vision. Planting of a type approved by the Planning Commission may also be required in addition to, or in lieu of, fencing. Subd. 12. Maintenance. In all districts, all structures, required landscaping and fences shall be maintained so as not to be unsightly or present harmful health or safety conditions. Subd. 13. Exterior Storage in "R" Districts. In all "R" Districts, all mobile materials and equipment shall be stored ORONO CC 378 (4-1-84) / 10.60 within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except boats and unoccupied trailers less than 20 feet in length, which are not stored for commercial purposes, if stored to the rear of the house and a distance of 10 feet or more from any property line. Source: Ordinance no. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 14. Waste Materials. Waste material shall not be washed into the public storm sewer system nor the sanitary sewer system without first having received a permit to do so from the City. If said permit is not granted, a method of disposal shall be devised which will not require continuous land requisition for permanent operation and will not cause a detrimental effect to the adjacent land. Should the waste be of solid form rather than fluid, the storage area shall be so located and fenced as to be removed from public view. In all districts, all waste material, debris, refuse, garbage, materials not currently in use for construction or otherwise regulated herein shall be kept in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container for such purposes. The owner of vacant land shall be responsible for keeping such vacant land free of waste material and noxious weeds. Subd. 15. Drainage. No land shall be developed and nc use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing flooding, or erosion on adjacent properties. Such runoff shall be properly channeled into a storm drain, water course, ponding area or other suitable facility. Subd. 16. Traffic Control. The traffic generated by any use shall be channelized and controlled in a manner that will avoid congestion on public streets, safety hazards, or excessive traffic ~through residential streets. Vehicles backing from a parking space shall not back into the public street. No access drive to any lot shall be located within 20 feet of any two intersecting street right-of-way lines. Subd. 17. Radiation, Etc. No activities shall be permitted that emit dangerous radio activity beyond enclosed areas. There shall be no electrical disturbance adversely affecting the operation of any point of any equipment including but not limited to radio and television reception other than that of the creator of the disturbance. SEC. 10.61. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. Subd. 1. Signs as Accessory Use. Signs are a permitted accessory use in all districts subject to the following regulations: ORONO CC 379 (4-1-84) Chanhassen (proposed) 6-14-6 Swings, slides and other play equipment. 6-14-5 Outdoor furniture. 6-14-6 Wood for burning in a fireplace, stove or furnace provided it is stored as follows: A. In a neat and secure stack. B. It is not within five feet of a property line. C. The wood stack is not infected or inhabited with rodents. D. The wood is not kept in a front yard. SECTION 15. STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES: Recreational vehicles may be parked or stored in a residential or agricultural district provided the following conditions are met: 6-15-1 No more than two (2) recreational vehicles may be parked or stored outside on a residential lot less than one acre in size. No more than four (4) recrea- tional vehicles may be parked or stored outside on a residential lot one acre or larger in size providing that at least two (2) of these recreational vehicles are completely screened from view from public streets or adjacent property. Additional recreational vehicles may be kept within an enclosed structure which otherwise conforms to the zoning requirements of the district. 6-15-2 Recreational vehicles must be maintained in a clean, well-kept, operable condition. - 6-15-3 Recreational vehicles shall be mobile and shall not be permanently affixed in the ground in a manner that would prevent removal. 6-15-4 Recreational vehicles may be parked or stored only on the rear or side yard behind the required front yard setback. The parking or storage of recreational vehicles on the rear or side yard, as permitted herein, may be on surfaced or unsurfaced areas. 6-15-5 Recreational vehicles may be stored on a lot without regard to the location on the lot for the sole and express purpose of loading and unloading for a period not to exceed twenty-four (24) hours. 6-15-6 Unmounted side-in pickup campers must be stored no higher than twenty inches (20") above the ground and must be securely supported at least at four (4) corners by solid support blocks or support mechanisms. 6-15-7 Recreational vehicles may not be occupied or used for living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes while parked or stored. 6-15-8 Except for routine maintenance or during emergency conditions when power supply is disrupted, the operation of a recreational vehicle power generator plant shall not be permitted in residential districts. Routine maintenance periods shall not exceed sixty (60) minutes per month. _7,- / Ms. Oan Bertrand Planning and Zoning 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS E: LAND SURVEYORS L PLANNERS September 10, 1986 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 SUBSECT: Final Plat Approval Cobblestone Cove (Cooks Bay Estates) MKA File #7887 Dear Oan: As requested, we have reviewed the final plans submitted for the above final plat approval and have the following comments and recommendations. Final Plat We have reviewed the final plat and find it aqceptable, subject to approval by Hennepin County. Grading and Drainage Plan The plan submitted for our review did not indicate the proposed grading to be done on the site, except for the road construction. We have requested a more complete plan be submitted for our approval prior to the City releasing the signed plat. We are also very concerned about the steep slope which exists at the lake side of these lots. If any grading is done to disturb the natural vegetation and tree cover, it is liable to cause serious erosion problems. The developer indicated at the previous public hearings that this slope would be maintained in its natural state. We would like to suggest that the City could require some type of permanent easement such as a conservation easement which would restrict the activity in this area. Attached are two samples of such easements that have been used in Eden Prairie. One activity which probably should not be prohibited but could be regulated, is the construction of stairs to serve potential dock sites. The area which we would suggest be covered by this easement is from approximately the 980 contour to the shoreline. Utilities and Streets We have reviewed the utility plan with Greg Skinner of Public Works and have made a few suggestions to the developers Engineer. They are in the process of revising the plan and will submit new drawings and specifications for our final approval. We would suggest that all six proposed lots, including Lots 1 and 6 be required to take access from the new street and not Highland Boulevard. Ms. Jan Bertrand Septemoer 10, 1986 Page Two Miscellaneous The developer will need to sign a development contract with the City and furnish a performance bond in the amount of ~31,000.00 to cover grading, drainage, utility and street construction. W~ Would~6 suggest that a bond of $~lg_~O00___be required for the demolition of the existing buildings. T~is would bring the total bond required to $50,000.00. It appears there are no deficient utility charges except for the sewer and water availability charge of $250.00 per lot, which is collected at the time connection permits are granted. In the past, it has been Mound's practice to collect additional unit charges for the previous street projects when additional building sites are created by subdividing land. This property was assessed only one unit charge, but the full frontage and total area for a total assessment of $14,811.55 when Highland Boulevard was improved in 1980. If past policy is followed, this roperty would be deficient 5 units ~ $1,828.15 per unit for a total of 9,140.75. This may be two large of an amount to expect as a deficiency, but maybe a compromise could be made such as charging 2 additional units. We suggest this because the developer is constructing an additional street to serve the proposed lots. Permits as required should be obtained from all agencies such as Minnehaha Creek Watershed Oistrict', MPCA, MWCC, Minnesota Health Department, etc. As previously suggested by the City Planner, the developer should submit a phasing plan identifying anticipated unit construction and removal of the existing day care facility and garage. As previously suggested, the performance bond in the development contract should incluOe an amount for this removal. It has been brought to our attention that there may be some encroachments on this property which are not shown on the drawings. There evidently are some underground fuel oil tanks adjacent to the shoreline that were used at one time for fueling float planes. If they are within the boundary of this property, they should be removed in conjunction with the building demolition. In conclusion, we would recommend approval of the final plat subject to the following conditions: 1) Approval of all final grading, utility and street plans by the City Engineer. Furnishing the City some type of conservation easement, subject to the City Attorney's approval. Hs. Jan Bertrand September 10, 1986 Page Three me. 4) 3C:cah Driveway access to all lots shall be from the new street and not Highland Boulevard. Developer sign a development contract and furnish a performance bond in the amount of $50,000.00. Approval submitted from all agencies requiring review, such as NCWD, HPCA, HWCC, Hinnesota Health Department, etc. Deficient street assessment of two units at $1,828.15 per unit for a total of $3,656.30 be paid. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Very truly yours, HcCOHBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Oohn Cameron RESOLUTION NO. 86- PAGE TWO Submit additional escrow funds of $~,500.00 to defray city costs for Engineering, Legal, and Planning fees and any additional amounts that may be charged against said account under City Ordinance Section 22.40. 7. City Attorney's title opinion approval. lC. Park dedication in the amount of the fee which is applicable at the time of building permit issuance, Out in no case less than $300.00 per dwelling unit. Two deficient street improvement unit charges in the amount of $1,828.15 each for a total of $3,656.30 are to be paid. Driveway access to all lots shall Oe from the newly constructed street and not Highland Boulevard. ll. 12. 13. Home Owner Association, By-laws, Articles of Incorporation and Covenants shall be reviewed by tn, City Attorney. Such articles shall specifically contain a provision for maintenance of the area shown as Outlot A on the final plat. Any Proposed docks s~all be reviewed and approved by the LMCD. Furnish to the City an executed document granting a conservation easement over that part of the proposed plat lying easterly of a line determined b~ the 980 contour.-,'?~~L,~6~~~'~. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the above named owner and subdivider after completion of the requirements for their use as required by M.S.A. 462.358. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereOy authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing resolution. This final plat shall be filed and recorded within 60 days of the date of the signing of the hardshells by the Mayor and City Manager in accordance with Section 22.00 of the City Code and shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this Resolution with one copy being filed with the City of Mound. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith Oy the subdivider and City Officials and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality, all in compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the Ordinances of the City. PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 86-509&510 RESOLUTION NO. 86- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT OF COBBLESTONE COVE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS COOKS 8AY ESTATES) PID # 23-117-24 41 0017, PART OF 8LOCK 1, "MINNESOTA BAPTIST SUMMER ASSEMBLY" WHEREAS, the final plat of CoOblestone Cove has been submitted in the manner required for platting of land unOer the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 22.00 and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota State Statute and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on May 13, 1986, held a puOlic hearing pursuant to Section 22.00, Chapter 22, of the Mound City Code of Ordinances, to consider the approval of the preliminary pl~t for CobOlestone Cove (formerly known as Cooks Bay Estates) subdivision located on property described as follows: That part of Block 1 lying North of a line 22.00 feet North and parallel with the North lzne of Block 2, and extending from the West line of Block i to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, "Minnesota Baptist Summer Assembly" also known as RID #23-117-24 41 0017. WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota an~ the Ordinances of the City of Mound. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: Plat approval is granted for CoOblestone Cove as requested by Creative Developers, Inc. upon compliance with the following requirements: 1. As per final plat, Exhibit "A". Completion of the requirements and conditions listed in Resolution 86-71. The Developer is to sign a Development Contract and furnish to the City a performance bond in the amount of $50,000.00 to cover demolition of existing structures, grading, drainage, utility and street construction as per plans approved by the City Engineer. Approval is to be submitted from all agencies requiring review, such as MCWD, MPCA, MWCC, Minnesota Health Department, etc. Approval of all final grading, utility and street plans by the City Engineer. PROPOSED RESOLUTION",E;~]i~, CASE NO. 86-509&510j~.ct R~SOLUTION NO. 86- ..... .~,:-~'.,'~ ~:~:~ ~' ~.-,~, ..~..~:-.;.,:, .~ L~' .' :.::S.._~ :' :" " (FORM ..K W. ~..:, ..................... y,, P~[ OF BLOCK 1,'..".Mi~T~.B~TIST S~ ~S~L W~, the ~ftn~ plat o¢ ~D~lestone ~ve has been submitted ~n the manne~ ~equ~ed fo~ platting of 'l~d.u~6~, t~' C~ty of M~nd O~dt~nce '~de, Section 22,00 and unde~ ~apte~ ~6~-6¢ the Minnesota.state Statute and p~oceedings have been duly conducted"the~eunde~; a~ '"~'~ - W~,' the City ~il, .on,May 1~, 1~86, held a pursuant to Section ~.~, ~te~ '~, .of the Mound Ci~y'~de of O~dinances, to conside~ the approval o~..the, p~eltmi~.Pl~t fo~ ~bolestone ~ve (fo~m~ly Known as ~oZs Bay Estates) subdivision;located on p~pe~ty'desc~ibed as follows: ~at pa~t of B~k Z ~y~ No~h of a Z~ne. ~.~ feet ~t ~ pa~a~e~ w~th the No~h ~ne of B~ock 2~ 'a~ extending f~om the West ~ne of B~ock Z to the"~ho~e 0f Lake H~nne~onkal .H~nnesota Baptist Su~e~ Assembly" a~so knO~ as P]D ~2~-~7-2~ ~ 00~7. W~, said Plat is in all ~e~peCts consistent with the city Plan and the ~egulations and ~equi~e~nts of the laws of_the. State of Minnesota and the O~dinances of the City of HoUndt .. ;.: NOW, T~EFORE, BE IT R~LV~ by the City ~uncil of the City of Mound, Minnesota: ' ': - '. .' ' ~~app~ova~ is g~anted fo~ ~oblestone ~ve as ~equested by~;ati~ A. ~upon compliance with the ~ollowing ~equi~emen~ 1. As pe~ ~inal plat, Exhibit "A". . - 2. Compietion of the ~equi~ements and Conditions listeO in Resolution 86-71. The Develope~ is to sign a Development Contract and furnish to the City a performance bond in the amount of $50,000.00 to cove~ demolition of ex~sting st~uc~es, g~ading, d~ainage, utility and street const~ction as pe~ pians approved by the City Engineer. 4. Approval is to be submitted f~om ail agencies ~equi~ing ~eview, suc~ as M~D, MPCA, MWCC, Hinn~sota Healt~ Department, etc. 5. Approval of ail final g~ading, utility and st;eet plans by the City Engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 86- .PAGE TWO 0 Suomit additional escro~Tfunds of '~to defray city costs for Engineering, Leg~l;'" 'and Plannif~and any additional amounts that may be charged against said account under City Ordinance Section 22.40. City Attorney's title opinion approval. Park dedication in the amount of the fee which is applicable at the time of building pezmit issuance, ~Jt in no case less than $300.00 per dwelling unit. B® Ce De 9. Two deficient street improv~entunitc~rges~ in the amount of 10. DriVeway access to all lots s/~fzom the newly constructed ~street and not Highland Boulevard. , .. 11' f~H°me Owner Ass°clarion, By-laws, Articles of Incorporation and / 'Covenants shall be reviewed by the City Attorney. Such articles b shall specifically contain a provision for matntenanceOf the l,drea shown as Outlot A on the final plat. 12. ~ Any Proposed docks s~al! be reviewed and approved by the LMCD. 13. Furnish to the Cit¥'an executed document 9ranting a conservatio~'~.~ ~?em~n~ over that pazt of the propRsed pla~ l~ing ,~a~te~v[ _,/ i_~oe oet~rmlne~ b~the ~0 contour~ ~ ~~~~$~' _ ~y ~$~ y ecteo to suppzy' a ce~tif~d ~opy of this ~esolutton to the above named owner and subdivider after / completion of the requirements fo: their use as required by M.S.A~~ . . '. Tha~ ~he Hayo~ and C~y Nanage~ a~e he~eby au~ho~zed~ uponeXecU~ecomp~a~~~~he~ ce~ca~e o~ app~ova~ on beha~ o~ ~he C~y Counc~~0 with the foregoing ~esolutton. ~ .~' This final plat shall be filed and ~eco~ded withi~ ~days of the dat~~,7 of the signing of the ha~dshells by the Mayor an~ ~ Manage~ in accordance with Section ~.00 of the City CoOe a~ll be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this Res~ ' n with one copy~ being filed with the City of Mound. ~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such execution of th~ ;e~ificate _z~~c~' said plat by the Mayor and City Manager shall be conclus~ ~bwing of p~ope~ ~ ~ compliance therewith Dy the subdivider and City Officials ~hall entitle~ ~ such plat to De placed on record forthwith without ~urthe~o~ality, all i~~, k, compliance with M.S.A. 462 and the Ordinances of th~:i~y~ ~ ~ ~ SCENIC EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE made this lqth day of August , 1985, by and between Cheyenne Land Company, a partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor," and the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City." WHEREAS, Grantor is the fee owner of the real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as: Outlots B, C and D, TANAGER CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof. WHEREAS, Grantor has platted said property into a subdivision entitled TANAGER CREEK 2ND ADDITION; and WHEREAS, Grantor and City wish to enter into an agreement which will grant to City a scenic easement for conservation and preservation of the terrain and vegetation, and to prohibit certain acts destructive thereof, over a portion of the plat legally described as: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 3; thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 34 minutes 45 seconds East, along the north line of said Lot 3 a distance of 338.79 feet to the point of beginning;thence South 30 degrees 13 minutes 25 seconds East 170.44~; thence South 01 degrees 32 minutes 09 seconds ~5"f__~t~ 400.05 feet to the intersection with the southerly line of said Lot 3; thence easterly 333.13 feet along a nontangential curve, concave to the south, having a radius of 454.05 feet and a central angle of 42 degrees 02 minutes 14 seconds; thence North 56 degrees 31 minutes 59 seconds East 335.69 feet; thence North 00 degrees 04 minutes 45 seconds East 181.27 feet; thence North 23 degrees 25 minutes 15 seconds West 109.89 feet; thence North 00 degrees 25 minutes 15 seconds West 101.58 feet to the north line of said Lot 3; thence westerly 636.22 feet along said north line to the point of beginning, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises contained herein, it is agreed by the parties as follows: 1. Grantor hereby grants, bargains, sells and conveys to City and its successors and assigns an easement in, under on and over the easement area, hereinafter referred to as the "Scenic Easement," and City hereby accepts the Scenic Easement. 2. The Scenic Easement is granted and accepted subject to the following terms and conditions: The easement area shall be preserved predominantly in its natural condition. No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be planted upon the easement area, and no trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be removed from the easement area without the prior written consent of City. No ~building, road, sign, billboard, utility or other man-made structure shall be placed in the easement area without the prior written consent of City. Ce Grantor assumes the obligation of maintaining the easement area, subject to the provisions hereof. No trash, waste or other offensive material, soil or landfill shall be placed upon or within the easement area without the prior written consent of the City. No'change in the general topography of the easement area landscape, including but not limited to excavation, dredging, movement or removal of soil, shall be made without the prior written consent of the City. The duration of the Scenic Easement is perpetual. 3. This agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties, their successors and assigns. 4. Nothing contained herein shall impair any right of City now held or hereafter acquired to construct or maintain public utilities in or on the easement area. CHEYENNE LAND COMPANY By Its CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Its By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /~r_~ day of ~,.. ~.~ , 1985, by /~..~.~_ and ..... / - - , , respectivel~ the and ....... of Cheyenne Land Company, a.~artnership, on behalf of the partnership. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1985, by and , respectively the and of City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal Gorporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public -4- APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec. 22.03- a VILLAGE OF MOUND FEE FEE OWNER PLAT PARCEL Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: '~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ /~'~ ~. ~ - ~ To be divided as follows: All supporting documents, such as sketch plans, surveys, attachments, etc. must be submitted in 8½'" X 11" size and/or 14 copies plus one 8½" X 11" copy.... (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimensionofpropo~ed buildingsites, squarefootareaofeachnew parceldesignatedbynumber) A WAIVER IN. LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Square feet TO Square feet Reason: T E L. NO. DATE Applicant's interest in the properly: ,,~,: /~...~,..,._.~..~..:.~ ,~. This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or anexplan- 'ation given why this is not the case. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ¢-) ..../. ............. ~.~, i.:..-~-<' ........ ~.~__ C O BBL'£S'T, ON£ ,~OV.E CASE NO. 86-535 TO: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff FROM: Jan Bertrand, Building Official J~,~ Planning Commission Agenda of August 11, 1986 CASE NO. 86-535 APPLICANT: Ned and Karen Podany LOCATION: 6165 & 6167 Sinclair Road LEGAL DESC.: Lots 1 and 2, Block 17, The Highlands PID No. 23-117-24 34 0067 SUBJECT: Side Yard Setback Variance for Existing Detached Garage EXISTING ZONING: R-3 One & two family residential The applicant, Mr. Podany, has relocated ao existing garage on his property which is marked on a survey attached which was dated in 1982. The garage was relocated by late fall of 1984 and the neighbor submitted a survey to our office dated April 29, 1985 indicating that the relocated garage is 1 foot onto Mrs. Hoag's property. Mr. Podany is getting ready to remove this encroachment from Mrs. Hoag's property and is applying to the City of Mound for a variance to allow the removed garage to be zero (0) feet to the property line abutting Lot 3 due to the narrowness of his lot. The Lots 1 and 2 are abutting the Lagoon Park Wetlands and has a narrow driveway in which to swing into the garage. The dual garage. doors are facing east and he has approximately 20 feet to swing into these de- tached accessory buildings. Mr. Podany had applied to the City several years ago in 1982 to trade land with the City, to obtain access to Lagoon Park. I have attached a copy of the Wetlands map that will depict the extent of the water line. The R-3 Zoning District detached accessory buildings for lakeshore lots does allow a 4 foot side yard and a 20 foot front yard setback. If you will note on Mrs. Hoag's survey, the upper right hand corner depicts a deflection line with ll.2 feet between property markers on the east side of Lot 3 with a property marker to the south and a retaining wall along her property which is encroaching 1.8 feet to 2.3 feet from Mr. Podanyls lot 2. The sur' veyor evidently was not called back to relocate the proper iron monuments that was set for Lot 2 and the property marker shown at the time of my inspection was the iron marker 11.2 feet onto Mrs. Hoag's property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recemmends approval of the request to allow a zero (0) lot line setback on the 14.4 foot encroachment area of Mr. Podany's garage on Lot 2. The abutting neighbors have been notified. JB/ms "Corrections and additions are shown underlined." MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETI~G AUGUST 25, 1986 Present were: Chairperson Liz Jense___n; Vice Chairman Tom Reese; Commissioners Geoff Michael, William Thal, Frank WAiland; Council representative Steve Smith; City Manager Ed Shukle; Building Official Jan Bertrand. Commissioners Ken Smith and William Meyer.were absent and'commiSSioner M~yer was excused. Also present were the following interested persons: Ned and Karen Podany, Marjorie Hoag, Peter Hille, Judge Wolner. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 11, 1986 were presented for consideration. Motion for approval by Tom Reese and seconded by Steve Smith to approve the minutes as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. 86-534 Side yard setback variance for an existing detached garage at '6165 and 6167 Sinclair Road - Lots 1 & 2, Block 17, The Highlands. Ned and Karen Podany and also Marjorie Hoag, Peter Hille were present. The item was brought before the Planning Commission from the August 11, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Staff reviewed the additional information submitted to the Planning Commission from Marjorie Hoag, relating to her request to deny.a setback variance on Mr. Podany's property. Discussion followed regarding Mr. Podany's letter that was submitted to the Planning Commission, regarding the roof between the garages, enclosure of a fence at both west and east side between the garages, and the building code requirement of one hour rated fire wall construction within three feet of the "' property llne. Mr. Hille indicated Mrs. Hoaq was agreeable to the 2 ft. variance; Mr. * Motion by Tom Reese seconded by Bill Thal to grant a two foot variance upon the condition: 1. The roof line is to be separated between the two structures, 2. Instal- lation of a one hour exterior fire rated wall 3. Installation of rain gutters to divert water away from the property lin~. As to why a two foot variance instead of requiring the four foot setback by ordinance; Commissioner Reese said it would alleviate some of the hardship on width of the driveway between the park land and the detached accessory buildings due to the narrowness of the lot. The Planning Commission discussed having the City Council seek state action to allow trading of land with the City and the applicant to give him a wider driveway. It was decided not to make a motion to direct the City Council to request any action. The applicant stated he has spent close to $3000. and almost lost his home due to previous expenses. An addendum was made to the motion by Tom Reese on the diversion of the water and was seconded by Bill Thal. The vote was unanimously in favor of granting the two foot setback to Mr. Podany's property line, with the above mentioned conditions. CASE NO. 86-536 Variance to Code Section 23.407 (2660 Lakewood Lane Lot 2, Shirley Hills, Unit G) The Building Official reviewed the request for a variance to allow a detached access~ building on a vacant parcel of land on Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G. The R-1 zoning district regulations state that no accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any individual residential lot prior to the time of the construction of a principal building. Podan¥ was also agreeable to the 2 foot variance. e PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 11. 1986 Case No. 86-534 Side yard Setback variance.for existing detachedgarage at & Sinclair Road - Lbts"l & 2', Block 17, The Highlands Ned and'Karen Podany and also Marjorle Hoag and Peter Hille were present. 'The Building. Official reviewed the application; Mr. Podany Keiocated an exlstl'ng garage on his property; there is a survey attached to thest~ff report dated 1982. The garage was relocated in 1984. .The neighbor submitted a survey dated April of 1985 indicating the relocated.garage is 1 foot onto Mrs. Hoag's property to the west. Podany is getting ready to try to remove the encroachment and is asking the City to allow the removed garage to be. zero feet to his west property llne due to the narrowness, of his.lot. The encroachment is about 1 foot at the great- est point, but is about 14 foot long where it is over the property llne. The wetlands (Lagoon Park) Is to the east.and Podany has approximately 20 feet to swing into the garages (doors face'the east). On the upper right hand co~ner of Mrs. Hoag's survey, a deflection, line with ll.2 feet between property markers is shown and the wrong marker was used for Podany's property line when garage was relocated; surveyor evidently was not called to locate the proper.iron monuments for Lot 2.. The property marker shown.at time of inspection was actually 11.2 feet onto .Hoag's .property. There ls also a railroad tie retaining wall encroach- ing on the southeast corner of her property. The staff is recommending request he'approved with zero feet to the lot line upon the condition, that the 1 by 14.4.foot encroachment be removed from Lot 3. Podany stated that he would cut back a foot on the first garage and rebuild that section. .It was discussed that the roof on this garage was hand framed so it could be rebuilt. The Commission had various questions relative to trying to understand how error was made; when permit was taken out and when work was done, whether garage was moved in, etc. Peter Hille, representi.ng Mrs. Hoag, stated he's been a general contractor for 20 years. His suggestion would be to pick up the garage and relocate for a cost of approximately $2,782. What is being asked, in his opinion, is for Mrs. Hoag to take the punishment for an error she had nothing to do with'because Podany failed to hire a surveyor to locate the proper stakes. He stated that this could prevent her from selling her:property to a developer and using it for what they would intend to use. it for; Mr. Podany.is having an extra foot of drive- way at the expense of possibly developing that'lot. His other concerns are what building would look like with a 14 foot angle and allowing all the water to drain onto her property. (Garage setback from property line requires 4 feet from side lot line). Hille's stated Podany moved one.to a wrong location and turned it around ¼ of a turn and built one garage. The Commission askedlpodany, how he determined where to locate his garage. Podany responded that, because of a discussion he had with the late Mr. Hoag sometime ago, they both thought that was where the property line stake was. He stated he had tried to locate the garage 4½ feet 6ack from the property line to.give more space. Mrs. Podany stated, if garage..is relocated, they would not have access to the garage because with the present approximately.20 feet to swing into the garage, it is hard now. ~ The Commission discussed the request' a-t length. Mrs. Hoag stated this has been going on for 15 months and she is against granting a variance. Hille stated the garage was built around a power pole which'would be an indication of where lot line is. Ken Smith moved to table until more members were present. The Chair was opposed to postponing action. Meyer stated that he was abstaining because he is related to Mr. Podany. The Chair stated the Commission will take no action at this. tim~ CITY OF MOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (Please type the following information) 1. Street Address of Property ~/~-e/r~/~ ~.~3~.~ ~.,~(~, 2. Legal Description of Property: Lot ~ ~ 3. Owner's Name ~~ ~~~ Applicant if other thah owner): Case~' N6. Fee Date Filed 7/~'~,/,~4 / Block / 7 PID No. ~3'-Il 7 '~"/ .~'"/ c~4,7 Day Phone No. Name Day Phone No. Address Se Type of Request: (~) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. *If other, specify: ( ) Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other 6, Present zoning Distr'ict 7. Existing Use(s) of Property 8. Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as'may be required by la . · Signature of Applicant Date ~-' Planning Commission Recommendation: ~/ Date Council Action: Resolution No. Date Request for Zoning Variance Procedure (2) Case D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc. E. Indicate North compass direction F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Ill. Request for a Zoning Variance A. All information below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled. B. Does the present use of the property conform to,a~l use regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes ~.~) No ( ) . If "no", specify each non-conforming use: ! Ce Do the existing structures comply with all area heigh~ and bulk regulations for the zone district in which it is located? Yes ~) No ( ) If "no", specify each non-conforming use: De Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the use. s permitted in that zoning district? ( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil () Too small ()Drainage (~ _~ Sub-surface ( ) Too shallow ( ) Shape (/~) Other: Specify: Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the Zoning Ordinance was adopted? Yes~) No ( ) If yes, explain: ~.~ ~~~-~'~'-. v . F. Was the hardship created by any o~h~r man-made change, such as the reloca- tion of a road? Yes ( ) No~) If yes, explain: Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a v~Eiance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ~) 'No ( ) If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) ~..~,~~_ Will ~r~nti~g of the variance be material~/y Oe~rim~e~tal to property in the same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? 6165 Sinclair Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 July 24, 1986 Mound Village Council c/o Jan Bertrand, Bldg. Inspector Mound, Minnesota Dear Ms. Bertrand: This letter is to request a variance in order'to resolve the problem of a portion of our garage which (according to Schoberg Land Survey) sits on the Hoag property abutting our land. This garage was turned and moved to its new location in order to build another garage next to it (our's is a two family duplex) to accommodate renter's Cars and was placed on the Hoag property entirely by accident. The existing stakes placed by surveyors were apparently misinterpreted at that time. We propose to remove one ft. off of the entire length of the offending garage in order to satisfy Mrs. Hoag's complaint. If we were to move the entire garage there would be insufficient room to gain access by automobile to these structures as there is a pond a~jacent to them. ~ If you have any further questions or I can be of help in any way, please call me at 936-4000 (office) or 472-4051 (home). Thank you for your consideration of this proposal for a variance. Sincerely, Ned Podany Certificate of Sur~'oy for Windward ?rcperties, Inc. of Lots 1 and 2, Block 17, The Highlands Hennepin County, Finnesota I hereby certify that this is a true and cotter% representation of a survey of the bo~:ndaries of Lots 1 and 2, Flock 17, The High- lsnds~ and the locatlcn of all existing b"~ildlngs thereon. It does not put,crt to sho'~ other imDrove.-..ents oz' enerczchments. ! Scale: ]." = AC' [ate : o-1~-80 o : I~n r~rker ~IDA. ~.. Book '/, ~ Pag~ e=.r~oN /noN. IN?'L. O:.T2OA/ M ON, ~E-T £,-?, k-'//DA/ /DTS' ~ ~,VD4-, BLOCK 17, ~-I-/;' H/ GHLAND3 , L /n / zwv £ 7-oH l< /~ , HEiY /~. CO. lldl N iV E $OT,~, L T- LOT 3 10o.o ' p, elf57:.$ 5i~Y I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SU? 'Y OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDEk .Y DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE.~S~AT)E~OF blI,NNESOTA; DA~(~/Z ~?,l/rt~ REGI'Si~I~ON,_/ N©. 1470D August 25, 1986 The Mound Village Council Mound Minnesota Dear Council Members: This letter will summarize the problems that we have encountered and that still exist regarding the garage located at 6177 and 6165 Sinclair Road ( a duplex), a portion of which infringes on the neighboring property of Mrs. Marjorie Hoag. Approximately four years ago, application was made for an exchange of parkland property to facilitate the construction of a badly needed second garage for our tennant's use. Initially, we were told by council members that we would have to go through legal channels but that they had no reason to dispute such an exchange and were indeed, in favor of it in order to gain lake access through our property. Several months and several thousand dollars later, however, (architectural plans, surveys and costly attorney's fees), we were told it would not be acceptable after all because neighbors in the area objected to our opening up the area to local residents. Subsequently, we had to change our plans, move the existing garage to have it face a different direction and construct another garage along side of it. This certainly was not our first choice but the only other alternative. It was not our intent to infringe on the neighboring property but due to confusion by everyone involved regarding the property stakes, the existing garage was moved to a location wherein a portion of that building was indeed on Mrs. Hoag's property. We were unaware of this problem until some time after the entire structure was moved and totally completed. As I have stated, the infringement on Mrs. Hoag's property was done without malice and was certainly unintentional. We have obtained bids from two other contractors who state it would be at least $4,000 to move the existing garages. Because of the time and monies already expended on supplying a garage for our tennants use, it would be a severe financial hardship for us to move them. We hold no hard feelings toward Mrs. Hoag but feel she could be more reasonable in granting her approval for a variance. We have tried to find a peaceful solution by offering Mrs. Hoag a foot of our lakeshore property but this was not acceptable to her at that time. We are open to any other reasonable suggestions she may have. We implore the Council to consider the hardhips we have already encountered in this respect and to find in our favor that a variance should be granted. Re sppc %ful~ly, /Ned Podany '4 , 30 29 26 2' )~$~ Proposed Resolution Case #86-535 August 29, 1986 RESOLUTION NO. 86- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 17, THE HIGHLANDS PID #23-117-24 34 0067 (6165/67 SINCLAIR ROAD) P & Z CASE #86-535 WHEREAS, Ned and Karen Podany, owners of the property described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 17, The Highlands has applied for a setback variance to allow an existing detached garage to be relocated within their property 0 feet to the west property line; and WHEREAS, Exhibit "A" has been submitted to indicate the existing garage encroachment onto the neighboring property of Lot 3 Block 17 The Highlands; and WHEREAS, the City Code requires a 4 foot setback to the property line for a detached accessory building on lake shore lots; and WHEREAS, ~'he Planning Commission has reviewed thc request and does recummend a modified approval from the applicant's original request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve a variance of 2 feet as shown on Exhibit "A" for Lots 1 and 2, Block 17 The Highlands PID #23-117-24 34 0067 (6165/67 Sinclair Road) due to the narrowness of the lot upon the following conditions: roof linde of the ga~parate~to ~-l~- che · 2) A one hour fire rated exterior wall assembly is to be constructed less than 3 feet to the lot li~~e'dr~iform building code. 3) Provision for water diversion away from the neighboring properties. Case No. 86-537 Ned and Karen Podany Variance for Existing Garage 1g3g Ned Podany Variance Request General Overview The problem began over 1½ years ago. Mr. Podany moved his garage and at the time there was a question as to the location of the property line. Mrs. Hoag had a survey made of her lot at her expense. On or about April 29, 1985 she notifie~--t~-~ City of Mound Building Inspection Department that a problem existed. Please look at her survey. Building of the new part of the garage was completed after the survey was' made and the problem was known by everyone concerned. The building has continued up to and including the closing of the area way 2 weeks ago. Why have a building code and setbacks ordinance if they are only for people who want to obey them. Mr. Podany and The City of Mound Bui]2-d~g Inspector have been aware of this problem since-May of 1985. Until now the po~i.tion of Jan Bertram has been one of getting the property cleared and the setback maintained. The position she took at the last variance board meeting was a complete reversal. Please read the letter she 'had the City of Mound Attorney prepare and send to Mr. Podany. Shortly after the death of her husband Mrs. Hoag. started to clean up her lower lot. She was forced to quit when Mr. Podany started using this area for a dumping ground. It was and still is her wish to clean up this area and keep it mowed. This is now quite impossible with the pile of dirt in front of her lot and the fact that Mr. Podany has been using her lot for his own purpose including the placement of his excess dirt. (Please Inspect) At the last variance Meeting I received a copy of the plot plan which was in question. When I examined this plan and the site I became confused. This plan started out as an attempt by Mr. Podany to trade porperty with the City of Mound. The property in the pink was to be a trade for the property in the yellow. I do not know if the trade was ever made. If it was not Mr. Podany has expanded onto City property as well. Please see plan No. 1. Note that I have taken the plan I received and expanded i~ 1~ times which changes the scale to 1" = 30' The only other changes I made was to take out some lines wl~ich do not ~pp].y to the problem ~n question. 2 On drawing no. 2 you will see the corrected position of the garage and driveway as though Mr. Podany made a trade with the City of Mound. Note: There is a 4' backset a 26' garage a 4' apron and 45' drive. If the trade was not made Mr. Podany is using' the City of Mound porperty because this is the way the drive is today. There are infact wooden curbs with in 10' of the water line. (Please Inspect). On drawing no. 3 you will see the garage layout corrected as though no trade was made. Please note the corrected position of the garage. This scheme leaves a 4' backset a 26' garage and a 20' drive. The 20' drive is an industry standard. Drawing no. 4 is taken from the Uniform Building Code book. If the wall is permited on the line the wall must be constructed to meet this code. The siding would have to be removed from the back wall and 3' up each side of the garage a total of 60' of wall is affected. The wall must be covered with a rated sheeting or a plywood sheeting and then resided. The inside of the wall must be covered up with 5/8" sheetrock and taped. This construction must be continued to the roof sheeting through the soffet which would mean the removal and replacement of the soffet as well. I think it would be cheaper to move the garage than build a 1 hr. rated wall. Here are the Facts 1. Setbacks are for appearance as well as utility. By code the Numbering side of a lot is the front side is in fact a 10' offset the required offset? 2. Mrs. Hoag wants to clean up this area for her use. Which she now can not do. 3. There would be damages to the Hoag property if a variance were granted and damases should be paid. 4. If a variance were granted no provision has been made for the roof water. 5. There is no provision for the maintanence wall without trespassing. Construction to code be made without trespassing. of this can not 6. Mr. Podany has placed his RR Tie retaining wall 2.3 feet on the Hoag property where there is no problem locating the stake. The stake is above ground. 7. The cost of bringing the wall to a 1 hr. wall as shown in the code would be as great or greater than the cost of moving the garage. 8. There was timely and proper notification of the problem and no corrective measures were taken. 9. The city has taken a proper position in this matter with the City Attorney's letter to Mr. Podany. 3 Conclusion 1. No variance should be granted because any deviation from the setbacks ordinance would damage the Hoag property for future development. 2. The issue here is much greater than that of a variance. If a variance were granted it would take a great deal of money to bring the wall to a 1 hr. wall which is specified in the code for this type of a situation. There is no way to make this wall a "0" clearance wall with out tespassing on the Hoag property. 3. Expansionism seems to be the way Mr. Podany operates. He is over the line on both the front of the lot with his retaining wall and with the garage. Both of which will have to be removed. 4. If the trade was not made with the City of Mound Mr. Podany has expanded in that direction also. This is a situation which should be examined by this board. 5. If the original 50' wide lot is not wide enough for the drive, a permit should not have been asked for and none should have been granted. 6. There is no variance which could give permission for trespassing and. the use of the Hoag property. There seems to be a pattern of misuse of the neighboring propertys by Mr. Podany and no respect for property lines on either side of his property. 7. The approach which was outlined in the letter to Mr. ?odany by the City of Mound attorney in regard to this matter should be followed and a time limit for the correction of this matter should be set. This problem is not one of innocence as presented to this board. If this were the case construction would never have started as the problem was known at a time when the correction of this problem would have been easy and very inexpensive. 8. The application for a permit is for only the moving of one garage and the building of a 24' x 26' Detached garage. This is not for the 26' x 52' unit as it now stands. PARK "The Highlands"*~- Road and Driveway Area Podany Area Water Property to give City of Mound ~ for ~10d C. ~d~ny ~- ' ..' . ~ ' correct ropre~en~t!on of a s~)- of %he 'J'. '.' ~.. ' follo~ng~cscri%ed..line: . ~u~nc~g at th6' ~[ort~ast'co~er of Said lot; thence South.. ] ' ~'~ '~) "Tke ]{IEhL~nd~" aoco~inf to tho recorded'' "'.'.'~" %~1 glut thereof, ~hich lies ~s~rly of the .... ~ , er. ly of the }ior.therll Line of'~'%'L, ~ock ~2~?I~./~. ~7, said "The H~g~andn"/ and Westerly of .cr~ bed lino~ at the ~;oFtha~st co~r of sa~d ~ 1; ~.%hence ~:orthwos~rt3 atong' %he .. ;,~n~ cr s~d ~L ~ a dist"rice o~ ~9.90 ~eot ~escrlted; tbence Fortherly ~ralb~l vith "~' ') ~ the ~'3st :ino of ~.aJd ~t 2'a distance oF ~ ~ ~ 5C feet; tkr, nca b~orth'.esterl/ ~ tho th~rs en-J i~g ,: J~J~o~, ~ ~ ~eccrdi~: ~ the recorded p~t, except I 3WC r' }70l e .ffort~ast'co~er of said lot; thence South ...... ,'. , alon2 the. 5~st li~s oC'~aid lot a dlz~p, ace:'"' ~ ~,._cf 50,' feat-to the ~i~C'.o~ ~gl~'~5 of ..:"';),_ .. )-'.' " ~ 'r said lin~; thenc0':da~lscti~g ~ th~ r'i$ht'-.~', ' ': '.. ~ 3°52' to the s}mr~lifl~ of ~ ~k~n>~',':'." ' ,'.-'. ~ .~arA there endinffj ..... :..' ,.- ...... ',' .... f- ',.,, ,u. ........... '~: ~':'[/' 'm~.'t'"~'~:'~'~~ ~:.'-'m~a~7[ ',~.$. :4!s:~m~.~ ~ ?Z-~.:' ~ tben%e Sou~ ~o~"]'.'~5~- ~st [tno' ~f'a~'~%":&: -'"".2." diz~nce.;oCj~O:fs~.to the:~nt o~.~.'~3....,:':% , of aa~d;l~o'~ ~ thence .... 'de~lact~n[ ..... ~ ~He'~ ~',2"-',-~ .... .. .., ' ' "3°52' ~a"the sho~'kl~ of ~ks Ydr~c*on~. ~.3',..."..'. '. ~ .ant ~he~2~__end~E;.'' .-/ :. '. '-..'"..'_: ... ;'.3:)~..'..,. '.'~ ..: "/ ,"yhe_jJ%ch~and~,,t, aocomind ~d the r~corded'' "".".'. ol~t the~o~ ~'hlch lies ~sMrly of th~ ..... ,: L~s: lln~ of ~t I,', ~ock 17,. . Yorth- ' er.ly of the Nor.ther~ line oF ~t 1, ~oc~,< 17, ~aid ~'?ho Hig~ands",' and '~'osb:rly of the follouing-degcrJbod llno: at ~},e Iiortha~st corner of said ~, '~"'-' t~rce" " .... ~ fly alon~[ the "- . . ,0, ~1~ ..... ~ ;'~ .......... ~::~=~;;~'~ z~ ,_~ o ...... ~'. r),):nt o~ b,~dlr'.ntnl; of :: '~ .'. [ the 'f,'~s:. .tm' of' :mid b:t, 2 ....... [~.~ ...... ~"~' 'l...~" '. 7~-:~, ,. ~.rcord n~' L~ ~.~', recorded / ) ~k'~- / I ~'.he :'~:.i.o'.Ln~;-d.~r. crt,-ed line: Ccrim,:nr[n,' } j ~..?nn,? .,crbn'-..s'.ac.y 3 ~cnF ~ J ' . /nf :'uti Let l a Ji~b,r. ce o:' ' ' 't .... '' ''[ ??l':":f' %~' " : : ,'' 't' ':Y~:.: ~[T,'" t.'ty':t " ' !:~ ',,-,r~ :'" ':~ ''~-': .... ' ''. 7, t't-v~': . iL {2L': :''t-c.'~l'-;'t t.O ~." .'.2' .~.:' .i * c ~,. 7 '":'tn -."'-,.'7 ]' ~;f j'3t'v ",~r '~ :~ ' ' ,r-)' '_ ,'2 -. !'. '. 5'.''. -" ........... Road and Driveway Area Poday Green Area Water Expanded Scale 1"= 30' for tied C. Pod~ny in Lots 1.and 2, ~Lock !?, The H~ghland~ ........ Hen~.epin County, Y~nne~ta I h:rgtr/ .certf~y ti'mt this lJ a tr~e '~r~~. "--" ' .']"-'] .7.:~. ~/:,::~, ..,: ~ correct ropresen~tion of a s~ey of ~he 'J',' ': ' "'' : ~.~.,.;t ', .." '..:. ~. ~ ~'~,. ~ ~ ~' ~iX~'~-]'~ 7: :"' '" ;~ ":"'.(;~:.~ .~:~ .. · : .... . ' o~~'.[,; · · -~. - ~ .... ~ ~ excep~.,':'..'.;<.:.. ....., ~=...:,-. :....... , ,, ..... '.o ~ ~.~'m~ ~aore~r i~a ~-a*~'ZZ~. 8} ~e,.. C.:'~ :7':&*'.'..., ~ ~ '. · .. '~ - * .... ,;'.~!' .-..;:~ ~Cb ~v,.) '. ,~J.~'- ,I~r~aa~'comer or Sa~d ~o~; theace-~u~h...[.".',.".: . ~ ;'{i'J'~;::' C~~' . , . aloha ~he ~a~ lLao et ~a/d ~o~ a a~ace......~ .., t..v,, .,.,..: .. : ~% ~. ~ ~ ~ ~he ~hordlind o~ M!~ LK~*~*~" .'?':~' :"..'*' '.' ..... _~ '.~ . ~ ~nere endi~E;:.~ ".' · "' 't .',-~'.':."".' ' :L] .:i> '.,'~., :, .~.' ' 3/ ~ ~ oF'~ · ~ .... , ........... , ....'. '""' ~'"-"' ':" ...... . -'k., ~< a~,~z.:o~.~ :o:Zo~a~'j~.:.':.:':. ~.' :~':;':" ~ ..... "':" . ~ . co~nc~n~" at..'L~:.}~'~as~ :~ .... · ~, _ ,'~':~ '. ;' '.:L. ..... ~'~-~ ~ k. ~eace 5o~'alo~;;' ~k ...... "-'- "?~ '~ ...... .* · m 1~P~e 0 0 ~ ~ + ' ' ~ ~- ' ' ~* ". '"' ' . . · . . ............ ~ . ~. _ ~ 5 .ae~.to ~he.~int o~'~ '~"- .... ~'.', '- P~fe ~ .. ~o~a, .,_, ..... , - ~ ............. ~,-.,-. ,.. · ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ae g '0 ~ ' ~ ~ · ' · " .... ~'~ ~ ~ ~ __~ .. .... . . . ~e ~a~e~onka.,..'.-,.... i ~,~ " k ~ ~qe~e e~- ' .... · " "~' ~, ' * .-' '~ ' "'.' . ' .... · - I --= a_~aa~nc~, aoco~inf %o tho r~corde~'' '""-." : ' - .... o. ~t g,; ~ock 17,'. . Vo~h_ .' .." ~ 17~ ~ald "The Eig~ands./ and l'ssMrly of . k . ~ the Collouing-degcrJbod lino: ~m~ncin "~<.cner, ce ,.orthwe~rly along the North~rl'z J ' ~ ". J i' ]~ .. b .... ~. - , ' 2 a d-stcnco of . ~ ~o.,~ / J , J~ 5C reeL; tkr:nne J , . D '0% "~/~ ,.-- - -i ... ;...;,.n;, o~ Lne ILna ~!ng descr[L-.~J. Fire Socnd GA I SKETCH AND DESIGN DATA Rating Radng File I Fire '-'--[ Sound STC No. DETAILED DESCRIPTION / Construction Type: Gypsum Wallboard, Gypsum Sheathing, Interior side: One layer %" type X gypsum wallboard or water resistant backer board or veneer base applied parallel with or' ~'~. ~!i't "~ ! at right angles to 2 x 4 wood studs, 24" o.c. with 6d coated nails ~ 1%" long, 0.0915" shank, V," heads, 7" o.c. Joints of square ( WP 8105 edge or bevel edge wallboard may be left exposed. Exterior side: Thickness: 43/~" One layer %" type X gypsum sheathing, 48" wide, applied Approx. Weight: 7 psf parallel to studs with galv roofing nails, 13/," long, 0.120" shank, Fire Test: See WP 3510 7A6" or V2" heads, 7" o.c. in field, 4" o.c. perimeter. Wallboard Sound Test: See WP 3510 and sheathing nailed to top and bottorn plates at 7" o.c. Exterior Insulation: See page 6, Section 10.1. cladding to be attached through sheathing to studs. (LOAD-BEARING) ~ Construction Type: Gypsum Wallboard, Polyethylene Film, Wood Studs, Glass Fiber, Foam Plastic Boards, Plywood Siding Fire Side Interior side; %" type X gypsum wallboard applied over 6 mil · ~ ~ ...... polyethylene film and parallel to 2 x 4 wood studs 16" O.c. with~'~ /~1~1[~' / I/''j'' )~ ?~/~ 6d smooth bright nails 2" long, 0.115" shank, 0.265" head, 8" ~ ~. ~{ ~ ~( ~{ ~{ ~i;, )~, ~',~)~'~}~ j o.c. Unlaced 3%" glass fiber 0.97 pcf friction fit in stud space. ~~ WP 8124 Exterior side; 1" proprietary aluminum foil faced, glass reinforc- ~~~ 35 (g,w,) ed isocyanurate foam plastic sheathing applied parallel to studs Thickness: 53/~'' with 11 ga galvanized roofing nails, 1V2" long, 0.122" shank, Approx. Weight: 6 psf 1 to 0.428" head, 12" o.c. in field, 8" o.c. around perimeter. %" Fire 'rest: OSU 6534, 3-12-~ HR pl~ siding panels applied parallel to studs with 10d galvaniz- 39 ed common nails, 3" long, 0.135" shank, 0.307" head, 12" o.c. in field, 6" o.c. around perimeter. Rating based on the lesser of loading to 2327 lbs/stud or 83g~o of full design load. (LOAD-BEARING) Construction ~pe: Gypsum Wallboa~, Foam Plastic Boards, Wood Studs, Glass Fiber, Wood Fiberboard, Plywood Siding interior base layer 1" proprietary aluminum foil faced, glass rein- forced isocyanurate foam plastic applied parallel to 2 x 4 wood Fire Side studs 16" o.c. with 11 ga galvanized roofing nails, 1~/2'' long, r ~ ~ L: 0.122" shank, 0.428" head, 12" o.c. in field, 8" o.c. around ~-'.:~-->~;<<,-. ...... z ~ perimeter with joints taped with 2" wide pressure sensitive (~ aluminum foil tape. Face layer %" type X gypsum wallboard ap- ~~( )¢ )¢)(i~ '~z~2~( ~ ( ( WP 8125 plied parallel to studs with 10d smooth bright box nails, 3" long, 0.295" 8" Unlaced 3%" glass fiber, 0.97 0.128" shank, head, pcf friction fit in stud space. Exterior side ~/2" intermediate grade Thickness: 6V4" fiberboard sheathing applied parallel to studs with 11 ga galvaniz- Approx. Weight: 7 psf ed roofing nails, 1V2" long, 0.122" shank, 0.428" head, 6" o.c. Fire Test: OSU 6535, 2-28-79 in field, 3" o.c. around perimeter. %" plywood siding panels ap- plied parallel to studs with 8d galvanized box nails, 2V~" long, 0.104" shank, 0.255" head, 12" o.c. in field, 6" o.c. around perimeter. Rating based on the lesser of loading to 2104 lbs/stud or 75% of lull design load. (LOAD-BEARING) Construction Type: Gypsum Wallboard, Wood Furring, Fire Side Foam Plastic Boards, Lightweight ~; ...... .......... ~.- ....... _ ....... ~ ~ .............. ..... .~-~ Concrete Block ~":'-'Z,'~'~"'.~J 2V4" proprietary aluminum foil faced, glass reinforced iso- ;'u;.' "~' ~'~':..~%~:4.:,-, '.~'- "~ ,"'"'/*~2 - '.','.'.','.'~,~:~ ¢.?_~, .? .... ~ cyanurate foam plastic boards applied vertically with V4" beads '-t". ~:" ........ '" ..."I': ':...l" -t' ..' ' "" '.' ' ' 2 50 of construction grade adhesive, 16" o.c. (4 per board widtt~; over ., , ~, .t,~ ~.. .', HR to wP 8201 nominal 8" x 8" x 16" lightweight 2 cell concrete block (55% , , :'-: ' .,'"1 (g,w) solid concrete) with %" type N mortar joints. 1" x 2" vertical wood 54 furring 24" o.c. applied over foam plastic boards with 4" x ~/.-" · "' .~ i-'~ ~ ~ :~ .' "~ F-/ ~:-~--. -:~ ~.....~ .., ..... ~.~ concrete fasteners 24" o.c. %" tyoe X gypsum wallboard applied ". ' ... - ' · parallel to furring with 6d smoolh bright nails 2" long, 0.115" Thickness: 11%" shank, 0.265" head, 8" o.c. with joints taped. Wall loaded to 271 Approx. Weight: 37 psf psi. (LOAD-BEARING) Fire Test: OSU 6536, 3-19-79 TABLE NO. 5-A--Continued TYPES II ONE-HOUR, II-N AND V ONLY FIRE RESISTANCE OF ESCRIPliON OF OCCUPANCY 4.--1cc plants, ~wcr plants, pumping plants, cold storage and creameries Factories and workshops u~ing noncombustible and nonexplosive matm-iuls Storage and sales r~ms ut noncombustible and nonexpk~sive materials E l~Any building used for educational put, scs 0~rouuh the 12~h grade by 50 or more ~rsons for more than 12 hours ~r week or ~our hours in any one day Sec also Secdon 2---Any buildin~ used for educational pu~oses through tl~c 12tt~ grade by less than 50 ~rsons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one day 3--Any building u~cd for day-care put, scs for more than six children - H I--Storage. handligg, usc or sale of hazardous and highly flammable or explosive materials other than flammable liquids [See also Section 901 (a), Sec also DNision 1.] Szctions 902 and 2~Storage. handling, use or sale of Classes 1, II and III-A liquids; dry cleaning 903 plants using Class I. 11 or III-A liquids; paint stores with bulk handling; palm shops and spray-painting r~ms and shops [See also Section 901 (a), Division 2.1 ~W~working establishments planing mills, ~x factories, buffing r~ms for tire-rebuilding plants and pinking r~ms; shops, factories or warehouses where l~se combustible fi~rs or dust ~e manufactured, pr~esse~, generated or stored; and pin-refinishing r~ms ~Rcpair g~ages not classified as a Group B. Division I Occupancy ~Group E, )ivisions 2 ~d 30ccup~cies having an ~cupant load of not more than v0 may have exterior wall Group R. Division 3 ~cupancies. EXTERIOR WALLS hour less than 5 fcct 2 hours less dian 5 feet, I hour less thau 10 fee0 EXq £RiOR WALLS 5 lcct ['rutcclcd Io., than 20 fcc[ Nut pcmmtcd less than 5 feet Not permitted le~, th,m 5 feet Protected less than 10 feet ~ Sec Chapter 9 and the Fire Code 4 hours less than 5 feet, I Not permitted [es, than 2 hours less than It) 5 feet feet, I hour less than 20 [ Prt)tcctcd less than 20 feet feet and opening protection as required for J H J 5~Aircraft repair hangar)~_? (Cont.) 1.1 - Nurseries for full-time care of children under the age of six (each accommodating more ~han four persons) Hospitals, sanitariums, nursing homes, and similar buildings (each accOmmod~t'ing more than four.~ersonst. .. 'Y-J2 ; Detoxi'fica~toh'centers, homes for children six years of age or over, supervised living facilities Class B as defined in UBC Section 420, for the mentally retarded, mentally ill, or :ne physically handicapped (each accommodating more .tDan four ,--McntalhospitMs. menmlsanitariums,jails, pfisons, reforrnatofiesand buildlngswherepemonalli~rtiesofinmatesaresimilarlyrestrained persons ) . M2 l--Private garages, carports, sheds and agricultural buildings (See also Section 1101, Division 1.) z O I hour tess than 60 feet t Protected less than 60 feet 2 hours less than 5 feet, I hour elsev, here I hour 2 hours less than 5 feet, I hour elsc~,,hcre I hour less than 3 fect (or may be protected un the exterior with materials approved for l-hum fire-resistive conx[ FtlCtioll) Not permitted less than 5 feet Protected less than l0 feet Not permitted less than 5 feet, protected less than I0 loci Not permitted less than 3 feet Not regdlated for fire resistance 2--Fences over 6 feet high. tanks and towers a.1 Hotels and apar]:ment houses, convents and monasteries-- I (each accommodating more than ten persons) Supervise~ li,:ing I hourlcssthan5fcct Notpcnnittedlc~.~than · 5 feet rac'.lities Class A2 aa defined in UBC Section 420 (acco~modacing~ { m~re than si~ ~[sons). Ihotnlcsstha. 3fcc{ , Not~rmittcdics~lhan R.3 - Dwellings and '~6d~'[~9 houses. Supervised living ~ { 3 feet ~ac~lit[e~ Class A-1 as defined in UBC Section 420 (each ~ ~ BUILDING PEi~IT APPLICATION CITY OF HOUND 5341 Haywood Road, Mound, Minnesota IMPROVEMENT STREET ADDRESS 6165 Sinclair Road ADDITION The Highlands PLAT # 61610 LOT 1 & 2 BLOCK OWNER Ned C. Pddany' PIg # PARCEL # ?~-1 7265 ~ nn~ ADDRESS 6165 Sinclair Road BLDR.-CONT. Chris Brandvold ADDRESS 76,0 EST I~J~TED VALUES7.O?O. ZONING DISTRICT R-3 COMPLETION DATE DATE l,J,- 12- 34 PHOHE. NO. 472-4051 '.J.~5- ~ i u3 '~. PHONE NO. 4'~5-8944 ZIP TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION l:~l Slng l& F.ml ly - Sq. Ft. l-m Mult I-Foal J¥ - Sq. FI:. ~ Co~m~rcl~ i - Sq. Ft. r-~ lndus:rlal - rage' ~mze 9~ X 2~ Sq. Ft. I D,-ck - Size Sq. Ft. .C:D?a~lo - Size .Sq..Ft. ~Fcnce -Slze Ln.g~. O1-3151 PERMIT FEE $ 62.50 OI-3151 PLAN CHECK FEE $ OI-2222 SURCHARGE $ 3.50 78-23O4 78-3774 S.A.C. 73-3155 WATER CONN. FEE $ + Move exls~ing garage per site plan RE,MOD EL I NG r--~ Addl tlon - $q. Ft. Interior - Sq. Ft. Sub. Level - Sq. Ft. f-'~ Roof 1 ng - ~.Ft. ~ Sldlng - Sq. Ft.: ~Utlllty Bldg. - Size l-mCouncll Resolution Sq. Ft. F ! NLAL INSPECTION DATE 73-3744 TAPPING FEE $ 78-3158 SEWER CONN. FEE $ OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE 73-3842 STATIONARY ROD FEE $ DATE TOTAL $ 66.o0 ,,. ,-,D~ITIOHAL PERMITS NEEDED: ELECTRICAL ' PLUMBING HEATING perm;: iS granted, I hereby agree to do the proposed -ork in accordance with dcscriptlon above set forth according to :he proviSiOnS of all orclJnanccs o[ thc C1:¥ of ~Ound and of all Statutes of the State of' ~',;nnc.',o:a i,.. such caSeS made and provlded. All buildin~ permits cxplr~ one year after date of issuance. m,-~ i h-lO-O' ...... '~ APPL I CANT Certificate of for Windward Preperttes, Inc. of Lots 1 and 2, 3lock 17, The Highlands Henneptn County, Finnesota I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation · of a survey of the bo~ndaries of Lcts 1 and 2~ ~lock 17, The High- .,,~l.t/~ lsnds, and t?.e locat!cn of all existing b'~idings thereon. It ScaLe: Cate : o : I~n ~.arker '2 Book / Page ££/%E i" : SO ~ e = rRON /noN. £N/:Z. O:.Z'RDM Aa o~. SET LOT- LDT- 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SUR' OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER L DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF TH~-STAT~///OF MI~NESOTA, CASE NO. 86-536 TO: FROM: Planning Commission, Applicant and Staff Jan Bertrand, Building Official /'- Planning Commission Agenda of August 11, 1986 CASE NO. $6-536 APPLICANT: H. E. Wolner LOCATION: 2660 Lakewood Lane LEGAL DESC.: Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G; PID No. 24-117-24 24 0017 SUBJECT: Variance to Code Section 23.407 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential The applicant, Judge Wolner, has applied for a variance to allow a detached accessory building 22 by 26 feet on a vacant parcel of land on Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G. The R-1 Zoning District Regulations 23.407 for Accessory Buildings states: (1) No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any residential lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. The property owned by Judge Wolner has two tax parcels at present, Lots 1 and 2, Shirley Hills Unit G and also Lot 3, Shirley Hills Unit G. If the tax parcels can be combined into two tax parcels with Lot 2 and Lot 3 as one property tax parcel, this combination will prevent the sale of an individual lot and tie the two properties together so the City could control the sale of Lot 3 or Lot 2. The property directly to .the west of Lakewood Lane is currently in the process of constructing a detached accessory building at this time. The abutting neighbors have been notified. Staff would like to state that present use of the dedicated right-of-way of Lakewood Lane, as it turns and proceeds to the west, is not built to City construction standards. It is being us~ and maintained as a driveway for Judge Wolner at this time. However, the neighbor on Parcel B, R.L.S. # 1497, has frontage on the dedicated right-of-way of Lakewood Lane to make his lot conforming to the Zoning Ordinance. JB/ms P'l'anning Commission Meeting of Aug.u.st 25~ 1986: CASE NO. 86-53~ Variance to Code Section 23.407 (2660 Lakewood Lane Lot 2, Shirley Hills, Unit G) The Building Official reviewed the request for a variance to allow a detached accessory building on a vacant parcel of land on Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G. The R-1 zoning district regulations state that no tccessory building or structure shall be constructed on any individual residential lot prior to the time of the construction of ~ principal building. The property owned by Judge Wolner has two tax parcels at present, lots 1 & 2, Shirley Hills Unit G and Lots 3, Shirley Hills Unit G. The staff recommends approving the variance to allow the construction of a 22' x 26' accessory building upon the condition ~hat Judge Wolner assign a combination form and combine the lots 2 & 3 as one property tax parcel. Planning Commission discussion followed regarding the present condition of the road at Lakewood Lane; Judge Wolner stated the CitY does not maintain the street in front of his home. The Lakewood Lane running east and west is not built t° City street standards because of drainage problems. Steve Smith made a motion for approval, seconded by Tom Reese to grant the requested variance upon the .condition that Judge Wolner sign a combination of tax.parcels fdr lots 3 & 2 to be combined. The vote was unanimous for approval, all ayes. e ~' ' CITY OF MOUND · ~,?.~' ~ .... :APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COHHISSION ~._" . ~- ....... Please ~ype ~he following information) Street Address of Property Legal Descrlpt|on o~c Property'. Lot Add it ion r~[~ Owner's Name ~//-F' L~ ~i(.LzV Address .~-) ~ x~:: 1~.~ Case No. ~'~ - Fee Pa.ld _~'~-,. ~-~ Date Filed ~-.~ '*'c, 4'.' '~,pplicant ~Jf other than owner): Block PID No.'Z-z/'// 7- Z- ~- Name Day Phone No. Z/7~ -/3 3 ~ Day Phone No. Address 5. Type of Request: Ye ( i/J/Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. *If other, specify: ( ) Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other Present Zoning District Existing Use(s) of Property Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or other zoning procedure for this property? ~-7~ If so, list date(s) of llst date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request. I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Signature of Applicant Planning Commission Recommendation: Date Council Action: Resolution No. Date :Z u.J n ~ n _-"_"_"_"_"_"_"_"_-4 LO .cC ~ rn Ji .0 Corr. engle$ ~re to ~.c... /he I/~es - es~ by adv. ;pos. and di< h~e bwn. ~ Gov Y Lots OT (~ ~) , ( ¢0 I I I / ~OOD 14~.2 , 9 Proposed Resolution Case #36-536 August 29, 1986 RESOLUTION NO. 86- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE VARIANCE TO ZONING CODE SECTION 23.407 FOR LOT 2, SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT G PID #2~-117-24 24 0017 P & Z CASE #86-536 WHEREAS, Judge Wolner has applied for a variance to allow a detached accessory building on a vacant parcel of land on Lot 2, Shirely Hills Unit G (2660 Lakewood Lane); and, WHEREAS, City Code for R-1 zoning residential district Section 23.407 states "no accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any residential lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory"; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend approval of the request to construct a 22 by 26 foot accessory building on Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve the variance as requested to construct a detached accessory building on Lot 2 Shirley Hills Unit G upon the condition that Lot 2 and Lot 3 Shirley Hills Unit G be combined as one tax parcel PID #24-117-24 24 0017 0018 (2660 Lakewood Lane). CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: Edward Shukle, City Manager FROM: Jan Bertrand, Building Official DATE: September 9, 1986 SUBJECT: Grading Permit Please place Grading Plans for Balboa for 5377 Shoreline Boule- vard (old Metro 500 site which is west of the new Super America Station) on the City Council Agenda for September 16th as the City Code Section 35:200 recommends the applicant obtain City Council approval. JB/ms Irene Porter Balboa Minnesota Inc. McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS [ LAND SURVEYORS PLANNERS September 3, 1986 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (812) 559-3700 Ms. Jan Bertrand Planning and Zoning City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Balboa Parking Lot MKA #8070 Dear Jan: As requested, we have reviewed the latest grading plan submitted for the Balboa property south of County Road #15, and west of the new Super America station, and have the following comments and recommendations: The grading fee should be based on a quantity of 5,170 cubic yards. We would recommend that the applicant obtain council approval as required by Section 35:200 of the Mound Ordinances. Applicant furnish a performance bond in the amount of $10,000.00 to cover the grading and storm sewer installation. Grading permit should not be issued until Hennepin County has issued an entrance permit. Phase I of construction should include the holding ponds, culvert under the entrance, the weir outlet and storm sewer connection to the existing catch basin. The two catch basins shown in the parking lot could be left for Phase II when the parking lot is surfaced. The catch basin and storm sewer system located in the county right-of-way appears to be a city system; therefore, condition one of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would require City approval, which we see no problem with. According to the City as-builts of this storm sewer system, the elevation at the outlet into the wetlands of Lost Lake is 929.50. This elevation and the invert of the catch basin adjacent to the new entrance need to be verified. If you have any questions, or require any additional information, please contact me. Very truly yours, MoCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron JC:jmj cc: Oulie Johnson, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District · i /'/ · / / / CYPRESS LANE '"McCOMB$-KNUT$ON ASSOCIATE:S, INC. ]%"~ COr~SULTING ENGINEERS ' LAND SURVE,S-~S September 9, 1986 R~21y To 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Ptln',outh, t,~;nnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Edward 3. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Lynwood Boulevard MSAP 145-104-03 Tuxedo Boulevard MSAP 145-101-05 Street Improvements MKA Files #7193 & #3724 Dear Ed: Enclosed is Preferred Paving's Payment Request No. 3 in the amount of $79,801.43 for work completed in August on the subject projects. Of this total, $25,070.27 is for the Lynwood Boulevard project, $9,496.20 is for the Tuxedo Safety Improvement project and $45,234.96 is from change orders 2 and 4, which is the work being done for the HRA. The amount of $45,234.96 for the NRA work will need to be paid to the Contractor by the City, but you should also bill the HRA for reimbursement in that amount. We have reviewed this request, find that it is in order and recommend payment in the above amount to the Contractor. If you have any questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 3ohn Cameron JC:cah cc: Sandy Woytcke, HRA CONI P. ACTOR PAY ESTIHATE NO. 03 PAGE 7~_93 CITY OF MOUND-LYNWOOD & TUXEDO BLVD-STREET IHPROVEMENTS 01 Ei~G!t~EER: ~cC.i'~BS-YJ~UTSON CONTRACTOR: PREFER?~D PAVIHG 12800 I~<D.PK.BL~,~}. 24 ~UTH OLIVE PLYMOUTH, MN 55441 WACONIA, MN 55387 DATE: 09/01/86 -- CONT~CTOR PAY ESTIMATE SUHMARY -- THIS PERIOD TO DATE WORK COMPLETED PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWDOD BOULEVARD PART 2-MSAP 145-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVARD MAI1ERIALS ON SITE PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD 80ULEVARD PART 8-MSAP 145-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVARD 74,005.50 243,424.45 9,996.00 16,565.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL LESS RETAINAGE - 84,001.50 PREVIOUS, 5% CU~PJENT 4,200.07 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE FOR WORK COMPLETED TO DATE LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS 79,801.48 246,990.45 -0.00 167,1~.02 TOTAL AHOUNT DUE -" 79,801.43 79,801.43 -- SUMMARY OF PF~EVIOUS PAYMENTS -- ESFIMATE NO. DATE 1 06/30/86 2 07/31/86 ENGINEER: McCOMBS-ENUTSDN AMOUNT TOTAL 116,709.63 116,709.63 50,479.39 !GT, 189.02 APPROVED: CONTRACTOR." PREFEP, RED PAVING 'FOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. 02: PAGE CI~ OF Y~OUi'~D-LYt~k'OOD & TUXEDO 8LVD-STREET i~,F'P, OVEYiENTS PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD 02 £~;GD.;EER: McCOYiBS-~O~UTSON CONTRACTOR: F'REFE~.FED PAVING !~800 Ii~D.F'K.BLVD. 24 SOUTH OLIVE FLYnOL,~H, MN S~441 WACD;IA, HN 55387 OATE: 09/01/86 -- PAYMENT SUMY, ARY FOR ~ORK COHF'LEIED TO DATE -- I~M ITEM CONTRACT UNIT .... THIS PERIOD ~0. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ~UANTITY AKOn''~' 1 80~l. EO1 ~OB!LIZATION 1.0 LS 8,500.00 0.0 0.00 2 210!.Ell C & G ROAD~'AY 1.0 LS 500.00 0.0 0.00 3 2103.501 BLDG. REMOVAL 1.0 LS 2-8,500.00 0.0 0.00 4 2-104.501 REM. ST.S.PIPE BTO.O LF 6.00 0.0 0.00 5 2-104.501 P£HO~ CO~.CEG 160.0 LF 1.00 35.0 3S.00 6 2-104.503 EEHOVE SIDEWALK 1,670.0 SF 0.35 0.0 0.00 ? 2-104,509 REMOVE MH OR CB 4.0 EA 175.00 0.0 0.00 B 2-104.509 REMOVE ~ALLS 1.0 LS 2,500.00 0.0 0.00 9 ~104.5~.3 SALVAGE CASTING 2-.0 EA 75.00 0.0 0.00 I0 2!04.?_3 SALVAGE L.POLE 1.0 EA 110.00 0.0 0.00 11 2-105.501 COHMON EXCAV. ~,600.0 0¥ 4.00 0.0 0.00 12- 2105.523 COHHON BORROW 0.0 CY 0.00 0.0 0.00 ~ 2105.525 TOPSOIL ~RROW 2-20.0 CY 6.00 0.0 0.00 2-130.501 WATER 2B.O GA 1.50 0.0 0.00 15 221!.501 ADD, BASE CL.2 45.0 TN 18.00 0.0 0.00 16 2211.501 AGG. BASE CL.5 1,360.0 TN B. O0 120.0 ~60.00 17 2Ek31.504 BIT NAT FOR NIX 2-5.0 TN 165.00 0.0 0.00 lB 8331.514 BA~ COURSE MIX 585.0 TN 13.80 0.0 0.00 19 8341.504 BlT MAT FOR MiX 81.0 TN 165.00 0.0 0.00 80 2-341.508 ~EAE COURSE MIX 390.0 TN 17.00 0.0 0.00 81 8357.508 BIT MAT - TACK 125.0 GA 1.50 0.0 0.00 82 2358.501 BIT MAT - PRIME 750.0 GA 1,50 0.0 0.00 83 ES03.Sll 12" RCP ST.CL.5 106.0 LF 2-0.70 0.0 0.00 24 8503.511 lB" RCF' ST.CL.5 63.0 LF 81.85 0.0 0.00 25 2503.511 lB" RCP ST.CL.2 88.0 LF 84.40 0.0 0.00 85 2-E. 0.'-:.511 2-4' RCP ST.CL.3 2-80.0 LF 89.90 0.0 0.00 87 2503.S!I 87' RCP BT.CL.8 425.0 LF 3~.00 0.0 0.00 28 8503,5!1 30' RCP ST.CL.2 35.0 LF 40.00 0.0 0.00 89 2503.573 30' RCP C,APRON 1.0 EA 1,100.00 0.0 0.00 2:0 2506.506 DESIGN SPEC. 19.6 LF 170.00 0.0 0.00 31 8506.507 MH/CB DESIGN F 9.4 LF 170.00 0.0 0.00 3-~ 2505.507 MH/CB DESIGN C 5.8 LF 170.00 0.0 0.00 33 P505.SZG CASTD,'G AS~M.A 8.0 EA 82-S.00 0.0 0.00 34 2505.516 CASTIHG ASSEM.B 4.0 EA 2-2-S.00 0.0 0.00 35 2505,S!6 CASTD;G ASSEM.C 1.0 EA 885.00 0.0 0.00 35 2SOS.EBZ It;STALL CASTING 9.0 EA 60.00 0.0 0.00 37 ~:C,~.q~2 ~DJ.FR~.~,RIt,~, 9.0 EA 70.00 0.0 0.00 E?_i. SOS RIP RAP 6.6 CY 40.00 0,0 0.00 S'? 2Eli. BiZ G?,Ai{ULAR FILTER ;q.E', CY 18.00 O.C) 0.0{ 4r s_-o~ c~, ~ C_~,-~E. .~.LK 4,q80.0 SF 1.40 4,8~7.n 5,9!7.80 · . ~._._~ ...... ~ .. .~.,r' ~,,~ - ~. ...... TO DATE ....... QUAHTITY 1.0 1.0 1.0 185.0 ].SS. 0 1,187.0 4.0 1.0 8.0 4.0 8,600.0 0.0 0.0 85.0 0.0 1,656.0 2-~.1 469.0 0.0 0.0 185.0 0.0 103.0 73.0 86.0 2-76.0 428.0 35.0 1.0 18.6 9.6 6.0 8.0 4.0 1.0 9.0 9.0 5.0 3.0 4,~27.0 AMOUNT 8,500.00 SO0. O0 88,500.00 1,110.00 1SS.O0 415.45 700.00 8,500.00 1_50.00 440.00 10,400.00 0.00 0.00 37.50 0.00 13,~8.00 3,646.50 6,478.20 0.00 0.00 187.50 0.00 2,132.10 1,S~5.OS 8,098.40 8,2-52.40 15,408.00 1~400.00 1,100.00 3,162-.00 1,632.00 1,02-0.00 450.00 BO0. O0 885.00 S40.00 630.00 ~00.00 S4 CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. 0~: PAGE CIT~ OF hOLfND-LYNL'OOD & TUXEDO 8LVD-STEEET IMPRO~MENIS PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD B93ULEVAED -- PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR WORK COMPLETED TO DATE -- ITEM ITEM CONTRACT NO. DESgRIPTIOH QUANTITY UNIT 41.2_~.1 501 C&G DESIGN BG18 1,600.0 LF 42 2531.507 G" APRONS 140.0 SY 43 2545.Sll INSTALL L.POLE 1.0 EA 44 2545.S15 LGT.BA~, DES.E 1.0 EA 45 2545.521 3-1/8" CONDUIT 40.0 LF 46 2545.553 P~L B~BXES 2.0 EA 47 2571.502 TPJZES - MAPLE 4.0 TR 48 8571.502 TREES - ASH 4.0 TR 49 2571.502 TREES-HACKJ~ERRY 4.0 TR SO 2575.S01 ROADSIDE SEED 0.3 AC S1 2575.502 SEED, MIXTURE 5 15.0 LB 52 2575.505 ~DDINQ 1,000.0 ST S3 2575.Sll MLECH MAT TYPE1 0.6 TN 54 SB CONCRETE STEPS 20.0 RI SS ST' DRY RUBBLE MASON WALL 0.0 SF 56 SP FEI G" DIP WATE~AIN 35.0 LF S7 SP FEI.DIP FITTINGS 2GO. O LB 58 SP FEI 1-1/8' COF'PER SEE 30.0 LF 59 SP FEI 1-1/2' CO~. COCK 1.0 EA GO SP F&I 1-1/8' CURB STOP 1.0 EA 61 SP FEI G" GATE VAL~ 1.0 EA G2 SP ADJUST EXISTING G.V. 1.0 EA G3 SP ADJUST EXIST CURB 80X 2.0 EA G4 SP RELOCATE HYO. & G.V 1.0 EA GS SP FEI 8" PVg SAN.SEWER 40.0 LF GG SP FEI G" CIST' ~W.~RV. 40.0 LF 67 ST' ADJ. EXIST. MH/CB 4.0 EA 68 SP EECONSTRLCT EXIST HH ' 1.0'EA 69 SP F~I SIGN POSTS 4.0 EA ?0 SF' F&I RS-1 SIGHS 2.0 EA 71 SP FEI R7-1 SIGNS 8.0 EA 72 2105.523 EXC.COM.~RROW 2,788.0 CY 73 LOWER WATER SERVICE 1.0 EA 74 RELOCATE CUE8 STOP 1.0 EA 75 KEYSTONE RETAINING WALL 1,420.0 SF 76 1-1/2' RIGID CONDUIT-EhC 110.0 LF 77 ALT. FOR STREET LIGHT 1.0 LS 78 SP DOZER TIFE 20.0 HR 79 SF' DUILDIHG D:~O~ITIOH 1.0 LS 80 SP CO,~iF'ACTED BSMT FILL 8,000.0 CY 81 SP CO~Oll E×CAV~TION 4,000.0 CY 82 SF' F, ETAIh.~,,G k'.~LL 1,800.0 SF 83 1-I/8" F'VC COHDUIT 80.0 LF 84 HO. 8 USE k, IRE 440.0 LF UNIT PRICE QUANTITY 5.85 117.0 80. O0 llB. 0 110. O0 O. 0 520. O0 O. 0 11.75 0.0 ?00.00 o.o 7~.00 O. 0 75.00 0.0 75.00 0.0 1,500. O0 O. 0 8.30 0.0 1.70 0,0 300. O0 O. 0 llS. O0 28.0 0.00 0.0 20.70 O. 0 1.50 0.0 -* 17. O0 O. 0 ~ 115. O0 O. 0 1~. 00, O. 0 400. O0 O. 0 85.00 0.0 50. O0 O. 0 650. O0 O. 0 19. O0 O. 0 16. O0 O. 0 100. O0 O. 0 500. O0 O. 0 BO. O0 O. 0 100. O0 O. 0 100. O0 O. 0 5.85 O. 0 890. O0 O. 0 550. O0 O. 0 9.75 1,230.0 5.35 0.0 1,G49.50 0.0 70. O0 O. 0 19,951. O0 O. 0 5. O0 737.0 4.25 4,5~-7.0 9.75 1,340.0 3.85 O. 0 0.68 0.0 .... THIS PERIOD ..... AMOUNT 684.45 8,840.00 0.00 O. O0 O. O0 O. O0 0.00 O. O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,520. O0 0.00 O. O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. O0 0.00 0.00 O. O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. O0 11,992.50 0.00 O. O0 0.00 0.00 19,839.75 1E',~ 065. O0 0.00 0.00 TO DATE QUANTITY 1,652.0 112.0 0.0 1.0 40.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 · 0.0 0.0 22.0 0.0 14.0 150.0 58.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 40.0 61.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,','88.0 1.0 1.0 1,230.0 105.0 0.9 12.2 1.0 737.0 4,5.~7.0 1,c,40.0 80.0 0.0 AHOUHT 9,664.20 2,240.00 0.00 520.00 470.00 1,400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,520.00 0.00 BBB.BO 225.0 98G.00 230.00 230.00 BO0.O0 170.00 0.00 650.00 760,00 976.00 0.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14,637.00 290.00 550.00 11,~92.50 561.75 1,484.55 854.00 19,~51.00 3,685.00 1~ 2~,-.7r 308.00 0.00 CO~TP, F'~CI'OR F'A¥ E~TIMAI'E NO. 03: PAGE CITY OF MO~ID-LYNt'50D & TUXEDO BLVD-STREET I~F~R,qVEHENTS PART 1-V, SAP 145-104-03 LYN~DOD BOULEVARD O4 -- F'AYKE~{T SL~Y, ARY FOR k'ORK COMPLETED TO ~ATE -- ITEM ITEM CONTRACT ~0. DESCRIPTION (tUANTITY UNIT PRICE QUANTITY ~S 1.~g. 4 USE t!IEE 2,800.0 LF 0.90 0.0 ~ TRE.~.~CH!!;G 440.0 LF 1.40 0.0 87 RELOCATE CONTROL CABINET 1.0 LS SO0. O0 0.0 88 KOVE EXtST!~G t~.~!RES 1.0 LS 880.00 0.0 83 S?LiCE KtEiHG 1.0 LS 170.00 0.0 ~0 FOOTi.~G - RETAINING ~!ALL 300.0 LF 10.00 835.0 91 F&I FENCE--RETAINING WALL 1.0 LS 300.00 0.0 92 BIT.PATCHIh'G MN/DOT 8241 80.0 ll~ 55.00 8.0 93 EXTP~q FOR 8'x6' WET TAP B.O EA 100.00 8.0 94 EXTRA FOR 8" SADDLE TAP 8.0 EA 50.00 .- 8.0 ~S SUBGF~DE CORP£CTION 600.0 CY S.00 7S.0 9S SUE:GRADE EXCAVATION 600.0 CY 6.00 1,111.0 97 GEANUtAR BORROW (L.V.) 800.0 CY S. O0 705.0 98 GEOTEXTtLE FABRIC 1,000.0 SY 1.50 0.0 .... THIS PERIOD ..... A ~; O LI;i T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,350. O0 0.00 440.00 800, O0 100. O0 27S. 00 6,656. O0 3,525.00 0.00 ...... TO DATE ....... QUAHTITY A~;OU:qT 8,000.0 1,cO0. O0 0.0 0.00 1. o s'oo. oo 1.0 880.00 1.0 170.00 835.0 8, SSO. O0 0.0 0.00 8.0 440.00 8.0 800. O0 8.0 100. O0 75.0 37S. O0 1,111.0 6,6S6.00 70S. 0 3,5B5. O0 0.0 0.00 TOTAL PART 1-HSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD 74,005.50 843,484.4B CONTP. ACTOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. 03 PAGE CITY OF HO~D-LYNWOOO 8~ TUXEDO BLVD-STREET IMPROVE~,ENTS PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD BOULEVARD OS EHGI~EEE: ~cCO~-~S-~,UTSON COHTRACTOR: F'REFERF£D PAVING 18800 IHD.PK.BLVD. 84 SOUTH OLIVE PLYt~OUTH, MN 5S441 WACONIA, MN SS3,87 DATE: 0~/01/8G -- PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR MATERIALS ON SI~ -- l~IS PERIOD ITEM ITEM CONTRACT UNITS INVOICE UHITS ~<0. ,2ESCRIF'TION QUAHTITY DELIVERED PRICE ON SITE TOTAL ITEM VALLE IHVO ICE PRICE TO OATE Or~ I TS ON SITE TOTAL ITEM VALUE TOTAL PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYN~'OOD BOULEVARD 0.00 0.00 COhI1-RACTOR PAY ESTIMAIE NO. 0~: PAGE CiT~' OF HUU,~D-LYhLOOD & TUXEDO I~¢}-STREET I~F'ROVE~EHTS PART 1-MSAP 14S-104-03 LYN~,'OOD BOULEVARD 0~ ENG Ii,ERE: McCO~SS-KNUTSON 12800 I,~D.F K.BLkK). PLYMOUTH, MN SS441 DATE.' 09/01/86 CONTRACTOR: F'P£FEE?£D PAVING 84 SOUTH OLIVE k'ACONIA, MN 55387 -- SUHMARY OF CHANGE ORDERS -- CHA~GE ORDER NO. 01 0G/30/GG 9~998.00 ITEM ITElt ~O. DESCRIPTION 11 8105.501 COMMON EXCAV. 19 2105._q23 COHMON BORROW 55 SP DRY RU~BLE MASON I~ALL 78 81¢~S.583 EXC.COM.8ORROW ~ LOWER WATER SERVICE 74 RELOCATE CURB STOP 75 KEYSTONE RETAINING IYALI 76 1-1/8' RIGID CONDUIT-EMC 77 ALT. FOR STREET LIGHT ~VIOUS QUANTITY UNIT PRICE 8,750.00 CY 4.00 1,SO0. O0 CY G.50 1,480.00 SF 7.90 0.00 CY 0.00 0.00 EA 0.00 0.00 EA 0.00 0.00 SF 0.00 0.00 LF 0.00 0.00 L$ 0.00 CH~x~D ......... QUANTITY U!~tT PRICE 8,GO0. O0 CY 4.00 0.00 CY 0.00 0.00 SF 0.00 8,788.00 CY 5.25 1.00 EA 890.00 1.00 EA 550.00 1,480.00 ~ 9.75 110.00 LF S.35 1.00 LS 1,649.50 AMOUNT DEDUCTED -600.00 -9,750.00 -11,818.00 A~OUNT ADDED 14,G37.00 890.00 ceO. O0 13,845.00 588.50 1,649.50 VlOUS CONTRACT PRICE 188,1~.E~ + CHANGE 9,998.00 = REVISED CONTE4CT AMOUNT 199,184.~ r'ONIRACTOP, PAY ESTIHATE NO. DE: PAGE CITY OF MOL~{D-LYNW00D ~ TUXEDO BLVD-STEEET IMF'P,0VEMENTS PART 1-HSAP 145-104-03 LYN~00D BOULEVAED 0'7 Eh ..... ~E~. HcCO~'iGS-KNUTSON CONTRACTOR: P~FEF~D. ED PAVIHG 18800 IHD.PK.51_k~). 84 ~UTH OLIVE PLYMOUTH, MN S5441 WACONIA, MN SS387 DATE: 09/01/86 -- SUMHARY OF CHANGE ORDERS -- CHAI~GE OROER HO. OB 07/31/BG 70,054.80 I!EM ITEM PREVIOUS ........ NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE QUANIlTY U~IT PRICE 78 SP DOZER TIHE O. 00 HR 0.00 80.00 HR 70.00 ~ SP BUILDING DEMOLITION 0.00 kS 0.00 1.00 kS 19,~1.00 80 SP COHPACTED BSMT FILL 0.00 CY 0.00 B,000.00 ~Y S.00 81 SP COMMON EXCAVATION 0.00 CY 0.00 4,000.00 CY 4.85 8'8 SP RETAINING WALL 0.00 ~ 0.00 ' 1,800.00 ~ 9.75 8.'q 1-1/8' PUC CO)IDUII 0.00 LF 0.00 80.00 LF 3.85 84 NO. 8 USE WI~ 0.00 LF 0.00 440.00 LF 0.68 85 NO. 4 USE ~ilRE 0.00 LF 0.00 8,BO0.O0 LF 0.90 8~ TRENCHING 0.00 LF 0.00 440.00 LF 1.40 87 RELOCATE CONTROL CABINET O. O0 L$ 0.00 1. O0 LS SOO. O0 88 MOVE EXISTING WIRES 0.00 LS 0.00 1.00 L$ 880.00 8B SPLICE WIRING 0.00 L~ . 0.00 1.00 LS 170.00 P~VIOUS CONTRACT PRICE 198,1B4.~ + CHANGE 054. BO AMOUHT DEDUCTED = ~EVISED CONTRACT AHOUNT AMOUNT ADDED 1, 400. O0 1B,BSi. O0 10,000. O0 17,000.00 17,550.00 308.00 899.80 1,9B0.00 G1G.O0 SO0. O0 880.00 O0 868,178.55 CO~4TRACTOE PAY ESTIMATE NO. 0~: PAGE CITY OF F, OU)~D-LYN~OOD & TUXEDO BLVD-STRE~T IhPEOVE~EHTS PART 1-~SAP i45-104-03 LYN~OD BOULEVA~J} 08 EHS It4EER: ki:CO~SS-~UTSON 1~00 ItlD. PK.E~VD. PLYk;OUTH, MN 5S441 DATE: 0~/01/8G CONTRACTOR: PREFEEP£D PAVING B4 SOUTH OLIVE ~.ACONIA~ MN SS387 -- SUMMARY OF CHANGE ORDERS -- CHAIIGE OP~EE IlO. 03 08/13/8G 4,?PO.O0 ITEM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION 90 FOOT!t,'G - RETAINING WALL 91 FEI FEniCE-RETAINING ~ALL 98 8IT.PATCHING MN/DOT 8341 93 EXTRA FOR 8'z6' WET TAP 94 EXTRA FOR 8' SADDLE TAP PREVIOUS QUANTITY 0.00 LF 0.00 LS 0.00 TN 0.00 EA 0.00 EA £HAI~GED AHOU~T A~O~IT ~IT PRICE QUANTITY ~IT PRICE DEDUCTED ADDED 0.00 300.00 LF 10.00 3,000.00 0.00 1.00 LS 300.00 300.00 0.00 80.00 ~l SS.O0 1,100.00 0.00 8.00 EA 100.00 800.00 0.00 8.00 EA S0.00 100.00 PREVIOUS CONTRACT PRICE 8GB,178.S5 + CHANGE 4,700.00 = EEVISE_D CONTRACT AMOUNT 866,878.55 CONTRACTOR PAY ESTIMATE NO. 03 PAGE ? .'!_9,~ ~ CITY OF MOUND-I.¥N~OOD E TUXEDO BLVD-STREET IMPP, OVEI4ENTS PART 1-MSAP 145-104-03 LYNWOOD BOULEVA~ 09 E--'UCCR: McCOYiBS-KHUTSON CONTRACTOR: PREFERP, FD PAVING 1BSO0 IND.PK.BLVD. 84 SOUTH OLIVE PLYMOUTH, MN SS441 WACONIA, MN SS387 DATE: 09/01/8G -- SbgiItARY OF CHANGE ORDERS -- CHANGE ORDER ND. 04 08/13/86 ITEM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION BS SUBSRADE COE~CTION 9~ SUBGRADE EXCAVATION 97 GRANULAR BORROW (t.~.) 98 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC ~,100.00 ~REVIOUS- QUANTI~ ~IT PRICE 0.00 CY 0.00 0.00 CY 0.00 0.00 CY 0.00 0.00 SY 0.00 CHANGED QUANTITY ~IT PRICE GO0. O0 CY S. O0 600.00 CY G.O0 BO0. O0 CT 5.00 1,000.00 SY 1.SO AMOUNT DEDUCTED AMOUNT ADDED 3,000.00 3,600.00 4,000.00 1,500.00 PREVIOUS COJlITRhCT PRICE ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE 866,878.55 lBS, 128.35 + CHANGE + CHANGE 18,100.00 = REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT = REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT 878,978.55 87B,978.55 /£ 7.2_ CO~-.'TR,~CTOR F'AY ESTIMATE NO, O~ F'AGE '7193 CITY OF HOU;~D-LYN~,OD & TUXEDO BLVD-STREET IMF'EOVEMENTS PART 8-~SAP 145-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVARD lO ENG!~EEF;: F, cCOi'~2S-ENUTSON CONTRACTOR: F'REF£F, AED PAVING 1B800 IHD.PE.BLVD. 84 SOUTH OLIVE PLY~OUTH~ MN S5441 ~ACON. tA, MN 5538? DATE: Og/01/SG -- PAYMENT SUHMARY FOR WORK COMPLETED TO OATE -- ITEM ITEM CONTRACT UN IT NO. DESCP, IPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE QUANTITY i 8i01.513 CiG RT-OF-WAY 1.0 LS SO0. O0 0.0 8 8!04.501 REM CONC. C&G 80.0 LF 1.00 0.0 3 8!04.501 REM BIT CURB 180.0 LF 1.00 0.0 4 2105.501 CONNON EXCA¥. 15.0 CY G. O0 0.0 S 8105.SB3 COMMON BORROW 400.0 CY G.50 0.0 G 8105.585 TOPSOIL BORROW 70.0 CY 6.00" 0.0 ? 8331.504 BIT MAT FOR MIX 1.G ~i 165.00 0.0 8 ~331.S14 BASE COURSE. MIX 35.0 TN 17.00 0.0 9 8341.S04 BIT MAT FOR MIX O.G TN 1GS.00 0.0 10 8341.508 WEAR COURSE MIX 10.0 TN 80.00 0.0 11 8357. S08 BIT NAT-TACK 5.0 GAL 1.50 0.0 12 B503.Sll 18' RCP ST.CL.5 5.0 LF 87.00 0.0 8S05.50B NH/CB DESIGN H 1.0 EA 170.00 0.0 8SOG._qlG CAST ASSENE~IES 1.0 EA 885.00 0.0 15 8535.~01 BITUMINOUS CURB 170.0 LF 4.00 0.0 1G 8554.501 DESIGN A 180.0 EF S8.00 1G8.0 17 857i.508 TREES - MAPLE 4.0 EA 75.00 3.0 18 8571.S08 TREES - A~d 4.0 EA 75.00 3.0 19 8571.541 TRANSPLANT TREE 8.0 EA 75.00 8.0 80 8575.505 SODDING 540.0 SY 1.70 0.0 BI SP RELOCATE EXISTING CB 1.0 L8 150.00 0.0 .... THIS PERIOD ..... O. O0 O. O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -q~3~. O0 B£5. O0 B85. O0 150. O0 O. O0 0.00 ...... TO DATE ....... QUANTITY 1.0 80.0 175.0 8~.0 400.0 40.0 8.0 43.0 O.B 14.8 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 180.0 1G-~. 0 3.0 3.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 AMOUNT 500.00 80.00 175. O0 !50. O0 8,600.00 84 O. O0 E~O.O0 731. O0 lsd. O0 884. O0 7.50 135. O0 170. O0 825. O0 780. O0 9,Sq_G.O0 885. O0 825. O0 150. O0 0.00 150.00 TOTAL PART 8-MSAP 145-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVARD 9, .c~6. O0 1G,565.50 CONTP. ACTOE PAY ESTIMATE NO. 0~: PAGE CITY OF MObg,{D-LYNWOOD & TUXEDO BLVO-STEEET IMF'EOVEMENTS PART 8-MSAP 14S-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVARD EttG!t~EER: McCO,gBS-KNUT~N CONT~CTOR: PREFERF~ED PAVIHG 18800 IHD.PK.BLVD. 84 SOUTH OLIkE PLYMOUTH, MN SS441 WACONIA, MN SS387 DATE .' 09/01/8G -- PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR MATERIALS ON SITE -- THIS PERIOD ITEM ITEM CDNTRACI lrN ITS INk, ICE L~{ITS NO. DESCEIPilON QUANTITY DELIVERED PRICE ON SITE TOTAL ITEM VAL~ TO DATE IHVO ICE ~d ITS PRICE ON SITE TOTAL ITEH VALUE. TOTAL PART 8-MSAP 145-101-05 TUXEDO BOULEVAPJ) 0.00 0.00 ORIGIh'AL CONTRACT PRICE 18,443.50 + CHANGE 0.00 = REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT 18,443.50 RESOLUTION NO. 86- Septer,~.ber 16, 1986 RESOLUTION RELEASING CERTAIN TAX FORFEIT LA[iDS TO HEI~NEPIN COUNTY FOR PUBLIC AUCTIOI~ AND CERTIFYING THE SPECIAL ASSESS},;EI~TS WHEREAS, the City of Mound has been informed by the Department of Property Taxation of Hennepin County that certain lands within the City have been forfeited for non-payment of real estate taxes; and WHEREAS, the parcels do comply with the City's zoning ordinance or building codes and are not adverse to the health, safety and general welfare of residents of this City; and },'HEREAS, all special assessments were cancelled at the time of forfeiture and may be reassessed after the property is returned to private ownership pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.02 (also note: M.S. 429.07, S'ubd. 4; M.S. 435.23 and M.S 444.076); and ' WHEREAS, all special assessments that have been levied since forfeiture shall be included as a separate item and added to the appraised value of any such parcel of land at the time it is sold (M.S. 282.01, Subd. 3); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: That the following parcels of tax forfeited land are released to the County of Hennepin for public auction and the City hereby certifies the following special assessments: ¥/19-117-23 32 0192 (Lots 23 & 24, Block 11, Wychwood) AMOUNT BEFORE FORFEITURE LEVY # ~;OU~T 7928 $ 6,709.80 A~:OUNT AFTER FORFEITURE LEVY # .AI~OU~T NONE ~/19-117-23 32 01 96 (Lots 21, 22, Block 11 , Wychwood) 7928 $ 6,947.53 NONE The Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to release the aforementioned lands for sale at public auction subject to the County imposing the lien of special assessments on said lands. September 16, 1986 The City of Mound is releasing the above properties subject to street and utility easements being retained by the City of Mound. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Counc ilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A RELEASE IN THE CASE OF MOUND V. SANDER AND COMPANY, INC. WHEREAS, when the Mound City Hall was constructed in the early 1970s, a problem soon arose with the skylight in the roof leaking and WHEREAS, numerous remedies were sought to correct this problem, and experts were hired to ascertain the cause of the problem and methods of correcting the problem, and WHEREAS, over the years numerous things were attempted including a process applied by Sander and Company, Inc. of a product manu- factured by General Electric Company, Inc., and that said process was suggested in an attempt to resolve the problem, and ~EREAS, after the skylight was fixed, the City acquired a guarantee of the process, and subsequent to said time, the leak resumed and the City has sustained damages, and ~EREAS, as a result of the damages, the City was unable to get the matter resolved and brought litigation against Sander and Co., Inc. and General Electric Company and continued to hold the architects as a potential defendant, and ~EREAS, after extensive discussions, discovery procedures, and other procedures prior to trial, the City Attorney and the various defendants have arrived at a recommended settlement amount of $7,500, and WHEREAS, it is determined to be in the best interests of the City to resolve said litigation for numerous reasons and to bring this matter to a close, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a release on behalf of the City of Mound releasing Sander & Co., Inc., General Electric Company, and James O'Brien from any further legal liability relating to the installation of a General Electric silicone roofing system on City Hall. Said release shall be executed upon receipt of the sum of $7,500 from the aforedescribed parties. 2. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to execute all other documents necessary to release the lawsuit with prejudice. Attest: Mayor City Clerk A t~OmAS WUR$?, Curtis A PEARSON, JAMES D LAR$ON, P.A. thOmaS F UNDERWOOD, P.A. ~OgEr ~. fELLOWS LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, LARSON & UNderWOOD IlO0 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 September 9, 1986 TELEfmHONE (612) 338-4200 Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Mound v. Sander and Company Dear Ed: You will recall sometime back I had an executive meeting with you and the City Council concerning the City's lawsuit against Sander and Company for damages as the result of the sky light leak. This has been an on-going problem for a long period of time, and we eventually commenced litigation and Jim Larson commenced the lawsuit against Sander and Company. I reported to the City Council that we had an offer of $6,000, and I felt that was insufficient. Discussions with the Council indicated that if we could obtain $7,500, the Council would be willing to settle the matter. Our demands were slightly in excess of $10,000, but as we previously indicated, Mr. Kopp's memory was such that we were not sure about the exact amount of alleged damages and we felt it would be difficult to prove the damages in court. We have had contact with the various parties and have obtained an agreement on the part of defendants to pay the sum of $7,500. I am enclosing herewith a copy of the check made payable to the City of Mound and Jim Larson along with copies of the release and a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice. I have also prepared a resolution for the Council's consideration at its meeting on September 16. Assuming everything is in order, I will have t?~e release at the meeting on September 16 along with the check, and if the Council approves the settlement we can get everything signed, forward the documents to the insurance ~company, and get this resolved. If you have any questions, please contact me. Very truly yours, Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney CAP: Ih September 16, 1986 RESOLUTION NO. _ 86-115 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A RELEASE IN THE CASE OF MOUND V SANDER AND COMPANY, INC. ' WHEREAS, when the Mound City Hall was constructed in the early 1970s, a problem soon arose with the skylight in the roof leaking, and WHEREAS, numerous remedies were sought to correct this problem, and experts were hired to ascertain the cause of the problem and methods of correcting the problem, and WHEREAS, over the years numerous things were attempted including a process applied by Sander and Company, Inc. of a product manu- factured by General Electric Company, Inc., and that said process was suggested in an attempt to resolve the problem, and WHEREAS, after the skylight was fixed, the City acquired a guarantee of the process, and subsequent to said time, the leak resumed and the City has sustained damages, and WHEREAS, as a result of the damages, the City was unable to get the matter resolved and brought litigation against Sander and Co., Inc. and General Electric Company and continued to hold the architects as a potential defendant, and WHEREAS, after extensive discussions, discovery procedures, and other procedures prior to trial, the City Attorney and the various defendants have arrived at a recommended settlement amount of $7,500, and WHEREAS, it is determined to be in the best interests of the City to resolve said litigation for numerous reasons and to bring this matter to a close, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a release on behalf of the City of Mound releasing Sander & Co., Inc., General Electric Company, and James O'Brien from any further legal liability relating to the installation of a General Electric silicone roofing system on City Hall. Said release shall be executed upon receipt of the sum of $7,500 from the aforedescribed parties. 2. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to execute all other documents necessary to release the lawsuit~wi~h prejudice. Attest: Mayo~ - City Clerk~aJ~ ~ SH L. Ro[ff. RT H YaLG~R BONNIE AL)C~ P[1ERSON WILLIAM R. JOHNSON KATHLEEN NICOL BEHOUNEK THOMAS L. THOMt~ON MICHAEL G, LAW OFFICES LANCE B. NYBERG & ASSOCIATES SUIT£ 145 · 441 WAYZKIA BOULEVARD GOI. DEN VALLEY. MINNESOta 55426 (612) 593-0307 September 3, 1986 James D. Larson WURST, PEAIRSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD Attorneys at Law 1100 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 556,02 Re: City of Mound vs. Sander & Co., Inc. Our File No. 8t4-4..389 Dear Mr. Larson: Enclosed please find the following: Original and three copies of the Release; Original and four copies of the Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice. 3. Proposed Order of Dismissal. Please obtain the signature of a person properly authorized by the City of Mound on the Releases, and return them to me before negotiating the draft. If you have any questions, please telephone me immediately. Sincerely you ~rs~ Thomas L. Thompson ~ /dmb Enclosures CC: Sol ly Johnson James O~3rien Joe Schader, Fireman's Fund Claim No: L-460219 RELEASE That, I, , on behalf of the City of Mound, for the sole consideration of $7,500.00 release and forever discharge Sander & Co, Inc. and its insurer, Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, General Electric Company and its insurer, if any, and James O'Brien and Williams, O'Brien & Associates, Inc. and its insurer, if any, and his, her, their, and its successors and assigns, heirs, executors, administrators, and all other persons, firms, ane corporations, of and from any and all claims, demands, rights, and causes of action of whatsoever kind and nature arising from, and by reason of any and all known and unknown, foreseen and unforeseen damage to property, and the consequent thereof, resulting, or to result, from the installation of a GE silicone roofing system on the Mound City Hall by Sander & Co. including but not limited to all claims of the City of Mound for breach of contract, breach of warranty express or implied, negligent installation, and negligent design for which the City of Mound has claimed that Sander & Co., GE Company, and James O'Brien/Williams O'Brien & Associates, Inc. to be legally liable, said liability being expressly denied. IN WTINESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this day of in the year one thousand nine hundred eighty-six. City of Mound , being duly sworn, deposes and states that he/she is the of the City of Mound, and that he/she is duly authorized by the City of Mound to sign the Release discharging Sander & Co., Inc., General Electric Company, and James O'Brien. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1986. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT City of Mound, a Minnesota r~'~ unicipal corporation, Plaintiff, VS. Sander & Co., Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, VS. General Electric Company, Third-Party Defendant. STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Court File No: 85-17711 The above entitled action, including all Crossclaims, Counterclaims, and Third Party Complaints interposed herein, having been fully compromised and settled, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties, through their respective attorneys, that the same is hereby dismissed on the merits and with prejudice, but without costs and disbursements to any of the parties. Dated: LANCE 19. NYBERG & ASSOCIATES Thomas L. Thompson Attorney for Defendant Attorney Reg. No. 109423 Suite 145 8441 Wayzata Boulevard Golden Valley, MN 55426 612-593-0307 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal corporation, Plaintiff, VS. Sander & Co., Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, VS. General Electric Company, Third-Party Defendant. ORDER OF DISMISSAL Court File No: 85-1771{ Upon this foregoing Stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Judgment of Dismissal with Prejudice on the merits, without cost to any party, be entered in the above-entitled matter. BY THE COURT: Dated this day of , 1986. Judge of the District Court MEMO T0: CAP FROM: JDL DATE: July 22, 1986 RE: Mound vs. Sander We have received an offer from Fireman's Fund, Sander's insurer, of $6000 to settle the roof lawsuit. We have alleged damages of: $ 9,488 2,700 125 $[2,31~ replacement roof repaint City-Hall water damaged books In December, 1985, we received an offer of $3,500. We counter offered $10,000 and they have come back at $6,000. Here are some points to consider: 1. The cost of the 1980 G.E. roof was $7,500, half paid by the architect. ($1,000 of it was for a two year warranty extension. At his deposition, Len Kopp was unsure whether the water damage caused by leaks before 1980 was repaired before the G.E. roof was installed. The G.E. roof warranty was a three (3) year warranty. The warranty was extended to five (5) years, but G.E. is claiming that the extension was done by Sander without G.E. approval. Before we try the case, G.E. will try to get out of the case because the suit was ~tarted after the t~,~ ~ ~ · .~e_ (3) year period lapsed. Williams/O'Brien is not a party to the lawsuit at this point, but would be joined by Sander if the matter is not settled. My guess is that each party has put up some money, e.g. Sander 2,000, G E 2,000, O'Brien 2,000. · · Williams/ ! ~On't thl-~ ~ we would bare a problem estab~/shinc i'f~e ~oof was sur-..~oged to stop the l=aks -~ ~ ,~ - .... ~ ' ~ _ - . , :~,5~"=~ of l~', =ntit~ed to the c~=~ - ~ ~'= the new roof as d:~m;c~=. / MEMO - Page Two TO: CAP FROM: JDL DATE: July 22, 1986 RE: Mound vs. Sander G.E. roof (7500 ~ 2) = 3,750 repaint City Hall = 2,700 damaged books = 125 '6,575 The matter is scheduled for arbitration under the new Rules of Court on October 14, 1986. A fair amount of preparation will be necessary so we need to establish quickly whether the matter is settled. JDL:td CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~,<), /- ED SI-IUKLE, CITY MANA{.~_ER PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY - CHECK LIST FOR REFERENDUM SEPTEMBER 16, 1986 At the August 26, 1986, City Council meeting, the City Council directed me to prepare a checklist.of work activities in preparing for the Public Works Facility Referendum scheduled for November 4, 1986. In the discussion of this issue, it was clear that the Council would consider the original report site (Westedge Blvd.). The resolution authorizing the referendum does not specifically state a site location for the proposed facility. However, preparation for the referendum will be much easier if we are focusing our attention to a specific site rather than two sites. We need to be clear and concise when we are presenting our proposal to the public. Therefore, the following activities wi]l need to be carried out whether we select the City Hall/Fire Station site or the Westedge Blvd. site: 1. Preparation of a.fact sheet. 2. Preparation of bonding costs by Miller and $chroeder. 3. Preparation of site plans by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc., Inc.- 4. Schedule and hold two public information meetings, possibly sponsored by two community organizations. 5. Preparation of presentation materials for information meetings. 6. Preparation of cost estimates for building construction and related costs including design fees, legal fees, bonds, advertising for bids and all other related costs. 7. Preparation of press releases. 8. Schedule and hold information meetings for City employees. 9. Meet with Planning Commission. 10. Meet with Senior Citizens and Fire Department.. An equal opportunity Employer that does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or handicapped status in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its programs and activities. Public Works Facility Memo Page 2 September 16, 1986 In addition to the above items, the followlng activities would apply to the City Hall/Fire Station site: 1. Revise site plans and building plans per the City Council action of 8-26-86, which eliminated $200,000 of reductions from the 1.7 million proposal. The following would apply to the Westedge Blvd. site: 1. Revise plans originally designed for this site, based upon the building size and facilities as the City Hail/Fire Station site. 2. Within the cost estimate, include cost for site improvements. The City Council should serlousty consider changing the si.te. The Westedge Blvd. site was the original recommended site by the Public Works Building Committee and the project engineer. It is true that the special election failed in April 1986, by only~34 votes, and could have resulted in an affirmative vote if more voters had participated -in the election. However, other factors caused itS.:' failure, including the proposed site. Many people did not like the idea of building next to the City Hall. Some were against the removal of many trees on both the east and west side of the City Hall. Others were against it because of the inconvenience it would have caused for the Public Works department in carrying out their duties. The Fire Department, for example, was not totally in favor of the site because it prohibited any future expansion of the Fire Hall. What was obvious to all of us howeveK, was that we were trying to "squeeze" an approximately 30,000 square foot building, which had been proposed for a three acre site, onto a one and one half acre site, thereby driving the estimated cost upward. I think a review of the advantages of this site as originally prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderl'ik & Assoc., Inc., in 1'983 and endorsed by the Public Works Building Committee is in order: 1. Site conditions appear adequate for support of structures and storage areas. 2. No adjacent residential area. 3. Southward slope of land is advantageous for partial earth sheltering of building and utilization of passive solar energy. 4. Sanitary sewer service is available on the site. 5. Storm water runoff can be feasibly controlled. 6. Ingress and egress for the site will not be hazardous to traffic. 7. Engine and other noises will not be a cause of irritation to adjoining properties. 8. Site is of sufficient size for purpose. 9. Site is owned by City and will not require additional expenditure of funds. 10. Watermain available by a minimal extensions. 11. Property is adjacent to railroad and therefore provides a suitable use area. Public Works Facility Memo Page 3 September 16, 1986 12. Site is hidden from view of public. Therefore, complaints regarding - storage of materials will be minimal. 13. Two directional travel available. Only three disadvantages were cited: 1. Site not centrally located in City. 2. Water service must be extended. 3. Bridge to south is small to accomodate large truck traffic (large vehicles would have to use Westedge Blvd. to County Road 15). Brad Lemberg, project engineer, in a letter dated August 14, 1986, and submitted to you at the 8-26-86 Council meeting, a copy of which is attached, indicated the possible cuts that could be made to reduce the total estimated cost of the Public Works Facility. Brad used the City Hall/Fire Station site and ran a parallel comparison with the Westedge Blvd. site. Please note that he anticipated the costs on theWestedge Blvd. site to be even less than on the City Hall/Fire Station site. Based upon his projections, it would appear that the maximum amount on the Westedge Blvd. site would fall below the 1.5 million dollar referendum you have authorized. Depending upon what the actual bids are, we may have an easier time reinstating the cuts at the Westedge Blvd. location, than at the City Hall/Fire Station site. It should be noted that the Public Works Department would prefer the Westedge Blvd. site, based upon the list of advantages stated above. They have always felt that this site was a better location for the facility. Thus, it is my recommendation that we settle upon a site at this point in time. I am recommending that we change the site to the Westedge Blvd. location and prepare for the November 4th referendum, based upon the Westedge Blvd. location. ES:ls Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 612.636.4600 August 14, 1986 Engineers & Architects City of Mound City Hall 5341 Mayvood Road Hound, HN 55364 Attn: Mr. Ed Shukle City Manager Re: Possible Revisions for Public Works Bldg. City of Mound, ~fl~ File No. 21402 Dear Ed, Enclosed are our brief analysis sheets showing possible reductions in the proposed Public Works Building cost estimates. lC should be kept in mind chat these are estimates based on preliminary sketches. It should also be kept in mind Chat there will probably be an increase of cost this coming year due to inflation. You will note that the items listed may be some of the. desired amenities and will have to be provided for in the future if cut at this time. We would suggest that after you have had time to review these items that we meet to discuss the total situation. Yours very truly, BONESTRO0, ROSENE, ANDERLI~/~ ASSOCIATES, INC. Bradfog/d A. Lemberg, ~.m. ~ BAL:li - ' Encl. 7193d 30 Year Mound, Minnesota - August 13, 1986 Public Works Building Posslble Cost Cutting Revisions ON CITY HALL/FIRE STATION SITE A. Possible Buildin~ Cost Cuts 1. Delete bituminous paving for present Install crushed rock base 2. Delete concrete curb & gutter 3. Delete concrete walks 4. Minimize landscape plantings 5. Delete painting of shop & storage areas 6. Delete lube equipment 7. Delete small hoist 8. Delete fuel pumps & storage tanks TOTAL .= ................................. B. Possible Storage Area Cuts 1. Delete bituminous surface 2. Delete curb & gutter TOTAL .................................. $ 19,500 3,000 4,000 5,000 8,000 10,000 5,000 40,000 $ 94,500 17,546 720 18,266 C. Other Cuts 1. Cut contingency for old bldg. retrofit TOTAL POSSIBLE CUTS - A+B+C $100,000 $212,766 D. Revised Recap of Costs Original Est. for construction Possible deducts A+B +10% Eng., legal, admiu. TOTAL (deleted. contingency) ........................ $ 1,470,000 - 112,766' $ 1,357,234 USE $1,500,000 E. Conclusion: The only means of cutting the project cost any further would be to cut the size of the building. This would have to be agreeable to the city staff since it would mean cutting some service areas or storage area. Also the cuts shown will decrease some staff efficiency and over the life cycle are not really F. Other Comments: It should be kept in mind that these estimates are based on past experience and on preliminary sketches. A 10% margin should be used in setting a budget to allow for variation in contractors bids, bidding time and possible inflation of prices by the time the project proceeds. In other words, this project may come in between $1,350,000 and $1,650,000. 7193d Page 1. ON ORIGINAL REPORT SITE (Old Treatment Plant Site) Assuming same building size and facilities as on City Hall/Fire Station Site. The following items could possibly be omitted or changed. A. Possible Cuts: 1. Delete bituminous paving (Bldg. Area) 2. Delete concrete curb and gutter 3. Delete concrete walks 4. Delete landscape plantings (Bldg.) 5. Delete painting of shops & storage areas 6. Delete lube equipment 7. Delete small hoist 8. Delete fuel pumps & storage tanks 9. Delete storage area bituminous 10. Delete curb & gutter from storage 11. Minimize storage area:grading 12. Reduce building excavation 13. Delete wood fence 14. Delete storage area plantings 15. Delete sod from storage area 16. Revise bldg. shell to a basically prefabricated metal building Reduce cost by 1.96% .0196 x $1,409,800 ' TOTAL POSSIBLE REDUCTION ..................... $ 19,500 3,000 4,000 10,000 8,000 10,000 5,000 40,000 17,546 720 1,000 20,000 3,500 4,000 2,900 27~650 $176,81~ B. Revised Recap...of Costs 1. Original estimate of const. (on city hall site) 2. Possible deducts 3. Possible contingency deduct +10% gugr/Arch, legal, admiu. $1,470,000 - 176,816 1,100~000 i93,184 .119,316 $1,312,500 C. Based on same as I-E & I-F above Possible range of costs: $1,181,250 to $1,443,750 7193d Page 2. A thOmAS WURSt, P.A. CuntJs A. pEAmSON, P.A. ~JANE$ D, LARSON. P.A. THOMAS F, UNDERWOOD, P.A. ~OGER ~J. ~ELLOW~ LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD IlO0 FIRST BANK PLACE wEST MINNEAPOLIS~ MINNESOTA 55402 September 9, 1986 Jan Bertrand Building official 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: 5516 Lynwood Dear Jan: Please review in the 9-16 agenda, the enclosed and then give to Ed for together with the written report. Very truly, yours, ~'2me s~'D. Larson inclusion JDL:td September , 1986 Mr. Randy Bickmann 815 Cedar Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 Re: Property Located at 5516 Lynwood Mound, Minnesota Dear Mr. Bickmann: Boulevard The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, at its regular meeting on September 16, 1986, adopted Resolution No. which is attached to and made a part of this Notlflcation~d Order. ~ . copy of Through this Resolution, the City Council found the structure located at 5516 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, 55364 to be a "hazardous building. within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes 1986, Section 463.15, Subdivision 3. 'In accordance with the aforementioned Resolution, you are hereby ordered either (1) to repair fully the deficiencies which are enumerated in the Resolution and which render the structure in question hazardous or (2) to raze and remove that hazardous structure. Unless an answer is served upon the City of Mound and filed with the Clerk of District Court of Hennepin County, Minnesota, within twenty (20)~ days of the date of service of this Order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this Order will be made to the District Court in and for Hennepin County. Should you serve and file an answer to this Order within the twenty (20) 'day time period mentioned above, and should you further promise to undertake one or the other of the corrective actions demanded herein, you will have thirty (30) days from the date of service of this Order upon you to complete that corrective action. You are hereby further advised that if it becomes proper and necessary for the City of Mound to take any corrective action specified herein, all necessary costs of that action will become a lien against the real estate on which the hazardous building or condition exists, which lien will be levied and collected as a special assessment in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1986, Section 463.21. Mayor ~r introduced the following Member resolution and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF UNSANITARY, UNSAFE, AND HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS EXISTING AT 5516 LY~OOD BOULEVARD IN THE CITY OF MOUND AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER AN ORDER WITH RESPECT TO THIS HAZARDOUS AND DANEROUS BUILDING. WHEREAS, the City Building official for the City of Mound has made a written report to the City Council relative to the condition of the structure at 5516 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, which structure is deemed by said Building official to be in an unsanitary, unsafe, hazardous and dangerous condition; and WHEREAS, in said report the Building official has recommended that proceedings be commenced for the abatement, correction, razing or removal of said structure and hazardous conditions pursuant to applicable statutes of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, said report has been examined and considered by the City Council. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound as follows: 1. That the unsanitary, unsafe, hazardous and dangerous conditions existing at 5516 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota, be abated or corrected in the manner described by the report of the Building official. 2. That the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Mound are authorized and directed to enter an order directed to the owner of the premises at 5516 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota and to all lien holders of record which Order shall direct owner and lien holders to correct, raze or remove the building thereon. 3. The City Attorney is authorized and directed to cause said order to be served upon the o~..~ners of record of said building, or their agents, upon any occupants therein and to proceed with the enforcement of said Order all (~1986). as provided in Minn. Stat. 463.15-463.26 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following v~.d~_~n favor ~hereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -2- KEPOF?. OF INSPECTION P£LATI~q~ TO HAZARDOUS AND D~f~EROUS BUILDING(S) AT CITY OF ~OUND 5516 Lynwood Boulevard DATE July 30, 1986 SITE ADDP~ESS Structural, Mechanical and Electrical Construction WHAT INSPECTED Resident ial ppI~CIPAL USES ~SE ZONE B-1 Central Business FIRE ZONE -~LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 6, 7 and 8, Koehlers Addition to Mound P~D Number 13-117-24 33 0028 OVYN ER ADDRESS Loretta E. Corbett et al Rand E. Bickmann 815 Cedar. Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN. 55404 PHONE AGENT ADDRESS !UPANTS ADDRESS HEIRS PHONE PHONE PHONE. ADDFESS ~ ~A RDI AN PHONE ADD?J~SS Li EN-H OLDEP~S ADDF£SS Wood Framed Residential BuildinE CO,,S~P[C-ION O[ BUILDING PHONE NO. OF STOPIES Fuel Oil Fired Boiler converted to gas. TYPE OF HEA?INC~ PLANT Appears to be in Eood condition ~iO!' O? Ht.A~!b~G ~A~T ............................ ,,,~ ..... ~r~,- -;r'.': -~':"~C''~'r~t'l"'~'r!/~inoperable at time _of insPec.tion.· ................ .......... irt? BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZARDOUS & DkNGEROU~ ELECTRIC LIGHTING AND WIRING BX, Greenfield and Romex In general, electrical wiring is fairly new. Inadequate number of CONDITION OF A~OVEj0.electrical outlets and other reoair required, KIND OF ROOF.Asphalt ShfnKle$ CONDITION OF ROOF In severe state of distress and need of replacement, Foundation walls exhibiting cracking and concrete showing signs of CONDITION OF BASE,tENT. spallingo Basement is in a very wet condition. Most all windows showing severe rotting of the frame and glass CONDITION OF WINDOWS missing in most, ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR PROVIDED Basement and crawl sDace under porch does not cont~n adequate ventilation. CONDITION OF SILLS.Severly rotted. Brick ch~ney, needs major repair and stone chimney in good CONDITION OF CHIMNEYS condition but does not appear to c'ontain foundation beneath ~t, ATTIC: HOW USED Attic is not used. CONDITION OF FOUNDATION WALL Concrete is cracked and spelling. CONDITION OF BEARING WALLS Adequate CONDITION OF NON-BEARING WALLS Adequate CONDITION OF EXTERIOR WALLS Most exterior walls are showing moisture penetration. In general, unaccep, table. Many areas do not meet code due to CONDITION OF PLUt~BING ~n~w~r~r~ n~' tr~p~ nv ~,,~t~ went~ng. CONDITION OF OTHER SANITARY FACILITIES Not Known. CONDITION OF COOKING EQUIPMENT. Inoperable. -~' MUNICIPAL WATER ? WELL CONDITION OF INTERIOR, LATH A/~D PLASTER, ETC. MUNICIPAL S~ER_ y~ In severe need of repair. TYPE D. ND CONDITION OF FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT OR FACILITIES Nonexistent DIMENSION OF BUILDING Approximately 27' by 27' SETBACKS, FRONT REAR SIDES DISTANCE FROM OTHER BUILDINGS okay The residence is a two story wood frame structure which is exhibiting RE~PJ<,S IN GENEP~L severe deterioration at both the u~per and lower roof areas. Substantial amounts of rotting are apparent and the roof overhangs could experience str% .raj failure. Considerable moisture penetration through the roof into ~he exterior walls or ceiling areas of the residence is apparent. repair due to nonoccupancy and vandalism. Interior of the dwelling is in serious need of BUILDING INSPECTiO~ (HAZAPDOUS & D~GEROUS) Nk~,~,ES OF ALL INSPECTORS WHO INSPECTED THE PREMISES AND FILED REPORTS: · Daubenberger, Van Doren_Hazard-Stallings, Inc. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector, City of Mound CObq~CIL HEARING L ACTION BUILDING poSTED ORDER SERVED TiME FOR COMPLIANCE HOW SERVED COURT ACTION TAKEN · FILED WITH CLERK OF COURT FILED WITH COUNTY RECORDER · - '~ /? DATE - DATE DATE DATE DATE ._ DATE DATE DATE · DATE LIST SEPARATELY ALL PEP~ITS ISSUED FOR BUILDING PAGE THREE BUILDING INSPECTION (HAZARDOUS & DANGEROUS) BUILDING HEATING PLUMBING 9-27-58 Building Per'it to instal] bathroom # 91 5-]5-69 Sewer Connection Permit # ]648 New ]00 Amp electric service installed ]982.due to.an electrical fire. CONCLUSIONS: IS BUILDING A FIRE HAZAP. D? Yes i~HY Due tO nonoccupancy of ~ entrance could be ained b vandals with a fire hazard being realized. Previous vandalism has occurred and fires set inside the residence. IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY? 'Yes for the dwelling being a fire hazard. krHY For the same reason sited IS BUILDING A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH Yes ~,rHy Due to nonoccupancy of the dwelling and no operable services. Access-gained by vandals etc.- would present a potentiaz public health hazard. Improper and inadequate 'plumbing and wiring present a hazard. P~CO~ENDATION:. CHECK O}IE REPAIR (LIST ALL REAPIRS REQUIP~D) REMOVAL WERE PHOTS TAKEN? No IF SO, ATTACH COPIES TO THE REPORT. 61 I ~ I I ,/..I 1o'1 I HEI~,,~-PIN ]"L ASSESSOR A-2103 Government Center 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 5548 7-0213 July 31, 1986 Jan Bertrand Building Inspector 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Jan, Re: Your Inquiry - PID #13-117-24-33-0028 5516 Lynwood Boulevard The above described property was inspected by one of our appraisers on January 21, 1986. Based on that inspection, the January 2, 1986, estimated market value was determined to be: Land Building Total 1986 EMV $33,000 $i8,000 $51,000 At that time it was discovered that the building value had been omitted from several prior years assessments. A copy of my Letter to Mr. Randy E. Bickman, notifying him of "omitted property" corrections is attached. On April 17, 1986, Mr. Bickman called me and requested a review appraisal to possibly lower the 1986 estimated market value. The inspection for the review appraisal was done on May 19, 1986. On that inspection, the review appraiser noted that the property was vacant, had been vandalized, and was in too poor condition to do a full interior inspection. I called Mr. Bickman and told him we would not be changing the 1986 EMV, but that I had scheduled the property for a review to determine its condition and value as of Janaury 2, 1987. If you have any further questions regarding our valuations on this property, please contact me at 348-3046. Very truly yours, Keith M. ~ Principal Appraiser KMR:jb Enc. HEI k,IEPiN COUIqTY an equal opportunity cmlgio,/¢r ASSESSOR A-2i03 Government Ceni'er 300 Soui'h Sixth S'treei Minneapolis, Minnesola 55z157-02'13 lqarch 7, 1986 Randy E. Bickman 815 Cedar Avenue So. Minneapolis, MN 55404 Dear Mr. Bickman: Re: 5516 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota PID ¢13-117-24-33-0028 A review of our records has revealed that the building value for the above described property has been omitted from the assessment records since January 2, 1979. Your 1986 estimated market value notice will include both the land and building value. Also, you will be receiving adjustments to prior years taxes based on the corrected values as follows: ~~¢~ Assessment Date January 2, 1981 january 2, 1982 january 2, 1983 January 2, 1984 January 2, 1985 Original Estimated Market Value (Land Only) $27,000 $29,700 $29,700 $29,700 $29,700 Estimated Market Value (Land & Building) $46,000 $48,500 $51,000 $51,000 $51,000 If you have any questions, please contact me at 348-3046. Very truly yours, Keith M. Rer..nerfeldt Principal Appraiser KI<R' jb HENNEPIN COUNIY Re: 5516 Lynwood Boulevard - Owner, Randy Bickmann 5-15-86 House is down on Fern Kraus Anderson ~516 Lynwood Boulevard 10 plus windows broken, east side overhang is on ground and rotted; front door broken and open; overhang/eaves are rotted. First Floor Unsafe fireplace - hearth, brick; floor/foundation/wood supporting - no clearance. Waterdama§ed ceilings at first floor. Plaster cracking through- out first floor and falling off. Carpet is torn and worn. Interior doors and woodwork throughout are in poor condition. First floor bathroom walls have window rotting, finish falling off walls with possible-rotting structural members. Floor finish in very poor condi- tion. Tile curling and ho]es in spots. Window inoperable. Insufficient outlets, unsafe wiring to'fixtures; boiler heat/radiators. Second Floor Ceilings and walls have plaster broken off and cracking; unsafe wiring to fixtures, insufficient outlets. No storm windows or screens; windows in poor condition. No smoke alarms~ Water damage. No door latch and knob at upper north bedroom. Floor rotted in bathroom; wall has water damage at tub. Sash and windows in poor condition. Water is shut off. Rafters - 2 X 4's - 2 feet on center 12 feet plus ]ow slope span. Roof board spaced apart with rolled/asphalt composition shlngles/not braced adequately. Front stone columns under 2nd floor are crumbling. Basement Some areas of basement walls are severely deteriorated; cement is crumbling (]/2 wa]is ). Gal'vanized wall piping and some copper. Debris through- out basement. Water heater is unsafe - no T & P with overflow; electric; 1/2 inch water copper piping. First Floor 2 X 10' floor joist 16 inches on.center; part of house has no access or base- ment. Sever pipes open (gas) and leave building above the floor. Floor drain full of paint or chemicals. Floor drain and laundry tray not hooked to sewer. Post setting on floor to shore up first floor by stairway and kitchen. Disconnect and remove oil piping. Control wiring not wired to code boiler - no backflow preventor; gas regulator mounted wrong, etc. No overflow, wrong temp. regulator. Siding, roofing and front porch in bad condition. Re: 5516 Lynwood Boulevard - Owner, Randy Bickmann 7-24-86 Northside Construction has boarded house. Rear door and front window (oval) plywood is outside of frame. Tried to phone Bickmann yesterday. Called contractor, Northside, this morning, but work was done yesterday afternoon. Bickmann stated the City will be responsible for break, ins into the house. Called Curt Pearson to return my phone message. Driveway was accessible to o¥¢ner after gravel; only 2 boards across the boulevard was needed to get into driveway for . at least 2 weeks. 3030 Harbor Lane North, Suite 104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 612/553.1950 August 4, 1986 Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Statement of Findings Residence at 5516 Lynwood Mound, MN Dear Ms. Bertrand: This letter is a summary of the Statement of Findings regarding the dwelling at 5516 Lynwood in Mound, MN. This Statement of Findings is presented following an inspection by Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector for the City of Mound and Mr. Max J. Daubenberger, Professional Engineer with Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings, Inc. This residence is a two story wood frame structure with a detached, single car garage. A basement xzsts below the entire residence with the exception of e ' approximately the south eight feet of the residence. Head room height in the basement is substandard by present building code requirements. Foundation wall construction consists of concrete walls which are cracked and spalling. The basement has inadequate lighting and ventilation. First floor framing consists of wood floor and rim joist construction consisting of 2 X 10 floor joists at 16" on center which are supported by a wood beam approximately 7 1/2" deep and 5" wide. The support beam is supported by wood columns which rest directly on top of the concrete slab-on-grade. The base of these colleens are in a moist condition. The first floor framing is ~n good condition. The exterior above grade walls of the dwelling are in a severe state of distress. The wood lap siding is rotting in areas and needs repainting. It is apparent that the exterior walls have received considerable amounts of moisture penetration from the_ roof of the residence. Ms. Jan Bertrand, Building Inspector Page 2 August 4, 1986 e Electrical service is 100 amp. with insufficient number of electrical circuits and outlets. The plumbing system is in general need of replacement and various locations are not properly trapped or vented. The heating system consists of a fuel oil fired boiler which is inoperable but appears to be in good condition. The ceiling area of both the first and second stories shows moisture penetratio~ due to either deteriorated roof conditions or plumbing which' needs repair. 5~st all light fixtures on both floors have been removed. The bay win~ow on the east side of the residence appears to have no foundation support. Stone pillers at the south edge of the porch area supports the second story portion of the residence. These stone pillers are in a severe , 'stress and potentially.are subject to structural collapse. state of d. 1 ........ l l ~,nd the corch area is severely cracked. The concrete and stone The first and second story areas have received considerable damage due to vandalism. Substantial areas of the second floor walls have lathe and plaster construction which has been destroyed due to this vandalism. The bathroom on the second story has sheet rock construction at the ceiling which is missing or sagging due to moisture penetration through the roof. The detached garage is a 16' X 12' wood frame structure. The floor consists of a dirt subgrade and roof framing consists of wood rafters approximately 2X4 in size at 24" on center. The asphalt shingle roofing is in a severe state of distress or missing. Wall sheeting consists of a single layer of tongue and groove wood siding which has rotted in areas. The garage door is missing and the electrical wiring is substandard and inoperative. Respectively submitted, VAN DOREN-HAZARE~STALLINGS, INC. Max J. Daubenberger, P.E. MJD/ct BILLS ......... SEPTEMBER 16, 1986 Batch 864083 Batch 864084 Preferred Paving Computer Run dated 9/3/86 Computer Run dated 9/11/86 Pymt Request #3 43,184.25 108,942.48 152,126.73 79,801.43 Total Bills 231,928.16 .J i,,.. I-. oO I I w bi .J :3t .J :~ ..ITM ..I.J I..- ~.- Z~ Id ! I ,-il %. Z 3:: N ::3'::3 bJ L~ ~J W Z 111111111111 I I X ~ 0 t~J -~- 'T' X /~J t~JU bJbJ C~ . C, .J .J ._/ ...; I I I 11-11,.41.11 (:3 Lt Z bJ I X Z 3-, ..1 ~,~ _/ Z .~. I Ld . ',-J I I I I ,.,;';...,,.T_, 2'"", · ,... r~ (.3 I I ! I I ! I I I I I t I I I TTTT I I I I I I ~J b.J ~J L~ NNNN Z ZZ;~_ 000 I I I bJ b.t bJ I .T 0 I 0 Z ,-4 U O0 oO U {J U L~ ,w c~ ~ 0 0 T Z Z (O I ~ cz;) CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 August 26, 1986 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK Please set Hearings: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. September 30, 1986, as the date for the CBD Parking Maintenance Unpaid Clean-Up Charges Unpaid Weed & Grass Cutting Charges Boarding Up of Hazardous Structure Charges Unpaid Capping of Sewer Line Charges Delinquent Sewer & Water Charges Unpaid Tree Removal Charges Thank you. following Assessment fc An equal opportunity Employer that does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or Ilandicapped status in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its programs and activities. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED'EASEMENT VACATION FOR LOT 2, BLOCK 15, DEVON, PID 25-117-24 11 0047 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE'IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT a meeting will b~ held at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, the 30th day!of September, 1986, to consider the vacation of a per- petual easement 20 feet in width for public sewer, water and other utility purposes over the following described land, the South line of easement being the South line of said Lot 2, Block 15, Devon, PID # 25-117-24 11 0047 (as created in Document No. 779757), 4844 Island View Drive, Mound, Minnesota. Such persons as desire to. be heard with reference to the above will be heard at this meeting. rancene C. Clark, City Clerk 270 Metro Square Builcling St. Paul, Minnesota ~5~0~ 6~2/292-8789 August 21, 1986 Mr. Ed Shukle City of Mound 5341Maywood Boulevard Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Shukle: I want to take this opportunity to invite you to a meeting of legislators and local officials from communities in your area to discuss transit issues. The meeting will be held 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, September 10, 1986, at the Minnetonka City Hall, 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard. This meeting willprovide me the chance to discuss several of the current activities of the Regional Transit Board. The major topic of this meeting will be.the Tmansit~ Service Needs ~ssessment. Our findings of the recently finai~iked'.P~e'i~'6f~this study will provide us with the alternatives we will u§e'to shape the transit delivery system in the metropolitan area for the next several years. I will spend time discussing our plans for the expansion and restructuring of Metro Mobility service as well as the competitive bidding of transit service. More importantly, I want this meeting to be an opportunity for you to express your ideas and concerns about the current and future direction of transit in the metro area. I would also like to use this session as a forum to answer any specific questions you may have about transit issues. I am a firm believer of good communication in the public decision-making process and hope that you will find time in your busy schedule to attend this meeting on current transit issues. I look forward to meeting with you on September lOth at the Minnetonka City Hall. Si ncere ly, Elliott Perovich Chairman An Equal Opportunity Employer DSTATE OF EPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BOX 6,6 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD · ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA · 55146 AuBust 18, 1986 DNR iNFORMATION (612) 296-6157 All City Clerks and Administrators: - Several years ago the department sent out a request for information on local restrictions on boat use, We have compiled that information from both cities and counties and have discovered that some municipalities are unaware of the statutes which regulate this function. In order to clarify this, you should be aware that: 1. Any restriction placed.on the surface use of the public waters (lakes, rivers or streams) on or after January 1, 1975, must have the approval of the Commissioner of Natural Reiources. Restrictions without this approval are invalid and not enforceable. Those restrictions enacted prior to January 1, 1975 are "granfathered-in" unless they have been amended since that date. (Restrictions would include speed, time, horsepower, area or activity restrictions.) For further reference see M.S. S 378.32 and 459.20 and Minn. Rule 6110.3000 - 6110.3800. 2. If your city i8 contemplating restrictions of any type, please contact · us by phone (612)296-3310 or by letter., so we can assist you. It is important that this be done before any ordinance is drafted. 3. Another related item is an amendment by the 1986 Legislature to H.S. S 378.32 which prohibits cities, towns and counties from restricting the type and sizes of boats or the horsepower of motors at any access when there is not a similar approved restriction on the surface of the lake or river. That is to say that a lake or river that does not have any horsepower restrictions cannot have any horsepower restrictions on an access. Any such restrictions on launch ramps are now invalid as of March 26, 1986. For further reference, please see M.S. § 378.32 as amended by Chapter 6,39 or give us a call. As always, if you need further information, assistance or copies of laws or rules, please call (612)296-3310 or drop us a line. Sincerely, oEimA. Elverum at and Water Safety Coordinator XC: Joseph Alexander, Commissioner Steven Thorne, Deputy Commissioner WSUMTask ~orce Paul Swenson, Trails & Watervays Director Regional Administrators Bob Nethercut, Metro Council Cindy Wheeler, DEED AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ASPHALT AND OENERAI- C.,ONTFLA(~TORS 24 SOUTH OLIVE WACONIAo MINNESOTA 55387 (612) 448-7711 August 20, 1986 Mr. John Cameron McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, ~ 55441 City of Mound Lynwood Boulevard and Tuxedo Boulevard MSAP 145-104-03 and MSAP 145-101-05 Dear John: Change orders on the above referenced project have increased the amount of work by approximately 50%. Due to this increase~ we are requesting an extension of time to complete the project from the original date of September 1~ 1986 to October 1, 1986. This extension will also enable us to lay the final wear course of asphalt after the ,major portions of heavy construction have been ca~pleted there. This should be advantageous to the finished product. Your prompt attention and reply to this request will be greatly appreciated. Res~ctfully~ Vice President Project Manager cc: Mr. Edward Shukle, City Manager City of Mound, Minnesota Board of Commissioners Shir ey A. B,~nine JudithS A*'derso2 Nicholas EoIoiI C, ec'ge E Nickey ~v'e r n J. August 29, 1986 Mr. Oon R. Elam 5341Maywood Road Mound, FIN 55364 Dear Mr. Elam: Recently, Hennepin Parks has been asked to participate in helping to resolve the long standing problem related to public access to Lake MinnetonKa. Specifically, Hennepin Parks has been asked to prepare a "master plan for a regional park entity" on the Lake. Enclosed is background'information about the planning process we intend to follow in this effort. The 1st step in the process is tour of the southwest area of the Lake. This is the portion of Lake Minnetonka where public access is needed the most. The tour will be held on Saturday, September 20th from lO:O0 a.m. to 2:00 p.m,. beginning from A__~l & Alma's.in Mound. It is very important that there be broad involvement in this planning process thus we are hopeful that you will participate. As you can see from the schedule outlined on page 4 of the enclosure, we will follow-up with a series of meetings and briefings to try to resolve this issue. Hennep~n Parks would very much appreciate your involvement. Please RSVP regarding the tour to Nancy or Gen at the Hennepin Parks office at 559-9000. For additional information, please contact Marty 3essen or Mike Henry at 559-9000. Sincerely, David Latvaaho Chairman of the Board of Commissioners DL:na Maple-Grove '--" ~ edma J .. Plym~)uth . Champlin ~ Hennepin CO. I j~rooklyn Park County Minnesota L~end AL & ALMA'S 5201 Piper Rd., Mound (See back for detailed map) Lgngdon ~5~aUD t~° ": PHELPS ..,' toke ~..,.. Zumbra~ ~e L ~/? PROCESS FOR PLANNING A REGIONAL PARK ENTITY ON LAKE MII;Nr-- ~.IO,~KA ,BACKGROUND INFORMATION Hennepin Parks has been asked to participate in the planning for regional park facilities on Lake Minnetonka, particularly as they relate to increased public access in Zone 5 of Lake Minnetonka (see attached map from Lake Minnetonka Task Force Report) as. designated by the Lake Minnetonka Task Force Report of 1983. The Lake Minnetonka Task Force appointed by the Metropolitan Council i'n 1985, in its recommendations concerning intergovernmental coordination Item c, Page ll, recommended that: ' "A principal recommendation is that a regional recreation open space implementing agency, most logically .the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District (SHRPD), should prepare a master plan and acquire, develop and operate a regional recreation open space entity on the lake. The facility should be consistent with applicable plans and should incorporate existing regional properties, other new parcels in the lake and on the lakeshore which may be necessary for its function as a significant regional recreation facility. The facility should provide the following regional functions, among others' staging areas for ferry or other access to islands in the regional park, shoreline access and docks for fishing, areas for viewing the lake and shoreline, parking and sanitary facilities, and'boat rentals. Appropriate launch facilities for small craft and fishing boats should be included, especially in zones 3 and 5. The plan should be prepared by the implementing agency, reviewed by LMCD and DNR and approved by the Metropolitan Parks' and Open Space Commission and Metropolitan Council. In the event that SHRPD is unable or unwilling to implement the proposed new regional facility, LMCD should be requested to carry out the task as a regional implementing agency. In the latter event, modification of LMCD's legislative authority may be required." Among the reasons for Hennepin Parks being asked to participate in this process is the Park District's existing presence on Lake Minnetonka. The District owns four parcels on Lake Minnetonka, including Noerenberg Memorial County Park, Hawatasso Island, Nild Goose Chase Island and a portion of Big Island. (An inventory and summary of these properties follows.) Hennepin Parks desires to acquire the Big Island Veterans Camp (58 acres), which is currently owned by the Big Island Veterans Camp Board of Governors, who are analyzing the possibility of reconstructing the camp for veterans' use. Acquisition of the camp for park purposes is supported by the City of Orono and is included in the Park District's acquisition plan. The Minnesota State Legislature, in 1983, designated all publicly owned land on Big Island as a Regional Park. 1. Big Island (Lake t.linnetonka Task Force Zone 3) A. Current ownership - 63.45 acres B. Acquisition consideration - 77.31 acres (B~g Island Veterans Camp - 58.0 acres and miscellaneous parcels - 19.31 acres) C. Existing Facility - Arthur Allen Hildlife Sa[,ctuary D. Possible Future Facilities and/or Activities Boat dock/slips Shore fishing docks Picnicking Swimming Hiking/nature trails Contact station (information and interpretation) Overnight group camping Maintenance/storage building Resident ~aretaker residence Water Restroom Trash collection E. Consideration should be given for winter use e Wild Goose Chase Island (Lake Minnetonka Task Force Zone 4.) A. Current ownership - 2.50 acres (represents total size of island) B. Existing Facilities Restrooms (vault type) Trash collection 3. Wawatasso Island (Lake Minnetonka Task Force Zone 5.) A. Current ownership 34.45 acres (represents total size of island) B. A deed restriction states that "Wawatossa Island shall continue in perpetuity to be a natural wildlife and wilderness area which shall be used for temporary outing and overnight camping purposes, in a manner consistent wtih the preservation of said island in a natural condition." C. Possible Facilities and/or Activities Tent camping Hiking trails Restrooms (vault type) Water · Trash Collection' Access to the islands, particularly Big Island, by non-boaters is needed. A staging area where those who don't own boats may park their cars and utilize a shuttle boat. Consideration for such a staging area would include' A. Acquisition consideration - 3.0 acres minimum B. In lieu of land acquisition and capital facility development by Hennepin Parks, consider contracting with a private source, i.e., private marina, etc. C. Consideration should be given to the boat shuttle; i.e., private source or Hennepin Parks o~,~ned and operated. D. Possible Facilities · Entry control · Parking (200-250 cars) -Nater .Restroom · Boat dock · Trash collection Hennepin Parks will be identifying alternatives for a staging areas(s) in the east portion of Lake Minnetonka. This analysis will include identification of potential sites to acquire and/or lease of parking'space. The investigation of contracting with a private charter boat(s) for shuttle service to Big Island, as well as self-operation of a shuttle service by Hennepin Parks, will be pursued. THE PRIMARY ISSUE AT HAND Two major questions exist related to the planning of a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka. They are: What is the attitude of the publi, c, Lake Minnetonka Communities, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, the Metropolitan Council, and others towards the establishment of a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka? 2. Nhat is the site potential for a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka? The Metropolitan Council Task Force on Lake Minnetonka recommended the preparation of a plan for a "regional park entity" on the Lake. Specifically, the Task Force recommends increased access in Zone 5 of Lake Minnetonka to accommodate an approximate total of 100 boats with car/trailer parking (primarily fishing craft access is needed). Possible solutions include accommodating additional parking at existing accesses within Zone 5. The Nilliams Street access, a site in Mound or the Howard's Point Marina might be possibilities. On the other hand, if all 100 were to occur in one access location, a minimum of ten acres is needed. Included would be a boat ramp, parking, circulation roads, a gatehouse for control, and sanitary facilities. This alternative would meet the minimum requirements of the Lake Minnetonka Task Force report. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has indicated support for a 40-acre "regional park" in Zone 5. This would accommodate the 100 car/trailer capacity access described above plus other limited recreational activity including boat rental and picnicking. In identifying potential sites to provide the access capacity, four contiguous parcels in the Halsted/Smithtown Bay area have been identified, totaling 380 acres· This land provides the opportunity for acquisition and development of a "major" regional park on Lake Minnetonka. In addition to meeting the access capacity needs, such a facility would also provide for a wide range of recreational opportunities including picnicking, swimming, play areas, trails, etc. A minimum of 100 acres should be considered for such a facility with the possibility of utilizing the entire 380 acres. Large areas of natural open space to buffer adjoining properties and to provide an excellent setting for the outdoor recreational activities listed would also be available. / -4- Consideration for a major regional park could include: (1) Acquisition consideration - 382.26± acres (Hagen & Mason - 220± acres; Edgar Hard Blanch, Or. - 90.26 acres; Vern Gagne - 54 acres; and A. E J. Brachmeier - 18 acres) (2) Possible facilities and/or activities Boat launch with dock (Halsteds & Smithtown Bay) Shore fishing docks Boat rental Picnicking Swimming Bike/hike trails Entry control ~laintenance storage building Outdoor recreation center building Ski touring Ice skating Parking Parking Restroomns Hater Trash collection In addition to the possibilities just outlined there may be other opportunities for which there may be community support. Six-Mile Creek is one possibility, a Lake Minnetonka Historical Cultural Center is another -- to name just two. The planning process shou'id identify additional possibilities, determine the degree of community support, and their feasibility. .SUMMARY Based on the land/property available, there appears to be potential for a ma~or regional park on Lake Minnetonka. Hennepin Parks seeks input from LMCD, the City of Minnetrista and other coummunities, neighborhood and user groups and others about their attitude towards regional park facilities on the Lake with the objective of determining the need for additional access and what size area and what range of facilities and opportunities should be provided. Toward that end, Hennepin Parks proposes the following process for planning a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka: A boat and bus tour of the Lake area for Hennepin Parks Board members, LMCD, and others - September 20, 1986, lO:O0 a.m., A1 & Alma's Supper Club, 5201 Piper Road, Mound. II. A series of meetings held around the Lake to determine the need for a regional park - (During October) o Lake Minnetonka Conservation District - September 24, 1986, 7:00 p.m., Tonka Bay City Hall. o Area Legislators o Neighborhood and User Groups o Others III. Review results of these meetings with the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners - November IV. Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners assesses alternatives - December Site analysis Costs Preliminary determination of feasibility Discuss alternatives with Lake Minnetonka Conser',,ation District - January VI. Discussion with Metropolitan Council and Parks and Open Space Commission and Department of Natural Resources - January VII. Hennepin Parks prepares report as to the feasibility of a regional park. - February VIII. Report to Lake Minnetonka Conservation District - February Through this process, alternative ideas for providing public access will be identified and thoroughly analyzed for their potential. The outcome of this. analvsis will be a report to LMCD as to the feasibility of a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka. The range of possibilities includes: 1. No new site acquisition (but expanding access capacity at existing locations). 2. A 10-acre boat access site. 3. A 40-acre regional park with limited additional recreation facilities. 4. A major regional park of from 100]38- acres including a wide array of recreation facilities and natural open space area. The report will be made by Hennepin Parks to LMCD as it is the lead agency for planning/coordination on Lake Minnetonka. The outcome of this process will then be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and regional park funding to accomplish its implementation. 0469A ~'Corrections and additions are shown underlined." MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION HEETI~G AUGUST 25, 1986 Present were: Chairperson Liz Jense__n; Vice Chairman Tom Reese; Commissioners Geoff Michael, William Thal, Frank W~iland; Council representative Steve Smith; City Hanager Ed Shukle; Building Official Jan Bertrand. Commissioners Ken Smith and~'William Meyer.were absent and commissioner Meyer was excused. Also present were the following interested persons: Ned and Karen Podany, Marjorie Hoag, Peter Hille, Judge Wolner. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 11, 1986 were presented for consideration. Motion for approval by Tom Reese and seconded by Steve Smith to approve the minutes as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS .: CASE NO. 86-534. Side yard setback variance for an existing detached garage at 6165 and 6167 Sinclair Road - Lots 1 & 2, Block 17, The Highlands. Ned and Karen Podany and also Marjorie Hoag, Peter Hille were present. The item was brought before the Planning Commission from the August 11, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Staff reviewed the additional information submitted to he Planning Commission from Marjorie Hoag, relating to her request to deny. a setback lariance on Mr. Podany's property. Discussion followed regarding Mr. Podany's letter ihat was submitted to the Planning Commission, regarding the roof between the garages, enclosure of a fence at both west and east side between the garages, and the building .. code requirement of one hour rated fire wall construction within three feet of the property line. Mr. Hille indicated Mrs. Hoag was agreeable to the 2 ft. variance; Mr. * Motion by Tom Reese seconded by Bill Thal to grant a two foot variance upon the condition: 1. The roof line is to be separated between the two structures, 2. Instal- lation of a one hour exterior fire rated wall 3. Installation of rain gutters to divert water away from the property lin~. As to why a two foot variance instead of requiring the four foot setback by ordinance; Commissioner Reese said it would alleviate some of the hardship on width of the driveway between the park land and the detached accessory buildings due to the narrowness of the lot. The Planning Commission discussed having the City Council seek state action to allow trading of land with the City and the applicant to give him a wider driveway. It was decided not to make a motion to direct the City Council to request any action. The applicant stated he has spent close to $3000. and almost lost his home due to previous expenses. An addendum was made to the motion by Tom Reese on the diversion of the water and was seconded by Bill Thal. The vote was unanimously in favor of granting the two foot setback to Mr. Podany's property line, with the above mentioned conditions. CASE ~0. 86-536 Variance to Code Section 23.407 (2660 Lakewood Lane Lot 2, Shirley ills, Unit G) ~uilding Official reviewed the request for a variance to allow a detached accessory guilding on a vacant parcel of land on Lot 2, Shirley Hills Unit G. The ~-1 zoning district regulations state that no ~ccessory building or structure shall be constructed on any individual residential lot prior to the time of the construction of a principal building. ?~n.., ',.,'as also aoreeable to the 2 foot variance. Planning Commission Advisory Meeting August 25, 1986 Page 2 The property owned by Judge Wolner has two tax parcels at present, lots 1 & 2, Shirley Hills Unit G and Lots 3, Shirley Hills Unit G. The staff recommends approving the variance to allow the construction of a 22' x 26' accessory building upon the condition ~hat Judge Wolner assign a combination form and combine the lots 2 & 3 as one property tax parcel. Planning Commission discussion followed regarding the present condition of the road at Lakewood Lane; Judge Wolner stated the City does not maintain the street in front of his home. The Lakewood Lane running east and west is not built to City street standards because of drainage problems. Steve Smith made a motion for approval, seconded by Tom Reese to grant the requested variance upon the condition that Judge Wolner sign a combination of tax parcels f~r lots 3 & 2 to be combined. The vote was unanimous for approval, all ayes. The Planning Commission interviewed applicants for Planning Commission appointments. 1. Thomas J. Goulette submitted a resume of'his past experience. Liz Jensen asked how long he had lived in Mound. He answered ten years Question, do you llve on the lake, answer, no.. She questioned why did you want to be on the Planning Commission and also Mr. Goulettes conflicts from.his business commitment as a real estate agent. Tom Reese questioned, what do you see is the planning issues for the future in Mound? Mr. Goulette answered~ the City is an evolutionary transition to being a year around housing and housing improvements in the City. The Planning Commission reviewed the skills that would help being on the Commission.° Mr. Goulette discussed his past lobbying experience. He ran for City Council in 1976. 2. Harold Meeker had submitted a letter, of intent for a position on the Planning Commission. His Comments were reviewed. Liz Jensen asked the same questions, how long have you lived in Mound, answer, 10 years. Do you live on. lake shore property, answer, no. Why are you seeking to be on the Planning Commission, answer, that he enjoys being in the people business from his 23 years in the Navy and Police Reserves, and counseling. Mr. Meeker stated he saw good changes in the last 10.years in the community and visualizes Mound as an improving community. Mr. Meeker feels the significant planning issues would be Lost Lake area, housing, senior citizens. The senior citizens need to be kept in their homes, if possible. The City should try to provide services necessary to have elderly citizens remain in their homes. The Commission discussed the expiring terms of the various commissioners. Mr. Bob Byrnes term would have expired December of 1986. They discussed who would construct or author a letter to prom~e~,e i.~z~r~=~articipa~_ te in the Planning Commission. It was decided that ~o~-R~s~-an~z-~ns~n would try to put together an invitation to citizens that would be published in the Laker inviting candidates. The Planning Commission meeting of September 22 will be available for additional interviews for more Planning Commission candidates after the publication of the promotional letter. The October Planning Commission meeting dates have been changed due to the Columbus Day holiday. October 6th will be the Board of Appeals meeting with the October 20th meeting date set aside for a recognition dinner evening. Motion was made by Tom Reese, seconded by Frank Weiland to adjourn at 9:00 PM. All in favor, the meeting was adjourned. ,i~;~'~c~.,~ c,-.,::cre~ary~ Jan Bertrand Liz Jensen, Chairperson EMERGENCY FIRE EMERGENCY 'FIRE EMERGENCY X;~<KETRI STA - FIRE EMERGENCY $;~OREWOOD - FIRE EMERGENCY FIRE SPRING PARK - / EMERGENCY TOTAL ~iRE CALLS // TOTAL EMERGENC~ CALLS /~ COmmErCIAL ~ ' RESIDENTIAL ~ i:DUSTRIAL ~ C~,,:,SS & MISCELLANEOUS AUTO FALSE ALARM ~40..OF HOURS - MOUND FIRE E~ERGENCY TOTAL '- M'TONKA B.-FIRE EMERGENCY TOTAL - MINNETRISTA- FIRE EMERGENCY TOTAL - ORONO FIRE E~ERGENCY TOTAL - SHOREWOOD -FIRE EKERGENCY TOTAL - SPR NG pK.-FIRE E~ERGEh'CY .... ,:: gRiLL FSL:cS TOTAL C, t (- /5',V t0 .,, /? ?/ ? z? /? ' //,- .> / / r',,_.-' ' L£?/:~ _~.iE;;T EEPORT FOR ~.iOL"T'r; OF /, ~?,2.-;' ':f v~ ii - DRILLS & t.[AIi~fEi.iA~ICE . FiRE & ?~SCUE L'.iE: ~DA~ DA~ DRIL~ DRILL VAIN. TOT/.L H.Ob~LY .... WAGES WAOES HOBOS PA~ WAGES ,~iersan ~' ~' "~ .'~ IF" /~ ,~'.~ 6.00 / ~".?. Boauchnmp ~'. ~' ,~ /~'~' .~ // 6.00 ~.r?.e -~ .... -' .Z /~ .¢ { /.: 6.50 //~ Br,'ce ~ --- *- /¢'-- ~ 1t // i_ 6.00 L''/ Carlson ¢' .- ¢'/- /F-' ,~¢ [ / t:, 6.00 ' I ' David ~ ~ ,~ /¢'~ ~ .Z ¢. ~ 6,00 /~,-¢ ~z. ~rickson f~ I ~ ~-~ ~ /¢~ ~ ':',~' ~ on .. ,"?~"~' -' Henderson ¢..-' X / fr;¢ ~ ~ ,~/ 6.00 Johnson ',~ d~ --,..-- ~{, /'/ 6.00 Klceberyer ~ ~ ~ /~ .~ I /7~ 6. O0 /~,v- ~ ~ Landsman .~ ~ .~ /'~,. 0 ~ // 6. O0 ~ f ~.~ ' I t I r~.~ ~ m ~ ,~' .... ~ /~' ~, ~ . /~' 6.00 ,~ ~. Staiiman .... ~ , .~ ~/7'~~ ,'3('~, /%2 6,OO ~,,..~o, ;~' : I.- .:~ ,x.'¢, t o II ': ~.oo-:~ ~,, ¥~il~ams I 6.00 6.00 D R I L L R E._P..O_R )iscipline and Team \4ork ......... Fi re Stre.-~:,s & Frlct]on loss Critique of Fires ~ House pr~-Flanning &.Inspections ~atural & Propane g~s Talk ~ools & Apparatus Identifying --- & D.~ strations tadder Evo~ utions Hand Extinguisher Operation _~ - Salvage Operations Wearing ProtectiVe Clothing Radio Operations Films ~- House Evolutlons First Ai~ and R~s~ue Operation Use of Self-Contalned Masks ~_~ Nozzle & Hose Alllence Inhalator Operation .- .... NOTE: HouYs Training Paid X__ Excused ~ Unexcus~d O_ Present, Not Paid ~; ~: ~___~_¢~x-~'~~'~ ~ ~-?--~C~-~3~;~Z-, L:~ ~ ho~ __ _ig-~:---z~t ~ ' ~-~-t~- q ~-L-~ ..... ,. ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~o o ~ .? ~ ~ ~_~..~- _~_'_ J. Andersen ~--' M. David--' ~'-J. Nafus-- ~-- T. Stallman--' ~-~ G. 2nderson ~- ~-' B. Erickson-' ~-M. Nelson ~ T. Swenson _3__ J. Babb-- ~I~S. Erickson ~ A. Opitz-- ~_ W. Swenson ~-' j. Beauchamp~- ~_~ J. Garvais ~ B. Palm-- ,S-M. Tobey-- _,5'__ D. Boyd~ ~ L. Heitz" ~ G. Palm-- ~ R. Williams-- ~'- D. Bryce-- ~/~-C. Henderson ~ M. Palm-- ~_~_,T. Williams--- ,5-- S. Bryce-- ~ G. Johnson ~ G. Pederson 5' _._~<~__._ D. Carlson-- ,~'- Platzer ---------f*. "~ -:I~ ~ Pasmussen~ ~ S. Cci!ins--" ~ .-fi,:-~vage~ M. K1 eeberger-- Z:),s~,,,,,~D. B. Landsman~ ,~'- T. R. P, arschl',e-'- _~'-_ F,. ._._ ~ ~, ~/ ~,.~;~.,:,,~,~or . _~.~p_.~_ ....... //~_ /t 0 /¢ 0 0 0 ~z 0 0 0 DATE MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MEN ON DUTY J. Anderson G. Anderson J. Babb J. Beauchamp D. Boyd D. Bryce S. Bryce D. Carlson S. Collins M. David S. Erickson J. Garvais L' Heitz C. Henderson G. Johnson B. Landsman R. Marschke J. Nafus M. Nelson A. Opitz B. Palm G. Palm M. Palm G. Pederson D. Platzer T. Rasmussen M. Savage T. Stallman W. Swenson T. Swenson M. Tobey R. Williams T. Williams TOTAL MONTHLY HOURS F.,'~'11 ~,~-~'~",V©OD ~OAD i612 472-1155 TO: FROH: RE: DATE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK AUGUST 1986 REPORT SEPTEMBER 12, 1986 Have been extremely busy with elections, special assessments and the budget. Tried to squeeze in all the other duties with the above. FC:ls TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL JAN BERTRAND, BUILDING INSPECTOR MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST 1986 SEPTEMBER 2, 53,I1 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (6'~ 2) 472-'~ 155 8-1-86 Work at home six hours. (4-1OP.M.) Dictate Planning and Zoning reports from applicants; return phone messages 8-2-86 8-4:30 Work Saturday. Furnace ducts to be cleaned File and Clean out drawers 8-4-86 8-lOAM Answer inquiries 4978 Three Points Blvd. footing inspection Davidson 2054 Shorewood Lane remodeling site inspection 2030 Shorewood Lane remodeling site inspection re: complaint notice 6216 Red Oak Road - plumbing 3018 Devon Road - plumbing 2600 Grove Lane footing inspection 5041 Wren Road -.footing inspection 5300 Shoreline Blvd. - hydrant flow test 2448 Lost Lake Rd - heating and framing - partial inspection 2501 Lakewood Lane - final inspection 2501 Emerald Lane - S. R. inspection 6:OOPM going home to do budget 8-5-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM Budget, time voucher, capital outlay Mound Bank blueprints 1779 Wildhurst Lane - garage site inspection for garage placement 3153 Donald Drive - final inspection 3124 Tuxedo Blvd - framing 4852 Lanark Rd - final 3046, 3068, 3061 Brighton Blvd - finals Monthly report 4855 Lanark Road - complaint 5229 Shoreline Blvd - framing - not complete yet Building Department August Report September 2, i986 Page 2 8-6-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM Review P & Z Commission reports 5021Crestview Road - final 4937 Crestview Road - final 4947 Crestview Road - final - with correction notice 2614 Clare Road - site inspection for porch addition 4915 Tuxedo Blvd - change address 3179 Alexander Lane - footing inspection 2600 Grove Lane - backfill 5229 Shoreline Blvd - progress inspection 2252 Commerce Blvd - sign site inspection 5040 Enchanted Road - complaint - notice to be sent again; court date today - public access full of debris yet Answer inquiries 2 - 3:30 Left office 5:45 PM 8-7-86 Review P & Z Commission reports Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM City Hall - heating system cleaning approval City Hall - Call Bill White re: skylight problem 4903 Hanover Road - final 4670 Bradford - heating 2200 Commerce Blvd - progress 1956 Shorewood - plumbing Met with Ray Geiger re: Mound Bank John Casseran to review construction plans final subdivision of Seton Place Met with Skinner to discuss ungrounded electric circuits on Noble Lane; current in water pipes 8-8-86 Plan Review Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM 2200 Commerce Blvd - progress 5300 Shoreline Blvd - progress 5322 Maywood Road - final inspection Review escrow accounts with Finance Dept Ed, regarding sign change recommendation for Deering Island 1609 Dove Lane - partial insulation 4957 Island View Drive - final 4670 Bedford Road - heating insulation 5080 Shoreline Blvd - final 5025 Shoreline Blvd - final 4900 Edgewater Drive - final 4915 Edgewater Drive - final 4964 Edgewater Drive - final - with notice of correction 4972 Edgewater Drive - final - with notice of correction 2162 Cardinal Lane - final 5348 Lynwood Blvd - final Met with Jim Guttormson re: plans for Toro remodel 8-9-86 Sat - plan review Building Depa[~ment August Report September 2, 1986 Page 3 8-11-86 8-12-86 8-13-86 8-14-86 8-15-86 8-18-86 Off Comp time Work at home at home 4 hours Resolution re: Seton Place and plan review P & Z Meeting 7 I 10:30 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM Plan review 2200 Commerce - inspection - air test gas lines 2240 Commerce - framing and insulation 1733 Bluebird - excavation for wood foundation 504~ Wren Road - backfill 2600 Grove Lane - complaint - soil erosion 2448 Lost Lake Rd - fireplace 2654 Halstead Lane - footings - not approved until compaction results submitted Met with Greg Skinner to discuss units being charged multidwelling water rates, new site construction, and water meter fittings at 1609 Dove installed wrong by builder 7:30 City Council meeting Answer inquiries - 8 - 10:30 City Manager budget meeting 2200 Commerce - gas line test 2654 Halsted - footings 6038 Evergreen Road - fireplace 5901 Lynwood - site inspection for shed Resolution, finance, engineering review, etc. 8 - 10AM Answer inquiries 2200 Commerce Blvd - progress 3124 Tuxedo Blvd - framing 3145 Donald Drive - plumbing 2448 Lost Lake Rd - drywall 5229 Shoreline Blvd - framing 2600 Grove Lane - complaint re: erosion control 6038 Evergreen Road - third fireplace 2151 Cedar Lane - footing 3 - 4:30 answer 'inquiries 8 - 10AM Answer inquiries Dictate P & Z resolutions for City Council Met with Maxfield Research Group regarding Lost Lake Land 3367 Warner Lane - site for garage 5222 Phelps Road - demolition 2621 Setter Circle - stop order to obtain permit 1700 Jones Lane - framing Next to New housing at Highland Blvd check site for leaking gas and tank - could not find tank Answer inquiries 8 - 10:30 Met with Jim Fackler re: City Hall necessary improvement for 1987 and Gene Hostetler Review P & Z Minutes and resolutions Return phone messages from Friday 6165 Sinclair Road - talked to NSP and Minnegasco re: utility locations 1724 Canary - insulation Building Department August Report September 2, 1986 Page 4 8-18-86 Continued 1604 Dove - heating 5041 Wren Road - complaint 5340 Shoreline - framing 2939 Dickens Lane - final 3021 Dickens Lane - final 1760/62/64/66 Commerce Blvd- final 5421Tonkawood Road site - final reports Left office 6:00PM 5537 Bartlett Blvd - complaint-filling with no permit Plan review 8 - 12 PM 8-19-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM Staff meeting - 1:30 - 3:30 Review correspondence 4170 Bedford Road - wall board 2914 Bradford - site inspection 5901 Beachwood - footing 3149 Inverness - footing 2200 Commerce Blvd - heating Plan review and discussion re: Road Returned messages possible vacation of Jennings 8-20-86 8-21-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM 2200 Commerce Review plans and permit applications Review City Council material Met with proposed subdivision applicant and homebuilder Approve payments Answer inquiries 8 10 AM 5300 Shoreline Blvd. - sprinkler final 6635 Halstad Ave - final 2242 Commerce Blvd - S.R. inspection 4937 Island View - final 4962 Bartlett final - progress 5045 Bartlett final - progress Return messages 8-22-86 Off work - 0rono to inspect 8-23-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10 AM 2614 Clare Lane - site inspection 1748 Avocet - final 4872 Hanover - framing 6299 Birch Lane - final 6241 Birch Lane - final 6224 Birch Lane - footing 2614 Clare Lane site Discuss addition 46XX Kildare - site to discuss variance possibilities 1576 Finch Lane - footing 2896 Highland - footing 2200 Commerce Blvd hydro sprinkler test Building Department August Report September 2, 1986 Page 5 8-23-86 8-25-86 Continued Met with J. Cameron - visit five sites Shadywood/Three Points - subdivision Westedge Blvd Minnetrista sewer request at new home site and Lot 4, Block 1, Anderson One Langdon Landing - complaint P & Z Meeting 7:30 - 9:30 Record daily log 9:30 - 9:45 Possible Finch/Gui! vacation 4967 Wilshire Blvd. site re: past use of location as a cemetary 1748 Avocet - final inspection and retake menonmeter test 4513 Montgomery - final 2717 Shannon - final 2914 Bradford - footing 4872 Hanover Road - framing 3107 Argyle Road - stop work order posted Met with Jerry Henke 8-26-86 Answer Inquiries 8 - 10 AM Met with M. Koegler re: City Council meeting items; I will not attend meeting Met with M. Smith Heating - City Hall air conditioner has problems 4872 Hanover Rd - insulation 2281 Commerce Blvd- complaint 2448 Lost Lake Road 5545 Bartlett Blvd - ~il.1/grading in county right of way and wetland citation issued after former notice of 8-18-86 4949 Bedford - footing 2434 Commerce Blvd - air test Review correspondence Dictate P & Z minutes 8-27-86 Answer inquiries 8 - 10:30 Inspection 2600 Grove - Si-re 2770 Grove - Final 5845 Fairfiel'd - framing 1555 Bluebi. rd - air test 6250 Dearwood Dr - footing 4716 Wilshire Blvd - footing Review Correspondence 3145 Island View Dr - progress on old permit 3118 Island View Dr - final 4649 Island View Dr - final 2627 Commerce Blvd rentals- complaint in apartment building Return phone messages Fill out reports Take home blueprints and mail Review - 2 hours O.T. Left office 5:30 Building Department August Report 'September 2. lg86 Page 6 8-28-86 Marge off work today; met Dee Schwaibe at 7:15 to explain and review permits, correspondence, etc. 45XX Shoreline Dr. Spring Park - house moving inspection request to move it into Mound 1767 Wildhurst - site inspection to approve remodel and addition to house 5045 Bartlett Blvd - final 5241 Shoreline Blvd- framing 5549 Bartlett Blvd - final 5463 Bartlett Blvd - final 5469 Bartlett Blvd - final 5267 Bartlett Blvd - final 5213 Bartlett Blvd - final 2440 Chateau Lane - final 5014 Bayport Road - final 5054 Bayport Road - final 5050 Glendale Road - final 2188 Chateau Road - final 2307 Chateau Road - left notice 5045 Bartlett Blvd - final 8-29-86 Answer inquiries - review with appointments, phones, and review correspondence One vacation, one minor subdivision and seven variance requests were handled and referred from the Planning Commission. The total number of Building Permits issued in August was 32 with a valuation of $736,700. A copy of the Building Activity Report is attached. CITY OF MOUND City 5341 Maywood Road . StreetAddmss Mound, MN. 55364 City and State BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT August rv~6 .a NEY,' RESIDENTIAL · CONSTRUCTION I FamllVJ Total Family Unltl NEW RESIDENTIAL (GrouD & Trafl$ienl) Total Non- Flmlly NEW NON- RESlDENTLJd. Comme~cilVInd.) Total No~*ReaRSofltl&l RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS Total Residential NON-RESIDENTIAL ADDI- TIONS & ALTERATIONS 'Total Nan- Ra$1dentla! TOTAL MONTH AND YEAR TO DATE · CONVERSIONS DEMOLn'IONS PERMITS, INSPECTIONS, COLLECTIONS : TOTAL · 598,140 ,672 DO9. ,490,000. 217,770. 110,5o0. 300,100. -- 5,214,440. 30,000. 4O,OOO. 56,200. 736,700. 223 I TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR STORE MANAGER AUGUST 1986 REPORT SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 The end of the summer drew to a close on a good note. We had our best month this year with $82,467.98 in gross sales. With September 1st approaching, Julie and I held individual and group meetings with our staff, providing them with information pertaining to the new liquor law that goes into effect September 2nd. The law states that anyone born on or after September 2nd, and who is not 21 years of age, is no longer eligible to purchase intoxicating beverages legally. However, there is a "Grandfather Clause" Anyone who was 19 or 20 before the law went into effect can legally buy alcoholic products. At times it may get a little confusing for our clerks, but if they take their time and think it out, I am sure they will be able to handle it. Our annual Labor Day Sale was very successful. The sale ran from August 26th through Labor Day itself. We had many beer packages on sale from 10 - 20% off their regular price. In addition to the beer on sale, we also had some excellent prices on wine coolers. To promote the sale, we ran a 1/4 page ad in The Laker newspaper and we advertised prices in our windows. At the first of the month we introduced some selected liquor items in plastic bottles. We were the first to do so in the Lake area. They are doing magnificently because they are ideal for boaters. Now I see that some of the other stores around here carry them. They will prob- ably slow down considerably once the boating season is over. I am hiring some new part time employees for the fall, since some of my help is returning to college. If you know of anyone who would be interested in work ng evenings and weekends, please let me know. JK: 1 s OiTY OF i'.iONTHLY ACTilGTY REPORT OF LIQUOR 'DEPART}~(T" TEiS MONTH THIS LEN HARRELL Chi~! o[ Folice 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-3711 Dispatch 544-9511 EM ERG ENCY 911 TO : FROM : SUBJECT : Ed Shukle)~$~y Manager Sgt Wm H~dsl~,~' Acting Chief of Police Monthl~p6rt for August, 1986 I. STATISTICS The police department received 734 calls for service in the month of August. Of those 734 calls, 45 were Part I Offenses and 73 were Part II Offenses. The Part I Offenses included 1 Criminal Sexual Conduct, 11 Burglaries, 32 Larcenies, and 1 Vehicle Theft. The Part II Offenses included 3 Child Abuse Neglect cases, 3 Forgery/NSF Check cases, 11 Criminal Damage to Property cases, 4 Narcotics cases, 21 DWI's, 5 Simple Assaults, 1 Domestic Assault, 6 Harrassing Phone Call cases, 4 Runaway/Incorrigibility cases, 9 Distrubing the Peace cases and 6 All Other Offenses° There were 14 accidents ( 5 with injuries ), 11 medicals, and 119 animal complaints, The patrol division issued 269 adult citations which included 48 parking citations. 25 juveniles received citations. There were 164 warnings issued. Adult arrest for the month of August included 3 for checks, 1 for damage to property, 3 for narcotics, 20 DWI's, 2 for simple assaults, 1 for domestic assault, 4 for distrubing the peace, and 4 for all other offenses. Juvenile arrest for the month of August included 3 for burglary, 5 for larceny, 3 for damage to property, 9 for ~narcotics, 1 for DWI, 2 for runaway/incorrigibility, and 4 for distrubing the peace. II INVESTIGATIONS Cases investigated for the month of August were 5 Child Abuse/Neglect cases, one assault, one burglary, one internal investigation, one check case, and one death investigation. iii !.£42<P OWER The number of days utilizing patrol officer in plain clothes was increas- ed due to the chief of police being out of town and the investigator /~ assuming the duties of the chief and also his normal duties. Two officers used 7 days of vacation, three officers were used in plain clothes for 8 days. There was 8 hours of assigned overtime and a total of 36 hours used. 51 hours of comp were used by various officers at various times. IV TRAINING TIME Two qualifying shoots were held which included the auto pistol and the shotguns. Hudson attended the annual C L E conference in Bloomington for 2½ days. Chief Harrell is attending SPI and was there for lb days in August. V RESERVES The Police Reserves donated 292 hours to the department in the month of August. Most of the time spent was in community functions and assisting the patrol division. They are also spending more time getting ready for their dance on 9-12-86. City ........ MOUND Month AUGUST 19 86-~ C 1 TAT I 0 N S or OUI More than .10% BAC ADULT 21 18 Careless/Reckless Driving Driving A{ter Susp. or Rev. Open Bottle Speeding Mo DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired, or No Plates Illegal Passing Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield 88 14 2 Equipment Violations 4 H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance 8 Illegal'or Unsafe Turn' )ver the Centerllne 1 Pa~ k'i n¢l ": V'i ~'1' a'~'i on'~- 48 Crosswalk 5 6 Do9 Ordinances Derelict Autos 1 20 269 Misdellaneous Tags TOTALS WARN I NGS Proof of Insurance JUV 1 7 1 1 2 9 25 40 14 Traffic 34 13 Equ i pment 61 10 Crosswalk 2 10 Animals Trash/Derelict Autos 17 Other 164 TOTAL ARRESTS Felony 28 j I~isdemeanor 49 PROPERTY LOSS/RECOVERY SUMMARY ITEM Blkes Snowmobiles Boats, Motors, Trailers Clothing Currency, Notes, Etc. Jewelry & Precious Metals Guns Home Furnishings Radio & Electronic Equipment Vehicles & Vehicle Equipment Miscellaneous TOTAL STOLEN $ 899 1,664 4O 8O 4,250 1,068 1,850 2,726 RECOVERED $1,539 2,300 $12,577 $3,839 OFFENSE ACTIVITY SUMMARY m~ m mz ~ ~'m ~m ~ z~ ~ cz ~ ~ ~ PART I CRI~S o~ = <o mo oo ~ULT Ho, de Criminal Sexual Conduct 2 1 1 1 t Robbery Assault Burglary 11 11 2 L~rceny 32 32 3 3 Vehicle Theft 1 1 1 Arson TOTAL 46 1 45 5 5 PART crams Child Abuse/Neglect 3 3 3 Forgery%NSF Checks 3 3 3 3 Criminal Damage to Property 12 1 11 2 16 1 Weapbns i. Narcotic Laws 4 4 4 3 L~-~,r Laws DW~ 21 21 21 20 Simple Assault. 6, 1 5 2 3 2 Domestic Assault 1 1 1 1 Domestics (No Assault) Harassing Phone Calls 6 6 1 Runaway/Incorrigibility 4' 4 1 2 Public Peace 9 9 2 5 4 Ail Other Offenses 6 6 3 4 4 TOTAL 75 2 73 14 59 ,-38 PART III & IV REPORTS Property Damage Accidents '-- 9 9 Personal Injury ~ccidents 5 5 Fatal Accidents 0 0 Medicals 11 11 Comp!aints 119 119 M~I~a 1 Aid 24 24 Other General Investigationsl 448 448 T,DTAL A~?IVITIES ! ?3? 3 734 I 19 64 , 38 MONTH GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY P6LICE/CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT AUGUST ~ YEAR 1986 THIS THIS YEAR LAST YEAR MONTH TO DATE TO DATE Hazardous Citations 138 1,000 760 Non-Hazardous Citations 44 409 604 Hazardous WarninEs 39 350 247 Non-Hazardou~ Warnings 114 783 734 Parkin~ Citations 48 525 751 DWI 21 102 59 OVER .10 18 73 39 Property Damage Accidents 9 52 79 Personal Injury Accidents 5 23 27 Fatal Accidents 0 0 0 Adul't Felony Arrests 0 36 16 Adult Misdemean6r Arrests 63 354 295 Adult Misdemeanor Citations 11 72 - Juvenile Felony Arrests 8 39 47 Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests 19 112 83 Juvenile Misdemeanor Citations' 14 43 - Part I Offenses 45 263 245 Part II Offenses 73 609 423 Medicals 11 114 188 Animal Complaints 119 821 895 Other General Investigations 448 3,464 4,399 TOTAL 1,247 9,244 9,881 Assists 65 562 - _ Follow_Ups 42 359 - LEN HARRELL Chief of Police 5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472-3711 Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 544-9511 E[~ERGENCY 911 MOUND POLICE RESERVES MONTHLY HOURS AUGUST 1986 OFFICER B.BROWN R.HAWKS D. HUGGETT D.NICCUM D.SHENKYR TAHLBUSCH D. ST.CYR D.THOMPSON R.VOGEL TOTAL ECO RS RA CS TR 8.5 6 2 3 3 5½ 2 6.5 14.5 22 18.5 TRAINEE 7 6.5 12 3 7.5 19.5 6 26.5 17.5 21 12.5 74 77 63½ ECO- Emergency call out Lost Child Gas Line Break 2 transport to jail RS - Reserve Squad RA - Ride Along w/regular CS - Community Services Incredible Festival Contel Truck Rodeo Training of Officers Gun Training 13 2 IN AD MT 15 2 1 2 11 20 2 2 2 19 35 33 IN - Instruction Given to Community/Officers AD - Administrative MT - Monthly Meeting TOTAL 16x 2 3o½ 59 20x 2 25½ 69 69 ?9? LEN HARRELL Chief of Police OFFICER B. BROWN B.HAWKS D.HUGGETT D.NICCUM D.SHENKYR D.ST.CYR. D.THOMPSON R.VOGEL MOUND SEVERANCE AUGUST 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 EMERGENCY 911 POLICE RESERVES ACCOUNT 1986 POLICE Telephone 472-3711 Dispatch 544-9511 AMOUNT DEPOSITED $ 5.oo 15.00 5.00 5~00 10.00 BALANCE $ 47.50 161.50 58.00 20.00 75.00 45.00 143.00 182.50 TOTAL $40.00 $732.50 September 9, 1986 TO: Ed Shukle FROM: Geno Hoff Street Supt. SUBJECT: August's Monthly Activity Report We finally finished the frostboil repairs in the streets and also the blacktop overlays. We have some patching to do on manholes and gate valves before winter sets in and that should do it as far as blacktop patching. (I hope.) Street materials used in August. Blacktop delivered 47 - ton Blacktop picked up 146 ton 3/4" crushed rock 137 ton Sandfill 1OO ton CSS1H tac Oil 737 gals. 1~" crushed rock 23 ton $1,O57.O0 $2,847.00 $458.00 $110.OO $1,1o5.oo 80.00 $5,657.oo As you can see we had our pocket book open again this month. EQUIPMENT REPAIR We had to buy a new starter for the trackless sweeper which cost $265.00 and also an intake hose for 'the vac-all for $700.00 The Street Dept. was short one man for four days while he was manufacturing the steel portion of a holding cell for the Police Dept. Page 2 The Street crew started to work on our storm sewer system last week and it will take about three weeks with the vac-all to Complete the cleaning if we don't have any trouble. We had Widmer Bros. bring in a backhoe the 21st to dig some drainage ditches for us and we might have them come back later this fall. We didn't have any time to work on signs this month but we hope to get back to them in September. CEMETARY WORK We layed out 3 graves and staked out 6 stones, we also had the loader up there to clean up the dump area located north of the cemetary. i'.',OU~iD,, ', ..... r:c~'rz. £5364 September 9, 1986 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle Greg Skinner Water & Sewer Supt. August's Monthly Activity Report In August we pumped 26,407,000 gallons of water. There was 6 new accounts for August. Bob has not spent to much time in the meter shop this month rep'airing meters, he has kept busy installing outside readers. 16 outside readers were installed in the month of August. SEWER The Sewer Dept. finished jetting sewer mains for the year. All in all it went pretty good, no major problems were found. We televised approximately 3,000 feet of sewer line that is located on city commons. What we found was a couple of problems with roots and cracked pipe. We will be repairing these in the near future. The sewer line for the new bank has been completed, clearing the way for paving the parking lot. As far as the city is concerned sewer and water utilities for Commerce Place are completed. SHOP MAINTENANCE RECORD The following is a record of work to City vehicles by the mechanic. POLICE DEPT. #842 - repaired truck release s~itch #843 - install rear brakes and turned drums, replaced right side adjuster, changed oil, filter and lubed Spent three days helping Tim Johnson build holding cage. STREET DEPT. Unit #8 - install exhaust pipe. Trackless - install battery and starter Unit #1 - install new right side motor mount 1980 Elgin Sweeper - replaced alternator pulley, repaired A/C leak (recharged) Unit #840 - changed oil, fil£er, lubed, installed stabalizer bars SEWER DEPT. Unit #4 - replaced brake lite switch August 1986 WATER DEPT. Unit #3 - changed motor mounts f.;OUI,~D, MIi,i,<:ESGT/, 55364 (612) 472-11%¢ TO: FROH: RE: DATE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR AUGUST 1986 PARKS DEPART~IENT REPORT SEPTEMBER 9, 1986 GENERAL COMMENT The Parks Department is showing a reduction of staff. Two college students and two high school tree trust on the mowing crew, have returned to school. On hand now is Bob Johnson and John Taffe, maintenance workers along with Del Rudolph the Dock Inspector. These men too will be leaving in the upcoming weeks. I feel that alot was accomplished'this summer in all areas of my supervision. This was possible due to the abilities of the retirees we hire. They have qualifications in many areas that allow the parks department to perform specialiazed tasks. Areas such as general building and ground construction and program management. We did experience setbacks due to equipment breakdown and lack of correct equipment on hand. This can be resolved with updated equipment and purchase of additional machines. SPECIFIC Tree Removal There has been approximately 10 trees removed from City property, and four trees from private property. We have received requests to remove brush that residents leave on vacant City properties. These areas have been used a long period of time. We do not have the manpower or monies to perform this work. Cemetery Howard Simar has done an excellent job of maintenance. Again we hope to have monies available to trim up the trees in the old section in 1987. Parks We are currently getting ready for winter by putting equipment away. storage area at Balboa will greatly help this winter. The Parks Department August Report Page 2 September 9, 1986 We are receiving complaints on geese. Their droppings and over population is a matter that the Council may be confronted with more and more in up coming years. Docks We are rip rapping four areas: 1. Ashland access 2. Surfside (dock area) 3. Beachside 4. Wiota Commons (end of Eagle) This is being done by City workers. The material was obtained from a farm in 1984. JF:ls TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL JOHN NORMAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR '~-~bld AUGUST 1986 FINANCE REPORT SEPTEMBER 11, 1986 BUDGET The majority of my time in August was spent preparing for the 1987 Budget. The Budget will be introduced to the Council by the City Manager on September 16. I will be at the Council meeting ~o assist Ed in answering any questions the Council may have. INVESTMENTS The following is August investment activity: Balance 8-1-86 Bought: BA 6.29 CD 6.1 cP 5.65 Matured: CP 7.69 BA 6.77 Repo 6.625 CD 7.85 CD 7.25 $7,436,534 Due 1-20-87 Dain Bosworth 172,335 Due 1-23-87 Marquette 120,000 Due 3-31-87 Marquette 125,000 Dain Bosworth American National Marquette Marquette Marquette (2OO,218) (139,529) (120,000) (~5o,ooo) (175,000) Balance 8-31-86 $7,O69,122 Breakdown of Balance: U.S. Government Securities Certificates of Deposit Commerical Paper Bankers Acceptance Government Trust Pool Repurchase Agreements $3,945,518 1,220,000 839,977 628,627 335,000 100,000 $7,069,122 August 1986 Finance Report September 11, 1986 Page 2 The rates on investments continue to slide. Short-term CD rates are under the traditional passbook savings rate of 5.5%. The amount of interest earned by the City is declining with the steady decline in the interest rates this year. COMMERCE SQUARE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Balance 8-1-86 $375,482 August interest 1,993 Balance 8-31-86 $377,734 Demolition expenses will begin coming in September. JN:ls