The URL can be used to link to this page

1987-01-27 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 1987 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Approve the Minutes of the January 13, 1987, Regular Meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: Delinquent Utility Bills Pg. 108-115 Pg. 1~6 $ CASE #87-601= Tim Torgrimson, 3091 Tuxedo Blvd., Subdivision of Land, Part of Lots 18 19, 20 & 21, Block 1, Pembroke. Pg. 117-123 e CASE ~87-605: Rick Lindlan, 1900 Shorewood Ln. Lot Size and Setback Variance, Lot 1, Block 2, Shadywood Point, PID # 18-117-23 23 0003. Pg. 124-138 Proposal from Westonka Communication Network - Robert McGlinsky, Acting Chairman. ~esolution Authorizing the May.or and City Manager to Enter Int-o a Lease Agreement with Mark A. Saliterman for the Mound Liquor Store. Pg. 139-145 Pg. 146-147 Proposed Amendments to the Cable Communication Ordinance Arising out of the Transfer of Ownership from Dow-Sat of Minnesota, Inc., to Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. Cable TV Advisory Committee Recommendations on the Purchase of Equipment for the Local Access Studio in Mound. Pg. 148-153 Pg. 154-155 Resolution Accepting the Lost Lake Study and Following Addendum as Prepared by Maxfield Research Group and Recommended by the Planning Commission. (Please bring copy of the Lost Lake Study distributed previously. Addendum is included in this packet). Pg. 156-15~9 10. Comments and Suggestions from Citizens Present 11. 12. License Renewal - Entertainment Permit - Captain Billy's Payment of Bills Pg. 160 Pg. 161-173 Page-lO6 13. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Be December 1986 Financial Report as prepared by John Norman, Finance Director Information on Governor Perpich's Proposal Considering Replacing Local Government Aid (LGA) and Property Tax Credits with one "School Credit". Pg. 174-176 Pg. 177-1 83 Minutes of the Planning Commission - Jan. 12, 1987 Pg. 184-187 E® Fe Letter from Hennepin County Department of Transportation on the Request to Renumber County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83. Article written by Wes Long, City Clerk, Brooklyn'Park, on Optical Scan Voting Equipment. This is the type of Equipment we will be purchasing for our 1988 election through Hennepin County. You are invited to attend the Planning Commission Meeting on February 16, 1987 to hear Curt Pearson, City Attorney, discuss zoning and other planning issues important to Planning Commission and City Council. The meeting begins at 7:30 PM. Pg. 188 Pg. 189-190 Ge me City Staff.will be meeting with Hennepin County Transportation officials at 1:30 PM, on January 28, 1987, at City Hall. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain updated information on the County Road 15 project and other transportation related issues, i.e., traffic signals, crosswalks, etc. Pg. 191-194 GENERAL NOTE: Anytime you receive information on attending conferences and/or seminars, let me know if you are interested in attending and we will register you through City Hall. We' have budgeted monies for this purpose and there is no need for you to have to pay for these expenses on your own. Mayor Smith, Councilmember ~essen and myself attended a reception at Hennepin County Parks. The reception included a presentation by the Chairman of the Park District Board, Dave Latvaaho and Nell Weber, our area representative on the proposed Lake Minnetonka regional parks. Attached is an article from the January 22nd issue of the Minneapolis Star and Tribun~ on the park issue. If you are interested, I can arrange to have Nell Weber attend an upcoming Council Meeting to give an in-depth presentation on the proposed parks. Page 107 Janua.ry 13, 1986 MINUTES -- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 13, 1987 The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, January 13, 1987, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 5341Maywood Road, in said City. Those present were: Mayor Steve Smith, Councilmembers Liz Jensen, Phyllis Jessen, and Skip Johnson.' Also present were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson and the following interested citizens: Bud Skoglund, Bernie & Mary Malcheski, Orval & Vivian Fenstad, Bob & Marilyn Byrnes, Margaret Bargman, Freda Olson, Greg & Lynn Keller, Barry Koepke, Scott & Chris Brickley, Art Ridgeway, Tammy Johnson, Bernard Lister, Bill Holm, Dallas Jensen, Judy Soukup, Frank & Andrea Ahrens, Cynthia Smith, Bryan Clem, Tom & Jeri Forster. Acting Mayor Phyllis Jessen opened the Meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The City Manager read Steve Smith's letter of resignation as a City Councilmember. Acting Mayor Jessen accepted the letter. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Mayor Steve Smith, and Councilmembers Liz Jensen and Skip Johnson. MOTION made by Jessen, seconded by Jensen to approve the Minutes of the December 23, 1986, Regular Meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF COUNCILMEMBER STEVE SMITH.AND DECLARING A VACANCY ON THE CITY COUNCIL Jensen moved and.Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-1 RESOLUTION FORMALLY ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF COUNCILMEMBER STEVE SMITH AND DECLARING A VACANCY ON THE CITY COUNCIL The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING MAYOR FOR lq87 Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-2 RESOLUTION APPOINTING SKIP JOHNSON ACTING MAYOR FOR 1987 2 January 13, 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING CITY MANAGER FOR lq87 Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-3 RESOLUTION APPOINTING ACTING CITY MANAGER FOR 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES TO VARIOUS COMMISSIONS Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-~ RESOLUTION APPOINTING PHYLLIS JESSEN TO THE PARK COMMISSION, LIZ JENSEN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND SKIP JOHNSON TO THE CABLE T.V. COMMISSION AS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES FOR 1987 ~ The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-5 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE LAKER OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL DESPOSITORIES Johnson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: THE RESOLUTION ~87-6' RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES FOR 1987 The'vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF OFFICIAL BONDS Jensen moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-7 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A $20,000 BOND FOR THE CITY CLERK The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Janua?y 13, 1987 'Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-8 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A $20,000 BOND FOR THE CITY TREASURER/FINANCE DIRECTOR The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. R~APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARK COMMISSION Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-9 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO REAPPOINT SHIRLEY ANDERSEN, NANCY CLOUGH AND LINDA PANETTA TO THE PARK COMMISSION FOR 3 YEAR TERMS BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REAPPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Jensen moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-10 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO REAPPOINT VERN ANDERSEN, GEOFF MICHAEL AND FRANK WEILAND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 3 YEAR TERMS BEGINNING JANUARY -1, 1987 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENTS TO CABLE T.V. COMMITTEE & ESTABLISHMENT OF TERMS Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-11 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE :CABLE T.V. COMMITTEE AND ESTABLISH TERMS F0R THE COMMITTEE AND APPOINT CERTAIN PERSONS TO THOSE TERMS 'The vote.was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE TO L.M.C.D. Mayor Smith suggested that the City publicize this opening on the L.M.C.D. He stated he would like to have a full Council before any appointment to this position is filled. Mayor Smith further stated that he would be willing to serve as the representative for 1 month. The Council agreed. Smith moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: /10 January '13, 1987 " RESOLUTION ~87-12 RESOLUTION TO APPOINT MAYOR STEVE SMITH AS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE L.M.C.D. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF DELEGATE AND A~-TERNATE DELEGATE TO THE ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIEg Jensen moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #87-13 RESOLUTION APPOINTING DELEGATE AND~ ALTERNATE TO THE ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. OFFICIAL LOGO TO COMMEMORATE 7STH ANNIVERSARY OF CITY OF MOUND AND MOUND CITY DAYS The City Manager explained the logo contest and showed the Council the final 6 semi-finalists. . The Council chose ~3, deleting "FIRE/POLICE". Johnson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-14 RESOLUTION SELECTING THE LOGO TO COMMEMORATE THE ?STH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CITY OF MOUND AND MOUND CITY DAYS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTIONS RELATING TO ONE WAY STREETS~ NO PARKING ZONES~ TIM£ LIMIT PARKING. AND TIME PARKING The City Clerk explained that these resolutions are also a part of the recodification of the ordinances. These restrictions were all in the old code book. In the new code book these types of · regulations will be done by resolution. Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-15 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING ONE WAY STREETS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jessen moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-16 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING NO PARKING ZONES The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Johnson moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: 5 January 13, 1987 RESOLUTION ~87-17 RESOLUTION RELATING TO TIME LIMIT PARKING The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jessen moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION ~87-18 RESOLUTION RELATING TO TIME PARKING The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. RELEASE OF ESCROW FUNDS TO ASHCO (COBBLESTONE COVE DEVELOPMENT) The City Manager reported that Ashco has requested that the City release $30,982.56 that is being held in escrow for the utilities in the Cobblestone Cove development. The City Engineer recommends that the City release only $25,000. Jessen moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #87-19 RESOLUTION TO RELEASE $25,000 IN ESCROW FUNDS TO ASHCO (COBBLESTONE COVE) The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ~ID AWARD: SHORELINE PROTECTION & RIP-RAPPING PROJECT The City Manager reported that bids were opened yesterday on the Shoreline Protection & Rip-Rapping Project. There were 5 bids received ranging from $29,528.90 to' $118,260.00. The City budgeted $29,000 for rip-rapping and dredging. ($20,000 worth to be done by a contractor and $9,000 worth to be done the City .staff. Under the provisions of the bids the City is allowed to delete certain areas, if necessary. The Park Director is recommending that areas 1 and 5 be deleted thus leaving the total price of $20,771.40. Work to be done by Widmer Brothers, the low bidder. · Smith moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution: .'RESOLUTION 87-20 RESOLUTION TO AWARD THE BID FOR THE SHORELINE PROTECTION & RIP-RAPPING PROJECT TO THE LOW BIDDER, WIDMER BROTHERS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,771.40 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Buzz Sycks suggested that the sound system in the Council Chambers be improved so that people in the back of the room can hear. January .13, 1987 STATE GAMBLING LICENSE RENE~ALg The City Clerk explained that if the Council has no objections to the renewals that have been filed with the State of Minnesota by American Legion Post ~398 and Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church, no action was needed. No action was taken. PAYMENT OF BILLS MOTION made by Jess.n, seconded by Johnson to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list, in the amount, $151,12~.62, when funds are available. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE: AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAl- USE PERMIT FOR UNION 76~ BEN MALINSKI ~ MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Jessen to set February 10, 1987, at 7:30 P.M. for a public hearing to amend the Conditional Use Permit of Union 76, Ben Malinski. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION! MISCELLANEOUS Department Head Monthly Reports for December 1986. School Board Minutes of November 10, 1986 November 13, 1986 December 8, 1986 December 15, 1986 Ce Letter from West Hennepin Public Safety regarding the renaming of Hennepin County Road 83. D. Invitation to attend a reception at Hennepin County Parks in Plymouth on January 22, 1987, from 4:30 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. E. Notice: Legislative Program adopted by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities is available for Council review. 'Let the City Manager know if you would like to See it. Fe Notice: A copy of the proposed 5-Year Development Program for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission is available for Council review. Let the City Manager know if you would like to see it. Ge Notice: Upcoming programs for newly elected and veteran elected officials. These seminars are held annually and are put on by the League of Minnesota Cities and the Government Training Service. Anyone interested, contact the City Manager. 7 He January 13, 1987 Notice: Upcoming annual National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional City Conference to be held February 28 - March ] in Washington, D.C. Anyone interested in attending, please contact the City Manager. Brochure from Minnesota Soft Drink (MSD) Recycle and Super Cycle regarding their services in recycling to the metropolitan area. Super Cycle has a contract with the City of Mound for 1987 recycling. NOTION made by Jess,n, seconded by Johnson to adjourn at P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager Fran Clark, CMC, City Clerk BILLS JANUARY 13, 1987 Batch 864124 Batch 864125 Computer Run dated 1/7/87 Computer Run dated 1/8/87 Assn of Metro Munlc Anthony's Floral ATOM Donald Bryce Balboa-MN Concept Microfilm Custom Fire Apparatus Dictaphone IAFC ICMA IACP Lutz Tree Serv LMCD League of MN Cities Lake Region Mutual Aid Minn Comm Lano Equip Metro Fone Communication MN State Fire Chief Assn MN State Fire Dept Assn MRPA MN City Mgmt Assn ' MN Park Supervis. Assn Metro Area Mgmt Assn MN Chiefs Police Assn MN Safety Council MN GFOA National Animal Control Timber Products United Fire Fighters Westonka Chamber Commerc R.L. Youngdabl Xerox Corp 87 Dues 1,936.00 Garland ql.O0 87 Dues 10.00 Supplies 14.79 Jan storage 1,411.25 Microfiche Reader q,984.04 Repair 69 Mack 10,353.00 87 Maint' 85.00 87 Dues -60.00 87 Dues 266.00 87 Dues ~ 50.00 Tree removal 1,600.00 1/3 of 87 Dues 2,348.67 87 Map Dues 199.00 87 Dues 10.00 87 Maint 90.00 Filters 101.52 Jan Pager Rent 35.40 87 Dues 140.00 87 Dues 90.00 87 Memb Pa rk D i rgBoa rd 170.00 '87 Memb 35.00 87 Dues 20.00 87 Dues 5.00 87 Dues 30.00 87 Dues 60.00 87 Dues 10.00 87 Subscrip 12.00 Tlmbers-trk flatbed 196.00 87 Dues 25.00 87 Dues 60.00 87 Bond-Clark 100.00 Princ-lnt--Xerox 253.19 24',"801.86 39,611.90 86,710.86 Total Bills 151~124.62 33 406 2628 61 "33'424.4738 41 33 439 4681 42 33 442 4578 61 33 46~.4740 81 33466 4937 31 23 ~87 4764 71 33 500 4455 21 33 5074524.01 33 515 ~3073 21 33 5!8 4660 92 33 548 3125.12 33 554 3065 71 587 3021 02 587 3062.41 593 52o6 31 596 ~72h 91 · ~3 596 5138 11 ' o.4841 93 33 6204925 01 33 65O 4610 51 33650 4618 11 '33 635 5123.91 .33 647 Delinquent Water and. Sewer J.P. Ki nneberg Gary Paulsen John Zambori 'Dan Segner Edna Enstad James Grady ' Renold Nelson Donna Luguar Leanard. L;i ndbl om Mike Jacobs Daniel Li ndgren Susan Arne Robert Smestad Ben 'Eikhout David Slack Dean Larson Todd Ringsred Kevin Sm[th Eric Berglund Gerald Pearson Holmes Empson Go~don Wolff Geri Paulsen Barbara Mi ller Du~ne Nelson $135.80 Paid 85.32 Paid 105.59 Paid 121.77 Paid $~8~08 114.52. - 122.99 95.66 Paid 95.66 145.82 Paid 103.74 92,04 51.58 ~'72~72 P~i.d 110.60 Paid 72.81 70.90 PAID 79.62 8 .86 118.97 Paid 90.03 170.41 90.88 73,48':Paid 164.94 180,42 2628 Tyrone Lane 1-27-87 4738 Galway'Rd. 4681Wilshire 'B'lvd. 4578 Denbigh Road 4740 Bedford R6ad 4937 Brunswick Road 4764 Cumberland Road 4455 Radnor Road 4524 Sti'rling Road 3073 Inverness Road ~02'.:~6~0 Hampton Road: ' 3125 Argyle Lane 3065 Dundee Lane 2841 Marlboro Lane 3021 brighton Blvd, 3062 Brighton Blvd. 5206 Drummond Road 472~ Hanover ROad 5138 Hanover Road 4841 Island View Drive 4925 Island View Drive 4610 Kildare Lane 4618 Kildare Road 5123 Waterbury Road 5211 Phelps Rd. * Made arrangements $2656.: 13 $1472.17 1-21-87 Delinquent Water and Sewer 33 406 2628 61 33 424 4738 41 33 439 4681 42 33442 4578 61 33 463 4740 81 33 466 4937 31 33 487 4764 71 33 500 4455 21 33 507 4524 O1 33 515 3073 21 33 518 4660 92 33 548 3125 12 33 554 3065 71 33 578 2841 11 33 587 3021 02 33 587 3062 41 33 593 5206 31 33 596 4724 91 33 596 5138 11 33 620 4841 93 33 620 4925 O1 33 650 4610 51 33 650 4618 11 33 635 5123 91 33 647 5211 71 $135.8o 85.32 '1o5,59 121.77 114.52 122.99 95.66 95.66 145.82 103.74 92.04 51.58 72.72 110.60 72.81 70.90 79.62 89.86 118.97 90.03 170.41 90.88 73.48 164.94 180.42 $2656.13 Mc RECEIVED DEC 9 195G COMB$-KNUT$ON ASSOCIATES, INC. Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 December 8, 1986 ~an Bertrand Planning and Zoning City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUB3ECT: Subdivision of Land Case ~ 87-501 Part of Lots 18, 19, 20 & 21, Block 1, Pembroke File Dear Jan: As requested we have reviewed the above proposed subdivision and would recommend approval as presented. If you have any questions or require additionai info~mation, piease contact US. JC:.tdv Very truI¥ yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ohn Cameron 117 Planning Commission Minutes Janury 12, 1~87 2. Case No. 87-601 SubdivisiOn.of Land - )0~1 Tuxedo Boulevard Part of Lots 18, 19, 20 and 21, Block 1, Pembroke · Applicant,. Tim Torgrlmson, and h'is neighbor, Warren Bode, were present. The Building Official, Jan Bertrand,.explalned that Hi. Torgrimson and Hr. Bode purchased Lot 21 and are requesting that Lot 21 be divided as described on the appllcation and a part added to each of their respective parcels (both parcels are present, ly conforming to City Code)~ 'The existing and proposed descriptions are listed on the survey. The Planning Commission questioned 'if a park dedica- tion would be.applicable (no--use is not being intensified) and what 20 foot jog east of Lot 21 was '(easement not used, but taken for Tuxedo Boulevard realign- ment.). Staff recommends the division and combination of land as requested. Weiland moved'and Heyer seconded a motion to approve the division of land with condition that'if there are any discrepancies, they be cleared before it goes to the Council. The vote was unanimously in favor. This will go to the City Council on January 27, 1987. FEE OWI~"~I ......... "' " APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION ,-!;--~ .... ~." , :~-,.~78ec 22 03-a I.."':.', , ..,."'x ~1 't'::'~ ' ' :~ !??-.--' "'.' ..... .L--¥~LL ~.GE OF MOUND .... DEC ? I~ ~ ~"t''~ ~ ~ ' ~/~ r'~" ~ ~,~ ~ 't (~ ~: "' ..... OF LAND ~ ~7-~/ FEE $ "~'~)' L)O PLAT PARCEL Location and complete legal description 9f propeF~y to be divided:.~ ZONING '-" All' supporting documents~ 'such as sketch plans~ sur. veTs,, attacEments, etc. su'bmitte';d In' 8½H'X l l'! size 'and/or 1b, copies plus' one 8½'"'X' l l'~C'c~py'. (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number) must be A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. .. .'From ,Square feet TO Square feet Reason: APPLICANT~ Applicant's interest in the property: ~..o. Y~"~-4'/'~'~ DATE This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan- 'ation given why this is not the case. J PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: .! Certificate of Survey for Tim A. Torgrimson in Lots 18-21, Block l, Pembroke Hennepin County, Minnesota Existing Descriptions I. Lots 18, 19, and 20, except the West 85 feet of said Lots and except the Easterly 20 feet of Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Pembroke. 2. The West 85 feet of Lots 18, i9, an~.20,. Block l~..Pembroke. Proposed ~escriptions (Check with Torrens Office) 1. Lots 18, 19, 20, and 21, except the West 85 feet of said Lots and except the Easterly 20 feet of Lots 18, 19, and'21, Block I," PEMBROKE. 2. The West 85 feet of Lots 18, 19, 20, and 21, Block 1, PEMBROKE. ! hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described properties and the location of all exist- ing buildings thereon.· It does'not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. Date · 10-29-86 Scale: 1" = 30' o · Iron marker COFFIN & GRONBERG,' INC. Mark S. Gron~erg Mn. Llc. No. 12~5~ Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota L..IJ (%, \ \ N I PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 87-601 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION OF LAND FOR PART OF LOTS 18, 19, 20 AND 21, BLOCK l, PEMBROKE, PID # 19-117-23-34 0030/0029/0028, P.C. CASE # 87-601 WHEREAS, an application to waive the subdivision requirements contained in Section 22.00 of the City Code has been filed with the City of Mound by the applicant, Timothy A. Torgrimson; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that there are special circumstances affecting said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would deprive the appllcant of the reasonable use of his land; and that the waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property rights; and that granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property owners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 'The request of the applicant for a waiver from the provisions of Section 22.00 of the City Code and the request to subdivision property of less than 5 acres, described as follows: Lots 18, 19 and 20, except the west 85 feet of said Lots and except the easterly 20 of Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Pembroke. Also the west 85 feet of Lots 18, 19, and 20, Block 1, Pembroke. Also Lot 2l, Block l, Pem- broke; PID Numbers 19-117-23 34 0030/0029/0028. A. it is hereby granted to permit the subdivision in the following manner as per Exhibit A: Parcel A: Lots 18, 19, 20, and 21, except the West 85 feet of said Lots and excep~ the Easterly 20 feet of Lots 18, 19, and 21, Block 1, Pembroke. Parcel B: The West 85 feet of Lots 18, 19, 20 and 21, Block l, Pembroke. Bo It is hereby determined that the foregoing subdivision will constitute a desirable and stable community development and it is in harmony with the adjacent properties. Ce The' City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this reso- lution to the applicant for filing in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the subdivision regulations of this City. This lot subdivision is to be filed and recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this resolution. CASE NO. 87-605 TO: Piann|ng Commission, Applicant and Staff FROH: Jan Bertrand~ Buildin9 Official ~ Planning Commission Agenda of January 12, CASE NO. 87-605 APPLICANT: Rick Lindlan LOCATION: 1900 Shorewood Lane LEGAL DESC.: Lot l, Block 2, Shadywood Point; PID # 18-117-23 23 0003 SUBJECT: Lot .size.and setback variance EXISTING ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential The applicant, Rick Lindlan, is requesting a variance to recognize an existing non-conforming 5.9 foot s|deyard~a~d~Q_~nQQ-conforming 6,990 square robot Lo~tsize Th O-~der to co~s~ct a ~c6h~':flo~r'over-the existing dweliing, add a 12 by 24.7 foot 2 story addition t° the east, and a 6.8 by 9 foot entry with an attached 24 by 24 foot garage.' The structure would be expanded to conform with the minimum 840 square foot f)oor area requirement. The R-1 Zoning District requires Q lO,O0~.square foot lot are~_~ With a lot width of 50 feet, the Zoning Ordinance requires a i0 foot sideyard and 6 foot sldeyard. The front yard requirement of 30 feet to the right-of-way and a 50 foot setback requirement to the lakeshore. The proposed site for the-addition would have the garage set' 29 feet from the curb line and 16.5 feet to the bu|lding from the property ]ine. The boulevard is approximately 15 feet wide. The lakeshore setback would be in excess of the required 50 feet, the sideyard is .1 foot from the existing building too.close to the Breezy Beach Path. The Planning Commission could consider the Breezy Beach Path as a City easement rather than a right-Of-way for setback. This would establish th~ 6.3 to 5.9 foot sideyard insteadof a front yard required setback. The applicant would also be very-interested in the City allowing him to purchase any portion of Breezy Beach Path or allowing a vacation of that area to bring the lot into a .larger square footage. RECOMMENDATION: The bulk of this building will be enlarged and renovated to a great extent. The abutting neighbors to the southeast are within 3 feet of his lot line with their structure. The buildings in the area tend to be larger in mass with approximately the same size lots. The plat map again fo~ the area is enclosed as the Planner has done a study for the Planning Commission recently on possibly rezoning all of the Shadywood Point area to the R-2 District. Staff recommends the requested 13.5 foot front yard variance to allow the two story addition and attached garage within 29 feet of the curb line and 16.5 feet at the closest point to the property line, recognize the .1 foot sideyard vari- ance, and the undersized lot area of 6,990 square feet~ . The abutting neighbors have been notified. This will be referred to the City Council on January 27, 1987 for their consideration. Planning Commission Hinutes Janury 12, 1987 Case No. 87-605 Lot size and setback variance for '1900 Shorewood Lane 'Lot 1, Block 2, Shady~ood Point; PlO 18-117-2323 0003 Rick Llndlan was present. The Building Official, Jan Bertrand, explained her report noting some modifi- cations in the proposal; both sides will have about 2 .feet additional on the structure. Applicant is requesting a variance to recognize an existing non- conforming 5.9 foot side yard setback, a nonconforming 6,~90 square foot lot size, and is requesting a 13.5 foot front yard variance to allow~t~vo 2 story additions with an ·attached 2q by 28 foot garage, ................. ~ .... The Commission dlscuSsed lot size and.their prevlous discussion .on.the possible rezoning .of the area, at which time,'they'had'decided eaCh undersized lot area variance should be Consldered'individually.'- Thal stated he fe.lt we.shouldn!t .'grant a variance as Over. lO~; a 3,,000'square foot+ variance neededL The'Commis- slon. ta'lked.about BreeZy Path easement being'a waTkway next to this lot given : open space to.the area'and that the proposed-enlargement and renovation of this struct'ure would be an-incredible 'improvement..and blend with t'he neighborhood. Reese moved and Hichael seconded a. motion that CommissiOn recommend 'the Staff recommendation.. ' The applicant questioned if he'could go 9 inches closer to the-lake in order to have free span.trusses; commission agreed so 'long as he meets the 50 foot lake setback. The Vote was all in favor';except Thai voted nay because of the lots.ize'vari- ance; stated this is over.the guideline usually used. This will go :o the Counqil.on danuarY27th. CITY OF HOUND APPLICATION TO PLANNINg & ZONING COHHISSION (Please type the following information) Fee Paid .~ ~ Date Flled' /- 1, Street Address of Property. lonn _q~_~,-et.~__~a_ 1_~__-_~_ 2. Legal Descripti.on of Property: Lot ! Bloc~ Addition Shadywoo~ PoSnt Owner's Name T.~nrlm t~n.~kin~ Address IgO0 ShQT~WQQd Lane PlO' No. 1 8-117-7,~)- 23-0003 Day 'Phone No. 472-6600 Mound q. Applicant (if other than owner): Name Rick. Lindlan (Voyageur Construction) Day Phone No. 472-6921 Address 1720 Resthaven Ln. Mound Type of Request: (X) Variance ( ) ConditiOnal Use Permit ( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review ( ) Wetland Permit ~, ) P.U.D. ."~ ' *If other, specify: Present Zoning District ( ).Amendment ( ) Sign Permit ( )*Other Existing Use(s) of Property Single family 'rem~ denre ' Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or .other zoning procedure for this property? No If so, list date(s) of list date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s) . 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 aut~orizedoff|clal of the City of ~ound for the purpose of inspecting, or~ postin~ mainta~ning and removing such not,ces'as may be required by law. ~ / :~ignature ~~- - Date /~-~.' ''ofAppilcant /~ ~~m " ,11 · / Planning Commission Rec°mmendat~on~/ Da t e Council Action: Resolution No. /AG,. Date Request for Zonl.ng Variance Procedure case ?? - C o_T D. Location of: Signs, easements~ underground utlllties, etc. E. Indicate North compass dlrectlon .F. Any additional information.as may reasonably be required by the City Staff and applicable Sections of the'Zoning Ordinance. III. Request for a Zoning Variance A. All.'lnformatlon below, a site plan~ as described In Part II, and general application must be provided before a ~earlng.w111 be scheduled. B. Does .the present use of. the property--conform to all~ regulatlons for the zone district In which It Is lo¢fi~ed? 'Yes (~-) i f ,no', specify_each 6°n-conformlng use: . for the zone district In'which i't Is.located? Yes If 'no", specify each non-conforming use: D.' Which unique physical characterlst c~r'~s of the subje~t, propert~-.prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses.permitted in that"..z~o'njng ~istrict? ~:~ .Too narrOw ( ) Topography ( )' S0~1 ( ) Too. small ( ) Drainage ( ) Sub-:surface ( ) Too shallow . (.'.::) Shape (') Other~ SgecJfy: Was 'the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property, interests in the land after the Zonlng Ordinance was adqpted? Yes ( ) No ~r) If yes, explain: '' F. Was the hardship created by 'any 'other man-made change, such as the reloca- tio of a road? Yes .o ( ) yes, explain: G. Are the conditions of hardship for'which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes ~-) No (~) If no, how many other properties are similarly affected? H..What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations' that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the same zon.~, or to the enforcement of this ordinance? Certificate of Survey for Voyageur Construction of Lot 1, Block 2, Shadywoo~ Point Hennepin County, Htnnesota Scale: Bate : 1" ~ 20' 1g-29-86 Iron marker Spot etevatta ~und City Se I I~ereby certify that this is a true and correct representation'of a survey of the boundaries of Lot I, Block g,"SHADYWOOO POINT, NENNEPIN COUNTY MINN" and the Northeasterly 5.00 feet of that part of vacated Shorewood Lane lying between the extensions across said Lane of the Northwesterly and Southeasterly lines of said Lot I. the location of all existing bdildings, if any, thereon. and the proposed location of a proposed building. It does not purport to she other improvements or encroachments. Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. Engineers, Land Surveyors & Planners Long Lake, Minnesota Coffin & Grogberg. Inc. ron~erg LIC ~; lZ/55 Attention: Jan Bertrand Mound Building Inspector Mound PlanninB Commission Mound City Council Julie Johnson ! Minnehaha Creek Watershed Rick Lindlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Mound, Minn. 55364 I (we) have discussed the proposed buildins plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewing the survey and building plans with Rick, we find that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached 8arage. Name Address cc; Julie Johnson Minnehaha Creek Watershed ~ ~ 7- ~ ~c'~ Rick L~ndlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Hound, Hinn. 55364 Attention: Jan Bertrand Hound Building Inspector Hound Planning Commission Hound City Council Julie Johnson / Minnehaha Creek Watershed ! (we) have discussed the proposed building plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewing the survey and ~uilding plans with Rick, we £ind that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached garage. Name Address cc; Julie Johnson Hinnehaha Creek Watershed Attention: Jan Bertrand Mound Building Inspector Hound Planning Commission Hound City Council Julie Johnson / Minnehaha Creek Watershed Rick Lindlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Mound, Minn. 55364 I (we) have discussed the proposed building plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewing the survey and building plans with Rick, we find that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached garage. Name Address cc; Julie Johnson Hinnehaha Creek Watershed Attention: Jan Bertrand Hound Building Inspector Hound Planning Commission Hound City Council Julie Johnson / Hinnehaha Creek Watershed Rick Lindlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Hound, Hinn. 55364 I (we) have discussed the proposed building plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewing the survey and building plans with Rick, we find that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached garage. ccl Julie Johnson Hinnehaha Creek Watershed kick Lindlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Hound, Hinn. 55364 Attention: Jan Bertrand Hound Building Inspector Hound Planning Commission Hound City Council Julie Johnson / Hinnehaha Creek Watershed I (we) have discussed the proposed building plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewing the survey and building plans with Rick, we find that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached garage. Name /9o a ~ ;~o~ ~._. Address cc= Julie Johnson Hinnehaha Creek Watershed Rick Lindlan 1712 Resthaven Ln. Hound, Hinn. 5536& Attention: Jan Bertrand Hound Buildin8 Inspector Hound Plannin8 Coaaission Hound City Council Julie Johnson / Minnehaha Creek Watershed I (we) have discussed the proposed bhilding plans with Rick Lindlan. After reviewini the survey and buildin$ plans with Rick, we find that we have no objections to the proposed new house with an attached iara8e. Sincerely, Rick Lindlan cc; Julie Johnson Hinnehaha Creek Watershed I:{ECEIVED JAN _9 Attention: J~n Bertrand Mound Buildin~ Inspector Mound Planning Oom~ISsion Mound City Council Julie Johnson / Hinnehaha Creek Watershed ~ic!c 1712 :lound, ~Iinn. 55364 I (we) have discussed the proposed building, plans w~:h .".Icl: Lindlan. After re. viewing; *.:;e survey and bct'ldine pl~'.a.~ with we find chat '.e ';ave no objections to *.he proposed --',...... ~a,~.._ . with an attached gara.~e, Sincerely, Ric:.~ Lindian cci Julie Johnson ~innehaha Croek Wate.,..~ned / ~ O8 (03dO93^30N~) H£Yd H~¥3B PROPOSED RESOLUTION CASE NO. 87-605 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES AS REQUESTED FOR LOT 1 BLOCK 2, SHADYW00D POINT, PID NO. 18-117-23 23 0003 P & Z CASE NO. 87-605 WHEREAS, the applicant, Rick Lindlan, has requested a variance to recognize an existing nonconforming 5.9 foot side yard setback, a nonconforming 6,990 square foot lot size, and is requesting a 13.5 foot front yard variance to allow two 2 story additions with an attached 24 by 28 foot garage; and WHEREAS, the R-1 Zoning District requires a 10,OO0 square foot lot area, a 6 foot side yard and a 10 foot side yard, and a 50 foot lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does recommend the variance considering the Breezy Path City easement as a walkway rather than a street right-of-way establishing a side yard setback and open space to the lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve a 13.5 foot front yard setback allowing an addition within 16.5 feet to 18.2 feet to the street front right-of'way, recognizing an existing 5.9 foot side yard setback to the existing structure, and recognizing a lot area of 6,990 square feet in the R-1 Zoning District for Lot 1, Block 2, Shadywood Point and the Northeasterly 5 feet of that part of the vacated Shorewood Lane lying between the extensions across said Lane of the Northwesterly and Southeasterly lines of said Lot 1, 19OO Shorewood Lane, PID Number 18-117-23 23 0003. Flemo to Ed Shukle Jan. 13, ! 987 Ref: W'estonka Communication Network City Council Fleeting Jan. 27, ! 987 Dear Ed, Attached is a corrected copy of our letter to you dated Jan. 8,1987. I have slightly revised pg.3 Phase I to note ( add 100 new members). Also attached is a current list of members as of 12/i/8(5. Best regards, Westonka Communication Network Robert Flc$1insky Acting Chairman cc. Pam Fleyers Kathy Jones Pat Chelberg To the City of Mound and the Mayor of MouncL 5341Maywood Rd. Mound, M~ 55364 attr~ Mr. Ecl 3hukle, Jr. City Manager J~8o1~7 Ref: Westonka Communication Network City Council Meeting Jan. 27,1987 Oear Mr. 5hukle, On behalf of the present 103 parents supporting the Westonka Communication Network, we wish to thank you for the opportunity of addressing the City Council. We wish to discuss this most Important Issue of clrug and alcohol use and abuse in our community, schools, and activities outside of school Jurisdiction by our under age youth. Drug abuse Is a community wide problem, and use by youth affects us all now or later. We have the support of the Mlnitrista and Mound police along with a growing network of parents who are willing to dig into the problem in many ways to contribute services, talents and support to start dealing with this problem. We need the support of the City of Mound so we can actively get started on Phase I of the plan and start communicatin~ We request Your consideration and support of Phase I of the plan as presented herein by the Westonka Communication Network. Your support will do many major things for the Network. For example: I. Funds will be available can start planning and communicating with parents to give the Network strength and lead to It's self support. 2. The Network will have the starting endorsement of. the City of Mound which will lead the way to future growth and possible support by other local communities such as Orono, MInitrista, and Watertowrt 3. We hope to be a central communication link for the many fragmented services and activities presently working to serve a similar cause. We need the physical and flnlancial support of the City of Mound to start with Phase I to gauge the true interest of this community problem. We request a commitment from you of $4,000 for start up funding of Phase I. We will issue a quarterly report on progress and expenditures to ~te as we go. If the community of Mound ts seriously concerned about our youth, 1987 Is the year to get started to save our youth. We feel your support will quicken our progress and keep the momentum high. The following History, Plans 'for Phase 1,2,&3o and copy of the Oct.gth, 1986 Meeting attached express our purpose. / BRIEF HI STORY OF THE WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK. On Aug.25,1986, Sue Schmidt, an active School Board Member, called a meeting of interested parents who were concerned about the drug abuse in our community. She wanted to find out the concerns of the parents in our community. Approximately 30 parents attended and expressed a need for a method to deal with this serious problem. Commitees of volunteers were formed to prepare an action plan. The committees decided to work with Kathy Jones and kick off the program at the Highschool on Sept. 15,1986 with an event on drug use and abuse sponsering Joe Sensor ( Ex Viking Football Player). The name of this organization was adopted as WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK (hereinafter called WCN) and the attached form was distributed at the Oct. 9th event. We were surprised when overlO0 of the parents in attendence signed and returned the form expressing commitments for the various sub committees at the very first meeting and the very first time they heard of WCN. On Nov. 11 th,the committees met in the MWHS to discuss the continuance of the plan and preparation of the sUbcommittees. We invited speakers from other local Communication Networks (Eden Prarie and §urnsville) to share their experiences with us. They encouraged us to procede and stated that they (Eden Prarie)started out with only 8 parents and have grown to over 250 in a few years. They stated the need is great and the plan works once parents know more about it. Communication to parents is very important. We have received the strong support of the police departments, the parents, and now we see a need of support from the community. Finiance wi 11 be a major consideration of the success of this program. The Westonka Communication Network has attempted to raise funds thru a donation re~luest at each event. To date, we have received $120 of which approximately $20 have been spent for materials and preparation of a mailing list covering the present 68 registered members. We can see a significant delay in progress if we are side tracked by working on the ali ready too many fund raising events. We believe with the support of the City of Mound, and other communities, we can put together a major and timely effort to change the fate of the future of our our most valued assets, our children. We herein request your support for this program. We have prepared a 3 phase budget showing expenditures for plans based upon 3 years of activity. page 2 of 3 Phase mi projected to attract !00 members in 1987. Directory' costs I"lailings 2/$chool year to all in community. Brochures Speakers for events Films for events I parent-youth event/year Training workshops I person News letters 4/year Teen activities 2/year Phase '2 projected for 300 members in 1988. Directory costs Hailings 2/school year to ali in community. Brochures Speakers for events' Films for events 2 parent-youth event/year Training workshops 2 persons News letters 4/year Teen activities 4/year Research combining existing support groups. Join Regional Associations like WCN. Promote WCN to local businesses for support. Sponcer dance and Prom activities. Solicit joint ventures with other communities. Phase ~3 for unknown projections in 1989. Ail of 1. and 2. above Teen activities 6/year Start teen .activities center. Form a coolition of churches. $200 120 43O 9OO 3OO 8O 25O 720 ! 000 total $2OO 120 43O 9OO 3OO 160 35O 720 2,000 100 150 25O 1,000 total $7,000 1,000 4,000 total $4,000 $7,000 $12,000 The above activities and projections are the best of the ideas as submitted to date by the planning committees. We are working on details of each to solidify the total plan for 1987. We need a commitment for Phase ~2 so we can keep the momentum and make an impact in 1987. Respectfully submi tted Westonka Communication Network Robert McGlinsky 1951 Lakeside Ln., Mound Acting Chairman ~n~. "~ nf '~ 472 4176 THE WESTONKA COF4MUNICATION NETWORK NEXT MEETING OCT gth, 7:30 in the M.W.H.S. GYI~I THE WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK is a group of concerned citizer~, parents, police, and school personel who are organized to support each other in acting on methods to discourage the illegal use and abuse of drugs or chemicals in our community. I~IEMBERS WHO JOIN THE NETWORK AGREE AND WILL TO: 1. Monitor and maintain home activities involving children of network members which are free from mind altering drugs. 2. Always chaparone home parties involving underaged children. 3. Keep each other informed of activities, parties, and events where mind altering drugs may be present. 4. Work with school administrators, police, public agencies, community parents, and judicial bodies to enforce laws, rules, and policies which deter or eliminate the use of mind altering drugs. Network for the Mound Westonka School District 277 and local communities. DETACH HERE AND RETURN TO THE WESTONKA COI~I~UNICATION NETWORK I WANT TO JOIN THE WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK, BE ACTIVE IN THE OPERATION, AND BE IN THE DIRECTORY. SIGNED. PLEASE PRINT HOME PHONE ADDRESS Children at home under age 19. First name School Grade ' PARENTS NAME (FATHER) (MOTHER) OTHER WEEKEND PHONE CITY ZIP Year of graduation Last name if different PLEASE INDICATE YOUR INTEREST AND COMMITMENT FOR FOLLOWING: (F) FATHER (M) MOTHER (B) BOTH News letter or public relations Education Teen activities Steering committee Observation and witness team Family support team Fundraising Membership Correspondance Telephone support Driver on call youth support THE WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK NEXT MEETING OCT 9tho 7:3D in the M.W.H.S. GYM THE WESTONKA COMMUNICATION NETWORK is a group of concerned citizens, parents, police, and school personal who are organized to support each other in acting on methods to discourage the illegal use and abuse of drugs or alcohol in our community. We hope you enjoyed the first open meeting with guest speaker Joe Sensor on Sept. 15th. The excellent turn out was a great indication of the interest of our community to offer better choices to our youth. Your commitment to work with us to make a stand will have a great impact on this community, on many of our children, and hopefully on adults. Your input into this Network and into the developement of the teams may well be rewarded by having a peaceful and enjoyable time with your children in the following years. The steering committee has spent many hours evaluating guide lines to be considered for a network for our community. The guidelines are suggested to provide continuity of the overall program. Several active and committed parent teams are necessary to make the total program successful. The guidelines were originally noted in 12 groups as shown. News letter or public relations Education Teen activities Steering committee Observation and witness team Family support team Fundraising Membership Correspondance Telephone support Driver on call Youth' support They have been combined into 5 groups as shown with temporary steering chairman. 1. News letter or public relations, Membership,Correspondance-Pat Chelberg 2. Education -Kathy Jones 3. Teen Activities- Carol Pitsch 4. Observation and witness team, Driver on call- Bob McGlinsky 5. Family support team, Youth support, Telephone support -Dennis Erickson You have offered to work on one or more of the 12 teams. Attached you will find a description of the guide lines for only the teams you checked off: For those of you who have. offered to work on several teams, please look at the team you feel most committed to as a first priority and start with that team. You will have many opportunities to work with other teams if you are interested, but during .this first organizational meeting, we would sure appreciate your starting with one. We need your help to get organized and into action immediately. Team coordination will start in this meeting. Think of what you see as a need or a solution which you can share with the other team members. Come prepared with your thoughts and action plans written out so they can be exchanged. One last need. We need funds to cover mailings etc. A donation of $5-$113 will help. WESTOW:.A L'OII1UNIC. ATION NLrrWolaC 12/ PHONE NA~E. . I ADDRESS ZiP CODE, 'CH, I,I.I)S I~11[ _~RM)4 CHILI)~2 aAM FI)e~ ,ClpLi)~3 I 1,472'i67~ ALLYN, ST~VE&OANi ...... 1916SXORE'~OODLI~i-rl(~ ' 55364 ERIC 9 NICKI 4 2 1446 11;31 ANO~RSON,GR*IG i7701 CTYJ~O. 110 WEST 5r~ 3 !472256~ AUC~R. CHUCK&PAM 13117HIGHLANOBLVO-UOUNO 55364 ~.IENNIFCr-q :g OANNV $ 4 L4726777 B~LCOURT, JEANETTE 152173RtJMMONORDd'IOUND 5.5.t64 ~BRETT RI2 JASON 10 IANDREA 'S 1472 7954 BILLINGS, SUSAN [5014,,rd40RELINE ~LVDe8 55364 FDIANA ig DANI~LLi; NONE & ,472 4515 BOYD, D&VID& CONSTANCE ISg~, GUM~OOO-MOUND' ~5.5364 Urr. NNIFER C.4~L,Ij4A~ 7 472 1772 BRYCE, G~q,,ANDelOTHER,LU~ 1314~DEVONLN''MOIJND $5~..M MICOLEHOCHENSON 810 :___.~,~,MJAH. 8 8 4726702 CAMP~LL, JOi,IN&MARV I51341BAVWOOD,~4D.q-MOUND 5~.~T64 UACKIE 111 O 47~ 2846 CHELBI;RG,PAT 15375 MOLINE RD -UAPLE PLAIN I0 4723181 CH;R~A, PAM _1 1 472 4444 CUNNINGI'ON,' BiLL & ~1 ,$g;36 RIGG;WOOORD-rtOU~ er,5,5~4~4' ~CI~iSTOPHER 9 KELLI 7 12 472 445~ DONAS,, ARLENE i6115 SUNNVFIELD RD.E. 5.5~4 13 471 7540 DOWNEY. CHUCK & ~:-TT¥ :2665 CASCO PT RD-WAYZATA 55391 i~LLE ri I KATIE 14 4727568 ELAH. JON,LJULIE 14267HAzEL'wooD-IlOUNO 55364 IR08 [12 KRISTEN 9 '15 472~B50 ,£NGLE, JAMES&~icNIE ~45;3111ANCXESTERRO-I'IOWiD 55364 ISCOTT~ IGRAD SEAN 10 Sk'TH 16 '472 123g ERICKSON, DENNIS 554T64 17 474 14~0 FASCHINGrRONALD&LOUANN '4,TSOSI4ADYLN-I'IOUND 5..5,564 IIIlCHA~ 10,4747140 IFLANNERY,~$&LINI:)A 4,T~)OSHAoyLN-rlOUNO ~,534~4 Ja~li .GRa~).RYAN I0 lO 4723407 [FLE,INa',JOY 20 !472 6547 rl:OOYF., JAN~ $9Sa HA~Iq~40~N~ RO-MOWiO 5,5,364 'FI~qS~ALL lO 21 1 472 434).3 BFRAN~EN, ~ &Di~IE 54)70 GLEND~E RD-MOUND 553~G4 :CINDY :g ad;)ad~ 22 47! 8828 G~O~GE, SANO~A 3399 CRYSTAL I~Y RD-WAYZaTA 5~91 JENNIFER i0 23 4744950 GOSHGARIAN, PAL~&PAT 5955LAKEVIEWO~-nOUNO 55364 JOHN 24 472 4478 GUSTAVSON, R~V. ERIC ~lOd~A 1700 8AYW000 SNORES IX~-MOUN 55;364 E1'H&N 2 E'VAN 7 ;ERIC 25 4723163 HALE, PEG 26 471 8295 ~d. LOWELL. 127 1472 3711 ~RELL. LEONARD S341 MAVWO00 RD-MOUND 1'20 472 5959 ~Er~EiN, GAlL 272~ HALSTEAO LN-~3UNO 55364 JENNIFER STENZEL 9 UL:N S. ' 7 ~ ;471 8281 HOLSTE, ~ 30 ;472 1802 HOWARO, C.~EGO~Y & KATEHRINE 6061 AGPEN-UCJUND 55;364 tl~lq' 12 ralLY rio &NDY 31 4723711 i'~SON, 8ILL 53,41MAY~OODRD-IIOUND 553,64 32 472 1600 JON~S, KATHV 55364 3~C 474 $g~7 KII'~LI~.L, JACK & ~ 4445 HiGHLAND CiRCLE.rIO&END 55364, ANDI~& OlOl~4:~aON 9 IGld'tl G KRib';T~ ,3,4 4724883 K'NOTT~GUSL IRENE 4937RIDGEWBOORO-,OUNO 55,364 JULIE 10 35 4724144 KUHL.MJ~, JOHN 3107ALEXANOERLN410UNO 55364 S/d4D¥ 36 472 1806 KUN2, DAVID I$453LUESIRDLN 55564 DANIELKUNZ 7 IMARYKU~ ~7 472 7592 MA¥£R, JOHN& NANCY ~ RIDr~WOOD'RD-MOUND ~,5,~a4 ~9.AD 12 ~IACKIE ~T~ 472 2795 MAVER~ MARTHA 39 4724176 MCGLINS~,RO~RT&RO'~ Iig$1LAKE$1DELN 55;364 CINDY 9 AMY 7 40 4724262 MELSNES$,LARRY&HELEN 12612WILSHII~-flOUND ~ PETER 11 iPAUL I0 41 4723247 MOSS, dOAN 42 4723081 NELSON, DC~_JCa_AS&ddd~'T 4~81$LANO¥1EWo~-rK)UNO 5S1364 D..SAtIUEL g 4~ 4725678 NEVE, JAMES&dACKIE 14060DANLRD-MO~ND 55364 JOE; 12 !DAVID ill 44 472 6237 ~rI'ON, ED&MARLENE 11565PARKi:~q-IlOUND 55564 ED 12 iKLrVIN 45 4724143, NORi~RG, OUA/~&~AROL 160ISAGPENRD-UOUI~ ,5.53~1, RENEE 11 !WENDY 4 46 472' 5317 .m.__~_~, BRUCE & CA.qOL ~6116 EVERGREEN RO-UOUND 55~)4 INC~IO JAPS I 0 47 ~ 472 1078 OSTVIG, JACK &G4JNNEL ,4718 I.i,I~IFTON RD-MOUND ~ JAY 9 48 472 12~ IPA~EReaON. LARRY& B~q~e~qA TODO 12 40 472 I~K:~ ,PECXTEL .BONNIE :1546BLI~BIRDLN 55564 IDANIELKLINZ 7 I1ARVKUNZ 8 50 472 462~ ~PETERSON, RU~$ & B~?I"T¥ 5561 ,,~4ERWO00 DR-MOUNO 5.5.,364 ION 1 I 51 472 24,22 ~PITSCH, ROD & CAROL 768 LAI:AYETTg LN-I'~ND ~ IANI~LA 15 52 472 5650 ,PUTT, KIETH & KATHLEEN 5562 ~q~RWOOD DR-MOUND 55~ I~ANE/ gl $~ 471 943.0 ,RICNARDS, BEN & KATIE 2470 DUtMO00¥ AVE-WAYZATA 55391 iB~l KATIE 6 .54 471 7o64 RIC~OS, JAY&G~IL ~243'~SCOCIRCL;-~UNO' 55~91 !~mcRDCKr~ 5,5 472 4596 la3N~LIEN, .56 472 2095 SCHttlDT, ~ 522S EDSALL RD -tliNNTRSTA 55364 57 M82644 ~c~_._u_E.J&Y-CC)ACH 1115Pad;b~LLELST<HA.SK~ ~318 ~R¥;~i i16mol sa 472 5042 STA~UC~N, S)~40¥ 4080 O~L RO-raJNO 55564 iS~P2Y~ II I 59 472"'1377 ,STEPHENSON, SHARON 60 4717483 ,$TiNSON, JIM&NAOItl 2623CAS~OPNT-WAYZATA 5,5591 I'RACtTE'W~ 10 &! 472 1226 IGTOKKE, RICHARD& PHVLLI$ ~1754 RESTHAVEN LN-MOUND 55~ ~OTT S 62 472 ,T~23 ,STRUS$r r,~NNi$ & KAy 3220 CTY Ri) eM-MOUND 553,64" IDARIN 11 &3 4726177 iSWITANKI, r~J~ClA ,6102mC, GE'W:OOORD-tloLa~ $5:~4 IPAUi. I0 eoaIN a 64 ~ 474 7862 ITHIBAULT, I~d~BARA ,4565 ENCHANTED PT-MOUND 5.5.T64 ILi$~ i 1 65 472 35:51 ITHOSTEN..CON, GALEN 66 471 &628 ~HE£LER, JEl~qV :,3399 CRYSTAL I~V RD'~AVZATA 55591 JENNIFER I0 67 472 51:)4 WHITE, DEWEV&. KAY ,492g THREE PTS. BLVD-MOUNO 5.5,364 IIAR¥ 12 JAItE,S , i0 JASON 68 471 aoo i ZULKf GENE WESTOffiCA COMIgUNICATION kl~ Il/I/DO ~ ~V.~. ~ILLI~, ~ ~14 ~E~I~ ~. ~~R,L~ ~l~ '~V~ L~ .... , ..... ~' ~LL~ ~ &. ~ 5~1 ~VW~ ~ ~-~ , , ~. P~ ~ .......... L~r ~ ~IE ~67 ~LW~~ Ri~r A~l~r ~D& L~ ~ ~~L~ " ~ .... B , ' L~r ~ & Li~ ~ ~Y 'LENIn. ~ , , 'R~N, ~H &DI~ ~70 ~;~E ~l~ P~ & PAT 5~5 L~EVIEW ~-~ .... ~AV~ ~V. ERIC &~ 17~ ~VW~ ~E ~ B .... B B .... B ' , ~L~LL ~ ~, BILL ~1 ~ . ~ ~ --, CIR~E-~ ',~, ~ ;3107 ALEXA~R L~ ........ ~IN~Y, ~ & R~ 11951 L~EgiDE LN EL~SS, L~& ~EN ;2612 ~IL~IRE~ B EL~. ~A~ ~ ,~28 I~ VIEW ~-~ B 8 ~B M ;M 8 ~. ~& ~LE~ 11~5 PARK ~- ~ ~, ~ & ~ i6116 EVER~EN ~VIGr ~ &~ ~ 18 ~ ~ B 8 ~E~EL. ~iE I~ ~ LN ~, RUES & ~V 5~ I ~ ~-~ ~l~ ~N& KATIE 2~0 ~W~ A~'~A~ATA ~l~, JIM &~l 26~ CA~ P~-WA~ATA ~ B ~B B ~KE, RIC~ & ~LIS I?~ RE~VEN L~ M F ~S'. ~lS ~ KAY 322o ~v 61o2 RI~W~ T~N~ ~N ~E. ~Y & KAY ~ T~EE ~. ~~ B 8 2~Kr ~ , January CITY of MOUND 5341 MAY~NOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA $5364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FRO8: RE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY HANAGER LIQUOR STORE LEASE The lease for the municipal liquor store at Shoreline Plaza, expired July 31",.1986. We have finally reached an agreement'On'a new lease retroactive to August 1,.1986, that expi'res December 31,-1989. The City leases 2,855 square feet from' Hr.. Hark Saliterman. The present rate for lease is $5.50 per square foot or $.15,702.50. The proposed lease has the following time frame and corresponalng rents: AuguSt. 1,. 1986 'thru December 31, 1987,'$6.75 per sq. ft. or $19,271.25 January 1, 1988 thru' December"31, 1989, $7.50 per sq.'ft or $21,q12.$0 This does not include what is commonly referred to as Common Area Haintenance, ie, taxes, utilities, repairs and maintenance, snow removal, etc. The city attorney has carefully scrutinized the proposed lease, and it has undergone a great deal of change'from the previous lease. I think the most critical portion of the lease deals with termination of it should the City of Hound decide at'some future date to remove them- selves from the municipal liquor store business. We have prot&cted ourselves by stating in the lease that the lease would become null and void should the city decide to close its munlcipal liquor store per Minnesota law.. The lease is very thick and should you have any questions with regard to it, Curt Pearson or myself will be happy to answer them. We recommend approval of'the lease, authorizing the Hayor and City Hanager to sign the lease. Attached is a resolution for your approval. ES:ls An e(3ual opportun~ty 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 I~rograms and activities. RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH MARK A. SALITERMAN FOR THE MOUND LIQUOR STORE. WHEREAS, the lease for the Mound Liquor Store expired on July 31, 1986; and, WHEREAS, a new lease has been negotiated with Mark A. Saliterman for the 2,855 square feet of space in the building; and, WHEREAS, this new lease will have a square foot price of $6.75 for the period of August 1, 1986 through December 31, 1987, and $7.50 per square foot from danuary 1, 1988 through December 31, 1989. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to enter into a lease agreement (Exhibit A) with Mark A. Saliterman for the Mound Liquor Store. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember , and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK TNO#AS R. SHE:RAN DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 343-1102 O'CONNOR & NAN NAN ATTORNEYq AT LAW 3800 IDS CENTER 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA [6IP} 341-3800 TELEX Z~-0584 TELECOPIER (612) 343-1256 INCLUDING THE FORMER FIRM MACINTOSH & COMMERS January 12, 1987 Mr. Ed. Shuckle City Manager 5341 Maywood RQad Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. Dear Ed: Please find enclosed a copy of proposed amendments and final amendments to the Cable Communications Ordinance arising out of the transfer of ownership and transfer of the Franchise from Dow-Sat of Minnesota, Inc. to Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. You will note that the proposed amendments relate to a change in the definition of Grantee and Offering. Additionally, I have included a proposed amendment relating to Exhibit A, which is the Schedule of Rates. State law requires that the Franchise contain a current list of the rates and charges of~a cable .. company or language that the current list of charges are available for public inspection in the city. offices. During this era of federal deregulation of cable rates and anticipated rate changes by Dowden in the future, I would recommend that the City delete Exhibit A from the existing Ordinance and substitute the new language. Subsequently, any changes in the cable rates can be ~eflected on the list in the city offices without the necessity for amending the Franchise. I would ask that you oversee the presentation ahd passage of the final amendments, as you are undoubtedly more familiar with Mound's procedure. The proposed amendments are included for your information and the benefit of the Council. You should merely follow your standard ordinance amendment procedures. Once the City Council has approved the amendments, I would ask that you return the signed original to me and I will undertake to secure the necessary signatures from Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. O'CONNOR & HANNAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW My guess is that you will need to hold a public hearing in undertaking an ordinance amendment.. I have included a sample Notice of Public Hearing for this purpose. If you should have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. MJA:mn cc: Mary Smith Very truly yours, Mark J. A~' ORDINANCE NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: CHAPTER 17-A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF MOUND ENTITLED "CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE" IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: 1. ARTICLE I, Section 2(I) is amended as follows: I. "Grantee" is Dowden Cable Partners, L.P., its agents and employees. 2. ARTICLE I, Section 2(N) is amended as follows: N. "Offering of Grantee" or "Offering" means that certain document dated November 15, 1982, entitled "Application for Cable Television Franchise" and signed by Grantee's predecessor, as amended from time to time by mutual written agreement between Grantee and City or its delegatee, and that certain document entitled "Dowden Communications, Inc. Response~to Questions in the City of Mound Proposal", and related documents and written information and documentation or response to the "Request for Information" as part of the transfer of the Franchise to Grantee, which documents are on 'file with the City Clerk. '3. EXHIBIT A of the Franchise is deleted in its'entirety and amended as follows: Exhibit A - Grantee Schedule of Rates The current rates and subscriber charges of Grantee are available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk during regular business hours. Passed and adopted this day of , 1987. ATTEST: CITY OF MOUND By. By Mayor This Franchise, as amended, is accepted, and we agree to be bound by all its terms and conditions. DOWDEN CABLE PARTNERS, L.P. By. By Its Its Date: Date: -2- PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA ARTICLE I, Section 2(I) is amended as follows: I. "Grantee" is Dowden Cable Partners, L.P., Dow-Sat o~-M~nnesotaT-~n~orporated?-a-who~-owned-snbs±d±ary o~-Dowden-eommun~cat~ons7 its agents and employees. ARTICLE I, Section 2(N) is amended as follows: N. "Offering of Grantee" or "Offering" means that certain document dated November 15, 1982, entitled "Application for Cable Television Franchise" and signed by Grantee's predecessor, as amended from time to time by mutual written agreement between Grantee and City o~ its delegatee, and that certain document entitled "Dowden Communications, Inc. Response to Questions in the City of Mound Proposal", and related documents and written information and documentation or response to the "Request For Information" as part of the transfer of the Franchise to Grantee, which documents are on file with the City Clerk'. EXHIBIT A of the Franchise is deleted in its entirety and amended as follows: Exhibit A - Grantee Schedule of Rates The current rates and subscriber charges of Grantee are available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk during regular business hours. Passed and adopted this day of , 1987. ATTEST: CITY OF MOUND By. By Mayor This Franchise, as amended, is accepted, and we agree to be bound by all its terms and conditions. By. Its Date: DOWDEN CABLE PARTNERS, L.P. By ' Its Date: -2- /'~INUTES OF THE CABLE TV ADVISORY COMHITTEE - DECEMBER 18, 1986 The meeting w~S called to order at 7:30PH. Hembers present: Jim Kutzner, ~ary Paulsen, Don Ulrlck,Doc Heler, Harsha ~mIth, L]nda Paulsen and Chuck ~hampine. Absent: Jack Braezile. Also present was the City Manager, ~d Shukle. upon motion by Ulrick, seconded by Gary Paulsen, carried unanimously the minutes of*the 0ctober'l&,:198& regular'meetlng were' approved.. " .' A review of the 1~86 agenda Items of major'slgnl-ficance was held.. Chairman dim' Kutzner reviewed the commlttee, goals, from the July 2q, 1986 minutes., Items dis- cussed were: 1..Con~unity Survey - The consensus was to have Marsha Smith and Linda Paulsen serve as a subcommittee to come up with a suggested survey. The city . ~. manager is to contact Dow-Sat regarding use of their mailing list for their subscribers. Both Items will be discussed 'at the next meeting. Annual Report - Thls was tabled u~til later. Publi~ Access - It was moved by Ulrick, seconded by Smith to recommend to the c~ty council that local access programing studio, with a number one priority being a time based generator. Jim Kutzner offered an amendment to the motion that the committee would recommend $5000. to the counc'il with no other restrictions other than the fact .that We would buy the equipment and Dow-Sat ~ould be required to maintain it. This was seconded by Smith. The*amendment was then voted upon and passed with the ayes being: L. Paulsen, Kutzner, Smith and Meier,.the nayes were Ul.rlck and G.-Paulsen. Then the orlginal motion was voted upon as amended and. passed unanlmously. It was' then moved by Ulrick, seconded by Gary Paulsen to have the equipment that is purchased identified as the equipment to be located at the 1?ca1 access studio.and clearly" marked "Property of the City of'Mound",'w~th the date of purchasp. The motion passed unanlmously. It' was then moved by Ulrick, seconded by Gary Paulsen to establish the terms of oCfice for the committee as follows: three persons to serve ;' three year term, t~ree persons to serve two year terms, three persons to serve one year terms with a councilmember included for a one year term. ~otlon passed unanimously. It was moved .by Ulrick, seconded by Champ|ne to.have 'the following persons Serve the corresponding terms: L. Paulsen, Doc Meier, G. Paulsen (to be recommended :o 'the City Council) to three year terms. Two year terms: Don Ulrick,' Jim Kutzner.and one new member. One year term: Harsha Smith, Chuck Chpmpine and a councll representative. The following vote was'recorded: the ayes were Ul'rick, Champine, Meier, L. Paulsen and G. Paulsen. Nayes were Smith and Kutzner.. It was then moved by Kutzner~ seconded by Meier and carried unanlmou$1¥ to rec- ommend Gary Paulsen to be .reappointed to the committee to serve one of the vacancies on the committee. The remaining.vacancy was discussed. It was the consensus to have Jim Kutzner and the city manager interview potential applicants for the vacancy on the committee. Also discussed within the community goal section was two way capacity electrical inspection, channel 6 interconnection, forum for airing grievances and use of legal counsel. /5(/ .4inures of the Cable TV Advisory Committee *. J)~ecember 18, 1~)86 -. Page 2 !t was then moved by Don Ulrlck, seconded by ~ary Paulsen,' and carried unanimously to request an original 1.1st of local access equipment that was purchased with the original price from Dow-Sat prior to 1/1/87, Other. business that was discussed 'was channel 23 a~d the potiential.addltlon of It to the cable system. It-was the consensus to ask' Hary Smith to come to the February meeting to address this Issue. Also~ the committee wants her'to address the issue of a request 'from a Hr. Paul Saba~ regarding cable service. Upon mOtion'by Meier, seconded by Smith, and carried unanimously, the meeting was adjourned. ~~k1~~~tfully S uJ~ml tted, . City Hanager RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE LOST LAKE STUDY AND FOLLOWUP ADDENDUM AS PREPARED BY MAXFIELD RESEARCH GROUP AND RECOMMENDED BY PLANNING COMMISSION. WHEREAS, the Ci. ty of Mound 6ngaged in a contract with Maxfield Research Group for professional services to study the highest and best use of the Lost Lake property owned by the City of Mound; and, WHEREAS, a report has been submitted to the City of Mound per the contract stated above; and, WHEREAS, the report and addendum has been recommended for acceptance by the Planning Commission. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mound City Council hereby accepts the report dated October 1986 and the addendum dated December 9, 1986 from Maxfield Research Group. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK January $, 1987 TO: FROH: RE: PLANNING COMHISSION AND STAFF .~., ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER LOST LAKE STUDY FOLLOW UP When you were presented.with the final report'from Maxfield Research, Group, Inc., on the Lost Lake area, three questions.were raised with regard to the report: -1. What impact does t'he Twin Birch Villa project, developed in Spring Park, have on the apartment alternative for Lost Lake? 2. What impact does the relocation of Advance Machine in Spring Park have on the recommendation? How are the income'calculations arrived at on page 13 of the report? Attached is a letter addressing questions one and three. It was pointed out to me in a te]ephone conversation with PeterWest of Maxfield Research Group, Inc., that reference was made to question · two on page 8 of the report, dealing with'the employment growth. The letter also indi.cbtes that Twin Birch Villa was considered, but not mentioned in the report because it has been designed for a different market than identified for the Lost Lake property. I hope this letter Clarifies and answers your questions. If there is further information needed, I would be happy to contact Maxfield Research Group, Inc., for you. ES:ls December 9, 1986 FIELD Mr. Edward j. ihuckle, Jr. City Manager City of Mou-d 5341 May~ood Road Hound, Hinuesota 55364 Dear Mr. Shuckle: This letter responds'to two issues relative to the recently completed Highest ~nd Best Use study done for the Lost Lake site in Mound. The first is the zmpact ou Lost Lake's apartment alternative from the Twin Birch Villa project developed in Spring Park by Mr. Ortenblad. The second is the use of current base figures in our income calculations. Our report took into couslderation, but did not mention the Twin Birch Villa by name because it has been designed for a different market than ideutified for the subject property. The project serves the senior market and has a minimum age qualification of 55 years. It's actual resident profile'for apartments leased to date includes persons from 67 years to 90 years old. Twin Birch Villa also provides 'serVices to its residents which include.an eveulng meal each day and van transportation. The facility draws on its affiliation with the Twin Birch Health Care Center. The rents range from $590 per mouth for an efficiency unit, to $690 to $1,000 per month for a one bedroom unit, and $950 to $1,375 per month for a two bedroom unit. The upcoming phases will also be designed as senior apar~nents. The City of Spring Park had uo knowledge of the project benefitting from Tax Increment Financing, although au application is being prepared and will be accepted subject to the proposed rents being re-' duced. Relative to the Mound-Lost Lake recommendation, T~in Bir~h Villa will have some impact but its effect will be minimal. The apartment demand in Mound is strong egough for the subject ~o be successful in sp£~e of some prospective reuters (those who are older and iu declining health) choosing ~he senior 'en~.ed character of Twin Birch Villa. You also.sought clarification as to our methodology for using U.S. Census Bu- reau income figures as the basis for our work. Our report used 1979 income figures which were then updated to derive a current estimate of income. used an increase in income from 1979 to the present as calculated by Sales and Marketing Hanagemen£'s Survey of Current Buying Powe, for suburban Henne- pin County. It is regrettable ~hat the Census Burea~ does not perform a 612-338-0012 620 KICKERNICKi 430 FIRST AVENUE NORTH Hr. Edward J. Shuckle, Jr. City of Hound December 11, 1986 Page 2 census more frequently, or update small area data between censuses. Although the base figures are six years old we believe Chat, once updated, they accur- ately measure and reflect the Hound area's hoUSehold spending power. You mentioned the Hinnesota Department of Revenue as an alternative source. We have reviewed their information on family and individual income but feel taxable income is not the most accurate indication of spending potential. Taxable income is a derived figure and factors in several distortions such as depreciation. In addition it eliminates some spendable cash sources like So- cial Security payments and some other publlc assistance funds, which are spent quickly. Another information source for incom~ estimates are reports created by several national demographic services. We have reviewed the£r figures for several specific areas that we are familiar with and have found that their projections are erratic. Their methodology is based on very generalized compu- ter modeling using the same Census Bureau figures we have used. We hope that this explanation satisfies the questions of the Planning Commis- sion. We have enjoyed working with the City of Hound on the report. We wish you continued success. $ince re ly, Peter J. West PJW/lind information for January 27, 1987 Council Meeting January 21, 1987 LICENSE RENEWAL -- Expires 1-31-87. Entertainment permit Captain Billy's, Inc. 5241 Shoreline Blvd. Mound, Minn. 55364 New License Period 2-1-87 to 1-31-88 BILLS JANUARY Batch 864126 Batch 874012 Batch 874013 Computer Run dated 1/16/87 Computer Run dated 1/21/87 Computer Run dated 1/22/87 11,142.87 76,129.38 36,765.78 12q,038.03 C) ~ZZ~ZZZZZ 0000~0000 000000000 ~ZZZZZZ LU W "r 000000000 !00000 !llll! illin! ZZZZ 0000 ooooooo 0 .J m U. ;Z 0 Z z T Z ~ 0 ~ I 0 'If O0 ,Do U1UI o X i. 0 0 0 ,J n n Z .J Io I~' .12 ~0 . O) I · I. 0 r ~ 3:: O~ 'UJ O. O00OOOOOO h- O Z 0 0 0 Z O0 I-I- O0 ~U I~bJ UU CiO 0 ~ Z 0 Z UJ Z U .J.J O0 0 Z bJ · ZZZZZ / 0 I- I Z 0 /(.,,l ! I o o o o o o EEEEEEEEEE Z 0 0 h, 0 U ZZ U o 0 II .]3.1:3 !33 rr- II~Jl IIII I'111 L ¢. 0 0 Z I,IJ I 0 f~ o I- 2: U U ~° Z 0 Z r o o oo o o oo 00000000000 , ~0o0oo~ ~ooooo~ IIIIII111 ~ooooo~o ~00000~ 000~00000 IIIII ZZZZZZZZZ 000000000 ZZZZZZZZZ IIIIIIIII 000000000 00000000000000 0000000000~00 I I I I 0000 ZZZZ 'ZZZZ ~0 I I I I O0 a) a) I~IUJ I-I- I-I- Z.~, UJUJ ::l:n= I-I- O0 ZZZ ooo ooo O0 n,, Z UJ 0000000000 ~0000~00~ 000000000 000000000 ~0 Z .J .I n~o ZZ n~ IflUlo O0 O0 an O0 O0 Oo O0 oo oo oo O0 o o \ LA 0 0 LI.I '!- 0'~ 0 Z Z oo · 0 0 r ~ 00000000000 ZZZZZZZZZZZ CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364 {§12) 472-1155 January 21, 1987 TO: FROM: RE: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER JOHN NORMAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR DECEMBER 1986 FINANCIAL REPORT The following reports contain the preliminary figures for the month of December. All of the year-end adjustments have not been entered and reflected in the accounts. However, the final figures that will be shown in the audit will not be significantly different from these preliminary figures. We have received 100.5% of the budgeted revenues for the General Fund. The expenditures are at 96.2% of budget through the preliminary Decem- ber reports. With the revenues exceeding budget and expenditures'under budget, the General Fund balance will increase from $500,000 to approx- imately $650,000 this year~ This balance is necessary to meet the expenses of the first six months of 1987. JN:ls An equal opport{Jn~ty Employer that does not discriminate on the Dasis of race, color, national origin, or handicapped status m the admission or ac"~ess to. or treatment or employment in, its programs and activities. /7¥ CITY OF HOUND 1986'.BUDGET REPORT REVENUES December..1986 Preliminary 1.00% of Year BUDGET GENERAL FUND Taxes $ 931,061 Intergovernmental 719,964 Business Licenses 13,060 Non-Business 'Licenses* S Permits . 11q,OO~. General Gov't Charges 27,750 Court Fines 82,000' Charges to other ' Oepartments' 23,004 Other Revenue 55,300 TOTAL REVENUE $1,966,135 December'. REVENUE 434,166 332,763~ 4,~50. 2,939 17,371 20,994 1,162 34,863 848,408 YTD REVENUE 899,682 · 715,681 12,408 131,739 31,358 105,458 22,804 57~304 1,976,434 VARIANCE .31,379. · 4,283 652 (17,739). (3,608.). (23,458) 196 (2,004) · (lO;299) PER CENT RECEIVED )6.6 95.0 115.6 113.0 128.6 1.o~.6 100.5 m Federal Revenue Sharing .Liquor.Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund 4S,o~o 820,000 264,000 500,000 77,829 24,188 84,217 31,079 759,527 285,059 551,270 13~92i '~0,473 (21,059) (51,270) 69.0 92.6 108.0 110.3 /-./¥' GENERAL CITY OF HOUND 1986 BUDGET REPORT EXPENDITURES DECEHBER 1986 BUDGET December EXPENSE YTD EXPENSE FUND Council $ 36,964 City Hanager/Clerk 89,273 Elections & Reg. 10,307 Assessing 43,369 Finance 141,q20 Legal 80,330 Cable T.V. ---- Contel 20,000 Recycling 18,585 Police Protection '568,199 Planning & Insp. 1OO,333 Civil Defense 3,000 Streets 369,950 Sho~ & Store 47,096 City Property- 83,449 Parks I)O,093 Contingency 50,000 Transfers 75,741 909 10,229 291 480 i4,895 21,091 2,652 60 66,470 13,738 112 28,009 6,068 4,594 8,308 6,312 31,352 86,662 8,411 43,614 136,711. 83,708 1,424 17,114 13,227 544,178 97,198 1,205 367,321 47,850 91,123 123,413 25,390 76,936 Preliminary lOO~ of Year UNEN- CUMBERED BALANCE 5,6i2 ' 2,611 1,896 (245) 4,709 (3,378) (1,424) 2,806 5,358. 24,021 3,135 1,795 2,629 (754) (7,674) 6,680 24,610 (1,195) PER CEtrr. EXPENDED 84.8 97.1 81.6 100.6 96.7 104.2 85.6 71.2 95.8 96.9 40.2 '99.3 101.6 109.2 94.9 .50.8 101.6. GENERAL FUND TOTAL $1,868,109 Federal Reserve Sharing 52,000 Area Fire Service 142,802' Sealcoat Program --- CBD Assessment -" Liquor Water Sewer Cemetery 1 3, i o 315,022 631,084 3,896 184,231 10,116 14,312 14,739 30,926 66,323 1,796,835 71,274 96.2 ·40,827 145,093 11,173 (2,291) 78.5 101.6 140,81'3 313,766 556,360 3,475 12,637 1,256 74,724 421 91.8 99.6 88.2 89.2 Week in review" GOVERNOR PERPICH CONSIDERING REPLACING LGA AND PROPERTY TAX 'CREDITS WITH ONE "SCHOOL CREDIT" Governor Perpich is considering a property tax reform proposal that would collapse all property tax credits and local government aid into one "school credit" used solely to reduce school levies. Details of the governor's property tax reform proposal are expected next week when Perpich submits his Budget and Tax Message to the Legislature. Although the governor hasn't made final decisions about the plan, here are some of the proposals Under consideration: · The state would channel all property tax relief currently available to cities through state-paid credits and aids into one credit to reduce school mill rates. As school mill rates decline, the proposal assumes that cities would increase their mill rates to make up for the property tax relief, particularly local government aid, they would lose. On average, to make up for this loss, cities' mill rates would have to increase by over 20 mills. * The number of property tax classifications would decrease to six. No classification ratios have been determined but the intention is to reduce property taXes for commercial and industrial property. Unless the state provides additional funding for commercial and industrial tax relief, this proposal could mean a shift in tax burdens to homeowners. · -'The proposal may include granting ,local discretion" to cities and counties. This would mean,\rcity councils and county commissions would determine how'large of a school credit to grant each class of property. · League Comment: Last month, the League sent a letter to all mayors urging them to contact their legislators in opposition to the governor's plan. The League considers the proposal a means for the state to bail out of providing financial assistance to cities. The school credit proposal attempts to fulfill the governor's commitment to increase the state's role in..funding education. The proposal, however, would increase state aids to schools by withdrawing state funds from cities and other units of local government, forcing them to increase their property tax levies. , league of minnesota oities December 23, 1986 Dear Mayor: A letter was recently sent by Mayor Mary Anderson of Golden Valley to mayors who had attended the 1986 Minnesota Mayors' Conference. The letter, which is enclosed, provides information about a property tax reform proposal under consideration by Governor Perpich. Although many key elements of the plan have not yet been developed by the Governor's staff, the League has done a preliminary analysis of the basics of the proposal. The overall structure of the proposal is to transform virtually all current property tax relief mechanisms, including local government aid, into one "school credit" used to reduce school levies. We believe the thrust of this proposal is to eliminate the state's role in providing property tax relief to cities, a policy commitment which the state has upheld for the past 15 years. ~ The Revenue Department's proposal would consolidate all property tax credits (homestead credit, agricultural credit, etc.) and local government aids (including LGA) into one "school credit" that would be used solely to reduce school district~mill rates. That is, all the property tax relief resources currently available to counties, cities and townships through state-paid creditS and aids would be channeled into one credit used to .reduce school mill rates. On average, the school credit is estimated to reduce school mill rates by approximately 33 mills. As school mill rates decline, the proposal assumes that counties, cities, and townships would increase their mill rates to make up for the property tax relief, particularly local government aid, they would lose. On average, to make up the loss of property tax relief, cities' mill rates would have to increase by over 20 mills. ~t this time, the intention of the school credit proposal is to make available to the various taxing jurisdictions the same amount of property tax relief funds as is currently available under our system of aids and credits. This would mean that resources would be allocated so that some areas could finance ~ ~,J.~,,vers,cyavenueeasc, sC. paul, minnesoCa 55101 (612] 227-5600 more-than the average 33 school mill rate reduction and other areas, less than that average. However, no details have been provided about either the first-year funding level for this new school credit or, even more critical, the design of the formula for distributing funds to jurisdictions in the future. In addition to consolidating all aids and credits into a school credit, the proposal would also reduce the number of property classifications to five or six. Although, no classifications ratios have yet been determined, the stated intention is to reduce property taxes for commercial and industrial property. Without additional funding for such property tax relief, a reduction in commercial/industrial rat~s could mean a shift in property tax burdens to homeowners. The proposal may also include granting a "local option" to local jurisdictions allowing them to determine how to allocate some portion of the school credit among classes of property. The school credit proposal attempts to fulfill the Governor's commitment to increase the state's role in funding education. Given the increased costs associated with such a commitment and given the tight budget situation faced by the state, it is clear that increasing property tax relief for schools will mean the withdrawal of state funds from other units of local government. This is a dramatic shift in state priorities. It asks cities to increase their property tax levies in order to finance increased property tax relief for schools. The League is also concerned that the allocation of tax relief under the school credit mechanism runs the future risk of increasing tax disparities among cities and between cities and neighboring townships. The stated intention of the proposal is not to cause such disparities. This would be done by "grandfathering" all taxing jurisdictions in the first year, thereby making available to them approximately the same amount of tax relief under the proposed school credit as is currently available through the various property tax credits.and local government aids. However, no allocation mechanism for the future distribution of funds has'been developed. We believe it will be very difficult in future years to maintain an equitable distribution of funds since the proposal would combine numerous allocation mechanisms (which currently are used to distribute property tax relief) into one single "school credit" mechanism. Sin~e several different allocation mechanisms would be Collapsed into one mechanism, we are very skeptical that a future increase in mill rate disparities among cities and between c£ties and neighboring townships can be avoided under this plan. Furthermore, granting local option for distributing school credit funds could magnify such disparities. Unless credit monies are distributed in an equitable manner that will compensate for, rather than exacerbate, tax base disparities, extremely unfair competition among adjacent taxing,jurisdictions wilI result. In summary, we believe this proposal does not represent property tax reform, but rather a means for the state to bail out of providing assistance to cities. Local units of government would lose state funding at a time when their resources are shrinking. Half of all cities are already struggling with the problem of declining tax bases. They are ~also under financial pressures with federal program cutbacks, the elimination of general revenue sharing, rising insurance rates, the costs of implementing state mandates, and other forces over which they have no control. I hope you will use this information to communicate your concerns about the Revenue Department's proposal to the GovernoP and your legislators. The League has created a Technical Committee to review and respond to property tax reform proposals. We will keep you informed as more details of such proposals become available. ~~Sincere~ James Miller President City of Golden Valley December 23, 1986 Dear Mayor: I am writtng to the Mayors who attended the Minnesota Mayor's Association Conference to clartfy my role on the Governor's Advisor~ Commission on State-Local Relat;ons, and to share some information and concerns about propert~v tax reform proposals. In 1985, Governor Perpich appointed a commission made up of City, County, Township and School Board officials plus legislators and State Department Heads to advise him on State-Local relations. It is known as the ACSLR. 'Sam Huston, the Mayor of St. Cloud, and I serve as representatives for cities. We are selected by the League of Minnesota Cities. I have been serving on a sub- committee of the ACSLR that is reviewing and commenting on various proposals being considered by the State Revenue Department for property tax reform. Revenue. Commissioner Tom Trtplett and his staff have been sharing ideas with this sub-committee and asking for reactions. The proposals for change have been complex, somewhat conceptual and lacking in specifics as well as in the formative stages. This has made meaningful comment difficult. At the last meeting of the sub-committee the Revenue Department's proposal called for consolidating all property tax credits (homestead credit, agricultural credit, etc.) and local government aids (including LGA) into one credit that would be used to reduce school district mill rates. That is, all the money currently available to counties, cities and townships through state- paid credits and aids would be channeled into one "school credit" used to reduce school mill rates..As school mill rates declined, counties, cities, and townships could increase their mill rates to make up for the credits and aids they would l As i understand it, the intention of the school credit proposal is to make available to tax payers in the various taxing jurisdictions the same amount of property tax relief funds as provided under the current system of aids and cre- dits. However, no details have been provided about either the first-year funding level for this new school credit or the design of a formula for distri- buting funds to jurisdictions in the future. Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Rd., Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, (612) 593-8000 December' 23, 1986 Page 2 The property tax reform proposal would also reduce the number of property classifications to less than ten. Although no classification ratios have yet been determined, the stated intention is to reduce property taxes for commercial and industrial property. The proposal may also include granting a "local option" to local jurisdictions allowing them to determine how to allocate some portion of the school credit among classes of property. This school credit pro- posal is in keeping with the Governor's commitment to increase the State's role in funding education. As I expressed at the Mayor's Conference, I have a concern about commenting on portions of the proposal without having a clear understanding of the impact of the total package. I am apprehensive about the effect on cities because we are different in our needs and capacities to deal with those needs. Local Government Aid made some attempt to recognize that. if cities lose LGA and rely entirely on the property tax, those disparities will be magnified. Also, the State and Federal government require us to do ~any things but don't provide the funds. This means there is a certain percent of our budget we really don't control. It seems to me those levels of government should provide funding for activities we are mandated to do. Another concern I have is the.pull back of the Federal Government from funding of programs serving the needy in our society. We are all feeling more pressure of requests for funding human ser- vices. Is the property tax the appropriate vehicle? We do need to reduce 'the number of classifications in our property tax system. There is also strong support for reducing the tax burden on commercial- industrial property. -If there is no new funding, how will a reduction in the commerical-industrial burden impact other classifications? The sub-committee I serve on and the full Advisory Commission submitted the following statement to the Revenue Department: PROPERTY TAX REFORM ISSUES 1. Support simplification of the property tax classification syst. em. 2. A necessary condition for state property tax reform is the need for reducing state revenue volatility. We support modifying the revenue system to enhance stability. Specifically we su.pport: * a targeted budget reserve * expansion of the sales tax base (no sales tax on local government) * trigger tax concepts such as temporary suspension of indexing. We feel it is inappropriate to reduce state revenue volatility by trans- ferring that volatility to the local property tax. Support programs to increase taxpayers' generalized knowledge of state's role in funding local government services including all aids, grants, etc. December 23, 1986 Page 3 Later the sub-committee added a statement about the necessity to provide addi- tional funding to implement a new system. I support property tax reform but feel strongly we should be aware of all the impacts of any proposals before we make a commitment to support specific aspects of a proposal. The League of Minnesota Cities has formed a Technical Committee to review and respond to property tax reform. I will also keep the League informed of the ACSLR Committee activities. I urge you to be in close contact with the League to keep up to date on this issue. ! enjoyed the day and evening at the Mayor's Conference and look forward to seeing many of you again at LMC or Mayor's Association activities. Mayor MEA:pb cc: Jim Miller, President - LMC Tom Triplett, Commissionerof Revenue. MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION M£ETING JANUARY 12, 1987 Present were: Chalr Elizabeth Jensen; Commissioners Vern Andersen, William Meyer, Geoff Michael, Thomas Reese, Kenneth Smith, William Thal and Frank Weiland; Council Representative Steve Smith who arrived later in the meeting; City Manager Ed Shukle; City Planner Mark Koegler; Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. Also present were the following interested persons: Louise Tallon, David Nixon, GJen Fenske, Harriet Champine, Tim Torgrimson, Warren E. Bode, Rick Lindlan, Scott and Chris Brickley and Ben Malinski. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 8, 1986 were presented for consideration. Thal moved and Michael seconded a motion to accept the minutes as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Case No. 86-564 Variance to recognize an existing nonconforming setback at 4618 Kildare Road; Lots lO and 37, Block ll, Seton. The applicant, Bradley J. Stannard, has asked the Commission to table this item until February as he has been trying to contact the abutting property owner and so far has not been able to do so. Weiland moved and Michael seconded a motion to table. The vote was unanimously in favor. Case No. 87-601 Subdivision of Land - 3091 Tuxedo Boulevard Part of LOts 18, 19, 20 and 2l, B)ock ], Pembroke · Applicant, Tim Torgrimson, and his neighbor, Warren Bode, were present. The Building Official, Jan Bertrand, explained that Mr. Torgrimson and Mr. Bode purchased Lot 21 and are requesting that Lot 21 be divided as described on the application and a part added to each of their respective parcels (both. parcels are presently conforming to City Code). The existing and proposed descriptions are listed on the survey. The Planning Commission questioned if a park dedica- tion would be applicable (no--use is not being intensified) and what 20 fodt jog east of Lot 21 was (easement not used, but taken for Tuxedo Boulevard realign- ment). Staff recommends the division and combination of Jand as requested. Weiland moved and Meyer seconded a motion to approve the division of land With condition that if there are any discrepancies, they be cleared 'before it goes. to the Council. The vote was unanimously in favor. This will go to the City Council on January 27, 1987. Case No. 87-602 House to be relocated from 17435 County Road 6 to 21XX Overland Lane, Mound; Legal Desc.: Part of Lot ll, Block 5, A. Lincoln Addition to Lake- side Park Applicant, Louise Tallon, was present. The Building Official explained the criteria for moving a house into Mound. Ordinance Section 26.163 requires that the Planning Commission review the request and no building shall be moved toa location within the City unless it conforms Planning Commission Hlnutes' -' January. 12, I~87 - Page 2 · with the Zoning regulations, wlll conform to front yard and other setbacks and / lot area requirements and will be of the same general character~and appearance as other structures In'the vlclnlty: '.Any mOved In structure shall Conform to all bulldlng code regulations relatlng ~o new structures.. She reViewed her report 'on t'he requirements to bring the house up to"code. Some of the Items were' that.'lt doesn't meet the 840 square foot floor area minimum;. it would be'hard for house to'meet.energy requirements, etc; and she.feels it w111 take a.great.deal .to remodel~renovete structure to brlng up to current code. 'The Assessor had a value of $8,360 on the structure which Is usually about of 'the market value." Hrs. Tal lon stated she has ~not .gotten her estimates In 'to know the costs of bringing house· into Mound and bringing ir'up to City'Code.' The CommiSsion discussed the proposal at'length and questioned Whether. it would fit·the neighborhood'. Configu~atibn of. hbuse'andlot proposed to put ~t on·are unusual. Some logs-~ould have to'be replaced and'it was questioned how youput 10 Inches of Insulation into 6 InCh space? Commission thought It looked like a cabin; had'been added onto several times o~er the years; and they:thoUght the mOdification required to meet code in eve.rY.respect would .detrect from ~he charm of the cabin. Ken Smith mOved a mOtion to recommend to' the City Council that ·this structure .. not be allowed to be moved .into Hound. Heyer..seconded the motion. .The. reasont given were. that It's an older home; It doesn't mee~ minimum ·square footage and renovation would ruin character of the d~elling. The vote was unanimously .in favor of the'denlal. This will go to the City 'Council on danuary 27th.- q.. Case No.'87-603 Public Hearlng to amend conditional use permit t0--allow the' storage of towed/abandoned/wrecked vehicles at q831 Shoreline.Boulevard . Lots l-q, .Incl., Lot 21 and Part'of Lots 5 and 20, Block 1, Shlrley Hitls Unit A PID # 13-117-2q q4 O01q (Union 76 Service Station) Ben Halinski was present,. 'The City Planner, Hark Koegler, reviewed hls.'report on the application for con- ditional' use permit.'to enable temporary storage of 'vehicles. within a wooden fence on.the Union 76'property. -Hr. Halinski is'in the proceSs of obtaining a contract to to~ abandoned.and Impounded vehicles. The Hound Police split.the towing busi- ness between two'operators and each will tow approximately 5-8 vehicles a mOnth. Host vehicles will be redeemed wlthin a few 'days; however, abandoned vehicles may be stored on the site for up to a year at which tlme they would be sold at a Police Department.auction. The City Council has approve~ a variance for a privacy fence which encloses the proposed storage area.' Planner"s recon~nendatlon ls for approval with the slx con'dltions in the report plus adding # 7, ~Boat storage should be expressly prohiblted~. The Commission questioned number of cars lo: would accommodate (40) and, if CUP should be'review annually. The Planner commented that Amendments A & B would be nullified with the approval of this request. The Commission discussed whether to require entrance off of County Road 15 and decided, if needed, could be added at the annual review. Discussed not chargi'ng fee for the annual reviews. Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1.987 - Page 3 The Chair opened .the public hear.ing. No one responded regarding this ~pplica-- tlon. The Chair c]ose'd the public hearing; ~eiland moved and Heyer seconded a motion to recommend approval of the Staff recommendations including Item ? with the further condition that the conditional use permit be reviewed each year. The vote'on the motion was unanimously in favor. The Council will be asked to set the public.hearing for February lOth. Reese asked about the fence on Pflug's property. Staff will check on CUP on that property. Council Representative Steve smith arrived at the meeting' Case No. 86-528 Sign Variance Amendment to a11ow free standing sign at 2242 Commerce Boulevard for Brickley's Hark, t-Amendment to 1986 variance. PiD Numbers 13-117-24 33 0042/0043 Scott & Chris Brick.ley of Brickley's Harket'were present. The City Planner reviewed .his repoFt stating that in 1986, there was a sign variance that came in tO allow signs above the mansard roof of the converted Super Valu Building. Brickley's Harket has applied to modify the original variance to include a permanently anchored free-standing sign along Commerce. The sign that is currently, there is a. legal'temporary sign for their grand opening. He commented on the structural integrity of the proposed sign--it is doubtful Sign anchored as proposed could withstand required 100 mph wind ]oad. Also the original variance was granted because aesthetics, etc. were · taken into consideration 'and in part because no addltional signage was requested. 'He also commented that, due to the setback of the existing Shops, a free standing sign along Commerce may be appropriate and necessary to do business. Chris Brickley stated they have had a dramatic lost of business due to the relocation and wants the sign instal!ed for the period until the lot is re-. stripped and a permanent area sign can be decided on and put up. The Pl'anner stated the sign that is there, could be a legal tempgrary sign 'for a total of 4 month period under the ordinance. It could be handled as an ad- ministrative function; after a 2 month period, applicant can call and get a 2 month &xtension.. After much discussion that an area identification sign would be appropriate, and that the owners of the center and businesses are planning on such a sign and that~ meanwhile, Brickleys' can have the temporary sign for their grand opening, Brickley's withdrew their amendment, request. Case No. 87-605 Lot size and setback variance for '1900 Shot,wood Lane Lot 1, Block 2, Shadywood Point; PID 18-117-23 23 0003 Rick L|ndlan was present. The Building Official, Jan Bertrand, explained her report noting some modifi- cations in the proposal; both sides will have about 2 feet additional on the structure. Applicant is requesting a variance to recognize an existing non- conforming 5.9 foot side yard setback, a nonconforming 6,990 square foot lot size, and is requesting a 13.5 foot front yard variance to allow two 2 story / gG, Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 1387 - Page ~ additions With an attached 2~ by 28 foot garage. The Commi'ssion discuSsed 1or'size and.their previous disCussion .on the possible rezoning of the area, at which time,'they'had'deCided each undersized lot area variance should be Considered'individUally.- Thai stated he felt we.shoUldn't .'grant. a variance as over 10~; a 3,000 square foot+ variance needed. The'Commis- sion talked about Breezy Path easement being'a..wai~way next to this lot given open space tO.the area.and that the proposed'enlargement.and renovation of this structure would be an incredible imp.rovement.and blend with.the.neighborhood. Reese moved and Michael seconded a motion that Commission recommend 'the Staff recOmmendation. The applicant questioned if he'could go ~ inches closer to the lake in ~rder to have free ~'pan.trusses; Commission agreed'so lon,9 as he meets the 50 foot lake setback. The vote was all in favor', except Tha'] voted nay because of the lot size vari- ance; stated this'is over.the guide]ine usually used; This wi1] go to the.Council.on January 27th. ELECTION'OF OFFICERS FOR 1987 The Chair opened the nominations'for Chair Person: Weiland moved and Meyer seconded a~motion nominating Thomas Reese. Andersen moved and Weiland seconded a motion to close the nomination. An unanimous ballot was cast for Thomas Reese for Chairman. The Chair opened the nominations for Vice Chair: Michael nominated William Tha'l. Ken Smith nominated Frank Weiland, who declined the nomination. Andersen moved'and ReeSe'seconded a motion that nominations be closed. An unadimous ballot was Cast for William Thai for Vice Chair. LOST LAKE STUDY The Commission discussed'briefly"the response to their questions.on impact on Lost .Lake's .apartment alternative from the Twin Birch.Villa P~oject being developed in Spring'Park aod impact the relocation of Advance'Machine in Spring. Park might have on ~he) r-'recommendations'. Reese thought the letter was somewhat unresponsive and casually done. Reese moved.and Thai Seconded a motion to'accept the report and addendumon LoSt Lake Study from the Maxfield Research'Group, inc. The vote was unanimously in favor. Discussed briefly cross walks over q lane highway and lighting downtown. ADJOURNMENT Ken Smith moved and Meyer seconded a motion to adjourn. was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. All were in favor so meeting Elizabeth Jensen, Chair', Attest: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 TrY 935-6433 January 14, 1987 Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City o f Mound 5341 Fmywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 RE: CSAH 83 Renumbering Dear Mr. Shukle: The proposal to renumber CSAH 83 between CSAH 6 and .TH 12 has been dropped. Renumbering this route to CSAH 110 was requested by city council resolution. The reason for not pursuing the number change is the failure to receive approval from the .City of Independence. In lieu of the change in number, we are presently making arrangements with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for special signing on TH 12 at its junction with CSAH 83. Signs on TH 12 will direct motorists 'south on CSAH 83 to gain access to CSAH 110. The county will also install "trail blazer" signs on southbound CSAH 83 assuring motorists that they are on the correct route to CSAH 110. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Sincerely, Denni~ L. Hansen, P.E. County Traffic Engineer DLH:mr cc: James D. Franklin, West Hennepin Public Safety Department Herb Klossner Pat Murphy HENNEPIN COUNTY an ~qual opportunity employer OPTICAL SCAN VOTING '" EQUIPMENT by Wes Long, City Clerk, Brcoldyn and Hennepin County Voting Equipment Task Force Member. Back In April of this year when we received Ihs' approval of the Secretary of State to use the Optech III-P on an experimental basis, the City Council and staff were both very . pleased. The City had been one of the early purchasers o! the punch card system in the late 196C)'e and we looked forward . ~. playing · part in ushering in what we perceived, to be the :- .... : ::plane.began to be formulated, end our: early exube~:ance~:?~.: part of the Secretary of State's certiflcatlon~'procese;,:we"~.;::.. · would be receiving teohnical-"assistan~e'' from.* the' manutaoturer. But we began to realize that it wu foremost an official election and that the ultimate' re~oonalbiflty t~,:.; conduct · proper election was ours. It was this .thought The judges were then scheduled for further training, In larger groups, in processes to be followed In the precinct on election day. At this time we gave them specific: text that w~s to be used in acquainting the voter with the new system and how the voter was to use IL At two separated judge assignments, voters were instructed in how to mark the ballot, how to Insert it into the device, and were reminded to not eroH over .!n vofing, and to vote for only one candidate per race. ,..;: When all 'of thso steps x)uld had been done to voters for election day. were completed we felt that 'all" that prepare ourselves, our judges and our And_ electien day did finally arrive. At 6~)0, eJa,'on 'September g, we h~l three technical experts representing the :manufacturer clustered a'round the switchtmard, waiting to .respond to cells from lranifo Judges who had problems they .proneea which prepared us to approach the task ahead of us. ..... ., .-.: i-.:-.~::: ...... In July the first device was dell~ered 'to us along with .- _, demonstration ballote: it wes actually an older version of the Optesh III, but R did enable us to become familiar with the ' mad-~an ouncapt and to begin to understand some of the thing~ that could and c~JId net be dorm.. ..- Then in August the Optech Ilrs began arriving, first with a' supply of the ballots to be used in demonstrating it et the State Fair, and then our ballots for the Primary Election. We began the testing process, both formal and Informal. For the offidal pubilo test, 25 card decks of ballots were prepared for each pre.tinct, with every conceivable votleg pattern - pmpedy' voted ballots, ~ossov®re, overvotea, blank ballots. it did not take us long to develop confidence in the ebllity of the-Optech II! to e_n~__~rately count valid votes ks well as to recognize and reject improperly voted ballots. What was still an unknown to us, however, was, how .will the 'devices function mechanically? It was one thlng for the staff to become familiar with them, spending hours in testing, but what happens when election Judges with minimal training and voters with none, begin operating them? we realized Ihat we must do all that was possible to deal with those two areas of waaknest~ ThG election judges were brought in, one precinct at a time, · maximum of 10 people, and spent at least one hour meeting the new equipmenL Each Judge had the opportunity to mark ballots, Insert them, ask questions and were urged not to leave the training session until, they were comfortable. During this first hour of training we actually opened the' device up and allowed them to see everything that was visible. This seemed to minimize the mystique of the 'new electronlo unknown', and although they knew they were never to open it themselves, it became less Intimidating to them. ,-could not solve. During the next 3 1/2 houri wa receivecl 26 calls from Judges. non frantic, who had. a problem or question and each was resolved over the phone. It wis then quiet until 11:3o a.m. at which time a. carl came whloh resulted in · technicen going to · precint only to discover Umt the problem was minor and could have been solved on the phone,. There worn no more celts until 4:30 ~m. when two routine questlon~ came In, end that was the extent of our ~x~)blems; Seventeen devices out of the" first 100 that were manufactured processed 5011 votes over a 13 hour period of 'time and, this, without one functional problem which negatively affected the election. If we had written the script ahead of time, it probably wouldnl have been that good. That fact alone overshadows the other &ccomplishments that ara recorded. This is a year in our state when many are very sensitive to c~ossover voting - those votes lost by a voter recording their preference for candidates in both .parties. In spite of our attempts to educate our voting constituency, 446 out of our 5011 voters still attempted to (:toss over. NI 446 ballots were returned and the voter was offered · second ballot on which to vote correctly. All but two accepted and returned with valid ballots. The other, two angrily refused. In addition, five of our absentee ballots were crossovers, for · total of seven.. Brooklyn Park'~ loss by ora·saver was then 14% (xxnpared with the state, figure of between 10 and 20%. The above facts and statistlos spear to a very suocessfuily run election and can not really be topped. There does remain, however; one fact which is · fitting capstone for the entire experience. The one element In either paper ballot or punch card elections that election Judges, adminlstrators end politidans alike decry is the. length of time between thk dosing of the polls and the determination of the results. If Brooklyn Park's 5011 votes had been punch cards we would not have had results before 11 to 12,p.m. Using the Optech III we had hard copy from all 17 precincts et 8:14. A queStl~)n whi=h could logically be ~ked by someone ~ inti~tely Iss~ted wl~ our ex~en~ ~is fql!~'would Fo~o~g ~ ~o~ of ~e p~ls, ~e ~e~e~ of o~ ~d~ a te~t ~ ~e of our pr~. ~e v~ ~ q~fi~ of ~ Task F~'s re~mmendaflon ~ ~en NOTICE OF POSITION - $24,6~ - $30,0~. Res~nsible administrative position i~ol~ng ele~iond, Ii~nsino, offlci~ r~s, and spe~al assignment. Requires ~ree years related muni~p~ ~urse work in public or business administration (or ~u~ ex~d~). Se~ resume ~ C~ M~ger, 1616 1986. 2anuary 22, 1987 HENNEPIN PARKS Planning for a Regional Park Entity on Lake Mtnne~onka Preliminary Assessment by the Board of Commissioners Over the last several months, Henneptn Parks has been conducting a planning process for a regional park entity on Lake Minnetonka. A series of eight public meetings was held. A tour of the area was arranged and Park District staff has been analyzing various issues related to this effort. At the 3anuary 8, lg87 Henneptn Parks Board of Commissioners Meeting, the Board reviewed eleven major tssues analyzed by our staff. The following is our response to each of those issues and a qutck summary as to why we took the position we have taken. 1. HAS THE NEED AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT BEEN AD~OUATELY DEMONSTRATED? YES Studies as to need done by the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin Parks research staff indicate that a Lake Mtnnetonka Regional Park In the southwest part of the Lake would attract much use and would satisfy current deficiencies for recreation services. Generally, the publtc expressed supportdurtng the series of eight public meetings..There were some reservations as to the appropriate regulation for boats on the Lake, but generally people supported park acquisition. Some City Councils have passed resolutions supporting a Regional Park. Acquisition of land for a park will satisfy the need for pbblic access in Zone 5 of Lake Mtnnetonka, thus resolving the longstanding issue between DNR and the City of Minnetrtsta. 2. IF SO. HOW MUCH I. AND SHOULD BE AcOUIRED FOR A REGIONAL PARK IN THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF THE LAKE? 292 ACRES (with possible additional.acquisition t.n the future) Acquisition of 292 acres provides for access to both Smithtown and Halsted's Bays, thus allowing for 100 car/trailer parking spaces to be provided, satisfying fully the need for additional access in Zone 5: Acquisition of 292 acres provides for complete integration between Lake Minnetonka Regional Park and Carver Park Reserve. Acquisition of 292 acres provides for additional land for future expansion of recreation facilities and adequate buffers from adjoining land uses and some natural resource management activities. The Board views the acquisition of the Blanch Parcel as desirable. Specifically, we wish to pursue with them the possibility of acquiring all or a portion of their property, now or in the future. lq/ -2- NOW HANY BOAT§ SHOULD BE LAUNCN[D THROUGH THE PARK? 100 car/trailer parking spaces should be provided If 292 acres Is acquired, the opportunity to satisfy all of the boat access needs for Zone 5 in Lake Minnetonka exists, with access to both bays it can be done in a way that will minimize congestion and impact on the natural resource. 4. WHAT REGULATIONS FOR LAKE USE SHOULD BE ENACTED BY THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT? A study ts needed LMCD has indicated that they will seek funding for a major study as to appropriate regulations for the use of the Lake. Henneptn Parks supports the concept of LMCD's effort and stands ready to assist in any way appropriate. 5. WHAT ARE THE RECREATION FACILITIES AND SERVICES THAT ARE NEEDED AND/OR DESIRED? 1. Boat access 2. Fishing 3. Picnicking 4. Swimming Cross-Country Skiing, Biking and Hiking and other trail uses 6. Historical Center and Interpretation 7. Camping The above list is indicated in priority order based on previous analysis (Issue #1) of need and the opportunity to satisfy need on this site. Camping is limited to camping on Wawatasso Island using the Lake Minnetonka Regional Park as the point to a~cess the Lake and Island - not for camping within the park. 6. HOW CAN THIS AREA BE INTEGRATED WITH CARVER PARK RESERVE? Trails can be connected. Carver. Park Reserve naturalists will provide programs. Maintenance services will be provided from Carver Park Reserve. Acquisition. of the 292 acre alternative'provides for.extensive frontage along Highway ? allowing for complete integration of the two park units. 7. WHAT CAN BE DONE TO ADDRESS MINNETRISTA'S CONCERNS RELATIVE TO ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LOSS OF ANTICIPATED FUTURE TAX BASE Land will be substituted within the MUSA line for future development Tax equilivalency payments will be made County Road 44 will be realigned Minnesota DNR should convey the Kings Point Road Site to Minnetrista Hennepin Parks will pay off all outstanding special assessments in cash at the time of purchase -3- Minnetrista has estimated a potential future tax loss of $406,000, assuming full development of the entire 38Z-acre search area. This Is based on fatrly intense development which is not likely to occur in the near ~uture. The Metropolitan Council has indicated that they will substitute other land tn Minnetrista for future urban development for land taken as a result of regional Park acquisition. 8. HOW CAN HENNEPIN PARKS WORK WITH THE BIG ISLAND VETERAN'S CAMP BOARD Ot V RN R T A hip H R NA PARK B T V N BI I AN ? Another offer to purchase will be made Hennepin Parks has previously offered to purchase the land, and the Big Island Veteran's Camp Board of Governors has declined the offer. Hennepln Parks w~11 again indicate its desire to acquire the property and continue to work with the City of Orono so that this land can be utillzed for public recreational purposes. g. WHERE WOULD A STAGING AREA BE BEST LOCATE~ AND MOST FEASIBLF? 1. Downtown Excelsior 2. Downtown Wayzata 3. An existing private marina The City of Orono suggested that Hennepin Parks consider a private marina as a staging .area for a shuttle boat to take.people to Big Island Regional Park. Parking for 200 to 250 cars is needed at a staging area. It is unknown whether an existing marina would provide enough space to satisfy this capacity. Hennjpin Parks'will confer with the municipalities indicated in an attempt to provide an answer to this question. A staging area is not needed unless the Big Island Veteran)s Camp can be acquired. 10. WHAT ARE THE COSTS. HOW CAN THEY BE PHASED AND HOW CAN THEY BE FUNDED? 1. Acquisition costs - $7 to SB million dollars 2. Assessments - $124,000 3. Park Development - $2 million dollars (first phase) 4. Realignment on County Road 44 - $500,000 (for grading, base work. and a grade-separated crossing) 5. Relationship to Carver Park Reserve - $350,000 (trail ~xtensions, main- tenance facility expansion, expansion of tee Lake Auburn Campground .and acquisition of land between the two park units, plus enhancement) 6. Grade-separated crossing of Highway 7 - $250,000 Phasing could be~done in the following general categoriesi Phase 1 Land acquisition and special assessments Phase 2 Basic park development (including realignment on County Road 44) Phase 3 Integration of Lake Minnetonka Regional Park and Carver Park Reserve. ll. WHAT ARE THE FUTURE ROLES OF THE PUBLIC AGENCIES INVOLVED, I.E. HENNEPI)I pARKS, LMCD, METROPOLITAN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSIO)I Hennepin Parks will report its final conclusions to the appropr)ate agencies in February for their review and action where necessary .. / Minneapolis Star end Tribune ,. ~. Thur., Jan. 22, 1987 7B Plan for':park 'may (or miay not) sOlve Minnet°nkass fight! i. By Kate P~. - .'. ~nt ~lM'.m~ h~ever, ~ '-r~y.'I~s ~ ~'-~s Po~' Staff Writer- ,~.. .~ For nearly two decades, the issue of public access to Lake lVfinneton~ has spawned controversy. · ' i~esidenls of the area and local offl- ~.-cials have said that they fear an ~ [i.n?ease in public boat launch sites ~ :wp. uld result in congested parking ~ alqng the shore and a lake over- ~ *loaded with boats. State officials : have complained that control of the ? ~' lake shore by private owners has too ['Severely limited access by the .pub- ! Ifc. I~ the past year, a plan for a region- run by the Suburban Henne- County Regional Park District has held out the possibility of solving ~ local concerns, clearing up a lawsuit between the Department of Natural. Resources (DNR) and the city' of Minnetrista and providing public ac- tess. When officials from communities along the lake meet with county park commissioners tonight, they'll be told of a tremendous zhow of support for the park in public hear- ings this winter, according to Neff Weber, the commissioner who repre- sents communities around the lake. Just below the surface of these re- ' · -are .the same old concerns: Minne.; ~al ~Jxat has the DNR ia court ~ ,with trtsta, ia particular, isa't ready to say .' Minnetrista, which is tryiag to ~)re- that aU is placid onLake Mi.nneton- * *.V~ .en~. DNR,~Mvelopmunt of the laad~ - "We have mixed feelings about ~hat public access remains pivotal to any- park proposal," said Bill Turnblad, one's plAn~ for a park because with- Miunetrlsta city plaaner. On the one out public access it 'will be difficult hand, the city favors some sort of to get funding from the legislature, , regional-park of about 50 acre~ on Weber said. the other hand, the county proposal : ~. ...... · - . .... ~ calls for a 290 acre park. The dty The idea of a regional park devel- favors public access to the lake for oped after 6ov. Rudy Perpich boaters, but it would like to see that jumped into the fray in 1985 and access on the main part of the upper asked the Metropolitan Council*. to lake; the park board plan suggests study the access issue. 'The council access through Halstead's Bay, an task force recommended that the area the city considers environmen- Suburban Hennepin Regional Park tally fragile. · District plan and develop a regional park on the lake. . In addition, Mlnnetrlsta has prevent- -' 'ed the fragmentation of the land The park commissione~ will "have around the bay with an eye toward a reception for all mayors and coun- business .or urban development, cfi people and city managers all Tui'nblad ~aid, "It's a parochial argu- around the lake to tell them where meet to say 'not in my backyard,' but we are on different issues," Weber it is ironic that because of the effort said of tonight's meeting. After that,- ,we've made to keep it together ... the park' board staff will develop an it's there to be taken for a regional acquisition plan that the board will park" that would take the land off vote on, he said. , I . tax roles, he said, After that, the fate of a regional park Tumbled said that although it ap- 'ml~s. to the Le~;lslature, which Will pears that a county park that pro- . receive a request from me,iiennepin vides access to the lake might clear County district for a $6 million bond- up DNR concerns, he believes it will 'Y.~ng om Iora haxe m~nnetonka re. seek public access at King's Point ~. . .-._ .... ~..: :.~ -~ (- i',1- U) 0 "!1 January CITYof MOUND TO: FROM: CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 The looks total County like a of 5.69 The mills has completed their data total millrate decrease mills (4.977%). breakout accordingly: 1987 City of Mound 18.207 School Dist. f~277 53.561 Vocational School 1.421 Misc. Levies Watershed Dist. Hennepin County TOTAL for 1987 for Mound and it from 114.327 to 108.637. A 16.76% 49.30% 5.49% .12% 100.00% 5.959 .133 108.637 FINAL ASSESSED VALUES I qB? Assessed Value 62,190,606 Contribution to Fiscal Disp. ( 987,894) Received from Fiscal Disp. 7,506,586 Tax Increment Value ( 26,377) TOTAL $68,682,921 1986 64:584 ;907 Increase $ 4,098,014 1986 f~ 19.614 -1.407 57.523 -3.962 1 .535 - .114 5.878 + .081 · 089 + .044 29.~ - .'~'~ 2 114.327 -5.69 I q86 58,956,289 ( 794,031) 6,422,649 -0 64,584,907 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 l~r employment in, its programs and activities. One mill equals a total o£ one tenth o£ one percent oF the total assessed value or a total of $68,682.92. Mound has a total millrate of 108.637 in 1987. To arrive at the total gross property taxes paid (before subtracting Homestead Credit allowances), multiply the millrate times the value of one mill. 108.637 X 68,682.92 = $7,461,506.38 In 1986, the total was $7,383,799.01, thus a total tax increase of $77,707.37 or 1.05%. In 1987, $7,461,506.38 is distributed among the various taxing bodies as follows: CITY OF MOUND SCHOOL DIST. #277 VOCATIONAL SCHOOLS MISC. LEVIES WATERSHED DISTRICT HENNEPIN 'COUNTY TOTAL 1987 $1,250,548.47 3,678,522.65 97,745.73 409,636.70 8,953.81 2;016;099.02 $7,461,506.38 1986 $1,267,059.91 3,714,789.28 98,942.91 379,527.27 5,907.04 1 ~.917 ~.572.60 $7,383,799.01 -$16,511.44 - 36,266.63 - 1,197.18 + 30,109.43 + 3,046.77 + 98;526.42 +$77,707.37 The following is a comparison of the other cities in Ind. School Dist. #277: 1987 1986 Increase/ % Increase/ INDEPENDENCE 114.048 114.479 - .431 - .377% MINNETRISTA 108.048 108.286 - .238 - .220% MOUND 108.637 114.327 - 5.690 -4.977% ORONO 102.498 105.547 - 3.049 -2.889% SHOREWOOD 114.073 117.853 - 3.780 -3.207% SPRING PARK 110.084 116.309 - 6.225 -5.352% 2 TO SEE HOW MOUND FITS INTO THE OVERALL HENNEPIN TAX PICTURE, A BREAKDOWN OF MOUND'S CITY MILL OTHER CITIES IS REQUIRED. 1987 MUNICIPAL MILL RATES HENNEPIN COUNTY 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 16. 17~ 18. 19. 20. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. ROCKFORD MINNEAPOLIS ST. BONIFACIUS CHANHASSEN MAPLE PLAIN LONG LAKE DAYTON MEDINA BROOKLYN PARK SHOREWOOD INDEPENDENCE ROBBINSDALE RICHFIELD CHAMPLIN MAPLE GROVE HANOVER SPING PARK LORETTO EDEN PRAIRIE ROGERS HOPKINS EXCELSIOR CRYSTAL MOUND ST. LOUIS PARK BROOKLYN CENTER BLOOMINGTON MINNETRISTA GOLDEN VALLEY M!NNETONKA BEACH MINNETONKA GREENFIELD OSSEO NEW HOPE WAYZATA ST. ANTHONY TONKA BAY MEDICINE LAKE DEEPHAVEN PLYMOUTH CORCORAN GREENWOOD HASSEN ORONO EDINA WOODLAND COUNTY MUNICIPAL RATE VERSUS THE 35.580 35.066 31.748 26.377 25.895 25.434 25.291 24.912 24.450 23.643 23.618' 23.469 21.735 21.408 21.256 20.175 19.654 19.288 19.275 19.173 18.910 1 8.872 18.704 18.207 18.204 18.167 18.119 17.618 17.615 17.057 16.974 16.578 16.273 16.062 16.057 15.543 15.508 15.373 15.137 15.048 14.886 14.294 13.105 12.068 11.954 10.401 ~=* * ~, * * * , * ~Jl~* ~"~,',¢ * * }, , , I},~, . mi, , , , ~, o ~.. :::::::::.:1::::.: ...................... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~.;/ ii';': . .: :~, -:::;: Minneapolis County County Revenue ......................... 10.235 County Capital Lmproue~nt Fun~ ......... 064 county Reserve Bon~s & Interest ......... 144 County Medical O~nter .................. 1.406 Metropolitan Health Plan ' 040 Total County 26.428 H~scellaneons Levies Metro Council ..... . ..................... 407 Metro Council Right-of-Way Loan Fun~ .... 077 Metro Council B~ & Interest .......... 041 Metro Council Solid Waste Bonds & Int.. ·029 Park Museum ........................ ' ..... 350 Metro Mosquito Control .................. 600 Metro Transit Commission ............... 3.023 Metro Transit Commission ~ & Iht .... 327 Total Miscellaneous Levies 4.854 City (Htnneapolis) r~micipal Building Commission ........... 616 Firemen' s Relief ....................... 2.987 Police P~nsion ......................... 3.752 General Fund - 12 056 Per~nent Improvement · 204 Estimate & Taxat/on ..................... 017 nibrary General ........................ 2.340-. l~n/cipal Pension & Retirement ......... 2.149 "' Police Personnel Expansion ............. 1.001 Bond Redemption Principal a Interest·.. 4.780 Park Reb_A~ilitation & Improvement ....... 215 ' 084 Park & Recreation ...................... 3. Dutch Elm Disease Control ............... 764 Tree Preservation & Reforestation ...... 1.050 Lake Pollution Control Fun~ ............. 051 Total City of Hinneapolis 35.066 Special School District No. i General ............................... 38·691 -Bonds & Interest ...................... 2.446 Capital Outlay ........................ 2.898 Transportation ........................ 4.221 Community Service ..................... 1~212 Total Special school District No. I 49.468 Watershed District No. 3 .133 CITY OF F/~LIS ~ILL RATE. ~BLE Tax Payable in1987 Total Pate: 115.816 Total Rate: 115.949 (with WatershedNo. 3)