Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2002-05-28
PLEASE TURN OFF AI.L CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. CITY OF MOUND MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Mound, Cost, quality s¢~iees that respond to the needs of all citizens, fostering a safe, attractive and flourishi~ TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 - 7:30 PM MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent .4genda are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. o OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTES: MAY 14, 2002 REGULAR MEETING *B. APPROVE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS *C. CASE # 02-14: 2060 WATERSIDE LANE OLSON LAKESIDE DECK *D. PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT: 4645 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE FOERSTER IRRIGATION COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER.) PUBLIC HEARING CUP REQUEST FROM MATT LA JOY & KEN CUSTER TO ALLOW OPEN SA. LES AT 4831 SHORELINE BOULEVARD - CONTINUE TO 6/11 POLICE CHIEF LEN HARRELL A. CONGRATULATIONS ON POLICE CHIEF'S AWARD B. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER REPORT C. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE TO RETIRE SUBMITTED BY CHIEF 2406-2412 2413-2436 2437-2457 2458-2476 2477-2478 2479-2481 2482-2491 2492 ACTION APPROVING DESIGN STUDY FOR NEW WELL & APPROVING WELL HEAD PROTECTION PLAN FOR WELL SYSTEM 2493-2514 PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. ACTION ON RESOLUTION INITIATING PROCESS FOR ADOPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING: 6/25 ACTION ON BALBOA LAND PURCHASE FOR USE AS A UTILITY DISTRICT WESTERN AREA FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY (WAFTA) STATUS REPORT 2515-2517 2518-2532 11. PLANNING COMMISSION CASES A. CASE # 02-11: 3030 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE JOHN & KATHY AQUILINA SETBACK VARIANCE - LAKESIDE DECK 2533-2581 12. DOCKS AND COMMONS A. ACTION ON HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATIONS AS THEY RELATE TO THE COMMERCIAL DOCK ORDINANCE B. ACTION AMENDING 2002 DOCK LOCATION MAP 2582-2621 2622-2655 13. DISCUSSION OF NAMING OF PARKS FORM 2656-2658 14. PRESENTATIONS TO THE Cou:NCIL A. ORV BURMA ON LAKESCAPING TEST SITE B. PAT ARNST ON LEGACY FOUNDATION C. TODD WARNER FROM HISTORICAL SOCIETY ON BRINGING THE MINNEHAHA TO MOUND 2659-2662 2663-2664 2665-2676 15. INDEPENDENT AUDITOR PRESENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED DEC 31, 2001 16. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON PROPOSED POST RETIREMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN 2677-2679 17. ANNUAL REPORTS A. FIRE DEPARTMENT GREG PEDERSON 18. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS mo B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. AMM Fax News LMC Friday Fax LMCD co.rrespondence Westonka School District News LMCC June 2002 schedule Hennepin County Assessor's 2002 Open Book results Report: Finance, April 2002 Phosphorous update Met Council newsletter FYI: Memo on rail corridor Letter and response on Mound City Days Minutes: Planning Commission - May 6, 2002 Minutes: Park & Open Space Commission - April 11, 2002 Minutes: Docks & Commons Commission - April 18, 2002 2680-2682 2683-2687 2688-2690 2691-2699 2700-2702 2703-2708 2709-2711 2712-2714 2715-2716 2717-2719 2720-2722 2723-2728 2729-2734 2735-2742 PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Resignation: Officer Sam Nelson Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative corresponclence Public Safety facility update 2743 2748-2750 19. ADJOURN This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: wn,n,.cit),o/h~ound, com. More current meeting COUNCIL BRIEFING May 28, 2002 CC Members: Please bring your calendars to this meeting. Upcoming Events Schedule: Don't Forget!! May 20 - Summer hours in effect May 28 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting May 28 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting June 1 - Fire Department Fish Fry and Dance to White Sidewalls June 3 - DARE Open June 4 - 3:00 - Post Office Ground Breaking June 4 - 6:30 - Special HRA meeting June 6 - 6:30 - Special HRA meeting June 8 - American Legion Convention Parade June 11 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting June 11 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting June 26 - 1:30 City golf outing June 28 - 6:00 - Police Chief retirement party July 25 - City Hall closes at 2:30 for employee appreciation July 27 - 3:30-4:30 Superintendent Myers retirement open house (Shirley Hills) City Manager absences: May 24-31: Sweden City Manager's Exchange June 3: DARE Open July 4 - 14: Vacation Finance Director Gino Businaro will act as City Manager. #9. Balboa Land Purchase A couple of months back you approved an agreement to purchase the land for a utility district. That agreement was not approved by the seller. The content of this agreement is agreeable to the seller and its approval is suggested, so that the lift station project can proceed this summer. #10. WAFTA Status Report John Dean requested time for an update on WAFTA. #16. Post Retirement Savings Plan This proposal is a result of months of negotiations between the Council Personnel Committee, consisting of Pat and Bob, and the Employee Retirement Committee. It is a by-product of the State plan, and will be administered by the State. It is the result of legislation that was passed in Fall of 2001. It has the City participating on the smallest possible scale. It largely depends upon employees contributing portions of unused sick leave, acting as a deterrent from sick time abuse. Human Resources Police Chief Len Harrell will retire as of June 30. A "by invitation" retirement party is planned for June 28. We are currently advertising for the Administrative Assistant that will be shared by the Streets, Sewer, Water, Parks and Docks Departments. The posting closes at 11:00 a.m., June 14. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 14, 2002 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, May 14, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of City Hall. Members present: Mayor Pat Meisel; Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and David Osmek. Members Absent: Peter Meyer was absent until 7:50 p.m., entering before item 7A. Others present: City Attorney, John Dean; City Manager, Kandis Hanson; City Clerk, Bonnie Ritter; Community Development Director, Sarah Smit Director, Gino Businaro; Utilities Superintendent, Greg Skinner; Jeff An( Todd Christopherson, Nancy Schultz, Peter Johnson, Connie & Mervin Woytc Hostetler, Leah Weycker, Greg Kinney, Joseph Linds Consent Agenda: All items listed under the routine in nature by the Council and will be Mattick, Gene ,enda are"~sidered to be call vote. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed frost, the genda and considered in Ma~the meeti~ii?~ii~ii!i~i~er ai~!!~i~3 p.m. and the Pledge of Allegiance was Meisel requested th~iiii~'~ii~i~ .°~!ii~,,=~..Balboa Building Update by John Cameron, and the addition of 13A, B~;~tificati'~ii iBroj:~[s by Peter Meyer. Hanson requested the deletion of item 8A, as th¥~!ii~esolution ~iiii?ii~rele~/ant. MOTION by Brown, ~Dde~?~ii~y Hanus to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried?iii:i:? 3. CONSENT AGENDA Osmek requested the removal of item 3A for discussion. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to approve the consent agenda as amended. Upon roll call vote taken, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. (removed) B. Approve claims in the amount of $472,391.99. C. ApProve parade permit for American Legion for June 8, 2002 as submitted. D. Approve Payment Request No. 1 to Doboszenski & Sons in the amount of $202,781.21 on the Mound Visions 2nd Addition project. 1 -2406- Mound City Council Minutes - May '14, 2002 E. Approve Payment Request No. 1 to S.M. Hentges in the amount of $57,911.67 for the Westedge Blvd. watermain project. F. RESOLUTION NO. 02-52: RESOLUTION REESTABLISHING PRECINCT BOUNDARIES AS REQUIRED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES 204B14, SUBD. 3(c). G. RESOLUTION NO. 02-53: RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO ALLOW PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2136 BELMONT LAN E. PI D#13-'117-24-32-0095, P & Z CASE #02-'10. RESOLUTION NO. 02-54: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR BRETT ANDERSON AT 2136 BELMONT LANE. PID #13-1'17- 24-32-0095. H, Approve liability insurance premium in the amount of 333. I, RESOLUTION No. 02-55: RESOLUTION ~IG THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF LAND J. Approve request by Mound Fire Department Wilshire BIvd between Maywood and on June Annual Fish Fry. ..::~,~::?¢i~:,~:: '*'~::'~ .... for the closure of )02 for the 51st 3A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTON by Hanus, seconded by Osmet in favor. Motion carried. ~tes as amended. All voted 4. COMMENTS AND SUG NOT ON THE AGENDA. Scott Thoma, 1716 Eagle Dreamwood resident a resolution on the PRESENT ON ANY ITEM the Council to update them on the groups are working together to come to 5~ :)N ON TO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AS IT RELATES TO THE DICAL L~AVE ACT OF 1993 Bonnie Ritter infor~:i~he C~cil that this provision is to comply with the Family Medical Leave Act of "~':':~=~iii~iiii~'ere is one change in the Leave Without Pay portion of the Administrative Codei':"~i'ng the deletion of the option to extend leave up to 1 year at the discretion of the City Manager. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to approve the addition of the Family Medical Leave provision and changes to the Leave Without Pay as outlined. All voted in favor. Motion carried, 5A. BALBOA PROPERTY PURCHASE John Cameron informed the Council that he as received a cost estimate of $5415 (which is $1000 less than previously quoted)to perform Phase II Environmental Site Assessment of Lots 23-28, Koehler's Addition - Balboa property. 2 -2407- Mound City Council Minutes - May 14, 2002 MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Osmek to accept this proposal for above stated site work. All voted in favor. Motion carried. City Attorney Dean stated that negotiations on the Balboa Property are going well and condemnation procedures may be avoided. 6. SKATE PARK A. Action on Skate Park Aqreement MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown to adopt the following resolution, of which the agreement is an exhibit. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 02-56: RESOLUTION REGARDING~ CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF SKATE PARK. B. Public Lands Permit for Skate Park MO~ ~-~ ~'~'~ek to ad~:~i~:~ihe f~t~[~wing reS~{;~tion. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 02-57: RESOLUTI~i~iiiiiAp:PR0~ili~:G A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR THE ZERO GRAVITY TASK FOR~A~'A::~D~HE ~i~Y OF MOUND FOR USE OF MA~OOD ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AN~I~~:'PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5341 MA~OOD ROAD AS A~S~A~.,E 7. METROPLAINS DEVE~;~MEN~?~?~?~?~:, John Dean explained~?~e ~:~nt subdivision agreement provides that Outlots C and D be conveye~::::'{h~'::~:~i~:::o~he construction of the park improvements has been completed¢~?~here is a '~Bcer~:;~f the ability to obtain release of liens of moKgage of these outlots if'::~conveye~ight away. The right of way agreement will allow MetroPlains to use {:~pac~ a staging area for their construction and to construct poAions of the park im~:ents. Councilmember Meyer arrived at the meeting at this point (7:55 p.m.) MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to enter into the Right of Way Agreement with The Village by the Bay Development, as presented. All voted in favor. Motion carried. B. Modifications to the Subdivision Aqreement John Dean explained that the modification is simply to allow for the for the early conveyance of Outlots C & D. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to approve the First Amendment to Subdivision Agreement, between the City and Mound Marketplace and Village by the Bay. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3 -2408- Mound City Council Minutes - May 14, 2002 8. WESTERN AREA FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY (WAFTA) A, (removed) B. Committin.q Local Match and Authorizinq Contract Siqnature Soren Mattick or Campbell Knutsen, WAFTA representative, appeared before the council to give a history of the WAFTA site and the history of its contamination investigation and subsequent grant application. Questions were asked regarding the actual cost to each of the eleven member cities, and Mattick stated that this amount is now yet known. The Corps of Engineers, Xcel Energy and Reliant Energy are also contributors to the cost of clean-up. The Council had serious concerns over adopting this resolution, to sponsor this grant application,'without knowing the actual cost to the City. John Dean assured them that before the City is obligated, we will be able to identify the risk and withdraw if need be. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Meyer to adopt the stipulation that prior to signing of the actual a funds need to be known and agreed to. All voted with the of matching RESOLUTION NO. 02-58: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRACT SIGNATURE FOR ACADEMY (WAFTA) MATCH AND AREA FIRE TRAINING 9. LIQUOR STORE A. Presentation of Interior Fini: Fi~ Greg Kinney of Tuchie M( drawings to the council for an the floor plan and exterior fa~:ade B. Liquor Store John Dean informE for the construction will construct the Ii( the inventory. He The [his agreement is in follow up to the letter of intent which called for drafting of a purchase and terms of the agreement are that Mound Marketplace do everything on site except for the cash registers and approval of this agreement. Larry Olson of Mound Marketplace informed the Council that he is comfortable with a November 1,2002 completion date. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Hanus to approve the Purchase and Construction Agreement made between Mound Marketplace, LLC, and the City of Mound. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4 -2409- Mound City Council Minutes - May 14, 2002 10. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY A. Agreement for Construction Manaqement Services Jeff Andersen, Public Safety Facility Committee member, introduced Todd Christopherson, President Construction Management, of Amcon to the Council and indicated that Amcon is the committee's recommendation for Construction Manager for the proposed Public Safety Facility. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 02-59: RESOLUTION FOR AUTHORI TO ENTER AN AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT B. Agreement for Architect Jeff Andersen informed the Council that the com~ii~e's for Architect is Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc., and introduce~!i:i:iRanc~i?~,i~hultz fro~ that firm. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to ado~iiiii~i~°llowing resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. AGREEMENT FOR ARCH TE S iCES.' ntendent, presented the 2001 Annual report to the of the City Clerk. A. Public Works Grog Skinner, Council. This repgi~% B. Building and ~i::~:nin.q :~iiii!iiiiii: Sarah Smith, Comm~8~ity DeVelOpment Director, presented the 2001 Annual report to the Council. This reP~i~ii:~:~s~i~' file in the office of the City Clerk. 12. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON NEW RESIDENTIAL/REMODEL CONSTRUCTION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND DISCUSSION/ACTION ON DRIVEWAY STANDARDS Sarah Smith presented a memorandum asking the Council to consider and discuss reasons to consider an escrow policy for residential construction. The goal is to eliminate the use of temporary certificates of occupancy. If there is an escrow account the deficiencies can be remedied if the homeowner doesn't do them himself. Discussion followed regarding developers vs. homeowners regarding this issue, plus the possibility of requiring escrow when the project is of a certain value. 5 -241 0- Mound City Council Minutes - May 14, 2002 Discussion also took place regarding driveway standards. Sarah Smith will do further research and bring these items back to the Council at a later date. 13. SPECIAL MEETING FOR CITY MANAGER'S EVALUATION MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown to set a special meeting for May 21,2002, at 6:30 p.m. to consider the City Manager's Evaluation. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 13A COUNCILMEMBER MEYER'S BEAUTIFICATION PRQ~ECTS Meyer's list of beautification projects was reviewed and dis.~==§ed. He is to keep the Council informed of any additional projects. He informedl;!i~=;,Council that he is open to 14. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS ~,¢¢? ....... ~iiiiii!iiiiii~,~> B. LMC Friday Fax C. LMCD correspondence: Burma, Mound's Rep to the lakescaping project was an o Commission, and that he the concept of lakesca test projects will not Orv Burma. City meeting for clarifil D. Westonka E. FYI: F. Report; ,ol - Hanus asked how many hours the SRO is at the h~gh sc~[,.,and h~ much grant money ~s expected, and what our expense for this office~:='~='~i~[~be.:,~ year. Hanson will get the Police Chief to report on this at the next' mee;~l:=~¢? Letter: City of Sho~Wood on Phosphorus legislation s attention that Orv LMCD meeting that the mound Planning the Mound Parks Director on City property. Hanus stated that these ~roperty and this should be conveyed to Mr. Burma attend the next council H. Public Safety Building status report I. FYI; Profile of Demographic Characteristics J. Gillespie Gazette K. Mediacom price change L. Letter: MaryOpheim M. Letter: John Evans N. LMCC May schedule O. Ice Out 2002 P. Jaycees charitable gambling donation 6 -2411 - Mound City Council Minutes - May 14, 2002 15. ADJOURN MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adjourn at 10:37 p.m. Motion carried. All voted in favor. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Me[sel ,,~iiiiii!iiiiiiii~'~ 7 - 2412- MAY 28, 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 051302SUE $15.00 051502SU E $110,777.68 051702SU E $18,240.00 052202SU E $11,265.25 052802S U E $239,304.34 TOTAL $379,602.27 -2413- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/13/02 11:00 AM Page 1 Current Period: May 2002 Batch Name 051302SUE User Dollar Amt $15.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $15.00 $0.00 In Balance Refer 51302 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHE 5/13/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-300 Professional Srvs BACKGROUND CHECK $15.00 Invoice 051302 Transaction Date 5/13/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $15,00 Fund Summary 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $15.oo $15.oo Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $15.OO $15.00 - 241 4- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/15/02 1:23 PM Page 1 Current Period: May 2002 Batch Name 051602SUE User Dollar Amt $110,777.68 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $110,777.68 Refer 51602 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM G 609-16200 Fixed Asset-Buildings 5/15/2O02 Cash Payment Invoice 051502 Transaction Date Refer $0.00 In Balance 5/15/2002 EARNEST MOUND MARKETPLACE 51602 EHRET, TODD Marquette Bank Mou 10100 5/15/2002 Cash Payment Invoice 051502 Cash Payment Invoice 051502 Transaction Date R 281-34725 Dock Permits R 281-34705 LMCD Fees 5/15/2O02 REFUND SHARE FEE REFUND LMCD FEE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 51602 GRADY, DANIEL Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical Invoice 051502 Transaction Date 5/15/2002 Refer 51602 PETTY'CASH ~,sh Payment Jvoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Transaction Date E 101-42400-434 Conference & Training E 101-43100-434 Conference & Training E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training E 602-49450-434 Conference & Training E 609-49750-434 Conference & Training E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training E 602-49450-434 Conference & Training E 101-43100-434 Conference & Training E 101-42110-212 Motor Fuels E 101-41500-331 Meeting/Travel E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts 5/15/2002 $110,000.00 Total $110,000.00 $80.00 $7.50 Total $87.50 5/15/2O02 REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total 5/15/2002 PARKING NORLANDER PARKING NELSON PARKING NELSON PARKING NELSON PARKING GRAND PARKING SKINNER PARKING SKINNER PARKING SKINNER FUEL CITY CAR MEETING BUSINARO FUEL FILTER Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $637.08 $637.08 $4.25 $1.42 $1.42 $1.41 $4.25 $2.34 $2.33 $2.33 $11.39 $15.00 $6.96 $53.10 -2415- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/15/02 1:23 PM Page 2 101 GENERAL FUND 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND Fund Summary 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $671.47 $87.50 $3.76 $1 O.7O $110,004.25 $110,777.68 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $110,777.68 $110,777.68 - 2416- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/16/02 1:28 PM Page 1 Current Period: May 2002 Batch Name 051702SUE User Dollar Amt $18,240.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $18,240.00 Refer 51602 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 051602 Transaction Date 5/16/2002 Fund Summary 455 TIF 1-2 $0.00 In Balance 5/16/2002 TRANSMISSION LINE RELOCATION Marquette Bank Mou 10100 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $18,240.00 $18,240.00 $18,240.00 Total $18,240.00 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $18,240.00 $18,240.00 - 2417- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/22/02 12:59 PM Page 1 Current Period: May 2002 Batch Name 052202SUE User Dollar Amt $11,265.25 Refer 52202 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $11,265.25 $0.00 In Balance CRETE WORKS, INCORPORATED 5/22/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic BARTLETT/AVON APRON $750.00 invoice 052102 Cash Payment E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic ALDER,BAYWOOD, GULL, PRIEST LANE $6,216.00 Invoice 052102 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic COMMERCE SIDEWALK $500.00 Invoice 052102 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $7,466.00 Refer 52202 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA 5/22/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 472-3555 Invoice 051002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone 04-02 472-0621 Invoice 051002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone 05-02 472-0646 Invoice 051002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-321 Telephone 05*02 472-3093 Invoice 051002 Refer 52202 Cash Payment Invoice 052002 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou Refer 52202 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMEN 5/22/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41500-315 Service Charges LATE FEE Invoice 16855 Transaction Date 5/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 NORLANDER, JILL 5/22/2002 G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE 10100 Total 10100 $178.87 $752.05 $18.02 $247,94 Total $1,196.88 $96.58 $96.58 $13.57 Total $13.57 Refer 52202 RELIANT ENERGY Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Payment ce 052202 Transaction Date E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities E 101-45200-383 Gas Utilities E 609-49750-383 Gas Utilities E 222-42260-383 Gas Utilities E 101-41910-383 Gas Utilities E 101-43100-383 Gas Utilities E 601-49400-383 Gas Utilities E 602-49450-383 Gas Utilities 5/14/2002 5/22/2002 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 5801 BARTLETT 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 4812 CUMBERLAND 03-20~02 THRU 04-18-02 LIQUOR STORE 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 FIRE STATION 03~20-02 THRU 04-18-02 5341 MAYWOOD 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 STREETS 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 WATER 03-20-02 THRU 04-18-02 SEWER Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $153.49 $365.14 $155,15 $639.30 $771.99 $150.99 $87.79 $104.38 $2,428,23 -2418- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/22/02 12:59 PM Page 2 Current Period: May 2002 Refer 52202 VERIZON WIRELESS 5/22/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41500-321 Telephone 05-02 296-9058 FINANCE $8.33 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone 05-02 590-4351 P/W SKINNER $6.92 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone 05-02 590-4351 PNV SKINNER $6.92 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone 05-02 590-4351 P/W SKINNER $6.91 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 723-7560 MOUND FIRE $0.92 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 751-3572 ENGINE #18 $1.24 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 751-3573 MOUND FIRE $2.20 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 875-4502 RESCUE TRUCK $8.33 Invoice 052202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone 05-02 750-2666 FIRE CHIEF $22.22 Invoice 052202 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $63.99 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $3,587.08 $853.08 $6,310.71 $111.29 $403.09 $11,265.25 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $11,265.25 $11,265.25 - 2419- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page Batch Name 052802SUE User Dollar Amt $239,304.34 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $239,304.34 $0.00 In Balance Refer 52802 AAA NURSERY AND LANDSCAPIN 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 280-45250-229 Street Repairs BLACK DIRT $175.00 Invoice 051502 Transaction Date 5~20~2002 $175.00 Refer 52802 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $126.96 Invoice MB214015 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $110.40 Invoice 55213509 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $237.36 Refer 52802 ASPEN EMBROIDERY AND DESIG 5/28/2002 Cash Payment Invoice 052002 Cash Payment Invoice 052002 Transaction Date 5/20/2002 IRefer 52802 AT&T Cash Payment E 101.41310-321 Telephone Invoice 052602 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 E 101-42400-218 Clothing and Uniforms E 101-42400-218 Clothing and Uniforms SIMONEAU CLOTHING $232.00 NORLANDER CLOTHING $82.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $314.00 5/28/2002 04-02 952-250-0429 $38.09 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $38.09 Refer 52802 BELLBOY CORPORATION 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 23806900 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MlSCELLAENOUS Invoice 23806900 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 23806900 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Refer 52802 BLACKOWIAK AND SON ROLLOFF Cash Payment E 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos Invoice 10129256 Cash Payment E Invoice 10129256 Cash Payment E Invoice 10129256 Cash Payment E Invoice 10129256 Cash Payment E Invoice 10129256 Cash Payment E Invoice 10129256 Payment E Invoice 10129256 601-49400-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 602-49450-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 222-42260-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 101-45200-384 Refuse/Garbage Dis pos 609-49750-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos Marquette Bank Mou 10100 5/28/2002 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP #CMR0120 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CMR0120 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CMR0120 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CM40121 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CM40308 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CHP0085 04-02 GARBAGE PICKUP CHP0045 Total $4,003.30 $223.33 $2,478.34 $6,704.97 $31.66 $31.66 $31.67 $67.01 $105.20 $17.76 $20.39 -2420- CITY OF MOUND Payments ~' 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 2 Current Period: May 2002 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $305.35 Refer 52802 BUSSE, TIMOTHY Cash Payment Invoice 00035 Transaction Date E 101-41110-300 Professional Srvs 5/21/2002 5/28/2002 TYPESETTING 2002 CITY CONTACT $700.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $700.00 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice D134847 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Pads Invoice D140599 Cash Payment E 101-43100-221 Equipment Pads Invoice D140586 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 CHAMPION AUTO .5/28/2002 E 101-45200-409 Other Equipment Repair HERCULINER KIT POLE LIGHT Kit Ma~uette Bank Mou 10100 Total $132.03 $4.25 $101.13 $237.41 Refer 52802 COCA COLA BOTTLING-MIDWEST ..5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 61363195 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 61285178 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $311.60 $190.80 $5O2.40 Refer 52802 CONCO, INCORPORATED Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Transaction Date E 455-46381-600 Debt Srv Principal E 455-46381-611 Bond Interest 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 06-02 PRINCIPLE TRUE VALUE 06-02 INTEREST TRUE VALUE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 To~l $499.47 $462.37 $961.84 Refer 52802 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Cash Payment Invoice 177807 Cash Payment Invoice 176946 Cash Payment Invoice 177021 Transaction Date E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 BEER BEER LIQUOR Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,941.99 $1,614.55 $258.00 $3,814.54 Refer 52802 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials Invoice 803046827 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 5/28/2002 TIP AND STRAINER Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $86.54 $86.54 Refer 52802 DOSSETT, SINDI Cash Payment Invoice 051502 Transaction Date E 101-49840-300 Professional Srvs 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 05-14-02 VIDEO MEETING Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $20.00 $20.00 Refer 52802 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Cash Payment Invoice 243722 Cash Payment Invoice 243721 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale ~2~2002 BEER BEER $32.50 $5,834.85 -2421 - CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 3 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 240763 Cash Payment Invoice 240762 Cash Payment Invoice 242111 Transaction Date Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 36921 Cash Payment Invoice 19447 Cash Payment Invoice 19448 Cash Payment Invoice 19449 Cash Payment Invoice 19450 Cash Payment Invoice 19451 Cash Payment ~ Invoice 19452 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale 5/22/2002 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BEER BEER $12.90 $1,223.95 $306.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $7,410.20 5/28/2002 E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 E 455-46380-300 Professional $rvs E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 MOUND GENERAL 04-02 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 04-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT 04-02 GENERAL SERVICES 04-02 POST OFFICE PROJECT 04-02 FIRE STATION 04-02 LIQUOR STORE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total 5/28/2002 309 MH SANITARY COVER Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $300.00 $1,775.00 $1,312.50 $150.00 $225.00 $1,687.50 $1,387.50 $6,837.50 $169.34 $169.34 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Refer 52802 ESS BROTHERS AND SONS,/NCO Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice EE1269 Transaction Date 5/20/2002 Refer 52802 FIT TEST, INCORPORATED 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-305 Medical and Dental Fees FIT TEST FIRE FIGHTERS Invoice 153 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Refer FORTIN CONSULTING, INCORPOR 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101.42400-434 Conference & Training SITE AVALON PARK Invoice 1175 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $851.00 $851.00 $75.00 $75.00 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 203925 Cash Payment Invoice 203925 Cash Payment Invoice 203925 Cash Payment Invoice 203925 Payment 203925 Cash Payment Invoice 203925 E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms E 601.49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials G & K SERVICES 5/28/2002 05-07-02 UNIFORMS 05-07-02 UNIFORMS 05-07-02 UNIFORMS 05-07-02 MATS 05-07-02 MATS 05-07-02 MATS $25.68 $25.68 $25.67 $18.55 $18.55 $18.55 -2422- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 4 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-216 Cleaning Supplies 05-14-02 MATS $42.01 Invoice 210892 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 05-14-02 MATS $51.48 Invoice 210890 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 05~14-02 MATS $81 Invoice 210891 Cash Payment E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 05-14-02 MATS $29.18 Invoice 210893 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $336.80 Refer 52802 GATEWAYCOMPANIES, INC. 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA COMPUTER $1,176.00 Invoice 79059358 PO 17229 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,176.00 Refer 52802 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies 04-02 #32345800 $35.75 Invoice 043002 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $35.75 Refer 52802 GRIGGS COOPER AND COMPANY 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,866.11 Invoice 540116 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $413.07 Invoice 540115 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $634.25 invoice 543256 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,813,85 Invoice 543921 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $4,727.28 Refer 52802 HANSON, KANDIS Cash Payment Invoice 052002 Transaction Date E 101-41310-321 Telephone 5/2O/20O2 5/28/2002 REIMBURSE DSL LINE $49.95 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $49.95 Refer 52802 HAWK LABELING SYSTEMS Cash Payment Invoice 122082 Transaction Date E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies PO 17365 5/21/2002 5/28/2002 WHITE ON BLACK/SINGLE $42.85 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $42,85 Refer 52802 HAWKINS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 601-49400-227 Chemicals Invoice DM73726 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 CONTAINERS Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $35.00 Total $35.00 Refer 52802 HECKSEL MACHINE SHOP Cash Payment Invoice 40717 Cash Payment Invoice 40775 Cash Payment Invoice 40775 E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 5/28/2002 HYDRANT CAPS $25,69 VACUUM $6.80 VACUUM $6.80 -2423- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 5 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials VACUUM $6.79 Invoice 40775 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply KEYS AND SCREWS $1.60 Invoice 40852 . Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $47.68 Refer 52802 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMA TIO 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41920-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-02 NETWORK SUPPORT Invoice 33047031 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S A 5/28/2002 E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners 03-02 BOOKING FEE Cash Payment Invoice 051602 Cash Payment Invoice 050702 Transaction Date E 101-42110-418 Other Rentals SPECIAL REPAIR 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-351 Legal Notices Publishing MINNEHAHA DOCK MAILING Invoice 10-44130-671500 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $38.64 Total $38.64 $185.80 $52.72 Total $238.52 $58.75 Total $58.75 Refer 52802 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP, I Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 050702-A1 Cash Payment E 401-43100-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 050702-A2 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 050702-B Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 050702-C Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 050702-D Transaction Date 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING WESTEDGE ROAD IMPROVEMENT 3030 ISLANDVIEW DRIVE VARIANCE MOUND VISIONS TIF RELATED WORK Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $1,991.21 $112.50 $262.5O $3,272.31 $2,192.47 Total $7,830.99 Refer 52802 HOWELL, MARLENE Cash Paymen[ Invoice 052202 Cash Payment invoice 052202 Cash Payment Invoice 052202 Transaction Date R 281-34725 Dock Permits R 281-34705 LMCD Fees R 281-36200 Miscellaneous Revenues 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 REFUND DOCK FEE REFUND LMCD FEE REFUND STAIRWAY FEE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL D/STRICT Cash Payment Invoice 042802 Transaction Date E 609-49750-412 Building Rentals 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 06-02 LIQUOR STORE RENTAL SPACE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Total $250.00 $7.50 $50.00 $307.50 $4,342.00 $4,342.00 52802 JEFFERSON FIRE AND SAFETY, IN 5/28/2002 yment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair REPAIR HOLMATRO PUMP Invoice 088987 $301.17 -2424- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 6 Current Period: May 2002 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $301.17 Refer 52802 JESSEN PRESS INCORPORATED 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41110-300 Professional Srvs SPRING 2002 NEWSLETTER $1,700,81 Invoice 44820 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs FIRE STATION PROJECT $967.02 Invoice 44817 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $2,867.83 Refer 52802 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR 5/28/2002. Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale LIQUOR $86.80 Invoice 1401785 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $2,584.96 Invoice 1401784 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $608.95 Invoice 1401783 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $519.90 Invoice 1401782 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $89,75 Invoice 1401781 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT--LIQUOR -$6.39 Invoice 193090 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $83.00 Invoice 1404738 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $993.10 Invoice 1404737 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $222.75 Invoice 1404736 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $2,300.00 Invoice 1404735 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $7,482~82 Refer 52802 JOHNSON, PHYLLIS 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 455-46381-600 Debt Srv Principal Invoice 052802 Cash Payment E 455-46381-611 Bond Interest Invoice 052802 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 06-02 PRINCIPLE TRUE VALUE 06-02 INTEREST TRUE VALUE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $263.06 $4O6.O5 Total $689.11 Refer 52802 JUBILEE FOODS Cash Payment Invoice 043002 Cash Payment Invoice 043002 Cash Payment Invoice 043002 Cash Payment Invoice 043002 Cash Payment Invoice 043002 Cash Payment Invoice 043002 E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services 5/28/2002 04-11-02 MEETING REFRESHMETNS 04-14-02 MEETING REFRESHMENTS 04-18-02 MEETING REFRESHMENTS 04-24-02 MEETING REFERSHMENTS 05-18-02 RECYCLE DAY 05-18-02 RECYCLE DAY $7.03 $39.93 $26.47 $18.90 $32.06 $41.81 -2425- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 7 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 670-49500-460 Janitorial Services 05-18-02 RECYCLE DAY $25.45 Invoice 043002 Cash Payment E 101-41110-331 Meeting/Travel 05-08-02 MEETING $37.48 Invoice 050802 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $229.13 Refer 52802 KENNEDYAND GRAVEN Cash Payment E 101-41110-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51970-A Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51970-B1 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51970-B2 Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51970-C Cash Payment Invoice 51970-D Cash Payment Invoice 51970-E Cash Payment Invoice 51971-A Cash Payment i Invoice 51971-B Cash Payment Invoice 51971-C Cash Payment invoice 51971-D Cash Payment Invoice 51971-E Cash Payment E 101-45200-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-F Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-G1 5/28/2002 04-02 HRNMISC BILLABLE 04-02 REDEV PROJECT AREA #1 04-02 DEMO LONGPRE BLDG 04-02 POST OFFICE RELOCATION G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 04-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 04-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT G 101-22854 Langdon Bay Major Sub-Divi 04-02 LANGDON BAY DEVELOPMENT E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 POST OFFICE RELOCAITON E 101-43100-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 RNV ORDINANCE E 609-49750-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA 04-02 NEW LIQUOR STORE E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 ACT II LOAN DEFAULT 04-02 ZERO GRAVITY SKATE PARK 04-02 SALE LOT 6 BLK 1 WYCHWOOD Cash Payment G 101-22891 Kells Lane Vacation, J. Paul 04-02 SALE LOT 6 BLK 1 WYCHWOOD Invoice 51971-G2 Cash Payment G 101-22892 4778/4790 Northern Road #0 04-02 SALE LOT 6 BLK 1 WYCHWOOD Invoice 51971-G3 Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-H Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-1 Cash Payment E 101-42110-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-J Cash Payment E 101"43100-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51971-K1 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs invoice 51971-K2 ~ash Payment E 602-49450-300 Professional Srvs 51971-K3 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 51970-A 04-02 EXECUTIVE 04-02 ADMINISTRATIVE 04-02 PUBLIC SAFETY 04-02 STREETS MISC LEGAL 04-02 WATER MISC LEGAL 04-02 SEWER MISC LEGAL 04-02 PLANNING MISC LEGAL $248.50 $369.50 $55.00 $482.12 $1,362.95 $7,621.79 $30.00 $5,129.57 $1,440.18 $1,113.00 $262.60 $1,578.00 $31,33 $31.33 $31.34 $1,086.00 $516.68 $3O.OO $114.67 $114.67 $114.66 $768,00 -2426- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 8 Current Period: May 2002 Transaction Date 5/23/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $22,531.89 Refer 52802 LAKER NEWSPAPER 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 05-18-02 COMP PLAN AMENDMETN Invoice 169 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 05-18-02 REZONING Invoice 168 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $67.66 $115.42 Total $183.08 Refer 52802 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC Cash Payment E 101-45200-221 Equipment Parts Invoice 9237864 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials Invoice 9246705 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials Invoice 9246705 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials Invoice 9246705 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials Invoice 9261301 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Refer 52802 LEAGUE MN CITIES INSURANCE T Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 042202 Transaction Date 5/28/2002 VINYL GOLVES,EAR PLUGS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS POLE PLUG E 601-49400-361 General Liability Ins E 101-43100-361 General Liability Ins 5/20/2002 10100 Marquette Bank Mou 5/28/2002 Total Total 4577 ISLANDVEW DAMAGE 04-22-02 COLLIDED WITH VEHICLE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $74.74 $159.09 $159.09 $159.09 $20.36 $572.37 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,000,00 Refer 52802 MARK VII DISTRIBUTOR Cash Payment Invoice 000981 Cash Payment Invoice 413889 Cash Payment Invoice 411381 Cash Payment Invoice 411380 Transaction Date E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale 5/22/2002 5/28/200~ CREDIT-BEER BEER BEER BEER Ma~ueEeBank Mou 10100 Total -$60.00 $3,033.65 $21.95 $1,997.05 $4,992.65 Refer 52802 MARLIN'S TRUCKING DELIVERY Cash Payment Invoice 10934 Cash Payment Invoice 10944 Cash Payment Invoice 10967 Cash Payment Invoice 10983 Transaction Date E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight 5/22/2002 5/28/2002 05-02-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 05-06-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 05-09-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 05-13-02 DELIVERY CHARGE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $153.60 $21.60 $151,20 $20.80 $347.20 Refer 52802 MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCI 5/28/2002 -2427- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 BEACHWOOD POND $247.50 Invoice 39693 Project 07544 Cash Payment E 401-43100-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 WESTEDGE MISC ENGINEERING $155.40 Invoice 39694-A Project 07827 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 WESTEDGE MISC ENGINERIGN $155.40 invoice 39684-B Project 07827 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 WESTEDGE WATERMAIN EXTENSION $4,456.20 Invoice 39695 Project 07953 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 MISC ENGINEERING SERVICES $145.00 Invoice 39696 Project 08900 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 BLDG INSPECTIONS $1,039.50 Invoice 39697 Project 08901 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 PLANNING MISCELLANEOUS $396.00 ENGINEERING Invoice 39698 Project 08902 Cash Payment E 101-43100-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 STREETS MISC ENGINEERING $315.50 Invoice 39699 Project 08903 Cash Payment E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 STORM WATER FUND $651.00 invoice 39700 Project 10293 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 04-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT $693.00 Invoice 39701 Project 12252 Cash Payment E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 CTY RD 15 RELOCATION $1,058.00 Invoice 39702 Project 12533 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 DOWNTOWN TIF DISTRICT $550.70 Invoice 39703 Project 12534 Cash Payment G 101-22854 Langdon Bay Major Sub-Divi 04-02 LANGDON BAY $455.50 Invoice 39704 Project 12754 Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 POST OFFICE MISCELLANEOUS $99.00 Invoice 39705 Project 12879 Cash Payment E 602-49450-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 MCES LIFT STATION $297.00 Invoice 39706 Project 13132 Cash Payment E 401-43100-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 STREET IMPROVE PROJECT $99.00 Invoice 39707 Project 13142 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 XCEL SUB-STATION $198.00 Invoice 39708 Project 13190 Cash Payment E 101-45200-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 SKATE PARK $1,464.70 Invoice 39709 Project 13207 Cash Payment E 401-43110-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 RETAINING WALL REPLACE $10,312.50 Invoice 39710 Project 13215 Cash Payment E 281-45210-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 SHORELINE FOOTAGE $99.00 Invoice 39711 Project 13223 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 WELL/PUMPHOUSE $398.70 Invoice 39712 Project 13313 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 LONGPRE BLDG DEMO $49.50 Invoice 39713 Project 13314 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 KELLS ROAD VACATION $33.00 Invoice 39714-A Project 13327 Payment G 101-22891 Kells Lane Vacation, J. Paul 04-02 KELLS ROAD VACATION $33.00 39714-B Project 13327 -2428- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 10 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment G 101-22895 Kells Lane Vacation Jeff Paul 04-02 KELLS ROAD VACATION $33.00 Invoice 39714-C Project 13327 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 6384 WALNUT LANE GRADING $275.10 Invoice 39715 Project 13488 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 SKAALERUD LOT SURVEY $125.25 invoice 39716-A Project 13501 Cash Payment G 101-22890 2957 Cambridge Retain Wall 04-02 SKAALERUD LOT SURVEY $125.25 Invoice 39716-B Project 13501 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 04-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT $17,642.70 Invoice 39717 Project 13646 Cash Payment E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMETN $7,660.30 Invoice 39718 Project 13677 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 R/VV FRANCHISE ORDINANCE $247.50 Invoice 39719 Project 13709 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 04-02 ANDERSON VARIANCE 02-10 $99.00 Invoice 39720 Project 13729 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $49,610.20 Refer 52802 MCFOA 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41310-433 Dues and Subscriptions 2002 MEMBERSHIP Invoice 052802 Cash Payment E 101-41500-434 Conference & Training 2002 ANNUAL DUES invoice 052802 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 MCMASTER, WILLIAM 5/28/2002 Cash Payment R 281-34725 Dock Permits invoice 052002 Cash Payment R 281-34725 Dock Permits invoice 052002 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Refer 52802 METRO FIRE Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 10209 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 10209 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 REFUND DOCK FEE REFUND LIGHT FEE Total $35.00 $35.0O $7O.00 $80.0O $10.50 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $90.50 5/28/2002 HIP BOOTS HIP BOOTS Refer 52802 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIR Cash Payment G 602-21825 SAC Deposits Invoice 043002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-388 Waste DisposaI-MClS 06-02 WASTEWATER Invoice 0000738683 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 MINNCOMM PAGING 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-325 Pagers-Fire Dept. 05-02 PAGERS Invoice 20233305026 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $98.41 $98.41 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $196.82 5/28/2002 04-02 SAC CHARGES $5,940.00 $33,341.2O Total $39,281.20 $110.86 Total $110.86 Refer 52802 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH 5/28/2002 -2429- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-433 Dues and Subscriptions CERTIFICATION KIVISTO, SCOTT $23.00 Invoice 23800 PO 17315 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $23.00 Refer 52802 MINNESOTA EXTERIORS, INCORP 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies DEPOT REPAIR SIDING/TRIM Invoice 0048135-1N Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $147.00 Total $147.00 Refer 52802 MINNESOTA LABOR AND INDUST 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-430 Miscellaneous INSPECT AIR TANK $10.00 Invoice 261826 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $10.00 Refer 52802 MINNESOTA WESTS COLLEGE 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies Invoice 00022201 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies Invoice 00022201 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies Invoice 00022201 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies Invoice 00022201 Date 5/2t/2002 Refer 52802 MOUND, CITY OF Cash Payment E 609-49750-382 Water Utilities Invoice 052802 Transaction Date 5/20/2002 04-20-20 FIRE SCHOOL GUSTAFSON, BRUCE 04-20-20 FIRE SCHOOL HENTGES, MATT 04-20-20 FIRE SCHOOL ROGERS, RICH 04-20-20 FIRE SCHOOL MYERS, RICK Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total 5/28/2002 04-02 WATER AND SEWER $75.00 $75.00 $75.00 $75.00 $300.00 $40.12 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $40.12 Refer 52802 NEWMAN SIGNS Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials Invoice TI-0085008-B Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials Invoice TI-0085008-B Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials Invoice TI-0086794 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 5/28/2002 SIGNS BALANCE DUE SIGNS SIGNS Marquette Bank Mou $100,00 $230~90 $422.81 10100 Total $753.71 Refer 52802 NORTHERN TOOL AND EQUIPMEN Cash Payment E 101-43100-221 Equipment Parts Invoice 06304186 PO 17316 Cash Payment E 601-49400-221 Equipment Parts Invoice 06304186 PO 17316 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts Invoice 06304186 PO 17316 5/28/2002 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS $94.00 $94.00 $94.00 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $282.00 Refer 52802 NORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPP 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies METER $1,005.37 Invoice 3110880 ction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,005.37 Refer 52802 NRG PROCESSING SOLLUTIONS L 5/28/2002. -2430- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 12 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic DUMP FEES $12,500.00 Invoice 15784 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Refer 52802 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INCORPO 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One-Call 04-02 LOCATES Invoice 2040537 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One-Call 04-02 LOCATES Invoice 2040537 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou Refer 52802 PAUSTIS AND SONS WINE COMPA 5/18/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 0189624-1N Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 10100 $12,500.00 $99.20 $99.20 Total $198.40 $400.00 Total $400.00 Refer 52802 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 S~)ft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 33871569 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Meu 10100 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 832199 Cash Payment Invoice 832198 Cash Payment Invoice 834478 Cash Payment Invoice 834477 Transaction Date E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale 5/22/2002 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC 5/28/2002 E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Total $97.65 $97.65 $93.00 $711.55 $723.80 $443.50 $1,392.40 $3,364,25 Refer 52802 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARE'I-rES Invoice 59155 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Memhandise For R ClGARE'i-I'ES Invoice 59162 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $926.14 $54.00 $980.14 Refer 52802 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS Cash Payment E Invoice 122068-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 121888-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 121681-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 134149-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 134542-00 5/28/2002 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $476.21 $261.29 $2,955.46 $1,374.37 $178.29 -2431 - CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 13 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX invoice 124236-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 124245-00 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Meu 10100 $134.69 $3,277.66 Total $8,657.97 Refer 52802 REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies Invoice R04021081 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Refer 52802 ROAD RUNNER TRANSPORTATIO Cash Payment Invoice 774732 Cash Payment Invoice 774732 Transaction Date E 101-41310-322 Postage E 101-41310-322 Postage 5/21/2002 5/28/2002 AIR AND OXYGEN $21.73 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $21.73 5/28/2002 05-15-02 METRO PLAINS 05-15~02 METRO PLAINS Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $26.55 $22.70 Total $49.25 Refer 52802 ROTARY CLUB OF MOUND 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-331 Meeting/Travel 4TH QTR PAYMENT Invoice 052802 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $166.40 Total $166.40 Refer 52802 SERVICE MASTER CLEAN 5/28/2002 Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services CAN LINERS,T.P. $114.79 Invoice 10886 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $114.79 Refer 52802 SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-533 Tree Removal STRADFORD REMOVE TREES $426.00 Invoice 3949 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $426.00 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 23385 Transaction Date Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 63805 Cash Payment Invoice 63824 SKYWAY PUBLICATIONS, INCORP 5/28/2002 E 101-45200-351 Legal Notices Publishing EE AD SEASONSONAL $207.00 BUSINESS CARDS 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $207.00 SOS PRINTING 5/28/2002 E 222-42260-350 Printing LETTERHEAD $94.68 E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies $53.52 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $148,20 Refer 52802 SPORTING BREED KENNELS ,, 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-445 Dog Kennel Fees 06-02 DOG KENNEL FEE $325.00 Invoice 052802 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $325,00 Refer 52802 STAR-WEST CHEVROLET/OLDS 5/22/2002 ;ash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery REPAIR IMPALA 165005 Transaction Date 5/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $684,03 10100 Total $684.03 -2432- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 14 Refer 52802 STS CONSULTANTS 5/28/2002. Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT $1,374.60 Invoice 230185 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,374.60 Refer 52802 SUBURBAN TIRE COMPANY Cash Payment E 601-49400-221 Equipment Parts TIRES Invoice 100000946 PO 17313 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Refer 52802 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 222330 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 261224 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER invoice 261225 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 261225 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 220634-B Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 259179-B Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 259177-B Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Refer 52802 TMB CONSULTING 5/28/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41920-400 Repairs & Maint Contract NE'I'VVORK SERVICES Invoice 05-218 Transaction Date 5/14/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 52802 TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITE 5/28/2002 $382.72 Total $382.72 $68.00 $175.60 $3,583.40 $3,583.40 -$10.00 -$10.00 $8.95 CREDIT-BEER CREDIT-BEER BEER Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $7,399.35 5/28/2002 $475.43 Total $475.43 Cash Payment Invoice 9 Transaction Date Refer 52802 TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY E 609-49750-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA LIQUOR STORE PROJECT $1,400.56 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,400.56 5/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $4.08 Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $2.00 invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $2.00 invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $17.70 Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $2.00 Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $0.67 Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $0.67 Invoice 343585-0 -2433- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 15 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 101-41110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 343585-0 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies Invoice 344238-0 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies invoice 345171-0 Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 345171-0 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES INK JET CARTRIDGE MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1.00 $1.00 $1.65 $100.66 $4.90 $4.90 $4,90 $16.62 $4.9O $1.63 $1.63 $2.45 $2.44 $177.80 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Transaction Date UNITED PROPERTIES 5/28/2002 E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic 06-02 BALBOA PARKING E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic 06-02 BALBOA PARKING E 602-49450-440 Other Contractual Servic 06-02 BALBOA PARKING 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $31.95 $31.95 $31.95 $95.85 Refer 52802 WELLS FARGO Cash Payment E 354-43140-620 Fiscal Agent's Fees Invoice 051702 Transaction Date 5/20/2002 5/28/2002 SERIES 11 12-01-85 Marqueffe Bank Mou 10100 Total $375.00 $375.00 Refer 52802 Cash Payment Invoice 5295 Cash Payment Invoice 5296 Cash Payment nvoice 5297 Payment Invoice 5298 WIDMER, INCORPORATED 5/28/2002 E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-05-02 NORTHERN ROAD E 601-49400-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-05-02 CTY RD 15 E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-25-02 FORCEMAIN BREAK E 601-49400-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-04-02 WATERMAIN BREAK $1,529.50 $420.00 $600.00 $1,025.00 -2434- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page 16 Current Period: May 2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 04-24-02 GATEVALVE $1,160.00 Invoice 5299 Transaction Date 5/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $4,734.50 Refer 52802 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-41910-381 Electdc Utilities Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 052802 Cash Payment Invoice 061202 Transaction Date E 101-42115-381 Electric Utilities E 609-49750-381 Electric Utilities E 601-49400-381 Electric Utilities E 222-42260-381 Electric Utilities E 101-45200-381 Electric Utilities E 101-43100-381 Electdc Utilities E 601-49400-381 Electric Utilities E 602-49450-381 Electric Utilities E 602-49450-381 Electric Utilities E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities 5/14/2002 5/28/2002 04-02 ~2245-301-939 04-02 ~0466-607-223 04-02 #1914-601-425 04-02 #0217-606-329 04-02 #2184-407-147 04-02 #O047-005-229 04-02 #0864-508-832 04-02 #0864-508-832 04-02 ~O864-508-832 04-02 ~0018-802-634 04-02 #0009-604-835 05-11-02 THRU 05-01-02 #0542-505-000-121 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $871.72 $21.99 $392.13 $3,066.30 $378.71 $161.92 $98.3O $98.30 $98.31 $1,636.18 $281.38 $4,836.20 $11,941.44 -2435- CITY OF MOUND Payments 05/23/02 1:27 PM Page Current Period: May 2002 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 280 CEMETERY FUND 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 354 Commerce Place Tif 1-1 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 455 TIF 1-2 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 670 RECYCLING FUND 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND 10100 Marquet~ Bank Mound $71,393.64 $3,624.76 $175.00 $497.00 $375.00 $14,721.42 $17,167.62 $13,936.74 $44,299.21 $64,455.83 $99.32 $8,558.80 $239,304.34 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $239,304.34 $239,304.34 -2436- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Community Development DireCtor Sarah Smith DATE: May 20, 2002 SUBJECT: Variance(s) Application - Lakeside Deck APPLICANT: John and Michelle Olson PLANNING CASE NUMBERS: 02-14 LOCATION: 2060 Waterside Lane ZONING: R-1 Residential District COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential SUMMARY At its May 20, 2002 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance(s) request from John and Michelle Olson to allow construction of a lakeside deck / patio to be constructed on the east side of the existing house located at 2060 Waterside Lane. The proposed project also includes a number of exterior improvements including cedar shake siding, stoned-faced columns with limestone caps and new patio doors/windows. The requested variance(s) are as follows: Existin~ Proposed Required Variance Front (east) 33.6 ff 21.6 ft 30 ft. 8.40 ft Front (south) 23.9 ft 23.9 i~ 30 ft 6.1 ft OVERVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Members of the Planning Commission reviewed the application and expressed support for the project as a lakeside deck but expressed concern regarding the possible conversion of the deck to a 3-season porch at such time in the future. City staff commented that any such conversion would require formal review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. Details regarding the Planning Commission's review of the application are included the May 20, 2002 Planning Commission meeting minute excerpts which have been included as a separate attachment. -2437- PLANNING COMMI§gION RECOMMENI)ATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the variance request(s) for the property located at 2060 Waterside Lane subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance application. 2. The approved variance is for the new lakeside deck only and is granted on the premise that it will not be converted to a 3-season porch. 3. The approved variance applies to the new lakeside deck only and does not run in perpetuity with the land. A draf~ resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included as an attachment. -2438- a. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance application. b. The approved variance is for the new lakeside deck only and is granted on the premise that it will not be converted to a 3-season porch. c. The approved variance applies to the new lakeside deck only and does not run in perpetuity with the land. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lots 3, 4, 5, 49, and 50, Block 2, Lakeside Park, A.L. Crockers 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 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: Adopted May 28, 2002 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: City Clerk -2439- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 02-' RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE(S) TO CONSTRUCT A LAKESIDE DECK FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2060 WATERSIDE LANE P & Z CASE # 02-14 PID # 13-117-24-33-0041 WHEREAS, the applicant(s), John and Michelle Olson have requested a variance to construct a 12' x 33.5' lakeside deck / patio on their property located 2060 Waterside Lane which would be located within the required front yard setback area of Waterside Lane; and WHEREAS, the existing house has a non-conforming front building setback of 23.9 feet along Spruce Road; and WHEREAS, the R-1 District requires a (30) foot front yard setback; and WHEREAS, the requested variances are identified as follows: Existin~ Proposed Required Variance Front (east) 33.6 ft 21.6 ft 30 ft. 8.40 ft Front (south) 23.9 ft 23.9 ft 30 ft 6.1 ft WHEREAS, the subject property includes an existing 1-story rambler with an attached garage that is bordered to the east by Waterside Lane and by Spruce Road to the south; and WHEREAS, the applicants are proposing to add a 12' x 33.5 foot lakeside deck on to the east side of the existing house to capture and enjoy the views afforded by Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, the property is fronted by both Spruce Road and Waterside Lane and is therefore subject to double front-yard setback requirements; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended approval of the variance as recommended by Staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: The City does hereby grant the variance as requested with the following conditions: -2440- The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the variance application. The approved variance is for the new lakeside deck only and is granted on the premise that it will not be converted to a 3-season porch. The approved variance applies to the new lakeside deck only and does not run in perpetuity with the land. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lots 3, 4, 5, 49, and 50, Block 2, Lakeside Park, A.L. Crockers 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The foregoing resolution and seconded by Councilmember was moved by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted May 28, 2002 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: City Clerk -2441 - Excerpt MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 20, 2002 CASE #02-14 Variance - Lakeside Deck John and Michelle Olson - 2060 Waterside Lane The property owners came in about a year ago and it was thought at that time they could meet the setbacks for a front yard deck. A few weeks ago it was discovered that the east side setback was short. Required street setbacks on Waterside and Spruce were 30 feet. Because of this staff considered this a cause for hardship. The deck addition will improve the livability of the home and visually enhance the property. Views from adjacent properties will not be negatively impacted. Discussion Burma inquired as to why a comer lot is a hardship. Smith said the double 30 foot setback it impacts what the property owner can do with the lot. Weiland was concerned that a future owner would come back for approval of a 3-season porch. Smith indicated that they would have to come back for approval. Clapsaddle thought it needed to be very clear that the variance does not mn in perpetuity. Gordon said that the way we have worded it in the past in the resolution does not allow the variance to continue indefinitely. Finding of Fact: There is almost 40' to Waterside Lane to the back &curb and 49' to Spruce Road back of curb. MOTION by Burma, seconded by Mueller, to move staff recommendation. Mueller wanted it amended to indicate the variance was for the deck only and provides no further improvement to the deck. Burma agreed. Burma agreed that not having a deck on the lake is a hardship. He does not agree that a comer lot is hardship. MOTION as amended carried unanimously -2442- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 PLANNING REPORT TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: May 15, 2002 SUBJECT: Variance(s) Request OWNER/APPLICANT: John and Michelle Olson PLANNIIqG CASE NUMBER: 02-14 LOCATION: 2060 Waterside Lane PID: 13-117-24-33-0041 ZONING: Residential District R- 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential BACKGRouND The applicant has submitted a variance(s) request to allow construction of a lakeside deck / patio to be constructed on the east side of the existing house located at 2060 Waterside Lane. The proposed project also includes a number of exterior improvements including cedar shake siding, stoned-faced columns with limestone caps and new patio doors/windows. The requested variance(s) are as follows: Existin~ Proposed Required Variance Front(east) 33.6 ff 21.6 ff 30 f. 8.40 ft Front (south) 23.9 ft 23.9 30 ft 6.1 ff SITE CONDITIONS The subject property includes an existing 1-story rambler with an attached garage that is bordered to the east by Waterside Lane and by Spruce Road to the south. The applicants are proposing to add a 12' x 33.5 foot lakeside deck on to the east side of the existing house to capture and enjoy the views afforded by Lake Minnetonka. The existing house has a non-conforming front building setback of 23.9 feet along Spruce Road. City Code Chapter 350:420, Subd. 9 regulates non- conforming buildings in the City of Mound and states that non-conforming principal and accessory structures may be expanded, enlarged or modified or conforming structures can be added provided that the expansion, enlargement, or modification meel;s the current zoning regulations and no other non-conformities are created. -2443- There is an existing 10' x 7' utility shed located behind the house is approximately 0.4 feet from the property line and is therefore in a non-conforming location. This issue is not affected by the proposal. Copies of the floor plans and elevation drawings for the proposed project have been included as separate attachments. An updated survey dated May 1, 2002 and hardcover calculation sheet have also been prepared. LEG~~TiGN Lots 3, 4, 5, 49 and 50, Block 2, Lakeside Park, A.L. Crockers 1st Addition 60-DAY PROCESS The application was received and deemed to be complete on April 30, 2002. l~ursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, the City of Mound has sixty (60) days to approve or deny a land use request. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All property owners abutting the subject site were mailed a copy of the Planning Commission agenda on or around May 17, 2002 to inform them of the variance request. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies o~' the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all applicable City departments for review and comment. All written comments received to date have been summarized below: City Engineer John Cameron Public Works Director Skinner Building Official Matt Simoneau No objections. No objections. A building permit is required including the submittal of all required information. -2444- GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The subject property is a comer lot and is therefore subject to double front yard setback requirements of (30) feet on Waterside Lane and Spruce Road. 2~ Water Bank Commons is located immediately east of Waterside Lane. 3. Tile piop'used~rovemeiitS 'will visually etd~m~ce' the prOp~l.y and will--he livability of the home. 4. Views from adjacent properties will not be negatively impacted. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council approval of the variance as requested with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all involved fees associated with the variance request. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW Tentatively, the variance application is scheduled to be forwarded to the City Council for review at its May 28, 2002 meeting in the event a recommendation from the Planning Commission is made at its May 20, 2002 meeting. -2445- 04/18/02 12:08 FAX 9524720679 CITY OF ~OUND ~013 .City of Mound VARIANCE APPLICATION ,. . 'planning Commission Date ~'/~-~/~ Application Fee: J~ ~ City Planner ..,, DNR' ' - city Engineer ~_'~,,-~- PARKS ~'~- Public Works / Other / Please type or print legibly . "1' PROPERTY LEGAL DESC~ PROPERTY >WNER APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) Subdivision L ' ' ' . ZONING DISTRICT R-1 R-lA R-2 R-3 Phone ('H >.~=~ L~..~~ ~)_ Name Address Phone (H)_ Lvh APR 3 0 2002 CITY OF MOUND Plat # B-1 B-2 B-3' (VV). _(M)_ 1. Has an application ever been mad_,,e for zoning, vadan~-,e, conditional use permit, or other zoning pr(~ced-'-~ for this property? Yes ( ) No (~/). If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide Copies of resolutions. Ds(ailed description 'of proposed construction or alteration (Size, number of stories, type of uss, etc,): Variance Application Page 1 of 3 Revised 03/20/02 -2446- REn~IVF,n_ APR 3 n 200?. MOUND y~.A~i',~ING & INSi, 04/18/02' 12:08 FAX 9524'720679 CITY OF MOUND Case No. 014 3..Do the existing structures comply With ail area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it Is located? Yes (V0' No (). If no, specify each non-c~nf0~ing use (~descrlbs, .reason for variance request, i.e. setbaCk,` Iotarea, etc.)." ' · ' . .... ~-~: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE Front Yard: ( N S E W ) ft ~_[~/~. ft. ~'~ ~. SldeYa~: (NSEW) ~0 ~ fi, ~ RearYa~: (NSEW) ~0 ~. ~ ff. ~ ff. ~keslde:'~ ( N S E W) I ' ~--~I ~ + . · (NSEW) ~, ~ ff, Skeet Frontage: ' ~' ff. _ fl. Lot Size: sq ff sq ff _sq ff Hard--er: sq ~ sq ff _sq ff. 4, Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is ', located? Yes (), No (). If no, specie7 each non-conforming use: 5. Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property Prevent its. reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? ( ) too narrow ( ) topography ( ) soil ( ) ~o small ...() drainage ():existing s{tuation (i~'~'sha'li~6W/ (') shape ( ),other:'specify ~. ........ :~t, ~d.~ : ' Variance Appllcatto .n Page 2 of 3 Revised 03/20/02 -2447- 04/18/02 12: 09 FAX 9524720679 CITY OF MOUND .___~ Case No. Was the i~ardship described above created by· the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was' adopted (1982)? Yes (), No ~ If yes, eXplain: 7. Was the hardship created' by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a rc3ad'~ Yes (), No (,/~. If yes, explain: ' 8. Are the conditions of J~ardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yes (//'), No (). If no, list some other ProPerties which are similarly affected? ,. Comments: I certify that all of the above statements and the statemenis COntained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are~e and .accurate. I acknowledge t~atl have read ali of the variance information provided. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this appJic~ti~n by any euthor'~ed. official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or' of posting, maintaining ~and..mrnoving 'such notices as may 5e required by law. Owner's Signature /~ ~C_~.~.. (~ ~..~3 ~ Dare Signature Data Variance Application Page 3 of' 3 Revised 03/20/02 -2448- CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) LOT AREA LOT AREA LOT AREA OWNER'S NAMEJ'~'o~rI.- ~ ~C.~3 1 (..(~ O I_.r"'~y-~_ SQ. FT. X 30% = (for all lots) ....................................... SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record) ............., ............... SQ. FT. X'15% = (for detached buildings only)..,.. HOUSE Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent cove~lge provided that techniques am utilized, as outlined In Zoning Ordinance Se~on 350:1225, Subd. 6,B.1 (see back), A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. l~) LENGTH ~/IDTH SQ FT. 7 x lo = 7o DETACHED BUILDINGS (GARAGE/SHED) AREAS, S.J.DEWALKS, ~ ~ ~ ETC; X Ofrr~o L~ ,~' x TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC' DECKS Open decks (1/4" min. Opening beN/een boarde),wlth a pervious surface under are not counted a~'hard~x~vel~;: X = --' X TOTAL NARDCOVER/'iMPERVIOUS SURFACE ................................................... t,5'; l~ ~,, z~ ~UNDER4OVE~ (indicatedifferen'ce) ...~..,~....OEG~ , I"~l~ ~ l' ...................................... PAID .... .. ~, ,Z~ o Re~ed 03~20102 [ CI~ OF MOUND -2449- · 17,7 I q,i TOTAL ..... 231 -2450- RECEIVED APR 3 0 2[102 MOUND HL~l~r~i[~ & INSP. Z ,-2451 - Z I-- Z 0 Property Information Search by Street Address Result page . page 1 of 2 Search By: '":~'Op~'~['~'"'~:~'~ ................ "~?" ' HOUSE or BUILDING #: ....... {at I~a~! firat $ UNIT # (if applicable) ~ records per page Property ID: Address: Municipality: School Dist: Watershed: Sewer Dist: Owner Name: Taxpayer Name & Address: HenneI>in County, MN Property Information S~arch Result The Hennepin County Property Tax,~eb database is updated daily (Monday -Friday) at a£proximately 9: l S la. rt~. (CST) !! Parcel Data for TaxeS Payabl9 2002 Click Here for State Copy of Payable 2002Tax Statement 2060 WATERSIDE, LA MbuND 277 Construction year: 1954 3. Parcel Size: IRREG J & M OLSON JOHN & MICHELLE OLSON 2060 WATERSIDE LA MOUND MN 55364 Most Current Sales Information Sales prices are reported as listed on 'the CertifiCate of Real Estate Value and warranted to represent arms-length transactions. Sale Date: May, ~981 Sale Price: $107,000 Transaction Type: ContraCt For Deed Addition Name: Lot: Block: Metes & Bounds:~ Tax Parcel DescriptiOn LAKE lSIDE PARKA L CROCKERS 1ST DIV 002 LOTS 3 4 5 49 AND 50.:BEK- 2 LAKE SIDE PARK A L CROCKERS 1STDIVISION HENNEPIN COUN.~ MINN ~ va!ue aha: Tax Summary for Taxes Payable 2002 Val,U"=~ ~sta~lished by,ASsessor as of January 2, 2001 Estimated Ma[j~t ValU:~':: - $327,000 Limited Market'Valu~; Taxable Market ValUe': Total Im proveitient Total Net Tax: Total Special Assessments: Solid Waste Fee: $263,500 $263,500 $3,357.62 $50.22 http://www2.co.hennepin.mn.us/pins/add~-~, , _ 2452- 5/17/2002 Property Information Search by Street Address Result page Page 2 of 2 Total Tax: $3,407.84 Property Information Detail for Taxes Pa3/able 2002 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2001 Values: Land Market ~ Building Market Machinery Market Total Market: Land Limited Building Limited Total Limited: QualifYinlg Improvemen~ Classifications: Property TYl3e " Homestead Status Relative Homestead Agricultural Exempt Status $200,000 $127,000 $327,000 $181,200 $102,300 $263,500 RESIDENT AL LAKE SHORE HOMESTEAD 62 Hennepin County. is providing, this information as a public service. Have a tax related question? Send e-mail to taxinfo@co.hennepin.mn.us Experience a problem searching database, have a technical question or wish to co Hennepin County Tax web site? Send e-mail to Don.K0pel@co.hennepin.mn.us Have a comment on any of Hennepin County's web sites or E-Commerce applicati, Send e-mail to Henn. Net@co.hennepin.mn.us Copyright © 1998 - 2001 Hennepin County http ://www2. co.hennepin.mn, us/pins/adc ....... 245 3 - 5/17/2002 oF CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR MICHELLE, OLSON LOTS 5, 4, 5, 49 & 50, BLOCK 2, LAKESIDE PARK A.L. CROCKERS 1ST ·DIVISION HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA %% 4¸9 EXISTING ~x, HOUSE.--' 5 LAKE .MINNETONKA HARRISON BAY . \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (9~t)O ' LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Lots 3, 4, 5, 49, and 50. Block 2. Lakeside Park A.L. Crackers 1st Division o : denotes 'ironmorker (908.3): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level dat~ Bearings shown are based upon an assuT~d datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, end the location of on existing house and shed thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroacfments. IGGRONB~,RG & AS20CIAT~2, INC. CoNSULII~ EN61NL~RS, LA~ ~VEY~, ~ ~ ~5 N. WILLO~ DR. LO~ LAKE, ~. 55~5~ 952-473-4141 I HEREBY C~RT~'Y THAT THIS PLAN, SPEC~F'IOATION, OR REPORT J SOALE: WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND ~ THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL. ENGINEER AND LAND ,~CALE. I#~ I00" ' ;' .):~: 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 FAX To: From: Date: Subject: Dave Zetterstrom, Hennepin County Sarah Smith May 23, 2002 Upcoming Land Use Applications - June 3, 2002 PC Review For your review and comment the following are being forwarded: 1. Variance application - 4948 Wilshire Blvd (new SFD) 2. Minor Subdivision - CSAH 110 -2456- This Page Is 'Left Intentionally Blank -2457- 5341 May~,vood Ro~d Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO; FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Council Sarah Smith, Community Development Director May 20, 2002 Public Lands Permit Application - 4645 Island View Drive Keith and Laurie Foerster Devon Commons Request to Install Underground Irrigation System SUMMARY At its May 16, 2002 meeting, the Docks and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) reviewed the application from Keith and Laurie Foerster for a Public Lands Permit to allow installation of a underground water intake pipe for a new sprinkler system. PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the proposal are contained in the Planning Report and the May 16, 2002 DCAC meeting minutes which have been included as attachments. RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the DCAC unanimously voted to recommend approval of the application subject to the conditions as recommended by City staff. ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2002-__ (draft) Planning Report - 4645 Island View Drive May 16, 2002 DCAC meeting minutes -2458- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 02- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR KEITH AND LAURIE FOERSTER AT 4645 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE LOT 13 AND THE SOUTH Y~ OF LOT 12, BLOCK 1, DEVON, HENNEPIN COUNTY DEVON COMMONS WHEREAS, the applicant is seeking a Public Lands Permit to install an underground water intake pipe for a new sprinkler system; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 320, requires City Council approval by a majority vote for construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park or commons; and WHEREAS, the Docks and Commons Advisory Commission considered the request at its May 16, 2002 meeting and unanimously recommend approval of the applicant's request subject to the following condition(s): 1. If there is ever a need for the City to do work on the Commons / City utilities and the irrigation line is disturbed, the City shall not be responsible to repair or replace it. and; WHEREAS, the City Council considered this request at their meeting of May 28, 2002. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, to approve the Public Lands Permit as submitted by Keith and Laurie Foerster. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember The following voted in the affirmative! The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of May 2002. and Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel -2459- Page 1 of 2 Sarah Smith From: To: Sent: Subject: "James W. Fackler" <JimFackler@cityofmound.com> "Gino" <GinoBusinaro@cityofmound.com>; "Bonnie" <BonnieRitter@cityofmound.com>; "Jodi" <JodiRahn(~cityofmound.com>; "Kandis" <KandisHanson(~cityofmound.com>; "Sarah" <SarahSmith@cityofmound.com> Friday, May 17, 2002 7:48 AM May 16, 2002 DCAC Meeting Absent: Frank Ahrens Late: Mark Hanus Present: Gerald Jones, Mark Goldberg, Jim Funk and Greg Eurich There were a few Avalon Dock Site Holders ( Sue has the names ) Meeting Started: 7:30pm 1) Minutes from April 18th were approved with no change. 2) No Agenda Changes 3) Comments & Suggestions, no one present with any input. 4) Minnehaha Dock at Mound Bay Park: Todd Warner reviewed the proposal and the commission recommended that this be looked into in greater detail. There was no one present from the neighborhood to give any feedback. 5) Public Lands Permit 4645 Island Drive: ***SARAH*** The permit was passed and I told Mr. Foerster that this will go to the May 28th CC meeting and he would be notified. 6) Request for the Small Water Craft Sites to Reinstalled at the Avalon Dock: ***KANDIS, BONNIE*** The DCAC passed a motion for these two sites #40550K & 40550L be added back onto the 2002 Dock Location Map. Mayor Pat M. asked that this be on the May 28th CC meeting agenda. 7) Review the Dock/Slips Revenue/Expense Sheets: ***GINO*** The commission is OK with the numbers buts would like then the Audit Balance for the 2001 Docks. 8) Review the Avalon Rip Rap Protection Ramp: The commission wants to see the ramp installed for the 2002-3 winter. 9) Rip Rapping For 2002: The commission asked that the Idelwood and the Cresent Park sites be looked at for a rip rap application for this summer. - 2460- 5/20/2002 Page 2 of 2 10) June Agenda: ***JODI*** Check with Sue on this. Meeting ended at 10:15 pm -2461 - 5/20/2002 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 PUBLIC LANDS REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: SUBJECT: DOCK SITE: Mound Council, Docks and Commons Commission and Staff Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Jim Fackler, Parks Director May 8, 2002 (Revised May 10, 2002) Public Lands Permit Application - 4645 Island View Drive Keith and Laurie Foerster Devon Commons, Class D Request to Installation of Underground Irrigation System 41437 (Batch # 6) REQUEST The applicant(s), Keith and Laurie Foerster, are requesting a Public Lands Permit to allow installation of a underground water intake pipe £or a new sprinkler system. Details regarding the proposal are contained in the application and survey that have been included as attachments. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 13 and the south ~A o£Lot 12, Block 1, Devon, Hennepin County CITY CODE 320 - PRIVATE STRUCTURES AND PRIVATE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ON PUBLIC LAND City Code 320.01 regulates private structures and private construction activities on public land in the City o£Mound. Specifically, Subd. 1 regulates new construction activities on public lands. DEVON COMMONS At the present time, there is a stairway, an electric light (with outlet) and a retaining wall located in Devon Commons which are z~ssociated with the subject property. 1. The subject site includes a single £amily home which is accessed from Island View Drive and is bordered by Devon Commons to the south. -2462- The private improvements located in Devon Commons were approved in 1995 following adoption of Resolution No. 95-65. Based on review of the Public Lands Permit file for the subject property, it appears that all existing permits are in proper order. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all applicable City departments for review and comment. All written comments received to date have been summarized below: City Engineer Cameron The applicant is advised that the City has a sanitary sewer main and water main located in Devon Commons. The survey includes the manhole and fire hydrant located on the property. The proposed underground irrigation line will cross both mains. Building Official Simoneau A plumbing permit will be required. Public Works Director Skinner No objections. Parks Director Fackler Application to be forwarded to DCAC for review. If there is ever a need for the City to do work on the Commons/City Utilities and the irrigation line is disturbed, the City shall not be responsible to repair or replace it. PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW Copies of the proposal were forwarded to all involved public agencies for review. All written comments received to date have been included in the packet as separate attachments. Specifically, please refer to the comments received from DNR Area Hydrologist Travis Germundson. SITE INSPECTION City Officials and Board Members are encouraged to visit the subject site prior to the meeting. PHOTOGRAPHS Digital photos of the subject site will be presented at the meeting. -2463- NOTIFICATION While City Code Section 320 does not require public notification, current City policy indicates that adjacent property owners are notified as a courtesy. Member of the Docks & Commons and City Council are advised that a meeting notice was mailed to adjacent property owners on or around May 10, 2002. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval of the Public Lands Permit request from Keith and Laurie Foerster to allow installation of a water intake pipe for a new sprinkler system subject to the following conditions: 1. Any and/or all comments from the Docks and Commons Commission, the City Council, and City staff CITY COUNCIL REVIEW Tentatively, the Public Lands Permit Application will be forwarded to the City Council for review at its Tuesday, May 28, 2002 meeting in the event a recommendation from the Docks and Commons Commissions is made at its Thursday, May 16, 2002 meeting. ATTACHMENTS · Public Lands Permit Application dated April 24, 2002 · Survey from Sathre-Bergquist dated January 14, 1999 · Letter of"complete" dated May 6, 2002 · Resolution No. 95-63 dated June 27, 1995 · File photo - subject site · Email from DNR Area Hydrologist dated May 7, 2002 -2464- City of Mound PUBLIC LANDS APPI,.ICATION Dock Commission Date c.~]]~/~,_ DISTRIBUTION ~~V DNR Check One Date Received City Council Date Building Official Public Works Pa rks Director CONSTRUCTION ON PUBLIC LAND PERMIT - new construction. MOWD Other~ NOT PERMIT SHALL BE ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BOAT HOUSES OR OTHER BUILDINGS ON PUBLIC LAND (City Code Section 320, Subd. 1). PUBLIC LAND MAINTENANCE PERMIT - to allow repairs to an existing structure (City Code Section 320, Subd. 3). CONTINUATION OF STRUCTURE - to allow an existing encroachment to remain in an "as is" condition (City Code Section 320, Subd. 3). LAND ALTERATION change in shoreline, drainage, slope, trees, vegetation, fill, etc. (City Code Section 320, Subd. 4). The structure or work you are requesting is an activity on publicly owned lands. Structures like boat houses, patios, sheds, etc. are all NONCONFORMING USES. It is the intent of the City to bring all these uses into conformance, which means that those structures will at some time in the future have to be removed from the public lands. All permits are 'qted for a limited time and are non-transferable. Stairway construction must meet the State Building Code when the ,nit is for new construction, or a new permit is applied for due to a change in dock site holder. Please type or print legibly APPLICANT Name .~F/-/"h/ Phone (H) ~Z - ~72-~'~ (W) ABUSING Address ~ PROPER~ LEGAL Lot /~ ~WD DESC. Subdivision PID ¢ Plat ZONING DISTRICT R-1 R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 Public Lands Permit Application Page I of 2 Revised 03/20/02 -2465- PROPERTY PROPOSED COST OF PROJECT (INCLUDING LABOR & MATERIALS) /---, ''~ I DO DESCRIBE REQUEST & PURPOSE Applicant's Signature, Date Public Lands Permit AppliCation Page 2 of 2 Revised 03/20/02 -2466- -2467- -2468- This Page. Is Left .Intentionally Blank ~. -2469- IIIll 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 CITY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound,com May 6, 2002 Keith Forester 4645 Island View Drive Mound, MN 55364 RE: Public Lauds Permit This letter is in response to the Public Lands Permit application to install irrigation on >;our property that was submitted on or around April 24, 2002. Please be advised that the application has been deemed to be complete and will be forwarded to the Docks and Conunons Conunission for review at its Ma3, 16, 2002 meeting. If you have m~y questions regarding this letter or would like any additional information, please feel free to contact me at 952-472-3190. Conmmnity Development Director ~i printed on recycled paper -2471 - RESO'LUTION #95.63 SPECIAL PERMITS FOR PRJ~TE STRUCTURE ON PUBLIC LAND . KN owN~!ii!~EVON COMMON · ?!: "BATCH#6" ' DOCK S~ES ~410:50, 41080, 4i110, 41470, 41170, 41227, 41272, 41319, 41337, & 41~7 EXCLUDING ~40945 WHEREAS, The City of Mound is updating the permits for structures located (3n public lands, and; WHEREAS, City Code Section 320, requires City Council approval bya four-fifths vote for Construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park, or' commons, and; WHEREAS, "Batch #6" details the private encroachments located at dock sites #~, 41050, 41080, 41110, 41470, 41170, 41227, 41272, 41319, 41337, and 41437, and the~e encroachments have been inspected by the Building Official and Dock Inspector according to the Procedu re Manual, and; WHEREAS, the.Park and.Open Space Commission reviewed this Batch #6 and recommended approval, with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council' of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: · 1. To approve Public Land Permits for "Batch #6" as follows: Batch #6 Public Land Permits DEVON COMMON, CLASS B ~ '?-=?? !$t...~.."!D V!-m.~! DR --.F-.I=AG-,~Ok~ F'-~.~ POLE AN~ ~ - COHCR~E BOAT ~HALL REMOVE THE P~.~ POLE AHD ~E C~ ~HA,'~ ~ ~MOVE THE ~OAT 410~ ~5 IS~ND V[~ DR - STAIRWAY STAIRWAY IS IN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION. APPROVE 5 BILL & BARB DAHLEN Y~R PERMIT TO A~OW STAIRWAY TO REMAIN AS IS, 41080 5109 DRUMMOND RD - STAIRWAY APPROVE 5 YEAR PERMIT FOR STAIRWAY PENDING TAMMY ~SK INSTAL~TION OF HAND.IL AS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL iI1~ 145 -2472- Resolution #95-63 June 27, 1995, Paqe ,2. DEVON COMMON, CLASS C ~ 41110 4559 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY APPROVE 5 YEAR PERMIT TO ALLOW STAIRWAY PENDING RAY SALAZAR INSTALLATION OF HANDRAIL AS APPROVE[D BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, 41140 4577 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY STAIRWAY IS IN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION, RESOLUTIONS RICHARD GLIDWELL ff92-61 & #92-82 EXPIRE 5-26-97. APPROVE/RE-ISSUE 5 YEAR PERMIT TO ALLOW EXISTING STAIRWAY TO REMAIN AS IS, 41170 4601 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY STAIRWAY IS IN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION, RESOLUTIONS ROGER STEPHANSON ~92-62 & #92-155 EXPIRE 5-26-97. ADDITIONAL RESTORATION & GRADING WORK NEEDED ON HILLSIDE AT OLD STAIR LANDING. APPROVE/RE-ISSUE 5 YEAR PERMIT FOR STAIRWAY PENDING STAFF'S APPROVAL OF RESTORATION, 41227 4609 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY STAIRWAY tS IN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION, APPROVE 5 A.R, TOUBA YEAR PERMIT TO ALLOW STAIRWAY TO RI~MAIN AS IS, 41272 4617 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY ISSUE 5 YEAR PERMIT TO ALLOW EXISTING STAIRWAY TO STEPHEN COOPER - FENCE REMAIN AS IT IS IN A SAFE CONDITION, 41319 4625 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY RESOLUTION #93-64 FOR STAIRWAY. NEW STAIR IS NOT MARY FAITH COMPLETE. HOLD 1995 DOCK LICENSE UNTIL STAIR COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY BUILDING OFFICIAL ISSUE 5 YEAR PERMIT PENDING COMPLETION. DEVON COMMON, CLASS D 41337 4633 ISLAND VIEW DR - STAIRWAY APPROVE 5 YEAR PERMIT TO RECONSTRUCT A STAIRWAY JAMES KUEHN PENDING APPROVAL BY BUILDING OFFICIAL. MAXIMUM 4' X - PUMP 8' PLATFORM FOR DOCK STORAGE MAY Bt::: INSTALLED. MR. KUEHN SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE - SHED W/DECK ON EXISTING STAIRWAY, TOP THE CITY SHALL REMOVE THE PUMP, SHED AND DECK AS - LIGHT POLE WITH THEY ARE IN POOR CONDITION, AND THE CITY SHALL OUTLET RESTORE AREA TO PRE-EXISTING SLOPE, LIGHT POLE & OUTLET SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CITY, THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY FOR THIS WORK SHALL COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, 41437 4645 ISLAND VIEW DR -ST~. STAIRWAY AND RETAINING WALL ARE IN ACCEPTABLE LECTR'C CONDITION. APPROVE 5 YEAR PERMIT TO ALLOW THE KE1TH FOERSTER W~I.~I~_.Q.U~L~ET STAIRWAY AND STONE RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN AS IS, - STyE OWNER MUST VERIFY STATE ELECTRICAL INSPECTION HAS RETAINING BEEN MADE,' WALL These permits shall expir~ five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. If compliance to these con~ditions have not been achieved within one (1) year of date of approval of the permit, the applicants dock license will not be issued until compliance has been achieved. 146 , -2473; Re~oluflon June 27~ 1995 Paqe 3 ~e~e= permits mu~f:~be':~i;ene:wed wth change' ,n docl< license h01deit ' 'All electrical work on public propertY.is required by State law to be installed by a qualified -I:[cen~.ed ele~tdcal.~Oi~traCtoi:and .inspected ~n'd a¢~toved bY the'State Eiectric,,~H~s~or, The CltY CeUnoii must:first' approve .:of ,.~e ProPosed installation' A scaled-slt~ pian' must b· sabrnitt~ showing.in detail :~ 'location of all electrical services on the public land. Ali power .,sUp~!Y ~:~he' a..buffi,~g l~r~:e~::-:~ust :b~ :pr0petl7' di~c0nnect~ Uhtil such Work is .e:ppr0v~ by the CityCouncii.. The applicant must verify disconnection with staff. 'l'Se foregoing reS0iu't]on was moved by Councilmember Polston, and=:. Seconded by C°uncilmember Jenson. The following Councilmember~ voted in the.affirmative: Ahrens, Hanus, Jenson, J6ssen and Polston; The following O6~(~ii~nembers::v~ted in the negative:._ .None May~r ~ttest: .City Ma~a'~r -24¢4-. 147 -2475- Page 1 of 1 Sarah Smith From: To: Sent: Subject: '"l'ravis Germundson" <travis.germundson@dnr.state.mn.us> <sarahsmith~cttyofmoun.com> Monday, May 06, 2002 4:08 PM Public Lands Application, Keith Foerster DNR Waters has reviewed the Public Lands Application for Keith and Laurie Foerster, City of Mound, Hennepin County. The installation of underground water intake pipe for lawn irrigation does not require a DNR Waters permit if the construction is above the OHWL for Lake Minnetonka of 929.4 and appropriations do not exceed 10,000 gallons per day or million gallons a year. It appears based on the application materials that the intake pipe/extent of construction may extend to the 929'.4 elevation. If so, a DN'R Protected WaterS Permit is required. Travis Germundson Area Hydrologist DNR Waters 1200 Warner Rd St. Paul, MN 55106 (651) 772-7914 -2476- 5/7/2002 5431 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Sarah Smith, Community Development Director May 23, 2002 Continuation of Public Hearing- CUP Amendment for Lake Minnetonka Quality Motors At its May 20, 2002 meeting, fine Planning Commission reviewed an application for a conditional use permit amendment application from Matt Lajoy and Ken Custer for fine property located at 4831 Shoreline Boulevard. Members of tine CiD, Council are advised that the Planning Commission tabled tine application to its next meeting to be held on June 3, 2002 meeting in order to obtain an opinion from fine City Attomey regarding the status of the 1995 and 1997 conditional use permits which were issued previously for the subject site. As the public hearing for this matter was scheduled to be held by fine City Council on May 25, 2002, it is respectfully requested ti~at ti~e public hearing be continued until Tuesday, June 11, 2002 -2477- 5431 Ma)wood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Neighbors and AdjacentProperty Owners o~~__ Sarah Smith, Community Development Direct May 23, 2002 Continuation of Public Hearing- CUP Amendment for Lake Minnetonka Quality Motors On or around May 16, 2002, you ~vere provided notice of,an upcoming public he~ing for review of flae conditional use permit amendment application from Man Lajoy and Ken Custer for the property located at 4831 Shoreline Boulevard to be held by the City Council on Tuesday, May 25, 2002 at 7:30 PM. As the application was tabled by the Planning Commission at its May 20, 2002 meeting until June 3, 2002, I wish to inform you that the public hearing ~vill be continued until the next meeting of the City Council to be held on Tuesday, Jtme 11, 2002 at 7:30 PM. In the event you have any comments or questions or regarding dais matter, please feel flee to contact me at your convenience at (952) 472-3190 md I will be happy to mswer my questions you may have. Best regards. -2478- Chief Len Harrell Receives Minnesota Chiefs' Highest Honor Chief Len Harrell was honored at the recent Spring Executive Training Institute of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association with the "Richard W. Schaller Award." The recognition is periodically awarded to a police chief who has distinguished them self through contributions to the law enforcement community. Mayor Meisel assisted in the presentation ceremony and Len was accompanied by his wife, IvIary. The award reads: "...in deep appreciation for his outstanding abilities and dedication as a Chief Law Enforcement Officer. Special recognition is also given for the major contributions that he has made to the law enforcement profession, both in his community and throughout the entire State of Minnesota." Chief Harrell was recognized for his leadership as past president of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, for involvement in numerous committees for the betterment of Minnesota Law Enforcement, and for his contributions as an instructor and in helping develop the CLEO and Command School. Presenters sited the excellence of the Mound Police Department and the previous recognition as the IACP/ITT Community Policing Award winner in 2000 and the ASIS "Best Practices" Award winner in 2001. -2479- -248O- ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~'' 0 ~ o -2481 - Memo From= Chief Len Harrell ~ Date= 5/21/02 Re= School Resource Officer (SRO) Grant Award The City received notification of the grant award of $125,000.00 over three years from the Department of Justice on April 16, 2002 and allowing for reimbumement for an additional officer to cover the SRO position. We are currently in the process of testing to fill this position as well as the opening that is coming with Sam Nelson going to the county. I have attached the grant budget which indicates that over the next three years the grant will cover approximately 76% of the costs of the new officer. The grant requires that the City maintain the costs of the additional officer afl~r the grant funds have expired. In the past, we have taken full advantage of the grant in the first year and covered the total costs of the new officer and then in subsequent years have gradually lowered the dependence on the grant so that the budget impact on the City is spread over the three years. The City will be responsible for approximately $40,000.00 of the estimated $165,000.00 costs for the officer for three years. If we choose to access the entire salary costs from the inception of the hiring of the new officer, there will be no cost to the City in the first year. The position is primarily at Grandview Middle School, but also works with Shirley Hills and Our Lady of the Lake in a liaison capacity and will teach D.A.R.E.. The SRO may have a very limited role at the high school as students living in Mound are involved in behavior requiring our department's attention, ff there is a crime committed in Mound by a student at the high school we often are already at the high school as an investigation may require. · Page 1 -2482- U. S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grants Administration Division 1100 Vermont Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Memorandum To: Leonard glarreli, Chief Mound Police Depamnent From: Re: Robert A. Phillips, Assistant Director, Grants Administration Raymond Reid, Grant Program Specialist, Grants Administration Bobbie Butler, Staff Accountant, Finance Division Approved Budget, COPS in Schools A financial analysis of budgeted costs has been completed. Costs under this award appear reasonable, allowable, and consistent with existing guidelines. ORI: MN02713 Grant Number: 2002SHWX0007 OJP Vendor Number: 416005396 Year 1 - Costs Per Full-Time Officer: Annual Base Salary Fringe Benefits: Social Security Medicare Health Insurance Life Insurance Vacation" Sick Leave Retirement Worker's Compensation Unemployment LTD & Liability Dental Uniform & Incentives Changes Change Approved Breakdown Reason $38,538.00 $0.00 $11,039.00 $.1,128.00 $0.00 $0.00 5559.00 50.00 5545.00 $0.00 $2;00 $0.00 $1,482.00 , $0.00 $1,779.00 50.00 $3,584.00 $0.00 $975.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 52,087.00 50.00 $26.00 $0.00 $0.00 $- 1,128.00 I S49,577.00[ I $.1,128.00 [ Exempt per Application 1.45% of the base salary Exempt per Application Unallowable Cost Full-Time Officer Costs: Project Costs Per Officer: Salaries and Fringe Benefits: Federal Share: Applicant Share: Total Changes: $-3,598.00 $165,084.00 $165,084.00 $125,000.00 Federal Share: $125,000.00 $40,084,00 I Applicant Share: $40,084.00 Budget Cleared Date: 03/28/2002 Overall Comments: The total project cost was reduced by $3,598 due to disallowed cost for Uniforms ($1670) and Incentives ($1928). The amount of the award reflects the maximum amount allowable ($125,000 per officer for three years, or the total project cost per officer for three years, whichever is less). ChiefLeornard Harrell was notified on 3f28/02. -2483- CIS Revised Budget Summary - Important Notice During the review of your COPS in Schools Program budget information, the Office of the Comptroller, Office of .lustice Programs or the COPS Office amended the budget information submitted with your application. These adjustments affect your budget summary. The COPS Office modified your budget summary to reflect these changes and to meet legislative requirements. Please examine the Revised Budget Summary below. COPS Office staff have changed the Federal Share, the local share or both shares, lf you have any questions, please contact your grant advisor at the COPS Office at 1 800 421 6770. Thank you for your attention to this matter. ·. ~3RI: MN02713 Organization: Mound Police Department The total three year cost for salaries and benefits per full-time officer requested is: The total amount of federal fimds per full-time officer requested is: The total three year cost for salaries and benefits per part-time officer requested is: The total amount of federal funds per part-time officer requested is: $165,084.00 $125,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Under the COPS in Schools, grant program, Federal funds per officer can not exceed $125,000. If your total three year project cost per officer is less than $125,000 then there is no local match. If your total three year project cost per officer is greater than ~ 125,000 then your local match is the difference between the total project cost and $125,000. In cases where there is a local match requirement, the Federal Share of total salaries and benefits must decrease each year leading to full local funding by the t'ourth year of an officer's employment. At the same time, your Local Share must increase each year. If these amounts do not neet your needs, please provide revised figures in the blank table below. Thank you. Full Time Federal Share (must decrease): Local Share (must increase): Total Salaries/Benefits: Federal Share (must decrease): Local Share (must increase): Total Salaries/Benefits: Part Time Federal Share (must decrease): Local Share (must increase): Total Salaries/Benefits: Federal Share (must decrease): Local Share (must increase): Total Salaries/Benefits: Year 1: Year 2: Year 3: Totals: $49,577.00 $41,090.00 $34,333.00 $125,000.00 $0.00 $13,697.00 $26,387.00 $40,084.00 $49,577.00 $54,787.00 $60,720.00 $165,084.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ;'he undersigned agrees to adhere to the financial commitments outlined above. ,lame (typed) of Authorized OffiCial: ~itle: ;ignature: ~ate: -2484- LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLIC 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Memo To-' .Kandis Hanson, City.~M~!ger From. Chief Len Harrell ~-~. Date=. 4/25/02 School Resource officer' (SRO) Grant Attached you will find a number of memos and correspondence regarding the SRO position at Grandview Middle School that also assists at OUr?Lady of the Lake and Shidey Hills Primary. ~- ~ .... The odginal discussion began in the Spring of 2000. In my yeady presentation to the council I believe I first presented the idea cases invoMng school shootings. In the Fall of 2000, stepped up to offer a substantial contribution Police Department. Money was needed for imp!ementation of~the pr~m ih the. Fall of 2001 at the start of the school year and any gra~aWa~ ~U~:nOt c0~ untii after January 1, 2002. Other community contributors and the approximately $24, Because of September awards. We had up to our grant program for the first awarded on March 20, the year. The grant is a three federal auditing office period. The award d°es~ Collaborative of 2001 with in making the grant record of living continue the our grant has been back to the first of from the 125i000 over a three year that the position continue to by funded by the City after the three year grant pedod. The grant is designed to allow City's to gradually add to their existing personnel over the three years to implement the program. Should you need a copy of the grant; Michelle Alexander has a copy. · Page I -2485- · Mound Police Department to Implement School Resource Officer Program The Mound Police Department is taking another quantum leap into community-oriented policing and crime prevention by implementing the School Resource Officer Program [SRO] at the Grandview Middle School. Many police agencies have formed partnerships with school systems to create the SRO program which is considered one of the most proactive strategies in community-oriented policing. The Mound Police Department recently received the prestigious International Association of Chiefs of Police/ITT Industries Community Policing award for the year 2000. Targeting an inception date of Fall 2001, the program requires an initial funding goal of $48,000. The Mound office of Wells Fargo Bank has generously donated $12,500 to kick offthe fundraising efforts of the SRO program at the G-randview Middle School. The balance of the fundraising efforts needs to be completed by the Spring of 2001 giving ample time to hire and train the School Resource Officer for the coming school year. Community support of programs like the SRO is needed in order to facilitate its initial implementation. The School Resource Officer Program places a law-enforcement officer on a school campus, making it the officer's assigned patrol area. By applying a community oriented policing philosophy within the school, the School Resource Officer is able to assist the school administration in providing the most secure and orderly environment possible. The SRO is a specially trained, state-certified law enforcement officer who is assigned full time during the academic school year. The SRO Program is based on a cooperative relationship between law enforcement officers, teachers, school personnel and parents. It develops a positive relationship between the SRO and students. The SRO fulfills several important roles. First, as a law enforcement officer, the law will be consistently and fairly enforced. The SRO will take the necessary enforcement actions, when necessary, to ensure a safe and peaceful learning environment. Second, the SRO serves as an instructor, teaching classes that are many times related to core subjects, such as D.A.R.E and the Corrective Behavior Curriculum. Finally, the SRO is a -2486- counselor, being permanently assigned to the school campus the SRO is readily available to assist` studems and'Staff members with personal and school related problems when appropriate. The School Resource Officer is involved with various school activities. The officer is seen as a part of the campus environment. The presence of a law enforcement officer on campus provides oppommities for positive experiences between the law. enforcement officer and the students. These experiences can lead to greater mutual understanding and 'respect, potentially resulting in the prevention of de.linquency and crime. Principal Kevin Borg of the Grandview Middle School, educating 525 students in grades 5-7, is very supportive of this program for the school district. The Mound Crime Prevention Association, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, is seeking contributions from the Mound community to fund this. program for the~ 2001 school year. Contact Jim Brand.at 472-2000 for more information. -2487- INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: POLICE PERSONNEL FROM: LEN I-L~RRRT.1', SUBJECT: SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER DATE: 5/16/01 AS MOST OF YOU ARE AWARE, WE HAVE RECEIVED FUNDING TO BEGIN A FUI,D-TIME PERSON IN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL FOR THE SCHOOL YEAR BEGINNING IN SEPTEMBER. THE POSITION WII,I, BE PRIMARILY AT THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, BUT WILL ALSO WORK CLOSELY WITH SHIRLEY HILLS, OUR LADY, AND THE HIGH SCHOOL. FUNDING HAS BEEN DONATED TO COVER THE FALL AND ADDITIONAL FUNDING HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR TO PAY FOR THE POSITION INTO THE FUTURE. THE POSITION WTLL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS AS NEEDS ARE IDENTIFIED AS WELT. AS SUMMER PROGRAMS FOR KIDS 12q OUR COMMUNITY. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE POSITION WILL BE SCHEDULED MONDAY-FRIDAY DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR DURING THE DAY, BUT MAY VARY SOMEWHAT IN THE SUMMER AS NEll. DS DEMAND. OFFICERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE POSITION ARE TO SUBMIT A LETTER OF INTENT OUTLINING THEIR QUAtJFICATIONS AS WELL AS A RESUME NO LATER THAN JUNE Is'r, 2001. DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF INTERESTED PARTIES, A SRLECTION PROCESS WILL TAKE PLACE. -2488- September 27, 2001 Ms. Leah Weycker Westonka Family Collaborative Mound, MN 55364 Dear Leah: Thank you and the Collaborative for agreeing to the generous donation of seven thousand dollars ($7,000.00) for the fall implementation of the school resource officer at Grandview Middle School. Officer Michelle Alexander has been assigned to the schools since late August and has been very active assisting students within the Mound/Westonka School District. Your support and partnership are greatly appreciated in this endeavor. Please make the check out to the Mound Crime Prevention Association who will handle the funding of the new initiative. Thank you! Sincerely, Len Harrell Chief of Police -2489- October l8,2000 Ms. Bonita Medenwaldt Wells Fargo Bank 5211 Shoreline Drive Mound, MN 55364 Dear Ms. Medenwaldt: The Mound Police Department is an agency within the government entity of the City of Mound. The City is represented by Mayor Patricia Meisel and four council members; Mark Hanus, Andrea Ahems, Leah Weycker, and Bob Brown. The City of Mound's tax exempt number is 802-4096. The Mound Police Department is an agency of thirteen sworn officers, three support personnel, and seven volunteers. The Department provides public safety and community policing services to a population of approximately 9,812 citizens. The City is a bedroom community on the west shores of Lake Minnetonka. The Mound Police Department is the recipient of the International Association of Chiefs of Police/ITT Industries Community Policing Award for the year 2000. The position for which we are requesting your assistance involves the implementation of a School Resource Officer (SRO) for the G-randview Middle School. The School Resource Officer (SRO) is assigned to work within the school environment and provide support and security to our young people. Grandview Middle School supports approximately 525 students in grades 5-7. The School Resource Officer (SRO) would be in addition to our fifth grade D.A.R.E. program and our Corrective Behavior Curriculum. The Bureau of Justice Assistance in their Guide for Preventing and Responding to School Violence recommends departments "patrol school grounds and develop a School Resource Officer (SRO) program" (p. 25, 1999). The Mound Police Department has worked in close partnership with the Grandview Middle School and believes that a School Resource Officer (SRO) program would benefit the educational environment. A recent report from Hennepin County indicates that approximately 37% of our "school crime" was committed by children thirteen and younger. A national publication, Juvenile Offenders and Victims:1999 National Report by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, reported that 13 and 14 year olds accounted for 27% of juvenile crime nationally and children 12 and under accounted for 10% of juvenile crime (p.146). -2490- The Grandview Middle School serves children ages 11-14 and would be our focus for the School Resource Officer (SRO) program. The School Resource Officer (SRO) program would allow for the expansion of our direct services to the youth of our community. Per our conversation, your assistance in implementation, would provide up to $25,000.00 towards the cost of implementation of $4t~,000. The additional funds would be provided through our own budgeting process within the City of Mound. The program would be scheduled to begin fall of 2001 for the school year of 2001-2002 giving ample time to hire and train the appropriate individual to work with our middle school children. Experience has shown that assistance in implementation is often the boost the department needs in order to facilitate new programs for the community. I hope that I have answered your questions appropriately. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for interest and assistance. Sincerely, Len Harrell Chief of Police -2491 - 920 Upper Cove Road Minne~rlsta, MN 55364 May 15, 2002 Ms. Kandis Hanson City of Mound Mound, MN 55364 RE: Tentative retirement date. Dear Ms. Hanson: It is not without some trepidation that I wish to inform you of my intention to retire effective June 30, 2002. I have been considering retirement for sometime, and especially now after surgery, I have finally come to a decision. My one concern is that the City has not come up with a health insurance program for retirees and that I have not had a response regarding my recent request. I would hope that an agreement could be reached in the next couple of weeks, but did not want to wait in providing you notice. The City of Mound has provided wonderful opportunities for my career and personal growth over the past eighteen years. I have been fortunate to work with some "top notch" professionals both within the police department and the City. I am very proud of the accomplishments of the men and women of the Mound Police Department and the support we have received from our community. Thank you for the opportunities and relationships that I have experienced during my tenure as Mound's Chief of Police. I will forever be indebted for the memories and friendships that I have developed. Cc: Mayor Pat Meisel -2492- May 7, 2002 Mr. John Cameron Mr. Frank Roos Macombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. 15050 23rd Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55447 EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES Subject: Revised Proposal for Wellhead Protection Planning City of Mound Dear Sirs: The attached proposal is revised from the proposal we submitted on April 17. Specifically, we reduced the "construction observation" tasks related to installation and testing of the test well and production well. We have also reduced our costs. We are very eager to work with you and the City of Mound on this project. Please let me know if you have questions or suggestions on how to improve this proposal. Sincerely, Smart Gmbb, PG Project Manager Making A Difference Through Integrated Resource Management EOR, INC. · 3825 Lake Elmo Avenue North · Lake Elmo, MN · 55042 · Tel: (651) 770-8448 · Fax: (651) 770-2552 -24@3- PROPOSAL Wellhead Protection Planning - City of Mound, Minnesota Macombs, Frank, Roos Associates, Inc. BACKGROUND The City of Mound obtains its municipal water supply from wells. Some of the wells need to be abandoned and replaced for various reasons. In order to comply with Minnesota Rules Parts 4710.5100 to 4720.5590, wellhead protection planning must be completed for all existing wells that are not scheduled for abandonment. Adding a new well will move the City to the top of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) priority list for Wellhead Protection Plan preparation. This proposal lists several wellhead protection tasks that must be completed. EOR is prepared to complete all these tasks or only some of these tasks, as requested by the client. Task 1 - Preliminary Meetings Objective: Meet with the City of Mound to discuss well planning options and gather information necessary for other Tasks. EOR Tasks: · Gather background data on geology and groundwater flow. · Meet with the City of Mound to discuss water supply needs and potential well locations. · Finalize plans for wellhead protection plan process. Deliverables: Revised Scope of Services,' if necessary. Key Understandings: None. Information and Services Provided by Others: None. Meetings and Travel: One meeting in Mound. Timeframe: This task will be completed within one week of the Notice to Proceed. Task 2 - Well Design Objective: Design a new water supply well. Mound is in an area where high levels of arsenic and natural radioactive elements have -2494- EOR Tasks: Deliverables: Key Understandings: Information and Services Provided by Others: Meetings and Travel: Timeframe: been found in some aquifers. We will review existing groundwater quality data and identify known potential concerns. We will work with the City, MDH, and the City's engineers to determine options for dealing with these issues, such as avoiding poor quality ground water or water treatment. EOR will assist with soliciting bids and selecting a well contractor to drill a test well and production wells. · Review available water quality data from nearby wells · Preliminary design of a production well. Design will address known water quality issues. · Develop well construction bid specifications, including specifications for a test well · Assist City of Mound with soliciting and evaluating contractor bids · Provide hydrogeologic information to assist with selecting a suitable well site Well design, bid specifications. EOR will work closely with one or more local well contractors to develop the specifications. Through this process the City will receive a design that is feasible and can be readily implemented by the contractors. EOR will rely on the City and its engineers to select a well location where land and easements can be reasonably purchased. EOR will assist in selecting the site by providing hydrogeologic information. Well site selection by the City of Mound. Up to three meetings in Mound to discuss well design and location issues. Well design and bid specifications will be completed four weeks after the completion of Task 1. Soliciting bids and selecting a contractor will require an additional three weeks. -2495- Task 3 - Test well Objective: EOR Tasks: Deliverables: Key Understandings: Information and Services Provided by Others: Meetings and Travel: Timeframe: Water quality and quantity vary considerably from location to location in the Mound area and cannot always be accurately predicted. A test well is recommended prior to drilling a larger production well(s). Test pumping and sampling will indicate whether the well location and depth will produce the necessary groundwater quality and quantity for the municipal water supply. Plan construction of a test well at the site of the proposed production well. · Review water quality data collected by the contractor or the City of Mound. · Analyze test pumping data to determine if a larger production well will produce enough water. Water quality and pump test data analysis. If samples from the test well suggest that a production well is not feasible for the selected location, the City will need to repeat Task 2 - Well Design and Task 3 - Test Well for a different location. Well drilling and water analysis costs are not included in this proposal. Well drilling and construction by a well contractor. Water quality analysis by a laboratory contractor. Construction observation by MFRA and the City of Mound. None. The test well will be completed four weeks after the selection of a contractor and well site (Task 2). Water quality testing results and analysis of pumping data will be available two weeks following completion of the well. Task 4 - Well Installation and Testing Objective: Provide technical assistance, if needed, during constmction of the production well. Analysis of pump testing of the completed well. EOR Tasks: Provide technical assistance to MFRA and the City of Mound during construction of the production well. -2496- Deliverables: Key Understandings: Information and Services Provided by Others: Meetings and Travel: Timeframe: · Make one site visit to observe the set up and beginning of the pump test. · Analyze pump test results Pump test analysis. Construction observation will be the responsibility of MFRA and the City of Mound. EOR will make one site visit after the well is constructed and Well drilling and laboratory costs are not included in this proposal. Well drilling and construction by a well contractor. Water quality analysis by a laboratory contractor. Construction observation by MFRA and the City of Mound One trip to the construction site to observe the set up and start of the pump test. Well construction will begin immediately after completion of Task 3 - Test Well. A completion date cannot be determined at this time because of uncertainties in scheduling well installation by a qualified well driller. For planning purposes, we have assumed that the well can be completed in three months. The pump test will begin shortly after the well is completed. Analysis of the results will be completed within two weeks of the test. Task 5 - Ground Water Modeling Objective: Definitions: The Wellhead Protection Area (WA) is the surface and subsurface area surrounding a well or well field that supplies a public water system, through which contaminants are likely to move toward and reach the well or well field. The Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) is the area delineated using identifiable land marks that reflects the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area boundaries as closely as possible. A groundwater model(s) will be constructed to determine the WHPA and DWSMA for each of the wells owned by the City of Mound. EOR Tasks: -2497- Deliverables: Key Understandings: Information and Services Provided by Others: Meetings and Travel: Timeframe: · Meet with the Minnesota Department of Health to determine the level of detail and information required to satisfactorily complete the groundwater modeling. · Gather hydrogeologic data necessary to construct the groundwater model. · Construct a groundwater model to determine the WHPA of each well. Multiple models may be necessary, depending on hydrogeologic conditions encountered during drilling. · Determine the DWSMA for each well. EOR will work closely with the City of Mound to identify landmarks that may be used for delineation and incorporate results into a useable Geographic Information System (GIS) map. * Present results at a public meeting Groundwater model with WHPA delineations and DWSMA delineations in a GIS format. The groundwater model(s) may be modified from existing groundwater models such as the Hennepin Conservation District model of the Prairie du Chien - Jordan Aquifer. The City of Mound will distribute the WHPA and DWSMA to other cities that lie within the delineated areas. The City of Mound will schedule, advertise, and facilitate one public information meeting to present results of this task.' This meeting can be part of another regularly scheduled meeting, such as a City Council meeting. · One meeting with MDH to discuss the level of detail necessary for the WHPA delineation. · Two meetings in Mound to gather data and discuss the results of the modeling. · One public meeting to discuss results of the WHPA and DWSMA delineation. The modeling will be completed six weeks from the completion of the wells. The public meeting should be scheduled shortly after that time. Task 6 - Vulnerability Assessment -2498- Objective: EOR Tasks: Deliverables: Key Understandings: Information and Services Provided by Others: Meetings and Travel: Timeframe: Identify potential contaminant sources within the DWSMA. Identify potential future problems and threats to water quality in the aquifers and DWSMAs. · Meet with MDH to determine the types and amounts of information that will be needed to complete the Vulnerability Assessment. · Conduct a "Contaminant Source Inventory" to identify potential contaminant sources within the DWSMA based on current land use. · Identify the impact of expected future changes to land and water resources. · Prepare a Vulnerability Assessment based on hydrogeologic conditions and the information gathered. Contaminant Source Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment. None. None. Travel as necessary to complete the Contaminant Source Inventory. This task should not be started until after the public meeting is held for Task 5. The Contaminant Source Inventory will require six weeks to complete. Task 7 - Ongoing Services Objective: Several additional tasks will be required to complete the Wellhead Protection Plan, as required by State Rules. These tasks are mostly planning-based. Also, their scope and costs are difficult to predict until the previous tasks have been completed. EOR is available to complete all the remaining work on the Wellhead Protection Plan and can provide cost estimates in the future. Potential EOR Tasks: · Update of the City's Water Supply Plan · Contingency strategy for an alternate water supply. · Identifying issues, problems, and opportunities for contaminant source management within the DWSMA. -2499- Deliverables: Establishing goals for present and future water and land use. · Identifying a strategy to evaluate the effectiveness of the Wellhead Protection (WHP) measures. · Preparing a draft WHP Plan · Submitting the WHP Plan to local units of government and MDH and responding to comments. · Holding a public hearing on the Wellhead Protection Plan. · WHP implementation program. · Updating the WHP Plan. To be determined. SCHEDULE The schedule is laid out in the individual Task descriptions. Much of the schedule will be determined by the well design and the progress of the well construction, which are not known at this time. The following schedule may be used for planning purposes: Notice to proceed Task 1 - Preliminary Meetings Task 2 - Well Design Task 3 - Test Well* Task 4 - Well Installation and Testing* Task 5 - Ground Water Modeling Public Hearing Task 6 - Vulnerability Assessment Task 7 - Ongoing Services Date June 1, 2002 June 15, 2002 July 30, 2002 September 31, 2002 November 30, 2002 December 31, 2002 February 15, 2003 March 31, 2003 To be determined -2500- KEY PERSONNEL Resumes are attached for the following key personnel on this project: Smart Grubb, PG Gary Oberts, PG Jennifer Olson Project Manager, Senior Hydrogeologist Supervising Professional Proj eot Hydrogeologist COSTS Total Hours Task 1 - Preliminary Meetings 16 Task 2 - Well Design 68 Task 3 - Test Well* 32 Task 4 - Well Installation and Testing* 64 Task 5 - Ground Water Modeling 107 Task 6 - Vulnerability Assessment 164 Task 7 - Ongoing Services Total Total Cost $1,916 $6,500 $2,940 $5,520 $9,930 $14,580 To be determined 455 $41,386 * The cost for these tasks is highly dependent on the final well design and the efficiency of the drilling contractor in constructing the well. These costs assume that the test well will be installed and tested in three weeks, and the production well will be installed and tested in 12 weeks. Costs could be lower if construction proceeds more quickly. Hourly Rates Classification Hourly Ratet*~ Supervising Professional .................................................. Senior Hydrogeologist ..................................................... Hydrogeologist/Project Professional ............................ GIS Specialist ..................................................................... Hydrologic Technician, Natural Resource Technician Senior Draft-person, Senior Inspector ............................. Inspector, Draft-person, Senior Technician .................... Support Staff/Clerical ...................................................... $115.00 $97.00 $80.00 $80.00 $70.00 $62.00 $57.00 ~o.oo Equipment GIS/CADD Workstation Equipment ............................. Total Station Surveying Equipment ............................... $20.00 $25.00 -2501 - GPS Equipment ............................................................... $20.00 Reimbursable Expenses - At Cost · Reproduction, printing, duplicating, field supplies, mileage (Government rate, currently $0.345/mile), use/rental of special equipment. I') Rates are applicable for the duration of the project -2502- GARY L. OBERTS, P.G. Summary of Professional Groundwater Experience Gary Oberts is an environmental analyst with 30 years of experience in groundwater resource assessment, water supply and water quality policy analysis and research, lie has recently entered the consulting field after serving in the public sector, most recently 25 years with the Metropolitan Council-Environmental Services staff. Mr. Oberts is a registered Professional Geologist in Minnesota. As a groundwater scientist, Mr. Oberts has: · Been a member of the Minnesota Department of Health Wellhead Protection, and Source Water Protection Advisory Committees. · Initiated and facilitated the Southwest Metro Groundwater Work Group and drafted the first management plan. Worked with agencies and the Legislature to establish a regional groundwater model. · Conducted regional assessment of water supply, leading to legislation requiting municipal water supply emergency and conservation planning. · Worked on the management team of the Upper Mississippi River Source Water Protection Initiative MPCA Clean Water Partnership study. As an environmental analyst, Mr. Oberts has: · Served for over ten years on the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board's Water Resources Committee. · Spent 30 years in the public policy sector at state and regional environmental agencies working on surface water quality and management, wetlands, groundwater, water supply and environmental assessment. · Testified at numerous Legislative hearings on water related issues · Chaired the MCES Environmental Education Team. As a water quality analyst, Mr. Oberts has: · Evaluated the nonpoint source pollution effects on water quality for the Twin Cities metropolitan area, leading to the passage of the legislation requiting watershed management plarming in the region. · Conducted primary research on the operation of many nonpoint source management practices, including extensive research on the McCarrons Wetland Treatment System. · Researched the impacts of cold climate on water quality and presented his findings in international publications, and at national and international conferences · Established the metro area Watershed Outlet Monitoring Program at MCES. · Researched, designed and built alternative runoff management systems. -2503- GARY L. OBERTS, P.G. · Education M.S. Geology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois, 1973. Master's Thesis: The Chemistry and Hydrogeology of Dry Valley Lakes, Antarctica B.S. Geology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois, 1971. · Current Professional Registration Minnesota, Professional Geologist Professional Affiliations Minnesota Ground Water Association American Geophysical Union American Water Resources Association American Water Works Association · Technical Publications Related to Groundwater Oberts, G.L., 1973. The Chemis~a'y and Hydrogeology of Dry Valley Lakes, South Victorialand, Antarctica. Master of Science Thesis, Northern Illinois University, Department of Geology, 120 pp. 1977. Assessment of Water Pollution From Mining Activities. Metropolitan Council Technical Report, 20pp. ,1979. Municipal Water Supply in the Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 10-79-062, 68pp. ,1981. ImpaCt of Wetlands on Watershed Water Quality in Proceedings, Midwest Conference on Wetland Values and Management, F.B. Richardson (ed.), p.213-226. ,1983. Water Use in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 10-83-056, 42pp. ,1984. Water Use in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area- An Update. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 10-84-068, 61pp. ,1985. Part 3, Water Resources Management: Water Availability and Use. Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-86-025, 68pp. and R.A. Osgood, 1988. Lake McCarrons Wetland Treatment System: Final Report on the Function of the Wetland Treatment System and the Impacts on Lake McCarrons. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-88-095,222pp. -2504- GARY L. OBERTSt P.G. Wotzka, P. and G.L. Oberts, 1988. The Water Quality Performance of a Detention Basin- Wetland Treatment System in an Urban Area. Nonpoint Pollution: 1988- Policy, Economy, Management and Appropriate Teelmology. American Water Resources Association, p. 237-247. Oberts, G.L., P.J. Wotzka and J.A. Hartsoe, 1989. The Water Quality Performance of Select Urban Runoff Treatment Systems. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-89-062a, 180pp. ,1990. Metropolitan Area Short-Term Water Supply Plan. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-90-035, 32Pp. ,1991. The Public Water Supply System: Inventory and the Possibility of Subregional Interconnection. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-91-010, 77pp. ,1991. Alternative Sources of Water for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-91-011, 54pp. ,1991. The Institutional Framework for Water Supply Management. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-91-064, 23pp. , J.A. Hartsoe and S.A. Corrigan, 1991. Water Supply Planning in the Land of 10,000 Lakes in. Proceedings - Symposium on Water Supply and Water Reuse: 1991 and Beyond (San Diego, June, 1991). American Water Resources Association, Bethesda, Maryland, p.23-32. , J.A. Hartsoe and S.A. Corrigan, 1992. Metropolitan Area Water Supply: A Plan for Action. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-91-141, 72pp. ,1992. The Role of Water Resources in the Metropolitan Development Framework. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-92-132, 32pp. ,1993. Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Water Supply: 1993 Municipal Inventory. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 590-93-095, 80pp. ,1996. Metropolitan Area Water Supply Planning: Bringing 112 Plans Together in Proceedings of CONSERV 96: Responsible Water Stewardship (Orlando, FL, January 4- 8, 1996). American Water Works Association, Denver, CO, p.831-835. ~, M.L. Honold and J.A. Sventek, 1997. Metropolitan Area Municipal Water Supply Planning Process: Metropolitan Council Report to the Legislature. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 32-97-064, 195pp. ,1997. Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Water Supply Issues: Solutions Through Partnering in_n Conference Proceedings of Water Resources Management: Preparing for the 21st Century (Seattle, WA, August 10-13, 1997). American Water Works Association, Denver, CO, p. 477-486. -2505- GARY L. OBERTS, P.G. , R.J. Anhom, J.A. Sventek, and M.J'. Pemiel, 1997. Lake McCarrons Wetland Treatment System Phase I11 (Clean Lakes) Study Report. Metropolitan Council Publication No. 32- 97-026, 250pp. , and C. Elvrum, 2001. Southwest Metro Groundwater Work Group Management Plan (in progress). -2506- STUART F, GRUI ] , P,G, · Project Related Experience Smart Grubb is a hydrogeologist with over 15 years of experience in environmental consulting. I-Ils areas of expertise are groundwater hydraulics, hydrogeology, groundwater modeling. This resume is a partial description of his qualifications and experience, with emphasis on project management. Groundwater Modelin~ Developed equations used to'determine capture zones of wells in unconfined aquifers using the analytic element method. Equations have been promoted by the Minnesota Department of Health as effective methods for defining wellhead protection areas. Wrote and sold ground water modeling software based on analytical element methods titled CAPTURE and WELLCALC for determining well capture zones and well head protection areas. Also developed and sold software for evaluating slug test data and ground water mounding below infiltration basins. Software is currently being use throughout the United States, Canada, and Europe. Ramsey, Anoka, Washington Counties, Minnesota - EOR, Kelton Barr Consulting, and Strack Consulting collaborated to produce a regional ground water flow model to be used by the Minnesota Department of Health for source water protection planning. The model expanded the MPCA Metro Model by making the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers different layers and by establishing interactions between aquifers above the Prairie du Chien aquifer, including water table aquifers in glacial deposits. Large data bases and modeling results were created and presented using ArcView GIS. [Voodbury andAflon, Minnesota - Created a MLAEM model to study ground water / surface water interactions in the area of Valley Creek. Model was part of a study of high nitrate levels in Valley Creek by the St. Croix Watershed Research Station. Model was later used to evaluate effects of proposed municipal pumping wells on the springs that feed the headwaters of Valley Creek, a designated trout stream. South [Vashington County, Minnesota - Developed a MLAEM model of the South Washington Watershed District (Woodbury, Cottage Grove area). Model is the first in Minnesota to fully utilize GIS data generated by the Minnesota Geological Survey and the ARCVIEW/MLAEM interface tools created by the Minnesota Department of Health. The model is based on the Northeast Province model developed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, with more detailed information added for bedrock and quaternary aquifers above the Prairie du Chien/Jordan aquifer. Completed model will be used for wellhead protection planning, infiltration management, and pollution tracking. Spencer, Iowa - Developed an analytic element model for Spencer Municipal Utilities well field. Calculated 1 O-year time-of-travel capture zones and created a wellhead protection program based on the results. -2507- Bloomington, Minnesota - Calculated potential impacts from construction at the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport and the Highway 55/62 Interchange. Reviewed construction plans and ground water models and worked with planners to develop construction alternatives that were less harmful. Presented results to the press and public audiences. Hutchinson, Minnesota - Evaluated potential for infiltration in low-permeability soils below septic systems. Bemidji, Minnesota - Analyzed ground water flow and contaminant transport using a SLAEM model of the Kummer Landfill and surrounding area. Cold Spring, Minnesota - Created ground water model and wellhead protection plan for five high-capacity wells owned by Gold'n Plump. McKinley, Minnesota - Developed an analytic element model to evaluate the effect of dewatering on ground water below a lined lagoon. Salt Lake City, Utah -Used analytic element modeling to research impact of road construction and compaction on wetlands bordering the Great Salt Lake. King Cove, Alaska - Designed well field within ah alluvial fan on the Aleutian Islands to provide water to a fish processing plant. Used MLAEM to model aquifer conditions and pumping. Boyd County, Nebraska - Collaborated with three other firms to develop a ground water model for a proposed low-level radioactive waste storage site. "Breach/leach/transport" model required extraordinary documentation due to the political nature of the project and the highly toxic materials involved. Omaha, Nebraska - Used analytic element modeling to evaluate capture areas of a 10-well pumping system. LaCrosse, Yr'isconsin - Created SLAEM model to analyze effectiveness of a large-scale pumping and treatment system associated with a large raikoad facility. Eagan, Minnesota - Assisted in modeling and permitting associated with dewatering for construction of the Seneca Wastewater Treatment Plant. HDR Engineering played a key role in installing the first permitted injection well in Minnesota in order to protect a calcareous fen. Pro,]ect Management _Pipestone County, Minnesota and Buena Vista County, Iowa - Project manager for environmental tasks related to siting the world's two largest wind energy generation systems. Project required evaluation of wetlands, native prairies, environmental liabilities, and cultural resources over an area of more than 100 square miles. -2508- Virginia, Minnesota - Project manager for Minnesota's first in-pit taconite tailings disposal project. Monthly meetings with MI)I-I, MPCA, DNR, and ~oca~ officials to track progress were a key responsibility of the project manager. Project involved regional geologic and luydrogeologic assessments, geochemical research, and stable isotope dating. Presented complex ~'esults at public meetings. Minnesota - Project manager for over 15 sites with leaking underground storage tanks or petroleum spills. Responsibilities include budgets, schedules, invoicing, client contact, and recovery of Petrofund reimbursements for proj eot costs. Clear Lake, Iowa - Project manager for landfill design, groundwater monitoring, and pollution remediation for the Landfill of North Iowa. Coleraine, Minnesota - Project manager for site assessment and remediation of a facility owned by U.S. Steel and the University of Minnesota. Issues included asbestos, PCB's, underground storage tanks, mercury, and radioactive soils. Minnesota and Wisconsin - Project manager for four private commercial and residential developments that featured onsite management and volume control of storm water through practices such as rain gardens and infiltration basins. Education M.S. Water Resources Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1989. B.S. Geology, Carleton College, Northfield, Minnesota. Concentration in Science, Technology, and Public Policy, 1985. Current Professional Registration Minnesota, Professional Geologist Professional Affiliations National Ground Water Association Minnesota Ground Water Association Past Chairman - Brown's Creek Watershed District Citizen's Advisory Committee Technical Publications Grubb, S., 1993. "Analytical Model for Estimation of Steady-State Capture Zones of Pumping Wells in Confined and Unconfined Aquifers." Ground Water, Vol. 31, No. 1. Grubb, S., 1996. "Bench Scale Testing of Enzyme Technologies for Treatment of Oily Wastewater." Proceedings of the IGT Symposium on Gas, Oil, and Environmental Biotechnology. Institute of Gas Technology, Des Plaines, IL. -2509- EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES Making A Difference Through Integrated Resource Management -2510- WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING WATERSHED PLANNING HYDROG EOLOGIC SERVICES Hydrc~geologic Services EOR understands that many of the solutions to environmental problem~ require a thorough understanding of the groundwater. Groundwater is a vital part of the hydrologic system that provides a source of high quality drinking water, clean, cold water for fisheries and other wildlife, and a unique, setting for plants. Our services in this area include: · Surface Water/G~oundwater Interactions · Groundwater Sampling and Analysis. · Groundwater Quantity/Quality Modeling · Subsurface Characterization · Monitoring and Analysis of Aquifer Parameters · Wellhead Protection Plans · Pollution Remediation -2511 - 4D MANAGE~v~ENT Watershed Planningand Management ~ EOR provides state-of-the-art watershed managemen~ by using ateam approach of multi-disciplinary Professionals. We understand the "Big Picture" and the need to solve problems by applying an integrated systems ap~proach. Our services in the area include: o· ~Vater ~Resour~e Planning · Stormwater Management Plans · Assessment, DeSign, and Management.of Infiltratio~ Techniques and Systems · Water Quality· Monitoring, Sampling, and Analysis · Hydraulic/Hydrologic (~omputer Modeling · · Water Quality Modeling -2512- EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES Mohing A Difference Through Integrated Resource Management EO/? /~ one of the leading firms in/~/innesoto specializing in H/ater Resources Engineering, Nc~urol /Tesource /v/onogement, Hyc/rogeo/ogic Services onc/ ~/cfte~hec/ Planning and/vfonogement. GROUND ATER SERVICES EaR is a recognized leader in ground water assessment, modeling, and management. Our unique focus on integrated resource management provides hnowledge of the relationship between ground water, surface water, and other natural resources. EaR provides groundwater management services for watershed districts, planners, and other clients. Our experience in the design of engineered infiltration structures has made EaR a leader in monitoring and modeling the impact of infiltrated storm water or treated wastewater on groundwater resources. Ground H/ater Management: Evaluating ground water/ surface water interactions P~/ellheod Protec#on Planning: Modeling the time of travel and capture zonei Wellhead protection plans are now required for all municipal wells. EaR provides the following: Ground water modeling using software such as MLAEM and MODFLOW · Contaminant source inventories · Assistance with writing rules, ordinances and plan implementation EaR provides a variety of monitoring and remediation services including: · Ground water sampling and analysis · Aquifer testing · Pollution remediation For more information regarding Groundwater Management contact: Stuart Grubb, P.G. Emmons & Olivier Resources Email: grubb@eor.cnchost.com 3825 Labe Elmo Avenue North Jennifer Swenson Labe Elmo, MN 55042 Email: swenson@eor, cnchost.com Telephone: 651/770-8448 -2514- I~AY, 2~.2~2 2:55~M EHLERS & ASSOCIATES N0.0319 P, 4 CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION INITIATING PROCESS FOR APPROVAL OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND CALLINO A PUBLIC HEARING BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Mound, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, the Housin~ and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound, Minnesota (the "Authority"), is authorized to exercise redevelopment powers; and (b) It has been proposed that the Authority establish a Redevelopment Project Area as described herein (the "Redevelopment Project Area"), in connection with construction of a new Public Safety Facility and adopt the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project A~ea (the "Plan"); all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law; and (c) The Authority has requested that the Council hold a public hearing on the Plan, as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.028, Subdivision 1. 2. Public Heating. The Council will hold a public hearing on the Plan at a meeting of the Council to be held at , on June 25, 2002, commencing at __ p.m., Central Time. The staff of the City is hereby authorized and directed to cause the Notice of Public Hearing which is attached to this Resolution to be published in the City's officiai newspaper not more than 30 and not less than 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing da~e. Adopted by the City Council on May 2g, 2002. Mayor City Clerk (SEAL) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon the resolution was declared passed and adopted. 1405830vl -2515- MAY, 23.2002 2'56PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES N0,0319 P. 5 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF MOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on June 25, 2002, at a meeting of the Council beginning at approximately p.m., Central Daylight Savings Time, at the , , in the City of Mound, Minnesota, relating to the proposal of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound to establish a Redevelopment Project Area in eormection with construction of a new Public Safety Facility and adopt the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area; all pursuant to and in' conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047. A copy of the relative documentation proposed to be considered at the hearing will be on file and available for public inspection at the office of the Ci~s Clerk at the Mound Public Safety Facility at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. All interested persons may appear at the June 25, 2002, public hearing and present their views orally or in writing. 140~830vt 2 -2516- MAY, 23,2002 2'56PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO, 0319 P, 6 gTAT~ (51~ ~gOTA COUNTY OF HEIqNEPIN CITY OF MOUND 1, the ur~dersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council, duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the Initiating Process for Approval of Redevelopment Project Area of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound, Minnesota. WITNESS my hand on May 28, 2002. Clerk 14058~0vl 3 -2517- May 23, 2002 ROBERT J. LINDALL Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9219 *Certified Real Property Law Specialist VIA FACSIMILE 766-1600 AND U.S. MAIL Paul Moe Faegre & Benson LLP 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901 Re~ Purchase by City of Mound of Lots 23-28, Koehlers Addition to Mound from Balboa Center Limited Partnership Dear Paul: Thank you for your letter of May 17, 2002, enclosing a revised form of the proposed option agreement between Balboa Center Limited Parmership and the City of Mound. I have revised it to reflect terms which are acceptable to me and Kandis Hanson, City Manager, including the $185,000 price proposed by Gary Maxwell. I have reinserted the provisions entitling the City to use eminent domain to clear title (for example, in the event that IDS does not deliver a partial release of the mortgage). I do not see why that should be objectionable to you or your client. We would like to get this approved by the City Council on Tuesday, May 28, 2002. Please advise if it is in acceptable form. Very truly yours, Robert J. Lindall RJL:peb Enclosure cc: Kandis Hanson (via fax and email) John Cameron (via fax) John Dean RJL-215166vl MU200-92 -2518- *Certified by Minnesota State Bar Association OPTION AGREEMENT 5/23/02 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of the day of ,2002, by and between BALBOA CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Texas limited partnership ("Seller"), and the CITY OF MOUND, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Optionee"). RECITALS Seller is the owner of real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"). The parties desire to enter into Agreement creating in Optionee an option to purchase said property. NOW, THEREFORE, Seller and Optionee do hereby agree as follows: 1. Grant of Option; Option Term and Executed Term. Upon and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Seller hereby grants to Optionee the exclusive option (the "Option") to purchase the Property, which Option shall expire on July 30, 2002 (the "Option Term"), unless prior thereto, time being of the essence, Optionee has exercised the Option strictly in accordance with Section 4. Provided that Optionee is not then in default under this Agreement, Optionee may extend the expiration date of the Option Term to September 30, 2002, by giving, prior to the end of the initial Option Term, written notice thereof to Seller, accompanied by a bank cashier's check payable to the order of Seller and in the amount of $8,500.00 (the "Additional Consideration"). 2. Option Consideration. Optionee agrees to pay to Seller, its successors and assigns, $1,000.00 (the "Option Consideration") as consideration for the grant of the Option for the Option Term. The Option Consideration and (if paid) the Additional Consideration shall be retained by Seller whether or not the Option is exercised, and shall be credited against the purchase price for the Property. 3. Purchase Price. The purchase price payable for the Property, which Optionee agrees to pay if it exercises the Option, is One Hundred Eight-Five Thousand and no/100s Dollars ($185,000.00) payable in cash or by certified or cashier's check or by federal funds wire transfer as provided in Section 4. 4. Exercise of Option. If Optionee elects to exercise the Option, it may do so only by giving written notice of such exercise to Seller prior to the expiration of the Option Term, which notice must be accompanied by the contemporaneous tender by Optionee to Seller of the purchase price specified in Section 3 above, less any credits as provided herein. Said tender shall be by certified or cashier's check or by federal funds wire transfer to an account at a bank (or other RJL-214397v4 1 MU200-92 -2519- financial institution) designated by Seller. The fulfillment of all the foregoing elements (collectively, "Notice of Exercise") with respect to exercise of the Option is necessary to the effectiveness of any attempted exercise thereof and no other method or form of notice and/or payment shall be effective. 5. Strict Adherence to Requirements. Each of the requirements set forth above in respect of the Option have been fully negotiated and agreed to and strict adherence to such requirements shall be the sole responsibility of Optionee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Seller shall have no duty to advise Optionee of the time, mounts or manner or form of notice or payment required to extend, or permit the extension of, the Option Term or to exercise the Option, and Optionee shall not be excused from any failure strictly to adhere to such requirements for any reason or cause whatsoever, whether by reason of error, mistake, accident, negligence or any similar or dissimilar reason. 6. Closing. 6.1 Optionee shall give Seller at least five days written notice of its intent to exercise the Option, specifying a day for exercise (hereinafter referred to as the "Closing Date"). (Closing shall occur in all events at 1:30 o'clock p.m., local time, in the offices of counsel for Seller, Faegre & Benson LLP, 2200 Wells Fargo Center, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 on the date so specified by Optionee.) Provided Optionee gives such notice, Seller shall deliver and, where appropriate, execute and acknowledge simultaneous with exercise by Optionee in accordance with Section 4 (which simultaneous events shall constitute cloSing) the following: 6.1.1 a limited warranty deed to the Property, subject to the Permitted Exceptions (as defined in Section 7), and to the provisions of Section 6.4; 6.1.2 A standard Affidavit of Seller; 6.1.3 A non-foreign affidavit, properly executed and in recordable form, containing such information as is required by IRC Section 1445(b)(2) and its regulations; and 6.1.4 Ail other documents reasonably determined by the title insurance company to be necessary to transfer the Property to Optionee free and clear of all encumbrances, except the Permitted Encumbrances. 6.2 At the closing, all real estate taxes and installments of unpaid current special assessments due and payable in the year the closing occurs shall be prorated between Seller and Optionee on a daily basis as of the closing, with Seller responsible for that portion thereof allocable to the period preceding the closing and Optionee responsible for that portion thereof from, after and including the closing date. 6.3 At the closing, Seller shall pay all levied and pending special assessments, if any, existing as of the date of this Agreement, and Optionee shall assume all assessments levied against the Property ,after the date of this Agreement, if any. Optionee shall pay the state deed tax RJL-214397v4 2 ML1200-92 -2520- due with respect to this transaction, and any recording fees due in connection with the recorclafion of the deed delivered at closing. 6.4 Seller shall use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain, on or prior to Closing, a release of the Property from the lien of (i) that certain Mortgage and Security Agreement and Fixture Financing gtatement with Assignment of Leases and Rents dated geptember 5, 1997, filed January 15, 1998, as Doc. No. 2877712, executed by Seller in favor of IDS Life Insurance Company of New York ("IDS Life"), and (ii) that certain Assignment of Leases and Rents dated September 4, 1997, filed January 15, 1998, as Document No. 2878813, executed by Seller in favor of IDS Life. If on the day of Closing Seller has not obtained such releases, Optionee shall commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire the Property in fee simple, subject only to paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 listed in Exhibit B (and the portion of real estate taxes payable in 2002 which is payable by Optionee pursuant to Section 6.2 hereof). Seller hereby irrevocably appoints Paul S. Moe, its attorney-in-fact, to accept service of the petition commencing said eminent domain proceedings, the notice of hearing, notice of intent to take title and possession pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.042 and other pleadings in said proceeding. Seller hereby waives objections to the public purpose of the taking and to the transfer of title and possession pursuant to Minn. Stat. §117.042 effective thirty (30) days from the date of filing of said petition or ninety (90) days from the date of this Agreement, whichever is earlier. Seller and Optionee agree that Optionee may deposit its approved appraisal of value with the District Court Administrator in the condemnation proceeding, as provided by law, and thereby cause transfer of rifle and possession of the Property to the Optionee pursuant to Minn. Stat. §117.042. Such deposit and other payments or deposits by Optionee in the condemnation proceeding shall apply toward Optionee's payment of the Purchase Price. Seller and Optionee hereby stipulate to the entry of an award of damages by the court- appointed commissioners in said proceedings in the amount of the Purchase Price and agree to waive appeal from said award of damages so long as said award is consistent with this Agreement and no other party shall appeal therefrom. In the event of an appeal by a party other than Seller or Optionee, Seller and Optionee agree to appeal and seek a jury verdict in the amount of the Purchase Price herein payable to Seller and IDS Life Insurance consistent with the provisions of this Agreement. 6.5 Optionee shall obtain and deliver to Seller, on or prior to Closing, a letter from the City of Mound that the parcel of land owned by Seller after the transfer of the Property to Optionee (the "Remaining Parcel") (a) conforms to all applicable platting, subdivision, zoning and other land use control laws, ordinances, regulations and restrictions (including parking); (b) is served by adequate water, sewer, gas, electric and other public utilities; (c) has adequate access to public roads; and (d) is usable for its intended purposes. Optionee shall also obtain and deliver to Seller, on or prior to Closing, approval from the City of Mound (and any other govemmentai entities whose approval is required) of a tax parcel division creating a property tax identification number for the Property that is separate and distinct from the property tax identification number(s) for the Remaining Parcel. 7. Examination of Title. 7.1 Title Evidence. Seller has furnished to Optionee a commitment (the "Commitment") to insure title to the Property issued by First American Title Insurance RJL-214397v4 3 MU200-92 -2521 - Company. The Commitment included copies of all documents, instruments and matters shown as exceptions or referenced therein. 7.2 Optionee's Obiections and Requirements. Optionee shall be allowed twenty (20) days after date of this Agreement for examination of the Commitment, and making any objections to the marketability of title to the Property. Optionee shall not object to any of the matters set out on Exhibit B attached hereto (the "Permitted Exceptions"). Any objections not made within said twenty (20) day period shall be deemed to be waived by Optlonee and shall be Permitted Exceptions. 7.3 Correction of Title. Seller shall be allowed twenty (20) days after the making of Optionee's objections to cure the same. Pending such cure, the Closing shall be postponed to the extent necessary to accommodate such time period. Upon such cure, the Closing shall be held on the later of (a) the Closing Date, and (b) the first business day occurring ten (10) days after the date such cure is completed. If such cure is not completed within said twenty (20) day period, Optionee shall have the option to do any of the following: 7.3.1 Terminate this Agreement, and receive a refund of the Option Consideration. 7.3.2 Waive one or more of its objections and proceed to Closing. 7.3.3 Commence and complete eminent domain proceedings as provided in Section 6.4 above. 8. Inspection; Condition of Property at Closing. 8.1 Inspections, Environmental Matters and Release. 8.1.1 Prior to Closing, Optionee, its agents, contractors and employees shall have the fight to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making non-invasive inspections and a Phase II environmental inspection and sampling of soil or other substances and materials as described in the scope of work described in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein. Such entries shall be at Optionee's sole risk, cost and expense. Before any such entry, Optionee shall provide Seller with a certificate of insurance naming Seller as an additional insured and with an insurer and insurance limits and coverage reasonably satisfactory to Seller. All of such entries upon the Property shall be at reasonable times during normal bu~siness hours and after at least 24 hours prior notice to Seller or Seller's agent, Zach Eliason (c/o United Properties, 3500 West 80th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55431, telephone (952) 893-8226), and Seller or Seller's agent shall have the right to accompany Optionee during any activities performed by Optionee on the Property. At Seller's request, Optionee shall provide Seller with a copy of the results of any tests and inspections made by Optionee, excluding only market and economic feasibility studies. If any inspection or test disturbs the Property, Optionee will restore the Property to the same condition as existed before the inspection or test. Purchaser shall defend, indemnify Seller and hold Seller, Seller's trustees, officers, RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 4 -2522- tenants, agents, contractors and employees and the Property harmless from and against any and all losses, costs, damages, claims or liabilities, including but not limited to, mechanic's and materialmen's liens and Seller's reasonable attorneys fees, arising out of or in connection with Optionee's inspection of the Property as allowed pursuant to this Section 8.1.1 or Section 8.1.2 below. The provisions of this Section 8.1.1 shall survive the Closing or the earlier termination of this Agreement. 8.1.2 Except as provided in Section 8.1.1 and Exhibit C, the inspections under Section 8.1.1 above may not include any Phase II environmental inspection or other invasive inspection or sampling of soil or other substances or materials. Except as provided in Section 8.1.1 and Exhibit C, no such Phase II environmental inspection or other invasive inspection or sampling shall be performed without the prior written consent of Seller (which shall not be unreasonably withheld), and if consented to by Seller, the proposed scope of work and the party who will perform the work shall be subject to Seller' review and approval. At Seller's request, Optionee shall deliver to Seller copies of any Phase II or other environmental report relating to the property which are prepared on behalf of Optionee. The provisions of this Section 8.1.2 shall survive the Closing or any earlier termination of this Agreement. 8.1.3 Optionee, for itself and any entity affiliated with Purchaser, waives and releases Seller from and against any liability or claim related to conditions present on the Property prior to Seller's acquisition of fee title to the Property ("Previous Conditions") arising under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Toxic Substance Control Act, all as amended, or any other cause of action based on any other state, local or federal environmental law, rule or regulation, provided however, the foregoing release shall not operate to release any claim by Optionee against any person or entity other than Seller or any claim by Optionee against Seller as to conditions present on the Property which are not Previous Conditions. The provisions of this Section 8.1.3 shall survive the Closing or any earlier termination of this Agreement. 8.2 Condition of Property at Closing. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, AND EXCEPT FOR SELLER' S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES IN SECTION 9.1 ("SELLER' S WARRANTIES"), THIS SALE IS MADE AND WILL BE MADE WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, COVENANT, OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND (WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, STATUTORY) BY SELLER. AS A MATERIAL PART OF THE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS AGREEMENT, EXCEPT AS TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 8.1.3 WHICH ARE PRESENT ON THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT PREVIOUS CONDITIONS, OPTIONEE AGREES TO ACCEPT THE PROPERTY ON AN "AS IS" AND "WHERE IS" BASIS, WITH ALL FAULTS, AND WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY, ALL OF WHICH SELLER HEREBY DISCLAIMS, EXCEPT FOR SELLER'S WARRANTIES. EXCEPT FOR SELLER'S WARRANTIES, NO WARRANTY OR RJL-214397v4 5 MU200-92 -2523- REPRESENTATION IS MADE BY SELLER AS TO FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY, DESIGN, QUALITY, CONDITION, OPERATION OR INCOME, COMPLIANCE WITH DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS, ABSENCE OF DEFECTS, ABSENCE OF HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES, ABSENCE OF FAULTS, FLOODING, OR COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE RELATING TO HEALTH, SAFETY, AND THE ENVIRONMENT. OPTIONEE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS ENTERED INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITH THE INTENTION OF MAKING AND RELYING UPON ITS OWN INVESTIGATION OF THE PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC USE, COMPLIANCE, AND LEGAL CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY AND THAT OPTIONEE IS NOT NOW RELYING, AND WILL NOT LATER RELY, UPON ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES MADE BY SELLER OR ANYONE ACTING OR CLAIMING TO ACT, BY, THROUGH OR UNDER OR ON SELLER'S BEHALF CONCERNING THE PROPERTY, EXCEPT. FOR SELLER'S WARRANTIES. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION 8.2 SHALL SURVIVE INDEFINITELY ANY CLOSING OR TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT AND SHALL NOT BE MERGED INTO THE CLOSING DOCUMENTS. 9. Representations and Warranties. 9.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller hereby represents to Optionee the following: 9.1.1 Seller has the requisite power and authority to enter into and perform this Agreement and the documents to be executed by Seller at Closing. 9.1.2 Seller is not a "foreign person," "foreign partnership," "foreign trust" or "foreign estate," as those terms are defined in Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code. 9.1.3 To the knowledge of Seller, there is no action, litigation, investigation, condemnation or proceeding of any kind pending or threatened against Seller or any portion of the Property. 9.1.4 To the knowledge of Seller, there are no "Wells" on the Property within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 103I or "Individual Sewage Treatment Systems" on the Property within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 115.55. This representation is intended to satisfy the requirements of those statutes. 9.1.5 To the knowledge of Seller, except as disclosed by any of the Environmental Reports (as defined below), no above ground or underground tanks are located in or about the Property, or have been located under, in or about the Property and have subsequently been removed or filled. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "Environmental Reports" means (i) that certain Phase I Environmental Site Assessment dated December 19, 1995, prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation for Balboa Center Limited Partnership (Braun Project No. CMXX-95-0829); (ii) that certain Phase II Environmental Site Assessment dated January 8, 1996, prepared by Braun Intertec RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 6 -2524- Corporation for Balboa Center Limited Partnership (Braun Project No. CMXX-95-0917); (iii) that certain Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update dated July 21, 1997, prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation for Balboa Center Limited Partnership and IDS Life Insurance Company of New York (Braun Project No. CMXX-97-0618); or any other environmental repons in the possession or control of Optionee. 9.1.6 Seller has not received any written notices from any governmental authorities that the Property is in violation of any law or ordinance. If Seller receives any such written notice, Seller shall promptly provide Optionee with a copy of same. 9.2 Representations and Warranties of Optionee. represents to Seller the following: Optionee warrants and 9.2.1 Valid and Binding Obligations. This Agreement and the other documents contemplated by this Agreement when duly executed and delivered by Optionee will constitute valid and binding obligations of Optionee and will be enforceable in accordance with their respective terms. Neither the execution nor the delivery by Optionee of this Agreement or any other agreements contemplated hereby will violate any applicable state or federal law or regulation. Optionee is not a party to or subject to or bound by any law, judgment, order, writ, injunction, ruling or decree of any jurisdiction, court or governmental body that is likely to materially and adversely affect in any manner the net worth of or performance by Optionee of this Agreement or any other agreements contemplated hereby. 10. Real Estate Commissions. Seller and Optionee represent and warrant to each other that they have not engaged the services of any broker in connection with the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Seller and Optionee hereby indemnify each other for any loss or damage resulting from a breach of the representation set forth in this Section 10. 11. Transfer by Optionee. Optionee shall not sell, assign, transfer, encumber or otherwise dispose of this Agreement (or the agreement formed by exercise of the Option) or any interest therein, in whole or in part, voluntarily or involuntarily, by operation of law or otherwise (collectively, "assignment"), or agree to do so without the prior written consent of Seller; and any attempted assignment without such prior written consent shall be null and void and shall constitute a default by Optionee hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Optionee's rights under this Agreement with respect to all or part of the Property may be assigned by Optionee to one or more of the following: Metropolitan Council, Xcel Energy Company or Hennepin County, or entities owned or controlled by such entities, provided that Optionee shall not be thereby released from any obligations under this Agreement. This provision shall not preclude transfer of the Property by Optionee following Closing. 12. Confn'mation of Termination of the Option. If Optionee fails to exercise the Option as herein provided, the Option shall automatically terminate without notice to Optionee and all rights of Optionee arising out of the Option shall immediately cease, and Optionee agrees to execute, acknowledge, and deliver to Seller within five (5) days after written request from Seller RJL-214397v4 7 MU200-92 -2525- therefor, a quit claim deed and any other instrument required, in Seller's legal counsel's opinion, to remove any possible cloud of the Option from the Property, but failure to give such deed or other instrument shall not affect the automatic termination provided for herein. 13. Miscellaneous. 13.1 Any notice, request or other communication required or provided to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered personally or when mailed by certified or registered mall, remm receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Seller: Balboa Center Limited Partnership c/o C.K. Development Corporation, General Partner Attn: Gary N. Maxwell, President 4600 Westbury Colleyville, TX 76034 To Optionee: City of Mound Atto: Kandis Hanson City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1627 With copy to: Robert J. Lindall, Esq. Kennedy and Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 or to such other party at such other address as such party, by notice given as herein provided, shall designate. If Optionee is unsuccessful in obtaining a remm receipt confirming successful delivery of a notice sent by or on behalf of Optionee to Seller at such address by certified or registered mail, Optionee may notify Seller by personal delivery or certified or registered mail, remm receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Paul S. Moe Attorney for Balboa Center Limited Partnership Faegre & Benson, LLP 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901 RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 -2526- Any notice given in any other manner shall be effective only upon receipt by the addressee. 13.2 The parties acknowledge that this Agreement has been made under the threat of condemnation of the Property by the Optionee. 13.3 Time is of the essence under this Agreement. 13.4 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto and may be modified only by mutual written agreement. If any term or provision of this Agreement or any application thereof shall be invalid and unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement and any other application of such term or provision shall not be affected thereby. This Agreement shall be construed under and govemed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. RJL-214397v4 9 MU200~92 -2527- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunder set their hands as of the date and year first above written. SELLER: BALBOA CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP By C.K. Development Corporation Its general partner By Gary N. Maxwell Its Vice President OPTIONEE: CITY OF MOUND By: Its: RIL-214397v4 MU200-92 10 -2528- EXHIBIT A Legal Description Lots 23 to 28 inclusive, "Koehler's Addition to Mound" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being registered property pursuant to Certificate of Title No. 862532, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 A-1 -2529- EXHIBIT B Permitted Exceptions 1. Real estate taxes payable in the year 2002. 2. INTENTIONALLY DELETED. Memorandum of Agreement, and the terms, obligations, conditions, and easements set forth therein, dated December 10, 1984, filed February 25, 1985, as Document Number 1629672, Office of Registrar of Titles, and as Document Number 4970032, Office of County Recorder, between Balboa Minnesota Co., a Minnesota corporation, and Tonka Corporation, a Minnesota corporation. Utility and street easements conveyed to the City of Mound as set forth in Easement dated September 3, 1980, filed September 26, 1980, as Document Number 1396752, Office of Registrar of Titles. Highway right of way in favor of Hennepin County as shown on Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 15, Plat 68, filed July 5, 1985, as Document Number 1656002, said plat filed pursuant to Resolution filed as Document Number 979240, Office of Registrar of Titles. The Northerly and Southerly boundary lines of Lot 23, the North and South boundary lines of Lots 24, 25, 26 and 27 and the North, West and Southerly boundary lines of Lot 28 are marked by Judicial Landmarks set at the Northwest and Southwest comers of Lot 28 and at the Northwest and Southwest comers of Lot 28 and at the Northeast and Southeast comers of Lot 23, all in "Koehler's Addition to Mound", Lake Minnetonka, pursuant to Torrens Case No. 15804, as shown by recital on the certificate of title. RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 B-1 -2530- EXHIBIT C Scope of Work for Phase II Environmental Investigation RJL-214397v4 MU200-92 C-1 -2531- This Page Is Left Intentionally Blank -2532- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Motmd City Cotmcil and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: May 23, 2002 SUBJECT: PC Case #02-11, 3030 Island View Drive - Variance Request This case was reviewed by the Plamfing Conmfission at their May 6, 2002 regular meeting at which time the Connnission reco~mnended denial of the applicant's request for a variance. The ?lalming Conm~ission agreed with Staff's reconnnendation for denial and approved a reconunendation for denial based on the findings of fact supplied in the attached Resolution. Since the Plarming Conunission meeting, Staff visited the site to look at the deck for issues that were discussed at the meeting. At that time, the applicant expressed interest in modifying the deck to qualify, as an acceptable encroaclunent. Plans to address this modification have not been submitted to the Ci~ at this time. One of the items that needs further clarification is the definition of a "landing." Attached is a memo from the Building Official providing an interpretation of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The Building Official confirms that a floor or landing must be present at the top and bottom of a stairway and meet certain dimensions to provide proper safety and mobility. This building code definition can easily be confused with a zoning interpretation in this case. The zoning code does not specifically use the word ~qanding" but recognizes the need to allow certain structures within required setback areas. The stairway is one of the allowed encroaclm~ems provided in the code. The point where the stairway reaches the level of the deck, as it is currently constructed, is not considered a "landing" under Section 350:440 Subd. 3(B). That open floor area, has been designed to be integral to the deck and therefore, must meet deck requirements. The applicant may choose to ask the Council for time to evaluate other design modifications for the deck to satisfy code requirements. If presented, the case could be tabled to provide tilne for the applicant to prepare plans for Staff review. Having said that? the Cotmcil cottld simply adopt the proposed resolution to deny the request which would in effect force a redesigned deck to conform. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft resolution 02- based on Plamfing Connnission reconnnendation 2. May 6, 2002 Plamfing Colranission meeting minutes excerpts 3. Letter dated May 15, 2002 from City Attorney Jolm Dean 4. Memorandmn from Building Official Matt Simoneau dated May 13, 2002 5. Plamfing Report dated April 30, 2002 6. Deck handout 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Mirmeapolis, Mnmesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -2533- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION it 02- RESOLUTION TO DENY A SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A DECK LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY AT 3030 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE PID it 19-117-23-34-0073 P & Z CASE #02-11 WHEREAS, the applicant, John and Kathy Aquilina, have submitted a request for a sideyard setback variance. The variance request is as follows: Deck sideyard setback Proposed Required Variance 1.2 ft. 4 ft. 2.8 ft. ; and, WHEREAS, the property is located within the R-1A Single Family Residential District which requires a lot area of 10,000 square feet, and principal structure setbacks 30 feet for from yard and 6 feet for side yards lots of record; and, WHEREAS, in 1997, the applicant was issued a building permit to construct a new single family dwelling at 3030 Island View Drive. The survey submitted with the building permit application indicates a "deck" and a "future deck" on the lakeside of the house. Building plans for the deck however, were not included with the building penmt application for the house and consequently, the construction of the deck was never authorized or approved; and, WHEREAS, the house is a single-story design with a lakeside walkout. The deck is located on the lakeside of the house and has the same elevation as the main floor. Dimensions are approximately 14 feet by 52 feet. The encroaching part of the deck is the portion extending past the south wall of the house; and, WHEREAS, decks are considered to be part of principal structure and are subject to the same yard setbacks except under certain circumstances as outlined in Section 350:440 Subd. 3(C) where they may be considered for reductions to their required setback; and, WHEREAS, a stairway is located on the south side of the house which provides access to the deck. As constructed, the point where the stairway reaches the deck surface is subject to applicable setbacks as defined in Section 350:440 Subd. 3; and, WHEREAS, the existing deck does qualify for a reduced setback however, as constructed it is not in conformance with the code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended that the City Council deny the variance as requested by the applicant; and, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby deny the variance request based on the following findings of fact: -2534- The nonconforming deck condition is the direct result of actions of the applicm~t. There are no special conditions present that are the result lot size, shape or topography. The grm~ting of a variance would confer special privileges to the applicant not afforded to other single-family property owners. The literal imerpretation of the provision of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the sm~e district under the terms of this ordinance. The granting of a variance would be materially detrimental to the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The granting of a variance would "legitimize" the existing deck encroachment and continue to negatively impact to the adjacent property by limiting sight lines and the separation between homes. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: and Adopted May 28, 2002 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: City Clerk -2535- EXCERPTS FROH MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 6, 2002 BOARD OF APPEAL~q CASE #02-11 Variance -Deck setback John and Kathy Aquilina 3030 Island View Drive The deck was built not in conformance with the code. They are requesting a 2.8 foot variance on the south side. The survey submitted with the original building permit showed the deck in conformance. On the. plans the deck was indicated as future and plans were not included. The deck was never approved as part of the building permit for the house. A certificate of occupancy was issued in 1998 and did not include the deck. The code looks at these decks in a number of ways. Typically, we ascribe principal structure setbacks for decks urdeSs there are reasons we would want to give them an encroachment. The code allows a deck that is higher than 30 feet offthe ground could have a 4-foot setback instead of 6 feet. The steps are allowed a 2-foot setback. We need to focus on how to view this if we were reviewing it with the building permit. When the house was proposed we did have at least 1 set of plans, and possibly 2, that showed a conforming deck. If we were to look at this, absent the deck, the same thought process probably played itself through to say there is nothing about the lot, dimensions, shape, or house saying there was a hardship with this side of the property. It's a deck, not a 2-story house. Is it a hardship to remove the non-conformity? Staff felt it wasn't and our recommendation is to deny the request with the following conditions: 1. Make the deck meet the setback. 2. Have the building permit applied for to modify the deck and building official will review the plan and establish fees, and possibly penalties for applying for the permit after the fact. 3. After modification an as-built survey should be submitted. Findings of Fact to support the recommendation: 1. Deck is result of the direct actions of the applicant, not inherited from another property owner. -2536- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 2. Conditions present are not a result of the lot size, dimension or topography. 3. If a variance was granted it would confer special privileges to the applicant not afforded to other property owners. 4. The granting ora variance would be materially detrimental to the spirit and intent of the Zoning ordinance. 5. The granting of a variance would "legitimize" the existing deck encroachment amd continue to negatively impact to the adjacent property by limiting sight lines and the separation between homes. The City of Mound has no litigation proceedings against the property owner at this time. There is a suit between the adjacent property owners. There is an enforcement action that has been filed by the City of Mound to correct the situation. This has been temporarily halted until the variance request has been acted upon. Clapsaddle felt it was a very clean-cut and simple issue. He likes staff's proposed solution. Mueller clarified that Best and Flannagan provided the Planning Commissioners a supplemental packet that was not part of the official packet. It was forwarded to the City by the legal council of the adjacent property owner. Each Commissioner was provided an identical copy prior to the meeting. Discussion followed regarding the wording of the Code and its application to the deck in question. Burma was concerned about the relationship of Mr. Meller. He is the attorney for the property owner to the south and also city attorney for the City of Wayzata. Gordon assured that it is not an issue but that John Dean has spoken to him regarding this on a number of occasions. City Attorney agrees with staff's position on this issue. Discussion John Aquilina - 3030 Island View Drive - In March of 1997 the house was destroyed by fire. The original house plans did include a deck. August 11, 1997 the house was demohshed. Either the builder didn't give the revised plans to the City or the plans were misplaced in City Hall. However, a later revised plan from the builder indicates a 10 foot wrap-around deck. According to the packet, an attached deck 30 inches or more above the ground floor does not have setback requirements. He felt that the code was clear. Burma asked for a clarification of the Planning Report. Gordon felt that the applicant's interpretation was in error and that the intent was as stated in the Planning Report. The portion of the deck in question is the landing area at the top of the stairs. Again, by code, the landing area may extend within 2 feet of the lot line. The variance would be 10 inches. The Planning Report indicates that the construction of the deck was never authorized. The builder and the city were on different pages. Mr. Aquilina put his faith in the builder. -2537- Plannin§ Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 · The Planning Report indicates that the deck extends the house 14 feet. Mr. Aquilina maintains that it is only 10 feet. Mr. Aquilina indicated that the deck handout and the code are not identical. The area in question is the landing area at the top of the stairs. He inquired if the word "landing" was no longer used. The Deck packet that was received from Smith does not match. Gordon responded that a landing is generally in the middle of a flight of stairs. He indicated that, for the Planning Report, he quoted directly from the Code. The house and deck were built 4 years ago. The former building official approved the plans and issued a certificate of occupancy. Builder was expected to follow code. Existing retairdng wall on the side of the house made the location of the stairs logical. Special privilege is what any variance is about. Sight lines are not affected by any degree by a 10-inch variance; Separation between the homes is not an issue because theirs is 20 some feet closer to the lake. Ayaz stated that the deck was built without a permit. If we were able to take the time back we wouldn't issue the permit as it is. Greg Fall - 3036 Island View Drive - Variances are applied for in cases of hardship. Both properties have the same basic shape and topography. There aren't any hardships other than those that were self-created. It is important to have laws enfomed. 1) There was no permit. 2) There WaS no permit application. 3) The deck is a different shape on the plans than what was built. 4) We are asking that the deck be brought into compliance with city code. He feels that the sight line and privacy is impacted. Burma inquired about Mr. Fall's setback expectation. The setback issue is confusing and needs to be clarified. Mr. Fall wants it to conform to the ordinance: John Aquilina said criticism states that it is not in the spirit of the ordinance. Six months ago a variance was requested by Mr. Fall from the LMCD and I spoke in favor of the variance. Island View Drive has many variances. He is asking for the same consideration. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Weiland, to move staff recommendation. Mueller stated that it is his understanding that the setback is 6 feet. Previous discussions confirm that. Clapsaddle amends the motion to establish a 6-foot sideyard setback. Weiland approved the amendment. Mueller wanted to include a Finding of Fact as follows: plans were received by the city on 7/25/97. It afforded the applicant to make any revisions. At that time the plan was for the deck not to go past the existing structure and the stairway was on the other side. Clapsaddle felt we should not be dealing with integrity of contractor or any of the responsibility of contractor. Contractor is responsible to the owner; owner is responsible to the city. MOTION carried. Voting against: Burma. Voting for: Ayaz, Clapsaddle, Glister, Hasse, Mueller, Weiland and Brown Burma voted against because staff recomm_o,~d5a~iSn_n came with punitive measures to deny. R T E R E D 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www, kennedy-graven.com JO~IN B. DEAN Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9207 Email: jdean@kennedy-graven.¢om May 15,2002 Sarah Smith Community Development Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Aquilina Variance Request. Dear Sarah: :'- At the May 6, 2002 Planning'Commission consideration of this matter, one of the commissioners mentioned that the attorney representing an abutting property owner, opposed to the variance, was also the city attorney for the city where you previously worked as city planner. Following that comment, Loren Gordon, who had been handling the presentation of'the matter for the planning staff., informed the commission that that issue had been previously discussed with me. Because this matter is now scheduled f,or consideration by the city council at its May 28, 2002 meeting, it will be helpf,ul to reduce our earlier discussions on this matter to writing. During two telephone conversations, one a conf,erence call that also included Loren.Gordon, you reminded us that you and the attomey for an abutting property owner had previously worked for the same city, you as city planner and he as city attorney. You stated that, although that connection would have no influence on your handling of this matter one way or the other, you would disqualif,y youi-self from involvement if it were legally necessary. I informed you that there clearly was no legal basis that would necessitate you to disqualify yourself from the matter. .;:;~ ~i: You further indicated that Loren Gordon was fully versed in the application} and would be able to prepare'the staff report and present the matter to the planning commissionifthat woUld '~ · eliminate any suggestion of a possible conflictl My reSPonse was that, although it was entirely up to you, in a highly contested matter such as this, it could be beneficial to avoid creating a basis to challenge the decision process, even if that basis were unf,ounded. JBD-214651vl MU220-5 -2539- Sar:ah Smith 5/14/02 Page 2 of 2 My previous opinion of no legal basis for disqualification applys equally to presentation of the matter to the city council. However, I imagine that your decision on participation before the city council will involve evaluation of the same factors you considered in determining your role before the planning comanission CB. ~D e~~...~Respect fully Mours, cc: K. Hanson B. Ritter (for inclusion in council packets) -2540- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, IvIN 55364 (952) 4~2~3190 MEMORANDUM From: Date: Re: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director Matt Simoneau May 13, 2002 Variance Application- 3030 Island View Drive In response to your questions regarding the temporary certificate of occupancy issued at the above noted address and the Uniform Building Code definition of a landing, the following information is provided. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Former Building Official Jon Sutherland issued a temporary certificate of occupancy on February 16, 1998 subject to the inspection notice dated February 26, 1998. (See attached). The temporary certificate of occupancy expired on June 15, 1998. Section 1305.0109 of the State Building Code requires that a certificate of occupancy be issued for all new or substantially remodeled buildings. In addition, Uniform Building Code section 108 requires a final inspection when the building is completed and ready for occupancy. Section 108 also states that it is the duty of the permit holder to request the required final inspection. DEFINITION OF LANDING Section 1003.3.1.6 of the Uniform Building Code requires that there be a landing on each side ora door and section 1003.3.5 requires that a floor or landing be provided at the top and bottoms of each stairway or run of stairs. In each instance the landing shall be a minimum of 36" x 36". -2541 - City of Mound Depart.~nt of ~uilding Inspection [~ FInAl, QP.,~UPAN~ GRANTED ~TI[MP(~RARY O~¢UI"ANCY GRAHTEO: ! % SUBJECT TO INSPECTION NOTICE DATED. 3030 IS~D VIE~ DRI~ , B~.Po~ 1~995 ~~~n LO~ 48. PHELPS ISLAND PA~, 1ST DIVISION &~drass ~OHN A~U~INA,. ~030 I~ND VTF~ D~, HO~D _ ...- ~n~mN~&Addre~ hi. STROH'S, 9620 10TH A~ N~~OUTH . -2542- OWNER CONTRACTOR I-] FOOTING I-1 FRAMING I-] INSULATION [] WALLBOARD ~PROGRESS INAL CITY OF MOUND INSPECTION,~OTICE M T W T(~ F //; O0 PHONE # [] PLUMBING ROUGH-IN ~[,PLUMBING FINAL ~1~ MECHANICAL 'LJ'FIREPLACE AT THROAT [-3 FIREPLACE FINAL [] DEMOLITION PHONE # [] SITE INSPECTION [] GRADING/EXCAV. [] COMPLAINT [] FOLLOW-UP ~, ........ . .___, _..,. ~~'~~, , ,.. _, Ca,,,or the next inspection 24 ho Ow"er'Co"'~t.~ ,..,.c,or L~ ~/A ~-0600 Yellow Copy/Site Notice White Copy/Inspeclo~s File -2543- 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1003.3.1.10 1003.3.3.6 3. Thc egress-control device shall be capable of being deacti- vated by a signal from a switch located in an approved location. 4. An irreversible process that will deactivate tile egress-con- trol device shall be initiated whenever a manual force of not more than 15 pounds (66.72 N) is applied for Iwo seconds to the panic bar or other door-latching hardware. The egress-control device shall deactivate within an approved time period not lo exceed a total of 15 seconds. The time delay established for each egress- control device shall not be field adjustable. 5. Actuation of the panic bar or other door-hitching hardware shall activate an audible signal at the door. 6. The unlatching shall not require more than one opcralion. A sign shall be provided on the door located above and wilhin 12 inches (305 mm) of the panic bar or other door-latching hard- ware reading: KEEP PUSHING. THIS DOOR WILL OPEN IN SECONDS. ALARM WILL SOUND. Sign lettering shall be at least 1 inch (25 nlm) in height ami shall have a stroke of not less than I/8 inch (3.2 mm). Regardless of the means of deactiwttion, relocking of tile egress-control device shall be hy mamtal means only at the door. 1003.3.1.11 Safety glazing identificalion. Regardless of the occupant load served, glass doors shall co,lform lo the require- ments specified in Section 2406. 1003.3.2 Gates. 1003.3.2.1 General. Gates serving a means of egress system shall comply with the requirements of Section It)1)3.3.2. 1003.3.2.2 Detailed requirements. Gates t,sed as a component in a means of egress system shall conform m the applicable requirements of Section 1003.3.1. EXCEPTION: Gates surrounding stadinms may be of thc horiznn~ tel sliding or swinging type and may exceed the 4-fora ( 1219 mm) max- imum leaf width limitation. 1003.3.3 Stairways. 1003.3.3.1 General. Every stairway having two or more risers serving any building or portion thereol' shall comply wilh the requirements of Seclion 10¢)3.3.3. For Ibc purposes Gl' Scclicm 1003.3.3, the term "slairway" shall inch,lc slairs, landings, hand- rails and guardrails as applicable. Where aisles in assembly moms have steps, they shall comply with Ihe requirenlents in Section 1004.3.2. EXCEPTION: Stairs or ladders used only to :lllcnd cquipmcul or window wells are exempt from the requiremcnls of Ibis seclion. For the purpose of this chapter, the term "step" shall mean Ihose portions of the means of egress achieving a change in elewtlion by means of a single riser. Individual steps shall comply with thc detailed requirements of this chapter that specify applicability to steps. 1003.3.3.2 Width. The width of stairways shall be determined as specified in Section 1003.2.3, but such width shall not be less than 44 inches (1118 mm), except as specified herein and in Chapter 11. Stairways serving an occupant load less than 50 shall not be less than 36 inches (914 mm) in width. Handrails may project into the required width a distance of 31/2 inches (89 mm) from each side of a stairway. Stringers and other projections such as trim and similar decorative features may project into the required width 11/2 inches (38 mm) from each side. -2544- 1003.3.3.3 Rise and run. The rise of steps and stairs shall not be less than 4 inches (102 mm) nor more than 7 inches (178 mm). The greatest riser height within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch (9.5 mm). Except as permitted in Sections 1003.3.3.8.1, 1003.3.3.8.2 and 1003.3.3.8.3, the run shall not be less than 11 inches (279 mm) as measured horizontally between the vertical planes of the furthermost projection of adja- cent treads or nosings. Stair treads shall be of uniform size and shape, except the largest tread run within any flight of stairs shall not exceed the smallest by more than 3/8 inch (9.5 mm). EXCEPTIONS: I. Private steps and stairways serving an occupant load of less than I0 and stairways to unoccupied mots may be constructed with an 8-inch-maximum (203 mm) rise and a 9-inch- minimum (229 mm) run. 2. Where the ho, om or top riser adjoins a sloping public way, walk or driveway having an established grade (other than natural earth) and serving as a landing, the bottom or top riser may be reduced along the slope lo less than 4 inches (102 mm) in height with 'lhe variation in heigh! of thc bottom or top riser not lo exceed I unit vertical in 12 units horizontal (8.3% slope) of stairway widlh. 1003.3.3.4 Headroom. Every stairway shall have a headroom clearance of not less than 6 feet 8 inches (2032 mm). Snch clear- ances shall be measured vertically from a plane parallel and tan- gent to Ihe stairway tread nosings to the soffit or other construction above at all points. ,~~!it~S ~'. ~adi '..he.to.. a dimension measured in the direction of travel not less than the width of the stairway. Such dimension need not exceed 44 inches (1118 mm) where tile stair has a straight run. At least one inter- mediate landing shall be provided for each 12 feet (3658 mm) of vertical stairway rise measnred between the horizontal planes of adjacent hmdings. Landings shall be level except that exterior landing.q may have a slope not to exceed I/4 unit vertical in 12 units horizonlal (2% slope). For landings with adjoining doors, see Sec- lion 1003.3.1.7. EXCEI~TIONS: I. In Group R, Division 3, and Group U Occupan- cies and within individual units of Group R, Division I Occupancies, snch length need nol exceed 36 inches (914 mm) where the stair has a straight run. 2. Stairs serving an unoccupied roof are exempt from these require- mcnls. 1003.3.3.6 llandrails. Stairways shall have handrails on each side, and every stairway required to be more than 88 inches (2235 mm) in widlh shall be provided with nol less than one intermediate handrail for each 88 inches (2235 mm) of required width. Inter- mediate handrails shall be spaced approximately equally across with thc entire width of the stairway. 1,2XCEIVl'lONS: I. Slairw.'~ys less Ihan 44 inches (Ill8 mm) in width or slairways serving one individual dwelling unit in Group R, Division I or 3 Occupancy or a Group R, Division 3 congregate resi- dence may have one hamlrail. 2. Private stairways 30 inches (762 mm) or less in height may have a handrail on one side only. 3. Stairways h.'~ving less than four risers and serving one individual dw,'.lling unit in Group R, Division I or 3, or a Group R, Division 3 con- gregate residence or Group U Occupancies need not have handrails. The top of handrails and handrail extensions shall not be placed less than 34 inches (864 mm) nor more than 38 inches (965 mm) above landings and the nosing of treads. Handrails shall be contin- uous the full length of the stairs and, except for private stairways, at least one handrail shall extend in the direction of the stair mn not less than 12 inches (305 mm) beyond the top riser nor less than 12 inches (305 mm) beyond the bottom riser. Ends shall be returned or shall have rounded terminations or bends. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Private stairways do not require handrail exten- sions. 1-109 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 108.8 - 109.6 TABLE 1-A reinspection fo, e in accordance with Table 1-A or as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the jurisdiction. In instances where reinspection fees have been assessed, no additional inspection of the work will be performed until the re- quired fees have been paid. 109.1 Use and Occupancy. No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the existing occupancy classi- fication of a building or structure or portion thereof shall be made until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefor as provided herein. EXCEPTION: Group R, Division 3 and Group U Occupancies. Issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall not be construed as an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Certificates presuming to give au- thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordi- nances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. 109.2 Change in Use. Changes in the character or use of a build- ing shall not be made except as specified in Section 3405 of this code. 109.3 Certificate Issued. After the building official inspects the building or structure and finds no violations of the provisions of this code or other laws that are enforced by the code enforcement agency, the building official shall issue a certificate of occupancy that shall contain the following: 1. The building permit number. 2. The address of the building. 3. The name and address of the owner. 4. A description of that portion of the building for which the certificate is issued. 5. A statement that the described portion of the building has been inspected for compliance with the requirements of this code for the group and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy is classified. 6. The name of the building official. 109.4 Temporary Certificate. If the building official finds that no substantial hazard will result from occupancy of any building or portion thereof before the same is completed, a temporary cer- tificate of occupancy may be issued for the use of a portion or por- tions of a building or structure prior to the completion of the entire building or structure. 109.5 Posting. The certificate of occupancy shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises and shall not be removed ex- cept by the building official. 109.6 Revocation. The building official may, in writing, sus- pend or revoke a certificate of occupancy issued under the provi- sions of this code whenever the certificate is issued in error, or on the basis of incorrect information supplied, or when it is deter- mined that the building or structure or portion thereof is in viola- tion of any ordinance or regulation or any of the provisions of this code· TABLE 1-A--BUILDING PERMIT FEES -- FEE TOTAL VALUATION $'--~.00 to $500.00 -~23.5(1 $23.50 for Ihe first $500.00 plus $3.05 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and $501.00 to $2,000.00 including $2,(10(}.00 $69.25 for the first $2,001k00 plus $14.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 and including $25,000.110 $391·75 for the first $25,000.00 plus $10.10 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $643.75 for the first $50,¢XI0.t10 plus $7.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $993.75 for Ihe first $100,000.00 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,233.75 for the first $500,0110.00 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $5,608.75 for thc first $1,000,000.00 plus $3.65 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction $1,000,001.00 and up thereof Other Inspections and Fees: $47.00 per hour1 1. Inspections outside of normal business hours ....................................................................... (minimum charge--two hours) $47.00 per hour1 2.. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8 ...................... .................................... $47.00 per hour1 · Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated ................................................................. (minimum charge---one-half hour) . 4. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to ptans ............................................... $47.00 per hour1 (minimum charge---one-half hour) Actual costs2 5. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and inspections, or both .................................................... 1Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved. 2Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs. 1-6 -2545- 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 107.6 108.8 per mit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The building official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. SECTION 108 -- INSPECTIONS 108.1 General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of construction shall have continuous in- spection, as specified in Section 1701.5. Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give au- thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material reqnired to allow inspection. A survey of the lot may be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in accordance with the approved plans. 108.2 Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder shall have posted or otherwise made available an inspec- tion record card such as to allow the building official to conve- niently make the required entries thereon regarding inspection of the work. This card shall be maintained awfilnble by the permit holder until final approval has been granted by the building official. ~[~~,~r6~'[~j~he building officml m y require that every request for inspection I,e filed at least one work- ing day before such inspection is desired. Such request may be in writing or by telephone at the option of the building official. It shall be the duty of the person requesting any inspections re- quired by this code to provide access to and means for inspection of such work. 108.4 Approval Required. Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive inspection without first obtain- ing the approval of the building official. The building official, upon notification, shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate that portion of the construction is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the per- mit holder wherein the same fails to comply with this code. Any portions that do not comply shall be corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building official. -2546- There shall be a final inspection and approval of all buildings and structures when completed and ready for occupancy and use. 108.5 Required Inspections. 108.5.1 General. Reinforcing steel or structural framework of any part of any building or structure shall not be covered or con- cealed without first obtaining the approval of the building official. Protection of joints and penetrations in fire-resistive assemblies shall not be concealed from view until inspected and approved. The building official, upon notification, shall make the inspec- tions set forth in the following sections. 108.5.2 Foundation inspection. To be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing steel is in place. For concrete foundations, any required forms shall be in place prior to inspection. All materials for the foundation shall be on the job, except where concrete is ready mixed i~ accordance with approved nationally recognized standards, the concrete need not be on the job. Where the foundation is to be constructed of ap- proved treated wood, additional inspections may be required by the building official. 108.53 Concrete slab or nnder-floor inspection. To be made after all in-slab or under-floor building service equipment, con- duit, piping accessories and other ancillary equipment items are in place, but before any concrete is placed or floor sheathing installed, including the subfloor. 108.5.4 Frame inspection. To be made after the roof, all fram- ing, fire blocking and bracing are in place and all pipes, chimneys and vents are complete and the rough electrical, plumbing, and heating wires, pipes and ducts are approved. 108.5.5 Lath or gypsum board inspection. To be made after all lathing and gypsum board, interior and exterior, is in place, but be- fore any plastering is applied or before gypsum board joints and fasteners are taped and finished. 108.5.6 Final inspection. To be made after finish grading and the building is completed and ready for occupancy. 108.6 Special Inspections. For special inspections, see Chapter 17. 108.7 Other Inspections. In addition to the called inspections specified above, the building official may make or require other inspections of any construction work to ascertain compliance with the provisions of this code and other laws which are enforced by the code enforcement agency. 108.8 Reinspections. A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or reinspection when such portion of work for which inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made. This section is not to be interpreted as requiring reinspection fees the first time a job is rejected for failure to comply with the requirements of this code, but as controlling the practice of calling for inspections before the job is ready for such inspection or re- inspection. Reinspection fees may be assessed when the inspection reCOrd card is not posted or otherwise available on the work site, the approved plans are not readily available to the inspector, for fail- ure to provide access on the date for which inspection is requested, or for deviating from plans requiring the approval of the building. official. To obtain a reinspection, the applicant shall file an application therefor in writing on a form furnished for that purpose and pay the I 1003.3.1.3 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1003.3.1.10 1003 3.1.3 Width and height. Every required exit doorw;,y serv- ing an occupant load of 10 or more shall bc ol'a size lo permit thc installation of a door not less than 3 feet 1914 mm) in nominal width and not less Ihan 6 feet 8 incl~es (2032 mm) in nominal height. Where installed, exit doors shall be capable of opening such that the clear width of the exit is not less than 32 inches 1813 mm). In computing the exit width as required by Section 11~03.2.3, the net dimension of the doorway shall be used. 1003.3.1.4 Door leaf width. A single leaf of an exit door serving an occupant load of 10 or more shall not exceed 4 feet ( 1219 nun) in width. 1003.3.1.5 Swing and opening force. Exit doors serving an occupant load of l0 or more shall be of the pivoled, balanced or side-hinged swinging type. Exit doors shall swing in the direction of the path of exit travel where the area served has an occupant load of 50 or more. The door shall swing to Ihe fully open posiliou when an opening force not to exceed 30 ponnds 1133.45 N) applied to the latch side. For other door opening forces, see Sec- tion 905.3 and Chapter 11. See Section 32117 for doors swinging over public property. EXCE~IONS: 1. Gmnp 1, Division 3 Occupancy llSCtl as a place of detention. 2. Doors within or serving an individual dwelling mill 3. Special doors conforming lo Scclion 111{13.3.1.2. DOuble-acting doors shall not be used as exits where any of the following conditions exist: 1. The occupant load se~ed by the door is '100 or more. 2. The door is part of a fire asscmbly. 3. The door is part of a smoke- and draf~-conlml assembly. 4. Panic hardware is required or provided on the door. A double-acting door shall be provided with a view panel ~1' less than 200 square inches (0.129 m21. Wher~ ac~ss ~'p~rsoh~i[h*:fll~ibilities is rqquired by Chapter 11, the floor or landing shall not be more than ~/2 inch (12.7 mm) lower than the threshold of the doorway. Where such access is required, the threshold shall not exceed I inch (25 mm). I.andings shall be level except that exterior loadings may have a slope m*t exceed I/4 unit vertical in 12 unils horiz~mtal (2% slope). EXCE~IONS: 1. In Group R, Division 3, and Group Il Occupan- cies and within individual units of Gruup R, Divisinn I Occupancies: 1.1 A door may open at Ibc lop step o1' aa inlcrior I'light hi' shlirs, provided thc door docs not swing over thc lop step. 1.2 A door may open at a lamling thai is n{*l ilmrc Ihml 8 inches (203 mm) lower than the fluor level, provided Iht d~mr docs not swing over thc landing. 1.3 Screen doors and stoma doors may swillg over slairs, steps or landings. 2. Doors scrving building equipment rmm~s Ihal arc nt~l normally occupied. 1003.3.1.7 Landings at doors. Regardless of Iht occupant load served, landings shall have a width not less than the width o1' thc door or the width of the stairway served, whichever is greater. Doors in the fully open position shall not reduce a required dimen- sion by more than 7 inches 1178 nun). Where a hmding serves an occupant load of 50 or more, doors in any position shall nol reduce the landing dimension to less than one half ils required width. Landings shall have a length measured in the direction of travel of not less than 44 inches 11118 mm). 1-108 -2547- EXCEPTION: In Group R, Division 3, and Group U Occupancies and within individual units of Group R, Division I Occupancies, such length need not exceed 36 inches 1914 mm). A landing that has no adjoining door shall comply with the requirements of Section 1003.3.3.5. 1003.3.1.8 Type of lock or latch. Regardless of the occupant load served, exit doors shall be openable from the inside without the use oi' a key or any special knowledge or effort. EXCEPTIONS: 1. In Groups A, Division 3; B; F; M and S Occu- pancies and in all chorches, key-locking hardware may be used on the main exit where the main exit consisls of a single door or pair of doors where Ihere is a readily visible, dnrable sign on or adjacent to the door slating, "Tilts DOOR MUST REMAtN UNLOCKED DURING BUSINESS HOURS." The sign shall lie in letters not less than I inch (25 mm) high on a conlrasting background. When nnlocked, the single dtmr or holh leaves of a p:fir of doors must be free to swing without operation of any lalclfing device. The nsc of this exception may be rcwtked by the building official for due cause. 2. Exit doors from indivkhml dwelling nnits; Group R, Division 3 ctmgregate residences; and guest rooms of Group R Occupancies hav- ing an occopanl load of Ifl or less may he provided with a night latch, tic,,ti bolt or security chain, provided such devices are openable from the inside without Ibc USC or' a key or tool :utd mounted at a height not tu exceed 48 inches 11219 mm) above the finished floor. Mannally operated edge- or surface-monnted flush bolts and surface bolts or any other type of device 1hat may be used to close or restrain the door other than hy operation of the locking device shall trot he nsed. Where exit doors are used in pairs and approved aulomatic flush bolls are used, the door leaf having the automatic l'lush bolts shall have no doorknob or surface-monnted hardware. Tile unhttching of any leaf shall not require more than one oper? lion. EXCEI~I'IONS: I. Group Il, Division 3 Occupancies. ~'... 2. Where a pair of doors serving a room not normally occupied is needed for Ibc movement of equipment, manually operated edge- or surface-mounled bolts may be used. ~ 1003.3.1.9 Panic hardware. Panic hardware, where installed, shall comply with the requirements of UBC Standard 10-4. The actiwtting member shall be motmted at a height of not less than 3ti inches (762 mm) nor more than 44 inches (1118 mm) above the fhmr. The unlatching force shall not exceed 15 pounds (66.72 N) when applied in the direclion of travel. Where pivoted or balanced doors are used and panic hardware is required, panic hardware shall be of the push-pad type and the pad shall not extend across more than one half of tile width of the door ntcasurcd fron~ Ibc latch side. 1003.3.1.10 Special egress-conlrol devices. When approved by Iht building ~ffficial, exit dm*rs in Group II; Group F; Group I, Di- vision 2; Group R, Division I cougregale residences serving as group-care facililies and Group S Occupancies may be equipped wilh approved listed special egress-control devices of the time- dehty type, provided the building is protecled throughout by an approved aulomalic sprinkler syslem and ,'lU approved atttomatic smoke-detection syslem. Such devices shall conform to all the fol- lowing: I. The egress-control device shall antomatically deactivate upon actiw~tion of either tile sprinkler syslem or Ihe smoke-detec; lion system. 2. Tile egress-conlrol device shall automatically deactivate upon loss of electrical power to any one of the following: 2.1 The egress-control device itself. 2.2 The smoke-detection system. 2.3 Means of egress illumination as required by Section 1003.2.9. PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: 'Mound Council, Planning Cornmissiof~ and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: April 30, 2002 SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: John and Kathy Aquilina CASE NUMBER: 02-11 HKG FILE NUMBER: 02-05 LOCATION: 3030 Island View Drive ZONING: Residential District R- lA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted a request for a sideYard setback ~variance. The variance request is as follows: Deck sideyard setback Proposed Required variance 1.2 ft. 4 ft. 2.8 ft. In 1997, the Aquilinas were issued a building permit to construct a new single family dwelling at 3030 Island View Drive. The survey submitted with the building permit apPlication indicates a "deck" and a "future deck" on the lakeside of the house, ,.Building p!an,S, for the deck however, were hot included with the' bulldog permit appllcafi}sn for the hOUSe, consequently the eons~Ction of th~'deCk was never authorized ~r aP~fbved. In all likelih0Od the deck was built at the same time as the new home which received the Certificate of Occupancy in 1998. It is a/so relevant to note the survey indicated the deck would be:conforming, but was built differently.. The house is a single-story design with a lakeside walkOut. The deck is located on the i~eside of the house and is at the same elevation as the main floor extending the wi,~'dth of the house and appr0~tely 14 feet deePl 'The encroaching p°ffibn'e iends 5 feet past the south wall of the house to accO~odate a stairway located in,,~e sideyard. Decks are considered to be part of princlpal structure and are subject tothe same yard setbacks except under certain circumstances as outlined in Section 350:440 Subd. 3(C) ~ ~. This section states: 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -2548- #02-1~ Aquilina Variance Ap~il ~O, 2002 Decks, balconies, and the like, attached to the principal building which extend in elevation above the height of the ground floor elevation of the principal building; and decks, balconies, and the like, detached from the principal building and exceeding 30 inches in height above the surrounding grade provided they do not extend within ten (1'0) feet of.~the rear lot line or extend beyond side yard sand front yard accessory, building setbacks. On lakeshore lots, such structures shall comply with the lakeshore setback of the principal structure. Staff's interpretation of this section as it relates to the Aquilina deck can be summahzed as follows: Decks are subject to the same setback requirements as the principal structure. Specifically with the Aquilina deck, a 6 feet side yard setback and a 50 feet' S~tbaCk from the ordinary high water of Lake Minnetonka is required. Under certain circumstances the Code. allows for encroachments int° req~red setback areas. Section 350:440 Subd. 3(C) allows certain structures to encroach into typical yard setback areas. There are three scenarios where decks and other similar structures are allowed different setbacks than the principal structure: Decks that are above the elevation of the ground / first story elevation, meaning that they are likely a second story'deck or somewhere in between the 1s~ and 2~d stoW. (dOesn't qualify in this case) 2. A detached deck, similar to what the shoreland management ordinance terms a "Water-oriented" struct~e. (doesn't qualify in this case) Any deck that is 30 inches or more above the grade which could be a ground / first story deck when the basement is a "walk out" / has "daylightwindows.' " (qualifies as an encroachment in this case) The stairs leading to the deck from sideyard that have a 4.9 feet setback are an allowable encroachment under Subd. 3(B) in this section. UncoVered porches, stoops or similar entrance structures not exceeding 32 square feet which do not extend in elevation above the height of the ground floor elevation of the principal building, and steps that do not extend to a distance of less than two (2) feet from any lot line. (the stairs satisfy this code sectionJ 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -2549- .p. 3 g02~l I Aquilina Variance April 30, 2002 DISCUSSION: The application for an "after the. fact" variance is certainly an acceptable approach as a possible remedy to the situation. Although the deck is akeady built, the criteria by which the variance is reviewed .are still the same and the review of the case should not focus on the fact that the deck is built. A built condition is part of the discussion but should not be viewed as reason alone to approve or deny the request. Any recommendation must determine if a hardship or practical difficulty is present that would warrant a deviation from the regulations. Section 350:530 identifies 6 criteria, for granting a variance in order to provide relief where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property .for the use of land. For this case, a review of the conditions assuming the deck was not built might be an appropriate approach to determine if a practical difficulty or hardship is present. When the survey showing the future deck was submitted, it indicated the deck could be built in conformance with the code. If the applicant were submitting a request to build the deck today, how would it be reviewed? What conditions are present that warrant the granting of a variance? Staff cannot recommend the granting of a variance because there is no apparent hardship or practical difficulty present. The problem is the direct result of actions created by the applicant and not a circumstance created by the shape of the lot, topography of the site, or location of the house. It is important to make this distinction in this case because it does not appear that requiring the deck to conform is impractical. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council deny the variance to allow the deck to remain in its current state and would further recommend the following conditions: 1. The deck meet current code requirements including a 4 feet side yard setback for that portion located in the rear yard. A Building Permit application for the existing deck and any needed improvements to reflect a conforming condition be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official subject to associated fees and penalties. 3. An "as-built" survey be prepared and submitted to the City at the completion of the project. Findings of fact in support of the recommendation for denial are as follows: 1. The nonconforming deck condition is the direct result of actions of the applicant. 2. There are no special conditions present that are the result lot size, shape or topography. 3. The granting of a variance would cgnfer special privileges to the applicant not afforded 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (6t2) 338-0800 Fax(612) 338-6838 -2550- p. 4 #02-11 Aquilina I~'ariance April 30, 2002 to other single-family property owners. 4. The granting of a variance would be materiallY detrimental to the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The granting of a variance would "legitimize" the eXisting deck encroachment and continue to negatively impact to the adjacent property by limiting sight lines arid the separation between homes. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -2551 - 17:27 FAX 9524720679 VARIANCE APPLICATION CiTY OF MOUND S341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 952.472-0607, Fax: 952.472-0620 Application Fee:~ (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) City Council Date: C!tY Planner .... DiqR~ City Engineer PARK Public Works Other SUBJECT Address PROPERTY Lot ~ .LEG~ Bio~ DESC, Subdivision .... ZONING DISTRICT PROPERW Name OWNER Ad~ress ~ Phone APPLICANT Name (IF OTHER Address_ THAN Phone 1, Has an apl )licatlon ever been made for zoning, vanance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for thi property? {,~"es, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copis of resolutions. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of uss, etc.): - 25 2- 12/19/Ul 11:4~ FAX 9~2~72067~ CITY OF ~0UBrD Variance Application; P. 2 °f.3. " Case No. · 3. Do the existing· structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and se~ack' regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No (). If no, specify each non,COnforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e. SetbaCk, lot area, etci): . ........................... .SE.T._BAD_E~:': ............................. "'REQUIRED .............. REQUESTED (or mitering) VARIANCE Front Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. Side Yard: ( N S E W ) ft,. ft, Side Yard: ( N 8 E W ) ~ ft, ft. Rear Yard: ( N S E W ) ft. ft. Lakeside: (NS EW) ... : .~ ...ft ft. ' (N@EW) fl, ft. Street Frontage: ft. fi. Lot Size: sq fl sq ff Hardcover: · sq fl _sq ft sq ft sq ft Does the/~resent use of the property conform to all regulations for the Zoning district in which It is located? Yes {/)', No (). If no, specify each non-C°nforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject propedYpr'even~ 'Its re'a'Sona~j~'~'~6' for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? (v~/'tOo narrow ( ) topography ( ) soli too small ( ) drainage ( ) existing situation too shallow. .( ~/~hape (,-~)"other: specify Please describe: Revised 04/24/01 -2553- Variance Application, p. $ of 3 · ~ 00.~... Case No,-- D -I I _ 6. ' Was the hardship described:above Created by the action Of anyone having property Interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (lg82)? Yes (), No (). If yes; explain: '7 .Was .the.hards..bip created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No ~ If yes, explain: Are the conditions ofpard~hlp for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property described in this petition? Yeajf~, No (). If no, list Some o~er properties wl~ich ate similarly affected? i cert~ that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papem or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accu ate:' I conset~t to th~ entry in' or upon the premises described in this application by any al~thorized offiufial of ie City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or'of posting, maintaining .and'removing such'notices as may be ~quired law. Owner's.Signature ~ ~ Data ~" ~' D ~ AppLicant'S signatUre Revtsed 04/24/0 f -2554- CITY OF NOUND 007 CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER CALCULATION~ (IUPER.VIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) . 'LOTAR~ [O~ . SQ, ~,X~%=(for Lo~ of Record) ............................. LOT AR~ .,, ~ SQ, ~, X 45% = (for detached buildings only)~ ......... · ~lS~ng Lorn of Record may have 40 peroent coverage provided that te~niques are utll~ed, as outltmed In Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225, Subd. 8.B.1 (see back). A plen must be submlaed and approved by the Building ~clal. LENGTH WIDTH SQ DETACHED BUILDINGS (GARAGE/SHED) TOTAL HOUSE .................................................... _.. ~ x to) = X = .... 9'_.~JY_~V.. A.Y, PARKING AREAS, ET'C. TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS ............................... X j DECKS O~en-.cia~e (1/4" rich, Open~g between boerc~) Wllh a pervious surface, under are not ~ounted as har~cover. TOTAL. DRIVEWAY, ETC X = X = X = TOTAL DECK ....................................................... X = TOTAtOTHER ............................ ,,, ......... , ........... TOTALHARDCOvERIIMPER~OU~I=IURFACE ............................. ~ ................... UNDER/OVER(Indlcatedlffemnce)..~ ....................................................... PREPARED BY ~ F -] DATE z~- 7. - O Z- -2555- April 15, 2002 53,~i. 1 MAYWOOD ROAD MC~UND, MN 55364-1687 CITY OF M'OUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FA,.'~: (952) 472-0620 WEEB: www. cltyofmound.com John and Kathy Acquilina 3030 Island View Drive Mound, MN 55364 RE: Variance Application - 3030 'Island View Drive Dear Mr. and Mrs. Acquilina: This letter is in regard to the variance application for'th~ property located at 3030 Island View Drive that was submitted on or about April 2, 2002. Based on review by City you are advised that the application has been deemed to be complete and will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review at its May 6, 2002 meeting. In the event you have any questions regarding any of this information, please contact me directly at (952) 472-3190. I look forward to working with you. Community Development Director prinled on recycled paper -2556- i! '.J i 'il c~ p ~ o~_.,o'~. DECK INFORMATION City of Mound, 5341.,Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 952-472-0607 Fax: 952-472-0679 I~uil.din_~ Permits A permit is required for.any deck that is attached to a bUilding or that is 30 inches or more above grade, or that is part of the exiting system such as a landing outside any door, Frost Footings Any deck that is attached to a dwelling or garage that has frost footings must also-. have frost footings. ~ All decks that are 30 inches or more above grade must be protected by a guardrail. Such guardrail shall be a minimum of 36 inches in height. Open guardrails and stair railings shall have intermediate rails or an ornamental pattern such that a 6 inch diameter sphere cannot pass through - LESS than a 6" opening. StairWay Specs (UBC 3306) Minimum Width 36 Inches (private stairways serving an occupant load of less than 49 persons - Section B) Minimum Run 9 Inches Maximum Rise 8 Inches Headroom 6 feet 8 inches (measured vertically from a plane parallel and tangent to the stairWay'tread nosing to the'Soffit above at ali Points ~ SectiOn p) Handrails Shall be placed not less than 34 inches nor more than 38 inches above the nosing of treads. Rail end shall-be returned :or terminate in,neWel posts or-safety terminals. Note attached handout for acceptable designs. HANDRAILS ON RESIDENTIAL STAIRWAYS AND ~ONd~EyE s~EP~;MUS'~'BE'~RovIDED IF FoUR OR MORE RISERS. AlSo, provide on both sides if open stairway - Section J. Handrails projecting fro~'a ,,wall shall, h,ave a space,.of~ n0¢ !ess than ! .~!/2. inches between the wall and the ha. ndrail.. The handgriP portio~ of handrails shall be not less that I 1/2 inches nor more than 2 inChbS, in CrOSs.sectiOnal ~ dimension and shall have a smooth surface.with no sharp corners. Landings Every landing shall have a minimum dimension of"36 inches. A door swinging, over a landing shall not ,reduce, the width :of the landing to less than 0ne-half its required width at any position in its swing nor by more than 7 inches when fully o9en, UBC 3306(g). Cantilevered or Overhanging Deck8 Maximum of 2 foot cantilevered joist. Generally, the.joist that cantilever must extend two times the distance into the structure that they project outside thbstructure: or an engineered design may be required, All decks shall be designed to support a load of 60 lbs per square foot. Deck Handout 01/31/02 -2566- Flashing All connections between'deck and dwelling shall be weatherstripped. Any cuts in exterior finish shall be flashed oi' Caulked, ' '~' Joist Hangers Header j'°ist more' than SiX feet Ion'ga. nd tail joiSt over 12 feet::long shall be supPoded by approved framing anChors such aS jOist hangers, Wood Required All exposed wood used in the construction of decks is required to De of approved wood of natural resistance t decay (redWood, cedar, etc.) or treated wood. This inclLideS ~bst~,:~ :beams, joists and deCking. Required WindoWs. May open into a. roofed porch where the P0rdh' 1) ab~s a street, ya:rd' or, Court; 2) has a Ceiling height of not less than 7 feet, and 3) has a longer side at least 65% open· and unobstructed (open sides may be closed with insect screening). DEFINITIONS · Arbor latticework covered with climbing shrubs or vines. Balcony a platform that projects from the wall of a building and is enclosed by a parapet or railing. Breezeway a roofed open passage connecting two buildings.or halves of a building. DeCk Gazebo Patio Patio Cover a flat, flOored, roofleSS a.~ea adjoining.a house. detached, free-standing porch or screen house, a courtyard open to the. sky - a. terrace. one-story roof structure open on one or more sides. May be attached or detached: patio covers shall be :'us'ecl'roi~ recr6ational, OutdoOr' living purposes and ~nd'~~ aS Carports, garages, StOrage rooms Or .habitable rooms. Porch TerraCe a roofed, unheated area adjoining a house. May be open, screened or glazed. a relatively level.earth area or platform'adjoining a bUilding. Trellis same as arbor excePt doe"not include vines. INSPECTIONS Pier Footing Final Inspection To be made after holes are excavated, but before any concrete is placed. After wOrk is completed, indluding guardraiis, stairs, and handrails, etc. Deck Handout 01/31/02 -2567- SMOKE DETECTORS - are required to be updated when value of any permitte¢i 'project is valued at $1000 or more. Please provide for proper inspection to verify if nee(led. ZONING REQUIREMENT~ (City Code E×cerPts) Section 350:310, Deflnitions.~. The following words and terms,,' whenever they occur in this Ordinance, are defined as follOws: ~ Subd. 1. Accessory Building, An accessory building Shall' be considered to be an integral part of the principal structure unless it is five (5) feet or more from the principal structure or use and providing that the structure exceeds 120 square'feet::. Section 350:435. Subd. 5. A. Subd. 37. Deck. A platform supported by an open system of posts, beams and other structural elements: Subd, 132. Structure. Anything construCted, or erected, the Use of which requires more or less permanent location on the ground or attached to something having a permanent location on the ground, except the following: (1.)on-grade stairways and steps notexceeding 6 feet in width and landings connected to such stairways or steps not. exceeding 6 feet in width and 6 -feet in length; (2) boardwalks not exceeding 6 feet in width; (3) driveways not exceeding 20 feet in width; (4) sidewalks not exceeding 6 feet in Width; and (5) retaining walls not exceeding 4.feet in height. Accessory_ Buildings. ' Accessory_ Residential Building Setback Requirements: Side Yard Setbacks. A detached accessory building may be located within four (4) feet of.the side lot line in the rear yard with a minimum' Of a six (6) foot Setback in side yard location, On throughand:lakeShore tots, a detached accessO~ building maybe located within fOUr:(4)feet of; the side lot line in the front yard Whenever a garage is so designed that the doors face a side street or side prope~: lifie; the~distance between:thedoorsand;the property line shall be ~enty',~(20) feet or mo~e'. B. ' Front Yard SetbaCks: Ali. accessory 'buildihgs Shallmeet the same front yard setback requirements as the principal:bUildingi:except for lakeshore and through lots. For detached garages on a lakeshore or through lots, a minimum twenty (20) foot fr~ntyard.'setbaCk:.:is required if the garage door(s) open to the street; '. an ~eight (8) foot frontyard ;~etbaCk is:required if the garage door(s) open to the Deck Handout 01/31/02 RearSetback, A detached accessory building may be located within four (4) feet Of the rear,lot line. ' ' - : Lakeshore Setback. Detached accessory buildings must maintain a 50 foot setback from the ordinary high water. ,¢ -2568- Section 350:440, ~ Reauired Yardsand O_~en Spa~,. Subd. 3. The following shall not be considered encroachments on yard requirements. ~ '~ ~'~i i, '. ~"i , .,' Chimneys, window air conditioners, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, omamenta! features,~.:.mechanical devices~ cornices, eaves, gutters, and the. like~ provided they do not extend more than two (2) feetinto, the required yard' area. B, Uncovered porches,.stooos, orsimilar:..entmnce .structures not e~(ceeding 32 so. uare feet which do not extend in ..elevation .above t, heheight ol=~the..ground elevation of the princi.Dal~.buiiding..and steps:that do not e,xtend.,to a distance of less than two (2) feet from any lot C. Decks, balconies, and the like, attached to the principal building which, extend in elevation above the height of the ground floor elevation of the principal building; and, decks; balconies., and the like~ detached from the princiPal building and exceeding 30. inches i~n height above {he surrounding grade provided they do not · extend within ten (10) feet of the rear lot line ,or extend:beyond side yard, and front.yard:accessory,~building setbacks, On lakeshore lots;, such structures shall comply with the lakeshore setback of the principal structure. D. Detached decks or similar structures which do not.extend above 30 :inches in elevation above the height of the surrounding grade and do not extend to a diStance of less than two (2) feet from;any lot, line, On,takeshore Iots~ such structures shall comply with the lakeshore setback of the principal structure. Section 350:620 (all districts) · D. Impervious surface..coverage of lots shall nQt exceed 30 percent of the lot area. Open.pattem~ed decks and.stairways shall be. Counted as 50 percent impervious cover providing thatthey are ~installed over a permeablesurface. Those constructed over an impermeable surface or are impermeable themselves shall be counted as 100% impervious cover. . 2,... Water~edented:Accesso~..Structures~. Each lot,may'have one water-oriented accessory stru:~ure on pdvate:lakeshore not meeting the normal structure setback in Section 350:1225, Subd. 3.A. 1. of this · ordi ,nancejf'the water, oriented acqeSSo~,stmcture complies with the follewingPmvisions:..~ .~ ..~.. ...., a. ~ An at-grade deck:is allowed providing that it does not occupy an . area :greater.than. 259. .... square. . feet:and; 'must. not exceed thirty (30) inches above grade at any point. : A..tockbox is allowed :providing tha~ it{d0'es:,not have a total floor area exceeding twenty (20) square feet and does not exceed four (4) feet in height. Where possible, lock boxes shall be positioned such that -the narrowest:side of ~he stm~oture is parallel to the ordinary high. water, iine;~ Deck Handout 01/31/02 -2569- Deck Handout 01/31702 The setback of water-oriented accessory structure s from the ordinary high water level must be at least ten feet. Water-Oriented accessory structures must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks or color, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. Stairways. Lifts. and Landings, Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative'to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep,slopes to shore areaS: stai~ays and lifts must meet all of the following design requirementS: Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width on residential lots. Wider stairways may be used for commercial properties, public Qpen,space recreational properties, and planned development areas, bo Landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed 32 square feet in area. Landings larger than 32 square feet may be used for commercial propertieS, public open-space recreational properties, and planned deVelopment areas. c. Canopies or rOofs are-not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings, Stai~aYS, lifts, and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings, or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the most visually inconsPicuouS portionS' of lotS, asviewed from the surface of the public water assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, whenever practical. fo Facilities such as ramps, lifts, or mobility paths for physically handicapped persohs are also ~llbwed for achieving access to shore areas,, provided that :they comply with the dimensional and performance stahdardsOf subltems (a) to (e)in ,~ddition to the requi:rements of Minnesota Regulations, ChaPter 1340, Specific Standards: Impervious surface coverage of lots in residential zoness!hall not exceed' 30 percent of the lot area. Open patterned decks and-stairways sl~all be counted as 50% impervious cover providing that they are installed over a permeable surface. Those constructed over an impermeable surface or are impermeable themselves shall be counted as 100% imPerviou~ cover. -2570- t -2571- Q: l -2572-. -2573- -2574- I.. I.= I- Z I,U DNI''~w"~ J-SOd '-2575-' , soz~ S~ZZNGZl · .auz--a ~z~a .............. 3000 2000 * 3000 · 12 ..e. * .4000 * 5000 * 16 · * 6000 * 7000 * 8000 * 20 * ' 6 * 9000 t 21 ' 10000 * 22 * 7 * 11000 · 2~ · 7 * 12'000 * 13000 * 25 * * 14000 * 15000 * 16000 * * 17000 * 18000 * 30 * 10 * 19000 * 20000' * 31 * 10 * 21000 * 32 * 11 * 22000 * 33 * * 23000 · 34 · 11 * 24000 *' 3~ · 11 * 250 O0 *' * 26000 · 36 * 12 · 27000 * 28000 * 29000 · * 30000 * 3~ * 13 * 43 * 15 · NOTE: 1. ~UNCHING SHEAR, BF-~ SKF. A/~AND BENDING MOHENT CHECKED. 02'25.I987 -2576- -2577- CITY OF MOUND HARDCOVER cAL~UI'A~oNS ~ / (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE O ER G-E) PROPERTY ADDRESS: OWNrER'S NAME: LOT AREA ~ SQ. FT. X 30% = LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% = {for all lots)' . .....~ ....... J (for Lots of Record~) ....... J LOT AREA · , 'SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only) .. *Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage Provided that techniqueS are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. LENGTH WIDTH SO FT HOUSE X = X TOTAL HOUSE BLD. GS.. , X = ,: . , (GARAGE/SHED) X = ' TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. · DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, DECKS Open decks (114" min. opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover OTHER TOTAL-DRIVEWAY, ETC . ...... ,....';; , . TOTAL OTHER HARD'cOvER / IMPERvIous SURFACE UNDER /OVER (indicate difference) ............................... I PREPARED BY DATE -2578- (Revised 8--17-99) SUMMARY OF, HAAbCO~R RULES. Excerpts.fibm th~'"M~Un~ Zoning Ordi~a'i~'Ce Section 3S0:310.. ~..e~0Zt[t[~ . ....... ~ Subd. 65: Imaervious Cover, Any surface i~'e~ous or resistant t0 ~e !.re~ fl°w of wa~er-or surface rnoi~ture. Impervious cover shall inctude;,but r!0t' be hniCe~l to ail' .8'~veWaY~ an'~ P~d~ig area~:'Wheth~t pay'ed or not, tenni~ COurts, sidewalks, patios, and swimming pools. OPen decks (1/4"' minimum opening between boards) shall not be counted in impervious cover calculations. SUbd. 78: Lot Area. MinimUlll, The area of a lot in a horizontal plane' bOanded by the~lot lines, but not including- any area oCCUpied by a floodplair~ as deSignated on the adopted HUD/DNR Floodplain Map. (Federal Regional Eieyation: Lake Minnetonka = 931,0; Dutch Lake = 940.0; Lake Langdon = 935.0) Section 350:645, General ReauirementsA.o.olicable to All Residential Districts · Impervious surface coverage of lots shall not exceed 30 percent of the lot area. Accessory buildings shall not exceed 15 % of the total lot area. Section 350:1225,.. Subd. 6. Shoreland Management~ 1, Impervious surface coverage of lots in residential zones shall not exceed 30 percentof the lot area. On existing tots of record, impervious coverage may be permitted by a maximum of 40 percent providing that the following techniques are utilized as ai3pli~ble. Co Impervious areas should be drained.~ vegetated areas or grass filter std~s'through: the use of c~rowns oh ddt, eways, direction downspouts on gutters collecting water from roof areas, etc. Dividing 'or separating impervious areas into smaller areas through the use of grass or vegetated filter ~p$ s~Ch' as the USe.o~ paving blOckS. separated by grass or sand allo~ng infiltration.~ Use grading and. constr~io,n techniques which' encourage rapid infiltration such as the installation of sand or gravel "sump" areas to collect and percolate, stonmwater. -- Install ben'ns to temporarily detain stormwater thereby increasing soil absorption, imper~i0u~ S'girfaCe coverage in 10ts in the b~sih~eSs and industrial zones shall not exceed 30 percent of the lot area. In business'~'~i'ihdustriat Zones' that are included within areas covered by an approved stormwater management plan, .. impervious surface coverage shall not exceed 75 percent of the total lot area. -2579- Building Permit Application City of Mound, 5341 Maywood RoadrM0und, MN 55364 Phone:: 952.472,0607 Fax: 952, 72,0679 SITE Property Address -. Business Name/Tenant Applicant is: [] Owner [] Contractor [] Tenant LEGAL Lot Block Plat DE~P. IPTION gubdivi-~ion PlD ~ OWNER Name Address Home Phone Other CONTRACTOR Company Name License Cf Contact Person ' Address Home Phone Other ARCHITECT Name, AND/OR Address ENGINEER Home Phone Other DESCRIBE WORK: vALUATION OF WORK: $ VALUE APPROVED $ Separate permits are required for electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilating or air conditioning. Permits become nult and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, or if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days at any time after work is commenced. Time Limits on Bulldino Comcletion. All work to be performed pursuant to a building permit obtained f°r new construction, repairs, remOdeling and alterations to the exteriors of any building or structure in any zoning distdct shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of permit issuance. The person obtaining the permit and the owner of the property shall be responsible for completion. A violation of this ordinance is a misdemeanor offense. The City Council may extend the time for completi0p uponwfltten r~ques! Of the permlttee, establishing to Re, reasonable satisfaction of,the City Council that cirCumstan~bey0nd the control of fh~ pe~ittee Prevented corflpletion of the work for Which the permit was granted. The exten~i0n shall be requested not less than thirty (30) business days pdor to the end of the one-year PeriOd. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. Ail provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be compl!ed with whether:specified herein or not. The granting Of a permit do4es not presume tog ve authority t~ Violate or cancel the proVisiOns of anY other state or local l~w regulating conStruCtion or the performance of construction. x PRINT APPLICANT'S NAME APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE (OFFICE uSE ONLY) SPECIAL CONDITIONS & COMMENTS: : RECEIVED BY & DATE COPIED APPROVED ZONING PLANS CHECKED BY CiTY ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS APPROVED BY & DATE ASSESSING BUILDING OFFICIAL -2580- BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMEI 'rs GARAGES, ADDITIONS; DECKS, SHEDS, ETC. (FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION SEE SEPARATE HANDOUT) Bo PLANS, Submit two (2) copies of drawings showing proposed design~ and materials. Drawings .shall be drawn to scale and shall include the following information: 1. Floor Plan indicating proposed size, window and door openings, h~ader sizes over openings, size, spacing and direction of rafters or trusses. 2. Cross-Section from footings through the roof. 3. Elevations, front and side view indicating height of structure and proposed grade. SURVEY OR SITE PLAN. Submit two (2) copies of a Certificate of Survey or two (2) copies of a site plan. The Building Official may require A Certificate of Survey if setbacks are controversial. Each site plan shall include the following: 1. Scale of drawing and north arrow. 2. Lot dimensions and square footage of lot. The lot area is measured above' the Flood Elevation (see below). 3. Location of all existing and proposed structures. 4. Driveway area, parking areas, sidewalks, and patios (indiCate type of surface, i.e. asphalt, gravel, concrete, etc.). 5. Dimensions of all existing and proposed structures. 6. Distance from all structures to property lines measuring to the nearest point of each building. 7. For lakeshore lots, a surveyor must locate the Ordinary High Water elevation and Flood Elevations. 8. Utilities (sewer and water) and easements. C. HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS. See worksheet. Not required for open decks. NOTE: A site' inspection be required which would require the proposed location of the impr(~vement to be staked.and the property markers made visible. PROPERTY IRONS MUST BE VISIBLE'AT THE FOOTING INSPECTION (prior to concrete being poured). Locating the property irons is the responsibility of the property owner. ELEVATION Ordinary High Water Flood Elevation Lowest Floor Elevation REQUIREMENTS LAKE MINNETONKA 929.4 MCWD 931.5 CITY 931 933 DUTCH LAKE 939.2 940 942 LAKE LANGDON 932.1 935 937 -2581 - CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com May 23, 2002 TO: FROM: REF: MEMORANDUM / Mayor/City Council ~ HJ~mmeF~Cwknlerer~sPsaorc~aSt~oirne~oc~k~ge Un~ Mouu~°r -"~J/ 1-~ City Code To refresh the City Council there was a request from a resident to review how the Mound City Code Section 436 Commercial Boat Docks relates to Home Owner Associations requirement to pay a dock fee. This matter was directed by the City Council to be heard at the Dock & Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) on April 18, 2002. All applicants were invited to attend and asked to provide a copy of their association bylaws. The DCAC reviewed all the information and determined that all but one applicant, Chapman Place, does not allow rental of slip sites to non-residents. The DCAC recommended "The private Associations not be included under the Commercial Dock Program and are not in fact charged a Fee. Also recommends the city not use staff time for Inspections, as the inspections are to be left to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District." _printed on recycl~ paper 2582- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission April 1 8, 2002 DRAFT 3. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. MINUTES PER SPEAKER) None (LIMIT TO THREF 4. DISCUSS: COMMERCIAL BOATS DOCK ORDINANCF a. Chapman Place Association b. Driftwood Shores c. Lakewinds Association d. Seahorse Condominiums e. Seton View f.. Harrison Harbor Association g. Seton Twin Homes h. Halstead Acres Association i. Pelican Point Homeowners Association Park Director Jim Fackler explained that he has been at the City of Mound for approximately 17 years. In the beginning, the Dock Department was monitoring the associations and the commercial docks. The policy at that time was not to charge any entity that was not subletting dock space outside of their association. This was the procedure for the following 16 years. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District notifies the Dock Department annually and requests any input in regards to these licenses. This year there was a closer look at dock fees including commercial and association fees. On February 26, 2002, the City Council directed the Dock and Commons Advisory Commission to look into the licensing of Associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The associations were requested to submit letters requesting exemption and copies of association bylaws. -2583- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 All the Associations submitted their by-laws for consideration and review of the Commission. The commercial license fee for 2002 is $20.00 per year. The adjustment would be over a three-year time frame. The City attorney was requested to investigate this issue. It is the attorney's opinion that a condominium association clearly fits within the relevant code definitions that would require it to obtain a license to continue to operate its docks. Section 436.01 subd. 1. Staff is requesting instruction from the Commission and the City Council as to staff time spent overseeing the associations. If so, due to budget restraints, a fee will have to be established to reimburse this time. The services would be very minimal. Docks are inspected once per year. Staff would recommend inspections twice per year if the Commission approves this matter. ' Commissioner Ahrens stated that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District also inspects the docks is issue. Feels the City doesn't need to re-inspect the docks. City Council Representative Hanus stated the City is the primary licensor for Commons Docks and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is the primary licensor for the association/commercial docks. Chair Funk requested comments and questions from the public present. Bob Brown, Seahorse Condominiums, 5430 Three Points Blvd. The Commission needs to understand that the docks at Seahorse Condominiums are privately owned and titled. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District limits the association as to the size of their slips. The owners of these docks can sublet the slips only to people who live or own at Seahorse Condominiums. This cannot be for profit as it is against the Seahorse Bylaws. -2584- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 Commissioner Goldberg feels the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is doing a good job inspecting these docks. There basically is no commercial activity and does not fee the Commission or City should be involved. Chair Funk agrees that this is not part of the Commons Program. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District does the inspections and feels staff does not need to' re-inspect the docks. Steve Schlacter, Lakewinds Condominiums Association President. The Lakewinds Association has rules and regulations in dealing with docks. The Association enforces the rules and deals with the complaints. The City does not generally have to deal with any complaints about the docks. In regards to parking, because the residents of Lakewinds only use the docks, the parking is totally the Association's responsibility, which is on prigate property. After living there for 20 years there has never been any problems with the inspections. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District does a very complete inspection. No sense in having the docks inspected again. Tom Lavoe, Lakewinds Condominiums Association Treasurer. Does not understand why they are being qualified as a commercial dock. If Lakewinds are classified as a commercial marina then they should be given the opportunity to lease to the general public. Hanus stated that status is governed by your own bylaws; however that status could affect how the City would deal with this issue and how the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District would deal with this issue. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District initially categorized associations as commercial docks. Somehow these docks were lumped in as commercial docks. Fackler stated the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's rules and regulations superceded the city of Mound's rules and regulations. -2585- Minutes of a Meeting of the Momad Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 Commissioner Ahrens feels the recommendation to the City Council should be to not inspect docks by City Staff because they are private property and are only being used by the individual property owners. These are not commercial Chuck Auger, Driftwood Shores Association. All the associations here tonight do not have commercial operations at their property. They should not be commercial simply because they are multiple docks. Being lumped in the commercial docks is not applicable to his association. MOTION by Funk second by Ahrens to recommend the private Associations not be included under the Commercial Dock Program and are not in fact charged a Fee. Also recommends the City not use staff time for Inspections, as the inspections arb to be left to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Dave Beede, Harrison Harbors, 1824 Commerce Blvd. Represents a small association with approximately 650 feet of shoreline primary wetland. One dock for seven slips minimizes the wetland hardship. MOTION carried unamiously, Staff is directed to determine the losses due commercial dock fee projections. Five minutes recess. 5. REVIEW: DOCK/SLIP FEES AND REVENUS VS. EXPENDITURES As requested staff provided revenues and expenditures from 1996 thru projected 2006. This is an update from the Finance Director. The breakdown is on page 240. The Commission is requesting more detail on the capital outlay items and the Administration costs. -2586- Mound City Council Minutes - February 2e, 2002 Sarah Smith, Loren Gordon and the applicants will meet with the applicants' surveyor to prepare the correct new legal descriptions. 6. (moved to 3E on consent a.qenda) 7. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2002 (MOUND VISIONS 2ND) City Engineer, John Cameron, presented the plans and specifiCations for the subject project to the Council, City Attorney Dean pointed out that this project is 100% assessed to MetroPlains. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adopt the followingi?esolution. All voted in John Cameron reviewed the bids re~ived for the ~e~tedge B~i~Vard 'Street Improvement. Project. ~is is for informational p~se[only, as :~i:'i~bf the info~ation will be reviewed by R H Develo merit be~use~he ha~:~a reed t0 a 75" · . P , ~ .......... Y .... g p y ~ofthe project plus a percentage of the other assessed ~?~:es, should they default. 9 C ~:~!~ .... '-:~ .... . OMMERClAL DOCK LICENSE RE~:Oi:REMENT'::FORCONDOMINIU~ ASSOCIATIONS Councilmember Brown stepped for ~scuss~on due to a ~nfli~ of interest. He is a condominium o~er After headng comments Council to have the ~n members, it was the wish of the review this item. on MOTION by Osr to suspend collection of these commercial dock fees until ~and this entire issue to the Docks and Commons Commission with a and request their recommendation. All voted in favor. Motion ives the Commission two meetings for discussion of this topic. Fackler informed the Council that he had LMCD approval paperwork to return and was given the OK to do so. Councilmember Brown returned to his Council seat. 9A. CELL PHONES Hanus inquired about why the Katie, the Dock Inspector, needs a combination cell phone/radio. Fackler explained that she spends a great deal of time in the field and feels this is an appropriate communication tool for her. After further discussion, Fackler · will look for a better rate, or a different carrier with a better rate. 3 -2587- DOCKS: 435.35 Commercial Boai' (fee per boat) 2002 $20/y!'. 436.00 Commercial Dock Renewal New applicant fee Prior. no,.charge commercial docks Slips Prior no-charge Slips .Boats stored on. land Prior no-charge boats stored on land $500/yr. $500/yr. $2501yr. $20 ea/yr. $10 ea/yr. $10 ea/yr.. $5 ea/yr. 437.00 Shared dock application Filed. on or after March $25 437.01 Penalty fee for unregistered boat $25 Filed 'on or after March 1a $25 437.10 Temporary boat docki'ng fee: Up to 21 days:. $30 437.12 Multiple Slip Fee Penally for unregistered boat LMCD charge ,, LMCD charge (if variance granted) $250/yr. $25 Actual Minimum as set by LMCD 437.25 Late dock license application fee on or'after March l't'(abutters only) Additional late feesi~ per month, starting April 1st '(abutters only) $20 $10 437.25 Dock/Slip Sailboat mooring Small watercraft Shared dock Senior citizen Primal: 65 and over Senior citizen: sharing. LMCD charge LMCD charge (no boat) $250/yr. $250/yr. $80/yr. $80/yr. $190/yr. $60/yr. Actual Minimum as set by LMCD R -2588- Mound City Code 436.00 Section 436 - COMMERCIAL BOAT DOCKS 436.01 Definitions. For the purpose of this Section, the following definitions shall apply: Subd. 1. Commercial Boat Dock. Providing space for docking, mooring at buoy, or otherwise keeping or storing of boats, barges, or other floating structures used in a trade or business or providing through the joint use of lakeshore property such space for boats or watercraft belonging to persons or families who are part of a group or association. Subd. 2. Business of Docking or Storing of Boats. Renting or otherwise prOviding space for docking, anchoring, or storing three or more boats or floating, structures belonging to persons other than the owner of the dock or property upon which said boat or structures are docked or stored or adjacent to which said boats are moored, Subd, 3, Dock. Any Wharf, pier, or other structure constructed or maintained in the lake, whether floating or not, ineltiding all 'La" or "Ts" or posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or adjacent to the principle structure. Subd. 4. Mooring. Any buoy, post, structure, or other device at which a watercraft may be moored and which is surrounded by navigable water. Subd. $. Authorized Commercial Dock Use Ar~a. That area in the lake which may be used for commercial boat docks, moorings, boat storage, or which may be enclosed on three sides for any of these purposes. SUbd. 6. .Site. Any shoreline lot, parcel, or other piece of property legally subdivided and recorded in the office of the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. Subd. 7. Stored. hours. Any boat or other watercraft docked or moored for more than 12 436,05 License Required.' No person, association of persons, or families whether incorporated ov not, through any arrangement, whether through common or corporate ownership or otherwise, shall operate, carry on,- or be engaged in the trade or business of docking, mooring, anchoring., keeping or storing of boats or make any arrangement for the use or joint use of lakeshore property for such dockage of boats and watercraft within the corporate limits of this City without having first obtained a license. Any person, firm, or corporation or group or association of persons desiring such a license, shall make application in writing to the City Council, which application shall be signed by the applicant and filed with the City Clerk. The application shall set forth the names and residence of the applicant, exact location at which the applicant proposes to carry on his or her business or use of lakeshore property, and whether he or she is then or has 1 2/25/01 -2589- Mound City Code 436.10 heretofore been engaged in a similar business. The application shall be accompanied by a sketch of the proposed facilities, including location and type of buoy to be used therewith and the parking facilities as well as a statement outlining the manner, extent, and degree of u~e contemplated. The Clerk shall present the application to the City Council at its next regular meeting after the filing thereof. .. 436.10 Regulation of Commercial Boat Docks. In the event boat storage facilities are provided, any person owning or operating a Commercial Boat Dock shall comply with the following minimum standards: Subd. 1. Fire Hazards. All watercraft shall be stored in such a manner that they do not create a fire hazard. Subd. 2. Gasoline Storage. Any gasoline offered for sale or stored on the premises shall be placed in tanks or containers as may be required by the City Council and by City 'and State fire regulations, and such tanks or containers shall be stored underground or such distance from the storage facilities so as not to create a danger in the community. Subd, 3. Gasoline Sales. Gasoline sales shall not be made from the dock at which customer'S watercraft are stored. Subd. 4. Buoys. The location and marking of ali buoys shall be subject to the regulation of the Council. Subd. 5. Orderly Maintenance. The premises shall at all times be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. . .' Subd. fi. Parking. Off-street parking shall be provided as follows: One off-street parking stall for each three rental boat stalls, buoys, or slips available to customers or joint users. Subd. 7. No Residential Use. No boat or other floating structure tied up or connected to such dock facilities shall be used as a permanent, temporary, or seasonal residence. 43{~.15 Limitation of Commercial Dockage. No person shall anchor, keep, moor, dock, or store a boat, canoe, raft, barge, or other watercraft within the harbor limits of this City except at a dock or buoy which is in compliance with the terms of this Section 436, except, however, that a riparian owner may dock or store boats and other watercraft, in the natural body of water adjoining his or her property in a manner which will not interfere with boat traffic, legitimate use of the lake, or infringe upon the riparian rights and privileges of abutting property owners. 2 -2590- 2/25/01 Mound City Code 436.20 436.20 Re~ulation of Commercial Boat Dock~, Subd. 1. ..Prohibition. No person, firm, corporation, or association shall use any area of the lake as an authorized commercial dock use area, for commercial docks, moori.ngs, or boat storage unless such use is specifically permitted and licensed under the provisions of this Section 436. Subd. 2. Authorized Commercial Dock Use Area, An authorized commercial dock use area is described as follows: ~ (a) Length - The authorized commercial dock use area for sites bordering on the lake extends into the lake a distance equal to the site lake frontage to be measured at right angles to the side site lines and, except as provided herein, shall not extend into the lake a distance greater than 200 feet to be measured in a line parallel to the side site line as extended into the lake. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subdivision, eommemial docks in existence or authorized by other governmental agencies and under construction on the date' this ordinance becomes effective shall be considered nonconforming use and. may continue in existence without the necessity for the granting of a variance under the provisions of Subsection 436.40. Said nonconforming docks shall be subject to the provisions and limitations set forth in Section 350 of the City Zoning Code and of all regulations subsequently adopted regarding nonconforming uses. (b) Width- The authorized dock use area for sites bordering on the lake is limited in width by the setback lin~itations prescribed herein. The setback from side site lines as extended in the lake shall be as follows: For that portion of the length of the authorized commercial dock use area which extends .from the shore The setback shall be Zero.to 50 feet 10 feet 50 to 100 feet 15 feet 100 to 200 feet 20 feet Subd. 3. Structures Not to Obstruct. No licensed dock, mooring, or other structure shall be so located asto obstruct a navigable channel, or so as to obstruct reasonable access to any other dock, mooring area, or similar structure authorized under this SeCtion 436. No dock., mooring area, or similar structure shall be located or designed so that it unneces~ily requires or encourages boats using it to encroach into any other authorized commercial dock use area or into individually owned private dock areas. 3 2/25/01 -2591 - Mound CityCod¢ 436.20, Subd. 4. Subd. 4. .Space Between Boats. Reasonable space shall be provided in mooring areas to allow navigation freely between moored watercraft. Subd, 5, Extensions. No commercial dock or mooring area shall extend across the extended zone line between, sites zoned differently by the City. Subd. 6. Unusual Configurations. Where the provisions of this Section 436 w°Uld' cause the authorized commercial dock use area of two or more sites to .overlap, or where there is. any other unusual configuration of shoreline or extended lot lines, which.causes a conflict between the owners of two or more adjacent or nearby sites as the use of the same area of the lake for docks, mooring areas,, or other structures or for reasonable access thereto, the owner of any of the affected sites may apply to the Council for a variance. Subd. 7. Construction~ Repair and Maintenance Standards. (a) General Rule. All commercial docks, mooring, and other structures shall be constructed and maintained as provided in this Section 436. (b) Materials. Docks, moorings, and other structures, whether temporary or permanent, shall be constructed of such materials and in such a manner as the owner determines, provided that they shall be so built and maintained that they do not constitute a hazard to the public using the waters of the lake. (c) (d) Safety. Commercial do,eks or mooring areas may be constructed of such materials and in such a manner as the owner determines provided that such dock or mooring area shall be so built and maintained as to be safe for use by the public. Lighting. Commercial docks shall be suitably and adequately lighted in'accordance with City regulations. No oscillating, rotating, flashing or moving sign or light may be used on any dock. Dock lighting shall not be directed toward the lake in such a manner that it impairs the vision of or confuse operators of watercraft. Signs, No advertising signs may be displayed from any dock other than an identifying sign which shall be no larger than six square feet in area. (0 Fuel and Power SuPply. Installation of electrical and fueling facilities on commercial docks, moorings, and other structures shall be in accordance with applicable building codes and subject to state and local inspection procedures. Persons making such electrical or fueling installations shall maintain records of compliance with state and local codes and regulations. (g) Factors Considered., In exercising its discretion in granting or denying licenses, the C~uncil may consider, among other things, the following: 4 2/25/01 -2592 Mou~ City Code 436.20, Subd. 7, (g) (i) Whether the commercial dock or mooring area will be structurally safe for u~e by the intended users. (2) Whether the facility will comply with the regulations contained in this Section 436. (3) Whether the proposed facility will create a volume of traffic on. the lake in the 'vicinity of the facility which will tend to be unsafe, or which Will cause an undue burden of traffic upon the lake in the vicinity of the facility. (4) Whether the pmpo,sed facility will be compatible with the adjacent development. (5). Whether the proposed facility will be compatible with the maintenance of the natural beauty of the lake. (6) Whether the proposed facility will affect the quality of the water of the lake and the ecology of the lake. (7) Whether the proposed facility, by reason of noise, fumes, or other nuisance characteristics, will tend to be a source of nuisance or annoyance to persons in the vicinity of the facility. (8) Whether adequOte sanitary facilities Will be provided in connection with the proposed facilitj. 436.25 License Fee and License Applications. Subd. 1. Expiration and Fee. Any license issued by the Council pursuant to this Section 436 shall expire on April 1 next following its issuance. The base fee for new applications and for renewal applications, plus an additional fee for each boat accommodation, shall' be established in accordance with the provisions of Section 500 of the City Code. (ORD 0!-2001, 2/25/01) Subd. 2. License Applications for Docks. License applications shall be obtained at the City offices. Such applications shall state completely the information required by Subsection 436.05 and by the City Manager or the Dock Inspector. Subd, 3. Application Filing. Applications for licenses shall be filed with the Dock Inspector at the City offices and he shall recommend to the City Council that the license be approved or denied. No license will be recommended or authorized until the Dock Inspector determines that the proposed dock complies substantially with the terms of all City ordi.nanees. 5 2/25/01 -2593- Mound City Code 436.25, Subd. 4. Subd. 4. , .Applleatlon Deadlines. Applications for dock licenses shall be made between January 1 and the last day of February of each year. Subd, 5. Late Applications. All applications received on or after March 1 shall,be subject to a late fee as established in accordance with the provisions of Section 500 of the City Code. (OKI) 01.-2001, 2/25/01) 436.30 Issuance of License. Subd. 1. Any license issued by the Council pursuant to this Section 436 may'contain restrictions as the Council deems necessary to protect the health, welfare, and safety of the general public from over burdening the primary harbor limits of this City and the lakeshore at any particular location having in mind (among other things) parking problems, safety requirements for docking and. mooring, contamination of the lake for boat traffic of all kinds. Each license when issued shall contain a statement of the restrictions and conditions and said license with such restrictions and conditions shall be conspicuously posted on the licensed premises. Subd. 2. No license shall be issued by the Council pursuant to this Section 435 authorizing a commercial boat dock or boat docking or storage upon property within the confines of this City contrary to the regulations and limitations applying to said property set forth in the City's Zoning Ordinance. 436.35 Inspection. The City ~council or such officer as may be designated by the Council for the purposes may, at reasonable times, inspect or cause to be inspected any such Iicensed commercial boat dock, and if it shall appear that such dock has not been constructed or is not being maintained or used in accordance with the license issued by the Council, or in accordance with the terms of this Section 436, the Council, by its City Manager, shall notify, the owner thereof in writing of the way or ways such dock does not comply with the license required in this Section, after which the owner shall have ten days to remove the dock or make the same comply with the terms of the license and this Section 436. If the violation is not corrected within the allotted time, the Council shall revoke the license. Notification under this Section 436 shall be made in writing to the owner of the dock at the address given in the application. Failure to have a valid license in force shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this Section 436. 436.40 Variances. Subd. 1. Variances; When Granted. Where practical difficulties or particular hardships occur, the Council, upon application of a person affected, may permit a variance from the requirements of this Section 436 or may require a variance from what is otherwise permitted by this Section 436, provided that such variance with whatever conditions are deemed necessary by the Council, does not adversely affect the purposes of this Section 436, the public health, safety, and welfare, and reasonable access to, or use of, the lake by the public or riparian owners. 6 2/25101 -2594- Mound City Code 436.40, Subd. 2. Subd. 2. Variance; Application. Applications for variances shall be filed with the City Manager. The application shall contain: Co) (d) (e) (0 (g) The name and address of the applicant; The description and location of the property for which the variance is sought; The variance for which the applicatio~n is made; The names and addresses of the owners of abutting sites; A map or plat of the site for which the variance is sought, and of abutting or other affected sites, showing any existing docks, moorings,, or other structures or the proposed location or relocation of any such structures; The consent of the applicant permitting' officers and agents of the City to enter upon the applicant's premises at reasonable times to investigate the appiieafion and to determine compliance with any variance which may be granted; Such other information, such as surveys and photographs, as the City Manager may require to assist the Council in consideration of the application. Subd. 3. Varianee~ Fee. The variance application shall be accompanied by an application fee as established in accordance with the provisions of Section 500 of the City Code. (ORD 01-2001, 2/25/01). Such fee shall not be refunded at any time after the processing of the application has been commenced. Subd. 4. Hearings, Upon receipt of a completed variance application, the City Manager shall schedule a hearing by the Council on the application. The Council may grant a variance from the literal provisions of this Section 436 in instances wh~re their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property or properties under consideration, and shall grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with'the spirit and intent of this Section 436. The Council may impose conditions on the riparian owners and users of the lake. Subd. 5.. Violations. Locating, constructing, installing, or maintaining a commercial dock, mooring, or other structure in a manner different from the terms and conditions ora license or variance which is ordered or permitted' is a violation of this Section 436 and grounds for rescission of the variance. 436.45 Relation to Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and Other Governmen~l Agencies. The provisions of this Section 436 shall not supersede any ordinance of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District or other governmental agencies that are more restrictive in their provisions and application to Commercial Boat Docks and Dockage. This Section 436 shall not relieve the applicant from obtaining licenses and permits required by other governmental agencies. 7 2/25/01 -2595- MEMORANDUM February 21, 2002 To Mayor and Council From: John Dean Subject: Commercial Docks This memorandum is to supplement my earlier memorandum on the subject dated February 8, 2002, and is also included in the Council packet. Jim Faclder and I have received several letters from groups that have been previously treated as having commercial docks, but were not required to pay a fee until this year. They are obviously interested in the issue, and how the Council ultimately decides it. My February 8, 2002 memo to you suggests that (a) the Council should first determine whether the existing ordinance calls for the licensing of association or other group docks that are owned by the user; and (b) if you conclude that it does not, then the next question is whether you want to revise the ordinance to cover those situations. If you answer no to both of these points, then it will be necessary to determine the impact of that decision on the association and group docks that are currently treated as commercial docks. This is a separate task from the item before you on the 26th. If you decide to exclude privately owned and used association and group docks, I would suggest that you refer the matter to Jim Fackler to review the status of the docks currently licensed and to come back to you with a recommendation of those that should be excluded. JBD-210437vl MU220-6 -2596- IVIEMORANDUM February 8, 2OO2 To: Mayor and City Council From: John Dean Subject: Applicability of Commercial Dock License Requirements to Certain Association Docks. For many years the City has licensed the docks at condominiums and other multiple ownership residential developments under section 436 of the City Code. However, no fee was charged unless the slip was being leased out to someone who was not a resident of the development. During the review of the fee schedules last fall, the Council directed staffto charge a fee on association docks if the ordinance required a fee to be charged. At the January 8, 2002 Council meeting a question was raised whether section 436 did, in fact, require the licensure of association docks. I was asked to provide you with an opinion. On January 14, 2002, this office provided an opinion on the subject. The opinion states that the "condo association is 'providing space for docking' ...for individuals, other than the owner of the dock..". The opinion then concluded that "a condominium association clearly fits within the relevant code definitions that would require it to obtain a license to continue to operate its docks". Subsequent to the issuance of that opinion, it was brought to our attention that, in certain cases, the docks are not owned by the association, but rather by individual members of the association. We have also been informefi that at least one multiple dock structure has been erected due to the desire of the owners of homes in the development to have a single dock structure rather than for each owner to have and maintain individual docks. At the January 22 Council meeting I informed the Council of this new information and requested that consideration of the matter be deferred until the February 12 meeting. Section 436.05 reads as follows: No person, association of persons, families whether incorporated or not, through any arrangement, whether through common or corporate ownership or otherwise, shall operate, carry on, or be engaged in the trade or business ofdocldng, mooring anchoring, keeping or storing of boats or make any arrangement for the use or joint use oflakeshore property for such dockage of boats... Without having first obtained a license. I have highlighted two phrases in the section because I think they provide the answer. Section 436.01 subd. 2 contains the following definition: Business of Docking or Storing of Boats. Renting or otherwise providing space for docking, anchoring, or storing three or more boats or floating structures .IBD.209807vl MU220.6 -2597- belonging to persons other than the owner ofthe dock or property on which said boat or structures are docked or stored or adjacent to which said boats are moored. (italics added) Reading those two sections together, I must conclude that, although contrary arguments are possible, in my opinion, the ordinance intends that only association docks that are used in the business of docking require a commercial license. Any association dock which is privately owned and used by its owner is not used in the business of docking. The result is different under the LMCD Code. Under that code, a license is required by the LMCD for either a multiple dock or a commercial dock. A multiple dock is a dock constructed or maintained for the use of five or more restricted watercrat~. As a result, association docks (for five or more unrestricted watercra~) do need a LMCD license no matter who actually owns the dock. Assuming Section 436 means what I think it means, it does present problems for enforcement. For example, docks owned by associations would be subject to licensure and the fee. Association docks that are privately owned would not be subject to licensure and the fee unless they were used by someone other than the owner. RECOMMENDATION If you are in agreement with my interpretation of Section 436, I would make the following recommendations: 1. Decide whether you want the section enforced as written, or whether you would like to consider changes to it. 2. As part of any review, it might be important to focus on the reasons why Mound would license and regulate this type of dock in the first place. 3. It would probably be a good idea to solicit recommendations form the Dock and Commons Commission in the process. JBD-209g07vl MU220.6 -2598- MEMORANDUM TO: John Dean FROM: Mary Tietjen DATE: January 14, 2002 Commercial Dock License Requflvment for Condominium Association Cit), of Mound You asked me to review the Mound City Code to determine whether a condomim'um association's operation of a boat dock is a "commercial boat dock" and thus, subject to licensing. The condomim'um association is a for-profit organization. It is my understanding that members of the association use the docks for anchoring and storing of personal boats and watercrat~. Section 436 of the Mound Code governs commercial boat docks and sets forth various licensing requirements and regulations. The Code's license requirement is very broad: No person, association of persons, families whether incorporated or not, through any arrangement, whether through common or corporate awnershlp or otherwise, shall operate, carry on, or be engaged in the trade or business of docking, mooting, anchoring, keeping or storing of boats or make any arrangement for the use or joint use of lakeshore property for such dockage of boats.., without having first obtained a license. Section 436.05. "Business of docking" is defined under the code as: "Renting or otherwise providing space for docking, anchoring, or storing three or more boats.., belonging to persons other than the owner of the dock or property." § 436.01, subd. 2. Finally, "commercial boat dock" is defined as: Providing space for docking, mooring at buoy, or otherwise keeping or storing of boats . . . used in a trade or business or providing through the joint use of lakeshore property such · space for boats or watercraf~ belonging to persons or families who are part of a group or association. Section 436.01, subd. 1. The condo association is an "association of persons" that has .made arrangements for the joint use of lakeshore property for the docking of boats. Under the code, the association does not have to be incorporated to fit within this category of persons required to obtain a license. In addition, the Mound Code does not require that the business of docking be a for-profit enterprise. The condo association is "providing space for docking" (I assume for more than 3 boats) for individuals, other than the owner of the dock, who are part of a group or association. The Code does not otherwise exempt the condo association from the licensing requirements. Thus, it is my opinion that a condominium association clearly fits within the relevant code definitions that would require it to obtain a license to continue to operate its docks. MDT-208~47vl MLr220-6 -2599- Z © < -~ ~.~ - ~°I ~E~ -2600- 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 CITY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WIEB; www. cityofmound,com March 29, 2002 Chapman Place Association John Price Karsten Dock, Service 20845 Larkin Road Corcoran, MN 55340 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear John, The City Council at.their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 M~ywood Road, Mound,'MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. ~ Fackler Park Director CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File prfnted on recycled paper -2601 - CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofrnound.com March 18, 2002 Driftwood Shores James Welboum 1772 Layafette Lane Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear James, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request .for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002..This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is Very much appreciated. Sincerely, £ . Park Director Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com March 18, 2002 Lakewinds Association Garsten Management Corporation 1600 University Ave., West Ste. 310 St. Paul, MN 55104 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Garsten Management Corporation, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate tO dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting, on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. ///4im Fackler Park Director CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com March 18, 2002 Seahorse Condominium Edythe Koenig 5440 Three Points Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Edythe Koenig, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association.bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. /' .//Jim"-F-'~ckler v Park Director CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 CITY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com March 18, 2002 Seton view Jan Trapp 4869 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Jan Trapp, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. ///Jim F'afkler ~" Park Director CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0520 WEB: www. cityofmound.com March 18, 2002 Harrision Harbor Association Thomas Brossard 1818 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Thomas Brossard, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. Sincerely, ~ ,~, CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com March 18, 2002 Seton Twin Homes Rob Sandom 4842 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Rob Sandom, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. Park Director CC: Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File -2607-.o~,,~ 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 CiTY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.corn March 18, 2002 Halstead Acres Association Bob Bittle 2927 Halstead Lane Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear Bob Bittle, The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 MayWood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very. much appreciated. Park Director Mayor/City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 CITY OF MOUND PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.corn March 18, 2002 Pelican Point Homeowners Association NP Dodge Mgmt. Company, Inc. 2850 Metro Drive, Suite 302 Bloomington, MN 55425 Re: Dock License Requirement for Associations Dear NP Dodge Mgmt. Company, Inc., The City Council at their February 26, 2002 meeting has directed the City of Mounds Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC) look into the licensing of associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The DCAC will be meeting on April 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Mound City Hall Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road. Please provide me with a letter of request for exemption and a copy of your association bylaws no later then April 15, 2002. This information can be mailed or faxed (Fax# 952-472-0620, Mailing - 5341 MaYwood Road, Mound, MN 55364.) A notice will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Your time in resolving this issue is very much appreciated. Sincerely, lrector CC; Mayor/City Council Kandis ltansnn, City Manager Katie Hoff, Dock Inspections File (~2609-e*,,.'a,'paper MEMORANDUM February 21, 2002 To Mayor and Council From: John Dean Subject: Commercial Docks This memorandum is to supplement my earlier memorandum on the subject dated February 8, 2002, and is also included in the Council packet. Jim Fackler and I have received several letters from groups that have been previously treated as having commercial docks, but were not required to pay a fee until this year. They are obviously interested in the issue, and how the Council ultimately decides it. My February 8, 2002 memo to you suggests that (a) the Council should first determine whether the existing ordinance calls for the licensing of association or other group docks that are owned by the user; and (b) if you conclude that it does not, then the next question is whether you want to revise the ordinance to cover those situations. If you answer no to both of these points, then it will be necessary to determine the impact of that decision on the association and group docks that are currently treated as commercial docks. This is a separate task from the item before you on the 26th. If you decide to exclude privately owned and used association and group docks, I would suggest that you refer the matter to Jim Fackler to review the status of the docks currently licensed and to come back to you with a recommendation of those that should be excluded. JBD-210437vl MU220-6 -26'10- belonging to persons other than the owner of the dock or property on Which said boat or structures are docked or stored or adjacent to which said boats are moored. (italics added) Reading those two sections together, I must conclude that, although contrary arguments are possible, in my opinion, the ordinance intends that only association docks that are used in the business of docking require a commercial license. Any association dock which is privately owned and used by its owner is not used in the business of docking. The result is different under the LMCD Code. Under that code, a license is required by the LMCD for either a multiple dock or a commercial dock. A multiple dock is a dock constructed or maintained for the use of five or more restricted watercraft. As a result, association docks (for five or more unrestricted watercraR) do need a LMCD license no matter who actually owns the dock. Assuming Section 436 means what I think it means, it does present problems for enforcement. For example, docks owned by associations would be subject to licensure and the fee. Association docks that are privately owned would not be subject to licensure and the fee unless they were used by someone other than the owner. RECOMMENDATION If you are in agreement with my interpretation of Section 436, I would make the following recommendations: 1. Decide whether you want the section enforced as written, or whether you would like to consider changes to it. 2. As part ofany review, it might be important to focus on the reasons why Mound would license and regulate this type of dock in the first place. 3. It would probably be a good idea to solicit recommendations form the Dock and Commons Commission in the process. J'BD-209807vl MU220-6 -2611 - MEMORANDUM TO: $ohn Dean FROM: Mary Tietjen DATE: January 14, 2002 Commercial Dock License Requirement for Condominium Association City of Mound You asked me to review the Mound City Code to determine whether a condomim'um association's operation of a boat dock is a "commercial boat dock" and thus, subject to licensing. The condornim'um association is a for-profit organization. It is my understanding that members of the association use the docks for anchoring and storing of personal boats and watercraft. Section 436 of the Mound Code govems commercial boat docks and sets forth various licensing requirements and regulations. The Code's license requirement is very broad: No person, association of persons, families whether incorporated or not, through any arrangement, whether through common or corporate ownership or otherwise, shall operate, carry on, or be engaged in the trade or business of docking, mooting, anchoring, keeping or storing of boats or make any arrangement for the use or joint use of lakeshore property for such dockage of boats.., without having first obtained a license. Section 436.05. "Business of docking" is defined under the code as: "Renting or otherwise providing space for docking, anchoring, or storing three or more boats.., belonging to persons other than the owner of the dock or property." § 436.01, subd. 2. Finally, "commercial boat dock" is defined as: Providing space for docking mooting at buoy, or otherwise keeping or storing of boats... used in a trade or business or providing through the joint use of lakeshore property such · space for boats or watereraf~ belonging to persons or families who are part of a group or association. Section 436.01, subd. 1. The condo association is an "association of persons" that has ~made arrangements for the joint use of lakeshore property for the docking of boats. Under the code, the association does not have to be incorporated to fit within this category of persons required to obtain a license. In addition, the Mound Code does not require that the business of docking be a for-profit enterprise. The condo association is "providing space for docking" (I assume for more than 3 boats) for individuals, other than the owner of the dock, who are part of a group or association. The Code does not otherwise exempt the condo association fi'om the licensing requirements. Thus, it is my opinion that a condominium association clearly fits within the relevant code defin fions that would require it to obtain a license to continue to operate its docks. MDT-208647vl MU220-6 -2612- TELEPHONE (952) 469-6961 KARSTEN DOCK SERVICE INC. 3145 DONALD DRIVE MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 MAILINO ADDRESS: 20845 LARKIN ROAD HAMEL, MINNESOTA 55340 FAX (763) 478-911 April 2, 2002 Mr. Jim Fackler, Park Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1687 Re: Chapman Place Association Dear Mr. Fackler: In response to your letter dated March 29, 2002, this letter shall serve as a request for an exemption for the 2002 boating season. It is my understanding that David Skoog, President of Chapman Place Association, will be providing a copy of the '~ ' ' association s By-LaWs sometime by the end of this week. Also, it is my understanding that Chapman Place Association's By-Laws indicate that the rental of boat slips must be done on a non-discriminatory basis and, further, that owners of units at Chapman Place shall not be given any special consideration. If you believe my attendance at the City of Mound's Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Meeting is necessary or if you require anything fUrther, please advise. Very truly yours, I~ohn A. Price III JAP:mam cc: 'Mr. David Skoog -2613- Mr. Jim Fackler Park Director 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364-1687 Dear Mr. Fackler: March 24, 2002 In response to your correspondence sent to the Driftwood Shores Homeowners Association, dated March 18, 2002, we are submitting our request for exemption of the fees payable for a commercial dock license. I have included your letter along with our previous correspondence regarding this matter, a description of our dock and outlot, and a copy of our Associations Operations Charter. Section V of our Charter details the rules of our Association as they relate to our Dock and boat slips. Please note specifically in Paragraph 8 the highlighted area that differentiates us from commercial dock activity. We do not allow our slips to be rented by our members nor do we utilize them for any commercial activities. Our dock and boat slips are privately owned by our members and are deeded with each members home ownership. As I'm sure you will f'md, we are no different than any other private lake owner on Lake Minnetonka as it relates to our dock usage. We thank you for your consideration regarding this matter. Sin~rely .... ' //J~ames P. Welbourn Treasurer- Driftwood Shores Homeowners Association -2614- March 19, 2002 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Attention: Dock Licensing Dear Sir or Madam: Thank you for your letter of March 18, 2002 regarding an exemption from dock licensing fees. The Lakewinds Association (4379 Wilshire Blvd.) hereby requests an exemption fi.om dock licensing fees. Per your request, enclosed is a copy of the Association's Declaration and By-Laws. We have submitted, previously, the~2002 Commercial Dock License Application for the Lakewinds Condominium Association, 4379 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, the legal description for the property, a scaled drawing showing the size and shape of the docks, and a scaled drawing of Lakewinds parking. Please note that Lakewinds has no rental boat stalls, slips or buoys. All of the Lakewinds boat slips are owned by condominium owners at Lakewinds and are not offered for rem to the public. The owners of the 43 boat slips at Lakewinds Association will use their boat slips from 21 days after ice out until around October 1, each year, depending on weather conditions. The boat slips at Lakewinds are for private use by residents of Lakewinds. Michael A. Koch, Property Manager. 16oo University Avenue,Suite 3lo,Saint Paul, Minnesota 551o4-3825,651.644.96oo,FAX 644.0296 -2615- April 5, 2002 Jim Fackler, Park Director Dock Commons Advisory Commission '(DCAC) City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Dock License Requirement for Associations The Board of Directors of the Seahorse Condominium Association respectfully requests that the docks in our private marina be exempt from licensure by the City of Mound, based on the findings of the City attorney and the DCAC. A copy of the Seahorse Association bylaws and rules governing the use of private docks in our marina is included with this letter as requested. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. S/~ely, , ;;/f) ~, Seahorse Condominium Association -2616- March 29, 2002 T.o: From: Re: Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Seton View Association x,/ Jan Trapp 952 472-3275 h 952 703-2773 Commercial Dock License Fee Seton View Association is a group of four individual lakeshore property and homeowners that share one dock. This dock has permission to accommodate up to eight boating units as determined by the LMCD. Seton View Association is requesting permanent exemption from the Mound Commercial Dock License fee. This request is based upon the following: · Each of the four homeowners owns their own lakeshore property - there is not any common property, shared land or Seton View land assets. (See attached map) In an effort to preserve the wqtland lakeshore habitat, only one dock approach was established with access to the eight slips. Each homeowner could have established their own dock approach from their individual shoreline property and this fee would then not apply. This is not a commercial operation. There are no rental slips, no boat fees that Seton View members pay, or any income to the Seton View Association derived fi.om this dock. Please feel free to contact me for any questions or concerns regarding this request. Thank you in advance for your consideration. -2617- IH[ A~ ]l~ ]FL ][ $ 0 ~ H .,~ ]t~ B @ ]~ "'1[' ~v ][ T~ IH[ 0 ~ E $ A ~ ~ 0 C ][ A T ][ 0 N March 23, 2002 City of Mound Dock and Commons Advisory Commission 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Fac -kler: Per your letter of March 18, 2002, Harrison Harbor Twin Homes Association is formally requesting to be exempt from the licensing and taxing of its private docks. As we noted in our letter of January 26, 2002 to the City Council, we are a Minnesota Non-Profit Corporation and the owners of a common dock area deeded as Harrison Harbor Twin Homes Association Outlot A. The boat slips are individually owned and the ownership is defined on the Deed for Ouflot A. Attached is a copy of our "Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions" -as requested. ~ Sincerely, Tom Brossard President Commerce Blvd. · Mound, MN 55564 · Phone 95:z.472.5691 -2618- April 15, 2002 City of Mound Mr. Jim Fackler 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Dock License Requirements for Associations / Seton Twin Homes Dear Mr. Fackler, The Seton Twin Homes are a private residency. The dockage for the Seton Twin Homes is also private. Access to the dockage is private property. Residents of the Seton Twin Homes do not sublet or rent their dockage for any exchange of money or trade -- (commercial dockage). Article V Section 3. "Management" of the Declarations of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements for the Seton Twin Homes states: All decisions shall be made on the basis of a majority vote, each lot having one vote...with respect to the construction, maintenance, reconstruction and use of the docks...etc. The Seton Twin Homes would like exemption from the City ordinance of commercial dockage fees by the City of Mound. Sincerely, Robert E. Sandom Seton Twin Homes -2619- HALSTED ACRES IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION (A OROUPE OF 13 INDIVIDUALLY DEEDED PROPERTY OWNERS) (CO-OPERATING ON THE PRIVATE USE OF HALSTED BAY LASKE SHORE) Mr. Jim Flackler Park Director City of Mound Mound, Minnesota 55364 March 20, 2002 Dear Mr. Flackler This is a request for exemption from paying any Mound City fees for our docking. The 13 individual deeded property owners simply co-operate on the private use of the Outlot One, Halstead Acres 2® Addition which has 351 feet of shoreline on Halsted Bay and thus do not have a formal printed Association Bylaws set which is requested in your letter dated 3/18/02. The shoreline exceeding 351 feet on Halsted Bay was established for private use by a Brandenburg partnership (a building business) filed as early as September 24, 1958. Each of these 13 pays individual property tax on their portion which is included in their normal property tax statement. There is no commercial property; there is no renting, only families owning the 13 properties are allowed to use this lakeshore. Additionally it is fenced and signed as private. Since it is a private docking on private land there is no requirement for any City activity to happen there. Under the LMCD our docking falls under Section 2.11, Subd. 2. Classification of Uses within parts e) and g) which reads in part--membersl3ip is restricted to -- owners -and - "Private Mukiple Facilities" -- at single family residential properties for the private uses--which can only be self owner and private. We have not paid any dock fees in the past because those involved knew the property to be private and not commercial and thereby no fee charged. Our mistake, early on, was to allow to be even listed as any other than private residential docking. There was a related conversation at the time. As happened when it first came about, no fee, no harm no objection pursued by us. We understand that the City is in the process of getting our private docking from under the mis- applied Commercial heading. We did send a check for $250.00 with the copy of the 2002 Commercial Dock License Application all with the intention of getting this settled as soon as possible and the return of our $250.00. Truly, ~c~ Robert J. Bittle *C. Berg, R. Bittle, M Hagberg, C. Henthorne, K Hawkins, T. Holste, A. Jerome, N. McNelis, J. Rasmussen, C. Regenfuss, R. Rutz, D. Ryan, J. Wilsey -2620- 04/08/2082 07:58 1124726778 QUESTMPLS GREH Pelican Point Boat Club Committee - Owen Crregg, Chair PAGE 2938 P, lican Point Circle Mound, M. innesom 55364 Bi Phone: 952/472~6195 Fax: 952/472-6778 April 06, 2002 Mr. J-ma Facider, Park Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Fax No.: 952/472-0620 I~ response to your I~er regarding dock licensing rmutr ts rot Associations, sent to our management company NP Dodge March 18th, I would like to r~quest an ~xemption for thc Pelican Point Bo~t Club Marina, for the following reasons: I) Pelican Point is a townhome community consisting of 40 homes, each one assigned, but not necessarily each one occupyiu~ either a 24' or 32' boat slip. 2) The 40 authorized slips are installed and removed every season aceording to a plat filed with both the City of Mound and the LMCD. Usually not all 40 slips are installed, as not every homeowner wants a slip. 3) Each Pelican Point homeowner pays As.sooiation dues which cowr our prop~i~s n~ services provided by outside vmdors and conlraotors. This fee also includes NP Dodge's managemeat fee. However, only slip users pay any fees relating to dockage at the Marina. 4) Each homeowner may only have one slip, and one boat assigned to it. ~) No commercial enterpris, of any sort is conduoted from our Marina, inoluding the sale ofgas, sundries, etc. 6) No homeowner may rent his or her slip to any outside party. 7) Normal charges for slip installation and removal, water and electrical installation and r~noval, replaca~ment of worn sections, permits, etc., are billed annually to the slipowner by our management company. The Pelican Point Boat Club is detlnitely not ~i marina operating as a commexcial venture. I am forwarding via fax, as an addendum to this l~ter, our 7-palle "Boat Club Marina Rules and Regulations," which is a "living document" and part of our Assooiation By-Laws. We sincerely hope, upon the DCAC and City Council's thorough review, that the Pelican Point Boat Club meets the exemption requirements. Please feel flee to oontact me with any additional questions. Sincerely, Pelican Point Boat Club, Chair cc: Boat Club files Rubart Schmidt, Chair - Pelican Point Board of Directors -2621 - 6. REVIEW: DRAFT REQUEST TO REINSTAL SMALL WATER CRAFT SITES AT AVALON PARK SITE NUMBERS 4055OK, 4055OL. A request has been received form Orv Burma who has a slip site at the Avalon Dock to re-establish the Small Watercraft (SWC) sites that were removed while determining the 2002 Dock Location Map. As you will note from the, attached information that two of the four SWC sites were removed. Mr. Burma had one of the remaining sites but chose not to renew it for 2002. Another site holder on the dock elected to lease the site so staff issued it to him. The reasoning behind staffs recommendation to the DCAC to remove SWC sites #40550 K and L and change slip sites #40550 G and H to Temporary sites was due to non use of the SWC sites and a question of meeting the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) side setback requirement. Staff believed that the four sites that saw change in their status on the 2002 Dock Location Map did not meet setback. Staff has since reviewed this site plan with the LMCD has found that the slip sites #40550 G and H would be very questionable in meeting setback but SWC sites $40550 K and L would have enough navigation with the current 30' setback. Staff did not bring this question to the LMCD prior to establishing the 2002 Dock Location Map because it was concerned that the two sites #40550 G and H would be jeopardized by the requirement of more then doubling the current 30' setback on either side of the dock. Watercraft that are moored parallel to the shoreline need a double Side Opening/Setback to private property. In the case of the Avalon Park, the slip sites #40550 G and H are 32'X 10' and would need a 64' setback on both sides of the dock. This would have a major impact on the Avalon Dock design and the number of boats that could be moored. Staffs recommendation is that if the DCAC does not have any other issue with re-establishing the SWC sites #40550 K and L the 2002 Dock Location Map adding these sites as permanent. Slip sites #40550 G and H should remain as Temporary so that this dock site at some point in the future, when there is a non-renewal, will meet all setbacks. -2622- DRAFT Page 47 relates to page 49 see drawing of the existing site. Facker: If you want to relate to when we looked at this your page 49. Will help you. There is a drawing of the existing site. A request has been received to reinstate two small watercraft sites that were removed while determining the 2002 dock location map. As you will note from the attached information, there were at one time four small watercraft sites and of those four, two of them were removed for the 2002 season. Two of them, I think at one time, the most that were utilized was there were three and then it went down to two and then currently we have a demand now for the three of them. The reason behind staff's recommendation is that the DCAC to remove the small watercraft sites. If you look at your plan, there are going to be K and L on that plan. To change the Two slip sites which are G and H, which are the regular sites, as you take a look at your plan. G and H are the parallel sites that are in the inside. The reason for removing these was the question of meeting LMCD site setback requirement. Staff believes that the four sites saw change in their status on the 2002 dock location map did not meet the setback. G and H were just changed from standard sites to temporary sites and not removed. Just the two small watercrafts were removed. The concern was that the site setback would come into contention and this is one of the reasons when we got involved with this a number of years ago, actually back in 1997 why we went from individual docks to a multiple slip dock because there was a request from adjacent property owner that we meet our site setback. And rather than loose the ability to utilize some of these areas we were able to consolidate them on one dock and at least bring in all the people that were boating there at that time. The concern is that we were not going to be meeting site setbacks. Staff has since reviewed this plan with the LMCD and has found that the slip sites of G and H are very questionable. These are the two that are the parallel ones. So they would be very questionable on meeting the side setbacks. Staff does not feel that they are going to meet the side setbacks. The interior site, the small watercraft sites K and L. as discussed with the LMCD would have enough navigation. K and L and I and J -2623- DRAFT they are now called required as side opening. They are not backing out towards private property. They can turn and go straigt out. The LMCD does not have a concern with I, J, K. and L. which are small watercraft. There concern would be with G and H. Staff did bring this to the LMCD and discussed it with them and we had the concern with G and H. The small watercrafts we did not have a problem with that. G and H the current side setback is 30 feet and using what the LMCD refers to as a side opening, which is a setback to property. In the case of the Avalon park slips G and H, which are currently 32 X 10. Would~ require~a64 foot setback on either side:This would greatly impact this dock. Please keep in mind to use the size of the slip not the size of the boat. We have some requests for dredging for G and H. Staff recommends is that if DCAC does not have any other issues with re-establishing the small watercraft K and L that this can be done on a recommendation to the City Council. To change the 2002 dock location map adding these sites are permanent. The slip sites G and H should remain as a temporary so if some time there is a non renewal we could revisit this area. Or change the size of the slips. Currently we are doing a shoreline study which will lead us to a site plan for each area which will show what size we have established there for slips and those will be required to meet side setbacks. I and J are very shallow and is established as a small water craft. Any dredging would be very costly. Orv Burma, 3011 Islandview Drive. Concurs with staff's recommendation. In regards to the other two, would like the Commission to indicate them as small rather than eliminating. This would allow someone to have utilization of these docks. Would appreciate when these types of things are considered that directly affect the dock holders they need to be notified. Fackler stated staff would like to be able to show the LMCD that the City has been working on adjusting the slips to adhere to the Dock location map. This would not change the application to the LMCD. The 590 mark is where we are at this time. We do have an excess of shoreline that we have not claimed. We do have a buffer. -2624- DRAFT Burma: LMCD the Mound Plan was approved a week ago in the consesnt agenda. Two docks: The LMCD does not like to micro- manage. What they respond to are neighbors that cannot get along. Pat Meisel, Bartlett. Requested this come back to the Dock Commission. This issue was reviewed by the City council two weeks ago. It was on the consent agenda and was approved. Meisel would like the Commission to be sure to involve the people that are using these docks for their input. There are 107 people on the waiting list. %/~l....,.I.,.J IlJ.~ 4. .... ,l.L..~ I:~,L L~ ~L,,.~,..,.L~__I %AI_..I_I I:1--- .I. .... vvt. JUlU iir%t:~ LtJ 0,~,~,, LIII::; II~)L L,J~::; -,~lli. JI L~II~U, VVUUlU Ilftt~ LU ~{~ Lll~Se~lips labeled as temporary. Chair Funk stated that they will see to it in the future that the Commission will notify neighbors/resident of upcoming issues in there neighborhoods. Would like to go with staff's recommendation to have these as temporary sites. Funk: Directed staff to re-examine the other two sites and get input from the LMCD and change those sites on the 2003 location map sites to permanent. Maybe established the others as small sites. Commissioner Jones is concerned the numbers are not working out. MOTION by second by Funk to re-establish the personal water craft license and to direct staff to come up with a plan for G and H as temporary, to meet the setback. K and L will be permanent and G and H will be temporary in 2003. Hanus arrived at 8:45 p.m. 7. REVIEW: DOCK/SLIP FEES AND REVENUSE VS EXPENDITURES. Commission requested more detail on administrative costs. Fackler: consulted with Gino typo on second line page 76. Revenue and expenditures. Page 79 which has items listed. Commission would like to see 2001 actual fees no proposed fees. Page 79. -2625- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 May 9, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: REF: DCAC ~ o~ Jim Fackler, Parks Direct Avalon Park Dockage A request has been received from Orv Burma who has a slip site at the Avalon Dock to re-establish the Small Watercraft (SWC) sites that were removed while determining the 2002 Dock Location Map. As you will note from the attached information that two of the four SWC sites were removed. Mr. Burma had one of the remaining sites but chose not to renew it for 2002. Another site holder on the dock elected to lease the site so staff issued it to him. The reasoning behind staffs recommendation to the DCAC to remove SWC sites #40550 K&L and change slip sites ~40550 G&H to Temporary sites was due to non use of the SWC sites and a question of meeting the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) side setback requirement. Staff believed that the four sites that saw change in their status on the 2002 Dock Location Map did not meet setback. Staff has since reviewed this site plan with the LMCD has found that the slip sites #40550 G&H would be very questionable in meeting'setback but SWC sites ~40550 K&L would have enough navigation with the current 30' setback. Staff did not bring this question to the LMCD prior to establishing the 2002 Dock Location Map because it was a concern that the two sites ~40550 G&H would be jeopardized by the requirement of more then doubling the current 30' setback on either side of the dock. Watercraft that are moored parallel to the shoreline need a double Side Opening/Setback to priVate property. In the case of the Avalon Park the slip sites #40550 G&H are 32'X10' and would need a 64' setback on both sides of the dock. This would have a major impact on the Avalon Dock desiqn and the number of boats that could be moored. Staffs recommendation is that if the DCAC does not have any other issue with re-establishing the SWC sites #40550 K&L there can be a recommendation to the City Council to change the 2002 Dock Location Map adding these sites as permanent. Slip sites #40550 G&H should remain as Temporary so that this dock site at some point in the future, when there is a non renewal, will meet all setbacks. Cc: Katie Hoff, Dock Inspection Avalon Park Site Holders -2627- Z _J -2628- Mound City' ,Code.' 437,~, ~ I0. Subbed, I0, New ~.esi. dents. T. hem will be. no late fee. charged to new re.~idents.'who app~ after the last ~iay' 0f F~bruary of the calendar year in. which .the resident, rr~oves to the ' City. The regular license fee will be charged and no penalty will attach during that year. (O :I~D. 4..5-1990- I2-29,90) 437.~0 ,,Rules ~d Reg-l~tions. Subd, 1. ~ Izw, aflon.Map Defin!tion. There shalt be on file in the City Hall a drawing of the City of Mound that is maintained by the Dock InsPeCtor showing the approved locations of private docks that may be Constructed on or abutting public shorelands under the control of the City. Such master Plan Shall contain the following information: A. Lineal footage for purposes of establishing dock locations; (ORD. 4:5-1990 - 12-29-90) B. Indication of approved dock location scaled to proximity within the property ma~k~rs; (oRD. 45~1990 '- 12-29-90) C.- Shoreline Types and any restrictions applicable to said locations; (ORD.. 45-1.990- 12,29-'90) (ORD.//66-1.993 -'1.2-27-93) D. Minimum spacing between dock locations shall be 'shown by the dock loc~.ion numbering system; (ORD. 45-1990 - 12-29-90) E. Dock location number shall be keyed to listing of licensees and addresses, and. the same number shall apply to the same location ~aeh year as far as possible; F. A -ecess points, and other relevant, information as is necessary, to review dock locations and to allow the City CounCil and the D0~k Inspector to protect the public lands and public waters; (ORD. 45-1990 - 12-29-90) G. Shoreline areas designated for n°winter dock storage. (ORD 45-1190 - 12-29-90) H. Repealed (ORD. 45-1990 - 12.29-90) SUbd. 2. Annual Review of Map. Approved dock location maps shall b~ kept and maintained bY the Dock Inspector and shall be reviewed by.. the Dock and Commons Advisory C~mmission at least once a year~. The Dock and Commons .Advisory Commission sh~lt review the dock location map between September 1 and. December 31 before each new boating season so their recommended changes' may be referred to and eonsider~l by the City ..co. uneil on or before January 15..Maps shalt contain all.approved dock loeafiom as estabhshed by the Council upon the advice and recommenda~mn of the 12/8101 -2629- Mound City Code 437. t0, Subd.2. Dock Insp~tor and Dock and Commons Advisory Commission. Final approval of the dock location map and the number of private dock licenses to be permitted shall, be reeommended by the Dock inspector~ reviewzd by the Dock and Commons Advisory Commission and approved by the City Council. (ORD. 45-1~90 - 12-2~-90) Subd. 3. Dock In~ector to Review Application. The Dock Inspector shall deten~n~ne and approve the location of each permit according to the specifications of the approved dock location map. Subd. 4. Costs of Erection and Maintenance. Licensed docks shall be erected and m~ntained bY the licensee at'his or her Sole expense and' liability for same, (ORD. 45-1990- 12-29-90) Subd. 5. Suspension of Eligible Location. The City Council may suspend a dock location where it appears that a location as established on the dock location map reasonably interferes with the use of public waters or imposes a hardship on property owners abutting on public streets or public commons. Subd. 6. One Dock Per Family,; Apartment Building. No more that one dock shall be permitted for each resident family. An apam~ent building or multiple dwelling owner sh~l not apply for dock licenses for his renters or lessees. He or she is entitled to apply for an. individual private dock license for himself or herself if he or she is a resident of the City. ~ 5ubd. 7. ' Construction Materials; Use of Car Tires.' Alt private docks shall be construetod of matorials specified by the Building Inspector and the Dock Inspector and in .accordance with all building codes of the City. The standards for the public health, safety, and general welfare:and neither the materials or the workmanship for an approved licensed private dock shall result in docks being located on public lands which are unsightly, unsafe or:create a puUlic naisance. No fire or tires shall be hung or attached on dock laOSts, dOck poles, or on dock hardware of any dock on or abutting public shorelands under the control of the City. (ORD. #40-1990, 1,29~90) Sub& 8. In~ections - Notice of Non-Compliance - License Revocation. The Dock I~tor or.. such other officer as may be designated by the City Manager or the City C~ounei!'~ may at. any reasonable time inspect, or cause to be inspected any dock erect~l or maintained upon or abutting upon any public street, road, park, or commons, .and if it shall appear that. any such .dock has not been constructed or properly maintained or the area su~ounding..--the, dock site is not being maintained in accordance with the application or the tieense granted therefore, or with the plans or location approved by the Council, or shall it appear that such dock is in a condition that no longer complies with the reqUirements of this ordinance or other ordinances of the City, the City, by its City Manager or any other officer designated by the City Manager, shall forthwith notify the owner there0f, in writing 12/8/01 -2630- Mound.Oily ¢ounoll.Mlnute~ -April23, 2002' 4~ 00MMEhl'~$.AND SUGGES.~IONS I=ROM CITIZENS. PRESENT ON .AN¥,,ITEI~' TOdd war'~i' 3~S6: :Ni~hland .Beuleva?~ appeared on. behalf of' the Wes{enl<a. Historical $o(3iety, asking te be: put en the' May 14- C'eUn¢il agenda to discuss the proposal to instatl, a commemia/deck at Meur~d Bay .Park to accommodate the Minnehaha Steamboat, Which eun~ently operates i~ Excals]or and Wayzata~ This item Will be on the Planning commission .agenda. of' May 9th, and the councli agenda of May t4th. Brown requested that adjacent prepe~'owners be: invited to these meetings when appropriate. On/Burma,. 3~"1:t Island View Drive~ presented a dock has redu~d the number ef BSU'te two spaces. consider that; the BSU be implemented this year to its full the Decks. and Commons COmmission, and then. consideration. his neighborhood that that the Council This item will go to Council after their John Evan% 2'025 ~Arbor Lane, gave positive commercial deck to' accommodate the Mir Excelsior and-Wayzata is the heart of the installation of the Ithat its presence in $,. LETTBR OF..IN?ENT.FOR MOUND IN~ERiOR:EINISH' MOTON' by:Bi~own~ seconded regarding the~pmPesed This. will: net: :be. a. legall legally,binding of'Mound, AIl:.v~ted. carried, ELL AND the non-,binding letter ef intent in the proposed Mound Mar~ketplace. will only serve as the outline for a Mound Marketplace, LLC, and the City City E~gj commented:on~th'{ pr0.jeet fe~ M~tmPlains 29t~ !.0ven/iewof'the 2002 City Projects List. He further that. are underway~ inclUding.the water and sewer Westedge street project that will begin the week of April Meyer requested an update'.regarding CSAH 15, including-the status of the former DakOta' Rail.. Cameron explained that-HennePin County an'd the City are.proceeding with the pmpa~ation ef the right,of, way agreement which, is tentatively scheduled te be heard, by the',:Gounei'l.at, its'~next meeting. 7. SKA~E.PARKAGREEMENT City AttOrney' Dean ProVided an oVerview.of the agreement and walked through the various ~mPene~tsof the. deCament~ including the fact that it will be a .C..ity.~ewned park, the des'¢ri~ti0ns of the various entities involved-and referenced in the document, as well as the various financial commitments that the City must receive prior to commencement of work. -2631 - MOUND GI~ COUNCIL MINUTES DECEM.BER,. tt;,~ 2001 session.~n :T. ues~y,' De~embet 11:,. 20~1;, at 7:3~';~,~. in,-the. ~urieil ~a~bers' at 534.1 Mayweod Read. in. said City. Councilmembem~ ~r~Sant:" Mayc~ ~atMeisel; Councilmembers Bob Brown, fi~lark Hanus, David Osmek and Peter Meyer. Otb'~s Pcesenc City A~teme~,,. John~an; Ci~: Manaiae~ .~ndis: ~nsen; A=in~ City Clerk~n~r~Gomm~i~De~e~~Dire~o~rah~S~;t~-~ty~e~ Bru~.Cham~l~n; City Engineer, Jehn.~memn; Parks DEe~ter,. Jim F~er; Finan~ Dire~r, ~no BUsina.re; Mr,. & Mm. ~Fmnk Weiland; Lo~ie. Ham; Tem. S~ke~ .~i; Osmek, Mr; & MRS.. Ma~i~ Carlson, separate .¢li~ussion on these items unless a Co~r~t. tmember or c~izen so requestS, in which~e~t~.~he, item:~wilt be~em'e.ve~ ~m~.~e~ .Get, eAt .~;l~e/~e'a .and:~nei~lef~t:.~n normal sequent. t. OpEN.MEETING Mayer.Mei~l;~led the. meefin~ te e~ at~ ?;34 p.~m~ an~l the Ple~ige ef.~lte~ian;e was recited. 3. APPROVE AGENDA · John De~:,~aeste~:,~he aciditien ef item. 1GA,. Supplemental Redevelopment In~e~i~' ~:e~i~rs,; MOTtON~. :~.ewn, se~,ended., by Hanus.:te: al3preve ~ agenda :as ame~, Niwoted in favor. Motion carried, /4. CO~N.S~N~. AGENDA ?/ Mayor,.Mei~t. r~uestecl t~ item 4C be removed,from the c,~nsent '..~'/ MOTI'O-N~Hanus, se~dby .Bm~..~o: approve the ~nsent a~e'n~a as'F~uested. . ~( Upon, roll: ~1~ vote, ~1~ ~l~fa~ -~tie~' -2~32- Mound CRy Counc41 Minutes- Dec, ember i. 1, 2001 /~E' Approve 2002 Do~k Map changes: " ' · . ' . Approve Planning Recommendatie. n: Case 01-43: Judith Milton 3033 Brighton ."-3 RESOLU.,TION. NO, 0~1-1G`3':. RESOLUTION TO,APPROVE A $1D~ARD SETB~ VARIANCE FOR THE GON:STRUC~iON ~:.A' SECOND S1~R¥ AND ......................... ~ .......... ' FIRS? FLOORADDITJ~N:QN T.I~E PR~ER~ .... LOCATED AT 303'3 BRIGHTON BLVD., LOTS 9 & a,.' &'z .¢ 4C. RESOLUTION COMMENDING KIMANDERSON FOR SERVICE TO'THE CITY OF MOUND ND ITS CITI E ..... [z Mayor MeiSel ~ked th~{ mis be rem.Dyad,from the consent agenda to. bNng it te publicly bring it to the forefront. She wants it pubhe, ly known that'this' ~esolution was adD,ted and will be sent to Klm A~derson: MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown te adopt the following resolution. Alt .¥eted in faVOr,. Metien~ carried: RESOLUTION NO.. 01'-1:O4: RESOLUT.:ION ~MENI3tNG KlM ANDERSON FOR SERVICE TO' THE C]~ OF MOUND AND ITS CITIZENS. i'_~°_MMENT$AND .sUGGEiSTIONs FROM .mT!~;_NS PRESENT .ON ANy,,ITEI~.' QT. ON..TH~.AGENDA, ........ " Ma~in ':~arl'~h:i ~1~: El'~Eoad~ appeared.bef<~i~e t~e 'CeLin(~tt; to inform the~. (~f POthOles and street damage caused, by the construction trucks traveling on EI:~ RO'~d and Bellaire Line. City Man,get Had.sen wilt leek into this. 6. LOS ,T. LAKE, ~REENWA¥ ~:~OJECT ~e e~la~. ~ preje~, i~.t~at:~it~::i~'.. .in. ~~: '~, 'ia~e ptan .s~bml~ ~e years ago. Even though the plans wilt be su~i~d, te M~DOT in the near f~B~&:,' {he pr~ ~. w~.U ~t be bid until, late Summer 2002 be~u~ ~.~e ~st o~ mle~pn iss~'. MOTI.ON by Meyer, seconded by Hanus to authorize staff to submit the Lost Lake Greenway Project plans to MnDOT for their review. All voted in favor. MotiOn carried. -2633- CiTY OF MOUND 5341 MAYVVOOD "ROAD MOUND, MN 5~864-1687 PH: (952) 472~0600 ~ F,~.X: (952) 472,O620 W'EB: wWW. cltyofmound.com To: DCAC From: Katie Hoff, Jim Fackler DM: 11/29/01 Re: 2002 Dock Map Changes; Revised Below you will find a revised chart that lists the Dock Map Changes for the 2002 season. Also attached is the 2002 Dock Location. file. This file reflects the 2002 map changes. If you have any questiOi~s please contact ' tlS. ^~ I.snd Commons IRec # Site..# on Type Name Type Slip Size Misc Information I 00155 n D Canary Removal; not ai~eqUate spacing-not asstg~ied fo~yeem _, 2 10220 · n D Cresent Prk Chang~ to Non-Abutting 'Slta 3 10250 a D Cresent Prk Change to Abutting. Site i' ~..~..,;.:., ....... 4 10280 a D Creesnt Prk Chafige tb Abutfl~i~ S 20130 fl D Waterbank Removel of site due O'~l~gatl0nal Eas~men[ .: .... s- 22990 a - D North Park Change to Abutting Site.: .... ., .,~ ,'," _ 7 40550G n D , Avalon Prk Slip' 32 x 10 S 40550H ' n D" AvalonPrk. Slip" 32 X 10 tem~ralTslte;un~!l.,nor~,.~enewaI,Naylgaflon Easement~ '~0 405!50L. , D AValbh' Prk' Sllj~ 755qff · 11 42800G n B Devon Muir Slip la x 8 Removal of this iem~r~;sits dd~ to Nev~g~ihel ~-smnt 12 42931 n lB Devon Remco;al of this temporary site due to non-ren~i 13 . 160835G n D Highland Prk Slip 75 sq ft Becomes a permanent._,.2nd water~mft (pwc) site 14 60835H n D Highland Prk Slip 75 sq ff Becomes a permanent 2-nd WaterCratt (pWC) site. _ 15 80835A, H n D Highland Prk Slips Various $1tef~s switched from 60900- d0ok entrance moved t4 other side ,~utUN Land Commons Rec # Site_~ on . Type Nm'ne Type Slip $tz~ Misc Inform~on :2 )00050 n D Avocet - 3 00070 n 0 A~ce~. 4 00125 n D Bluebird 6 00145 n D Canaw ~ - 8 00195 n D D~ ~n. - 7 00215 n D ~ ~ 8 00o~R n D ~ ~ne g 00255 . n D D~ ~ne _ I0 00275 n D O~ ~ne 11 00295 n D D~ ~ne ~2 00315 n D D~ 13 00335 n D ~ ~ne 14 00385 n D D~ ~ne 15 O~OOA n D Blueblm So~ S~p 18 X 8 - 18 0~00B n . D IBluab~r~ ~o~ Slip 18x8 ~7 10OSBSA · n D ~Woodland Rd ~]Jp 20 x ~.5 ' ' 18 00~B5 B n D Woodland Rd Slip 2~ x 20 016B5 B n D Blueb{~ No~ Slip 24 x 10 21 01685C n D Bluabl~ No~ Slip 24 x 10 - ~ 01685 D n D Bluebiffi No~ Slip 24 x 10 - 23 i01 g5~ n D D~ Lane Slip 20 x 24 01952B n D ~ ~ne Slip 20 x ~ 01'952C n D D~ Lane Slip 18x8 28 019520 n D D~e ,sr~ ~8x6 27 02150A n D ~ag{e ~ne ' Sap 2a 02150B n D Eagle ~na Slip 24 x 1~ - =a ~02150C n D Eagle ~nm Slip 24 x eO 021500 n D ~aglm ~ne Slip 24 x si 02360A n D ~ ~ne Slip 24 x 10 32 02360B n D Finch ~ne S~p 24 x 10 ' 33 02360C n D Finch ~ne S~P 24 x 10 ~ 02360D n D Finch ~ne Slip 24 x 10 35 02~5A n D ~u~ ~ne Slip 24 x 10 9e 02~5B n D euU ~na S~p 24 x ~37 0~05 a D Pebble B~ SS 02635 n D ~Pe~ia Bch 3g 02665 n D Pebb;e Bch ' 4o 02695 a D Pebble Bch 41 ~02720 n D PabbleBch 42 02750 n D Pebble Bch 4= 02810 n D ~ 02840 n O 3 ~ 4s 02870 n D 3 ~ Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 Page 1 of lO 11/7/01 -2635- Cib/_of-Mound_Dock_P_rogram ~Duu~. Land Commons Rec # Slte_~ on ' 'Type Name 46 i02900 n D 3Pta 47 02930 n D 3 Pta 48 04070 n D Beachside N 4o 04110 n' O Beachside N 5o 10020 n D Sfiorewood Lq 51 t 0066A n D Beachside $ ~lip 24 x 8 (~2 100666 n D Beach$ide S Slip 24 x e 53 10066C n D Beachslde S Slip 20 x 6 54 10220 n o Cresent Prk 55 10250 eL O Cresent Prk Change to Abutting Site 68 10280 a D Cr~eent Prk Change to Abutting 57 10310 a D Cresent Prk 56 10340 n D Cresent Prk sa 10370 a D Cresent Prk so 10400 n' O Cresent Prk 61 10430 n D' CresentPrk 62 10460 a D Cresent Prk 63 10490 n D Cresent Prk ~4 10520 a D Cresent Prk 65 10550 et D Cresent Prk R6 10580 n D Cresent Prk 67 10810 a D CresemPrk e6 10640 eL D Cresent Pr1< ag 10670 a O CmaentPrk 70 10700 a O Cresent Prk 71 12430 n D ~Vren (street) 72 12490 a D Iwiota 73 12520 n O V~ota 74 1255 0 eL D Wiota 75 ' 12560 a D Wiota 76 12610 a O wiom 77 1284'0 ' 'n O Wlota 78 12670 n D Wtota 70 12700 n · [3. 8o 12730 n D VViota e~ 12780 a D Wiota 62 12790 n D Wiota 63 i 12820 a D Wiota 84 12850 n D Wlota s5 12880 a D Wlota B6 12910 n O V~ota .... 67 12940 n D Wima es 12970 a O a9 13000 n D 90 13030 n D Widm Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 page 2 of ~.0 -2636- .. ............. -Cib/,.of-Mound_Dock Program Abutt/N Land Commons · Rec # Slte...~ on Type Name Type Slip Size Misc Information gl 13060 n D Wota .. g2 13090 g3 13120 n ~s 13180 as 13210 n D 97 13240 n D 9~ 13270 n D ~00 13330 n o ~ -- ~0~ 13360 a o ~ _ 1~2 13390 n ~05 13480 a D 10, 13510 n D 107 13540 n D ~oa _ 108 13570 n ~0~ 13600 n O 1~0 13630 n D ~11 13660 n D 112 13690 a O ~ 13720 n D ~4 13750 n D HS ~13780 n D ~7 20050 a D 118 20160 n D 11g 20190 n D W~ibank 12~ 20~0 n D 121 ~20250 n D 122 20280 a D ~23 20310 n D !Wa~ank 124 20~0 125 20370 a D Wa~,bar~ 128 2~00 n D 127 20430 n O 128 ~20480 n D f2g 2~90 n D ~'ate~ank ~30 20520 n D W~ank 131 20550 n D Wam~ank 132 20580 n D Wam~ank 133 20610 n D 1~ 20~0 n O 135 20670 a D Wage,bank [ · Dock Map Chans'es for 2002; 2002 Page 3 of 10 -2637- Ci~.of_Mound-Dock-i~rog~am ..... ' Ab~ Land Commons Rec ~ S~ on T~e N~e T~e ~lip S~ Mi=c Info~on ~8 J20700 n D Wate~bank 137 207-~0 n g Waterbank 138 20780 n D Waterside 13g 20790 n D Waterside 140 ;20810 n · D Waterside 141 20830 n D Cenm~ew 142 20860 n D Cente~ew 143 20890 n D Centerview 144 20920 n D Cente~ew 145 20950 n D Cente~4ew '14S 20980 n D Cerrm~ew ' 147 21110 n D Center~ew 148 21140A n D Cente~ew 149 21170 n D Cenmr~ew 150 21200 n D Cen~r,4ew 151 21230 n D Cent~rvi~/v 152 22i BO a D Waterside 1~ 22200 n D 'Waterside 154 22220 n .. D Waterside ~55 ~2240 n D Waterside 158 22260 n Waterside 157 22330 n D 158 22360 a D Waterside 159 22390 n D Waterside r 180 22420 n D Waterside 181 22450 n [3 Watemide 182 22480 a D Waterside 183 22610 n D Waterside 184 22540 n D Waterside res 22570 n D Waterside lee 122600 a D Waterside 187 22910 a D Morton 188 22990 a D North Park Changes to Abutting 188 23050 a D North Park ~70 23070 n D North Park 171 23090 a D Lake 172 23150 a D Lake a~d 173 23200A n D Lale Blvd Slip 27.5 x 10 174 2320OB n D Lake Blvd Slip 24x1D 175 232000 n D Lake Bird Slip 24 x 10 178 ~3200D n D Lake Blvd Slip 27,5 x 10 177 Z3200E n D Lake Blvd Slip 18x8 178 23275 n D Chateau 178 23325 nn D Arbor IBD 30020 n O Norwood Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 PaEe 4 of lO 11/7/01 -2638- .................. City of-Mound. DookProgram Rec # S~e_~ 30100A 301008 30100C 30100D 10100E, 30100F. 3O1O0(3 30!00H 301001 30100J 30100K 30100L 30250 30300 30330 30350 30370 30450 30510 30590 30870 30710 30950A 30950B 309500 30950D 30950E 30950F 30954A 30954B 31210 i31240 3127O 31300 31330 31380 31390 31420 31450 31480 3151O 31540 31570 31600 31830 ~utt~ Land Commons on Type Name Type Slip SM Carlson Prk 24 x 10 Carlson Prk 24 x 10 Carl~3n Prk 24 x 10 Carlson Prk 24 x 10 Darlson Prk 24 x 10 Prk 24x 10 Carlson Prk 24 x 10 Carlson Prk 24 x 113 Cadson Prk 24 x 10 24x10 Cadson Prk 24 x 10 Carlson Prk 24 x 10 Inwood Emerald Emerald Emerald Longford Rd Longford Rd Longford Rd L~ngford Rd I.~ngford Rd Longford Rd Langford Rd Lonl~'o~ Rd Longford Rd Longfo~ Rd Rd I.ongfon:l Rd Kanmora Kenmor~ Kenrnor~ KeDmo~ Kenmom Kenmom Ken.om Kenmo~ Kanmom K~nmom Kenmom Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 Page 5 of :[0 Mlsc Information 11/~/01 -2639- Ci~ of Mound Dock Program Abuit/N Land Commons Roe # SRo_# on Type Name Type Slip SEe Mis¢ Inform on :228 31680 n D Excelsior 227 3171 0 n D Excelsior 228 31740 n O Excelsior 229 31770 a D Excelsior 2~o 31800 a D Excelsior 231 31830 n D Excelsior 232 31850 n D Excelsior 233 31890 a D Excelsior 234 31920 n D E:x~elsior ~35 31950 a D Excelsior 238 31980 n D Excelsior 237 32010 n D Excelsior 238 32040 a D Excelsior 2.3g 32070 n D Excelsior 240 32100 n D ~xcelsior 241 32130 a O Excelsior 242 32180 al D Excelsior 243 32190 n D IEx'calslor 244 '32220 n D {Excelsior 245 32250 n D Excelsior 248 32280 a D Excelsior 247 32310 n D !Excelsior 248 3234~3 n . D Excelsior 24g 32600 ' ' n D 250 32670 a D Stratford Lane 251 327~'0' a D Stratford Lane 252 32750 a D Stratford Lane 253 32790 a O S~atford Lane 2~4 3282'0 .a D S~ra~ordLane 255 3.2940 a D 5'matf~rd Lane 258 33287 n D Stratford Lane 257 33347 a D Strat~rd Lane 258 33407 a O Stratford Lane 258 33447 a. C 5~a~rd Lane 2ao ,33487 a C St~afford Lane 2al 33525 a C Stratford Lane 282 40550',A, n D Avalon Pti( Slip 35.5 x 10 283 40550B n D ~.valon Prk Slip 32 x 10 284 40550C n D ~,valon Prk Slip 32x10 2R5 40{~50 D n D ~,valon Prk Slip 32 x 10 288 40550E .n D ~,valon Prk Slip 32x10 287 40550F n D Avalon Prk Slip 35.5x 10 " 28S 40550G n D Avalon Prk Slip 32 x 10 'temporary site-Navigation Easement 289 40550H n D Avalon Prk Slip :32 x 10 'temporary site-Navigation Easement 270 405501 n D Avalon Prk Slip 75.sq ft 2nd small WIC Slip Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 Page 6 of 10 ! 1/7/01 -2640- Ci~ of Mound DoCk Program Abut~ Land Commor~ Rec # Site..~ on Type Name Type Slip Size 40550J Avalon Prk 75 sq ft 40550K 75 sq tt 40550L 75 sq tt 40820A 27.5 x lO 40820B 24x10 40920C 24xl0 40820D :24 x 10 40820E' 24x 10 40820F 24x10 40820G 27.~ x lO 40820H 18xe 408201 18x8 40945 41050 41110 41140 41170 41227 41272 41319 41377 41437 41650 41750 41854 41933 42008 42059 42091 42121 42172 42227 42277 42314 42351 42406 42511 42556 42586 42626 42891 42791 42800A Devan/Scharvan Devon/$chervan Devon/Schervan Devon/Schervan ' :3evon/Schervan Devonf$chevan Devon/Schervan Devon/Schervan Devon/Schetvan Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon 'Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon Devon 3avon Devon Muir Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 27.5x 1§ Page 7 of -2641 ~c Inform~on 2nd small WIC Slip ' Site .2nd W/~ Rem°V~? 'Site -2nd WfC Ramov~ ? 11/7/01 Cib/of Hound Dock Program Land Commons Rec # Site..~ on Type Name Type Slip Size Misc Information 318 42800~ n B IDev~n Muir Slip 24 x 10 317 428000 n B ~Devon Muir Slip 24 x 10 319 42800D n B Devon Muir Slip 24 x 10 319 42800E n a IDe,~on Mult Slip 24x1D 320 42800F n ' B D~wn Muir Slip 27.5 x 10 321 42961 a B D~von 322 43020 a B E)evon 323 43080 a C IDevon 324 43120 a C Devon 325 43180 a C Devon 328 43235 a c Devon 327 43300A n a Devon/Amhurst Slip 27.5 x 10 328 43300B n a Devon/Amhurst Slip 24 x 1 32a 43300C n B Devon/Amhurst Slip 24 x 10 330. 43300 D n B Devon/Amhurst Slip 27.5 x 10 331 43420 a B Devon 332 43450 a C Devon 3S3 43520 a C Devon 334 43575 a C Devon 335 43647 a C Devon 336 43727 a C Devon 337 43770 a C Devon 3a9 43800 a c Devon 339 43840 a C Devon 340 43882 a C Devon 341 43942 a c Devon 342 44002 a C D~von 343 44097 a C D~von 344 44160 a C Devon 345 44193 a C Dsvan 319 44243 a c Devon 347 ;44408 la C :Devon 349 50238A n D Waterbury Slip 24 x 349 50238B n D Waterbury Slip 24 x 10 350 50238C n D Waterbury Slip 24 x 1D 351 50238D n e Waterbury Slip 24 x B 362 50400 a D · Brighton Blvd 353 50430 n D Bdghton Bird 3~4 50460 a D Brighton Blvd .~ss 50490 a . .D Brighton Bird 358 50520 a D Bflghton Blvd 357 50550 a D Brighton Btvd 358 50560 n D Brighton Btvd 359 50610 n D Brighton Blvd 380 50640 a D Brighton Bird Dock Map Chans'es for 2002; 2002 Page 8 of 10 ] 1/7101 ' '-2642- City of Mound Dock Program AbutUN Land Commons Rec ~ Site_~ on Type Name Type Slip Size Mist ~8t 50670 n D Brighton Blvd __ 382 50700 a D Br~Qhiow~ Blvd _ 38350760 n D Brighton Bird 38450790 a D Brighton '-"- 385 50620 a D arighton 388 50850 n D Brighton 387 506~0 n D Brighton 388 50910 a c Brigmon 38g 50940 n c Brighten · 37050970 ---------- a C Brighton ..-.-_......._ 371 51030 a C E~righton 37251105 a C B~tghton 373 51135 s c anghton 374 51195 a. C Brighton 375 51315 a c Brighton 378 51'375 a C Brighton 377 51435 S C Brighton 37e 51495 , a C 9dghton 379 51555 S C Brighton 37._.L 51675 a c Brighton 381 51705 --------- n c Brighton 38251735 a C Brighton 383 51795 a c E~,~h[~n __ 384 !51850 S C Brighton 38551885 n C Brighton 3~8 64970 n D Last Lake ~ "-- 3e7 55000 .. n D Last Lake 388 55030 n D L¢~t Lake 38g 55060 n D Lost Lake 3gO 55090 a D J3st Lake 391 55120 n D Lost Lake 392 55'150 a D n~ Lake 393 55'180 n D L~t La'ke 3g4 80640 n D Idlewo0d 395 60685 n D' Idlewood 398 60765A n D ;Twin Pa~k Slip 27.5 x 10 3g? 60765B n D Twin Park Slip 24 x 10 398 60765C n D Twin Park Slip 24x10 3aa 60765D n D' Twin Park Slip 24 x In 400 !60935A n D Highland Prk Slip 27.5 x 10 401 60835B n D Highland Prk Slip 24 x 10 -- 402 60935C n D Highland Prk Slip 24 x 10 403 60635D n D Highland Prk Slip 24 x 10 404 .60835E n D Highland Prk Slip 24 x 10 405 60835F n D Hl,~,~a,'~d Prk Slip 27.5 x 1 Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 Page 9 of 3.0 ;l ~./7/03. -2643- City of Mound Dock Program AbumN Land Commons Re¢ ~ $/te..i~ on Type N~e Type Slip $~ MIs¢ Inform~ion 4(]6 608'35H n D ;Highland Prk Slip 75 sq fi: Make Per~anent sim?? 4n7 608351 n D Highland Pr~ Slip 75 sq fi: Temporary Site -2nd WIC- Ramie? 40a 60940 a D Highland Prk 4ha 60965 a D Highland Prk 4~o 61010 n D Rldgewood 411 61030 n D Ridgewood 412 61050 n D RidgeW%d 413 61090 n D Rldgewood 414 61110 n D Rldgewood 415 :61150 n D Rldgewood 41§ 61190, n D Lagoon Prk 417 61215 n D Lagonn Prk 418 61240 n D Lagoon Prk 41g 61265 n D Lageun Prk Dock Map Changes for 2002; 2002 Page ].0 of 10 -2644- 1/7/01 Mound Advisory Docks and Commons Commission November 15, 2001 MOTION carried unanimously. REVIEW FLOW CHART/PROCEDURE MANUAl Item #6 Sarah Smith cannot attend meeting. This item tabled until December 2001 meeting. 7. DISCUSS: 2002 DOCK LOCATION MAP CHANGES The following changes were approved: · #54 changed from abutting to non-abutting. · 10250 was changed to an abutting site last year. Page 77, Devon Multiple Site 42800G 18X8 small craft slip. This was eliminated previously. As Item #10 · Eliminate 42800H and 428001 on Devon Commons which were designated as temporary sites. · Highland Park on Page 78 the entrance was switched. This should be noted as a change. 60835G was eliminated and then renumbered and 60835G, 60835H (should be permanent, second w~ttercraft site), and 608351 (I needs to be eliminated.) Both 75 square feet and permanent. Avalon Park questions regarding watercraft. Keep the larger size. Marking G and H as temporary sites then eliminate as the sites are not renewed. Leave lines 6 and 7 but eliminate 8 and 9 and 8 and 9 (40550K and L) were a temporary second watercraft. MOTION by Funk second by Ahrens to extend the meeting by 15 minutes. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Funk second by jones to approve the 2002 Dock Application changes as amended. MOTION carried unanimously. -2645- CITY OF MOUND ~5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cltyofmound.com Memorandum To: ' DCAC From: Katie Hoff, Jim Fackler Date: 11/06/01 Re: 2002 Dock Map Changes Below you will find a chart that lists the Dock Map Changes for the 2002 season. If you have any questions please contact us. AbulEN Land Commons Hoc # 81te..~on Type Name Type Slip Size Misc Information 1 DO 155 ri D Canary Not adequate spacing-not assigned for.years 2 10250 a D Crasant Prk Change to Abuffing Site 3 1 0280 a D Cresent Pti( Change to Abutting Site 4 20130 n D Waterbank To be removed-Navigational Easement Issue 5 22990 a D North Park Change to Abutting Site 6 40550G , ' i1 D Avalon Prk Slip 32 x 10 ~'temporary site until non-renewal-Navigation Easement 7 40550H n D Avalon Prk Slip 32 x 10 i'temporary site until non-renewaI-Navtgatlon Easement 8 40550'~.. n: · D Avalon, prk Slip, 75 eq fl :Tem'~r~r~it~,;~',~iC.'~'R~'~~ ~i~!i'~'~'' i~i~(~;~.i~,.~:,~'~.~:~i~', 9 40550L n D Avalon Prk Slip 75 sq ff ~ o 42800G n 13 Devon Muit Slip 18 x 8 Was temporary site-Navigational Easement 1 ~ 42931 n B I Devon Removal of this temporary site due to non-renewal · 12 60835(~ n D I HIghland Prk Slip 18 x 8 To be removed-Navigational Eaaement 13 60835H n D Highland Prk. Slip 75 sq It Make~Perfii~ih~t~'"~it~~'~!~i~ 14 808351: n.. D Highland Prk Slip. 75 sq It TemPbra'r~:Slt~":'~2i~!W/~l~'~'~?.i')!i,~i~;~i:,ii~:!~;~;;~i:; ..prlnted on recycled paper .2646- Alit/ Land Oommons # N~ Type Name -2647-= '" ,~oe.l~3~.,...__-'~~ ~,~,,~,.:~ ..-. --- . .' ......... '",...' ' - ' ........ . . , . .~, ,.. ,1o3 ~'1.~ .~1 .... ·" ' ~ ', ,2" "',;:,', '" "'~'~' ' '104 , '1'~:. 1c~1'~.' ....... a D ...... WiOm' ........ :~ ~':~'"'":'~' ..... ':" ...... ; '" - " ' '""" ...... ~"~ '~"'"""~'~'"~" '"'~'~"' ........... ~' '"'":':"~' --~, --.- 4q6~'3 l~- ,.~.~ ...... . ..... ., . ~'~:." ~ ~. D.. -2648- Nm Type N~,me 2~ '"- ......... " _~LZZ,. . ;... .... , ........ , .l ~ .~, -2649- -2650- ~,~ 8~ite...# Non Type Name '" -2651 - Land Oommons '~ :z, ea ~s,~.~i~,'." a. ~ ~ "' .......... " '"'~"~' '.-":"'~.'""'"'"'"' ....... '~"",~,,' ',~ ,.:?:.~..'~ · ....: ...... ....... ~ ...... I ..... , .... . ~,.~ : , :.'..., '~ ,, .... ::' , ,, ., ,':'... .... , '?,'~.~"~',".~ ...... :_~_' .,, .., .... ' ~.4~ a,c.,. ~. , .......... ,,.,.~-.-.-.,,~-.,.,. , ,- ........... ~ ........ ~,.-.-~ .............. :,': .~, .... , ,,,, ~i.~" · c ~ ~ . .... ' '.~. ~ ~w~. , m.. .,.. C, ~ ~.~' ' ' . ....... ' ":- '~ '"""1'""~ .... ... ,,.., ..... . . :::.~:.~ ~4252~' .ii a C ;~' "'" ':':'" "' ' " 311 . J ~ ., .~ ~ :'" ~r r '".' :'.~:"~.-', .......... .' '- '.' , .... ~ ......... : ' ~ . .... sl~ ~e~u" ............ sis: ~,~ ~.~ '" "''~ '" ~, "" ......... ' ', ' .... "" '''' n B ~ .... ~.._.. 2~ .' ~,,.~',._.,. :~..'-.~::.j,.:~.,-,,.,.:.,,, ~. ........... ,.,.:.....:~::,:.,,,,..:.: .... :: ..... . - ....... ... .... ..:. ..... . ~: ~,'. ,.~. ,..,~.-~.~:..¢,..,: .: ...:.:.:-..-:: ....... :.:: . : ........ 'r:"'"' ' ....... '0' ~'""? ......... ~ .................................. ' ""'~ ......... ' .......... ' :,' - ' .............. ~"S_~_ ..... ,.'~'.~ ,~ ......... . ' ' ~' "~ "/", ...... ' ,... ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ , . , : ........... ~..,.. ,.,~ ~-- ;...:~..,._. , ........" ...................... ,,._, ..................... ....... ,., .., .,.,:, ....................... ~,. .............. · ~'" ":" ~5~? ~-"',,~'~',,,~'.-~,,~'r,-r.':,..,. · ,, .~'.,.,~;~ , ~ ..... ~... ~ ......... : .... '.,,..,.,,~ ............................ ~ ~....~.. ............... :: ::.?:,,:-:.::::.... ,...- :.., .: .......... . ,~::.. ,. .... ~,,:,~,,~.~'~ ............... ;....'::,.~..,;-:;~'"."~"."--';: ' , ~.' '.,..-:;L./,:~ .~ ~ .'..:. :: "",'. :.,. ~ :'.'.~: :..:.:.'OL" '~ ...... 'b"""','~ ',,'n ..' ~:~',,.,,,.,. ..... · . '. 0 ~ . I i _~:~'"'""', ~. ~j,~.,,~-~., ~'""~':""'"" ..,., ................ , ~~. ~,...~.., .... ~ ...... ,.......~ ......... ,....,.: .............. .. ,, ........, ..... ~ ......... . .... ~'~.~..,.. ~...~...: ..... .... ,....~ . ...... :' ,l~# ,Fife N~. Type Name "" -2653- for, 201~2,; 2DD2 -2654- This Page Is Left Intentionally Blank -2655- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAY~VOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (61Z) 47Z-O§Z0 May 20, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor/City Council FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Director REF: Naming of Park The Park & Open Space Advisory Commission is in the process of naming the new parks in the Metro Plain and Rottlund developments. The commission is asking the City Council to review and make changes to the form that is to be a insert in this summers City Contact. The format will be redone by the editor to make it more user friendly. I. GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHING THE NAME OF PARK FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA The purpose for these guidelines is to establish a procedure for the naming and approving of Park and Recreation Facilities with the City of Mound. The guidelines should not be viewed as mandates and the City Council may, in its reasonable judgement, depart from them in appropriate situations. Contributor. This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location. The name should fit the neighborhood. A Famous American or Prominent Citizen. Recognition shall not be ordinarily considered until termination of service or death. Occasion. A special event in history. Service. An individual living or dead who has significantly served the community above and beyond the call of duty. II. GUIDELINES FOR NAME OF FACILITIES AND PROVIDING MEMORIALS WITH THE PARKS. FACILITIES WITHIN THE PARK Facilities within a park can be named for an individual or organization who has made a significant donation of funds for the construction of the facility or has contributed service to the community. Examples of such facilities would include: Athletic Fields Tennis Courts Swim Pools Ice Arena Golf Course Buildings Wild Life Area The percentage of donation should ordinarily be at least 50% of the estimated cost of the facility when new, not including cost of the land. Service contributions to be eligible, would also be significant, generally at least 10 years of service to recreation in the City and a period of at least two years has passed from the termination of service or the death of the individual. MEMORIALS Memorials to deceased residents may be given. Objects (trees, benches, etc., and the size and material of the plaques( will be selected from a city list, and will be ordered, installed and maintained by the city. -2657- THE MOUND PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY C011 11 15510N NEEDS YOUR HELP! rare opportunity presents itself in that we have received two new parks for the City of Mound. The Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission is asking for help in naming these parks. We have begun the process of naming two new parks. One is located in the old Haddorf Field site (Village By The Bay) and the Rottlund Development (Langdon Bay). What we would like is for anyone who is interested to submit a recommendation of a name for either one or both of these new parks. Following are some basic guidelines for naming of the parks. However these are only guidelines and are not necessarily requirements. Contributor: This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location: The name should fit the neighborhood. famous American or Prominent Citizen: Recognition shall not be ordinarily ~idered until termination of service or death. Occasion: A special event in history. Service: An individual living or dead who has significantly served the community above and beyond the call of duty. Langdon Bay. Recommended Name Old Haddorf Field Reason for Recommendation Your Name Phone Please mail, drop off or fax (952) 472-0620 to the City of Mound of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Any questions Contact: Park Director Park Commission Chair Park Commission Vice-Chair -2658- Jim Fackler 952-472-0611 John Beise 952-472-2898 Norm Domholt 952-472-3806 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting ., .. April t0i.2002 ' ,*'Page 8 MOTION: GitmanmOVed, Babcock seconded to approve the*.Lafayette Ridge HOAr'new multipl~, deck,ii.tense for the 2002 seasOn, subject.to the applicant submitting a revised lighting plan to reviewed 'by staff by the ................................................................................ ,~.._o]~tbe2_QO2season ...... . .... - VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 1,. SAVE THE ~'.I.~.*E A;' Consideration of draft 2002 "Save the Lake", Budget. McMitlan 'stated'that she'*'had'recentlyfinalized-the draft'2002 "Save~the Lake"' budget' with Nybeclq that this was the first year that'bUdgeted expenditures were the same as budgeted revenues;'~. In:'the past, budgeted revenues have exceeded budgeted expenditures. There are additional projects being funded in 2002ce, mpamd to past.'years/citing the Water,Patrol arid sol,ir.., buoy light:, projeCts. She asl~ed, forqae~tlons or comments on the draft budget. Van Hercke questioned,whether the $30,000 budgeted for'solicited contributions in 2002 might be too high, .taking into consideration that actual contributions received in 2001 were $23,300, Nybeck stated that there were formula problems in the draft budget for budgeted expenditures from 1999 through 2001. These past "Save the Lake" budgets also had budgeted expenditures the same as budgeted revenue,: ,' ~.: · · . Foster complimented the efforts of. McMilan and stated that review of the draft budget might be more at the next Board meeting sin~"there~were forriiula problems in the budget spreadsheet.and.because it.was'in the handout folders. Wertasked how the'reniaini~g, fundS,'re0eived from the-business community 'it~ 200t is reflected in:the draft 2002 "Save the Lake" budget. · " " ,**'~'" '. .. ~; ";"I'"..'~ Nybeck stated that audit currently being prepared for 2001 will recognize the remaining funds from the ~"!,.' ~ 'business,community centribution::for ~.the Water PatTol project as a,.desi~nated:~und,balar~:..The .lir~e~.:item for the 2002 Water Patrol takes into consideration that there will probably be a shortfall of voluntary contributions '".'fmmthe~nember-cities~ wlt~thi~eho~fall,'bei'ng..niade:~up by th~b~,~taesS', .eerhmi~'hity 'ee~dbutien;,~ ~.'...,:.~ .. Wort stated that the proposed budget could use an explanation¢~n Why,propo~i~l~elicitatio%ih,2002,*:Save the Lake" budget would increase to $30,000 in 2002 from $23,300 actually received in 2001. · -,:~ ·. U¢lt/lillan state, d Wliert~a~aly~selioitation~s~ r,~iv~-im200,'~ ~.the.:Beard shoUld~,takt~.:inte':cenSideration solicitations rece~ved?~in eattY~l~be'¢,au, se~they~area result,el a.~letter~senteLit analysis of 2002 solicitation contributions might be appropriate, with a need to further update the database. The consensus of the Board was to revise and update the 2002 "Save the Lake" budget and bri.ngitback for review at the 4~24~02 Regular Meeting. ,~(dditional Business. · , . . )/. McMillan stated that the".'Save,{he Lake. lakesoaping" project was'presented at a'recent Mo~ndPlanning v Commission meeting, noting thatShe~understood.that,it was well received based..onpreliminary,,feedback. -2659 ' Lake Minnetonka Consewation District -'.. ...... ~.-:~ '~ ~ '.,.~ Re, gular ,Board Meeting .... ~ ~ ~.~, ~:, .. ApRHi0,2002 ' ' ,, Page BiJ~'a :stated thi~t:t:ie: believed tliat:th'e,lake~aping project'Wa~~ an opportunity to ~Ucate',',the'Mbuhd ': Planning ~dmm!s~ic~:,~Th:~ pi~Sentation'br~at~a positive atti~de on'~lakes~Ping' alte~atives, noting that h.._. _e.=ha__~' hed~p't~limlriia~: ~;~nvl~tsations With the'Mobnd,P~il'k~ Direbto.r:._on_'.{_h_e'.~'_c.~n_~! bf on city property to educate the public. McMillan stated that other Board members who believe the city they represent would like tc~ review the lakescaping project should contact her WATER STRUCTURES B. Additiona Business. There'was no additional businesS. FINANOIAL ~ ;: · A. Audit'bf~vbUcher~ (3/t6/02.3/3i/02) and (411102,4/15/02), Skramstad reviewed..the audit of vouchers for payment as submitted, MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Gilman seconded; to approve the audit of vouchers for the periods of (3/16/02 '"" ' ,3/31~t02)'and:,(4tl/02- 4t,15/02) as' submitted.. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. B,. January and February finandal summary and balance :sheets. Skramstad reviewed revenues and expenditures for the Administrative, Exotics, ;and ",Save the Lake" .-~bu'dgi~tsfor,Janua~,,and February. ,.This format is. new from :previous :years. ~ :It includes a summary sheet that takes into consideration budgeted revenues and budgeted expenditureslfor all three budgets, .The .sumrtiary sheet in .'the:r~ew.fon~at'provides On a monthly bas~is..'the variance of budgeted mevenues and ex, pendltureSi'~.netir~g~th~se~additional detalJsmu!d be c!arified if a specifioBOa~ member desired,. The ~ea~.com~Fne~i!i~..*theeffo~ ~.Skramstad eh~ the new ~onthly:;finan~al s~mmary~and~balance sheet; howevers: a numbe~of Boardmembem statedthat they would like the additional.de~jis.~.~p,fmr~t~o, that they cap De,tter:.un.de~e~.~,:the;t"~,an~i,a.! si~ati.*,e~t;pf the~d.~t,~ ..The ~.~ ,o,.f.the Bpp~;w..,as that Board members, iinte~sted in :fine tu~ing thee-format of the menth!y financial summary and ~er~e,,-sheet~should LAKE C, DiScussion of Board inspection'Tour of tributaries in proposed ordinance amendmenL 'i .~. Foster,.stated .l;hat, he~had talked te,st..,,a.ff'.~nd a tentati~'date~ednesda~?5/15!0~?t around, 5~p,. m,.has watemra~in., certain parts of Lake Ui~etonka,.. H~uestiened whether thgre was a need to '~ sit Painter's Creek, and he asked, for feedback and comments from the Boardon this proposed date. -~660- City of Mound Avalon Park Shoreline Buffer Planting Fortin Consulting, Inc. Marleane Callaghan April 24, 2002 Proposed Plan On April 24, 2002, I met with Lili McMillan and Orr Burma at the Avalon Park site. In reviewing the site, I would recommend a narrow planting along each side of the walkway entering the dock. The plants would be a combination of sedges, grasses and blooming plants in the 2-4' range. The procedure would be as follows: Right side of dock (facing the lake) 7' x 40' = 280 square feet. This would need approximately 150 plants. Left side of dock (facing the lake) 7' x 63' = 441 square feet. This would need approximately 240 plants. Step #1 - Herbicide with Rodeo the proposed planting area, two times, about 10 days apart. Assuming the city would do. (Fortin Consulting could do this). Step #2 - Mulch the planting area, after the grass is dead, with a shredded bark mulch, 2-4" in depth. The mulch will retain moisture for the plants, reduce weeds and define the planting area. Step #3 - Put in plants. With a group of volunteers, the planting would take approximately 6 hours or less. Time frame for planting: June through mid-September Drainage area from culvert to lake edge: Add two flats of wetland type plants. This would benefit the lake by: · Slowing down the velocity of water from the culvert · Retain more sediment in the drainage area · Absorb nutrients from the mn-off · Add habitat for dragonflies and frogs and small fish -2661 - Maintenance: · Watering is the most important for the first 6 weeks if weekly rains have not happened. Monitoring for weeds. Education: Signage describing the native shoreline planting and a brochure explaining the planting would be helpful for residents and visitors to the park. A PowerPoint presentation on using native plants in the landscape by Fortin Consulting, Inc. could also be done for the Parks Commission, City Council and the neighborhood surrounding Avalon Park. Approximate Costs: Plants: Wetland plants - $125.00 Upland plants - $400.00 Mulch and herbicide: City could provide? Planting - help from volunteers? Design and Coordination - Fortin Consulting, Inc. Depending upon the number of volunteers approximately 20 hours at $50.00/hour + mileage and travel time. Fortin Consulting, Inc. will bill for actual hours. Total approximate costs for Avalon Park Planting: $1525.00 The estimates are a best guess based on the information we have at this time. We are assuming there will be volunteers to assist with planting, maintenance of watering and weed monitoring and the city could help with the herbicide and mulch. Avalon Park has the potential to be a very beautiful demonstration site for lakescaping. The increase in plant diversity will attract butterflies, dragonflies and songbirds as well as provide habitat for frogs. As the plants grow in size they will help keep the geese offthe grass and help absorb the nutrients that mn-off from the lawn area into the lake. Barfing any unusual weather such as flooding in this first season, this planting can really be successful. -2662- OZ -2663- THE ~ LEGACY Giving To The Lake lVlinnetonka Area April 22, 2002 Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor & Council Members: Thank you for the opportunity to present information about The Legacy Foundation. The purpose for the brief presentation is to acquaint you with the vision and mission of the foundation, and to answer your questions. Two of our board members are on your council agenda on May 28, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. The Legacy Foundation was founded in 2001. Its mission is to adopt significant lake area projects that enhance the livability of our lake community. The Legacy Foundation will provide leadership, vision and ability to assemble the diverse resources available. In addition, The Legacy Foundation will work to ,coordinate the necessary inter- jurisdictional approvals and support that is necessary for the successful completion of the projects. Our board looks forward to the opportunity to meet with your Council. Enclosed is an informational piece regarding The Legacy Foundation. Please' contact me if you have questions prior to the meeting. a~t~ds' Administrative Assistant 19765 HIGHWAY SEVEN - SHOREWOOD, MN 55331 TEL: (952) 401-1260 FAX: (952) 474-0751 EMAIL: inf(-2{~(~4-yfoundation.net WEB SITE: www. thelegacyfoundation.net Dear Ms. Hanson, It is my pleasure, as a board member of the Westonka Historical Society, to present a proposal to unify the citizens, raise awareness on our rich past, and enhance the lives of residents and visitors alike, to the City of Mound. We Propose: Bring the Minnehaha to Mound The Minnesota TransportatiOn Museum operates the Steamboat known as the Minnehaha, which tours Lake Minnetonka. Mound currently lacks a proper pier to accommodate a 71-foot boat and the passengers who come and go. If a City Pier existed, Mound could be part of their scheduled tours &.stops on Lake Minnetonka. A City Pier would bring many benefits to our town: A beginning to eventually link Cook's Bay to Lost Lake, an invitation to visit our park and beach by boat for swimming and picnicking not to mention an additional option for other tour boats. It is our proposal to spearhead this project for launch and completion by Spring 2002. Our proposal calls for the full endorsement of the City of Mound, it's Council and Planning Commission as well as the Dock/Commons and Park/Recreation Departments. We propose to operate out of the Mound Depot and locate the Pier on her lakeshore. We feel the parking provided in both the Depot and Landing parking lots as well as street parking will be fully adequate. Any overflow parking may need to rely on the Gillespie Center for support. We propose to fund this project with private and public funds (if available). The construction estimate is less than $30,000 for a 100 ft. by 8 ft pier, installed by Minnetonka Portable Dredging. We will prepare a drawing and estimate when required. -2665- There is an urgent cry from the citizens to find a common ground of full cooperation. It is our common belief that it is time for the Citizens to demonstrate to the governing body, and vice versa, that Mound is a "Can Do Community". We ask for the full support, guidance and assistance of the city to streamline and expedite our proposal. The Westonka Historical Society believes that one successful endeavor will breed and encourage additional proposals to enhance our way of life. Young and Old, resident and visitor will share the excitement that The Minnehaha's presence will bring to the fair City of Mound. We ask you to advise The Chairman of the Minnehaha to Mound Committee regarding issues that the city may have so that we may address and resolve them without delay. F. Todd Warner can be reached Monday through Friday at 952-495-0007. Respectfully Submitted, F. Todd Warner Chairman - Minnehaha to Mound Committee Westonka Historical Society Cc: Jim Facler -2666- Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. Lake Minnetonka Division March 27, 2002 F Todd Warner Mahogany Bay 26422 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Todd In enjoyed your tour of the Mound waterfront, chilly as it was, and hearing about the developments the city of Mound is planning for the downtown area. The Lake Minnetonka Division of the Minnesota Transportation Museum has many members who live in the Upper Lake area and we are interested in. the history of the streetcar boats in the Upper Lake. In fact this coming summer we are planning a survey of the Zumbro street car landing led by our site administrator and her husband who are marine hist(nians and archeologists. At the February Minnehaha council meeting I presented ~your idea to have Minnehaha come to Mound when we can. The concept was endorsed by the Council as long as we can develop an operational plan to ensure that a safe route, water depth and bridge clearance issues are addressed. This doesn't appear to be insurmountable. Assuming Minnehaha can safely come to Mound, unless there is a substantial dock we would only be able to cruise around the bay but not carry passengers to or fi.om Mound. If there is a dock available that is capable of handling the 55 ton, 70' long x 6' draft Minnehaha we would be happy to come to Mound for special events. The upcoming season for Minnehaha is pretty well set now but we would try to bring Minnehaha to Mound on a special cruise or two. In the future we could schedule the boat for special events & cruises to Mound. We support your efforts to develop a public dock that the Minnehaha and other boats can use and will be in touch with you as the season nears to develop the operational plan enabling the Minnehaha to Visit Mound. Sincerely, Brad Buxton General Superintendent Lake Minnetonka Division of the MTM The Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. is a 501. C. 3 non-profit corporation. All gifts are tax deductible. 328 Lake Street, Excelsior, MN 55331 Phone: 952-474-2115 Fax: 952-474-2192 -2667- WESTONKA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 3740 Enchanted Lane Mound, MN 55364 952 472-4893 City Council Meeting May 28, 2002 The Westonka Historical Society would like to address the following issues regarding the Minnehaha to Mound proposal: · Location of dock - if Depot - handicap accessibility, bathrooms, rental of Depot. Would now be the time to re-visit previous redesign of Depot deck to be more community~minded? · Would it make more sense to have dock closer to landing? · Apply for permit for multiple dock now for lrhrther expansion later? · Neighborhood concerns - help make the park safer and less subject to vandalism · How far from property line dock should go? · Lighting · Parking · Volleyball court · Signage using historical decor · Plantings, beautification of area done by volunteers? · VFW has offered parking lot for a possible "special cruise or two" by Minnehaha (see insert) · Coordinate Minnehaha visit with Music in the Park to kick off fundraiser · Minnesota Transportation Museum could possibly supply a vintage streetcar to Mound (see insert) We need: · · · City to apply for multiple transient dock permit with LMCD/DNK City engineers for drawings Escrow account set up by City for donations Unanimous support from Council to move forward -2668 ~!AY--01--2002 02 :22 PM MINNETONKA PORTABLE ~REG 952 4?4 6712 *~ P.02 ORONO BAY/ ! : f I 3D ~Y EAST UPPER 20 lO klM,, -2669- ~AY--O~--2902 02~25 P~ ~%NN£TONKA PORTABLE ~RE~ 952 ~7~ 67~2 P.O~ -2670- II FREE '¢olume 20 1 Volunteers prepare the Minnehaha .for its May 4 laUnch .Study of I Cruising,'se.ason nears transitto · ' suburbs Minnetonka mayo.r expressE skepticism thai light rail a reality 'By Jaime Hunt A.ssistant Editor Kerm Stake, a long-time volunteer with the Lake Mlnnet0nka Division of the Minnesota Transportation Museum, greets visitors to the museum's opsn house on April 28. On the same day, he touched up the paint on the Minnehaha, which will be.launched for the season at 9:30 a.m. on Saturday, May 4. ' ' ' Marina receives' apprOval fiat. 29? publiC doCks` on Gray's B; BI~ johnathon White Staff Reporter The old GraT's Bay. Marina will soon get a new lease on the DNR but is' being devei- apparently was reSOlved. Light rail transit might 'in the southwest met~ future, The Hennepin Cou: Regional Railroad AUtho~ is investigating its c~ptions the Southwest Transit Co dot, which runs from dm town Minneapolis to E; Prairie through St.. Louis P and Minnetonka. Katie Walker, the coun~ study manager for the p: 'eCt, told the Minnetonka £ Council April 22 that · HCRRA is conducting a str to assess potential rail trar technologies for the corrid, "It's within our charge look at rail options on prop ties we own," Walker told t Ci "to buY"311 Council Member ~omson, · Heritage Preservation oped and will be operated by A'consultant working onCommissiOner Don ·DouglaSs· the city of Minnetonka. It is the projdct for the city agreedCriticize ExCelsior,& purchase expected to.operate by next to a-2671- of some dock yea_rj~ bo.ating sea. son.., loca.uons, to tessen the impact Rv I~,n~ Itt',, . : Lake Minnetonka's Grand Historic Sternwheeler Prlva~e Ckar~ers anc~ Publlc Excursions Weddings * Annlversar[es, Bibthck:y Parties Compa.y Functions · Groups from 3O to Catering & Beverage Service La~0e Dance Floor & Sound System All Weather Enclosed ' Newly P-.enovated 'Day and Evening Cruises 952.929.1209 Check out our website www.Lad¥OITheLakeCruises,com ' · Corporate & Private Cruises · Birthday Parties (Surpriaell) · Weddings & Grooms Dinners , Appetizer, Luncheon & Dinner Crt · Options on Bar & Beverage Servh · Small & Large Groups to 54 Call For A Free Broch 952-474-117: Outstate 1-888-474-117 ~ww.excel$1orbavchar ter~.{a; Custom Charters' of Lake Minnetonka S0ec~alizlng In affordable cruises for groups up to 50 or a private cruise for h our 52' triple deck Driftaway IlL C[ Chaders cruises are Individually priced a( lng to your private cruise and dining optior Your captain likes to be on the water an make It affordable for your occasion beauty of our lake's shoreline explode.~ tile change of oLrr seasons. You char course-Driftaway III will make it float. "Serving Great Times to Great People on Lake Minnetonka Since 1989" HOLIDAY FAIR ~OAT CHARTER P.O. Box 485 · Spring Park, MN 55384 Phone: (952) 936-4040 · Fax: (952) 471-0087 www. chartermen com · CORPORATE EvENTs · SOCIAL OUTINGS ·CELEBRATIONS Creating exceptional events on the water with our 'First Class'fleet of yachts. Charter ,on Lake Minneton, featuring 6 luxury yac to fit any group ~, Tradition of Excellence Continues for 28 years... CaE for free brochure 9521472-3098 -2672- · Corporate · Birthdays · Anniversaries · For the fun of'itl OPERATE THE HISTORIC 1906 STREETCAR STEAMBOAT MINNEHAHA AND STREETCAR 78 Please join the Minnesota Transportation Museum's volunteers and members. Train to be a Captain/Pilot, Purser, and Engineer on the steamboat, an Operator and Conductor on the streetcar, conduct maintenance on our properties, or help operate the Ticket Office for the Lake Minnetonka Division of the MTM. Perks: 1. Operate or maintain a unique 1906 steamboat with an O'Connor Triple Expansion Steam Engine and Cleaver-Brooks Boiler. 2. Operate 1893 Electric Streetcar 78, the oldest operating electric streetcar in the United States. Help restore the 1907 Twin City Rapid Transit Company Streetcar 1239. 3. Educate others about the interesting and rich transportation history of Minnesota. 4. Free steamboat and streetcar rides for volunteers; earn free passes for family and friends through the accumulation of volunteer hours. 5. Store Merchandise Discounts and Volunteer Recognition. 6. Meeting and working with great people. Training begins in the spring but continues all summer. Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. membership is required to volunteer. Please call 952-474-2115 for more information. If you receive the voice mail system, please leave a message and Ann will get back to you. VOLUNTEER POSITION DESCRIPTIONS: Captain/Pilot: The person responsible steering, docking, historical commentary, and the over-all operation of the steamboat. Training is required and provided. State of Minnesota Master's License required. Purser: The person responsible for line handling, tickets, historical commentary, and passenger safety on the steamboat. Training is required and provided. Engineer: The person responsible for operating the steam engine and boiler, including upon orders from the Captain/Pilot, changing the steamboat's speed and direction. Training is required and provided. ~Jpon sufficient trainir~g, a Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry Hobby Boiler's License is required to operate the power plant independently. Streetcar Conductor/Operator: The person responsible for safe operation of a streetcar using a throttle and air break system who also imparts historical commentary and gives tours of our streetcar barn. Training is required and provided. Ticket Office Worker: Sell tickets for 'the steamboat, tokens' for the streetcar, and merchandise related to the Minnehaha and streetcars. Maintenance Worker: Volunteers do not have to operate our properties. Those interested in the maintenance of the steamboat or streetcar, or restoration of streetcars are always welcome. Maintenance of our properties is a year-round activity. -2673- A Very Brief History of Streetcar Boa!s 1905, Electric Streetcars of the Twin City Rapid Transit Company (at speeds Ihat could top 60 miles per hour) led out to Excelsior from Minneapolis. The TCRT recognized the need for scheduled public waterborne transportation, not pleasure cruises, on the lake and during 1905-1906, constructed six Express Boats in the oompany'~ Minneapolis shops under the supervision of Wayzata shipwright Royal Moore. Also known as Streetcar Boats since their design emulated the TCRT streetcars, the steamboats operated on Lake Minnetonka between 1906 and 1926. They were named after cities and areas served by the TCRT: Como, Harriet, Hopkins, Minnehaha, Stillwater, and White Bear. A seventh Streetcar Boat, Excelsior, of a slightly different design and construction, was built in Excelsior and was added to the fleet in 1915. Improvements in roads and the proliferation of the automobile began putting the Streetcar Boats out of service. Minnel~aha, Como, and White Bear were taken out of commission in 1925. During the winter of 1925-1926, these three steamboats were dismantled to down to their hulls, with their engines, seats, superstructures, and other items removed and sold off. Minnehaha, Como, and White Bear were intentionally scuffled north of Big Island in 1926. Hopkins was sold to Mr. JoSeph Du Guise and Mr. George B. HoPkins in 1927. She was painted white and re-named Minnetonka. :cinnetonka traveled the lake until 1949, when she was also taken north of Big Island uttled near her sisters. In 1928 Excelsior, Harriet, and Stillwater were dismantled, with their seats sold to the Pearce Amusement Company and their machinery and salvaged wood sold off as well. Contra'fy to popular belief, these steamboats were not sunk to the lake's bottom. Private individuals raised Minnehaha in 1980. Without money in hand to conserve, restore, or properly store the hull, Minnehaha sat outside and rotted through ten cold winters and hot summers despite efforts by local Excelsior business owners and historians Darel and LaVerna Leipold. The Leipolds established the non-profit Inland Marine Interpretive Center and received Minnehaha's title from the State of Minnesota, who actually owned the boat since the state controls the bOttoms of lakes, rivers, and streams. Ultimately the LeiP~lds transferred ownershiP of the steamboat to the Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. and restoration began in 1990. Fortunately, the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987 prohibits the destruction of shipwreck sites, so the remaining Streetcar Boats are safe on the lake's bottom, The Lake Minnetonka Division of the MTM is planning, within the next five years, to begin documenting the lake's wrecks in Situ and create accurate site Plans of the Streetcar Boats, including two other wrecks nearby. Two MTM staff members are trained l autical Archaeologists and will have the proper permits and permission from the tate of Minnesota to conduct these .investigations. -2674- Brief History of the Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. The Minnesota. Transportation Museum, Inc. had its origins in the Minnesota Railfans Association. The MR_A_ took .possession o£ S~ 1300 in 1.954 and .it ~vas .in stor~ge until 1962. The Minnesota Transportation Museum Committee was formed to restore Streetcar 1300 and in May. 1963, it began running under its own power generator. The MTMC acquired the historic Minnehaha Depot, the ownership of which was transferred to the Minnesota Historical Society, but restored by the MTMC starting in 1967. The Depot is operated in cooperation with the Minsq and Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. In 1969, the Como- Harriet Streetcar Line was founded at Lake Harriet in Minneapolis, also in cooperation with the MPRB. Both CHSL and the Depot are on the National Register of Historic Places. These humble beginnings led to the incorporation of the Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. in 1971 as a non-profit 501.C.3 organization. In 1976 the Railroad Division was formed and' Stillwater steam locomotive #328 was acquired and' its restoration began in 1980. Several' pieces of rolling stock were acquired over the years and MTM trains operated out of Stillwater until 1992. 'Relocated to Osceola, Wisconsin, the OsceOla and St.' CrOix'¥alley Railway runs on Canadian National track along the St. Croix River Valley in conjunction with the Osceola Historicat Society. -In-1985, ~e-MTM purchased' thefrrst roundhouse 'constmctedin SX. Panl, onthe 'site of the t 862 Minnesota and Pacific Railroad locomotive maintenance facility. The Jackson Street Roundhouse Museum.opened-in-- 1-999,. is currently under- restoration; and- a- new. turntable is being re-installed. The MTM's Motor Bus Operations includes several historic buses that have operated in the Twin Cities area including. #630, a 1943 Mack bus; #1399, a 1954 General Motes model TDH 5105, and several unrestored properties. The Lake Minnetonka Division was established in 1989 upon the acquisition of the steamboat Minnehaha from the State of Minnesota. The Minnehaha was restored between 1990-1996 and launched in May 1996. The Excelsior Streetcar Line was established in 1999 and Duluth Electric Streetcar 78 is currently operating on this line. Como-Harriet Streetcar Line volunteers restored Streetcar 78 between 1985 and 1991. Excelsior Streetcar 1239 is currently under restoration in our Excelsior Streetcar Barn. Minn-esota Transportation Museum, 'Inc. Streetcaws Currently' the. Traction. Division of the Minnesota Transportation Museum, Inc. (MTM) operates three vintage streetcars on our Como-Harriet Streetcar Line in Minn~tpolis: Streetcar 265, Streetcar 1300, and PCC Streetcar 322. All three of these streetcars were owned by the Twin City Rapid Transit Company (TCRT) at some point, with 265 and 1300 being constructed in the Twin Cities by the TCRT. The Lake Minnetonka Division of the MTM currently operates the oldest operating electric streetcar in the United States, Streetcar 78, in Excelsior. Streetcar 78 originally operated in Duluth between 1893 and 1911. At our Excelsior facility we are restoring TCRT Streetcar 1239 and two other streetcars, Winona 10 and Mesaba 10, await restoration. -2675- Page 1 of 1 Kandis M. Hanson From: To: Sent: Subject: "MoundPD" <MoundPD@cityofmound.com> "Kandis M. Hanson" <KandisHanson@cityofmound.com> Tuesday, May 21,2002 10:09 AM Fw: Minnehaha Steamboat --To the Mound City Council ..... Original Message ..... From: CUTYOW@aol.com ' To: MoundPD@cityofmound.com Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 6:11 PM Subject: Minnehaha Steamboat --To the Mound City Council We received notice of the proposal to install a dock at Mound Bay park that will accommodate the Minnehaha Steamboat. Since we will be out of town at the time of the City Council Meeting on May 28, 2002, we are sending this letter in support of the Idea of installing the dock. We are one of the closest neighbors as we live in Chapman Place which borders on Mound Bay Park. It is our opinion that the Minnehaha coming to Mound is a great idea. This would be an added feature to the redevelopment of downtown Mound. Most of our neighbors who live in Chapman Place are supporters of this Minnehaha Steamboat Dock proposal. We hope the City Council looks favorable on this proposal. Robert T. and Carolyn Y. Cuthill 2670 Commerce Blvd., #208 Mound, MN 55364 952 472 6094 - 2676- 05/23/2002 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com To: From: Re: Date: Mayor and City Council Kandis Hanson, City Manager Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan May 23, 2002 The City Personnel Committee (Mayor Meisel, Council Member Bob Brown, City Manager Kandis Hanson, Finance Director Gino Businaro) has negotiated a proposal for a Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan with the Employee Retirement Program Committee. Attached please find the proposal and an analysis of the fiscal impact. The City Personnel Committee recommends approval. With the exclusion of the members of Local 320, all other full time employees will be required to participate in this plan. If you have any questions on this plan please feel free to call me or any other member of the committee. April 30, 2002 City of Mound Cash Contributions: Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan: I. Initial Contribution to the Plan The members of Local 320 do not wish to participate uutil the city_ is in a better financial situation. -This contribution would be made by the end of the month ]~[a.Y_ltf_2~ -It would be based on 8 hours of accumulated sick leave -The mount of initial hours contributed can not exceed 40% of the employee's accumulated sick leave as of the end oftbe year 2001. -For the purposes of this contribution, the hourly rate would be based on the employee base pay multiplied by the percentage as stated in 18.1 of the City Administrative Code or as stated in the applicable Union Contract's severance section. _The accumulated sick leave of each employee would be reduced by the initial contribution, lkhours. 2. Subsequent Contributions to the Plan Starting with the month of June of 2002. the employee would contribute ~ of the employee gross pay, on a monthly basis and the employer would contribute I percent of the employee gross pay starting January 1, 2003. 3. Contribution at Retirement At the time of termination, the employee shall contribute based on the following scale; 1250 hours accumulated sick hours ......................................... 75% ~ 1000 hours accumulated sick hours ......................................... 60% ~.* 750 hours accumulated sick hours ........................................... 50% s., 500 hours accumulated sick hours ........................................... 25% 3., of the full amount of severance pay from accrued sick time toward the plan.*** Employees who have over $3.000.00 in severance from accrued vacation or comp time shah contribute all monies to the plan. Employees with less than $3.000.00 in severance from accrued vacation or comp time shah receive such monies in a severance check. ***contributions shall be calculated in the following manner: 1: Total sick hours, as listed on the employee's final pay check, shall determine "accumulated sick hours" percentage o-.> as stated in item 3 listed above. 2: Total sick hours will then be multiplied by 18.1 in the Administrative Code or applicable Union Contract's severance sections (depending on employee status/union membership). 3. That amount will then be multiplied by the percentage o.,> listed above in item 3. The remaining percentage shall be given to the employee in the form of a severance check. -2678- 0 ¢~ -2679- NE _ II 's not too late...- hour ........ 5:30 - 6'.30 "' B:~ - 7'.30 dinner .......... 7:30 e~ons ............. ~. r.45 ~a~er .............. i Aiso(ia£iofl of Hecropolitan ~l;flkipali£ies 1~$ PntverdO, Avenue St. Paul, ,q,12V 55Z03.2044 Phone: (451) 215-4000 Fax.. (65~) ~-mail: amm~am~l ~ 5, o~g ~4MM F~, No~_s Is foxed to all AIffM city oagers and ~~, ~l~ve ~d ~ard w~h your ~o~ · t~to keep them -> I aflRtil hip in pr°riding May 20 - 24, 2002 II I I Governor Approves $626.8 million in Bonding Projects Citing concern about the state's unresolved budget shortfall for fiscal years 2004 and 2005, Governor Ventura approved only $626.8 million of the $ 983,3 million capital budget passed by the Legislature. The ,$356.7 million difference has been line item vetoed. The approved projects are primarily those that have been previously funded and are under construction or are asset preservation improvements. As a result of the vetoes, the state will save approximately $73 million in debt service. Among the projects surviving the Governor's veto pen are $6 million for re- gional parks in the metropolitan area and $20 million for the Northwest Busway, which will run from Minneapolis to Rogers. The $9 million authorized for the Livable Communities program was vetoed. Additionally, the Governor has said he won't authorize the entire bond issu- ance for three projects that were not vetoed. The three projects are flood hazard mitigation, local bddge repair and replacement and Nicholson Hall at the University of Minnesota. Flood mitigation projects in St. Louis Park, St. Anthony and Minneapolis were included in the bill passed by the legislature, however, it is unclear how the partial bond issuance will impact these cities. Met Council To Release City-Level Household and Employment Forecasts On Friday, May 24, the Metropolitan Council will release the updated 2020 and 2030 household and employment forecasts for incorporation into Blue- print 2030. The forecast numbers, which are only preliminary, will be e-mailed or faxed to all cities on Friday and discussed at the Council's Regional Growth Policy Committee meeting on Wednesday, May 29. Following the Council's discussion on the 29% Council staff will begin meeting with city officials to discuss the preliminary forecasts. The new household forecasts for 2020 may differ from those included in a city's 1998 comprehensive plan. The Council is forecasting approximately 50,000 more households in the region by the year 2030 than cities planned for in their 1998 comprehensive plans. Egan Appointed To Metropolitan Council Former AMM board member and Eagan mayor, Tom Eagan has been ap- pointed by Governor Ventura to the Metropolitan Council. Eagan is filling the District 15 position that was held by the late Carolyn Rodriquez. District 15 includes the cities of Eagan, Bumsville, Apple Valley and rvlendota Heights. -2680- TOTRL P.02 X~g 13 2BBZ 17:37:1B Via Fax FAX Penny to Replace Brandl as Annual Meeting Speaker Due to an unforeseen sched- uling conflict, Dr. John Brandl, dean ofthe Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, has had to cancel his presentation at the AMM Annual Meeting on May 30. However, former Con- gressman Tim Penny has agreed to be the keynote speaker for the evening. Penny has served as a state senator and Congressman from southern Minnesota and is currently a senior policy fel- low atthe Humphrey Institute. As~odadon oF Hetropolita, 145 [/n~versily Aven~ West Phone: (~Sl~ F~' (~1) 281-13~9 AMM Fax News i~ fax~d to all AMM eJty manage~ ~d ad~nim, mo~, legislative con. tactr and Board n~ernbt~v. PI~ ~hare titi~ far with yottr ma~, ~~ and staff to keep thegn abretul of lt#portant metr~ -> 9524?ZBGZB gandisHansun Pa~u BBZ Of 082 Pa nemhiPS in providing enaoe and olutiona MaY 13 - 17, 2002 Legislative Leaders Agree to Basics of a Budget Solution Over~e weekend House and Sen- ate leaders reached an agreement to eliminate the state's remaining $439 million budget deficit by shift- ing a portion of school aid and county human services payments into the next biennium and using money in the workers compensa- tion reserve fund. The plan would not raise any general fund taxes or cut state aid payments to cities, but it does restore some of the outs made in phase one of the budget balancing process. Legislators are attempting to resolve the re- maining budget issues, such as how to restore at least a minimal budget reserve, so that the confer- ence committee report can be taken up by each body before the end of the day on Tuesday. This would allow time to attempt a veto override, if necessary. The bill does not address the pro- jected deficit for the next biennium. Therefore, reductions in local gov- ernment aid for the 2003 calendar year could be part of a future bud- get solution when the legislature convenes in January of 2003. The weekend budget agreement did not include resolution of the is- sues surrounding the transporta- tion funding or capital bonding bills. Met Council Scheduled to Release City-Level Forecasts VVRhin the next few weeks, the Metropolitan Council will be sending a letter to ali metro-area cities outlining the schedule and process that the Council plans to follow in releasing preliminary city-level forecasts for population, households and employment through 2030. As has been previoulsy reported, the Council is projecting an additional 930,000 people in the seven-county region by 2030. Metropolitan Council members will receive the city-level forecasts at the May 29 meeting of the Regional Growth Policy Committee. Sector representatives will then contact cities to discuss the forecasts in early June, with the Council hoping for some preliminary feedback from cit- ies by mid-July. -2681 - TOTRL P, 02 Ii -> Legislative Update , Budget Balancing Plan The budget balancing bill that took shape over the weekend (see Monday's FAX NEWS) has now been passed by both the House and Senate and has been sent to the Governor. The final sticking point was resolved when legislative leaders agreed Tuesday evening to use the state's tobacco endowment as a budget reserve, if necessary. The bill shifts a portion of school aid and county human services payments into the state's next biennium and transfers money from a variety of state funds, such as the worker's compensation reserve fund, to the state's general fund. The bill also allows for $13 million in appropria- tions for anti-terrorism efforts, money to pay interest on the bonding bill and res- toration of some of the cuts made to K- 12 and higher education and the Governor's Residence during Phase L The budget bill does not reduce local gov- ernment aids or Property tax relief pay- ments. Nor does it address the projected budget shortfall for the state's 2004-05 fiscal year, which begins July 1, 20133. Therefore, if revenue projections do not improve, the next legislature may be faced with an additional budget deficit. Tax Bill Includes TIF Amendments The House and Senate also passed an omnibus tax bill on Wednesday. The bill includes numerous sales and income tax provisions. The bill makes no changes to Ievy limits or local government aids, but it does amend the tax inorement law. The tax increment changes include: (1) of the requirement that a TIF au- must obtain approval from the it` of Revenue to decertify a district 95Z4?ZOGZO prior to the required decertification date; and (2) authorization for cities to use the TIF deficit reduction provisions without being required to first pool available in- crements from other districts to reduce deficits. The bill also provides ~at in determining if a city may Pool increments among its districts to pay deficits in another district, the existence of a guarantee of obliga- tions by the individual or entity that would receive the payment under the pooling provisions does not provide a basis for denial of the authority to pool by the De- partment of Revenue. Finally, it includes local provisions for TIF districts in Minne- apolis, St. Paul, Duluth, Albert Lea, Rushford and West St, Paul. The bill also amends the abatement law to permit twenty-year abatements for qualh~ed business. A qualified business is defined as a business with at least 50% of its payroll for manufacturing, agricul. tural processing, mining, reseamh and development, warehousing or high tech- nology. Omnibus Public Finance Bill House and Senate conferees have ap- proved a conference committee report on the omnibus public finance bill (S.F.2572). The bill, which includes several provisions related to the issuance of general obliga- tion and industrial revenue bonds, was approved by the Senate on Thursday and is expected to be approved by the House later this week. The bill amends the public debt law to allow a c/ty to issue general obligation (G.O.) bonds for street reconstruction projects without a referendum - if a city has adopted a street reconstruction plan and the bond issuance is approved by a Partnerships Jn providing ervi and utions May 13 - 17, 2002, no. 2 unanimous vote ofthe city council. How- ever, the bond issuance would be sub- ject to reverse referendum, ifa number of residents equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the last municipal general elec. lion sign a petition requesting a referen- dum. The provision is effective August 1, 3.002. Cities' authority to issue special assessment bonds remains unchanged. Second/y, the Metropolitan Council had sought authority to establishment a Hous- ing Production Revolving Loan Fund, as described in the April 29 FAX NEWS. This authority was not included in the fi- nal bill. Transportation Funding Although a bill can be revived at any time, it appears the transportation funding package, which includes a gas tax in- crease, will not pass this session. Bonding Bill The conference committee on the bond- ing bill has agreed to a total of $880 mil- lion in projects, but has yet to finalize the bill. Therefore, there will not be enough time for the legislature to over- ride any gubernatorial vetoes of the bill or line item vetoes of specific projects. A ocbtion of Hetropolitan Hunicipalitie 145 tYntv,~rsity ,,h, en#~ W~st 8't. J~aul, Mlv $$105-2044 Phone: (651) 215.4000 Fax: (631) 281-1299 F~rnail: amm(~mm145, org .AMM Fax Noo~s is f~ced to all AMM city manaffer~ and admintstra~ors, l~girlati~e con- taels and Board members. Please Share this fmc with pout mayors, eOnndlmembers aod staff w keep them abreast o£ important me~o -2682- TOTAL P.02 ~ay 18 2802 1G:flT:IZ Yia Fax -> 9524?ZBGZB ~&~inix~ra~or Page 80! Of flSZ -FridayFax- A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Working Weekend? With the magical Tuesday deadline fast approaching, the major House and Senate conference committees will likely meet, if not publicly, in private to try to reach an agreement to end the session. Next Tuesday is important because it is considered the last day the legislature can send a bill to the governor and still have enough time to overr~de a governor's veto. Leadership from the House and Senate met again late this morning in an attempt to hammer out more details regarding the big packages left on the table--bonding, budget reconciliation, and transportation. Upon emerging from their meeting, members spoke to the press and indicated that committee chairs were being encouraged to work throughout the weekend and to finish work by early next week. Little additional information on the progress of committees was forthcoming. Budget Bleaker? On Thursday, the state's budget picture turned a little bleaker as the monthly collection report for state revenues took an unexpected $60 million downturn. The report reflects actual revenues collected by the state in April versus the revenues forecasted in the February budget forecast. Although Finance Commissioner Para Wheelock and State Economist Tom Stinson always caution against drawing long-term conclusions from short-term data, the downturn seems to be significant. In addition, when coupled with the recent announcements of factory closings across the state, the chances of a major state revenue rebound do not seem likely. The new information on revenue collections will not directly affect the current negotiations to resolve the $439 million state budget shortfall. However, the governor has suggested that the state may prepare an additional state budget May 10, 2002 Page 1 forecast if circumstances necessitate. Even if the legislature finished its work and the current projected 2002~2003 deficit is resolved, a new forecast could indicate an even larger deficit, giving the governor a rationale to call a fall special session or reason to use his unallotment authority to balance any newly identified deficit. Transportation Travails The Transportation conference committee met on Thursday evening and reconvened this morning to consider a Senate offer largely based on the Minnesota Transportation Coalition's plan that included a 5 cent per gallon gas tax increase, no indexing of the gas tax, the authority to issue up to $100 million in trunk highway bonds annually, no ~/5 cent metro sales tax, and an 8.25 percent dedication of the motor vehicle sales tax to a multi-modal fund. The vote on the offer failed with the House Republican members passing on their vote. At the end of this morning's meeting, Representative Al Juhnke (DFL-Willmar) offered his own compromise. Juhnke is the only DFL member among the I-louse conferees and he stated that he was offering his plan because he believes that the only way for the House to pass a gas tax bill is with substantial DFL support. Although complete details of his proposal were not released, he indicated that it did include a six- cent gas tax increase and the creation of a multi- modal fund. However, rather that spelling out the precise distribution, he would leave much of the discretion of how the multi-modal funds would be distributed up to future legislatures. The committee is waiting to reconvene yet this afternoon where we expect the House to counteroffer with a proposal that would raise the gas tax by three cents. The bonding conference committee met on Thursday evening but also failed to make any significant progress. The anti-terrorism For more info?marion on city legislative issues, contact any member of the League of Minnesota Cities lmetgovemmenlal Relations learn. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 -2683- Hay 18 Z08Z 16:87:56 Via Fax -> 95Z4?Z06Z8 administrator Page80Z Of 88Z - Friday F ax - A weekly legislative upclatefrom the League of Minnesota Cities conference committee is scheduled to meet this afternoon. May 10, 2002 Page 2 amendingthe billonthe floorand repassing itto the Senate forathirdtime. If at first you don't succeed ...... make up new rules On Thursday, we experienced another interesting twist in the session as Senators Neuville (R- Northfieid), Pariseau (R-Farmington) and Limmer (R-Maple Grove) introduced a concurrent resolution that would allow the House and Senate to use an entirely new process to reach a compromise on the budget reconciliation bill. The resolution would allow the House and Senate to effectively negotiate a compromise on the House and Senate floors by passing the bill back and forth rather than using the traditional conference committee setting. After introduction, the resolution was sent to the Senate Rules and Administration committee. According to Representative Kevin Goodno (R- Moorhead), the chair of the budget reconciliation conference committee, the process just won't work. He sees the House and Senate being too far apart on the major pieces of the budget reconciliation bill as well as on the transportation funding bill, both of which have become roadblocks for the completion of the session. Under thc concurrent resolution, thc House would essentially start thc process again by recalling their budget reconciliation bill from thc conference committee and then consider, amend, repass and then send thc bill to thc Senate for a second time. If during consideration by the Senate the bill is amended, it would be returned to the House. This step is also like thc current process. However, after thc Senate sends thc bill back the House, the process could change. Instead of not concurring with the Senate changes and appointing a conference committee, the House would have thc additional option of further This exchange could occur once more before the Rouse would be forced to appoint a conference committee. The concurrent resolution process restricts amendments to items of appropriation contained in the first drafts of the bill and no amendment could increase the budget deficit. In addition, the House and Senate would be required to convene in regular session every day until the bill is passed and sent to the governor or returned to a conference committee. Of course, the May 20 constitutional deadline for adjournment would ultimately limit the length of this new process, if in fact it is ever employed. However, based on Representative Goodno's comments, we believe that such an alternative has little support in the House. Unallotment: Unlikely or Unavoidable? Thanks for your help. Based upon the request contained in the letter sent by the League on Wednesday, it appears that city officials are phoning and e-mailing their legislators urging them to complete their work. Without a legislative solution to the state's budget shortfall, the governor might have little recourse but to unallot state appropriations-- including July, October and December state payments for city LGA and market value homestead credit reimbursement. Unallotment of city aid and credit payments would occur more than six months into our fiscal year and could create local financial hardship. We still have hope that unallotment is unlikely--not unavoidable. For more information on ¢ily legislative issues, conlacl any member of Ibc I..,¢agu¢ of M inneaola Cities I nlergovernmenlal Relations learn. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 -2684- Xay 17 ZBBZ 15:Z?:53 Via Fax -> 95ZqTZBGZ8 fl&ministrator Page 88! 0£ 883 F 'd yF - ri a ax'- A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities The final countdown With less than 88 hours until the legislature will adjourn sine die for this session, much legislative work remains on the table even with the large issues of policy, spending, and saving already at the governor's desk. As of this publication's noon deadline, there had not been word from the governor's office on whether he would veto the budget or tax bills. The major transportation funding package has been declared dead by the transportation advocates. At this point, the buzz centers around the activities of the bonding and anti-terrorism bill negotiations. A stadium bill could see action on the floor still, and the governor is pressing legislators to take a vote on the unicameral issue. No doubt legislators will use these last few nights and days to put it all together before going home for a summer of parade appearances and candidate forums before the November elections. 2002 Omnibus Tax Bill Late Wednesday night, the House and Senate each passed the omnibus tax conference committee report, HF 2498 and sent the tax package off to the governor thus meeting their midnight deadline. For most of this session, the speculation was that there would not even be an omnibus tax bill. This omnibus tax package was crafted during the budget bill conference committee negotiations earlier this week, and was amended onto last year's regular session tax bill, which was left behind in tax committee after the regular session ended without a tax bill. What follows is a brief summary of provisions in the tax bill affecting municipalities. More details will follow as this bill moves through the governor's office. Please call if you have questions. Levies and ams - Allows a new special levy 'for any increased levy need to meet required contributions for May 17, 2002 Page 1 police and firefighter relief associations, in excess of any levy for this purpose in 2001, payable in 2002. Effective beginning with pay 2003 levies. - Allows for increasing the levy limit base for taxes levied in 2002, payable in 2003 by the amount of tree growth tax a city or county receives in payable 2002 (only a few cities in northeastern MN receive tree growth aid) and for the amount of mobile home HACA received by a city payable in 2001.Tree growth revenue payments are eliminated beginning in 2003. City mobile home I-IACA payments were eliminated beginning in 2002. - The statutes are amended to reflect the two-year delay (enacted in 2000) for when "existing low- income housing aid" is to be folded into each city's local government aid base. Effective for aid payable in 2002 and after. - A change to the homestead classification clarifies a 2001 law change affecting property that is classified partly as homestead and partly as nonhomestead property. This provision is intended to mitigate the large tax increases that occurred this year for some of these 'split' properties. - I-Iermantown's LGA base aid is increased by $200,000. The city had received a $200,000 increase in its I-IACA in :1.995. This provision is intended to compensate Hermantown for the loss of that I-IACA increase when the I-IACA program was eliminated in 2001. - County I-IACA is increased for counties with a high percentage of certain public utility property. The 200:1. tax bill provided significant relief to public utility property and in certain areas of the state and the result was significant shifts in taxes to other types of property. The aid will mitigate the impact of the shifts in the 2001 tax bill in Red Lake, Kittson and Clearwater Counties. For mote information on oily lea:[slalive issue, a, conlacl any member of the Leal:ue of Minneaola Cilie~ lnler,e~overnmenlal Relalion,< learn. 651.28:]..'1200 or 800.925.1122 -2685- -FridayFax- A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Sales and lodging taxes - The sales tax exemption for construction materials for low-income housing is expanded to include more types of housing projects. - Exemption from sales tax for construction or renovation of facilities owned or operated by nonprofit arts organizations if these projects receive funding in the 2002 bonding bill. - Authorization for Bloomington to increase its lodging tax from one to two percent upon local approval. - Authorization for Rochester to impose an additional one-percent lodging tax. - Authorization for six cities in St. Cloud area to impose a one-half percent local sales tax to fund improvements to regional airport. Extra proceeds may be used for other projects of regional scope including parks, libraries, community centers, and roadway improvements. The cities of St. Cloud and Sartell have already received voter approval; the cities of Sauk Rapids, Waite Park, St. Joseph and St. Augusta must still receive voter approval. - Delay of the state administration of the Duluth sales tax until January 1, 2006. Tax increment finaneing provisions - The city of Moorhead is authorized to levy a property tax on commercial-industrial property and public utility property to pay for pre-existing tax increment financing (TIF) obligations. The amount of the levy is limited to the amount needed to pay for deficits in TIF districts caused by the property tax class rate changes and the elimination of the state general education levy contained in the 2001 tax bill. - The types of property that qualify for the property tax exemption under the border city development zone law are expanded to include housing (homestead and non-homestead residential and apartment buildings). Effective for May 17, 2002 Page 2 the 2003 assessment year. Border city development zone allocations are also authorized to be used to grant sales tax exemptions for construction materials for housing that is located in the zone. Effective for sales made after June 3, 2002. - Cities are authorized to use the deficit reduction provisions (allowing the original tax rate to float and changing the fiscal disparities election) without being required to pool available increments from other districts first to reduce the deficits. Effective for actions taken and resolutions approved after June 30, 2002. - Twenty-year property tax abatements are authorized for businesses with at least 50 percent of their payroll payable to employees who are engaged in manufacturing, agricultural processing, mining, research and development, warehousing, or qualified high technology. The authority to grant 20-year abatements to qualified businesses expires July 1, 2004. - The cities of Rushford and Minneapolis and Dakota County were granted the authority to extend the durations of certain TIF districts. The city of Albert Lea was granted the authority to create a TIF district without certain general TIF law restrictions. Miscellaneous - The city of Thief River Falls is authorized to incorporate a nonprofit corporation to operate a community or regional center. Repealers - Repeals Laws 2001, First Special Session chapter 5, article 3, section 88. This provision authorized Chisago City to provide reimbursement for orderly annexation of property to the town of Wyoming for the period and in the amounts agreed to by the city and town under a joint powers agreement. For more information on oily legialalive i$',ues, contacl any member of Ihe League of M/nnesola Cities Intergovernmenlal Relations team. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 -2686- Xay 17 Z80Z 15:zg:lB ~ia Fax -> 95247ZSGZB A~inis~ra%or Page 0~3 0£ 883 - Frid ay Fax - A weekly legislative updatefrora the League of Minnesota Cities 2002 Public Finance Bill (SF2572 (Hottinlger) - substituting (SF3343 Rest / HF 2879 Abrams) Late Wednesday evening the Senate/House conferees completed their work on the public finance bill. The provisions eclipse the original focus of the bill that was to establish the Region Nine Development Commission nonprofit corporation. Key provisions of the bill include: · Removes the county residency requirement when selecting qualified commissioners to eminent domain commissions. · Provides for the St. Paul library levy to be listed separate from the remaining amount of the city's levy. Provides for an independent library agency for the city and authorizes the agency to issue general obligation bonds. * Expands the projects eligible for USDA Rural Development loans and increases the maximum loan amount from $250,000 to $450,000. · Provides for public notice requirements to the public and property owners of property to be acquired via eminent domain when part of development project is under MS 469. · Provides that general obligation revenue bonds maturities may not extend more than 30 years from the estimated date of completion of the project and extends the maturity of housing bonds from 20 years to 30 years. · Defines under MS 469.153, "related public improvements", as any public improvement described under MS 429.021 that are acquired and constructed in connection with the project and are financed by the contracting party under the revenue agreement. ° Extends the ability to refinance the debt of nonprofit corporations to a variety of 501(c)(3)organizations engaged in health May 17, 2002 Page 3 care, educational activities, arts education and social services. · Places limitations on bonds issued for extraterritoria I projects. · Allows Metropolitan Council to provide for funding to municipalities for the production of affordable housing. · Granting municipalities the authority to issue bonds under MS 475 for street reconstruction without regard election requirements. Conditions on the authority include approval of the issuance by unanimous council vote, is part of the reconstruction plan, public notice is provided, reverse referendum, and is subject to the municipalities net debt limit. · Allows the Southwest Regional Development Commission to levy an additional amount to retire the remaining debt connected with the Prairie Expo project in Worthington · Grants South St. Paul the ability to convey real estate to advance construction of residential dwellings. · Amends the levy provisions governing the Cook County Hospital District. ° Establishes the Region Nine Development Commission. · Grants Anoka County the authority to incur debt for building out its public safety communication system. · Directs the establishment of a single coordinated economic development authority for the Alexandria area known as the Lakes Area Economic Development Authority. · Guides the use of tax forfeited land proceeds for property in St, Louis County. · Increases the amount Itasca County can spend annually for the promotion of tourism, agriculture and industrial development from $4 to $10 per capita out of proceeds from sale of tax forfeited land dedicated for those purposes. more infm'mation on city legislative issues, contacl any member of the League of Minnesota C[lies Intergovernmental Relalions team. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 -2687- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' ~ AGENDA 7:00 PM, Wednesday,May 22, 2002 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster READING OF MINUTES- 5/8/02 LMCD Regular Board Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTs _ Persons in'attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) CONSENT AGENDA- Consent agenda items with a (*) will be approved in one motion unless a Board member requests discussion of any item, in whiCh case the item will be removed from the consent agenda, ·., PUBLIC HEARINGS · Bayview Charter Cruises, new on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor and wine license applications for the charter boat, Endeavor. i 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion..and/0~' O'0nsideration · ci~.°f;b~p:h'~¥en, new m. ui iPle l?nse' special density'license, and variance applications to: 1) Add 5 additional temporary Boat Storage Units (BSU's) for the 2002 season, 2) variance from LMCD Code for dock length requirements. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration Wayzata Bay Management, new multiple dock license and special density~:iicen~e applications.for 83 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on I 134' of continUous shoreline. 1. Public Hearing ' .. 2. Discussion and/or Consideration .... Howards Point Marina, Inc., new multiple dock license and special density license applications for 15 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 153' of continUOUs~$hOmline. 1. Public Hearing 2.. Discussion ahd/or ConsideratiOn ' LAKE, USE &'~REC~REATioN A. Discussio~ of Wetiand Protection Ordinance Amendment; B. (*) Henne~i~ co~n.t:y Sheriff's Office Water P~tr°i'SJ~nific~t Activity Report; C. Additional Business; -2688- WATER STRUCTURES A) (*) 2002 Multiple Dock License, staff recommends approval of 2002 renewal without change application for Ridgewood Cove Property Owners Association; B) Additional Business; 3. FINANCIAL A) Audit of vouchers (5/16/02 - 5/31/02); B) (*) April financial summary and balance sheet; C) Review of draft 2003 LMCD Budget; D) Additional Business; 4. EWM/EXoTIcs TASK FORCE A) (*) Minutes from 5/10/02 EWM/Exotics Task Force Meeting (handout); B) Additional Business; , .~:, ~, A) Review of draft LMCD Resolution 102 (handout); ~': :":' ~ ~,"" ~:'i"'~ ' .... B) Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for Administrative Technician, Judd Harper (handou[)~: C) Additional Business; 6. SAVE THE LAKE 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSINESS 10.ADJOURNMENT -2689- BOARD MEMBERS Bert Foster Chair, Deephaven Craig Nelson Vice Chair, Spring Park Lili McMillan Secretary, Orono Tom Skramstad Treasurer, Shorewood Bob Ambrose Wayzata Douglas E. Babcock Tonka Bay Orv Burma Mound Tom Gilman Excelsior Paul Knudsen Minnetrista Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb J. Suerth Woodland Katy Van Hercke Minnetonka Sheldon Wert Greenwood LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD. · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/745-O789 o FAX 952/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NEWS RELEASE (For Immediate Release) May 16, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Editor (Lakeshore Weekly News, The Laker, Sun Sailor) LMCD Board of Directors LMCD Member Cities Interested Parties Gregory S. Nybeck, Executive Director ~~ Lake Minnetonka "Solar-Light" Pilot Project Lake Minnetonka is the most heavily used lake in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Lake Minnetonka also has a large number of navigational buoys that are established to assist boaters. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has established a Lake Minnetonka 'tSolar-Light" Pilot project to aid in night navigation for the 2002 season. Three areas of Lake Minnetonka have been chosen for the 2002 pilot project to test the effectiveness of these lights. These include: 1) two channels just east of the Arcola Bridge, 2) the channel on the southeast side of Spray Island on the Upper Lake, and 3) both ends of the Narrows and Arcola Bridge channels. These lights will be installed on navigational buoys on these areas of Lake Uinnetonka prior to the Memorial Day weekend. At its March 13, 2002 Regular Meeting, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board of Directors authorized the purchase of small potycarbonate lights units that will be installed on existing red and green navigational buoys on certain areas of Lake Minnetonka. These lights generate power from a solar cell locate on top and are capable of storing energy to last three weeks without sun. These lights were purchased from donations of the LMCD "Save the Lake" fund, which are derived from private donations. The LMCD is asking for cooperation from the public on the Lake Minnetonka "Solar-Light" Pilot Project for the 2002 season. Public feedback on the effectiveness of the pilot program or any reports on vandalism to the lights are encouraged. The primary purpose of this pilot program is to assist boaters in improving navigation of Lake Minnetonka during the nighttime hours, For further details on this pilot project, please contact the LMCD office at (952) 745-0789. 50% Recycled Content 20% Post Consumer Waste Web Page Address: http://www.lmcd.org E-mail Address: Imcd@lmcd.org -2690- Page 1 of 5 Kandis M. Hanson From: Sent: Subject: "Barbara Olson" <olsonb@westonka. k12.mn, us> Friday, May 10, 2002 2:41 PM weston ka.news west°nka.news Vol. 2, No. 30 May 10, 2002 The Westonka Public Schools' channel for direct electronic communication to interested parents, staff, and community members, providing up-to-date information about education in District 277. westonka.news publishes weekly. Look for it in your mailbox on Fridays. Westonka Public Schools, 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A, Mound MN 55364; http://www.westonka.k12.mn.us; tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043; e-mail: welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us. Contents 1. News Briefs --MWHS Symphonic Band Rakes in Top Ratings --Looking for Summer Activities for Your Kids? --Shirley Hills Celebrates 50th Birthday in Style (and Thunderstorm) --Half-Price Scholastic Book Fair Coming 2. Focus Topic: All Westonka Schools Earn NCA Accreditation 3. Upcoming Events 4. Tell Us What You Think NEWS BRIEFS **MWHS Symphonic Band Rakes in Top Ratings** Congratulations to the Mound Westonka High School Symphonic Band, whose members earned Superior ratings, the highest possible, from every judge at the Region 6AA Band Contest. Region 6AA includes schools up to four times as large as Mound Westonka - 2691 - 05/13/2002 Page 2 of 5 High School, including Hopkins, Minnet0nka, and Richfield. In spite of being substantially smaller, Westonka vocal and instrumental groups consistently earn exceptional results when measured against the same competitive standards applied to the larger schools. According to band director Leigh Kallestad, the MWHS Symphonic Band has earned ~uperior rating~ every year in ~ row, for at lea~t ~even y~r~. "I'm really proud of these students. We had a great band trip to New Orleans at the end of April, where we performed an exchange concert with a high school, participated in a college clinic, and experienced a good deal of New Orleans culture. Within four days of our return, we performed a major concert here. Four days after that, we competed in the Region 6AA band contest, and walked away with the highest rating possible. These students kept their focus and were simply remarkable," Kallestad said. **Looking for Summer Activities for Your Kids?** If you're looking for safe, fun, and supervised learning opportunities for your kids this summer, take a look at the Summer Westonka Community Education and Services catalogue of classes. There's something exciting to learn nearly every day, and classes are filling fast. For more information, check out the catalogue online at www.westonka.k12.mn.us/comed/catalog.html, or call 952.491.8040. If you're thinking more along the lines of an "away camp," check out the American Camping Association at www.acacamps.org. This site offers a search engine plus important information about accreditation, guidelines for choosing camps, etc. **Shirley Hills Celebrates 50th Birthday in Style (and Thunderstorm)** If you missed the Shirley Hills 50th Birthday party earlier this week, you truly missed out on a piece of local community history. In spite of a downpour (and booming thunder claps), the gym was filled with current and former students and teachers, parents, and community members who came to reminisce with old friends, browse through archive materials, and marvel at the items recovered from a time capsule buried in 1952. A PowerPoint presentation about the school's history and present played throughout the evening, and student musicians performed the familiar Happy Birthday tune. The event was organized and carried out by Shirley Hills parents, with key leadership from co-chairs Deb Bailey, Ginny Kunz, and Lynne Robertson. Thanks Deb, Ginny, and Lynne! - 2692 - 05/13/2002 Page 3 of 5 **Half-Price Scholastic Book Fair Coming to Westonka** Shirley Hills Primary will host Scholastic Book Fairs' "Big Book Sale," offering 50% off the cover price of thousands of titles, on May 17 & 18, and 20-22. The sale is huge--filling the gym--and it's open to the public. They'll accept most major credit cards, checks, and cash. For more information, contact Kristi Henkels at 952.491.8413, or henkelsk@westonka, kl 2. mn. us. FOCUS TOPIC **All Westonka Schools Earn NCA Accreditation** The North Central Association (NCA) recently announced that it has accredited all four Westonka schools for 2001-2002. Accreditation is important because it signals that each school: has met NCA standards and criteria; is focused on continual improvement processes; and has undergone an objective evaluation by a peer review team of recognized NCA evaluators. Shirley Hills and Hilltop Primary Schools were accredited for the tenth consecutive year, and Grandview Middle School was accredited for the ninth consecutive year. Mound Westonka has been accredited since 1966. Current data for other school districts is not available, but in previous years, Westonka has been among fewer than 15% of all Minnesota school districts that had earned NCA accreditation for every school within the district. UPCOMING EVENTS --May 5-11, National Teacher Appreciation Week; We Appreciate Westonka Teachers! --May 11, MW Prom, 9 p.m. to midnight, Gillespie Center --May 13, SH Gr. 4 leaves for Wolf Ridge/ELC --May 13, Superintendent's Roundtable, 5-6 p.m., Room 200, Shirley Hills Primary School. The Superintendent's Roundtable is an informal opportunity to chat with Supt. Pam Myers, to ask questions and learn more about the school district. - 2693 - 05/13/2002 Page 4 of 5 --May 13, School Board regular meeting, 7:30 p.m. (The Share the Success portion of the meeting starts at 7 p.m.) Shirley Hills Primary School --May 13, --May 14, --May 14, School --May 15, School --May 16, --May 17, --May 17, School --May 18, School Gr. 6 Choir Concert, 7 p.m., Grandview Middle School HT PTA, 7 p.m. MWHS Senior Scholarship Night, 7 p.m., Mound Westonka High Advanced Placement Test, Government, Mound Westonka High Gr. 7 Band Concert, 7 p.m., Grandview Middle School SH Gr. 4 returns from Wolf Ridge/ELC Popsingers Thank You Show, 7:30 p.m., Mound Westonka High Popsingers Thank You Show, 7:30 p.m., Mound Westonka High Home --May --May 13, 4:15 p.m. --May 13, 4:15 p.m. Athletic Competitions: 13, Boys Tennis Conference Tournament, MWHS Court, 12 noon Varsity and JV Baseball vs. St. Anthony, MVVHS Fields 1 & 10, Gr. 9, JV and V Softball vs. Fridley, MWHS Fields 7, 9 and 6, --May 14, Boys Varsity Golf vs. Fridley, Burl Oaks, 3:30 p.m. --May 15, Boys Varsity and Gr. 9 Baseball vs. Fridley, MWHS Fields 1 & 10, 4:15 p.m. --May 18, Boys Varsity Baseball vs. Hopkins, MVVHS Field 1, 11 a.m. FUNDAMENTAL FINANCE FACT Here's an easy way to remember one aspect of school finance: Levies are for Learning (paying the operating costs of providing education, such as salaries, utilities, and bus service) An operating levy failed in November 2001. Bonds are for Buildings (keeping buildings in good repair and providing certain equipment, such as computers) A maintenance and technology bond referendum passed in March 2001. State law prevents school districts from using bond money to pay for operating expenses. TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! - 2694- 05/13/2002 Page 5 of 5 We would like to hear your feedback on any of the topics above, or any other school-related issue. Use whichever way works best for you: send an e-mail message to <welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us>; call the District Feedback Line at 952.491.8260; or mail your comments to Barbara Olson, Community Relations Coordinator, Westonka Public Schools, 2450 Wilshire Blvd., Suite A, Mound MN 55364 To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to Barbara Olson at <olsonb@westonka.k12.mn.us> It is the mission of the Westonka Public School District, in partnership with students, parents, and the community, to create the environment necessary to achieve quality education for lifelong learning. Westonka Public Schools 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A Mound MN 55364 tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043 welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us http://www.westonka.k12.mn, us westonka.news is published by the Community Relations Department, Barbara Olson, editor. The information contained in this broadcast is given in good faith based on available information. The Westonka School District accepts no legal responsibility for its accuracy. According to the State of Minnesota, the subscriber list for this newsletter is public data. -2695- 05/13/2002 Page 1 of 4 Kandis M. Hanson From: Sent: Subject: "Barbara Olson" <olsonb@westonka.k12.mn.us> Friday, May 17, 2002 2:32 PM westonka.news Vol. 2, No. 31 May 17, 2OO2 The Westonka Public Schools' channel for direct electronic communication to interested parents, staff, and community members, providing up-to-date information about education in District 277. westonka.news publishes weekly. Look for it in your mailbox on Fridays. Westonka Public Schools, 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A, Mound MN 55364; http://www.westonka.k12.mn.us; tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043; e-mail: welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us. Contents 1. News Briefs --Justin Morris Scholarship Car Wash --Half-Price Scholastic Book Fair At Shirley Hills 2. Focus Topic: Budget Cuts for 2003-2004 3. Upcoming Events 4. Tell Us What You Think NEWS BRIEFS **Justin Morris Scholarship Car Wash** The Justin Morris Scholarship car wash will be held tomorrow, May 18 from 10 a.m-1 p.m. at the Minnetonka Drive-In. Former and new Mound Westonka High School Student Senate members will be working to provide you with a top-of-the-line car wash. Hope to see you there! **Half-Price Scholastic Book Fair** -2696- 05/17/2002 Page 2 of 4 Thousands of fabulous books are on sale for half the regular price (or for $3 per pound) at Shirley Hills Primary School. The Scholastic Book Fairs' "Big Book Sale" takes place May 17 (8 a.m to 7 p.m.) & 18 (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.), and May 20 & 21 (8 a.m. to 7 p.m. both days). The sale is huge-filling the gym-and it's open to the public. They'll accept most major credit cards, checks, and cash. For more information, contact Kristi Henkels at 952.491.8413, or henkelsk@westo n ka. kl 2. mn. us. FOCUS TOPIC **Budget Cuts for 2003-2004'* At its Special Study Session on Monday, May 20, the Westonka School Board will finalize the list of budget cuts to be made for 2003-2004. The bottom line for the School Board is a balanced budget (in accordance with financial principles adopted in 1999). Even when all known funding aspects for the 2003-2004 school year are taken into consideration, such as projected state funding, projected enrollment counts, and possible passage of a local operating levy, the School District will still face a budget deficit of anywhere from $300,000 to $1.1 million. The deciding factor between the $300,000 shortfall and the $1.1 million deficit is the outcome of the September 10 operating levy vote. Therefore, the cuts are outlined in two stages, depending on the outcome of the operating levy: Stage One includes mandatory cuts that will be made even if the September 10 operating levy referendum passes. State law limits the amount of local levies a school district can collect, so even if the September 10 vote is approved, the School District will be prohibited from collecting enough to cover the $300,000 shortfall. Given no changes in state funding or enrollment projections, then, those cuts will be made, regardless of the vote. Stage Two includes cuts that are dependent on the outcome of the levy vote. If the levy fails, Stage Two cuts (adding $800,000 to the cuts already identified in Stage One) will be made, as well. Given no changes in state funding or enrollment projections, those cuts will be made if the levy vote fails. The Board will be reviewing a draft list of cut options that total more - 2697- 05/17/2002 Page 3 of 4 than the $800,000 needed for Stage Two, and will be able to choose from among tho~e option~ to come up with a tota~ of $800,000. The option~ listed represent a combination of suggestions from past budget-cutting discussions, recent budget task force discussions, and ideas from school district administrators. The *draft* list is available on the school district web site, www.westonka.k12.mn.us UPCOMING EVENTS --May 17, School --May 18, School --May 20, --May 20, --May 20, --May 20, School --May 21, Popsingers Thank You Show, 7:30 p.m., Mound Westonka High Popsingers Thank You Show, 7:30 p.m., Mound Westonka High HT Gr. 4 leaves for Wolf Ridge, ELC Joint Parent Advisory, 3:30 p.m. Early Childhood Center Gr. 5 Choir Concert, 7 p.m., Grandview Middle School School Board Study Session, 7 p.m., Shirley Hills Primary SH PTA, 3:30 p.m. --May 21, Community Education Advisory Council, 7 p.m., Shirley Hills Primary School --May 22-23, Mound Westonka High School Talent Show, 7:30 p.m., MWHS --May 23, Gr. 5 Band Concert, 7 p.m., Grandview Middle School --May 24, HT Gr. 4 Returns from Wolf Ridge/ELC --May 27, Memorial Day, No School E-12 Home Athletic Competitions: --May 18, Boys Varsity Baseball vs. Hopkins, MWHS Field 1, 11 a.m. FUNDAMENTAL FINANCE FACT Here's an easy way to remember one aspect of school finance: Levies are for Learning (paying the operating costs of providing education, such as salaries, utilities, and bus service) An operating levy failed in November 2001. Bonds are for Buildings (keeping buildings in good repair and providing certain equipment, such as computers) A maintenance and technology bond referendum passed in March 2001. - 2698- 05/17/2002 Page 4 of 4 State law prevents school districts from using bond money to pay for operating expenses. TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! We would like to hear your feedback on any of the topics above, or any other school-related issue. Use whichever way works best for you: send an e-mail message to <welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us>; call the District Feedback Line at 952.491.8260; or mail your comments to Barbara Olson, Community Relations Coordinator, Westonka Public Schools, 2450 Wilshire Blvd., Suite A, Mound MN 55364 To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to Barbara Olson at <olsonb@westonka.k12.mn.us> It is the mission of the Westonka Public School District, in partnership with students, parents, and the community, to create the environment necessary to achieve quality education for lifelong learning. Westonka Public Schools 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A Mound MN 55364 tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043 welisten @westonka. k 12.mn. us http ://www.weston ka. k 12. m n. us westonka.news is published by the Community Relations Department, Barbara Olson, editor. The information contained in this broadcast is given in good faith based on available information. The Westonka School District accepts no legal responsibility for its accuracy. According to the State of Minnesota, the subscriber list for this newsletter is public data. - 2699 - 05/17/2002 0S-16-2002 10:08AM FROM LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICA TO 4920620 P.O1 4071 Sunset Ddve Box 385 Spring Park, MN 553844:)385 Phone- 952-471-7125 FaX- 952-471-9151 E-mail- Imcc~u~.net CC: [] U~llent [] For Review [] Please ComrrNmt ~ Please Reply I-! Please Rec'JK:Ie If you do not receive all of the pages, please contact our office as soon as pmmible at 952471-7125 -2700- 0S-16-2002 10:08AM FROM LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICA TO 4?20620 P.02 -2701 - 05-16-2002 10:09AM FROM LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICA TO 4?20620 P.03 -2702- TOTAL P.O3 Hennepin County Assessor Department A-2103 Govern ment Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0231 www. co.hennepin.mn.us May 16,2002 Ms. Kandis Hanson, Administrator City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Kandis, Re: 2002 Open Book Meeting We have completed the 2002 Mound Open Book Meeting and subsequent review of properties for those in attendance. The results of our findings are as noted. I have also included a listing of the 2002 listing of review contacts and a letter from one of the attendees. If you have any questions or concerns please contact our offices. Very truly yours, Appraiser Hennepin County Assessors Office An EqualOpportunity Employer - 2703- Recycled Paper -2704- TYPE OF MEETING DATE PLEASE PRINT PERSONs PRESENT AT MEETING Address 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. 17. 18. -2705- May 10, 2002 Re: PID #24-117-24-23-0030 RECEIVED Philip Jensen Hennipen County Assessor Department A-2103 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-023t HAY t 5 2002 Dear Mr. Jensen, We appreciate the t/me you spent with us at the recent Open Book session held in Mound to explain to us the logic behind our home's assessed value. Thanks too for reviewing your data for this property and for updating your records appropriately. Your explanation of the methods used to estimate property values made sense and, more importantly, helped us feel comfortable that the process is fair and not arbitrary. It was time well spent, so thanks for giving up an evening for this process. Regards, J,¢~a Halberg 5429 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 -2706- -2707- -2708- General Fund $865,640 CDBG 1,114 Area Fire Protection Services 199,789 Grant Revolving 9,257 Cemetery (2,226) Dock 216;245 pW Facility 68,731 Commerce Place TIF (66,359) G.O. Bonds.2001 - A 6,608 G.O. Bonds 2001 - C 19,147 Capital Improvement t ,622,089 MSA 20,520 Sealcoat 6,275 CDB (258) Downtown TIF 1-2 (1,689,826) Water 1,341,964 Sewer 1,034,261 Liquor Store 1,487,041 Recycling 81,427 Storm Water 848,665 Fire Relief (36,295) HRA 0 Note: The above schedule shows the combined cash and investment balances by fund for the months indicated as recorded in the General Ledger. The balances do not reflect receivable, payables, authorized transfers, encumbered funds, or dedicated/reserved resources, etc. Only some accrued transactions are reflected. Investment income will be distributed to the funds at the end of the year and is not included. A long and complete process is followed to record all transactions, before we close the boOks, at the end of the year. In addition, the audit from the independent auditor is performed and an official Comprehensive Report will be presented to the City Council and made available to interested parties. In no way this schedule is intended to represent balances of funds available for spending. 05/15/2002 CashReportCouncil Gino -2709- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT April 2002 33.33% GENERAL FUND Taxes Business Licenses Non-Business Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Court Fines Other Revenue Transfers from Other Funds Charges to Other Departments April 2002 YTD BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE 2,253,520 0 0 6,300 615 2,965 188,450 25,908 83,749 461,130 0 40,400 137,550 9,406 35,973 110,000 6,785 22,153 145,400 16,859 75,934 128,000 0 0 13,000 2,995 4,450 PERCENT VARIANCE RECEIVED (2,253,520) 0.00% (3,335) 47.06% (104,701) 44.44% (420,730) 8.76% (101,577) 26.15% (87,847) 20.14% (69,466) 52.22% (128,000) 0.00% (8,550) 34.23% TOTAL REVENUE 3,443,350 62,568 265,624 (3.177.726) 7.71% FIRE FUND 429,470 42,766 CEMETERY FUND 6,050 100 DOCK FUND 129,360 (26,714) WATER FUND 535,500 46,298 SEWER FUND 1,048,810 84,800' LIQUOR FUND 2,050,000 135,125 RECYCLING FUND 127,880 7,225 STORM WATER UTILITY 112,000 9,624 180,602 (248,868) 1,300 (4,750) 109,570 (19,790) 182,7i~'~ ~ ~i' (352,784) 338,748 (710,062) 521,989 (1,528,011) 28,089 (99,791) 36,576 (75,424) 42.O5% 21.49% 84.70% 34.12% 32.30% 25.46% 21.97% 32.66% 05/1412002 rev01 Gino -2710- CITY OF MOUND .BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT April 2002 33.33% GENERAL FUND Council Cable TV City Manager/Clerk Elections Assessing Finance Computer Legal Police Civil Defense Planning/Inspections Streets City Property Parks Contingencies Transfers April 2002 YTD PERCENT BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED 79,280 12,516 25,788 53,492 32.53% 48,000 20 70 47,930 0.15% 235,100 19,162 69,622 165,478 29.61% 11,030 0 875 10,155 7.93% 79,700 116 117 79,583 0.15% 201,260 15,907 55,819 145,441 27.73% 28,250 556 9,254 18,996 32.76% 122,000 17,787 27,957 94,043 22.92% 1,164,600 87,641 299,112 865,488 25.68% 6,780 1,397 3,028 3,752 44.66% 266,030 23,649 69,705 196,325 26.20% 576,610 55,249 159,941 416,669 27.74% 89,110 6,688 26,095 63,015 29.28% 322,240 14,731 109,069 213,171 33.85% 60,860 0 6,707 54,153 11.02% 207.840 17.320 69.280 138.560 33.33% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 3.498.690 272,739 932.439 2.566.251 26.65% Area Fire Service Fund 699,470 Cemetery Fund 9,920 Dock Fund 132,700 TIF 1-2 0 Water Fund 577,660 Sewer Fund 1,007,420 Liquor Fund 460,660 Recycling Fund 155,510 Storm Water 58,200 50,165 262,517 436,953 37.53% 0 936 8,984 9.44% 7,018 20,915 111,785 15.76% 25,993 80,850 (80,850) 46,346 214,031 363,629 37.05% 71,515 376,537 630,883 37.38% 38,934 144,825 315,835 31.44% 8,647 26,911 128,599 17.30% 318 20,692 37,508 35.55% Exp-01 05/14/2002 Gino -2711- CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us - cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us April 30, 2002 Mayor Pat Meisel City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1627 Dear Mayor Meisel: We have achieved a major, overwhelming victory at the Legislature. A new bill was been signe~l into law on April 19 that will restrict the use of lawn fertilizers containing phosphorus throughout the state. Minnesota is the first state in the nation to take such an action to further improve the quality of our waters and thus reduce the public costs to treat the effects of phosphorus pollution. Your support and that of over 50 cities, other local governments and associations, largely through governing board resolutions and contacts with legislators at key moments, were critical to the passage of this legislation. I would like especially to acknowledge the financial support given to Shorewood by the cities of Cottage Grove, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Falcon Heights, Plymouth, and Stillwater. While we sought State regulation of the sale of these fertilizers, this broad of a scope proved unpassable. By restricting the use of such fertilizers, however, we believe that manufacturers and retailers will not want to cause or abet illegal activity by their customers; hence, they will need to make low- and no-phosphorus fertilizers readily available to consumers. The key provisions in the legislation, nearly all of which will take effect January 1, 2004: · Maximum of 0% phosphorus content in the seven-county Metro area, and 3% phosphorus content in the rest of Minnesota, will be allowed to be used. (Reasonable exceptions, of course: establishment of new turf, or soil test results showing a deficiency of phosphorus.) · Non-metro local units of government may adopt ordinances to go to 0% phosphorus, provided that they subsequently notify the Department of Agriculture. · Local ordinances more restrictive than the new law are grandfathered if they were effective prior to August 1, 2002. (The League of Minnesota Cities and Association of Metropolitan Murd'cipalities are developing sample/model ordinances for cities that may want to have restrictions on the sale of fertilizers with Phosphorus.) · Golf courses and commercial applicators are exempted, provided they have State license, training, or certification. · The Department of Agriculture, with consultation from other interested organizations, will develop point-of-sale information. ~'~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER -2712- Lawn Fertilizer Legislation April 30, 2002 Page' Two · The Department of Agriculture, with involvement of the University of Minnesota extension service and other interested or affected parties, will evaluate effectiveness of the law and report io the Legislature by January 15, 2007. · The scope of the legislation is .tuff fertilizers. Cities may not regulate fertilizers containing phosphorus for agricultural uses or application. Being involved in the process of passing a piece of legislation is interesting, to say the least. This proposal certainly had its ups and downs. Despite the overwhelming support (55 - 3 in the Senate, 116 - 16 in the House, on each body's first reading), there were several times that the bill might be held up to miss committee deadlines, and several times that the nose-counting did not appear in our favor. There were many long or sleepless nights. Ultimately, hard work at finding common ground as well as goodold common sense prevailed. This law was the result of the involvement of many people and organizations. I am greatly appreciative and personally humbled by the support shown by so many. Shorewood is proud to be a member of the broad coalition backing and pushing this bill. Thank you again for being a part of this unprecedented legislation. Sincerely, Woody Love Mayor c: City Manager/Administrator -2713- LINDA HIGGINS Majority Whip Senate District 58 :328 State Capitol 7,5 Constitution Ave. St. Paul MN 5515:5-160(i Phone: (651 ) 296-9246 Fax: (65l) 296-6511 Email: sen.linda.higginsrssenate.leg.state.mn.us Senate State of Minnesota April 30, 2002 Dear iVfayor: As you are probably aware, Senate File 1555, restricting the use of phosphorus m lawn fertilizers, has been signed into law. This is the culmination of two years of efforts by many, and I was honored r_o work with so many local officials who pushed this bill forward. The final bill took shape after hours of testimony and discussion. I wanted to make you aware of an important part of this legislation that may affect your local efforts. Some communities have l~assed ordinances banning the ~ak of lawn fer~lizer containing phosphorus. S.F. 1555, however, contains a preempt/on that would overrule a local ban on the sale of fertilizer contamin~ phosphorus if ir is enacted after August 1, 2002. Any local unit of government that has already passed an ordinance before that date banning the sale will be grandfathered in and protected from the preempt/on. If. your communiO, mould be interested in passing an ordnance banning the/ocai sak qf /awn fertilizer containin~phosphorus, the ordnance MUST become effective beJbre ~4u~ust l, 2002. If you have questions regarding this issue, or if vou, would be interested in loo 'king at some of the ordinances already passed, there are some numbers that you can call for assistance. Woody Love Mavor of Shorexvood- (952) 474-3236 5andy CoMn Roy Msnncapoiis (]in' Councilmember (1612) 673-2212 League of Minnesota Cides Research Department (651) 281-1220 Please feel free to call me or my Legislat/ve Assistant, Jukie Rusk. as well at (.651) 296-9246. It was a privilege to xvork '~4th so manx' wonderful indMduals and groups to get this important legislauon passed, and I am excited that S.F. 1555 is an important step in the protecuon or' our lakes and waterxvavs. Thank you all for your support. Cg¢[dially, Lmda Higgins State Senator, District 58 M~rs Park Centre, ~30 E. F't~ St., St. Paul, MN 55101 . KANDIS HANSON ,2 CITY MANAGER · CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYvVOOD RD MOUND MN 55364-1627' hhl,,I,l,'.ll,,!h.h,l.,Ihll.,,hlh.hh,I.JLIl,I STANDARD U.S, POSTAGE PAID · MINN~:.(POLIS, MN PERMIT NO. 16T0 f nership are the nearly 200 com- ~ munity'axd counzycompx'ehetisive plans, each express'rog ~ unique community vision ~o the year 2020. When'woven t0~er du'ough an or.Il ~ional ~ision,- the individual community plans will form a tape. shy of the entire Twin Cities mezro ar~, '.'B/aep~r 205~. 'SMplng the o~t- lines of this tapestry is a regional casts.of this growth over the neat1: 30 yea~ are a s~ng ~int ~e ~ 1~ on how co ~ ~ q~ of ~ fion ~.~ used u "~h sha~," ~ ~ used ~ ~r~ ~r o~i~ new d~pm~t. See a paper, ~/~.~ ~OJO F~. yisxon+ m~de Up.of sever~ strand. Stmte~e~, au When completed mt the e~d o£the mv~mdro~un.~l.o~dlmot~/ year, theB/utprintWi]] spell out an p~a~slre~s~,J~m agenda that works l~ions] and many local ~oals into an overall fi'~mework'd~i~/ing priorities for ~ction. Active .participation of cid- zens, local governments, the pti- wte sector and Community orgmi- giving fo~ ~i~s c0mmuni~7. zatigns isl ~ m se~ ~ ~- a~ ~aii. ~ of pa~. . , ~ ~,~ proj- ~~'~ b~' ":~,~}~a&,li~[,s ~ia"-" ~ ~ dppma~ ~ to ~d ~ ~pm~ff ~ ~cn~' . me~ ~'s ~m~ ~ ~d ~:~d p~ ~e' ~ ~ .. p~ple; ~s~o~ and jo~ con- co~e PlaMilflg CommJs~ ,Jean Wort and Slbley County ~)mmisslmler Bill HarJe~ M a mfM la~ea Wm4~MIOp bi Chaska Apdl 4. The wod~ltop was ooe e~ three S(mkeholder Charting the rural Local offici~ and commpni- area's future shops to weigh .for growth ~o accommodate ] Roughly half o£the region's 3,000-square-mile x~gion is rurlL nearly a ~..o,0 more residents [ Cultivated fsrmhnd. Nurseries, orchards a~d vineym'ds. Scattered 'h~ 203~j~;~ at Community Center, M~yl0, ! topre~erveandprotectmrall~dm~lllvelihoods~thct~gion 7:~1-9 a.m. Previous me~.tings ~ grow~? ' . were held in St. Pax~, ~ In ~ second round of' mee6ngs, held in April, the Metropoli~ '.Minneto~t and L~-ville. [ Council's Rural Issues Work Group'met with rural midents and · ! offlci~ ro discuss d~t recommen&dons fix the rural area (see photo above), l~comm~ndatlons include: . · Stronger tools for p~ot~ing agricultural areas - for example, e-h%-~-d agricultural preserves program and purchase of agri- culU~al preservation easement~. · Support for performance-based stand~cls (community chooses method) t9 protect n~ral chamctet. · Incxeued emp ,hasis on identifying significant nat'ur~ resources in ~he rural area shat f~ture develzpment should recognize and lccommodatc; · · More flexibility in how local governme.nts prgtect the rural . character of areas that have I mix of homes, f~a'ms, commerdal operations md other activities. . - * Strategies to ~ issu~ ~out wastewnt~ street conneenons and cost of development in mrat ~esidendd areas that have near-urban development pattecns. Polldes and semcegies for thc ~ area will be incorporated i~co the Blwlvd~t ~050, · new regional growth s~r~tegy tO expand communities' choices shout how.they grow and protect our high quality o£1ifc. Sec workshops shove. Metropoltt~xt Council Taklnq a new .~ t~klng ~ new livability throughout opm~nt in · w~¥ thst~p~omotes · direction, embracing the Twin Cities ar~a. healthy, x4tal, livable communi- toqether thems~ ..... te llv-. hold many opportuni- The issue ~s not whether w~ able: They'wa~nt to des to participate in will grow. It's how ne will grow. Fol too long, we in the Twin create a sense of place, d~veloping the That's why we invite you to p~r- Cities area have been sitting on Ex~knd.ch0ices ha , MeU~elmn ~an~ ' Blueionnt. I invite par- ticipate in the creation of the our l~ttrel~ and liwb~ty creden- type and co~t Of homes. C~lr Tea Men~le ticipation among resi- Blueprint. rials - the wide n~twork of ngtu- Broaden transportation options, dents, local ofiqcials, business, www.metro~oen~tl.org/dire~ion,/ ral arr~cnities, strong cmo partici- Weave open space and natural faith and Civic leaders, anyone bplnv01wMm patloa, reasonable affordability areas into the fabric of develop- ~nd everyone. and mobili .ty, strong corcanitment mont. Create pleasant ' The region's.projected steady No~' Learn about to education, high workfotce par- stteetscapes: growth in population, households Blueprint 2030 and' parfid- 5icipatior~ ~conomic success and How can thc rcgi0n become md jobs over th~ next 30 yc~ pate in u~coming community Today the region has grown broad public ini6ative, with a region is afforded a unique local- www.mmn~mm~Lfi~/p~uin~/ ' and married. M~ny communities goal bf creating a shared regional regional parmership. By using it, ~ueprlnt~oveoaewJ~n across the regiqn - old and new - vision and s~xategy to enhance we .can shape growth and devel- PUBLICATIONS * FOlicy and bnplementa~ Proposal for ~e Rural . Area - Rural Work Group Re~, mlline at: www. tTmboeauncil.mg/plamsing/ ~aper. NO c~ar~e. ~1 Twin fa~f~s Train Sy~em Audit, ~.m~l,~/m~p~l~p (65~ -29~ -0~ ~ www.metrocouncil.org While there, readd~ir~ct/on~ online Subscribe to mon~ly email Directions: .2716- TO: Marcia Wilde, Manager, HCRRA FROM: Marilyn ~. Maloney~.~~~la#l~ County Attorney DATE: May 15, 2002 You have asked: What are the parameters that govern use and disposition of the Dakota Rail Line? Facts: HCRRA acquired the Dakota Rail Une with McLeod and Carver County Regianal Railroad Authorities and the State of Minnesota. As part of the acquisition HCRRA has taken a freight railroad operating easement over the full length of the line. HCRRA owns fee me to the corridor in Hennepin County. McLeod and Carver own fee tiUe to the corridor in their respective counties, subject to the railroad easement in favor of HCRRA. The Surface Tran~portatfon Board (STB) governs jurisdiction over freight railroad lines in the United States. A~ order of the STB dated December 27, 2001 allowed HCRRA to acquire the line for fi.eight rail service. HCRRA consummated acquisition of the line on December 28, 2001. The previous owner, Dakota Rail, Inc., had sought to abandon the line for the purposes of liquidating it and allowing a developer to sell it off into separate pie~:es. By agreeing to acquire the line in lieu of abandonment, HCRRA was permiffed to keep the corridor intact for public transportation purposes, including freight rail service and other future transportation purposes. HCRRA acquired the corridor pursuant to the STB's Offer of Financial Assistance (OFA) process. Under the OFA process, HCRRA'$ first legal priority is restoration of ~eight rail service. This means that the corridor is still an active freight rail line, with protections and obligations that are the same as for any other private freight rail line. CormlusJon: Just as with other active freight lines, HCRRA is obligated to keep the rail line intact and reedy for/might service. It may not sever the line nor in any way impair the passage of fright traffic on the line during its two-year obligation to provide freight rail service. This means it may not alter the grade of its rail line, nor may it cover or permit the coverage of its tracks $o that freight traffic is unable to pass. It may not lower its grade for the purpose of accommodating highway Im'Ojects. Instead, -2717- MRY-16-2002 15:26 HENN CTY TR~NS & RE~L EST 612 ~48 ~710 any planned highway project must ac~)mmodate the integrity Of th® rail line, as would be recluired for any other freight rail operation. This is a matter' of federal law. Additionally, HCRRA may not dispose of the rail line without the =on.~nt of Mr..Leod and Carver County Regional Railroad Authorities and the State of Minnesota. This is a part of the obligations HCRRA has undertaken when it acquired the rail line with these partners. Discu~Jon: 49 U,S.C. Sec, 10904(f) 4(A) governs the OFA process under which HCRRA acquired the rail line. It provides; No purchaser of a line or portion of line sold under this section may transfer or discontinue service on such line prior to the end of the second year after consummation of the sale, nor may such purchaser transfer such line, except to the rail carrier from whom it was pumhased, prior to the end of the fi/th year after consummation of the sale. 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10904(f) 4(A). Accordingly, HCRRA has an obligation to attempt to provide rail service on the DAKR Rail Line until the STB permits the line to be abandoned. The line may not be abandoned pdor to December 28, 2003. The Minnesota Department of Transportation will provide financing for the acquisition pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 222.50, subd. 7(5) (Rail Service Improvement Program). Minnesota Rules 8830.5450, Subpart 1.E. pursuant to this statute provides: So long as the purchase assistance loan remains unpaid, the Regional Railroad Authorit)c. (1) agrees to and does keep title to property purchased by the ~ P. egional Railroad Authority;, and (2) does not sell, trade, convey, transfer, or assign any portion of its interest in the property in any manner without previous approval by the commissioner. Minnesota Rules 8830.5450, Subpart 1 .E. See also attached e-mail dated May 14, 2002 from the Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding its position as to the proposed High#ay 15 project in Mound. -2718- MAY-16-2002 15:26 HENN CTY TPJ:tN$ & REAL EST 612 348 ~710 P.04/05 Add*~ermlly, the Coop~ion Agreement with the three railroad authorities ~umremi.ts them to..kee~ir~ the ~m Co.or inact for the purp~ of pmsm,ir,.~ it ~ transpor't~on purposes. 'Each rail authority and the State of I~~a must agree to any dispasitian af the c~rridor. MJM cc: Mark Chapin -2719- -2720- -2721 - Open letter to Paige Robertson, Paige, as I understand it, you are a sixth grader at Grandview Middle School. I want to thank you for your letter of concern about Mound City Days. I, too, am sad that it will not happen this year; it's a great tradition. But, I need to clarify some things. Mound City Days is not an event of the City of Mound. The City of Mound is a financial contributor to City Days, giving about $4,000 annually, which is a very small part of the its budget. The fire works alone is over $12,000. In addition, Mound Police, Parks and Public Works Departments devote a great deal of time toward the celebration each year. What I want to emphasize is that Mound City Days is a community event. It depends upon the help of many volunteer workers. It takes a lot of people to pull off a successful celebration. Over the last few years, less and less people were willing to help out. I volunteered last year for the first time and found out first hand just how much work it is. I found out that just a handful of dedicated volunteers pull offthat celebration each year. With year after year of that, those volunteers were simply burned out. Lack of money is not the problem; the area civic organizations have been very generous in donating thousands of charitable gambling dollars toward Mound City Days. Lack of people is the problem. It takes a lot of people, simply said. Celebration planning starts months and months in advance of the actual event. Normally, the first meeting is early in January. I would be happy to take the names of adults who would like to get involved. I will also, once again, get involved if there are others who wish to restore Mound City Days. Otherwise, without the people to do it, we need to face the fact that this community event is a thing of the past. Sincerely, Kandis Hanson City Manager and Mound Citizen 472-0609 Submitted to the Laker on May 21, 2002, for print in Letters to the Editor. -2722- MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 6, 2002 1. CALL TO ORDER Acting Chairman Burma welcomed the public and called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Those present: Vice Chair Orvin Burma; Commissioners: Jorj Ayaz, Jerry Clapsaddle, Becky Glister, Cklair Hasse, Michael Mueller, Frank Weiland and Council Liaison Bob Brown. Absent and excused: GeoffMichael. Staff present: City Planner Loren Gordon, Community Development Director Sarah Smith and Recording Secretary Jill Norlander. The following individuals were present: John & Kathy Aquilina - 3030 Island View Drive, Paul Glynn - 4600 Cumberland Road, Dan Hutchson - 4432 Radnor Road, Greg & Kathy Fall - 3036 Island View Drive, Helen Ohnesorge - 3066 Island View Drive, Burt Carlson - 4432 Denbigh Road, Brett Anderson - 5604 Chowen Avenue South. 3. APPROVAL OF APRIL 15, 2002 MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Clapsaddle, to approve the minutes of the April 15, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. MOTION carded unanimously. 4. BOARD OF APPEALS CASE #02-10 Variance - Parking lot improvements Brett Anderson 2136 Belmont Lane Anderson is new owner of the four-unit apartment complex and is proposing improvements to upgrade the parking facilities and garbage containment area. Specifically, he wishes to add 2 parking spaces, bringing it closer toeompliance, and a screened garbage storage area. The proposal does not affect any of the setback issues, however, the parking area is in non- compliance due to deficient setback area. The following permits will be required: a Public Lands permit (to allow use of the city-owned portion), a building permit (for the garbage screening facility), a grading permit and a street excavation permit. The property is zoned multiple family and the present use is permitted in this district. Lot area is deficient. Parking facilities are deficient (should be 10 with a portion provided indoors). Parking stalls are deficient in size (should be 10 x 20'). The current non-conforming issues on this property are not made worse by this plan. Staffis suggesting hard surface driveway similar to the other apartment buildings in the area. The building is bordered on all sides by like buildings. All the neighboring properties have undergone similar improvements. City staff regards the dumpster screening as a positive. -2723- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 Staff recommends that the variance be approved with the following conditions: 1. The City Council must approve a Public Lands permit. 2. The setback on south side should be increased to 10 feet to meet the R-3 requirement. 3. Applicant must obtain building, grading, street excavation and other permits as necessary. 4. The request shall be made subject to all comments from City staff. 5. The applicant is responsible for all fees associated with the variance application. Weiland thought that the slope should be graded so the retaining wall stays under 4 feet and the retaining wall be moved closer to the building so parking is further off Belmont. Smith indicated that staff would like the parking spaces increased to 10' x 17'. Mueller was very supportive of changes to these properties to improve their appearance. He felt we should encourage owners to clean these properties up as much as possible and was very comfortable in granting variances for this purpose because the City of Mound would be better off in a long run. Brown felt the 6-inch variance on the south side should be moved to 10 feet to eliminate the need for a variance on that side. Smith concurred. Glister was in support of this project and, because there is a hardship, it is not setting a precedent for smaller parking stalls. Clapsaddle indicated that, if the only reason for the short parking spaces was to line up the retaining wall with the wall on the property adjacent, it was a very arbitrary reason. Structurally, the building could handle the narrower greenspace and perhaps we should use this opportunity to establish a criteria for the other properties to follow in the future. Discussion Brett Anderson - 5604 Chowen Avenue South: The increased grading and dirt removal may be cost prohibitive. Money might be the deciding factor whether he does only the dumpster enclosure vs. including the parking. The steps are set out into the parking area now and will be set in. Mueller observed that there would always be a variance here because of the parking space deficiency and the north and east setbacks. It is ridiculous to ask for compliance on something that will still be varianced. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Mueller, to accept the proposal except that the south side setback be made 10 feet and parking stalls be made 20 feet. Mueller is in favor of this motion but is concerned that we are not encouraging these property owners to upgrade. By encouraging improvement of the property we make Mound a better place to live. 2 -2724- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 Finding of Fact: If there is a way to help the property owner with the cost of this improvement the City Council is asked to pursue that. A discussion followed regarding the lack of money as a hardship. It was concluded that it was covered under State Statute and that, combined with other factors, it could be considered a hardship. Mueller suggested an amendment to motion as follows: that the City Council explores other opportunities to eliminate or reduce permit/engineering costs to help with the property owner's expenses. Brown accepts the amendment - but - he can only suggest it, not guarantee the City Council will go along with it. MOTION carried unanimously CASE #02-11 Variance - Deck setback John and Kathy Aquilina 3030 Island View Drive The deck was built not in conformance with the code. They are requesting a 2.8 foot variance on the south side. The survey submitted with the original building permit showed the deck in conformance. On the plans the deck was indicated as future and plans were not included. The deck was never approved as part of the building permit for the house. A certificate of occupancy was issued in 1998 and did not include the deck. The code looks at these decks in a number of ways. Typically, we ascribe principal structure setbacks for decks unless there are reasons we would want to give them an encroachment. The code allows a deck that is higher than 30 feet offthe ground could have a 4-foot setback instead of 6 feet. The steps are allowed a 2-foot setback. We need to focus on how to view this if we were reviewing it with the building permit. When the house was proposed we did have at least 1 set of plans, and possibly 2, that showed a conforming deck. If we were to look at this, absent the deck, the same thought process probably played itself through to say there is nothing about the lot, dimensions, shape, or house saying there was a hardship with this side of the property. It's a deck, not a 2-story house. Is it a hardship to remove the non-conformity? Staff felt it wasn't and our recommendation is to deny the request with the following conditions: 1. Make the deck meet the setback. 2. Have the building permit applied for to modify the deck and building official will review the plan and establish fees, and possibly penalties for applying for the permit after the fact. 3. After modification an as-built survey should be submitted. Findings of Fact to support the recommendation: 1. Deck is result of the direct actions of the applicant, not inherited from another property owner. -2725- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 2. Conditions present are not a result of the lot size, dimension or topography. 3. If a variance was granted it would confer special privileges to the applicant not afforded to other property owners. 4. The granting of a variance would be materially detrimental to the spirit and intent of the Zoning ordinance. 5. The granting of a variance would "legitimize" the existing deck encroachment and continue to negatively impact to the adjacent property by limiting sight lines and the separation between homes. The City of Mound has no litigation proceedings against the property owner at this time. There is a suit between the adjacent property owners. There is an enforcement action that has been filed by the City of Mound to correct the situation. This has been temporarily halted until the variance request has been acted upon. Clapsaddle felt it was a very clean-cut and simple issue. He likes staffs proposed solution. Mueller clarified that Best and Flannagan provided the Planning Commissioners a supplemental packet that was not part of the official packet. It was forwarded to the City by the legal council of the adjacent property owner. Each Commissioner was provided an identical copy prior to the meeting. Discussion followed regarding the wording of the Code and its application to the deck in question. Burma was concerned about the relationship of Mr. Meller. He is the attorney for the property owner to the south and also city attorney for the City of Wayzata. Gordon assured that it is not an issue but that John Dean has spoken to him regarding this on a number of occasions. City Attorney agrees with staffs position on this issue. Discussion John Aquilina - 3030 Island View Drive - In March of 1997 the house was destroyed by fire. The original house plans did include a deck. August 11, 1997 the house was demolished. Either the builder didn't give the revised plans to the City or the plans were misplaced in City Hall. However, a later revised plan from the builder indicates a 10 foot wrap-around deck. According to the packet, an attached deck 30 inches or more above the ground floor does not have setback requirements. He felt that the code was clear. Burma asked for a clarification of the Planning Report. Gordon felt that the applicant's interpretation was in error and that the intent was as stated in the Planning Report. The portion of the deck in question is the landing area at the top of the stairs. Again, by code, the landing area may extend within 2 feet of the lot line. The variance would be 10 inches. The Planning Report indicates that the construction of the deck was never authorized. The builder and the city were on different pages. Mr. Aquilina put his faith in the builder. -2726- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 The Planning Report indicates that the deck extends the house 14 feet. Mr. Aquilina maintains that it is only 10 feet. Mr. Aquilina indicated that the deck handout and the code are not identical. The area in question is the landing area at the top of the stairs. He inquired if the word "landing" was no longer used. The Deck packet that was received from Smith does not match. Gordon responded that a landing is generally in the middle of a flight of stairs. He indicated that, for the Planning Report, he quoted directly from the Code. The house and deck were built 4 years ago. The former building official approved the plans and issued a certificate of occupancy. Builder was expected to follow code. Existing retaining wall on the side of the house made the location of the stairs logical. Special privilege is what any variance is about. Sight lines are not affected by any degree by a 1 O-inch variance. Separation between the homes is not an issue because theirs is 20 some feet closer to the lake. Ayaz stated that the deck was built without a permit. If we were able to take the time back we wouldn't issue the permit as it is. Greg Fall - 3036 Island View Drive - Variances are applied for in cases of hardship. Both properties have the same basic shape and topography. There aren't any hardships other than those that were self-created. It is important to have laws enforced. 1) There was no permit. 2) There was no permit application. 3) The deck is a different shape on the plans than what was built. 4) We are asking that the deck be brought into compliance with city code. He feels that the sight line and privacy is impacted. Burma inquired about Mr. Fall's setback expectation. The setback issue is confusing and needs to be clarified. Mr. Fall wants it to conform to the ordinance. John Aquilina said criticism states that it is not in the spirit of the ordinance. Six months ago a variance was requested by Mr. Fall from the LMCD and I spoke in favor of the variance. Island View Drive has many variances. He is asking for the same consideration. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Weiland, to move staff recommendation. Mueller stated that it is his understanding that the setback is 6 feet. Previous discussions confirm that. Clapsaddle amends the motion to establish a 6-foot sideyard setback. Weiland approved the amendment. Mueller wanted to include a Finding of Fact as follows: Plans were received by the city on 7/25/97. It afforded the applicant to make any revisions. At that time the plan was for the deck not to go past the existing structure and the stairway was on the other side. -2727- Planning Commission Minutes May 6, 2002 Clapsaddle felt we should not be dealing with integrity of contractor or any of the responsibility of contractor. Contractor is responsible to the owner; owner is responsible to the city. MOTION carded. Voting against: Burma. Voting for: Ayaz, Clapsaddle, Glister, Hasse, Mueller, Weiland and Brown Burma voted against because staff recommendation came with punitive measures to deny. 4. OLD / NEW BUSINESS A. Zoning Map/Comprehensive Plan consistency issues Indian Knoll parking lot - Current zoning is R2 - should be R3 - Commission concurs North side of CSAH 15 near Chateau - Presently the area is R1 and Rla. Comprehensive Plan indicates the area should be R3. West side of Commerce near Bartlett - Bring to CC to decide Grandview Apartment- Property has just less than 3 acres of property with 99 units. Mueller wanted Councilman Brown to bring the following comments to the City Council. Councilman Meyer had a good idea addressing the painting of the ugly buildings downtown. Council hasn't done anything about them after repeated requests to take care of it. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Weiland, seconded by Hasse, to adjourn the meeting at 10:40 PM. MOTION carried unanimously. Attest, Planning Secretary Acting Chair Orvin Burma -2728- MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL I 1,2002 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL 11, 2002 Present: Chair John Beise, Commissioners Gene Hostetler, Norman Domhold, and Derrick Hentz. Aisc present: Parks Director Jim Fackler and Recording Secretary Sue Schwaibe. Absent and excused: Ron Motyka, Susan Taylor, and David Osmek. Citizens present: Peter Meyer Chair Beise called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OFTHE FEBRUARY 14, 2002 PARKS AND OPEN SPACF COMMISSION MINUTES MOTION BY Domhold second by Hentz to approve the minutes of the February 14, 2002 Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission MOTION carried unamiously. 2. AGENDA CHANGES None 3. DISCUSS:' PARKS TOUR AND CLEAN-UP Chair recognized Peter Meyer and copied a note from Peter as a handout. Peter Meyer announced a trash/liter pickup of the Dakota Trail right-of-way in Mound on Saturday, April 20, 2002. Volunteers are meeting at Scotty B's Restaurant in 9:00 a.m. Volunteers are asked to bring gloves and participate for about three hours. There will be a notice in the Li~ker Newspaper. The School District is having a clean up of the Bruce Miller Wildlife Area organized by Dr. Pam Meyer on the same day. Pete continued to explain that Marleen Calahan spoke to the Planning Commission last Monday (April 8, 2002) on earth friendly landscaping. She completed projects for the City of Long Lake, Nuremberg Park and at the Narrow Bridge. -2729- MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL ! l, 2002 She is currently working on a project by Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church. These are all earth friendly projects. Ms. Calahan is also an active volunteer in the Hennepin Parks Program. Chair Beise thanked Peter Meyer.for all his volunteering. 3. DISCUSS: DRAFTS OF CITY CONTRACT PUBLICATION FOR ANMING OF PARKS The Commission has a wonderful opportunity to coordinate the naming of two parks. Chair Beise and Commissioner Hostetler distributed ideas for publication in the City Contact. Park Director Fackler indicated a decision needs to be made tonight for the publication cut-off in the Spring City Contact. See attached draft for publication. Staff is directed to send a copy of this to the two developers. 5. DISCUSS ZERO GRAVITY SKATE PARK Commissioner Hostetler explained to the Commission that this project is on the "fast track". He is asking the Commission for a motion to consent and forward all permits directly to the City Cbuncil for approval. For example, a Construction on Public Lands Permit needs to be completed. Commissioner Hostetler than explained the drawings, plans, etc to the Commission. Including elevations, obstacles, parking locations, shelter area for vending machines, etc. There will be a normal curb stop at the end of the street to keep vehicles from entering the area. Please drive by to view the Zero Gravity Skate Park sign. Staff will begin clearing the area very soon. Staff.will be completing the grading next. Regarding donations, Tom Stokes has been very helpful in regards to the construction of the skate park. A sign for the rules and regulations is still needed and also a donation for the cement. The cost of the cement will be approximately $20,000.00. -2730- MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL t I, 2002 MOTION by Beise second by Hentz to recommend approval oF the Zero Gravity Skate Park plans. The Park and Open Space Advisory Commission waives the review process for permits in order to proceed with this project in a timely manner. MOTION carried unamiously. 5. REVIEW MAY AGENDA ADD: ADD: ADD: Discuss of City Contract Publication For Naming Of Parks Invite The Public For Capital Outlay for 2002 Park Districting the Next Steps REPORTS. CITY COUNCIL REPRESENSTATIVE DAVID OSMEK Item lifeguard program. Neither effort was successful in obtaining the targeted amount for saving the lifeguard program. $5,000 was contributed from the VFVV. $2,000 will go to the Kids Scholarship Parks Program; $2,00 will go to Music in the Parks; and $1,000 will be for additional plant boxes in the green space areas. A Resolution passed regarding the Watershed District Buffer Zones. The majority of the City Council feels that some of these buffers intrude on the rights of the property owners. The Resolution was drafted and forwarded to the Watershed District. A Public Lands Permit was approved for Sunset Landing on Resthaven Lane. A retaining wall and trees encroach onto public lands. The Fire Station issue will be on the agenda very soon. Five council members seem to be in agreement that this is going forward. Invitations will be forthcoming to the Parks Department for touring the first residential section of the Metro Plains Development. The tour will be April 15th at 6:30 p.m. -2731- MINUTES OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION APRIL I l, 2002 PARK DIRECTOR JIM FACKLER 9taft recommends any additional plant boxes be the same design as the new Mound Visions Design. David Osmek will contact Bruce Chamberlain for direction. Be sure to review Packet Item #7 "Docking the Minnehaha at Mound Bay Park". This might involve considerations for Mound Bay Park. F. Todd Warner is working with the Minnesota Transportation Museum and the Historical Society to move forward with this project. The deadline for applying for summer park employment is April 18, 2002. Some part-time employees will be returning. > At this time, staff is prepping equipment, installing mowers, etc. The Island Park Hall has flooded. In the morning it was dry and by noon was flooded. ISLAND PARK TASK FORCE Commissioner Hentz reported the next meeting will be April 29, 2002. This meeting will be to discuss the June 15 Open House. Another option the task force is reviewing is moving to the Lynwood Blvd. Public Works Building. Also the task force reviewing taking Steps to clean up the building a little at a time. The April meeting will just be for Task Force Committee members only. MISCELLANEOUS Chair Beise directed Staff to insert upcoming events at the Mound Bay Parks sign. Possibly a thank you to the VFW for the donation or Park Naming information. Chair Beise,would like staff to insert "Open for Public Comment" on the agenda with a three minute time limit. MOTION by Domhold second by Hostetler to adjourn meeting at 9:15 p.m. MOTION carried unamiously. INSERT: NAMING OF PARKS FORM -2732- ,THE MOUND PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY ,COMMISSION NEEDS YOUR A rare opportunity presents itself in that we have received two new parks for the City of Mound. The Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission is asking for help in naming these parks. One is located in the old HaddOrf Field site (Village By The Bay) and the Rottlund Development (Langdon Bay). What we would like is for anyone who is interested to submit a recommendation of a name for either one or both of these new parks. The following are basic guidelines for naming of the parks. These are only guidelines and are not necessarily requirements. - Contributor: This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location: The name should fit the neighborhood. A famous American or Prominent Citizen: Recognition shall not be ordinarily considered until termination of service or death. Occasion' A special event in history. Service: An individual living or deac~,who has significantly served the community' above and beyond the call of duty. Langdon Bay Recommended Name Old Haddorf Field Reason for Recommendation Your Name Phone Please mail, drop off Or fax (952) 472-0620 to the City of Mound City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Questions Contact: Park Director Park Commission Chair Park Commission Vice-Chair Jim Fackler 952-472-0611 John Beise 952-472-2898 Norm Domholt 952-472-3808 -2733- THE MOUND PARK AND OPEN SPA CE ,COMMISSION NEEDS YOUR HEL ! A rare opportunity presents itself in that we have received two new parks for the City of Mound. The Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission is asking for help in naming these parks, We have begun the process of naming two new parks. One is located in the old Haddorf Field site (Village By The Bay) and the Rottlund Development (Langdon Bay). What we would like is for anyone who is interested to submit a recommendation of a name for either one or both of these new parks. Following are some basic guidelines for naming of the parks. However these are only guidelines and are not necessarily requirements. Contributori This can be an individual or organization that has contributed financially to the acquisition and/or development of the Park and Recreation System. Location' The name should fit the neighborhood. iA famous American or Prominent Citizen' Recognition shall not be ordinarily considered until termination of service or death. Occasion: A special event in history. Service: An individual living or dead who has significantly served the community above and beyond the call of duty. Langdon Bay. Recommended Name Old Haddorf Field Reason for Recommendation Your Name Phone Please mail, drop off or fax (952) 472-0620 to the City of Mound of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Any questions Contact: Park Director Park Commission Chair Park Co m mis,'-'273'4~'_;e-Ch a ir Jim Fackler 952-472-0611 John Beise 952-472-2898 Norm Domholt 952-472-3806 Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission April 18, 2002 DRAFT MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY DOCKS COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2002 Present: Chair Jim Funk, Frank Ahrens, Mark Goldberg, and City Council Representative Mark Hanus. Also present Parks Director Jim Fackler and Recording Secretary Sue Schwalbe. Absent and excused: Commissioners Jerry Jones and Greg Eurich Citizens Present: Tom Brossard, 1818 Commerce Blvd. Dave Beede, 1824 Commerce Blvd. Jan Trapp, 4869 Bartlett Blvd. Jeff Starkman, 4838 Wilshire Blvd. Rob Sandon, 4842 Wilshire Blvd. Jim Welbourn, Driftwood Shores Chuck Auger, Driftwood Shores Kathryn Hanna, 1816 Commerce Blvd. Chair Funk called the meetlng to order at 7:30 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 21, 2002 DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES MOTION by Ahrens, second by Goldberg to approve the March 21, 2002 Dock and Commons Advisory Commission Minutes MOTION carried unanimously. AGENDA CHANGES None -2735- Minutes ora Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission April 18, 2002 DRAFT 3. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. MINUTES PER SPEAKER) None (LIMIT TO THREF 4. DISCUSS: COMMERCIAL BOATS DOCK ORDINANCF a. Chapman Place Association b. Driftwood Shores c. Lakewinds Association d. Seahorse Condominiums e. Seton View f. Harrison Harbor Association g. Seton Twin Homes h. Halstead Acres Association i. Pelican Point Homeowners Association Park Director Jim Fackler explained that he has been at the City of Mound for approximately 17 years. In the beginning, the Dock Department was monitoring the associations and the commercial docks. The policy at that time was not to charge any entity that was not subletting dock space dutside of their association. This was the procedure for the following 16 years. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District notifies the Dock Department annually and requests any input in regards to these licenses. This year there was a closer look at dock fees including commercial and association fees. On February 26, 2002, the City Council directed the Dock and Commons Advisory Commission to look into the licensing of Associations as they relate to dockage on Lake Minnetonka. The associations were requested to submit letters requesting exemption and copies of association bylaws. -2736- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18,2002 All the Associations submitted their by-laws for consideration and review of the Commission. The commercial license fee for 2002 is $20.00 per year. The adjustment would be over a three-year time frame. The City attorney was requested to investigate this issue. It is the attorney's opinion that a condominium association clearly fits within the relevant code definitions that would require it to obtain a license to continue to operate its docks. Section 436.01 subd. 1. Staff is requesting instruction from the Commission and the City Council as to staff time spent overseeing the associations. If so, due to budget restraints, a fee will have to be established to reimburse this time. The services would be very minimal. Docks are inspected once per year. Staff would recommend inspections twice per year if the Commission approves this matter. Commissioner Ahrens stated that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District also inspects the docks is issue. Feels the City doesn't need to re-inspect the docks. City Council Representativ~ Hanus stated the City is the primary licensor for Commons Docks and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is the primary licensor for the association/commercial docks. Chair Funk requested comments and questions from the public present. Bob Brown, Seahorse Condominiums, 5430 Three Points. Blvd. The Commission needs to understand that the docks at Seahorse Condominiums are privately owned and titled. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District limits the association as to the size of their slips. The owners of these docks can sublet the slips only to people who live or own at Seahorse Condominiums. This cannot be for profit as it is against the Seahorse Bylaws. -2737- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 Commissioner Goldberg feels the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is doing a good job inspecting these docks. There basically is no commercial activity and does not fee the Commission or City should be involved. Chair Funk agrees that this is not part of the Commons Program. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District does the inspections and feels staff does not need to re-inspect the docks. Steve Schlacter, Lakewinds Condominiums Association President. The Lakewinds Association has rules and regulations in dealing with docks. The Association enforces the rules and deals with the complaints. The City does not generally have to deal with any complaints about the docks. In regards to parking, because the residents of Lakewinds only use the docks, the parking is totally the Association's responsibility, which is on private property. After living there for 20 years there has never been any problems with the inspections. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District does a very complete inspection. No sense in having the docks inspected again. Tom Lavoe, Lakewinds Condominiums Association Treasurer. Does not understand why they ar~ being qualified as a commercial dock. If Lakewinds are classified as a commercial marina then they should be given the opportunity to lease to the general public. Hanus stated that status is governed by your own bylaws; however' that status could affect how the City would deal with this issue and how the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District would deal with this issue. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District initially categorized associations as commercial dOCks. Somehow these docks were lumped in as commercial docks. Fackler stated the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's rules and regulations superceded the city of Mound's rules and regulations. -2738- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 Commissioner Ahrens feels the recommendation to the City Council should be to not inspect docks by City Staff because they are private property and are only being used by the individual Property owners. These are not commercial Chuck Auger, Driftwood Shores Association. All the associations here tonight do not have commercial operations at their property. They should not be commercial simply because they are mUltiple docks. Being lumped in the commercial docks is not applicable to his association. MOTION by Funk second by Ahrens to recommend the private Associations not be included under the Commercial Dock Program and are not in fact charged a Fee. Also recommends the City not use staff time for Inspections, as the inspections are to be left to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Dave Beede, Harrison Harbors, 1824 Commerce Blvd. Represents a small association with approximately 650 feet of shoreline primary wetland. One dock for sev,en slips minimizes the wetland hardship. MOTION carried unamiously. Staff is directed to determine the losses due commercial dock fee projections. Five minutes recess. 5. REVIEW: DOCK/SLIP FEES AND REVENUS VS. EXPENDITURES As requested staff provided revenues and expenditures from 1996 thru projected 2006. This is an update from the Finance Director. The breakdown is on page 240. The Commission is requesting more detail on the capital outlay items and the Administration costs. -2739- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission April 18, 2002 Staff is directed to determine the reasons why the "actual" 2001 General Liability Costs and the 2001 Professional Services costs are high. Staff will bring this back in May 2002. 6. REVIEW: CENTERVIEW AND IDELWOOD ACCESS MULT'IPLF SLIP DOCKS Park Director Jim Fackler stated this is simply information for the Commission's review. The Commission is asked to review the drawings for possible Multiple Slip Dock installations at the Centerview and Idelwood accesses. Currently the Centerview docking area has 11 dock sites (four docks and shares) with 19 boats in 2001 and 17 boats currently in 2002. The Idelwood docking area has two dock sites (one dock is shared) with four boats in 2001 and four boats currently in 2002. In a discussion with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District for the City to do Multiple Slip Dock installations at these sites the number of boats from the individual dock sites must remain consistent to the number of boats to be moo~'ed at the Multiple Slip Dock. If the number of boats are increased than a revised Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Dock and Mooring Permit must be completed. This could lead to possible costs incurred by the City for the application and have an impact on exceeding the City's maximum Boat Storage Units allowed by the current Lake Minnetonka District license. The Centerview docking area has seen 19'boats and the Idelwood docking area has seen four boats. Staff recommends that the Docks and Commons Advisory Commission should consider Plan "A" for Idelwood and Plan "A" for Centerview. These plans can be justified from the history of boat using the two areas so as to not trigger a revised application to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. -2740- Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission April 18, 2002 The higher number on the application would be a change in use and would affect som~ grandfathered issues; however, staff feels it can justify the 19 slips at Centerview. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District examines concentrated areas. This is just changing the configuration not adding to the number of boats in this area of Centerview. City Council Hanus and Commissioner Ahrens cannot justifY the expense if there is not a gain of slips. The neighborhood should be considered and this would be a cleanup. The increase of parking could be an issue. Staff feels the neighborhood might be concerned of any increases. Vandalism is out of control and they docks are not in good shape. Idelwood Parking is a problem and parking would be in the street. Staff would like the Commission to consider this issue if funds are available next year. 7. REVIEW: MAY 2002 AGENDA CALENDAR ADD: REVIEW DOCK/SLIP FEES AND REVENUES VS EXPENDITURES (THREE ITEMS) ADD: TOUR 6:30 P.M. NEXT MEETING REPORTS PARK DIRECTOR JAMES FACKLER With the ice out, the Dock inspector is inundated with calls. Administrative assistant hiring should be completed in the fall. Docks are being installed. There will be some extra expense due to vandalism. Not aware of any thefts at this time. All docks will be up to standard. Pembroke installed. Contracts with some of the newer docks for contractor for installation. -2741 - Minutes of a Meeting of the Mound Advisory Docks Commission DRAFT April 18, 2002 Staff will bid for installation. There are two services working at the same time. Boat ~ize~ are an issue on individula dock site. This happens every year. The boat count will be coming in July. The staff will be working on an amended application. This will come back to the commission and to the City Council. MOTION by Funk second by Goldberg to adjourn meeting at 10:15 p.m. MOTION carried unanimously. -2742- LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472-0621 Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 May 20, 2002 Chief Len Harrell Mound Police Department 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Len, As I have previously a job process for the position of deputy The Sheriffs Office has since made I am sorry to inform you that this letter serves as my resignati0nand two-week notice. My last date of employment with the City of Mound will be June' 2002. It should be noted, as background and other the agreed to _fall is completing my iattended t°'ii~_dit,.ibfis of my job offer. we and continuing Throughout my years ~of~ servme~.as a ~0und~. r61iC4 Offi~br~ !;!:am grateful for the experiences I have to thank you for making me a part and experiences that made me the officer I forever appreciative, enough and I am Ph career. D. Samuel Nelson # 17 olice Department -2743- Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative Agenda -May 17, 2002 7:15 - 9:00 a.m. Mound City Hall 1. Social - Coffee, tea, rolls, fruit and juice start at 7:15 2. Introductions start at 7:30 3. Additions or Changes to the Agenda / Minutes 4. Announcements 5. Review request for Excel academic coaching (15 min.) .: The Youth Activities work group recommends approval for funding an academic coaching project modeled after a successful program in the Bumsville schools. Kathy Jones will present the request. ' ... 6. Search Institute Asset Building (30 min.) We are going to revisit ASSETS! The Collaborative was founded with the desire to bUild assets in our Westonka children. HoW are you using assets in your every day job9.. How can we continue building assets? What's new with Search Institute? ' ' "Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never failed to imitate them," -- James Baldwin Any comments or questions, call Leah Weycker, Collaborative Coordinator, at 952-491-8058 or WeyckerL @ westonka.k 12. mn.us -2744- Work Group Updates Health Sandy Olstad, Laurie Fitz, Mary Goode, Seanette Metz, Mark BreVe : · ': The depression and suicide awareness cards, and holders were.distributed, If anyone h~..a:need for more cards, let Leah know. The task force is working on an second " ' "' annual Blue Skies, Blue Summers, -tW° p~ series 0n depression. This time we will also have an art and poetry show to go with iti Anoth~r p~6je~'being worked on is a camp to train youth on bringing awareness to their own school community. This would be a joint project with SAVE and a group from Mahtomedi school district. Youth Activities Sandy Rauschendorfer-temp chair, Jean Ann Thayer We will participate in NYPUM, minibike program this year. The school Counselors are wOrking on referals for five kids. The group reviewed and recommended approval for an academic coaching program. Leah will work with Kathy Jones to complete the new project request form. ZGTF is very busy! Zero Gravity.task force is working on an Xtreme Sports Film Fest~for kids to submit video's for a public showing/fundrasier. They are close to completing a contract With the City of Mound on :the details of building the park. The t-shirts, pencils and stickers are in, ready tO give out to those making, donations. We still need help! Parenting Sandy Wing, Sandy Olstad, Bill Erickson The Parent Education group is working on the develoPment of a web site at www. westonka.org. We were luC~ t° get that name."' . ': community . :: .: :. . Margaret Hqls.te,'cathy. Baileyl This group has not met. Communications Anne Wilbur, Carol Olson The communications group is concentrating on skate park communications and fundraising. They made' buckets to collect moneY at local business'. Executive Craig Anderson, 'C~ol Olson, Mgghret H°lste, Sandy' Wing, Sandy. Raushendoffer The executive work group will meet May 14 to revieW the new project request form and minor restructuring, of the collab.orative work groups. Alliance for Families and Children in Hennepin County Hand in Hand, Primary Project is being reviewed and may apply for additional funding to offer the program for a second year. -2745- Westonka Health Community Collaborative Minutes - April 19, 2002 Present: Craig Anderson, Carol Olson, Rich Zierdt, Bill Anderson, John Rogers, Sandy Olstad, JeanAnn Thayer, Kathy JoneS, Margaret Holste, Amy Lien, Laurie Fitz, Mary Hughes, Senator Gen Olsen, and Leah Weycker 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda or Minutes: Bob Stevens, CEO will be here to share information abOut Ridgeview Medical Center. The Search Institute Asset Building diScussion will be tabled until next month. No changes were made to the minutes from March 22, 2002. 2. Announcements: · * Leah nominated h~r, and Margaret H01ste has been ChOsen 'by the Lake Minnetonka Chamber to receive the 2002 Service Excellence award. The awards banquetwill be held on April 25, 2002 at Island View Country Club in Waconia. Tickets are $20, and everyone is welcome to attend. · Skatepark update: We have raised $15,000 plus the in-kind donations of materials from Brenshall Homes for which we need a dollar value. The city of Mound wants us to wait to break ground until-~we have 50% of the $162,000 cOst. We need volunteers to help with the project including fundraisers. Carol Olson gave $1,000 today - Thanks, CatOllll . . · Membership updates: Len Harrell has recently had surgery, and Sandy Wing is dealing with cancer. Leah will send cards in our name, but encouraged members to also send cardS~ Brian Hacklander, pastor at Bethel Methodist, is being transferred to a church in Roseville at the end of June. However, he and his family will continue to live in our community. John Braland's 3 Year old son has f(~cently been diagnoSed with leukemia. On a more cheerful note, Sarah Baker had a. baby boy. · The Health work group has completed depression awareness cards which.will be distributed ' throughoUt the community. Students have joined the group and. helped design the cards, · Kathy Jones shared that there will be a dinner and program for 7th graders and their~parents on May 13 to help with the transition to the high School. The atmosphere at the high sChoOl will be discussed as ~well as a "heads uP" about Potential issues, e.g., expectations*about chemical use. · Craig Anderson, Minnetrista Police Chief, shared information about a variety of road construction projects starting soon including the Highland Bridge and other road work on Highway 7 between Highway 41 and the east end of St. Bonifacius, and County Road 110 from Sunnyfield Road north to County Road 6. He asked that people resPect the detours. If not, tickets will be issued, He thanked Gen Olson for her help with the funding to fix the Highland Bridge so that it Can be used by emergency vehiCles during construction of the bridge over Six Mile Creek on HighwaY 7. There will be an e-mail newsletter giving updates on the construction. COntact Craig to get on the list to reCeive the newsletter at 952,446-1131 or canderson @ ci.minnetrista:mn.us. · Craig also announced that Minnetrista is holding a HOmeland Security Night On APril 24, 2002 from 7 - 9 p.m. at Mound Westonka High School. The Family Safety Day will be held on May 11 at the Minnetrista City Hall. 3. Ridgeview Medical Center: Theresa Pesch of the Ridgeview Foundation briefly shared -2746- information about WHCC projects they have funded as well as the work they are currently doing to determine needs and connect with the communities they serve. The Foundation is als0 awarding scholarships to high school seniors going into health care careers from each of the high schools in their service area, including a student from Mound Westonka. She then introduced Bob Stevens, CEO for the Medical Center. He shared a handout about the Center as well as information regarding their service area, their mission, (to enhance the health of people in the communities it serves,) their vision, (including being innovative, proactive, and family focused,) as well as a history of the hospital (which was owned by the city of Waconia until January, 2000) and the various community clinics. They are focusing on providing the best experience possible from a patient's perspective, improving their cash position, and finding and retaining the best staff. They now have a violence coordinator on staff and will "screen" all patients in the ER for domestic violence. Their mental health clinic closed because insurance companies wouldn,t pay which leaves mental health services at a crisis point. Gen Oison offered to put pressure on HMO's and insurance companies about this. There .are also many people without insurance, and the hospital will serve people who can't pay. When asked about needs we see in our community, groups/classes for prenatal issues and diabetes were mentioned: It was also suggested that the Foundation consider funding parish nurses. Bob~suggested that community support is crucial to their work in communities and schools, and they plan ~to again survey our area regarding medical services and people's perceptions of the clinic~here. He offered thatwe could put information about WHCC.in their newsletter, Tracings, which ~goes to the 65',000. · households in their service area. We could also get on the mailing list fortheFoundation's. newsletter regarding projects.they, ve supported, Theresa offered, tobe our contact for~further work together 4. Budget:, Although the budget was approved last month:, there wa~i'~an opportunity to ask questions about it. Currently there Es approximately $34,000 that is not encumbered, partly . because .we~are. so thri.fty and.. e. fficient. However, the..legislature is concerned ~bout the money not being .used, and has discussed taking this funding away. Laurie suggested thatweconsider a project .with the.Orono Collaborative that deals with housing, advocacy.. School staff have a couple projects in mind and will deal with the appro.priate work groups about them. Generally, projects need to deal with at-risk children, especially those at risk of out;of-home placement, and not supplant current, programs. ~ 5. Other Items: * Jubilee has. announced that they will be moving to the new development as Festival-FoodS. We will again explore the possibility of housing a group of non-profits in their current site." ~ * Craig asked that members cOnsider being the chairperson. (A list of duties.was shared.). * We .need. t.o encourage.pthers.t0 attend our meetings, Leah Will expand the survey to .include a mid-day option with the possibility of having it at the Senior Center with lunch. Since. th s option still may not increase parent participation, we could consider offering a. quarterly.evening dinner meeting with activities for the children. Hopefully, this would increase parent input beyond our current parent representation.. -... Carol made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Sandy. Motion approved unanimously. Margaret Holste, Recorder -2747- Mound Public Safety Facility 5/22/2002 Mound, MN Budget Work .Sheet May-02 Funding Source Schematic Budget Estimate Total Funding Available (net of financing fees/costs) 5,800,000 ,8oo,oool Budget Expenditures Pro!ect Develooment Costs NE Base Fee SEH A/E Reimbursables SEH Civil Engineering SEH NV consultant N/A Land Costs City of Mound Legal Fees Financing Costs City Road & Utility Fees Public Utility charges Geotechnical/Environmental Services TBD Surveying MFRA Bid Advertisement and Printing To be Bid Lease Cost of Temporary Facility Moving Costs (two moves) Construction Testing Furnishinos and Eoui_oment Total In Construction Cost Sub-totals FFE Owner Audio visual Systems Incl in FFE Security and Access Systems Incl in FFE Telephone System Incl in FFE Computer Network Incl in FFE 0 SEH 0 SEH 0 SEH 0 City o city 0 Ehlers 0 Ehlers o city 0 Amcon 0 Amcon 0 City 0 Amcon o city o city 0 Amcon 0 0 City 0 City 0 City 0 City 0 City Sub-totals Construction Cost Building Hard Costs Construction Manager Fee Site Improvements Demolition of Existing Removal of Well New (replacement well) Contingency Recommended Alternates Uncommited Funds Contractors (to be bid) Amcon CM Included in Building Included in Building Included in Building NOT included in project Sub-totals Totals (Fund Shortage) 4,450,000 Amcon 128,500 Amcon 0 Amcon 0 Amcon 0 City/Amcon 0 C~ty 350,000 Amcon 0 Amcon 4,928,500 $4,928,500 Il 87 ,5o0 II AMCON cost est MPS Total Project Cost -2748- Ii.. o E EO00 O0 oEO0 0000 o 008 o~ooo o -2749- oo0 I 0o0 -2750- This Page Is Left Intentionally Blank -2751 -