The URL can be used to link to this page

2003-08-12 PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. CITY OF MOUND MISSION sTATEMENT: The City of Mound, thrOUgh teamwork and co°perati°nl Provides at h reasonable c°St, qUali~ services that respond to :the needs of all citizens, fostering a safe, attractive and flourishing community. AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2003 - 7:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD *Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member or Citizen so requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. OPEN MEETING PAGE 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTES: JULY 22, 2003 REGULAR MEETiNG *B. APPROVE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS 3075-3079 3080-3108 *C. APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. CASE #03-32: GILLESPIE FOUNDATION/ WESTONKA SENIOR FOUNDATION 2590 COMMERCE BLVD VARIANCES: SIGN/MESSAGE BOARD RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL 3109-3127 2. CASE #03-25: GORDON & LAURA ENGSTRAND 1754 JONES LANE VARIANCES: FRONT SETBACK RECOMMENDED: APPROVAL 3128-3141 3. CASE #03-26: ERNIE & MICHELLE ROSENBERG 4967 WILSHIRE BLVD VARIANCE: FRONT SETBACK RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL 3142-3158 *D. APPROVE TEMPORARY ON-SALE 3.2 BEER PERMIT & PUBLIC DANCE/LIVE MUSIC PERMIT: 2003 OUR LADY OF THE LAKE INCREDIBLE FESTIVAL 3159-3161 *E. APPROVE PAYMENT REQUEST NO. 4 BY BUFFALO BITUMINOUS FOR 2003 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT 3162-3164 *F. APPROVE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY CODE AS IT RELATES 3165-3166 TO HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ON-SALE LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENTS PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. *G. APPROVE MEETINGS: A. NOV 11 REGULAR MEETING RESCHEDULED TO NOV 10 Bo TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING DATES: DEC 1, 7:00 P.M., WITH CONTINUATION HEARING ON DEC 8, 7:00 P.M., IF NEEDED C. DEC 23 REGULAR MEETING CANCELLED COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER) 3167 o ° 10. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 4717 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE: ACTION ON RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ABATE UNSAFE AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS, AND ASSESS RESULTING CHARGES AGAINST THE PROPERTY 3168-3181 ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 06-2003 - ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE 3182-3191 ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 07-2003 - IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER D/B/A/XCEL ENERGY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND 3192-3195 ACTION AWARDING BID: LOST LAKE GREENWAY PROJECT - S.P. 145- 090-01, MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. TEAX 2700(028). LOW BDDER: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC, WILMAR, MN 3196-3200 REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS: PROPOSAL TO CHANGE LAND USE FROM HIGH TO LOW DENSITY RESDENTIAL FOR (9) PROPERTIES IN FAIRVIEW/CHATEAU LANE NEIGHBORHOOD 3201-3208 12. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. Redevelopment Update - July/Aug 2003 B. Gillespie Gazette C. Minutes: Planning Commission - July 21, 2003 D. Correspondence: Mediacom E. Update: Mound Marketplace F. Update: Rail elevation G. WAFTA articles H. Communications Law Update I. Charitable Gambling Donation to PS facility J. Minutes: Suburban Rate Authority K. Minutes: LMCD L. Report: Harbor Wine and Spirits M. Minutes: Park and Open Space Commission - July 10, 2003 N. Update: Public Safety facility ADJOURN 3209-3213 3214 3215-3221 3222-3225 3226 3227 3228-3237 3238-3241 3242 3243-3246 3247-3264 3265-3266 3267-3270 3271-3290 This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. More current meeting agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site. COUNCIL BRIEFING August 12, 2003 Events Schedule: Don't Forget!! Aug 12 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting Aug 12 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting Aug 25 - 6:30 - CC budget workshop Aug 26 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting Aug 26 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting Sept 2 - 6:30 - CC budget workshop Sept 4 - 8:00 a.m. - Author Jon Gordon on Getting and Staying Energized Sept 9 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting Sept 9 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting Sept 11 - 2:00 - 911 Dedication Ceremony at Veteran's Park Upcomine Absences Aug 14-18 Kandis Hanson Vacation City Hall Closed Sept 1 Labor Day #4.G. Meeting Dates The Nov 11 meeting is moved due do a conflict with Veteran's Day. The Truth in Taxation meeting dates are County-prescribe/suggested. We always hope to hold only one meeting in December, but we've only achieved that once in three years. #5. Nuisance Abatement Even though the Code states the "Council may" hold a heating for nuisance abatement, as an after thought, staff is advising that we take the conservative approach and add the hearing to the process. Please bear with us .... Thanks! #7-8. Electric Franchise Fees Jim Strommen of K & G will be present to explain matters as they related to enacting policies that will begin the collection of electric franchise fees. #9. Lost Lake Greenway Pro.iect Bruce Chamberlain of HKG will be present to update you on the project and ask for the award of the bid to begin construction. #11.I. Charitable Gambling Donation All four of the local gambling associations received a detailed letter and plans from the City requesting they share in the cost of the monument for the public safety facility. The share amount was $5,500 each. The total received to date is $1,000 from the Jaycee's. Other Asbestos removal was performed at the Longpre building this week. Demolition is expected next week. A specific day has not been earmarked. Call Matt Simoneau for more current information, as it happens. Matt is charge of this project while John Cameron is on vacation. Due to construction of the public safety facility, deliveries and utility bill drops will take place from the Maywood Road side of City Hall. Staff, council members and commissioners should continue to park on Cypress. The public will again use the parking lot to the rear of the building, starting Aug 18. The City has been named, among many others, in a suit being brought by Bolt Construction. Please see the attachment. George Hoff has been assigned to the case by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. Human Resources On July 29, five candidates were interviewed for the Public Works Director/Engineering Coordinator. The pool was narrowed to a single candidate and he was interviewed once again on Aug 6. Pending positive back grounding results, the Public Works Director/Engineering Coordinator position for the City of Mound will be offered to Carlton Moore. Carlton has a bachelor's degree in landscape architecture and has been employed by the City of St. Louis Park for the past 26 years. Carlton will bring significant experience in several areas to the City of Mound including downtown development, infrastructure and utilities reconstruction projects, construction inspection and has experience working with neighborhood residents and commercial businesses. It is worth noting that Carlton worked on the Excelsior and Grand Redevelopment Project in St. Louis Park which will be very beneficial as we move towards development phase of the Mound Harbor Renaissance project in the downtown area. More to come on Carlton. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPLN Boltt Corporation, DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. CASE TYPE: CONTRACT Plaintiff, VS. Mound Marketplace, L.L.C., Mound Marketplace Association, P. B.K. Investments, Inc., City of Mound, Associated Bank, National Association, Westwood Professional Services, Inc., James R. Schwebel, The Business Bank, Northland Concrete & Masonry Co., Inc., Aggregate Industries, Inc., Tailored Foam, Inc., Hussmann Corporation, Olympic Wall Systems, Inc. - Minnetonka, Armor Waste Systems, Dakota Plumbing & Heating, Inc., South Side Lumber Company, and John and Jane Doe, Defendants. AMENDED SUMMONS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the Complaint in this action, which has been filed in the Office of the District Court Administration for Hennepin County, and file your Answer to the Complaint in the office of the D/strict Court Administrator within twenty (20) days of the date this Summons is served upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint. YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that this action is, in part, to enforce and foreclose a mechanic's lien in the amount ors 1,600,789.41, with interest thereon, plus costs, disbursemei~ts and attorney's fees, on the tract of land in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as: Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Mound Visions 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, for the furnishing of construction management and suPervision by Plaintiff on the property legally described above. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 543.22, you are further notified that under the Minnesota General Rules of Practice, all civil cases are subject.to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes, except for those actions enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 4-84.76 and Minnesota Gegeral Rules of Practice 111.01 and 310.01. The Court Administrator of the above-captioned Court can provide you with information about the available ADR processes and neutrals. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that appropriate sanctions may be imposed against the parties and/or their attorneys pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211 if the Court determines that the claims, defenses or other legal contentions contained herein are presented for an improper purpose, ulnwarranted by existing law, frivolously presented, without evidentiary support, not reasonably based upon knowledge, information and belief or made without reasonable inquiry under the circumstances. COLLINS, BUCKLEY, SAUNTRY & HAUGH, P.L.L.P. Dated: -;~- 3' ,-- ~'7 BY: THOMAS E. McELLISTREM (#23042X) MARK W. GEHAN, (#33984) Attorneys for Plaintiff W-1100 First National Bank Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Telephone No. 651-227-0611 MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 22, 2003 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, July 22, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of city hall. Members Present: Mayor Pat Meisel; Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, David Osmek and Peter Meyer. Others Present: City Attorney Jim Strommen, Acting City Manager Gino Businaro, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Building Official Matt Simoneau, Arne Hendrickson, Scott Bischke, Dan Gleason Consent Agenda: Afl items listed under the Consen~Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council and will be enacted:by a roil call vote. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a COUncilmember or citizen requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. OPEN MEETING Mayor Meisel called the meeting toOrder at 7:30 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVE AGENDA Meisel requested the addition of 5A, FranChise Fee Ordinance Amendment. Businaro requested the additionOf 6A, Public Safety Facility Construction & Parking Changes MOT, ION bY Brown seconded.by Osmek to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in fag~r~" Motion carried: 4. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor MeiSel asked that F be removed to add a fax that was received after the packets were sent out. Osmek asked to remove item D and Meyer requested the removal of B and E. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Osmek to approve the consent agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve minutes of July 8, 2003 B. (removed) 1 3075 Mound Council Minutes - July 22, 2003 Planning Commission Recommendations 1. RESOLUTION NO. 03-67: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK AND HARDCOVER VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 4925 DRUMMOND ROAD. P&Z CASE #03-'12, PID #25-'1 '17-24-'1 '1-0'105. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 03-68: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A REAER YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 47'!'1 MANCHESTER ROAD. P&Z;'CASE #03-28, PID #'19- '1 '17-23-32-022'1. D. (removed) E. (removed) F. (removed) G. Approve Valley Paving's Payment R~uest No. 1 for $104,533.13 fOr:the 2003 Street Project. H. Approve special budget workshops for AugUst 25 at 6:30 p.m., with September 2, at 6:30 p.m. as possible seCgn.d date if needed! 4B. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Meyer questioned the claim for MetroP!ains for liqu0~ store legal fees, in the amount of $7,000. Businaro additi0fiat co,tS ~e're~i~red with the Liquor store, which the City city h~§' ownership and should share in these costs. '"":~'~ inal clairnWas for $20,000 and it was negotiated down to that a compromise W~s suggested rather than incurring $7,000.00. It additional costs MOTIO $1,0~ ..74. voted ag by Brown t~ay the claims in the amount of in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Osmek. The otion carried. 4D. TEmpORARY sIGN ~ERMITFoR OUR LADY OF THE LAKE Osmek that ie temporary sign fee of $55.00 be waived for the sign for the I by Our Lady of the Lake Church on September 13 and 14. MOTION by by Brown to approve the temporary sign permit applied for by Our Lady of th~Lake Church, waiving the $55.00 fee. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4E, PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR VILLAGE BY THE BAY Meyer indicated he would like a vocal vote for the three extra lights at the entrance of Village by the Bay, as he feels there is not additional need for extra lights. Hanus commented that the request received unanimous approval from the Parks and Open Space Commission. 2 3076 Mound Council Minutes - July 22, 2003 MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to adopt the following resolution. The following voted in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Osmek. The following voted against: Meyer. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 03-69: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT FOR THE VILLAGE BY THE BAY, LLC, 5710-5740 VILLAGE TRAIL AND 2100 OLD SCHOOL ROAD 4F. APPROVE RELEASE OF TAX FORFEIT Meyer requested that a letter received by fax on 7/22 entered into the record. Osmek and Brown indicated City and is public. Sarah Smith reviewed the City's policy of discussions with Hennepin County, written City Council. uests. be read and is on file with the following by the Hanus stated that the property is n, and notification efforts will be epin is not listed as a City Park, MOTION by Meisel, seconded by verification that this parc, Brown, Hanus, Meisel carried. resolution subject to staff ng voted in favor: Meyer. Motion RESOLUTION FORFEITED PR( OWNER: [PPROVE THE RELEASE OF TAX TO ADJACENT PROPERTY KRISTINE BISCHKE 5. lENTS & ON ~E AGENDA None offered. 5A. Jim StrommE stating that the which is the earlie,, FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT FEE reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment, franchise fee will be collected beginning in September, the administrative work can be completed. Arne Hendrickson of Center Point/Minnegasco asked the Council to consider reviewing this issue in a few years in case things change with the City's need for this fee. Meisel stated that is the City's intent. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to pass the following ordinance. The following voted in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Meyer. The following voted against: Osmek. Motion carried. 3 3077 Mound Council Minutes - July 22, 2003 ORDINANCE NO. 05-2003: AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO FOR PROVIDING GAS SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND. 6. CONSIDERATION/ACTION ON AUTHORIZATION TO STAFF FOR THE ABATEMENT OF UNSAFE & NUISANCE CONDITIONS AT 47~17 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE~ ASSESSING CHARGES AGAINST THE PR(:: Council reviewed the nuisance issue at 4717 Island View Community Services Officer. Matt Simoneau indicated contact with the property owner, but in general the Osmek indicate that residents shouldn't have to neighborhoods, and coming to the city for resolu like this. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Brown process and assess subsequent charges to th, carried. 6A. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY C Businaro offered a reminder that the completely closed for 2-3 and I: stalls are reserved in bills on the North 'ION 7. INF¢ )US A. Letter: Orv B. Repo C. D. ~ort E. uly 2003 F. 20C Council G. H. Article: sought I. Letter: nstruction J. LMCC Au ~ K. MN Departmenl -tation 10 year plan L. Report: Police Department: June 2003 ts prepared by the CSO has had limited unresponsive. like this in their way to circumstances with the voted in favor. Motion KING CHANGES )uth of City Hall will be side, with note that a drop-off box for utility 4 3078 Mound Council Minutes - July 22, 2003 8. ADJOURN MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 5 3079 AUGUST 12, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 072303SU E $24,117.80 JULY 072903SU E $133.12 JULY 073003SUE $733.45 JULY 080403SU E $1,526.02 AUG 080603S U E$4,755.25 AUG 081203SU E $284,286.50AUG TOTAL $315,552.14 3080 CITY OF MOUND Payments 07/24/03 10:30 AM Page 1 Batch Name 072303SUE User Dollar Amt $24,117.80 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $24,117.80 $0.00 In Balance Refer 72303 AT&T Cash Payment E 101-41310-321 Telephone & Cells 06-03 952-250-0429 Invoice 072303 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 $39.14 Total $39.14 Refer 72303 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Cells 06-03 952-472-3555 $256.96 Invoice 071003 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $256.96 Refer 72303 HARDINA, DAMON Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $593.95 Invoice 072303 Transaction Date 7/22/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $593.95 Refer 72303 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Cash Payment E 101-41310~434 Conference & Training] ALL STAFF SEMINAR $52.00 Invoice 072303 Refer 72303 LEAGUE MN CITIES INSURANCE T Cash Payment E 101-41110-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $1,25t.27 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-41310-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $387.69 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-41500-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY iNSURANCE $499.18 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-41600-361 General Liability ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $91.52 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-42110-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $2,715.52 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-42115-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $43.26 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-42400-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $499.18 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-43100-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $3,006.70 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-41910-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $201.33 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 101-45200-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $678.88 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 222-42260-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $3,635.67 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment E 609-49750-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $3,885.25 072303 Payment E 601-49400-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $2,838.65 Invoice 072303 3081 CITY OF MOUND Payments 07/24/03 10:30 AM Page 2 Current Period: July 2003 E 602-49450-361 General Liability [ns GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $2,838.65 Cash Payment Invoice 072303 Cash Payment Invoice 072303 Transaction Date E 281-45210-361 General Liability Ins GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE $401.00 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $22,973.75 Refer 72303 PETTY CASH Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow BUY A BRICK PROJECT $35.00 Invoice 072303 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow UB PAYMENT $17.00 invoice 072303 Transaction Date 7/22/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $52.00 Refer 72303 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, I Cash Payment E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training 08-11-03 REGISTRATION TODD, RICK $150.00 Invoice 072303 PO 17910 Transaction Date 7~22/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $150.00 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 10100 Wells Fargo $10,111,62 $3,892.63 $401.00 $2,988,65 $2,838.65 $3,885.25 $24,117.80 Pre-Written Check Checks to 'be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $24,117.80 $24,117.80 3O82 CiTY OF MOUND Payments 07/31/03 7:46 AM Page I Current Period: July 2003 Batch Name 072903SUE Payments User Dollar Amt $133.12 Computer Dollar Amt $133.12 $0.00 In Balance RENTAL FOR EE APPRECIATION Wells Fargo 10100 Refer 72903 JUMP FOR JOY RENTALS, LLC Cash Payment invoice 072903 Transaction Date E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous 7/31/2003 $133.12 Total $133.12 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $133.12 $133.12 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $133.12 Total $133.12 3O83 CITY OF MOUND Payments 07/30/03 7:50 AM Page 1 Current Period: July 2003 Batch Name 073003SUE User Dollar Amt $733.45 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $733.45 Refer 73003 GRAND, DEB Cash Payment Invoice 073003 Transaction Date E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies 7/29/2003 $0.00 In Balance REIMBURSE INK JET CARTRIDGE $107.80 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $107.80 Refer 73003 HARDINA, DAMON Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $225.65 Invoice 073003 Transaction Date 7/28/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $225.65 Refer 73003 ROTARY CLUB OF MOUND Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising GOLF SPONSORSHIP $100.00 Invoice 073003 Transaction Date 7/28/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $100.00 Refer 73003 SWAR7-ZER, BRIAN Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $300.00 Invoice 070303 Transaction Date 7/30/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $300.00 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $525.65 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $207.80 $733.45 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $733.45 Total $733.45 3O84 CITY OF MOUND Payments 0§/04/03 §:50 Page 1 Current Period: August 2003 Batch Name 080403SUE User Dollar Amt Payments Computer Dollar Amt Refer 8403 NELSON, JOYCE Cash Payment Invoice 080403 Transaction Date G 101-22816 Personal Cell Phone 8/4/2003 $1,526.02 $1,526.02 $0.00 In Balance REIMBURSE CELL CREDIT Wells Fargo 10100 $26.02 Total $26.02 Refer 80403 STORM CONTRACTING Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 07-28-03 THRU 08-01-03 DURA PATCHER $1,500.00 Invoice 100044 PO 17908 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,500.00 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $1,526.02 $1,526.02 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $1,526.02 $1,526.02 3O85 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:18 AM Page 1 Batch Name 080603SUE User Dollar Amt $4,755.25 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $4,755.25 $0.00 In Balance Refer 80603 HANSON, KANDIS Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $284.24 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $284.24 Refer 80603 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS (PA/V) E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 CE#23 KESTNER, AL $34.35 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment invoice 080603 Cash Payment invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment Invoice 080603 Cash Payment invoice 080603 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-6740 BERENT,BRIAN $20.94 E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-6974 TAFFE,JOHN $20.86 E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-6812 #15 FACKLER,JIM $81.62 E 281-45210-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-6813 HOFF,KATIE $40.24 E 101-41310-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-6814 #03 RAHN,JODI $34.35 E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-221-8385 SWARTZER,BRIAN $34.33 E 101-42400-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-282-5889 SIMONEAU, MATT $71.45 E 101-42400-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 612-363-5883 NORLANDER,JILL $29.48 E 281-45210-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 952-292-1375 WIDMER,DENICE $6.87 E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 952-282-1375 WIDMER,DENICE $13.73 E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells .06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 952-292-1375 $13.73 WIDMER,DENICE Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 7/28/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $401.95 Refer 80603 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS (POLl Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone & Cells 06-19-03 THRU 07-18-03 CELL PHONES $184.73 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $184.73 Refer 80603 NORLANDER, JILL Cash Payment E 101-42400-305 Medical Services REIMBURSE EYE EXAM $50.00 invoice 080603 3086 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:18 AM Page 2 Current Period: August 2003 Transaction Date 81512003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $50.00 Refer 80603 PETTY CASH Cash Payment E 609-49750-202 Duplicating and copying USED FAX AND CART $120.59 Invoice 080803 PO 17702 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies REPLENISH PETTY CASH $40.60 Invoice 080603 PO 17702 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $161.19 Refer 80603 ROBERTS, COLLETTE Cash Payment G 101-21716 Flex PJan Dependents REIMBURSE DEPENDENT CARE $495.60 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $495.60 Refer 80603 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA (FIR Cash Payment E 222-42260-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-21-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $355.17 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 7/29/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $355.17 Refer 80603 SPEEDWA Y SUPERAMERICA (P/W Cash Payment E 101-43100-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-22-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $435.77 Invoice 080306 ~sh Payment E 601-49400-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-22-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $248.15 080306 Cash Payment E 602-49450-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-22-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $334.45 Invoice 080306 Transaction Date 7/29/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,018.37 Refer 80603 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA (PAR Cash Payment E 101-45200-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-2%03 GASOLINE CHARGES $443.50 Invoice 080803 Cash Payment E 101-42400-212 Motor Fuels THRU 07-21-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $31.82 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 7/29/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $475.32 Refer 80603 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA (POL Cash Payment E 101-42110-212 Motdr Fuels THRU 07-26-03 GASOLINE CHARGES $1,227.00 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,227.00 Refer 80603 WIDMER, DENICE Cash Payment G 101-21715 Flex Plan Medical REIMBURSE MEDICAL EXPENSE $101.68 Invoice 080603 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $101.68 3087 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:18 AM Page 3 Current Period: August 2003 Fund Summary 10100 Wells Fargo 101 GENERAL FUND $3.547.37 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES $355.17 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND $47.11 601 WATER FUND $296.23 602 SEWER FUND $348.18 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND $161.19 $4,755.25 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $4,755.25 Total $4,755.25 3O88 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 1 Batch Name 081203SUE User Dollar Amt $284,286.50 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $284,286.50 $0.00 In Balance Refer 81203 3M COMPANY Cash Payment E 101-43100-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA ELECTRONIC CUTTABLE FILM $360.00 Invoice TP36522 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $360,00 Refer 81203 A+ CLEANING CONTRACTORS, IN Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 08-03 CLEANING SERVICE $1,260.95 Invoice 9432 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,260.95 Refer 81203 AMERICAN LEGION POST #398 Cash Payment E 101-41110-434 Conference & Training RENTAL FOR STAFF MEETING $50.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $50.00 Refer 81203 AMERICAN RED CROSS MPLS AR Cash Payment G 101-22803 Police Reserves TEXTS AND WORKBOOKS $389.40 Invoice 70980 ansaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $389.40 Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous PLANT $30.00 Invoice 21533 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $30.00 Refer 81203 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $106,56 Invoice 387321601 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $158.04 Invoice 387321414 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $247.36 invoice 387321314 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $157.68 Invoice 387320909 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $192.92 Invoice 387320712 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $143.28 Invoice 387320612 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $60.48 'Invoice 387320211 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $213,12 Invoice 387320014 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $149,40 Invoice 387319909 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $100.44 387319309 Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $120.36 Invoice 387317912 3089 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 2 Current Period: August 2003 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,649.64 Refer 81203 ASPEN EMBROIDERY AND DESIG Cash Payment E 609-49750-218 Clothing and Uniforms UNIFORMS $736.00 invoice 072303 Transaction Date 7/24/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $736.00 Refer 81203 BADASH, JACK, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise Fo~'R LIQUOR $240.13 Invoice 00101277 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $240.13 Refer 81203 BELLBOY CORPORATION Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise Fo;' R MISCELLANEOUS $204.16 Invoice 37361000 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MISCELLANEOUS $82.89 invoice 37325400 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CREDIT-MISCELLANEOUS -$6.30 Invoice 37329400 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MISCELLANEOUS $156~00 Invoice 37284200 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CREDIT-MISCELLANEOUS -$30.84 Invoice 37276100 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,188.00 Invoice 27019600 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $950.75 Invoice 27038500 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT-LIQUOR -$330.00 Invoice 26974700 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,586.25 Invoice 26962600 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,378,30 invoice 26923600 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,736.78 Invoice 26866500 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,915.99 Refer 81203 BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC. Cash Payment E 609-49750-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $24,42 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment E 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 MAIN STREET ONE CAN $20.39 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment E 101-45200-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $306.40 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment 1~ 101-43100-384 Refuse/Garbage DispoS 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $31.66 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment E 601-49400-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $31.66 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment E 602-49450-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $31,67 Invoice 030700 Cash Payment E 222-42260-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $67.01 Invoice 030700 3O9O CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 3 Current Period: August 2003 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $513.21 Refer 81203 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUP Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities TRAFFIC BULBS $6.68 Invoice 93121728 PO 17905 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6.68 Refer 81203 BOSMA, BOB Cash Payment' E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training TOW TRUCK TO SALVAGE $100.00 invoice 280652 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $100.00 Refer 81203 BRENSHELI._/FINE LINE DESIGNS Cash Paymen( G 101-22905 4600 Islandview Landscaping REFUND ESCROW LANDSCAPE $5,000.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,000.00 Refer 81203 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials 3/4 MINUS (CL 2) $353.08 invoice 10196 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $353.08 Refer 81203 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS ash Payment E 401-43110-300 Professional Srvs #4 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Refer 81203 CARQUESTOFNAVARRE THRU 07-18-03 REQUEST #4 $22,230,89 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $22,230.89 Cash Payment E 101-45200-409 Other Equipment Repair FUSE $3.02 Invoice N14779 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3.02 Refer 81203 CENTERPOINT ENERGY (MINNEG Cash Payment E 609-49750-383 Gas Utilities 06-17-03 THRU 07-21-03 SERVICES $15.98 invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $15.98 Refer 81203 CHADWICK AND MERTZ Cash Payment E 101-41600~304 Legal Fees 07-03 PROSECUTION SERVICES $6,185.70 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $6,185.70 Refer 81203 CHAMPION AUTO Cash Payment E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery OIL FILTERS $4.24 Invoice D208271 Cash Payment E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery BLADES $59.60 invoice D208218 Cash Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply OIL FILTERS $1.90 Invoice D208271 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies COIL $11.70 ~voice D207830 ~nsaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $77.44 Refer 81203 CLASSIFIEDS, ROUNDUP, LAKER, 3091 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 4 Current Period: August 2003 :' ~ ~:~ : : :'~, ~:~!~ :~ ~':~' :~ : ~. · ~.1' '~ '.,: ~ · ~ ~ ,~ ,~:.~ ~, ,,, - .... Cash Payment E 609~9750-328 Employment Adve~ising 05-29-03 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING $115.43 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101~3100-328 Employment Adve~ising 06-05-03 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING $316.40 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 601~9400-328 Employment Adve~ising 06-05-03 EMPLOYMENTADVERTIStNG $316.40 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 602~9450-328 Employment AdveKising 06-05-03 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING $316.40 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 401~6540-300 Professional S~s 07-05-03 SEALED BIDS $64.80 Invoice 25678 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,129.43 Refer 81203 COCA CO~ BO~LING-MIDWEST Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $304.00 Invoice 61384222 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $304.00 Refer 81203 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $32.00 Invoice 228582 Cash Payment E 609~9750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,382.55 Invoice 228472 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,447.75 invoice 22760~ Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,862.30 R;~e; 81203 ~Mj C~R~i~'~ Cash Payment E 675~25-300 Professional S~s PAVING SWENSON PARK $14,997,00 Invoice 6239 PO 17773 Transaction Date 7/28/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $14,997.00 Cash Payment E 60949750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $41.60 Invoice 433563 Cash Payment E 609~9750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,903.55 Invoice 433562 Cash Payment E 609~9750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,216.65 Invoice 430393 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $12.10 Invoice 427168 Cash Payment E 609~9750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $9,644.80 Invoice 427167 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $148.00 Invoice 40054 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $13,966.70 Refer 81203 EQUIPMENT SUPPL Y, INCORPOR Cash Payment E 101-41910401 Repairs/Maint Buildings 07-01-03THRU 09-30-03 MAINTENANCE $944.00 Invoice s258~1703 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $944.00 ~e;;; 8i~03 EXTREM~ ~E~A~ 3092 CITY OF MOUND Payments 06107103 9:14 AM Page 5 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $32.00 Invoice 137780 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $32.00 Refer 81203 FARMINGTON, CITY OF Cash Payment E 101-41500-434 Conference & Training 09-17-03 REGISTRATION $200.00 Invoice 081203 PO 17951 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $200.00 Refer 81203 FIRE CHIEFS, INTNAL ASSOCIA TI Cash Payment E 222-42260-433 Dues and Subscriptions ANDERSON, JEFF MEMBERSHIP $170.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $170.00 Refer 81203 G & K SERVICES Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 633415 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms invoice 633415 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 633415 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials ~voice 633415 Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials Invoice 633415 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials Invoice 633415 Cash Payment E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services Invoice 640162 Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 90057512 Cash Payment E 601.49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 90057512 Cash Payment E 602.49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms Invoice 90057512 Cash Payment Invoice 646823 Cash Payment invoice 646823 Cash Payment Invoice 646823 Cash Payment Invoice 646823 Cash Payment Invoice 646823 Cash Payment Invoice 646823 ash Payment 654482 Cash Payment Invoice 653483 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 E 222-42260-216 Cleaning Supplies 07-15-03 UNIFORMS $23.44 07-15-03 UNIFORMS $23.44 07-15-03 UNIFORMS $23.44 07-15-03 MATS $28.35 07-15-03 MATS $28.35 07-15-03 MATS $28.35 07-22-03 MATS $30.98 RAIN OVERALLS $18.62 RAIN OVERALLS $18.62 RAIN OVERALLS $18.62 07-28-03 UNIFORMS $28.64 07-28-03 UNIFORMS $28.64 07-28-03 UNIFORMS $28.64 07-18-03 MATS $23.15 07-18-30 MATS $23.15 07-18-03 MATS $23.15 08-05-03 MATS $54.42 $16.86 E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 08-05-03 MATS 3093 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 6 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 08-05-03 MATS $59.57 Invoice 653484 Cash Payment 08-05-03 MATS $50.14 invoice 653480 Cash Payment 07-22-03 UNIFORMS $26.91 Invoice 640163 Cash Payment 07-22-03 UNIFORMS $26.91 Invoice 840163 Cash Payment 07-22-03 UNIFORMS $26.90 Invoice 640163 Cash Payment 07-22-03 MATS $33.32 Invoice 640163 Cash Payment 07-22-03 MATS $33.32 Invoice 640163 Cash Payment 07-22-03 MATS $32.32 Invoice 640163 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 07-22-03 MATS $58.92 Invoice 640165 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 07-22-03 MATS $81.11 invoice 640166 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $898.28 Cash Payment E 101-43100-210 Operating Supplies 07-03 WATER #5158502 $7.00 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies 07-03 WATER #5158502 $7.00 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 602-49450-210 Operating Supplies 07-03 WATER #5158502 $7.00 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-42110-210 Operating Supplies 07-03 WATER #5158500 $83.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $104.00 Refer 81203 GOODYEAR TIRES Cash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery TIRES $420.00 Invoice 089126 PO 17831 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $420.00 E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 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 Refer 81203 GRAPE BEGINNINGS, INCORPOR Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE invoice 56650 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total Refer 81203 GRIGGS COOPER AND COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Invoice 617691 Cash Payment Invoice 617629 Cash Payment invoice 617183 Cash Payment Invoice 617082 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale $2,146.00 $2,146.00 CREDIT-LIQUOR -$14.26 CREDIT-LIQUOR -$12.34 CREDIT-WiNE -$8.50 CREDIT-LIQUOR -$80.60 3O94 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 7 Cash Payment LIQUOR $757.05 Invoice 751344 Cash Payment BEER $167.50 Invoice 751343 Cash Payment WINE $1,814.10 Invoice 751341 Cash Payment WINE $288.25 Invoice 751133 Cash Payment WINE $239.76 Invoice 751342 Cash Payment LIQUOR $421.80 Invoice 750253 Cash Payment WINE $2,874.95 Invoice 748209 Cash Payment WINE $1,016.72 Invoice 748207 Cash Payment WINE $227.08 Invoice 745081 Cash Payment LIQUOR $3,089.75 Invoice 745080 ash Payment LIQUOR $1,477.57 741914 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $12,258.83 Refer 81203 HATCH, JIM SALES COMPAY Cash Payment E 101.43100-220 RepaidMaint Supply CONVERSION KIT $76.95 invoice 4913 Transaction Date 8~6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $76.95 Refer 81203 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMA TIO Cash Payment E 222-42260-418 Other Rentals 06-03 RADIO LEASE $580.98 Invoice 23068018 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $580.98 E 609.49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale Refer 81203 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S A Cash Payment E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners 06-03 BOOKING FEE $816.69 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $816.69 Refer 81203 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASUR (R Cash Payment E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners 06-03 ROOM AND BOARD $1,660.25 Invoice 000067 Transaction Date 7/24/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,660.25 Refer 81203 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER( Cash Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies MAIL LABELS $40.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $40.00 81203 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs PENALTY 1ST HALF TAX $84.87 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $84,87 3095 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM PaGe 8 Current Period: August 2003 Refer 81203 HOHENSTEINS, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 309936 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo Refer 81203 IKON OFFICE MACHINES Cash Payment E 101-43100-202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 23836497 Cash Payment E 601-49400-202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 23836497 Cash Payment E 602-49450-202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 23836497 Cash Payment E 101-42110-202 Duplicating and copying Invoice 23847470 $292.00 10100 Total $292.00 07-12-03 THRU 10-12-03 COPIER MAINTENANCE $36.41 07-12-03THRU10-12-03COPIER MAINTENANCE $36.41 07-12-03 THRU 10-12-03 COPIER MAINTENANCE $36.41 07-24-03 THRU 08-24-03 $137.69 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $246.92 Refer 81203 INSITUFORM TECHNOLOGIES US Cash Payment G 602-16325 Distribution System LINER $t4,495.00 Invoice 20041 Transaction Date 8~6~2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $14 495.00 Refer 81203 ISLAND PARK SK~L~Y Cash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery CHANGE OIL $25.86 Invoice 13781 Cash Payment $32.00 Invoice 13890 Cash Payment $21.00 Invoice 13926 Cash Payment $27.45 Invoice 13946 Cash Payment $32.00 Invoice 13986 Cash Payment $0.00 Invoice 13781 Cash Payment $279.25 Invoice 13840 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Tota $417.56 Refer 81203 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery MOUNT/BALANCE TIRE E 101-42110-404 Repairs'/Maint Machinery WHEEL ROTATION E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery CHANGE OIL E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery MOUNT/BALANCE TIRES E 101-41110-102 F T Empl Over[ime AUTOMOTIVE REPAIRS E 101--4-5200-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery TRANSMISSION FLUSH/FILL CREDIT-WINE Invoice 227556 ~$14.64 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$20.80 Invoice 227555 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$59.94 Invoice 227554 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$33,10 Invoice 226869 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa CREDIT-MIX -$30.65 Invoice 226324 3O96 CITY OF MOUND Payments 06/07/03 9:14 AM Page 9 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $366.25 Invoice 1592324 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $0,O0 Invoice 1592323 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,854.52 Invoice 1592322 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,710.25 Invoice 1592321 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,059.00 Invoice 1589020 Cash Payment WINE $488.37 Invoice 1589019 Cash Payment LIQUOR $2,549.88 invoice 1589018 Cash Payment WINE $87.32 Invoice 1586267 Cash Payment WINE $592.75 Invoice 1586266 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $618.10 Invoice 1586265 ~ll[ansaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9,187.31 Wefer 81203 JUBILEE FOODS _ Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous 07-24-03 COUNCIL COOKIES $49.47 E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-43100-328 Employment Advertising 07-29-03 INTERVIEWS $22.94 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 601-49400-328 Employment Advertising 07-29-03 INTERVIEWS $22.94 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 602-49450-328 Employment Advertising 07-29-03 INTERVIEWS $22,94 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous 06-02-03 COUNCIL COOKIES $37.98 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous 07-01-03 COUNCIL COOKIES $15.56 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous 07-31-03 EE APPRECIATION $13.75 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/28/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $185.58 Refer 81203 KORTERRA UTILITY INDUSTRY AP Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One-Call FAX MODEM $50.59 invoice 9815899 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One-Call FAX MODEM $50.59 Invoice 9815899 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $101,18 Refer 81203 LAKE MINNETONKA COMM. COM :ash Payment E 101-49840-300 Professional Srvs 04-10-03 THRU 06-30-03 ACCESS FEE $10,887.10 ,ice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $10,887.10 Refer 81203 LAKE MINNETONKA CONVERSATI 3097 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 10 Cash Payment Invoice 061403 Cash Payment Invoice 00X7 Cash Payment Invoice 00X6 Cash Payment Invoice 00X7 Cash Payment Invoice 00X8 Transaction Date Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 101-41110-433 Dues and Subscriptions 3DRD QTR LEVY PAYMENT $4,948.30 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,948.30 Cash Paymen~ E 222~2260~34 Conference & Training FIRE SCHOOL 2003 DULUTH MYERS $1 ~0,00 Invoice 2002298 Cash Paymen~ E 222~2260~34 Conference & Training FIRE SCHOOL 2003 DULUTH ~RSON $110.00 Invoice 2002298 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $220.00 Refer 81203 ~KER NEWSPAPER Cash Payment E 101~1110-351 Legal Notices Publishing 07-19-03 ORD 04-2003 Invoice 709 Cash Paymen~ E 101-41110-351 Legal Notices Publishing 08-02-03 ORDINANCE Invoice 726 Transaction Date 7/24/2003 Refer 81203 ~KE~PIONEER NEWSPAPER E 609~9750-340 Advedising E 609-49750-340 Advertising E 609-49750-340 Advertising E 609-49750-340 Advertising E 609-49750-340 Advertising Wells Fargo 06-14-03 INSERTS 07-19-03 DISPLAY AD 07-05-03 INSERTS 07-05-03 OPEN UNTIL 10 08-03 SALES 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo Refer 81203 LEAGUE MN CITIES INSURANCE T Cash Payment E 101-41110-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE $111.44 $103.48 10100 Total $214.92 $273.00 $273.0O $331.50 $372.O0 $331.50 10100 Total $1,581.00 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 Cash Payment Invoice 081203 E 101-41310-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 101-41500-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 101-42110-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 101-42400-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 101-43100-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 101-45200-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 222-42260-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 609-49750-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE E 601-49400-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE $27,00 $21,75 $60.00 $699.70 $70.50 $262.48 $60.75 $1,737.85 $251.23 $361.48 3098 CiTY OF MOUND Payments 08107103 9:14 AM Page 11 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 602-49450-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP iNSURANCE $533.96 invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 281-45210-151 Worker's Comp Insuranc WORKERS COMP INSURANCE $76.50 Invoice 081203 Transact on Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $4,163.00 Refer 81203 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts FILTERS $61.81 Invoice 048530 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $61.81 Refer 81203 LOVAAS, KRIS Cash Payment G 101-22935 2305 Norwood Ln, #03-23'Va REIMBURSE ESCROW $448.50 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $448.50 Refer 81203 MARIETTA, MARTIN AGGREGA TE Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials BULK #2 $666.48 Invoice 8842463 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $666.48 Refer 81203 MARK VII DISTRIBUTOR ;ash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $74.40 542829-B Cash Payment E 609-49750-252.Beer For Resale CREDIT-BEER -$25.00 Invoice 213 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale CREDIT-BEER -$8.80 Invoice 555923-B Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $84.00 Invoice 566256 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $52.50 Invoice 566255 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,104.40 Invoice 566254 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $3,100.65 Invoice 566253 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $0.03 Invoice 566252 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale CREDIT-BEER -$100.00 Invoice 563644-B Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $7,464.25 Invoice 564644 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $32,00 Invoice 563645 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $45.00 Invoice 562199 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $12,823.43 81203 MARLIN'S TRUCKING DELIVERY Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 06-07-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $24.30 Invoice 12911 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-03-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $92,70 invoice 12903 3O99 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 12 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-10-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $233.10 Invoice 12911 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-14-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $14.40 Invoice 12944 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-17-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $144.90 Invoice 12965 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-21-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $10.80 Invoice 12973 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-24-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $198.00 Invoice 12996 Cash Payment E 609-49750-265 Freight 07-31-03 DELIVERY CHARGE $173.70 Invoice 33 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 ~. Wells Fargo 10100 Total $891 90 Cash Payment E 101-42110-219 Safety supplies ADAPTER OTULET $20.42 Invoice 822562 PO 16734 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 ..... Wells Fargo 10100 Total $20.42 t~ef~r ~i2~3 Cash Payment E 101-43100-300 Professional Srvs 04-03 BALANCE DUE $30.00 Invoice 43488-B Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $30.00 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies MOUNTING PLATES $115.20 Invoice 13711 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 ......... Wells Fargo 10100 Total $115 20 Cash Payment E 101-43100-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA COMPUTER FOR SIGNS $796.07 Invoice 609 PO 17906 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $796.07 Cash Payment E 101-42110-210 Operating Supplies INK JET LABELS $536.65 Invoice 39135 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $536.65 Refer 81203 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MAINTENA Cash Payment E 609-49750-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings Invoice 713006653 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Refer 81203 MINNESOTA PLAYGROUND,/NCO 06-16-03 WINDOW WASHING Wells Fargo 10100 $37,28 Total $37.28 Cash Payment E 101-45200-221 Equipment Parts SPIRAL SLIDE SECTION Invoice 691453 Transaction Date 8/4/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 $198.97 Total $198.97 Refer 81203 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LA Cash Payment E 601-49400-470 Water Samples COLIFORM, MF - WATER $72.50 Invoice 174882 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 ., ~ ,~ Wells Fargo 10100 Total $72 50 3100 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 13 Current Period: August 2003 .i. ~;~ ;~L:~,~,"h',~: ~,..~;, ~:,:~L;,~ :~;:;: '~ ~.! ,',,, 'd;~,~, ~h,;,~,. ,:i'~ ;~: ~',~:~"¢~!~,'-~:' '...~i!~. ~-~-,~, '~ ',:',~-'~;,:,7- ~!,:'~;, ,, :,' ~:~,~' '~,~:~',,~:~,~ ?~;;;~:' ';~;"~;~,~:~:~ Cash Payment E 222-42260-180 Fire-Drill Pay 06-03 DRILLS $977.00 invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 222-42260-185 Fire-Maintenance Pay 06-03 MAINTENANCE $510.00 invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 222-42260-190 Fire-Monthly Salaries 06-03 SALARIES $9,533.25 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $11,020.25 Refer 81203 MOUND FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIA TIO Cash Payment E 895-49990-124 Fire Pens Contrib 07-03 FIRE RELIEF $9,361.66 invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8~7~2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $9,361.66 Refer 81203 MUELLER, WILLIAM AND SONS Cash Payment E 101-45200-232 Landscape Material 06-19-03 CONCRETE $357.63 Invoice 79864 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $357.83 Refer 81203 MUZAK- MINNEAPOLIS Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-03 MUSIC SERVICES $92.90 Invoice A391779 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $92.90 Cash Payment E601-49400-220~y CURB BOX, REAPIR CPLG $343.37 Invoice 9550693 Transaction Date 8/612003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $343.37 Refer 81203 NEWMAN SIGNS Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials SHEETED BLANK $1,363.20 Invoice T1-0108707 Cash Payment E 101-43100-226 Sign Repair Materials STOP SIGNS $412.37 Invoice T1-0108747 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,775.57 Refer 81203 NORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPP Cash Payment E 601-49400-221 Equipment Parts METER BOARD, CABLE $302.40 Invoice 3179780 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $302.40 Refer 81203 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INCORPO Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One-Call 06-03 LOCATES $223.20 Invoice 3060535 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One-Call 06-03 LOCATES $223.20 Invoice 3060535 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $446.40 Refer 81203 PAUSTIS AND SONS WINE COMPA Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $216.00 Invoice 8011638 ;ash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $968.00 8011264 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$40.00 Invoice 8011253 3101 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07~03 9:14 AM Page 14 Current Period: August 2003 i~ ~:~;~:ii~J:~i~~;~i~.!~~~?~?;~ :;.~.:~!~i.~' ~i'l~i~!i .~~~ ~ Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $1,136.13 Invoice 8011159 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale LIQUOR $19.95 invoice 8010658 Cash Payment E 809-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $890.49 Invoice 8010657 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$240.00 invoice 8010532 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $240.O0 Invoice 8010363 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,190.57 Refer 81203 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise Fo~ R MIX $179.04 invoice 46076861 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $179.04 Refer 81203 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE -$6.O0 Invoice 328039 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE -$24.00 Invoice 3283038 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$1,241.40 Invoice 3282454 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$146.98 Invoice 3282464 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $199.75 Invoice 974082 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $84.15 Invoice 974081 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $104.25 Invoice 971713 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $951.00 Invoice 971712 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,628.60 Invoice 971711 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $50.00 Invoice 969533 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $2,370.12 Invoice 969532 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $3,969.49 Refer 81203 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES $569.25 Invoice 22706 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES $691.98 Invoice 22144 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES $387.64 Invoice 21621 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,648.87 Refer 81203 PLUNKET'I"S, INCORPORATED 31 O2 CITY OF MOUND Payments 00107103 9:14 AM Pag~ 15 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 101-41910-440 Other Contractual Servic JUL,AUG,SEPT, PEST CONTROL $95.84 Invoice 903259 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $95.64 Refer 81203 POLICE CHAPLAINS INTERNATIO Cash Payment G 101-22803 Police Reserves 2003 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP $100.00 Invoice 8363 PO 17824 Transaction Date 7/30/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $100.00 Refer 81203 PROTECTION ONE Cash Payment E 101-41910-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-01-03 THRU 10-31-03 $142.80 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $142.80 Refer 81203 PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT COM Cash Payment E 101-42110-409 Other Equipment Repair CALIBRATE RADAR UNITS $285.00 Invoice 8403 PO 17829 Transaction Date 7/30/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $285.00 Refer 81203 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE Invoice 285821-00 ash Payment E 290496-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 290050-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 289992-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 287999-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 287632-00 Cash Payment E invoice 287115-00 Cash Payment E Invoice 287114-00 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 2804565-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 284564-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 284999-00 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo -$52.00 $1,111.65 $49.34 $3,613.91 $110.65 $1,687.49 $1,596.81 $68.86 $1,678.27 $27.00 $921.79 10100 Total $10,813.77 Refer 81203 R & S COLLISION SERVICES,/NCO Cash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery REPAIR SQUAD #842 $727.21 Invoice 7855 PO 17833 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $727,21 81203 RAND Y"S SANITA TA TION Payment E 101-41910-384 Refuse/Garbage Dispos 07-03 GARBAGE SERVICE $114.54 Invoice 1752 Transaction Date 7/24/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $114,54 31 O3 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 16 Current Period: August 2003 iii!,';: ?i~ ~ :i .. ;' ~: .i '!iii ;~i~i!~!!~: ~i : :~:: ~i i: :;::;' ::~'::i~ : ~ :' : '~: : :~: ;,: :::~,' ~ '~, i :! ~.~ ?!~i:~? ~, :.~: ~i; ::~i. :' ! !. ~, ~ ~ ~'~!i 'i; ~:;: ~: Refer 81203 REED BUSINESS INFORMATION Cash Payment E 401-46540-300 Professional Srvs 07-11-03 LOST LAKE GREENWAY $322.14 invoice 2374269 Cash Payment E 401-46540-300 Professional Srvs 07-18-03 LOST LAKE GREENWAY $322.14 invoice 2376896 Transaction Date 7130/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $644.28 Refer 81203 ROTARY CLUB OF MOUND Cash Payment E 101-42110-331 Use of personal auto JAN THRU JUNE 2003 DUES $347.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $347.00 Refer 81203 SCHARBER AND SONS Cash Payment E 101-45200-400 Repairs & Maint Contract REPLACE CLUTCH $424.06 invoice 4691 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $424.06 Refer 81203 SENTRY SYSTEMS, INCORPORA T Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-03 BURGLARY SYSTEM $20.18 Invoice 324222 Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-03 FIRE SYSTEM $23.38 Invoice 324222 Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-03 ANNUAL FIRE TEST/INSPECTION $10.65 Invoice 324222 Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 08-03 SUPERVISED O/C'S REPORTS $10.65 invoice 324222 Transaction Date 7/29/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $64.86 Refer 81203 SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE Cash Payment E 101-45200-533 Tree Removal 4991 BRIGHTON REMOVE TREE $1,331.25 Invoice 4627 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,331.25 Refer 81203 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, I Cash Payment E 496.46580-300 Professional Srvs 06-03 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $5,228.32 Invoice 0103161 Transaction Date 7/24/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5,228.32 Refer 81203 SOS PRINTING Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising 08-03 FLYERS . $272.53 Invoice 64806 Transaction Date 7/3112003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $272.53 Refer 81203 SOUTHWEST TRAILS ASSOCIATIO Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow 06-03-03 PAYMENT $19,531.95 invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/2112003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $19,531.95 Refer 71203 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT, INCORP Cash.Payment E 101-43100-220 RepaidMaint Supply ELEMENTAND FILTER $57.21 Invoice SI20644 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $57,21 Refer 81203 STREICHER'S 31 O4 CITY OF r 0UND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 17 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment G 101-22803 Police Reserves INITIAL ISSUE RICHARDSON $280.84 Invoice 378589.1 PO 17827 Cash Payment E 101-42110-500 Capital Outlay (GENERA SQUAD BUILD UP $1,197.75 Invoice 380361.1 Cash Payment E 101-42110-101 F T Empl Regular INITIAL ISSUE RICHARDSON $0.00 Invoice 378589.1 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,478.59 Refer 81203 STS CONSULTANTS Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs THRU 07-18-03 MAXWELL PROPERTY $1,038.00 invoice 246259 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,038.00 Refer 81203 TAPES PLUS ADVERTISING Cash Payment E 609-49750-340 Advertising JULY-OCTOBER 2003 ADVERTISING $250.00 Invoice TP22008 Transaction Date 7/31t2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $250 00 Refer 81203 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $68.00 invoice 305527 Cash Payment BEER $9,683.05 voice 305222 ~yment BEER $3,074.85 invoice 304427 Cash Payment BEER $118.75 invoice 304426 Cash Pay?nent BEER $810.00 invoice 303695 Cash Payment BEER $5,523.60 Invoice 303694 Cash Payment BEER $26.30 Invoice 303693 Cash Payment BEER $9,665.50 Invoice 305222 Cash Payment BEER $137,95 Invoice 305221 Cash Payment BEER $256.50 Invoice 264208 Cash Payment BEER $532.00 invoice 263740 Cash Payment BEER $305.00 Invoice 263245 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $30,201.50 Refer 81203 '7~Rb~'~AL~, ~'0'b~ Cash Payment E 101-45200-232 Landscape Material 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $63,88 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 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 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 081203 ~sh Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $19.21 081203 Cash Payment E 609-49750-210 Operating Supplies 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $14.78 Invoice 081203 3105 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 18 Current Period: August 2003 Cash Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $19.76 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $63.77 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $6t.23 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $86.17 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 101-41910-220 Repair/Maint Supply 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $8.71 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $156.44 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $706.51 Invoice 081203 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Cells 06-03 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $65.67 invoice 081203 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,266.13 Refer 81203 TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY Cash Payment E 281-45210-200 Office Supplies INK JET CARTRIDGE $65,92 Invoice 393622-0 Cash Payment E 281-45210-200 Office Supplies HANGING FOLDERS $14.54 Invoice 394032-0 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies HANGING FOLDERS $29.08 invoice 394032-0 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies HANGING FOLDERS $29.08 invoice 394032-0 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies REFILL $3.29 Invoice 394429-0 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies BINDERS $45.51 Invoice 394056-0 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies INK JET CARTRIDGE $129.48 Invoice 393899-0 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies KEYBOARD DRAWER $81.54 Invoice 389344-0 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies INK JET CARTRIDGE $107.03 Invoice 395163-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies RECEIPT BOOKS $61.74 Invoice 395068-0 PO 17835 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies CREDIT-INK JET CARTRIGDE -$63,88 Invoice 387914-0 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $503.33 Refer 81203 UNIFORMS LIMITED Cash Payment G 101-22803 Police Reserves INITIAL ISSUE RICHARDSON $311.10 Invoice 184838 PO 17828 Transaction Date 7/31/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $311.10 Refer 81203 VANECEK, EDWARD Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training REIMBURSE FIREFIGHTER TEST $50.00 Invoice 081203 3106 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07/03 9:14 AM Page 19 Transaction Date 7/21/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $50.00 Refer 81203 WALDRON, PAUL A. AND ASSOCIA Cash Payment E 101-42110-300 Professional Srvs 07-03 BULLING INSPECTIONS $580.00 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/6/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $580.00 Refer 81203 WIDMER, INCORPORATED Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 06-02-03 REPLACE STAND PIPES $652.50 Invoice 6117 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 06-11-03 REPLACE STAND PIPES $290.00 Invoice 6118 Cash Payment E 601-49400-400 Repairs & Maint Contract 06-06-03 REPLACE CURB STOPS $435.00 Invoice 6116 Transaction Date 7/2112003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,377.50 Refer 81203 WINE COMPANY Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $959.40 Invoice 9145-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $294.05 Invoice 4574-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$35.34 8607-00 Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $582.58 Invoice 8563-00 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $1,800,69 Refer 81203 WINE MERCHANTS Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $900,00 invoice 78372 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $978.50 Invoice 77692 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $135.00 Invoice 75477 Transaction Date 8/7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $2 013.50 Refer 81203 WORLD CLASS WINES, INCORPO Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $908.75 Invoice 138034 Transaction Date 8~7/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $908.75 Refer 81203 XCEL ENERGY Cash Payment E 101-43100-381 Electric Utilities 07-03 #0542-505-000-001 $5,188.97 Invoice 081203 Transaction Date 8/5/2003 Wells Fargo 10100 Total $5 188.97 3107 CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/07~03 9:14 AM Page 20 Current Period: August 2003 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 496 HRA PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND 895 FIRE RELIEF FUND 10100 Wells Fargo $73,495.72 $15,077.67 $156.96 $22,939.97 $5,228.32 $2,828.77 $17,174.59 $122,940.97 $15,081.87 $9,361.66 $284,286.50 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $284,286.5O $284,286.50 3108 5341 Mayxvood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-319(I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: July 29, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request - sign size / front setback OWNER: Gillespie Foundation / Westonka Senior Foundation CASE NUMBER: 03-32 LOCATION: 2590 Commerce Boulevard ZONING: B-1 Business COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Linear BACKGROUND At its June 16, 2003 and August 5, 2003 meetings, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance(s) application submitted by the Gillespie Foundation to allow installation of a 64 SF freestanding sign along the east side of Commerce Boulevard which includes an electronic changeable message board for the purpose of providing public information. According to the City Code, freestanding signs are permitted in the B-I District but are limited to no more than (25) feet in height and 48 SF and must be located at least (10) feet fi'om the property line. The Planning Commission tabled the application and requested that the applicant consider an alternate design to decrease the square footage of the sign by removing the address portion of the sign as it does not count towards the square footage allowance The requested variance(s) are described as follows: Required/Allowed Requested Variance Sign size 48 64 16 Front setback I0 feet 0 feet 10 feet PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the project are contained in Planning Report No. 03-32 and Addendum Report and the June 16, 2003 and August 4, 2003 meeting minute excerpts which have been included as attachments. 3109 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the variance application as requested. A dra~ resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included as an attachment. 3110 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 03- A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SIGN SIZE VARIANCE AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF A FREESTANDING SIGN AT THE GILLESPIE CENTER LOCATED AT 2590 COMMERCE BOULEVARD P & Z CASE # 03-32 PID NO. 23-117-24-14-0138 WHEREAS, the applicant, the Gillespie Center / Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation, has requested the following variances to allow installation ora freestanding sign with changeable message board at 2590 Commerce Boulevard: Required / Allowed Requested Variance Sign size 48 SF 64 SF 16 SF Front setback 10 FT 0 10 FT ; and WHEREAS, public buildings are permitted uses in the B-1 District; and WHEREAS, signs are regulated in City Code Chapter 365 and freestanding signs are allowed as long as they do not exceed 48 square feet and are located a minimum of 10 feet from the property line; and WHEREAS, the property presently includes a public building which was con.structed in 2000-2001 which is owned by the Westonka Senior Foundation and primarily used by the senior citizens; and 3111 WHEREAS, the Gillespie Center is proposing to install a freestanding sign which would include a changeable message board for the purpose of advertising events and providing public information; and WHEREAS, the Gillespie Center is also requesting a sign variance of 16 SF to allow the placement of tenant boards which could be used by businesses and/or organizations which may lease space in the Center in the future; and WHEREAS, as the Gillespie Center is used primarily by senior citizens it is important that the freestanding sign includes adequately-sized letters which are prominently displayed and illuminated so that they may be easily seen by their customers; and WHEREAS, the sign has been well designed and will compliment the Gillespie building; and WHEREAS, the existing wall signage on the Gillespie building is well designed but may be difficult to be seen from the road entrance; and WHEREAS, strict application of the front setback standard of 10-feet places the freestanding sign in the parking lot and one (1) parking stall is lost; and WHEREAS, placement of the sign on the property line is more aesthetically pleasing; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Gillespie Center have indicated that a parking shortage already exists and the loss of a parking stall exacerbates this problem; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at its August 4, 2003 meeting and recommended approval of the variance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant the requested variances subject to the following conditions: a. The freestanding sign is moved further north so as to establish an appropriate sight triangle. b. A building permit application shall be submitted including all required information. 2. This variance is approved for the following legally described property in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lot 1, Block 1, Gillespie Addition 3112 This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to M.S.S. 462.36, Subd. 1. This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying for all costs for such recording. 'A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. 5. The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd 2 (E). 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 August 12, 2003 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 3113 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2003 Planning Case No. 03-32 Variance - Freestanding Sign 2590 Commerce Boulevard The Gillespie Foundation / Westonka Senior Center Michaels opted to step down from the Planning Commission during the discussion of Planning Case No. 03-32 so as to avoid a conflict of interest. Smith provided an overview of the case. The Gillespie Center has submitted a variance request to allow installation ora freestanding sign which will include a changeable message board. City Code allows for a freestanding sign not to exceed 48 SF in the B-1 District and the Gillespie Center is proposing a 64 SF sign. She indicated that the variance was reviewed by the Commission at its June 16, 2003 meeting but was tabled so as to allow the applicants time to consider a modification(s) to sign to remove the address portion from the sign as it appears the sign without the address board may be able to meet the 48 SF size allowance. Smith commented that the Gillespie Center has indicated that they wish for the original design to be advanced as they wish to maintain the address board on the sign and further commented that they prefer the information to be illuminated. Smith also commented that since the June 16, 2003 meeting, an additional issue has been raised regarding the placement of the sign due to the extra ROW dedication which occurred when the Gillespie Addition was platted. The City Code requires a I O-foot setback for freestanding sign. If the sign is placed at the minimum setback line, it will be located in the parking lot and one stall will be lost. Smith also commented that Staff did not offer a recommendation regarding the sign variance. Mueller asked if Staff'or the applicant could clarify the width of the sign. Mueller asked about the timeline for processing of the variance. Smith indicated that the 60-day extension was executed last week. Dave Anderson, sign representative for the Gillespie Center, explained that they are requesting a variance to place the sign same on the western property line of the Gillespie Center which fronts Commerce Boulevard. He further commented that the sign is approximately 40 inches in width. 3114 Anderson commented that the seniors don't want to put the sign in the parking lot and noted that it will be better placed in the green area on the "rise." Anderson further commented that the purpose for the additional sign size is to accommodate tenants to raise revenue for the Gillespie Center and stated that the tenant board adds about 15 SF to the size of the structure. He also commented that the reason the Gillespie is unwilling to remove the address from the sign is because the Center's primary users are seniors and they don't want the center to be missed. Osmek asked about moving the address numbers on to the pylon and indicated that if the space is taken out the sign is probably close to the B-1 size requirements. He questioned why this option wasn't more seriously considered. Jerry Henke of the Gillespie Center indicated that they spoke with the Fire Chief and indicated that a lighted sign will be of great assistance to emergency response personnel. Sharon Cook of the Gillespie Center also indicated that the address component on the sign is a benefit to possible renters and will also help visitors find the Center. Osmek noted that "The Gillespie Center" will be prominently displayed on the sign. Cook mentioned that the Foundation indicated that it is important that the sign be illuminated. Mueller indicated that no one wants to see the Center fail. However, as soon as th.e tenant boards are added, it becomes less ora public building and more of a retail center. The portion of the sign that puts it over the sign requirements is the tenant board and further commented that the commercial aspect of the project makes him a bit uneasy. Mueller asked if lighting of the address signage on the pylon could be accommodated and indicated that this alternative would be more comfortable for him. Cook confirmed that Mueller doesn't appear to be opposed to the tenant board but would prefer that the sign meet the code regulations. Mueller commented that relocation of the address to the pylon would .bring the project closer to conformity. Cook commented that it is likely that the business which will take the space will be non-profit. Anderson noted that the address (2590) could be lit on the pylon. Cook noted that the loss ora parking stall for a sign seems illogical and that they are desiring to buy more land. Ayaz noted that a sign in the parking lot does not make sense and that he is comfortable with the location of the structure at the setback line. 3115 Glister noted that loss of a parking stall is a hardship and if the 2590 portion can be lit in another location it seems like a reasonable plan. Clapsaddle noted that placement of a sign in the parking lot may create maintenance issues and further commented that location of the 2590 portion further down may be beneficial due to vehicle sight issues. Anderson requested clarification that the 2590 portion would not be COunted in the size. Mueller verified that the address portion would not be counted if it was removed or relocated. Osmek noted that he believes that a variance may still be necessary as removal of the address portion will still make the sign over by approximately (6) square feet. He commented if the sign is non-conforming it is non-conforming. Clapsaddle stated that less non-conformity is better than more nonconformity. Raines indicated that he believes the sign is very tasteful and he is comfortable with the current submittal. Ayaz indicated that the sign is well designed and very balanced and commented that they should get the variance they applied for. Mueller indicated that he has concerns about the sight distance but commented that the sign should be shifted further north to maintain an appropriate sight triangle. Osmek noted that there is a utility pole a bit further north which would help provide additional light. Meuller noted that the Gillespie is a wonderful organization and he is thrilled that it is doing so well. He commented, however, that if we are granting a variance because of high level of design we should be doing it for other commercial operations as well. Osmek noted the MetroPlains sign and the reasons the City approved the variance. Mueller noted that the new shopping center includes businesses on two streets. Clapsaddle indicated that if you trim off the top it is going to become a "less attractive sign" and he is almost certain that a sign could be developed within the code. He further commented that when it comes to sign ordinances, he has been involved with cities who have established new ordinances and often problems with the code are not attributed to new signs but the existing ones which were grandfathered in. He commented that we are at an early stage of what he believes is a significant growth pattern and commented that others will likely be coming in for sign variances. 3116 MOTION by Raines, seconded by Osmek, to approve the variance request(s) as submitted by the Gillespie Center to allow installation ora 64 SF freestanding sign with a zero (0) foot front setback subject to the following condition: The sign is moved further north as discussed and presented at the meeting to establish an appropriate sight triangle. Voting in favor: Raines, Osmek, Hasse, Ayaz. Voting against: Commissioners Clapsaddle, Glister and Mueller. Motioned carried 4 to 3. Chair Michaels returned to podium to chair the meeting after this item. 3117 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 PLANNING REPORT - ADDENDUM # 1 TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: July 29, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request - sign size / front setback OWNER: Gillespie Foundation / Westonka Senior Foundation CASE NUMBER: 03-32 LOCATION: 2590 Commerce Boulevard ZONING: B-1 Business COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Linear BACKGROUND At its June 16, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance application submitted by the Gillespie Foundation to allow installation of a 64 SF freestanding sign along the east side of Commerce Boulevard which includes an electronic changeable message board for the purpose of providing public information. According to the City Code, freestanding signs are permitted in the B-1 District but are limited to no more than (25) feet in height and 48 SF and must be located at least (10) feet from the property line. The Planning Commission tabled the application and requested that the applicant consider an alternate design to decrease the square footage of the sign by removing the address portion of the sign as it does not count towards the square footage allowance. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Based on discussions with the applicant, it is City staff's understandihg that the Gillespie Center prefers to advance the original application without modification(s) as they want the "address portion" of the sign to be illuminated. Contrary to earlier discussions with representatives from the Gillespie Center, it is City staff's understanding that an additional variance is being requested to allow placement of the sign on the front property line. As previously stated, a front setback of (10) feet is required according to the City Code. When the final plat for the Gillespie Addition was approved and filed, Hennepin County required the dedication of an additional 7.0 feet for roadway purposes. 3118 If the 10-foot setback is applied, the proposed sign will be located in the parking lot and 1 parking space will be lost. It is anticipated that representatives from the Gillespie Center will be present at the August 4t~ meeting to review the proposal in detail. 2 3119 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION June 16, 2003 CASE #03-32 Variance for Freestanding Sign 2590 Commerce Bivd - Gillespie Foundation A variance is requested to allow installation of a freestanding sign along the east side of Commerce Boulevard that includes an electronic changeable message board for the purpose of providing public information. Freestanding signs are permitted in the B 1 District but are limited to no more than 25 feet in height and 48 SF and must be located at least 10 feet from the property line. The sign requested is 64 SF. Due to policy issues'associated with the sign variance, City staff is not offering a recommendation. In the event that the Planning Commission supports the request, City staff would recommend that the following conditions be considered: 1. The building permit for the tenant board for the new sign shall not be issued until the variance resolution is recorded at Hennepin County. 2. The variance shall expire after one year unless an extension is granted pursuant to City Code Chapter 350.530, Subd. 2(E). 3. The new sign must meet the 10-foot front setback. Discussion Ayaz suggested a layout change to decrease the square footage of the sign. Mueller clarified that, as long as the address is not part of the signboard i~self, it does not count in the square footage of the sign. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Osmek, to recommend tabling of the variance and ask staff to communicate the design recommendations to the Foundation. MOTION carried unanimously. 312O 3121 2590 3122 t, 3123 5341 M'~ywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 PLANNING REPORT TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: June 9, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request - sign size OWNER: Gillespie Foundation / Westonka Senior Foundation CASE NUMBER: 03-32 LOCATION: 2590 Commerce Boulevard ZONING: B-1 Business COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Linear BACKGROUND The Gillespie Foundation is requesting variance approval to allow installation of a freestanding sign along the east side of Commerce Boulevard which includes an electronic changeable message board for the purpose of providing public information. Members of the Planning Commission and City Council are advised that freestanding signs are permitted in the B~I District but are limited to no more than (25) feet in height and 48 SF and must be located at least (10) feet from the property line. The requested variance is outlined below Allowed Requested Variance Sign size 48 SF 64 SF 15 SF SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is 1.26 acres and includes the Gillespie Senior Center and support facilities including parking areas and landscaping elements. The property was rezoned to B-I Business in 2000 to allow for the construction of the new senior center building. A building permit application has been submitted for installation of a 47.6 SF sign which is consistent with the City Code. The purpose for the variance is to allow for the installation of an additional "tenant board" which would be placed immediately below the changeable message line. 60-DAY PROCESS The application was received and deemed to be complete on June 3, 2003 Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, the City of Mound has sixty (60) days to approve or deny a land use request. 3124 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All property owners abutting the subject site were mailed a copy of the Planning Commission agenda on or around June 13, 2002 to inform them of the variance request. DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all applicable City departments for review and comment. All comments received to date are summarized below: Building Official Matt Simoneau GENERAL COMMENTS A building permit was recently submitted for the pylon sign excluding the additional tenant board but has not yet been issued. The sign consultant has confirmed that the proposed size is 47.6 SF and therefore meets the regulations of City Code Chapter 365. In the event the variance is approved for the proposed tenant board, an additional building permit and all required supplemental information pursuant to City Code and/or the UBC may need to be submitted City Resolution No. 00-83 approved the final plat and variance(s) for the Gillespie Senior Center. City Resolution No. 0051 approved the preliminary plat and variance(s) for the Gillespie Center. Copies have been included as attachments At its May 13, 2003 meeting, the City Council waived the fees associated with the sign and building permits as requested by the Gillespie'Center. Due to current budget concerns in the City and within the P&B1 Department, City staff is concerned about the waiver of additional application and/or escrow fees associated with the land use application. 3. A sign permit was issued in 2001 for a 4.5 SF wall sign which was installed on the west side of the building. A copy of the sign permit has been included as an attachment. 4. City Code Section 365.15 Subd. 4 states as follows: "No illuminated sign which changes in either color or intensity of light shall be permitted except one giving time, date, temperature, weather or similar public service information. The City in granting permits for illuminated signs shall specify the hours during which same may be kept lighted when necessary to prevent the creation of a nuisance. All illuminated signs shall have a shielded light source and concealed wiring and conduit and shall not interfere with traffic signaliiation." As set forth in the City Code Chapter 465, the maximum allowed height for freestanding signs in the B-1 zone is (25) feet. The sign, as proposed, is approximately, (15) feet in height. 3125 6. The materials to be used on the new sign are compatible with the materials used on the building and/or on the site. 7. It is City staff's understanding that the sign will meet the 10-foot setback requirement. RECOMMENDATION Due to policy issues associated with the sign variance, City staff is not offering a recommendation at this time. In the event that the Planning Commissions supports the request, City staff would recommend that the following conditions be considered: 1. The building permit for the tenant board for the new sign shall not be issued until the variance resolution is recorded at Hennepin County. 2. The variance shall expire after one (1) year unless an extension is granted pursuant to City Code Chapter 350:530, Subd. 2 (E.) 3. The new sign must meet the 10-foot front setback. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW Tentatively, the variance application is scheduled to be forwarded to the City Council for review at its June 24, 2003 meeting in the event a recommendation from the Planning Commission is made at its June 16, 2003 meeting. 3126 f-~ A I ,'~ Z./. IV L/o .1 p? -7 ! ~' / MIDPOINT OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 49- EAST LINE OF COMMERCE BOULEVARD ALSO THE EASTERLY I RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF H.C.S.A.H. NO. 110. PLAT 54 ,.-4 PER R.T. DOCUMENT NUMBER 1471507'~, I0 ~ ~ ,o ~ 200: NO0~O0' 7"W ,,119.72 .!. - .... 80.00 MIDPOINT OF' THI EAST ~INE OF LOT 47-" ~:~;~,.T OF THE MIDPOINT LIN[ ~ LO~ 44-% 1~6'10 ,,' ~ ...... 50.12 ~ q.-- i NOO-O1744'W - -- 80.00 99.88 .... ' so~'~'w ~ ! :. ............. ~0 -~,: \ ....... I z 5341 May~ood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: July 29, 2003 (Revised 8/5/03) SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: Gordon and Laura Engstrand CASE NUMBER: 03-35 LOCATION: 1754 Jones Lane ZONING: R-1 Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential. BACKGROUND At its August 4, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed a "modified" variance request from Gordon and Laura Engstrand to allow for a comprehensive remodel of the existing home located at 1754 Jones Lane. The requested variance is described as follows: Required Requested Variance Front setback 30 feet 6 feet 24 feet If the City Council recalls, at its May 27, 2003 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 03-50 which approved a front setback variance of (12) feet and a side/lakeside setback of (25) feet to allow for a comprehensive remodel of the existing home located at 1754 Jones Lane including upper / main floor improvements and construction of an attached garage on the west side. Since that time, however, the applicant has modified the proposal to shift the garage addition further north towards the street and reduced the proposed addition on the lakeside by 220 SF so as to respond to a neighbor's concern regarding possible impacts upon lake views from his home. Therefore, the "modified" proposal from the applicant includes a request for a front setback variance of (24) feet which would place the garage addition (6) feet from the front (north) property line. The side/lakeside setback of (25) feet which was previously approved does not change as a result of the current proposal. 3128 PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the original project are contained in Planning Report No. 03-35 and the August 4, 2003 meeting minute excerpts which have been included as attachments. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the variance application as requested. A draf~ resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included as an attachment. 3129 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 03- A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW A COMPREHENSIVE REMODEL AND CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ADDITION AT 1754 JONES LANE P & Z CASE # 03-32 WHEREAS, the following variances were approved by the Mound City Council on May 27, 2003 upon adoption of Resolution No. 03-50 for the property located at 1754 Jones Lane variances to allow for a comprehensive remodel of the existing home including upper and main floor improvements and construction of an attached garage addition to be located on the west side: Required Req u ested Va ria n ce Front Setback 30 feet 12 feet 18 feet Side/Lakeside Setback 50 feet 25 feet 25 feet (channel) and; WHEREAS, details regarding the original application are outlined in Planning Report No. 03-20; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located in a R-1 Zoning District and subject to the requirements in City Code Section 350:620; and WHEREAS, the applicants are proposing to modify their building plans to reduce the size of the addition on the lakeside by five (5,t;feet and shift the garage addition closer towards the street so as to respond, in part, t~: concern from an abutting property owner regarding possible negative impacts on lakevi~ws; and 3130 WHEREAS, variance associated with the the modified proposal, as submitted, is described as follows: Required Requested Variance Front setback 30 feet 6 feet 24 feet and; WHEREAS, the side / lakeside variance which was previously approved for the project in Resolution No. 03-50 does not change as a result of the modified plan; and WHEREAS, the modified plan reduces hardcover on the subject property; and WHEREAS, the increase in the lakeside setback associated with the modified plan is viewed as favorable; and WHEREAS, the applicant's desire to cooperate with the adjacent property owner to protect and maintain lake views is favorable; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at its August 4, 2003 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the requested variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City,of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant the requested variances subject to the following conditions: a. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. b. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance(s) is approved. c. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. d. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all permits, 2. This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lot 1, Block 2, Replat of Harrisons Shores 3131 This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to M.S.S. 462.36, Subd. 1. This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying for all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. 5. The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd. 2 (E). The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councihnembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted August 12, 2003 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 3132 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2003 Planning Case No. 03-32 Variance - Front Setback for Garage Addition 754 Jones Lane Gordon Engstrand Smith gave a brief overview of the case. A front yard setback variance of(12) feet and side/lakeside setback of (25) feet were granted by the Council in May 2003 to allow for a comprehensive remodel of the home located at 1754 Jones Lane. Since that time, however, the applicant has modified the proposal to shift the garage addition further north towards the street and reduced the proposed addition on the lakeside by 220 SF. The purpose for the change, in part, is to respond to a concern from the Engstrand's neighbor regarding possible impacts upon lakeviews from their home. Therefore, the applicants have submitted a "modified" proposal to the City for consideration which includes a request for a front setback variance of (24) feet which would place the garage addition (6) feet from the front (north) property line to accommodate rearrangement of interior space including location of the mechanical and plumbing equipment. Smith noted that the applicant's willingness to respond to the neighbor's concerns is commendable and applauded their efforts. However, Staff was unable to support the variance as hardship has not been demonstrated as it could not be established that the reduction of the addition on the lakeside needed to push the addition closer to street and commented that the applicant may be able to explain the internal function of the house and modifications that were made with the new proposal. Tim Nelson introduced himself to the Commission and indicated that he is the applicant's representative and stated that both Gordon Engstrand and the involved neighbor were also in attendance at the meeting. Nelson provided an overview and indicated that the reduction of the lakeside addition by five (5) feet will help maintain the view corridor for the westerly neighbor. He indicated that one good thing about moving farther away from lake is that they have reduced the visual impact of the structure from iLake Minnetonka which is positive. Nelson also commented that if the addition is pulled closer to the street they may reduce the hardcover slightly which is also favorable. Nelson also commented that it was essential to the Engstrands' that the project was well received by the neighbor. 3133 Nelson stated that there are minimal implications of moving the garage closer to the street as there is no neighbor on the east side. He also distributed a number of photos and stated that when looking at the sight line the proposal does not create a visual block. Additionally, because the road curves in the area there is minimal intrusion. Nelson noted that he viewed a number of properties with similar setbacks and characteristics in the Three Points neighborhood and further commented that side loaded garages usually do not create plowing problems. Nelson further commented that they want the house to be appealing for the neighborhood and stated that he does not see any problems created by the modified plan Skip Smith introduced himself and indicated that he owns the house on the west side. In terns of their involvement, they have been neighbors for 25 years and have had good relationship with Gordon's parents and Gordon and Laura. He indicated that Gordon shared early drawings with him early on during the design process which excluded mechanical space / equipment. Subsequently, as the plans moved along, changes to the layout of the house were made and advanced for review and action by the City. Mr. Smith commented that he visited with Staff following approval of the resolution which referenced the final project plans. After the project was approved, Skip worked with Gordon and Laura to see if modifications could be made based on field conditions and City approvals. Mueller indicated that the project received (2) variances previously and the modified plan is simply moving closer the addition towards the street by a few feet. He noted the decrease in hardcover and no increase in building footprint. Additionally, the increased lakeside setback is an improvement as well. Mueller further commented that he is in favor of side loaded garages. Ayaz noted that he is pleased that neighbors are working with one another. It is a win- win for all parties and commented that lake view protection is important. MOTION BY Osmek, seconded by Ayaz, to recommend approval of variance request as submitted to allow a front setback of (6) feet for the comprehensive remodel of the home located at 1754 Jones Lane. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Chair Michael noted that the application will be forwarded to the Council for review at its August 12, 2003 meeting. 3134 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: July 29, 2003 (Revised g/5/03) SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: Gordon Engstrand CASE NUMBER: 03-35 LOCATION: 1754 Jones Lane ZONING: R- 1 Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND At its May 27, 2003 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 03-50 approving the following variances to allow for a comprehensive remodel of the existing home located at 1754 Jones Lane including upper / main floor improvements and construction of an attached garage on the west side: Required Requested Variance Front setback Side setback (lakeside/east) 30 feet 12 feet 18 feet 50 feet 25 'feet 25 feet Since that time, however, the applicant has modified the proposal to shift the garage addition further north towards the street and reduced the proposed addition on the lakeside by 220 SF. Therefore, the "modified" proposal from the applicant includes a request for a front setback variance of (24) feet which would place the garage addition (6) feet from the front (north) property line to accommodate rearrangement of interior space including location of the mechanical and plumbing equipment. Members of the Planning Commission are advised that the side/lakeside variance on the east side which was approved as part of Resolution No.. 03-50 does not change as a result of the "modified" proposal. PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the project were outlined previously in Planning Report No. 03-20. In general, the scope and design of the project is not changing with the exception of the proposed front setback of (6) feet and a 5-foot decrease on the addition on the south side which subsequently increases the lakeside setback. 3135 REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 350:530 Subd. 1 outlines the criteria for granting variances in the City of Mound and generally states that a variance to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those areas where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his or her land. 60-DAY PROCESS Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. The variance application was received and deemed to be complete on June 26, 2003. NOTIFICATION City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified of variance requests by mailed notice. Members of the Planning Commission are advised that this activity was completed on or about August 1, 2003. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Refer to comments which were received previously and referenced in Planning Report No. 03-30. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS A copy of the modified application was forwarded to the DNR Area Hydrologist for review. As of July 28, 2003, no comments have been received. DISCUSSION Please refer to information and comments contained in Planning Report No. 0%20. The revised proposal has been based on a current survey which was updated for PC Case No. 03-20. In the event the variance is approved, a new survey to reference the modification(s) will be required to be submitted as part of building permit review. Relocation of the structure further away from the lake is generally viewed as positive. The reduction of the proposed addition on the south side increases the lakeside setback by five (5) feet. It is unknown whether there are alternate locations for the mechanical equipment so as to maintain the previously approved 12 foot front setback and avoid pushing the structure closer to the street. 2 3136 5. A from setback of (8) feet is allowed for side loaded detached garages on lakeside lots. It is City staff's understanding that the proposal, as modified, has been submitted in part to respond to a neighbor's concern regarding possible impacts upon lake views from his/her home. 7. A lakeside setback variance was not required with the original proposal. RECOMMENDATION Due to lack of demonstrated hardship, staff cannot support the request at this time. It is important to note however that the applicant's desire to cooperate with the adjacent property owner is commendable. Staff suggests that other options be explored with the applicant and/or applicant's representative at the meeting. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW In the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission at its August 4, 2003 meeting, it is anticipated that the application will be forwarded to the City Council for review at its August 12, 2003 meeting. 3 3137 Vqo~ H,,~v'F= A !lI Na po...J,A 3138 (:ERTIFICATE OF GORDON OF LOT 1, BLOCK SURVEY FOR D. ENGSTRAND 2, REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES HENNEPtN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ~? EXISTING (' HOUSE GARAGE DRIVE~AY.' HOUSE 1754 PATIO k' 22"x22"x22"x22" COfT~ .,,. ! I SURVEY LINE *' ! ! LAKE MINi 3140 D 3141 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: August 5, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg CASE NUMBER: 03-36 LOCATION: 4967 Wilshire Boulevard ZONING: R- 1A Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND At its August 4, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the application frorn Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg for variance approval to allow modifications to their ex!sting home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including a proposed addition to be constructed on the south side and construction ora 12' x 14' 5" deck to be located on the north side which fronts Wilshire Boulevard and faces Lake Minnetonka. The requested variance is described as follows: Reqnired Reqnested Variance Front (north) (20) (4.9) feet (15.1 ) feet PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the original project are contained in Planning Report No. 03-36 and the August 4, 2003 meeting minute excerpts that have been included as attachments. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the variance application as requested. A draft resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included as an attachment. 3142 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 03- A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 4967 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD P & Z CASE # 03-36 PID NO. 24-117-24-14-0067 WHEREAS, the applicants, Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg, have submitted a variance request to allow modifications to their existing home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including construction of a 12' x 14' 5" deck to be constructed on the north side which requires variance approval. The requested variance is described as follows: Required Requested Variance Front setback 20 feet 4.9 feet 15.1 feet WHEREAS, details regarding the variance application are outlined in Planning Report No. 03-36; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located in an R-IA Zoning District and subject to the requirements in City Code Section 350:630 which requires a front setback of (20) feet, side setbacks of(6) feet, a rear setback of(l 5) feet and hardcover not exceeding (40) percent for lots of record; and WHEREAS, the subject property includes a single-family home that is bordered on the north side by Wilshire Boulevard and Brighton Boulevard to the south which provides access; and WHEREAS, there are two (2) non-conforming conditions associated with the subject property including a deficient front setback of(16.8) feet on the north side and a deficient side setback of 2 feet on the west side for the existing on-grade deck which were 3143 WHEREAS, the subject property is long and linear and the placement of the house near Wilshire Boulevard has created difficulties regarding expansion possibilities on the north, west and east sides; and WHEREAS, while the subject property includes a small deck on the west side it is not functional due to its location and size; and WHEREAS, a deck is viewed as a customary feature for properties with lakeside views; and WHEREAS, there are topographical issues associated with the subject lot; and WHEREAS, while the area fronting Wilshire Boulevard is deemed to be a fi'ont yard according to the City Code, it is essentially serving as a back yard for the applicants in which case a rear yard setback of(10) feet is allowed for a deck: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at its August 4, 2003 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the requested variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby grant the requested variances subject to the following conditions: a. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated .with the land use request. b. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance(s) is approved. c. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. d. Applicant shall be responsible roi' procurement of any and/or all permits This variance is approved for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: See Exhibit A This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to M.S.S. 462.36, Subd. 1. This shall be considered a restriction on how this property may be used. 3144 The property owner shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution with Hennepin County and paying for all costs for such recording. A building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. The variance is valid for one (1) year following its approval unless an extension is approved by the City Council pursuant to the City Code 350:530, Subd. 2 (E). 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 August 12, 2003 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk 3145 5341 Ma),xvood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: August 5, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg CASE NUMBER: 03-36 LOCATION: 4967 Wilshire Boulevard ZONING: R-1A Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND At its August 4, 2003 meeting, the Planning Comrnission reviewed the application from Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg for variance approval to allow modifications to their existing home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including a proposed addition to be constructed on the south side and construction ora 12' x 14' 6" deck to be located on the north side which fronts Wilshire Boulevard and faces Lake Minnetonka. The requested variance is described as follows: Required Requested Variance Front (north) (20) (16.8) feet (4.9) feet (15.1) feet PROJECT DETAILS Details regarding the original project are contained in Planning Report No. 03-36 and the August 4, 2003 meeting minute excerpts that have been included as attachments. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Based on its review, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the variance application as requested. A draft resolution based on the Planning Commission's recommendation has been included as an attachment. 3146 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2003 Planning Case No. 03-36 Front Setback Variance 4967 Wilshire Boulevard Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg Smith provided an overview of report. The applicants, Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg, are requesting variance approval to allow modifications to their existing home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including a proposed addition to be constructed on the south side and construction ora 12' x 14' 6" deck to be located on the north side which fronts Wilshire Boulevard and faces Lake Minnetonka. The applicants are requesting a variance of(15.1) feet to allow a (4.9) foot front setback on the north side. The existing house is non-conforming due a deficient front setback for the house and a side setback for the deck on the west side. Mueller asked Smith about the hardship(s). Smith noted that the property is long and linear and the placement of the house near the north side towards Wilshire has limited construction options on the west, north and east sides. Additionally, there are elevation issues on the lot. The placement ora deck on the south side is not preferred by the applicant as no lakeviews would not be afforded. The applicant, Ernie Rosenberg, introduced himself to the Planning Commission, and noted that they have lived in the house for 12 years and commented that his property part ora subdivision before they bought it. He noted that the deck was encroaching arid had to be cut offso as to remove the portion of the dock that was over the line. Mr. Rosenberg noted the retaining wall system on the Wilshire Blvd side and noted that there is 26 feet from the bottom to the edge of their property. Retaining walls are owned by Hennepin County.. Mr. Rosenberg stated that when you walk out the back door there is a (7) foot hill about (3) feet out. He indicated that the addition on the south side is being done to help resolve a water issue. Raines asked if the water issue has been resolved. Applicant indicated that water is being funneled to the tile at the back of the house. Mueller asked about the 15 foot setback versus 10 foot setback for detached decks. Smith indicated that the Encroachment Section in the City Code is vague and read the excerpts from City Code 350:440. The abutting property owner to the west (Kraay) was present at the meeting and stated that he is in favor of the request. 3147 Bill Baker, an a neighboring property owner, indicated that the County right-of-way in front of the Rosenberg's house is wider in this area. Mr. Rosenberg indicated that they have a Brighton address and their neighbor to the west has a Wilshire Boulevard address. Cklare Hasse provided some background history regarding address assignment in the subject area. Hasse asked if the deck was to be an enclosed porch. Applicants indicated that the deck as shown on the plans will be open. Mueller asked a number of questions to the applicant regarding details in the subm. itted plans. Mueller also asked if they use the west deck and asked if the deck could be removed to make the project more non-conforming Mr. Rosenberg indicated that the deck was accepted when the property was split. Mueller stated that it was his recollection that it was classified as a ground deck at that time therefore a 2-foot setback would have been allowed. Mr. Rosenberg indicated the existing deck is narrow and lacks functionality. Michaels asked Staff for input regarding expansion of a non-conformity. Smith responded that the locations of the existing deck and house were likely recognized when the subdivision waiver occurred. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Raines, to approve staff recommendation to approve requested front yard variance of(15.1) feet to allow a (4.9) foot front setback for construction of a deck at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard. Mueller indicated that the house ah'eady has a deck even though it is somewhat non - functional and is basically serving as a walkway. He commented that the applicant has indicated that the west deck lacks functionality and stated that it remains in a non- conforming location. Michaels asked Staff for input regarding expansion of a non-conformity. Smith responded that the locations of the existing deck and house were likely recognized when the subdivision waiver occurred All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3148 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2003 Planning Case No. 03-36 Front Setback Variance 4967 Wilshire Boulevard Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg Smith provided an overview of report. The applicants, Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg, are requesting variance approval to allow modifications to their existing home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including a proposed addition to be constructed on the south side and construction ora 12' x 14' 6" deck to be located on the north side which fronts Wilshire Boulevard and faces Lake Minnetonka. The applicants are requesting a variance of (15.1) feet to allow a (4.9) foot front setback on the north side. The existing house is non-conforming due a deficient front setback for the house and a side setback for the deck on the west side. Mueller asked Smith about the hardship(s). Smith noted that the property is long .and linear and the placement of the house near the north side towards Wilshire has limited construction options on the west, north and east sides. Additionally, there are elevation issues on the lot. The placement ora deck on the south side is not preferred'by the applicant as no lakeviews would not be afforded. The applicant, Ernie Rosenberg, introduced himself to the Planning Commission, and noted that they have lived in the house for 12 years and commented that his property part of a subdivision before they bought it. He noted that the deck was encroaching and had to be cut off so as to remove the portion of the dock that was over the line'. Mr. Rosenberg noted the retaining wall system on the Wilshire Blvd side and noted that there is 26 feet from the bottom to the edge of their property. Retaining walls are owned by Hennepin County. Mr. Rosenberg stated that when you walk out the back door there is a (7) foot hill about (3) feet out. He indicated that the addition on the south side is being done to help resolve a water issue. Raines asked if the water issue has been resolved. Applicant indicated that water is being funneled to the tile at the back of the house. Mueller asked about the 15 foot setback versus 10 foot setback for detached decks. Smith indicated that the Encroachment Section in the City Code is vague and read the excerpts from City Code 350:440. The abutting property owner to the west (Kraay) was present at the meeting and stated that he is in favor of the request. 3149 Bill Baker, an a neighboring property owner, indicated that the County right-of-way in front of the Rosenberg's house is wider in this area. Mr. Rosenberg indicated that they have a Brighton address and their neighbor to the west has a Wilshire Boulevard address. Cklare Hasse provided some background history regarding address assignment in .the subject area. Hasse asked if the deck was to be an enclosed porch. Applicants indicated that the deck as shown on the plans will be open. Mueller asked a number of questions to the applicant regarding details in the sub]'nitted plans. Mueller also asked if they use the west deck and asked if the deck could be removed to make the project more non-conforming. Mr. Rosenberg indicated that the deck was accepted when the property was split. Mueller stated that it was his recollection that it was classified as a ground deck at that time therefore a 2-foot setback would have been allowed. Mr. Rosenberg indicated the existing deck is narrow and lacks functionality. Michaels asked Staff for input regarding expansion ora non-conforrnity. Smith responded that the locations of the existing deck and house were likely recognized when the subdivision waiver occurred MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Raines, to approve staff recommendation to approve requested front yard variance of(15.1) feet to allow a (4.9) foot front setback for construction ora deck at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard. Mueller indicated that the house already has a deck even though it is somewhat non - functional and is basically serving as a walkway. He commented that the applicant has indicated that the west deck lacks functionality and stated that it remains in a non- conforming location. Michaels asked Staff for input regarding expansion of a non-conformity. Smith responded that the locations of the existing deck and house were likely recognized when the subdivision waiver occurred All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3150 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: July 29, 2003 SUBJECT: Variance Request OWNER: Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg CASE NUMBER: 03-36 LOCATION: 4967 Wilshire Boulevard ZONING: R- 1A Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND The applicants, Ernest and Michelle Rosenberg, are requesting variance approval to allow modifications to their existing home located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard including a proposed addition to be constructed on the south side and construction of a 12' x 14' 6" deck to be located on the north side which fronts Wilshire Boulevard and faces Lake Minnetonka. The requested variance is described as follows: Required Existing Requested Variance Front (north) (20) (16.8) feet (4.9) feet (15.1) feet Specific details regarding the project are outlined in the submitted plans (ie. floor, elevation drawings, etc.) that have been included as attachments. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject property includes a single-family home that is bordered on the north side by Wilshire Boulevard and Brighton Boulevard to the south which provides access. There are a number of non-conforming issues associated with the subject property including a deficient front setback of 16.8 feet on the north side and a deficient side setback of 2 feet on the west side associated with the existing deck. The existing garage and storage shed which are located in the southern end of the property are in conforming locations. 3151 REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Section 350:530 Subd. 1 outlines the criteria for granting variances in the City of Mound and generally states that a variance to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those areas where the ordinance imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of his or her land. 60-DAY PROCESS Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 15.99, local government agencies are required to approve or deny land use requests within 60 days. The variance application was received and deemed to be complete on June 30, 2003. NOTIFICATION City policy requires that abutting property owners are notified of variance request's by mailed notice. Members of the Planning Commission are advised that this activity was completed on or about August 1, 2003. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Copies of the variance application were forwarded to all City departments for review. All written comments which were received are outlined below: Parks Department No comments needed from POSAC Engineering Department Additional details including elevation data may be required as part of building permit process. Police Department No concerns fi'om Police Department Fire Department No concerns from Fire Department. Building Inspections A building permit will be required including the submittal of required information. From a construction standpoint, the standard deck size is 12' x 12'. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS A copy of the variance application was forwarded to Hennepin County for review and comment. Dave Zetterstrom of Hennepin County contacted City staff the week of July 14, 2003 and indicated that he has no concerns regarding the project. 2 3152 DISCUSSION 1. The property is fronted on the north and south sides by dedicated public streets and is therefore subject to double front setback requirements of(20) feet. 2. Hardcover on the subject property including the proposed improvements is within the (40) percent allowance. 3. While the subject property is long and linear, the placement of the house near Wilshire Boulevard has created difficulties with expansion on the north, west and east sides. 4. A deck is viewed as a customary feature for properties with lakeside views. 5. No vehicular access is provided from Wilshire Boulevard. 6. The north end of the subject property is situated significantly higher that the road elevation therefore impacts from the proposed deck will be minimal. While the area fronting Wilshire Boulevard is deemed to be a front yard according to the City Code, it essentially is serving as a back yard. Typically, the rear yard setback for a deck is (10) feet. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the requested variance to allow construction of a deck to be constructed on the north side of the house located at 4967 Wilshire Boulevard subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use requests. 2. No future approval of any development plans and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the variance(s) application is approved. 3. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit application. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or all permits. 3 3153 CITY COUNCIL REVIEW In the event a recommendation is received from the Planning Commission at its August 4, 2003 meeting, it is anticipated that the application will be forwarded to the City Council for review at its August 12, 2003 meeting. 4 3154 )Joua Jo s~uauJa^oJ~u] ~ou s~op ~1 'uogJgq~ ~o uo]~oOOl pasodoJd UO!~DOOI 9q~ '~bDJDb ~ '~J~doJd peq!Jos~p t spu@~Ul ~8^JnS S!4~ >q aJo u~oqs sbulJoe8 ~u!ls!xa se~ouap '(~'e06) ~ouJ uoJ~ se~ou@p : o I@ql pUD 'Sl ~o~'p!DS ~os @oueq~ ~paq!Jos~p ~aa~ ~L jo eouo~s!p t~ ~U!l XlJaq]Jou iD U~OJp ~U!I O bUOIO ) ~u!od ~lJ~S~ .s~ $~!1 qo!q~ uo~S ; pUD ~ S~O] ~O ~JDd ~$~ aq~ pUD 30 NOIIdI~OS3Q ]VO3q 13NN3H )9 NI ONV JO .JIIW3O (g'ZG6)/i Cg'6 t-'::::: ..... / .......... 3 ,,00,8~'o~8 SI I ! I I I I ! I 3SnOH I ONIJ. SlX-q [ ! I I I I I I ! I ~ [~'~6) / / .: I (~"6£6) ~ (6'g'1,6) ........ gg'gg (6"6~'6) I I I /S331Aa35 9'61 a3sodo~a 30VSV9 ONIISIX3 llYM ' ~ ON~YI3U :' (6'1. 96) 3SFIOH 9NIISIX3 ¥'91,6) :,"(0'9Y6) ,ggogg N ....... W3/A3S A~VIINVS , ,n JU~I~ I"q I W k~ i o CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com July 29, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BONNIE RITTER PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM OUR LADY OF THE LAKE CHURCH FOR INCREDIBLE FESTIVAL. The following applications were received from Our Lady of the Lake for the Incredible Festival to be held September 13 and 14, 2003: Temporary On-Sale 3.2 Beer Permit for Sept. 13 & 14 (fee paid) Public Dance/Live Music Permit for September 13 from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. (requesting that the $100/day fee be waived) $50/day Permit Fee 1525/da~, Permit Fee for non-profit orgs. ILimited to Ten Consecutive Days [Only Four Per Year to any OrgAnization Days License Is To Be Used: September 13 and 14, 2003 LICENSE # CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 TEMPORARY ON-SALE 3.2 BEER PERMIT CI7~, Of-- MOL% Event: Incredible Festival Address of Event: 2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Organization: Our Lady of the Lake Church Chairman or Title: Rhonda M. Eurich, Administrator Address: 2385 Commerce Blvd. Address: 2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Mound, MN 55364 Phone No.: 952.472.1284 ext. 161 Home Phone: 952.472.1284 ext. 161 Work Phone: 952.472.1284 ext. 161 Section 810.10, Subd. 2. Liability Insurance. (a) Prior to the issuance of any Beer license, the applicant shall demonstrate proof of financial responsibility with regard to liability imposed by Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.801 to the City Clerk and to the Commissioner of Public Safety as a condition of the issuance or renewal of his license. Proof of financial responsibility shall be given by filing a certificate that there is in effect an insurance policy or pool providing the minimum coverage for dram shop liability as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.409, Subdivision 1. It is the intent of this section to require the minimum insurance coverage and amounts required by Minnesota law. Name of Insurance Co.: Catholic Mutual Relief Society Amount of Coverage: $500,000. Section 810:10. Subd. 1. Application Form. In the case of any application for a Temporary "On-Sale" license to allow sale and consumption of beer on public land or public school lands, the applicant shall, prior to issuance of such license, file the written consent of the owner of such lands to such use of its lands. 7-01-03 Date \ Applicant's Signature Date Approval - City Clerk Date Approval - Police Dept. 3160 ,$100/day or ,$300/yr, Dance September 13, 2003 Date of Sing e Dance ! LiCenSe Year -:AnnUaI LICENSE# CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 PUBLIC DANCE/LIVE MUSIC PERMIT APPLICATION EVENT: I~credible Festival LOCATION OF DANCE/LIVE MUSIC: Our Lad~, of the Lake Church 2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound~ MN 55364 TYPE OF DANCE/LIVE MUSIC: Variet}, TIME PERIOD OF DANCE/LIVE MUSIC: 7:30PMto 9 PM (HOURS PERMITTED: Mon-Sat: 8pm-12:30am- Sunday: 8pm- 11:30pm) CHAIRPERSON OR APPLICANT:Rhonda Eurich TITLE:Administrator o fOur Lad~, of the Lake Church ADDRESS:2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound~ MN 55364 HOME PHONE #952.472.1284 ext. 161 WORK PHONE #:952.472.1284 ext. 161 7/01/03 Date Department Approval/Denial (Submit memo if denied) Approved Denied Police Dept. Adm. Bldg. Dept. Fire Dept. '3161 Engineering * Planning ~' Surveying July 3 l, 2003 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1627 SUBJECT: City of Mound West Edge Boulevard Street Improvements Partial Payment MFRA #7827 Dear Kandis: Enclosed is Buffalo Bituminous' Payment Request No. 4 for work completed through July 18, 2003 on the subject project. The amount of this payment request is $22,230.89. We have reviewed this request, find it in order, and recommend payment in the above amount to the Contractor. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure cc: Gino Businaro, Finance Director, City of Mound s:~nain:hMou07827 :\Correspondence~hanson7 -31 3162 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-mail: mfra@mfra.com o -- LLI mO tom 3163 I,- Z LU 88~8~°88888888~8~888~88888888888888 ~ o~o ~~8~88§~ D .... ~ ...... ~ . ....... ~~ . . . 88~8~o~888888888~8~888~88888888888888 ~ ~8~ ~ ~ ~ ......... 88888888888888888888888888888~88888~8 888888~888888888~8888~88888888888888 ~ '~ '~ ' '~ ' ' '~ ' '~~ ' '~ '~ ~ 8~o~8~~88o~o8~~88~o~$~oo~ ~ 8~8~88o88888~8~o~8~88o8888888~ ;dddddddddddN~;~d~dd~;~dd~;d;d~dddd 888 8. 888 3164 CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. 06-2003 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY CODE SECTIONS 800.00 AND 8'10.00 AS THEY RELATE TO HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ON-SALE LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENTS The City of Mound does ordain: That Subsection 800.01, Subd. 1, be amended to read as follows: Subd. '1. Provisions of State Law Adopted. Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340A relating to the definition of terms, licensing, consumption, sales, conditions of bonds of licensees, hours of sale, and all other matters pertaining to the retail sale, distribution, and consumption of intoxicating liquor are adopted and made a part of this section as if set out in full. That Subsection 800.35, Subd. 8, Hours of Operation, be amended to read as follows: Subd. 8. Hours of Sale and Operation. No sale of liquor may be made between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the days of Monday through Saturday, and after 1:00 a.m. on Sunday. Every room, place, or premises where liquor is permitted to be sold, including caf6, restaurant, or dining room operated in connection therewith, pursuant to an On-Sale Liquor license, shall be closed and kept closed to the public during the times when a sale of liquor is prohibitedaay-St~eqaw under this subdivision. During said hours, no person or persons shall be allowed to be or remain within such room, place or premises, for any purpose whatsoever, except that the owner or licensee, his or her agents, servants, or employees, may be and remain there for the purpose only of cleaning, preparation of meals, necessary repairs or other work in connection therewith. That Subsection 810.40, Subd. 1 and Subd. 2 be amended to read as follows: Subd. 1. No beer or 3.2 malt liquor shall be sold, served or consumed on the licensed premises during *~,'~ *~ ...... ~, ..... ~,; .... ~,~k;,,~,~ ~,,, q+,,,~ I .... between 1:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the days of Monday through Saturday, nor between 1:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on Sunday. Subd. 2. Every room, place or premises where such beer or 3.2 malt liquor is permitted to be sold, including caf6, restaurant, or dining room operated in connection therewith, pursuant to an "on-sale" license, shall be closed or kept closed to the public 1 3165 during the times when the sale of beer or 3.2 malt liquor is prohibited ~ under Subdivision 1. Passed by the City Council this day of ,2003. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 2 3166 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com July 25, 2003 To: From: Re: Mayor, Council, and City Manager Finance Director ~ oez__>, Truth in Taxation Meetings Again this year we need to follow the Truth in Taxation (TNT) process. A set of informational publications and Council hearings are being mandated for this purpose by the Legislature to all cities. I am requesting that the City Council set an initial TNT public heating date and a continuation heating date if needed. Kandis and I are proposing that the meetings be held on the following dates and time: * TNT Initial Public Heating December 1, 2003 7:00 P.M. * Continuation Hearing December 8, 2003 7:00 P.M. * Dec. Reg. Council Meeting December 9, 2003 7:30 P.M. Approval of Final Levy/Budget Even though the initial TNT Public Hearing can be set at a different time in early December, the first and second Mondays of December are reserved for the use by cities. If you need more information on this matter, please call me at 952-472-0608. printed on recycled paper 3167 Mound City Code 1000.1SA (q) (q) Operating any water craft, motor vehicle, or powered device, or propelled device, on the open water, or upon the ice of a body of water, in such a manner as to endanger life, limb, or property; (r) Standing upon any street bridge or railroad bridge for purposes of fishing therefrom; (s) Causing to be made any fire on any public beach area or park except in fireplaces designated for that purpose; (0 Any well, hole, or similar excavation which is left uncovered or in such other condition as to constitute a hazard to any child coming on the premises where it is located; (u) Obstruction to the free flow or water in a natural'waterway or a public street drain, gutter, or ditch with trash or other materials; (v) The placing or throwing on any street, sidewalk, or other public property or any glass, tacks, nails, bottles, or other substance which may injure any person or animal or damage any pneumatic tire when passing over such substance; (w) The depositi.ng of garbage or refuse on a public right-of-way or on. adjacent private property. (ORD. #29-1989- 6-26-89) 1000.20 Duties of City Offic.ers. The Police Department shall enforce the provisions relating to nuisances. Such officers shall have the power to inspect private premises and take all reasonable precautions to prevent the commission and maintenance of public nuisances. 1000.25 Abatement. Whenever the officer charged with enforcement determines that a public nuisance is being maintained or exists on premises in the City, the officer shall notify in, writing .the owner or occupant of the premises of such fact and shall order that such nuisance be terminated and abated. The notice shall be served in person or by certified or registered mail. If the premises are not occupied and the owner is u...~wn, .the notice may be served by posting it on the premises, The notice shall spec-iO the steps to be taken to abate the nuisance and the time, not exceeding 10 da¥~,:, wi~.'n which the nuisance is to be abated, If the notice is not complied with .~' '~n~ the 'roue specified, the enforcing officer shall report that fact forthwith to the ConneiL Thereafter, the Council may, after notice to the owner or occupant and an ~orm~:~. be he~d_,, provide for abating the nuisance by the City. The notice shall be served i~n the same manner as notice by the enforcing officer is served and ,~alt.be gi~an at least seven days before the date stated in the notice when the Council wi:ti consider the mater. I.f: notice is given by posting, at least 10 days shall elapse be~ee.~a ~ day of pasting the notice and. the hearing, and a copy of the notice shall be sent by certified mail to the record owner of.the subject property. 12/31/98 3168 July 31, 2003 TO: Jan Purcell 3145 Park Overlook Dr. Shoreview, MN 55126 Regarding: The property at 4717 Island View Dr. Mound, MN PUBLIC NOTICE This letter is to inform you that there will be a public meeting on Tuesday August 12, 2003 at 7:30p.m., at the Mound City Hall. This meeting is concerning the abatement of your property at 4717 Island View Dr. As per city ordinance 1000:25, this meeting will allow you to address the City Council, concerning this matter. This would be the time to present any information that you feel needs to be brought to the Council's attention. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter please contact Mike Wocken at 952-472-0621. Thank you, Mike Wocken Community Service Officer 3169 CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 03- RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ABATE UNSAFE AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS AT 4717 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, AND ASSESS RESULTING CHARGES AGAINST THE PROPERTY PID #30-117-23-22-0052 WHEREAS, it was first determined by the Mound Police Department in January of 2003 that at 4717 Island View Drive, violations of City Code Subsection 350.710 Exterior Storage, and Subsection 1000.15A Public Nuisances Affecting Peace and Safety were occurring; and WHEREAS, a citation was issued for above stated violations; and WHEREAS, the Police Department has been working with the property owner to attempt to get them to make the property comply with City Code; and WHEREAS, the property owner has made no attempt to improve the property or answer correspondence of the Police Department; and WHEREAS, the property owner has been given due notice according to City Code Subsection 1000.25; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mound, Minnesota, to authorize City Staff to have the unsafe and nuisance conditions at 4717 Island View Drive abated and authorize the assessment of charges incurred to abate such conditions against the subject property. Adopted by the City Council this __ day of ,,2003. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 3170 July 9, 2003 TO: City Manager K. Hanson FROM: CSO Wocken I would like to request that the following information be forwarded to the City Council, for approval of action, for the abatement of a Nuisance, Mound City Ordinance 1000:25. The property needs the following work performed: cut the lawn, tear down the 2 remaining garage walls, clean up all the itmes that sit in and around the garage area, bags of garbage, all over the property, and secure the buildings, so no one can get into the property. The property at 4717 Island View Dr. Mound, MN is owned by a Jan Purcell of Shoreview MN. The property is in violation of ordinances that relate to safety of the public. The Police Department has been working on this property for the past few months, to try to get the owner to clean up the property and make it safe. The owner has made no attempt to improve the property and on many occasions will not return calls to her, by the Community Service Officer. A report, follow up report, pictures, letter, and other paper work are attached for a history of this property issue. If you have any questions please contact CSO Wocken. Thank You, 3171 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT CASE NUMBER: '03'0535 INITIAJ~ COMPI2~INT REPORT DATE: 03/27/200R On 02-13-03 CSO Wocken went to 4717 Island View Dr. Mound, Mn to conduct a follow up to a written warning issued on 01-07-03. Wocken noticed that nothing had changed at the property, so Wocken called the property owner, Purcell, Jan Marie DOB 10-18- 68, and explained all the problems at the property. Purcell stated she would take care of the problems. On 02-20-03 Officers ?etz and Burke were notified by the City of Mound Public Works Dept. that while they were out to shut off the water at the residence, they noticed the door to the home kicked in. Officers Petz, Burke, Sussman, and Wocken responded to the residence. After the Officers cleared the residence Wocken left a voice message with Purcell's phone to call the Police Dept, and speak to Officer Petz. At this date none of the problems originally on the notice were resolved. On 03-21-03 Wocken met with the Mound Building Inspector at' 4~17 Island View to discuss the safety issue of the leaning garage~ wall with the electrical meter on it. ~t was decided that f~r safety reasons the condition of the garage could not wait any longer for repair. Wocken called Purcell, and left an urgent message on Purcell's voice mail, to brace the garage wall before it would fall and pull the live electrical wire out and create a serious safety issue, for anyone nearby. On 03-25-03 Wocken went to 4717 Island View to follow up to see if Purcell had braced the garage wall as per instructed, for safety. Upon arrival Wocken noticed that nothing had been done and that the weight of the leaning wall was causing the electrical pole on the garage to bend and pull the top of the meter box up. Due to the safety concern Wocken notified Xcell Energy and had Xcell send out'a technician'to disconnect the. .~.~i~_~.-e~¢~ricit~-~t~the poleso ~f~-~he, garage walt'~we.r~to~fall'~..there would not be any live wires to cause a concern. At 1600 Hrs. Xcell Energy arrived and disconnected the electric wires to the residence at the pole, and removed the meter, then Wocken and the Xcell technician placed a temporary board up against the wall so it would not fall on anyone. On 03-26-03 Wocken issued Citation #3030608826 to Purcell for failure to respond to the written warning of exterior storage and nuisance. The citation will be mailed to Purcell, since she lives in Shoreview, MN. Wocken clear. 3172 Page 1 of 1 MOUND 'POLICE 'DEPARTMENT ~ FOLLOW-UP REPORT CASE NUMBER: 03-0535 , DATE:OT/Og/2ooJ On 06-21-03 CSO Wocken returned to 4717 Island View Dr. to see if any progress, on the clean up of the property had taken place. Wocken noticed that nothing had been done to improve the property, and that now the grass/weeds had grown so much as to become a violation of the city ordinance. Wocken called Purcell at thel~number and left a voice message, stating that the lawn needed to be cut within 10 days or the city would cut the lawn and charge Purcell for the cost of the mowing. On 06-24-03 Wocken sent a letter to Purcell, at the 3145 Park Overlook DR. address, stating that the lawn needed to be cut along with the other violations at the property, such as the leaning garage walls, the bags of garbage that sit throughout the property, all the items that sit in the area that used to be a garage, and the fact that the property cannot be secured due to broken windows and doors. In this letter Wocken noted that all these items/violations need to be corrected within 10 days of the post mark of the letter, or the City of Mound will clean up the property and bill Purcell for all the costs incurred to complete the clean up. This letter was sent certified mail with return receipt. The letter was received on 06-26-03 by a Tyler Purcell. On 07-09-03 Wocken checked the property, to see if the clean up had been complete, but Wocken found that nothing had been done at the property. Wocken will pass this information on to the city manager, so the information can be passed on to the City Council for approval of the clean up, using city resources. Wocken clear. Page 1 of 1 3173 June 24, 2003 TO: Jan Purcell 3145 Park Overlook Dr. Shoreview, MN 55126 REGUARDING: The property at 4717 Island View Dr. Mound, MN This letter is to notify you that the property at 4717 Island View Dr. in Mound, needs your immediate attention. The home cannot be secured due to a broken basement door and a broke window. The 2 remaining walls of the garage are not stable or secure. This constitutes a safety concern for everyone close to your property. The yard needs to be cut, there are bags of garbage that are laying all over the back yard as well as sitting in the area that used to be a garage along with windows, suitcases etc.. The garage walls need to be taken down and everything else needs to be removed or stored inside. If after 10 days, of the post marked date, of this notice, everything listed above has not been done to th~.~.~property, the city will take the action needed to clean up the.property.and ~ will bil'i ~ou for~the costs~incUrred for the clean up. '~ ' If you have any questions please contact Mike Wocken at 952-472- 0621. Thank You, Mike Wocken Community Service Officer 3174 6~&~ ~0E2 0~00 OaaE 660~ 3175 3176 3177 3178 3179 318O Warning Notice MOUND POLICE 5341 May'wood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone 472-0621 '~ HARRELL ef of Police '~ER/ U PANT Phone # CODE VIOLATIONS FOUND ON PROPERTY: ,~ 350:710 EXTERIOR STORAGE 490 GARBAGE CONTAINERS [] 1000 NUISANCE ~ 330:130~ ~....D._~c~E NUMBERS .~ OTHER j Future v~lati~s shall resu~ in the issua~e of a citation. i Please ~tl the inspe~ng officer within 48 hours. ~ Failure lo abate ~e indi~l~ ~olat~n(s) by ~/ .L/~ result in De issu~ ol a dragon. ,'OcoJpant State of Minnes0ta-Hennepin C0unt~-F0urth h&¢ial blstrlct! City Community Code ~COMPLAIN'I'] Citation # Drivers License Number 3030608826 State Name - Last, First, Middle ~urce. ll , Ad~lress - Street, Apt # ,I~MN [] State Zip Vehicle LicenseNo. >late Year Date of Offense [Fime of Offense Parking Meter No. INeighborhood / [-]Booked ,~Owner Accident DInjury []Property F1Fatal [-[Passenger [DDriver Offense Location z/71'7 No I Offense No 2 Offense Stat ute]'Ord 1004 [-]Speed MS 169.14(subd [-IEndangering Life/Property [-]Hazardous Material (DOT) .~77av, tdt II-]No Seat ~¢l~ ~:;3MS 169.686 Juris Cod, ]' State Patrol Jufis" Code Cod~: ~'~[[ CodeState Pa~ol Juris lCode ~d:'tI ): mph in a mph zone []Unsafe Conditions I-1Commercial Vehicle Identification: [-IDL [] Photo ID [] Other Comments: Badge No(s).~ CCN#IICR# }Citing Agen.cy _ U'-/~,~ I.,~,,,,,.4 COURT COPY DO NOT WRITB ON RF, VEI-~E 3181 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council James M. Strommen August 7, 2003 Xcel Electric Franchise Ordinance and Franchise Fee Ordinance Attached is the franchise ordinance that has been negotiated with Xcel. This is a twenty (20) year franchise with the concurrent establishment by ordinance of a franchise fee of $2.00 per meter per customer. This will be implemented at Xcel's earliest billing month, estimated to be in the fall. The franchise also contains a cap on fee amounts that will be chargeable to Xcel customers. "Section 9.1". Franchise Fees. Section 9.1 provides for a cap on franchise fees if applied to each class of customer within the city. It allows increases above the $2.00 per month that is being charged now, and can be adjusted for inflation during the term of the franchise. Permit Fees Waived. City has agreed that permit fees otherwise charged to Xcel for work in the right-of-way, are waived when a franchise fee is implemented. Right-of-Way Management. The City is incorporating much of the right-of-way ordinance into this franchise. Language governing issues of particular importance to public works such as abandoned facilities have been reviewed by that department and approved. Timing. The ordinance will be effective upon publication and written acceptance by Xcel. The franchise fee will be implemented when Xcel is able to build it the fee collection process into its billing cycle, estimated to be in October or November of this year. JMS-235792vl MU200-95 3182 CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. 07-2003 ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, D/B/A XCEL ENERGY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND PUBLIC GROUNDS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. The City of Mound does ordain: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: City. The City of Mound, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. City Utility System. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Electric Facilities subject to this franchise. Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, conductor lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public use. Non-Betterment Costs. Costs incurred by Company from relocation, removal or rearrangement of Electric Facilities that do not result in an improvement to the Electric Facilities. JMS-235313v2 MU200-95 3183 Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, Legal Services, Suite 3000, 800 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 5 5402. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Manager, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364-1627. Any party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other parties. Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public. Public Way. Public right-of-way within the City as defined in Minn. Stat. § 237.163 subd. 3. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1 Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the d ate t his Ordinance is passed a nd approved by t he City, t he right t o transmit a nd furnish electric energy for light, heat and power for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Ways and Public Grounds, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2 Effective Date[ Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 60 days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, or otherwise places the City on notice, before that time, that the Company does not accept all terms of this franchise, the City Council by resolution may revoke this Ordinance or seek its enforcement in a court of competent jurisdiction. 2.3 Service~ Rates and Area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. The area within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.40. 2.4 Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance shall be paid by Company. 2.5 Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and JMS-235313v2 2 MU200-95 3184 expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6 Continuation of Franchise. If the City and Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire, but in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. SECTION 3. LOCATION~ OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1 Location' of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt normal operation of any City Utility System. Electric Facilities shall be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Electric Facilities shall be subject to any permit requirements authorized in a separate ordinance and other reasonable regulations of the City, consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this franchise agreement. Company may abandon underground Electric Facilities in place, provided at City's request Company at its own expense, removes abandoned metal conduits or concrete encased conduit or other Facilities interfering with a City improvement project to extent such conduit is uncovered as part of the City's improvement project. 3.2 Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee, subject to the provisions of Section 9. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than t hose imposed o n other utilities for similar facilities o r work. Company m ay, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone, e-mail or similar notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3 Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring t he opening o f a ny Public Way, Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, Part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances to the extent consistent with law. Company shall restore the Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six months thereafter, but shall have no obligation to water any grass or other vegetation thereon. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, JMS-235313v2 3 MU200-95 3185 equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. 3.4 Performance Security. The City hereby waives any requirement, in the normal course of Company operations, for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, 1 etter o f credit o r a ny other form of s ecufity o r assurance t hat m ay b e required under a separate existing or future ordinance of the City, of a person or entity obtaining the City's permission to install, replace or maintain facilities in a Public Way or the Public Ground. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City reserves the fight to require a performance bond for new installation, replacement, or repairs, when the duration of Company's work within a Public Way is estimated by Company to exceed 14 calendar days and Company's completion of its work is required in order for the City to proceed with its work for constructing a public improvement to the Public Way. 3.5 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. 3.6 Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person, including Company, from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Electric Facilities or other persons or property while performing any activity. 3.7 Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The Notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities Company deems necessary. 3.8 Mappinff Information. for any of its underground Electric 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. Company must promptly provide mapping information Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules Pans JMS-235313v2 MU200-95 4 3186 SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.1 Relocation in Public Ways. Company shall comply with the requirements of any applicable ordinance of the City relating to relocation of Electric Facilities in Public Ways to the extent consistent with Minnesota Rules, Part 7819.3100 and applicable law. 4.2 Relocation in Public Grounds. The City may require Company at Company's expense to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable city ordinances consistent with law. 4.3 Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Electric Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally- aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46, as supplemented or amended. It is expressly understood that the right herein granted to Company is a valuable property fight and City shall not order Company to remove or relocate its facilities without compensation when a Public Way is vacated, improved or re-aligned because of a renewal or a redevelopment plan which is financially subsidized in whole or in part by the Federal Government or any agency thereof, unless the reasonable non-betterment costs of such relocation is first paid to Company. The City is obligated to pay Company only for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has received federal funding specifically allocated for relocation costs in the amount requested by the Company. 4.4 No Waiver. The provisions of Section 4 apply only to Electric Facilities constructed in reliance on a franchise from City and Company does not waive its rights under an easement or prescriptive right or State or County permit. SECTION 5. TREE TRIMMING. Unless otherwise provided in any permit or other reasonable regulation required by the City under separate ordinance, Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Ways and Public Grounds of City t o the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall save the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1 Indemnity of Ci .ty. Company shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Ways and Public Grounds. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. JMS-235313v2 5 MU200-95 3187 6.2 Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City, and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City, shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. Except where required solely for a City improvement project, the vacation of any Public Way, after the installation of Electric Facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such Electric Facilities, until the reasonable cost of relocating the same and the loss and expenses resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no case, however, shall the City be liable to Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of-way, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 160.29. In accordance with Minnesota Rules, Part 7819.3200, if the City's order directing vacation of the Public Way does not require relocation of the Company's Electric Facilities, the vacation proceedings shall not be deemed to deprive Company of its right to continue to use the right-of-way of the former Public Way for its Electric Facilities installed prior to such order of vacation. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1 Fee Schedule. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in lieu of any permit or other fees being imposed on the Company for work in or use of the right-of-way, the City may impose on the Company a franchise fee by collecting the amounts indicated in a Fee Schedule set forth in a separate ordinance from each customer in the designated Company Customer Class. The City retains the right to modify the fee rate and fee design for the term of the franchise, subject to fee limits agreed upon below. The parties have agreed that the franchise fee collected by the Company and paid to the City in accordance with this Section 9 shall not exceed the following amounts, as they may be adjusted for inflation during the term of this franchise: JMS-235313v2 6 MU200-95 3188 Class Amount Per Month Residential 3.00 Sm C & I -- Non-Dem 5.00 Sm C & I -- Demand' 10.00 Large C & I 10.00 Public Street Ltg. 5.00 Muni Pumping - N/D 5.00 Muni Pumping - Dem 5.00 9.2 Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council. Unless otherwise agreed by the Company, the ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5 shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. No action by the City to implement a separate ordinance will commence until this Ordinance is effective. 9.3 Collection o f t he Fee. The franchise fee s hall b e payable quarterly a nd shall b e based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made by imposing a surcharge equal to the designated franchise fee for the applicable customer classification in all customer billings for electric service in each class. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually and no change shall require a collection from any customer for electric service in excess of the amounts specifically permitted by this Section 9. The time and manner of collecting the franchise fee is subject to the approval of the Commission. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is legally unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rates for electric service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for un-collectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers. In addition, the Company agrees to provide at the time of each payment a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total surcharge billed in the period for which the payment is being made to account for any un-collectibles, refunds or error corrections. JMS-235313v2 7 MU200-95 3189 9.4 Terms Defined. 9.4.1 "Class" shall refer to classes listed in the Fee Schedule and as defined or determined in Company's electric rate book on file with the Commission. 9.4.2 "Fee Schedule" refers to the Schedule in Section 9.1 setting forth the various customer classes from which a franchise fee would be collected if a separate ordinance were implemented immediately after the effective date of this franchise agreement. The Fee Schedule in the separate ordinance may include new Customer Classes added by the Company to its electric tariffs after the effective date of this franchise agreement. 9.5 Equivalent Fee Requirement. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City monthly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The "same or greater equivalent amount" shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a franchise fee from each similar customer, or by comparing, as to similar customers the percentage of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting, or to mn machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing fuel for vehicles. If the Company specifically consents in writing to a franchise or separate ordinance collecting or failing to collect a fee fi-om another energy supplier in contravention of this Section 9.5, the foregoing conditions will be waived to the extent of such written consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing equivalent fee requirement, City retains the final right to determine a franchise fee structure that, after good faith negotiations with Company, the City in its sole discretion, is satisfied constitutes a reasonable equivalent fee structure between customers of the Company and other energy suppliers. SECTION 10. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 10.1 Severabilit3,. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, that if the City is unable to enforce its franchise fee provisions for any reason the City will be allowed to amend the franchise agreement to impose a franchise fee pursuant to statute. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 10.2 Limitation On Applicability,. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. JMS-235313v2 MU200-95 319O SECTION 11. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company's written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. SECTION 12. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERSEDED. This franchise supersedes and replaces previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessors. Upon Company acceptance of this franchise under Section 2.2, the previous franchise shall terminate. Passed by the City Council this __ day of ., 2003. Mayor Pat Meisel Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk JMS-235313v2 9 MU200-95 3191 CITY OF MOUND ORDINANCE NO. 08-2003 AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER D/B/A XCEL ENERGY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND The City of Mound does ordain: SECTION 1. The City of Mound Municipal Code Appendix C is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mound City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and electric services within the City of Mound. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 07-2003, a Franchise Agreement between the City and Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Xcel Energy in amount and fee design as set forth in Section 9 of the Xcel Energy Franchise and in the fee schedule attached as Exhibit A. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Xcel Energy under its Electric Franchise in accordance with the schedule attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance, commencing with the Xcel Energy's October billing month. Subd. 3. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto. Subd. 4. Surcharee. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission allows the utility company to add a surcharge to customer rates to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee and that Xcel Energy will surcharge its customers in the City the amount of the fee. Subd. 5. Record Support for Payment. Xcel Energy shall make each payment when due and, if requested by the City, shall furnish a statement of electric usage by each customer class at the time of each payment for the period for the payment was made. Xcel Energy shall permit the City's designated representative reasonable access to the company's records for the purpose of verifying such statements. Subd. 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 the Franchise Agreement. JMS-231054vl MU200-95 1 3192 §nbtl. '/. lgffeetive Bate of Franehlse Fee. Notwlthstanct'mg {he e~fect'~ve clare ot~ thls ordinance and notwithstanding any contrary provisions in the Franchise, the et~fectivc date of the fee collected under Subdivision 2 of this ordinance is the later of ten (10) days after the publication or after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted ordinance upon Xcel Energy by certified mail. It has been agreed to in advance by Xcel Energy's representatives that Xcel Energy will abide'by the provisions of this Subdivision 7. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect as provided herein. Passed by the City Council of the City of Mound this __ day of ,2003. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel JMS-231054vl MU200-95 2 3193 EXHIBIT A XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE SCHEDULE Class Meter Fee Residential Sm C & I - Non-Dem Sm C & I - Demand Large C & I Public Street Ltg Mtmi Pumping-N/D MuniPumping - Dem $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 JMS-231054vl MU200-95 3 3194 EXHIBIT B XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC FRANCHISE COLLECTION OF THE FEE The franchise fee s hall b e payable quarterly a nd s hall b e based o n t he complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time, however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and may not occur more o~en than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount, which the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City by imposing a surcharge equivalent to such fee in its rates for electric service. The Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles or customer refunds. The time and manner of collecting the franchise fee is subject to approval of the Public Utilities Commission, which the Company agrees to use best efforts to obtain. The Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times, provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information that is not public data which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or any other information regarding specific customers. JMS-231054vl MU200-95 4 3195 August 7, 2003 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Lost Lake Greenway Project S.P. 145-090-01, TEAX 2700 (028) MFRA #13566 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Enclosed is a tabulation of the five (5) bids received on July 30, 2003 for the Lost Lake Greenway Project. The bids ranged from a low of $1,147,509.10, submitted by Environmental Associates, Inc. of Willmar, Minnesota to a high of $1,579,079.30. The Engineer's estimate was $1,261,719.61. The lower bidder, Environmental Associates, Inc., has provided all the necessary documents to the Mn/DOT State Aid office in St. Paul. They have also submitted their list of Suppliers, Subcontractors and references for review by HKGI and our office. Everything appears to be in order; therefore we are recommending that the City award a contract to Environmental Associates, Inc. in the amount of $1,147,509.10. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:rth cc: Bruce Chamberlain, HKGI s:\main:\mou 13566\corresponden ce\mayor~council8 -7 3196 00000000~000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000~00000000000000000000000000000~00000~ 3197 3198 3199 oo, 32OO 5341 Mayw00d Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 To: From: Date: Subject: Honorable Mayor and City Council Sarah Smith August 4, 2003 Proposed Minor Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Consistency with M.S.S. Background In 2002, the Planning Commission formally reviewed a number of proposed rezoning and comprehensive plan (Land Use Map) amendments which included a proposed rezoning of a number on properties Chateau Lane and Fairview Lane from R-2 to R-3 as follows: PID Property Address Existing Comprehensive Plan Proposed Comprehensive Plan 1311724430064 2200 Fairview Lane High Density Residential Low Density Resideritial 1311724430063 2208 Fairview Lane High Density Residential Low Densi .ty Residential 1311724430062 2212 Fairview Lane Hi~ Density Residential Low Densit.¥ Residential 1311724430061 2216 Fairview Lane High Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430055 2203 Chateau Lane High Density., Residential Low Densi .ty Residential 1311724430057 2209 Chateau Lane High Density,, Residential Low Densi ,ty Residential 1311724430058 2213 Chateau Lane High Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430059 2217 Chateau Lane High Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430060 222 t Chateau Lane High Density Residential Low Density Residential The proposed amendments were intended to correct inconsistencies with zoning and the existing use of the property as required by statute. Following review and discussion which took place as part of the public hearing, the Planning Commission offered a recommendation to the City Council advising that the subject properties on Chateau and Fairview be rezoned to R-'3. At its June 24, 2003 meeting, the City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the properties on Chateau and Fairview but opted not to rezone the subject properties in light of concerns expressed by the several property owners and further commented that there was a significant amount of high density associated with the downtown project(s) and requested that the Planning Commission consider a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use designations for the subject properties along Chateau and Fairview from High Density Residential (HI)R) to Low Density Residential (HI)R) to coincide with the existing R-2 zoning. 3201 Planning Commission Review- Comprehensive 'Plan Amendments At part of its July 21, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider comprehensive plan amendments for the properties on Chateau Lane and Fairview Lane to change the land use to LDR. The Planning Commission tabled action on this matter to its August 4, 2003 meeting to allow for additional discussion by all members if possible. Planning Commission Recommendation At its August 4, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and unanimously voted to retain the existing land use designation of HDR for the properties on Chateau Lane and Fairview Lane and further recommended that the subject properties be rezoned as they are better suited to R-3 high density residential from a planning perspective. Members of the City Council are advised that a resolution has not been prepared in advance of the meeting due to ditTering recommendations from Staff and Planning Commission regarding this issue. 3202 MINUTE iEXCERPTS MOUND iPLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 2003 5. BOARD OF APPEALS Review of Comprehensive Plan Amendmeuts - Chateau / Fairview Smith provided a brief overview of the case. In 2002, the Planning Commission considered a number of proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan for consistency with state statute. Included in the proposed rezoning action(s) was a recommendation from the Planning Commission to rezone a number of properties on Chateau Lane and Chateau Lane from R-2 to R-3 residential. The properties are identified as follows: PID Property Address 1311724430064 2200 Fairview Lmm 1311724430063 2208 Fairview Lane 1311724430062 2212 Fairview Lane 1311724430061 2216 Fairview Lane 13I 1724430055 22(i)3 Chateau Lane 1311724430057 2209 Chateau Lane 1311724430058 22 l 3 Chateau Lane 13t 1724430059 2217 Chateau Lane 1311724430060 2221 Chateau Lane When the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendments were forwarded on to the City Council for action on June 24, 2003, the City Council opted not to rezone the subject properties due to concerns brought up by involved property owners and directed Staff to prepare a request for a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use designation to Low Density Residential for consistency with the existing zoning. Smith commented that the public hearing was opened at the July 21, 2003 meetin~ but was tabled to the August 4TM meeting so allow for further discussion by the Commission as several members were absent and the motion brought up at the July 2'1 ~t meeting resulted in a 3-3 vote. Mueller clarified that the Planning Commission's original motion in 2002 supported that the properties be rezoned to R-3 and that the City Council opted not to take action on the proposed rezoning action and referenced the motion from the July 15, 2002 Planning Commission meeting minutes which were included in the agenda packet. Mueller further commented that he is against changing the colnprehensive plan because he believes that one of the ways that change and redevelopment can occur in an area is through zoning and from a planning perspective, the proposal to rezone the area to R-3 was a good tool. 32O3 Osmek mentioned that several individuals from the neighborhood attended the Council meeting and expressed concern about changing the zoning to allow for higher density and further commented that many of the owners indicated that they purchased the properties for single-family use. Osmek further commented that a significant amount of higher density housing will be coming in with the new development. Michael commented that it makes sense from a planning standpoint to change the zoning and stated that this appears to be a case where the City Council and Planning Commission may differ on what is appropriate for the area. Osmek indicated that if the concept does not make sense from a planning perspective, the Commission should not support the proposed amendment to change the land use plan. Meuller indicated that he heard that the City Council felt that there wasn't adequate space for a apartment complex. Mueller further commented that interested developers could perhaps buy 1 - 2 lots and put in a twin home or duplex. He indicated that because we can allow zero lot line and combine tots this alternative could be a viable option. The option of buying three lots to build 2 dwellings could also be a possibility. Muelter indicated that rezoning to R-3 would allow someone to buy the lots and make a project economically feasible. MOTION by Mueller, seconded by Raines, to not change the land use designation to Low Density Residential for the (9) properties on Chateau and Fairview Lane and to rezone the properties to R-3. Voting in favor: Michael, Glister, Hasse, Ayaz, Raines, Mueller and Clapsaddle. Voting against: Osmek. Motion carried 7 to 1. 3204 MINUTE EXCERPTS MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21., 2003 CASE #02-20 PUBLIC HEARING REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FAIRVIEW LANE/CHATEAU LANE The proposed amendments are intended to correct inconsistencies with zoning and the existing use of the property as required by statute. At its June 24, 2003 meeting, the City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendations and further directed staff to undertake a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use designations for the properties along Chateau and Fairview from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential to coincide with the existing R-2 zoning. Staff recommends approval of the proposed minor comprehensive plan amendments. Mueller asked for clarification of the previous action from 2002 and commented that the Planning Commission offered a recommendation to rezone the subject properties to high density. Staff confirmed Mr. Mueller's statement and indicated that there was a typographical error in the Planning Report. Open the Public Hearing Tom Liljemark, 2192 Chateau Lane - He wanted to be sure that he understood the requested change. It was explained that the zoning would not change but the Comprehensive Plan would. Osmek felt there were a significant number of residents in the area concerned about creating a density problem, especially in light of the high density going in downtown. Close the Public Hearing MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from high to low density for these properties. Mueller noted that the area had a lot of undersized and nonconforming lots. He would have rather changed the zoning to high density because it would be good planning to encourage someone to come in and develop the area for multi-family residential. MOTION carried. Voting for: Osmek, Hasse, Clapsaddle. Voting against: MUeller, Schwingler, Michael. 3205 MOTION by Mueller, second by Clapsaddle, to table action until the August 4, 2003 meeting. MOTION carried. Voting for: Hasse, Clapsaddle, Mueller, Schwingler, Michael. Voting against: Osmek. Smith said that the meeting minutes from 2002 will be provided and hopefully more commission members will be in attendance. 32O6 32O7 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER MINOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MOUND NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:00 p.m, on Monday, July 21, 2003 to consider Comprehensive Plan amendments to a number of properties, as indicated below: PID Property Address Existing comprehensive Proposed Plan Comprehensive Plan 1311724430064 2200 Fairview Lane Hi[;h Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430063 2208 Fairview Lane Hish Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430062 2212 Fairview Lane Hi~;h Density Residential Low Density~Residential 1311724430061 2216 Fairview Lane High Density Residential Low Density Residential 1311724430055 2203 Chateau Lane Hil~h Density Residenlial Low Density Residemial 1311724430057 2209 Chateau Lane High Density Residential Low Density Resifi'ential 1311724430058 2213 Chateau Lane High Density Residential Low D%sity Residential 1311724430059 2217 Chateau Lane Hi/~h Density Residential Low Density Residential 131 I724430060 2221 Chateau Lane Hish Density Residential Low Density Residential Information regarding the proposed CoP~prehensive Plan amendments is available to the public upon request at City Hall. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting Planning and Building Inspections Published in the Laker on July 5. 2003 printed on recycled'paper 3208 CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 £ib/of Mound P, edevelopment Update .]uly-Augusl: 2003 Greenway Construction. Bids for the Greenway Trail project were opened on July 30, 2003 and will be reviewed at the August 12, 2003 City Council / HRA meeting(s). It is anticipated that construction will begin shortly thereafter and should be completed by June 2004. A date for the groundbreaking ceremony for the Greenway project is pending and will be announced soon. The Greenway Trail will serve as the gateway to Mound's new downtown. Public Safety Building, The building shell of the new Mound Public Safety building is up. The project is on schedule and on budget. Tentative completion date is November. Mound Marketplace. Final touches are being made to Mound Market Place including the completion of a waterfall at the intersection of Commerce and Lynwood. Earlier this summer, the area identification monument and landscaping plantings were completed. Village by the Bay. To date, permits have been issued for the following buildings in the Village By the Bay residential development: Building 1 4-unit Building 2 4-unit Building 3 4-unit Building 4 3-unit Building 8 6-unit Building 9 6-unit Building 14 20-unit 32O9 CSAH 15. The City and Hennepin County approved the Right-of-Way Agreement in October 2002 for Phase I and Phase II of the CSAH 15 / Shoreline Drive Reconstruction Project. · Relocation notices to affected businesses were sent out by Hennepin County in December 2002. The proposed draft of the Construction Agreement between the City of Mound and Hennepin County for the County Road 15 road project is forthcoming and should be delivered in the next few weeks. · Construction activities are expected to begin in April of 2004 and will be on- going through 2005. Downtown Streetscape. Plans and specifications for the realigned County Road 15 are nearing completion. In addition to the street itself, the project will include brick as well as concrete sidewalks, significant landscaping, ornamental streetlights, benches, trash receptacles, bike racks and decorative fencing. The project will build stormwater treatment ponds that will cleanse downtown runoff before it enters Lost Lake. One of those ponds will have a fountain installed that will not only create a gateway feature for the downtown but help further cleanse the stormwater. Pedestrian overlooks along the roadway will be placed at Lost Lake and the pond. City staff is working with the owners of the post office property to create a small civic plaza at the entry of the new post office as part of the street project to enhance the post office's traditional function as an impromptu community social space. Xcel. Members of the Mound Project Team are currently working to resolve issues related to the NSP substation and the relocation of transmission and distribution lines. MCES Lift Station. The lift station located at Shoreline and Belmont is slated for removal in late 2005 with the addition of a gravity line that will run from its current location to the wastewater treatment plant on the west boundary of Mound. It will be a two-year project, starting from the west and moving to the east. Its removal in 2005 will then allow for development of the Auditor's Road District. Longpre Building Removal. At its July 8, 2003 meeting, the HRA accepted the bid from Landwehr Construction to demolish the former Longpre building located at the intersection of Commerce and Shoreline. Demolition is expected to begin in the next 2-3 weeks. · Page 2 3210 Former Dakota Railroad Line I Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA). The former Dakota Railroad corridor was purchased by Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority in cooperation with McLeod and Carver Counties and the State of Minnesota in December 2001. Pursuant to the multi-party agreement with the Surface Transportation Board (STB), the HCRRA is obligated to attempt to provide rail service on the line until the STB permits the line to be abandoned which cannot occur prior to December 31,2003. The Cooperative Agreement between the three railroad authorities also commits them to keeping the rail corridor in tact for the purpose of preserving it for future transportation purposes. · Requests for Proposals (RFPs) were let by the HCRRA earlier this year for reuse of the rail line however no responses were received. The future of the rail is in a holding pattern until the December date expires. This holding pattern affects the design of the realigned County 15 where it crosses Belmont. Mound Harbor Renaissance Development, LLC (MHRD) At its July 8, 2003 meeting, the Mound City Council and HRA approved the Second Amendment to the Preliminary Development Agreement with MHRD until August 26, 2003 to allow time for the Developer and the HRA to compile a list of potential options to determine if there is sufficient funding to make the development project economically feasible. Additionally, no later than September 23, 2003, MHRD will provide the HRA and the City with materials indicating that relationships have been established between the developer and other entities participating in the development of specific areas in the project including the hotel portion of the development. Shoreline Plaza Remodel. A comprehensive exterior remodel of the Shoreline Plaza Shopping Center is nearing completion. Additionally, the space formerly occupied by Mound Liquor and a portion of the former Jubilee Foods space is being renovated by Westonka Schools to expand its educational facilities and programs. Former Bowling Alley. The interior remodel of the former bowling alley owned and operated by Dave Willette is almost complete. Current tenants include Curves for Women, the Mound Home Laundry and Sew What. Exterior renovations will be in keeping with the historic lake hotels. · Page 3 3211 Mound Development Update. City staff prepares a bdef development update on a regular basis which is sent out in electronic form. Anyone interested in being added to the email list is requested to contact Community Development Director Sarah Smith at 952-472-3190. Email: Sarahsmith~cityofmound.com · Page 4 3212 Mound Council Minutes - July 8, 2003 7. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MOUND HARBOR RENAISSANCE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT Mayor Meisel stepped down as Mayor because she and her husband own property in the proposed redevelopment district. Acting Mayor Hanus in th meeting. in full earlier ON by Brown, seconded by Osmek to grant a 120 day extension, until November 2003, to the Preliminary Developers Agreement with Mound Harbor Renaissance Development, LLC, with the following timeline; within 60 days have gap options available to the HRA, within 90 days have the hotel agreement in place with Rick Bloomquist, and within 120 days have the financial gap strategies completed, as well as presenting monthly updates during the 120 day extension. Staff is directed to prepare a second amendment to the Preliminary Developers Agreement with Mound Harbor Renaissance Development, LLC, that will incorporate the above stated terms. All voted 8. DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN BUILDINGS AS STRUCTURALLY SUBSTANDARD WITHIN DEVELOPMNT DISTRICT NO. '! It was noted that this item was discussed earlier at the HRA meeting. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO, 03-66: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN BUILDINGS AS STRUCTURALLY SUBSTANDARD WITHIN PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 9. CONSIDERATION/ACTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR SAFE AND SOBER COMMUNITIES PROGRAM Police Chief Jim Kurtz presented the proposed grant agreement to the Council, and discussion followed regarding the aspects of the program and the program budget. MOTION by Meyer that the City of Mound join the Safe and Sober Campaign as proposed. Motion died for lack of a second. 10. CONSIDERATION/ACTION DIRECTING STAFF REGARDING 2 A.M. BAR CLOSING It was noted that the current City Code states that hours of operation for liquor establishments is according to State Statute, which means that now bars have the option to be open until 2 a.m. unless the code is revised. 3 3213 The Gillespie Gazette VOL XI NO 8 August- 2003 July 17, 2003 Dear Members and Friends, PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE We are already into the last half of summer and I'm wondering where the first half went. We did receive plenty of rain in June and at thts point, the farm crops look pretty good. Our Annual Sweepstakes has been concluded. All 300 tickets were sold. Thanks to all who bought or sold tickets. Good luck to all. Our Pork Chop Dinner went well and everyone enjoyed the entertainment. We did'hr sell out and probably missed some people because it was a beautiful Minnesota summer evening. Thanks to all of those who helped with this dinner. Last Saturday was the "Old-Fashioned Saturday" in Mound and it was a busy, busy, day. We certainly had a full house to enjoy the food, Roger Erickson and Cai Brazier. Thanks to those who helped make this a fun evening. Special thanks go to Ken and Dee Scott for organizing this fund raising event. Last month I mentioned that because of budget cuts, our Senior Dining Program was in jeopardy. The Foundation board voted to continue the Dining Program for this year and they would find the money. Because of a number of wonderful donors, the money has mostly been raised for this year. Thanks, Friends of the Center. For any of you who have attended our fund raising events, or been at the Center on a busy day, you know that we need more parking. The Foundation will be purchasing a piece of property, which will be used to increase our parking area. We will be fund raising to pay for this property in the coming months. On Sunday, July 27~, from 2:00 to 4:00 pm we will be celebrating our 2"4 Anniversary of our beautiful Gillespie Center. We will be serving Culvers' ice cream sundaes and be entertained by well- known local musician, I~alph Gnitka. Please drop in and spend some time with us. Congratulations to all members on another successful year and, of course, thanks to our friend Bill Gillespie the beautiful air-conditioned building we can celebrate in. Chairperson Gillespie Center Advisory Council 3214 MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 21, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Michael welcomed the public and called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. · 2. ROLL CALL Those present: Chair Geoff Michael; Commissioners: Jerry Clapsaddle, Cklair Hasse, Michael Mueller, Jon Schwingler and Dave Osmek. Absent and excused: Jorj Ayaz, Becky Glister and Greg Raines. Staff present: Community Development Director Sarah Smith, Planner Loren Gordon and Recording Secretary Jill Norlander. The following individuals were present: Kevin Wells - 2205 Mill Pond Ln; Chuck Alcon - WARA Real Estate; Chris Anderson - 2231 Southview Ln; Fred Shinnick - 6107 Sugar Mill Ln, Scott Holter - 2241 Southview Ln; James Sampson - 2203 Chateau Ln; Tom Liljemark - 2192 Chateau Ln; Jim Niesen - 2321 Mill Pond Ln. 3. APPROVAL OF JULY 7~ 2003 MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Hasse, to approve the minutes of the July 7, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Discussion The two motions to table the Coddon request were questioned. It was established that the draft minutes were accurate as submitted. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION to reconsider by Mueller, seconded by Osmek. MOTION carried unanimously. It was determined that the third motion to table was not accurate. It should show that it was just a request for the specific information required to bring the case back to the commission and no vote was taken as it wasn't brought up as a motion. MOTION to approve changes carried unanimously. 4. APPROVE AGENDA WITH ANY AMENDMENTS Add information from Smith as Item 6b. Jon Schwingter arrived at 7:09. 3215 Planning Coinmission Minutes July 2 I. 2003 5. BOARD OF APPEALS CASE #03-33 PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PDA-CUP 2241 SOUTHVIEW LANE - WARA REAL ESTATE The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for a 13 lot single-family development named "Langdon Trails". The project is located in the western portion of the community along Southview Lane. The property has one home and a few outbuildings. Access is off Southview Lane. Topography falls from the high point on the north property line to the wetland area along the railroad right-of-way. There is about 44 feet of elevation change on the site. A DNR wetland is located along the western property boundary, adjacent to the Langdon Bay residential development. The wetland drains through the property when water levels are high. A number of large pine trees are located along the northern property boundary, The storm water pond is believed to be undersized at this time. The overflow that is created during the wet times of the years is not accommodated. These items will be addressed before the final plat is authorized. It may impact on Lot 11. It has been suggested that the Langdon Bay pond be combined with this pond but there are problems with that approach. Water and sewer connections are both off Southview Lane. There are two hydrants planned within the development with a loop back into the Langdon Bay area. Park trails have been proposed. There is no land for park dedication so fees will be collected. The retaining walls along the north border used to accommodate the layout and protect the pine trees are about 15 feet in height over the range of the two wall systems proposed. Staff agrees wit the approach to protect the trees as long as the retaining walls are designed and constructed ina manner that will not pose drainage and erosion problems. More detail will be needed. The east/west street is proposed as "Southview Lane" which is also the platted name of the unimproved section along the east property line. Staff will need to discuss this and make recommendation if this is an acceptable name before final plat approval. The 50-foot road right-of-way may not be necessary. The current Southview Lane is a 30-foot roadway, there is no sidewalk and all utilities are within the street surface area. Narrowing the roadway would enable the southern cul-de-sac lots to move away from the rear lot lines 5 or 10 feet. Staff recommends approval of the project with the following conditions: 1. The WCA provisions apply to the development 2. Include the comments of the City Engineer's report 3. Include any comments from the Parks Director Clapsaddle asked the distance of the house on Lot 1 to the retaining wall. Gordon indicated it would be between 20 and 30 feet. 2 3216 Pla/ming Commission Minutes July 21, 2003 Mueller wanted to know where the 1-foot by 1-foot drainage swale for the overflow was located. It appeared that it ran into some of the house pads. Gordon indicated that it would be altered as the lot is graded after construction. Mueller felt that the information supplied isn't adequate to approve a preliminary plat, especially since the Planning Commission may not have another chance to review. He's uncomfortable with the preliminary plat being discussed without the City Engineer present. Clapsaddle asked what the Planning Commission needs to do at this point. Gordon responded that the Planning Commission needs to take comments and give feedback. The Commission can table or pass it on to the City Council. Osmek said he'd rather that this Commission get everything they need to make a good recommendation to the Council. The pressure being put on the infrastructure (streets, traffic and utilities) is a concern. Trail hook being on the Southview Lane side in the subdivision would increase pedestrian traffic into the neighborhood. It was discussed previously to have the trail access down the unimproved Southview Lane area. Decreasing the street width to 30. feet would be too tight. Forty feet would be livable. The name Southview Road would work. The 1-foot drainage swale is a washout concern. Mueller asked what staff.would be comfortable with as a roadway width. Gordon said that Cameron and he would be okay with a 40-foot right-of-way. This project would have concrete curb and gutter. City standard is 28-foot street bed width. Mueller noted that the trail connection down Southview Lane would put it through a wetland. The storm water pond and wetland are immediately adjacent. Why not use the existing wetland rather than creating a pond? Gordon indicated that the function of the pond is to filter the water. Mueller asked about the collection points for the storm water system. He is concerned that the volume and speed of water runoff would affect the neighborhoods outside of our current consideration. Clapsaddle observed that the east area runoff would be reduced by 2/3rds. The City Engineer feels that we need more information from the applicant before he can be satisfied the drainage is going to work. Open the Public Hearing Fred Sinnick, 6107 Sugar Mill - Where is the watermain loop going to go? Gordon i.ndicated there were connections and easements already in place. Sinnick said that the westerly wetland drainage has been running most of the last year. The current trail connection area has grown up with trees and would need to be cleared and regraded. He doesn't want to see all of it cut down. There are some good trees as well as scrub trees in the area. Osmek would like to see the trail connection go south along Southview Lane and on a boardwalk system if necessary. Kevin Wells, 2205 Mill Pond Lane - Drainage easement through his property has remained extremely wet. The property behind his (Stuhr's) backs up to the wetland area and has been under water basically the whole summer. He has seen the storm water runoff, increase since the 3217 Planning Commission Minutes July 21, 2003 Rottlund development was established. Chris Anderson - 2231 Southview Lane - Lots 1 and 2 back up to their property. They are currently dealing with the Landon Woods construction. It's non-stop beginning at 7 a.m. and runs through the evening. Traffic has increased. Southview is narrow. This adds 13 homes, 2 cars per home, 2 trips per day. The road is in disrepair and won't handle it. Her husband works a night shit~ and the construction is disrupting. Trucks are backed up in front of their.property waiting to get to the Chestnut area. Power surges have occurred every day. Water pressure fluctuates throughout the day down to a trickle. Existing sewer and water may not handle the load. Water is coming in the basement. Why cram as many houses as you can. It would double the population of their road. Look at the property and the neighborhood. Jim Niesen, 2221 Mill Pond Lane - This is an example of the problems resulting from piece meal planning. The western wetlands are too full all the time. Neighbors used to have a garden in the back yard and they can't have one anymore because it's too wet. The 1-foot drainage swale could be converted to a culvert as a more permanent solution. Any plans for the outlot behind him? Mueller indicated it will remain an outlot. Can we require the developer to save the trees? Rottlund promised and didn't. Osmek commented that the disturbance of the root systems would kill the trees. Scott Hoiseth, 6100 Sugar Mill Lane - He is concerned about stripping of the berm for the trail - they would lose some of the screening. Drainage out of wetlands should have been dealt with by Rottlund. Setbacks force the homes closer to their lot. Overall asthetics between the two developments needs to be addressed. Closed Public Hearing. Schwingler asked if the 1-foot swale wet all the time? Hoiseth indicated it was and that it's slightly wider than 1-foot and the clay stays muddy. Mueller noted that there are a fair amount of shrubs at the rear. The ditch is elevated and he sees the drainage as coming towards Hoiseth's house. They built a retaining wall to separate their home from the swale. Chuck Alcon, WARA Real Estate. Recommends tabling the action. DNR has inadequate records. Retaining walls would be constructed by the contractor not the individual homeowner. The street name doesn't matter to them. Trail location was altered because of the wetland. It would require mitigation or extensive permitting. Right-of-way from 50to 40 is new data that will be considered. We want to keep front setbacks at 25. Otto (engineer) conservatively constructed pond. Cameron may not have had time to look at runoff calcs. It was constructed strictly for their development. Obviously there may be other issues from Mill Pond and areas that need to be addressed. The water pressure issue may be because the Anderson's are at the end of the line. The loop may help that problem. Interested parties are invited to look at the Saunders Lake development for WARA's tree preservation policy. They have conserved a large percentage. Kara (their engineer) will be at the next meeting. 3218 Planning Commission Minutes July 21, 2003 Mueller wants to know the feasibility of a different trail access - maybe between Lots 11 and 127 It was indicated by staffthat the trail can go into the buffer area. Alcon indicated that if that is true they would reroute and stay to the outer edge of the buffer area. The retaining walls will not be disturbing the top of the pine tree area. The drainage should not change there. The development construction project should be between 6-10 weeks. Home construction could be 12-18 months depending on lot sales. MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Clapsaddle, to continue the public hearing to the August 4th meeting. It was determined that two weeks weren't adequate. Mueller amended motion to reflect that the public hearing should be tabled to the August 18th meeting. The 1-foot ditch goes through the Rottlund development as well and drains into the wetland to the east and not into the storm water pond. More information needs to be provided regarding expectations for this development from the perspective of the wetland that serves both. We need to look at the water flowage for the area not just this development. Drainage from the Clover Circle and Red Oak Lane area exits into the wetlands on the west .side of Mill Pond. Gordon clarified that they contribute to existing volumes. He also indicated that Mound does have a tree preservation plan. It is a process through the PDA process that deals with stands of trees not particular trees. It encourages protection but no specific policy to "protect over a certain caliper". Mueller said it was a due diligence provision. It was discussed during the Rottlund development but was not followed through. How are we going to deal with this one? We need delineation between neighborhoods. Alcon requested that Cameron provide as-builts for Rottlund and Mill Pond areas. MOTION carried unanimously CASE #02-20 PUBLIC HEARING REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FAIRVIEW LANE/CHATEAU LANE The proposed amendments are intended to correct inconsistencies with zoning and the existing use of the property as required by statute. At its June 24, 2003 meeting, the City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendations and further directed staff to undertake a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use designations for the properties along Chateau and Fairview from High Density Residential to Low Density Residential to coincide with the existing R-2 zoning. 5 3219 Planning Commission Minutes July 21, 2003 Staff recommends approval of the proposed minor comprehensive plan amendments. Mueller asked for clarification of the previous action from 2002 and commented that the Planning Commission offered a recommendation to rezone the subject properties to high density. Staff confirmed Mr. Mueller's statement and indicated that there was a typographical error in the Planning Report. Open the Public Hearing Tom Liljemark, 2192 Chateau Lane - He wanted to be sure that he understood the requested change. It was explained that the zoning would not change but the Comprehensive Plan would. Osmek felt there were a significant number of residents in the area concerned about creating a density problem, especially in light of the high density going in downtown. Close the Public Hearing MOTION by Osmek, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan from high to low density for these properties. Mueller noted that the area had a lot of undersized and nonconforming lots. He would have rather changed the zoning to high density because it would be good planning to encourage someone to come in and develop the area for multi-family residential. MOTION carried. Voting for: Osmek, Hasse, Clapsaddle. Voting against: Mueller, Schwingler, Michael. MOTION by Mueller, second by Clapsaddle, to table action until the August 4, 2003 meeting. MOTION carried. Voting for: Hasse, Clapsaddle, Mueller, Schwingler, Michael. Voting against: Osmek. Smith said that the meeting minutes from 2002 will be provided and hopefully more commission members will be in attendance. 6. OLD / NEW BUSINESS a. City Councilmember Update 6 3220 Planning Commission Minutes July 21, 2003 b. Community Development Director Update Smith covered the following items: Status of Longpre building demoliton; City Engineer interviews; Greenway Trail status; Mahogany Bay parking lot paving completion; Coddon - Staff working with legal council to address issues raised during the 7/7/03 meeting; Agenda items for 8/4 Planning Commission meeting; New development applications; and Mound Harbor Renaissance preliminary development agreement extension. Mueller inquired why the Coddon division was considered legal even though it didn't include city review and requested background information and detail. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Hasse, seconded by Michael, to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 PM. MOTION carried unanimously. Chair Geoff Michael Attest, Planning Secretary 7 3221 Mediaco m Theresa Sunde Government Relations Coordinator Augustl, 2003 Dear Community Leaders, We are improving our programming choices for our Digital Programming Custom ers! Effective on or around September 12, 2003, Mediacom will be expanding the service in your community by providing the additional exciting programming on our Digital Service Tiers. Mediacom has created the Digital Special Interest and the Digital Variety Pac.t Mediacom is notifying our customers of the new channel lineup by mail. A copy of the notice is attached. We realize that our customers have a choice of how to spend their entertainment dollar and we are working hard to deliver the best product possible with outstanding service. Mediacom is pleased to be your cable television provider. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the number listed below. Sincerely, Theresa Sunde Mediacom Communications Corporation 1504 2na Street SE · Waseca, MN 56093 · 507-835-2356 · Fax 507-835-4567 3222 SU:liiOLSliO 'IVi191(I I10.-I SMgN 099~ VI'S=INIOR S9(3 OIVd 39VJ. SOd S~ O3±~OS3~d 3224 3225 Page 1 of 1 Kandis M Hanson From: To: Cc-' Sent: Subject: "Vern Hanson" <vhanson@metroplains.com> "Kandis Hanson (E-mail)" <KandisHanson@cityofmound.com>; "Sarah Smith (E-mail)" <sarahsmith@cityofmound.com>; "Larry OIson" <lolson@metroplains.com>; "Larissa Tadavarthy" <ltadavarthy@metroplains.com> "Michelle Kaisef' <mkaiser@metroplains.com>; "Brian Pellowski (E-mail)" <PBKINVEST@AOL.COM> Tuesday, July 29, 2003 !0:20 AM Fountain update @ Mound Marketplace Just a update on the progress of the fountain: 1. The plaza pavers are in. They will be installed after the fountain is finished because we need the plaza area for staging the fountain installation of stone. 2. The stone for the fountain has not been delivered. We were told it would be 6 to 8 weeks for delivery and this was at the end of June. We were hopeful for a July delivery and installation but it appears it will be the six weeks which puts the delivery in the first two weeks of august. 3. Fountain installation will take a week to two weeks and the pavers a little less than a week to install. 4. Appears that completion will be the end of august. 3226 7/31/03 Page 1 of 1 Kandis M Hanson From: To: Cc: Sent: Subject: <Guy. K. Nowlan@co.hennepin.mn.us> <andrew.leith@co.hennepin.mn,us>; <Bernard.J.Jahn@co.hennepin.rnn.us>; <blc@hkgi.com>; <Dean. Michalko@co.hennepin.mn. us>; <Dharam.c. Bobra@co.hennepin.mnlus>; <Guy. K. Nowlan@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Jerry.Smrcka@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Jerry. Mortenson@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <joel.settles@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <jcameron@mfra.com>; <KarI.Holtz@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Larry. Odell@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Mark. E.Stafne@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <ppaige@HKGI.com>; <Rich. Grant@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <vwestrum@HKGI.com> <kandishanson@cityofmound.com>; <Marcia.Wilda@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Bruce. M.Polaczyk@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Brad. Moe@co.hennepin.mn.us>; <Steven. P.Theis@co. hennepin, mn. us> Tuesday, June 17, 2003 3:56 PM 15/9417 - Rail Lowering A message to inform you that I will be inserting into the bid plan the necessary info for lowering of the rail line. The objective is to maintain the HCRRA's rail line as a viable heavy rail corridor for the foreseeable future. Also, this would provide for a continuous construction of the roadway through the city. This is likely to create the need for plan adjustments. I ask that we continue with our work leading to the 95% plan (6/26) and wait to consider what adjustments will be necessary once I determine the impact. (additional RW, RR pay items, grading, walls, etc.). I have already asked HCRRA for a RR crossing typical and will need to work through the details of RR design criteria. Thanks Guy K. Nowlan, P.E. Project Manager-Design Division Hennepin County Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive, Medina, MN 55340-5421 Telephone: 763-745-7655 Fax: 763-478-4000 3227 7/31/03 Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road · Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 · edenprairie.org, 952-949-8300 · TDD 952.949-8qQ9 MemOrandum #2003~050 DATE: July 25, 2003 TO: FROM: RE: WAFTA City Contacts Scott H. Neal, City Manager WAFTA Progress Report Since our May 30th meeting in Mound, a number of positive developments have occurred for WAFTA. As you may have seen in local media, 2nd District Congressmen Jim Kline was successful in adding a $250,000 appropriation for WAFTA to the 2003-04 Department of Defense budget bill. The appropriation would be used to fund the proposed environmental study we need to ultimately determine the remediation financial responsibility for the site. I have included a copy of the press release from Congressmen Kline's office and a copy of the news article about the WAFTA site from the Star-Tribune. The U.S. House approved the Defense spending bill, including the WAFTA appropriation. The U.S. Senate also approved a Defense spen~ting bill with the WAFTA appropriation on July 17th, but due to other differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, it must go to Conference Committee. The Conference Committee that will take up theDefense spending bill is not scheduled to meet until after September 3, 2003. The Committee must get its work done quickly to allow for both theHouse and the Senate to approve the revised bill before the start of the new. federal fiscal year on October 1,206~. Because of the Short time frame between September 3~d and October 1 st, it is important for WAFTA city officials to contact Senator Norm Coleman and Senator Mark Dayton to ask for their support of the WAFTA appropriation. Also, a message t° C°ng~essmen Kline's office thanking him for his S~l~po~t Would be appropriate as well. Also included with this memorandum is a packet of contact information for WAFTA city officials. The information includes contact and biographical information about WAFTA state and county officials. We will need this information later this year when we launch an advocacy campaign to gain state assistance for the WAFTA clean-up project. I will be arranging a progress report meeting in September for WAFTA city officials. My office will contact you in AugUst c°ncerning datei time, and l°cation. Thank you. 8 10 11 WAFTA Citl - City Con aet Information City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen MN 55317-0147 city Contact Phone/Fax PopUlation Todd Gerhardt 952-227-1100 21,100 City Manager 952,227,1110 City of Chaska I City Hall Plaza Chaska MN 55318-1982 Dave Pokorney 952-448-2851 18,380 City Administrator 952-448-9300 City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie MN 55344-4485 Scott H. Neal 952-949-8300 55,660 City Manager 952-949-8589 City of Excelsior 339 Third Street Excelsior MN 55331-1809 Myles McGrath 952-474-5233 2,392 City Manager 952-474-6300 City of Long Lake 1964 Park Avenue P.O. Box 606 Long Lake MN 55356-0606 Michelle Morse 952-473-6961 1,849 City Manager 952-476-9622 City of Maple Plain 1620 Maple Street P.O. Box 97 Maple Plain MN 55359-0097 Bevedy Anderson 763-479-0515 2,088 City Administrator 763-479-0519 City of Mayer 413 Blue Jay Avenue P.O. Box 102 Mayer MN 55360-0120 Lois Maetzold 952-657-1502 559 City Clerk/Treasurer 952-657-1203 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound MN 55364-1627 Kandis Hanson 952-472-0600 9,454 City Manager 952-472-0620 City of St. Bonifacius 8535 Kennedy Memorial Ddve St. Bonifacius MN 55375-1151 Brenda Fisk 952-446-1061 1,998 City Clerk 952-446-9265 City of Victoria 7951 Rose Street P.O. Box 36 Victoria MN 55386-0036 Steven Sarvi 952-443-2363 4,365 City Administrator 952-443-2110 City of Watertown 309 Lewis Avenue South P.O. Box 279 Watertown MN 55388-0279 Dave Mandt 952-955-2681 3,200 City Administrator 952-955-2695 WAFTA cities Total Population = 121,045 17.4% 15.2% 46.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.7% 0.5% 7.8% 1.7% 3.6% 2.6% 3229 District 33 - Senator Gen Olson (R.), Minnetrista~ MN Senator Olson is in her 7th term, first elected in to the Senate in 1982. She has aBS in Education from the University of Minnesota,' and an EdD from the University of Minnesota. Prior to serving in the Senate, she was an Educator, from high school, to the Minnesota Department of Education, to secondary school administration. She is single, and lives on her family farm in Minnetrista, which she no longer actively farms. She became involved in policy debates at the local level out of concern that raw sewage might be dumped into a lake near her family farm. She began working for the incorporation of Minnetrista Township in to a city. That led to a seat on the Minnetrista Park and Recreation Commission, then the Planning and Zoning Commission, election to the Minnetrista City Council, and election as mayor. In 1982, a local Republican search' committee asked her to-nm for the Senate. Committee's: Education - Lead Minority E-12 Education Budget Division - Lead Minority Environment and Natural Resources Rules and Administration District 34 - Senator Julianne Ortman (iL), Chanhassen, MN Senator Ortman is in her 1~t term, first elected to the Senate in 2002. She has a BA from Macalester College, and a JD from the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Ortxnan is a business attorney. In her career, she has worked drug cme cases in the U.S. Attorney's office in New York (under Kudy Guiliani), has worked as an associate in a business law firm in Washington, D.C., and has been an adjunct professor at George Washington University. In 1994, she moved to Minnesota with her spouse and opened their own business law and litigation firm, Ortman Associates. She is married (spouse is Kay), with four children. : She jumped into the political arena in 2000, successfully running for the Carver County Board. She then successfully ran for the Minnesota Senate in 2002. Committee's: Transportation Policy and Budget Division Judiciary Taxes 323O District 33A - Representative Steve Smith OL)~ Mound~ MN Representative Smith is in his 7th term, first elected to the house in 1990. He has aBA in Political Science from the University of Mirmesota, arid a JD from Oklahoma City University SchOol of Law. Smith has a small, general practice laW firm, smith. Fisher Attorneys, in Richfield, He is married (Spouse is Cindi), with one child. Smith attended a Mound City Council meeting in the early 1980's and left sO angry about City spending issues that the next day he filed to run for the Council. He lost that first election, but ran successfully for the Mound City Council in 1984, and served as Mayor of Mound from 1986-1990. He then successfully ran for the MinneSota House in 1990, Committee's: Judiciary Po!icY and .Finance- Chair Civil Law Health and Hman Services Policy Ways and Means District 33B - Representative Barbara Sykora (R.), Excelsior, MN Representative Sykora is in her 5th tenu, first elected to the house in 1994. She has a BA in Education from the College of St. Catherine, She is a former public school teacher, and has been active in her church as a volunteer. She is married (spouse is Bob), with four children. Sykora entered politics in the 1960's worldng on her father'S (the late U.S, Congressman John Zwach) re-election campaigns. She served as the 6th District Republican chair in 1982, and was elected Republican state party chair and deputy chair, serving from 1987- 1993, She then successfully ran for the MinnesOta HoUSe in 1994. Committee's: Commerce, Jobs, and Economic Development Policy Education Finance Education Policy- Chair 3231 District 42A -Representative Peter Adolphs°n (IL), Minnet°nka~ ~ Representative Adolphson is in his 1st term, first elected to the house in 2002. He has a BA from the Gustavus Adolphus College, and a MBA from National University. He is a program manager for Ion CorpOration, a small electronics firm in Hopkins, MN. Adolphson is a former Naval Flight Officer, leaving the U.S. Navy in 1993, and is currently a Commander in the Naval Reserves. He is married (spouse is Kristin), with four children. He got involved in local Republican politics in Mirmetonka, and ran for an open seat in his first nm at elective office, when he won eleCtion to the M~esota House in 2002. Committee' s: Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Transportation Finance Transportation Policy Ways and Means District 42B - Representative Erik Paulson (IL), Eden Prairie, MN Representative Paulson is in his 5th term, first elected to the house in 1994. He has a BA in mathematics from St. Olaf cOllege. He is a financial advisor with NavPoint Financial. He is married (spouse is Kelly), with four children. He got involved in politics, Serving as. legislative assistant and then district director for 3Td Congressional District Representative Jim Ramstad (Rep). His was first elected to political office when he successfully ran for the Minnesota HOuse in 1994. Representative Paulson is the House majority leader, a position that guides the floor debate. As majority leader, he chairs the powerful Rules and Legislative Adminis~ation Committee, a critical gate-keeper position that decides which bills are sent to the floor. C OllLrnittee ' S: Rules and Legislative Administration - Chair * House Majority I~ader * 3232 WAFTA cities Political Representation. Congressional District representation [Each is shown with name of Pep, their City of residence, and who they represent.] Second District Third District Chanhassen Representative John Kline Chaska Representative John Ktine Eden Prairie Representative Jim Ramstad Excelsior Representative Jim Ramstad Long Lake Representative Jim Ramstad Maple Plain Representative Jim Ramstad Mayer Representative John Kline Mound Representative Jim Ramstad St. Bonifacius Representative Jim Ramstad Victoria Representative John Kline Watedown Representative John Kline Second Congressional District Rep. John Kline (R.) 1429 Longworth House Office Building Washington D.C.. 20515 phone 202-225-2271 Third Congressional District Rep. Jim Ramstad (R.) 103 Cannon House Office Building Washington D.C. 20515 phone 202-225-2871 Minnesota Office 101 W. Burnsville Parkway, Suite 201 Burnsville MN 55337 phone 952-808-1213 fax 952-808-1261 Minnesota Office 1809 Plymouth Road South, Suite 300 Minnetonka MN 55305 phone 952-738-8200 ~x 952-738-9362 3233 DERP FUDS Inventory July 1999 Page 1 of i Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DBRP) Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Inventory Site Count by State July 1999 State Number of Sites State Number of Sites State Number of Sites .AK 330 KY 23 .NY 486 AL 167 LA 88 OH 83 AR 74 MA 322 OK 110 AZ 198 MD 116 OR 102 CA 1092 ME 185 PA 186 CO 88 MI 167 RI 82 CT 50 MN 79 ,SC 194 DC 59 MO 79 SD 82 DE 44 MS 203 TN 55 FL, 673 MT 98 TX 403 GA 221 NC 183 UT 50 HI 398 ND 67 VA 258 IA 35 NE 98 VT 8 ID 71 NH 34 WA 322 IL 153 N___~J 189 WI 71 IN 64 NM 180 WV 21 KS 124 NV 56 WY 50 Territories Number of Sites AS American Samoa 30 CN Mariana Island 34 GM Guam 48 PR Puerto Rico 16 Total Site Count = 8710 https://www.demx.osd.nul/demX/Public/L~brary/F3 34¢/fuds-llst.html 06/18/2003 The Eden Prairie News I Editorial: Doing the right thing Page 1 of 1 Editorial: Doing the right thing We~ne.,.q~y, .luly .t~, 2003 By If you make a mess, clean it up. That's at the heart of a rallying cry being sounded by local officials over a small stretch of overgrown land that used to house a Nike missile site just outside of St. Bonifacius. Eleven cities - including Eden Prairie - own the land, having purchased it a lifetime ago for firefighter training from the Department of Defense. Mom than a decade after the Western Area Fire Training Academy closed its doors, city officials are far from proud owners of the land as they grapple with the residual environmental woes of its past and the inevitable question: Who's responsible? The land is contaminated with petroleum and other compounds. How much is anyone's guess. An environmental study will tell the true tale. Thanks to U.S. Rep. John Kline, a $369 billion Department of Defense spending bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last week included a $250,000 appropriation for the environmental study of the former Nike Missile Site NSP- The Senate is expected to approve the bill this week, and it will then need to be signed by the president. We hope all goes well. As Eden Prairie officials immersed in the issue concluded, funding is critical in determining how the ultimate larger costs of cleaning up the 20 acres will be divvied up among the many public entities that have used it over the years. Besides WAFTA and the Department of Defense, CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco and Xcel Energy are players in this drama (both had participated in firefighting exercises with WAFTA). Although WAFTA owned the site, Minnegasco managed it during its 18 years of operation. WAFTA officials contend that the landowners, the 11 cities, shouldn't have to foot the entire bill since other entities are more responsible for the contamination. A report recently completed by an environmental consultant hired by Eden Prairie concluded that the Department of Defense was the top contaminator, followed by Minnegasco, Xcel, and then WAFTA. But federal officials, according to a recent Star Tribune article, say most of the ground and water pollution at the site is the result of the fire training exercises. Indeed, there is plenty of blame being bandied about. We certainly hope the study will help shed light on not only how much the cleanup will cost, but the reasons why it's contaminated. In the end, all involved need to take responsibility for their actions in this matter and, as City Manager Scott Neal recently said, "we ought to clean up our mess." Enough said. Content © 2003 Eden Prairie News Software © 1998-2003 1upi Software, All Rights ReserVed h ttp : / /www~ edenpralri en ews~ c~m/pri nt~asp ? Arfi c~ e~D=4 3 4~& Sec~ ~n~D=2& Sub Sec~ ~n~D= ~ 1 7/23/2003 3235 The Eden Prairie News ] Money earmarked for WAFTA site Page 1 of 2 Money earmarked for WAFTA site W~dne~d~),, July 16, 2003 By Stuart Sudak News that dollars have been tentatively earmarked to pay for an environmental study of an old Nike missile launch site in Carver County came as good news to one of the local officials leading the charge to clean it up. Included in a $369 billion Department of Defense spending bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last week was a $250,000 appropriation for the environmental study of the former Nike Missile Site MSP-70. The Senate will vote on the bill this week; it will then need to be signed by the president. '~Ve've never been this far," said Don Uram, Eden Prairie's director of management and budget and a member of the Western Area Fire Training Academy (WAFTA) executive committee that oversees the land for the 11 cities who own it. '~Ne now have some funds that have been allocated specifically for site investigation and remediation through the Army Corps of Engineers. ! think that gives us encouragement that people are taking some interest in whats happening. Our goal from Day i has always been to try to get the site cleaned up." U.S. Rep..~ohn Kline (R-2, Lakeville), a member of the Armed Services Committee, requested the appropriation along with $24 million worth of other klinnesota projects be part of the House bill. Uram says Chanhassen city councilor Bob Ayotte deserves the credit for getting Kline involved. "He's the one who actually got in front of Kline's office," Uram said. "Eventually we may have gotten it. But he just sped up the whole process." Ayotte said he shared his concerns about cost shadng with Kline but it was City Manager Todd Gerhardt who has continued to push the issue. Eden Prairie City Manager Scott Neal says the funding is critical in determining how the costs of cleaning up the 20 acres of land located fwe miles northwest of St. Bonifacius will be divvied up among the many public entities that have used the land over the years. From 1958 to 1972, the U.S. Department of Defense operated the site as well as three others in Minnesota to protect the Twin Cities from Soviet bombs. In 1974, 11 cities including Eden Prairie, Chanhassen and Chaska bought the land for fire training and formed WAFTA. "It's a big step toward that," Neal said. More than 30 years after the missiles were removed and a decade after firefighters stopped training there, the land is contaminated with petroleum and other compounds. Although that has been known since the late 1980s, the extent of the contamination is still unknown. The core question that WAFTA off'~:ials want answered is exactly who is going to pay for the clean up. They contend that the 11 cities shouldn't have to foot the entire bill since other entities are more responsible for the contamination. According to a fact sheet on WAFTA, CenterPoint Energy [4innegasco and Xcel Energy also did firefighting exercises on the http://www, edenprairienews.com/print, asp?ArticleID~4339& SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2 7/23/2003 3236 The Eden Prairie News [ Money earmarked for WAFTA site Page 2 of 2 land from 1974 through 1992. Although WAFTA owned the s~, tqinnecjasco managed it and was the primaff operator of it during that time. Both Hinnecjasco and Xcel also made some minor improvements to the site. a Sunday article in the Star Tribune, federal officials say most of the ground and water pollution at the site is the result of fire training exercises. The article states that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does not consider it an immediate health risk. However, Uram said, a recent report by an environmental consultant hired by the city documents the major users of the site over the years and the primary contributors to the contamination. According to bhat report, the Department of Defense was the top contaminator, followed by Minnegasco, Xcel and WAFTA. "Our report, based on the document review, really says the fire training academy has the least amount of responsibility based on the records we have," he said. Gerhardt said he is excited about the potential money for an environmental study but doesn't want to get his hopes up until after the Senate approves the funding. He's spoken to representatives from Sen. Norm Coleman's office and hopes the city's concerns are communicated to him. "One group wanted to have each city chip in for the cost," he said. "I suggested that, since we already did a study that said we're liable for 8 percent of the contamination, we work with the federal government (who probably has a greater share of contamination), and have them come to the table." Chanhassen Villager reporter Melissa Gilman contributed to this report. Content © 2003 Eden Prairie News Software © 1998-2003 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved http://www, edenprairienews.com/print, asp?ArticleID=4339& SectionlD=2&Sub SectionlD=2 7/23/2003 3237 07/28/2003 10:44:41 PM Terri Hammer Moss Barnett Page 2 To: From: Date: MO S S & BARNETT A Professional Association COMMUNICATIONS LAW UPDATE Moss & Barnett Clients and Interested Parties Brian T. Grogan, Esq. Jnly 24, 2oo3 1. FIFTH CIRCUIT UPHOLDS FCC FRANCHISE FEE DECISION In October of 2001, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an order involving the City of Pasadena, California ("Pasadena Order") which permitted cable operators to pass-through franchise fees to subscribers on cable television bills based on gross revenues that encompass "non-subscriber" revenue. Specifically, this non-subscriber revenue included income generated by advertising sales and home shopping commissions. As a result of the Pasadena Order many cable operators around the country increased franchise fees on subscribers' bills by .25% or more. A number of local franchising authorities (LFAs) around the country, including a group of Texas franchising authorities and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers petitioned the Fifth Circuit for review of the Pasadena Order. On March 27, 2003, the Fifth Circuit denied the LFAs' petition for review on the grounds that the FCC had acted within its broad discretion and not in a manner that was arbitrary, capricious or manifestly contrary to the statute in question. See Texas Coalition of Cities for Utility Issues v. FCC, 324 F. 3d 802 (54 Cir. March 27, 2003). The LFAs argued that the Pasadena Order should be reversed because it conflicts with two particular provisions of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. §§ 542 and 543. In particular, the LFAs contended that where the franchise fee is based on the percentage of the cable operator's gross revenue, only the portion of that fee attributable to revenue from the subscribers may be passed through to subscribers. The LFAs argued that the Pasadena Order permitted an improper shifting of costs on to subscribers and that each class of the cable operator's customers should bear a proportionate amount of the franchise fee (i.e., the portion of the franchise fee attributable to advertising revenue should be passed through to advertisers). The Fifth Circuit concluded that whether or not the court may have interpreted the statutes differently the FCC's decision is entitled to deference and its order is not arbitrary and capricious. The practical result for franchising authorities across the country is that cable operators can pass-through as a separate line item on subscribers' bills all franchise fees due and owing the franchising authority. These franchise fees may include non-subscriber revenues, including home shopping and advertising revenues. In other words, cable operators will be permitted to reap the benefits of growth in non-subscription revenue while subscribers must bear the financial burden of increased franchise fees. By way of example, ifa cable operator sells $100 worth of advertising to a local business to provide commercial spots on the cable system, many franchises require the cable operator to pay a 5% franchise fee on that revenue. Prior to the Pasadena Order in 2001 cable operators paid the applicable $5 fi:anchise fee on the $100 of revenue and/or assessed the $5 fee to the advertiser. Under the Pasadena Order this $5 franchise fee is now spread over all subscribers in that jurisdiction resulting in a minimum .25% increase per month in the total franchise fee paid by a subscriber. In essence, the more advertising a subscriber watches, the higher the franchise fee on their bill. 5~9631/1 I 3238 07/28/2003 10:45:10 PM Terri Hammer Moss Barnett Page 3 MO S S & BARNETT A Professional Association The Fifth Circuit decision will not result in any reduction in franchise fee payments to LFAs although subscribers will continue lo bear the burden of additional franchise fee payments even as cable operators increase non- subscription revenue. 2. REGULATION OF CABLE MODEMS On May 8, 2003, oral arguments were held regarding the FCC's 2002 Order which limits local and state regulation over high-speed Intemet access via cable modem. Municipalities and public interest groups as well as virtually every segment of the industry is participating in the case. At stake for municipalities is over $300 million in annual franchise fees lost. The Ninth Circuit is expected to role on the case by year end. The FCC also has a pending rulemaking proceeding on cable modem services with a decision expected in the third quarter of 2003, although the Ninth Circuit case may have an impact on the FCC's liming. Many local franchising authorities have initiated violation proceedings against cable operators arguing that the cable operators' failure to remit franchise fees on cable modem services violates their local cable franchise. Generally, these cases revolved around specific language in the franchise defining the "gross revenues" on which the franchise fees are to be based. Other cases are based on the argument that the cable operators should not be permitted to cease collection and payment of franchise fees until a final ruling is rendered by the courts and/or the FCC issues ils decision in the pending mlemaking proceeding. Municipalities have been losing up to $3 per subscriber per month in franchise fee revenue as a result of the FCC's 2002 Order. Interestingly, the FCC on May 30, 2003 released a report regarding Inquiries and Complaints processed by the .sumer and Government Affairs Bureau of the FCC for the first quarter of 2003. The FCC's report found that :omplaints regarding cable service nearly doubled and cable modem service complaints increased by over 100%. As a result of the FCC's 2002 Order neither states nor local franchising authorities have regulatory control over the provision of cable modem services. Thus subscribers with complaints regarding their cable modem service must direct them to the FCC. Previously the FCC had been referring such complaints back to local franchising authorities. 3. TIER BY-THROUGH PROHIBITION Recently, cities have experienced a number of complaints from subscribers arguing that their cable operator will not permit them to purchase pay-per-view or pay-per-channel programming without also purchasing a variety of digital packages or other tiers of programming. Cities should be aware that in the 1992 Cable Act congress included a provision which prohibits cable operators from requiring subscribers to purchase tiers of programming, other than the basic service tier, in order to obtain access to video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis. In addition, the Cable Act provision prohibits a cable operator from discriminating between subscribers who subscribe to only the basic tier and other subscribers with regard to the rates charged for programming on a per channel or per event basis. This provision does not apply if the cable operator is subject to "effective competition" (see discussion below) or if a cable operator has obtained a waiver from the FCC. 4. CABLE INDUSTRY CONTINUES EFFORTS TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE COMPETITION FINDINGS Cable operators across the country have been stepping up their efforts to obtain rulings from the FCC that effective competition is present and therefore rate regulation should no longer apply to the cable operator in a given community. In order to obtain a ruling from the FCC the cable operator must submit a "petition for special relief and for determination of effective competition." A copy of the petition must be provided to the franchising authority the franchising authority then has an opportunity to respond to the FCC. It generally takes the FCC several days place the petition on public notice and the franchising authority then has 20 days from the date of public notice within which to submit comments regarding the petition. 589031/1 2 3239 07/28/2003 10:45:50 PM Terri Hammer Moss Barnett Page MO S S & BARNETT A Professional Association While the petitions may be bulky, the basis of the cable operator's argument is rather simple. First, the cable operator must demonstrate that a competing provider offers programming to at least 50% of the households in the franchise area and second, the competing operator(s) serves at least 15% of the households. Typically, the cable operator's petition is based on competition from DBS providers. Operators rely on data provided by a company called SkyTrends. SkyTrends is an entity that provides satellite subscriber totals based on zip codes. It is important to recognize, however, there are many deficiencies with respect to SkyTrends data including whether the zip codes overlap surrounding jurisdictions, whether relevant commercial establishments, temporary rentals or disconnected satellite subscribers have been accurately eliminated from the cable operator's calculations and whether the household data reported for the jurisdiction is accurate. Should a cable operator be successful in obtaining a determination of effective competition then the local franchising authority loses all of its rate regulation authority and all of the FCC's rate regulations are no longer applicable to that cable operator within that jurisdiction. This would impact such provisions as uniform price structure throughout a jurisdiction, tier by-through requirements, equipment and installation rates and related matters. 5. FCC REPORT ON CABLE INDUSTRY PRICES On July 8, 2003, the FCC issued a report regarding cable industry rates. As reported in many media outlets the monthly rate for cable programming services and equipment increased by over 8% despite the fact that the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for the same period increased by only 1.5%. As a result of the FCC's Order Senator John McCain, Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, described the cable rate increases as "astounding" and stated that '"[his means that cable rates increased an unbelievable 5-1/2 times faster than inflation. The cable industry has risen to new heights in their apparent willingness and ability to gouge the American consumer." Not surprisingly, the cable industry bristled at the idea of further rate regulation via either congressional action or the FCC and has argued that increased programming, programming costs and related factors mitigate the apparent discrepancy between cable rates and the CPl. 6. DO NOT CALL LIST Effective October 1, 2003 telemarketers across the country are prohibited from calling numbers that have been placed in the FCC's do not call registry. As of late June over 20 million phone numbers had been registered and the FCC expects up to 60 million numbers within the first year. However, the FCC carved out an exception for cable operators and other businesses which permits an 18 month window for operators to call "former subscribers" without running afoul of the do not call telemarketing roles. The only way the customer can stop the cable operator from placing such calls is to verbally request that the cable operator stop when such calls are placed. Cable operators found in violation of the do not call roles could face fines of up to $11,000 per violation. 7. CABLE STOCKS REBOUND IN FIRST HALF OF 2003 The battered cable industry which had experienced heavy stock declines throughout 2002 found the going much easier in 2003. Both AOL Time Warner and Comcast saw their stocks increase over 20% while Insight, Mediacom and Cox experienced more modest growth of 4% to 7%. Charter and Adelphia, two of the hardest hit cable operators during 2002, saw their stock values increase 200% or more during the first half of 2003 although each still faces hurdles either in bankruptcy or before the SEC. 8. MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP TO BE DECIDED BY U.S. SUPREME COURT Beginning in October 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court will determine whether state governments can block local municipalities from offering telecommunications and cable television services. The case, involving the state of Missouri, the Federal Communications Commission, SBC Communications and others will prove crucial in 58963 1/1 ~ 3240 07/28/2003 10:46:32 PM Terri Hammer Moss Barnett Page 5 MO S $ & BARNETT A ?rofes$Ional Association determining whether the cable and telecommunications industry can continue its state by state efforts to limit municipal entry into communications business. Look for further updates on this case in the fall edition of this update. 9. NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY DECISION On June 2003, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York invalidated several provisions of a local right-of-way ordinance concluding that they exceeded the scope of a New York town's management rights under the 1996 Telecommunications Act. TCI S~tems, Inc. et. al. v. Town of Colonic, N.Y. No. 1:00-CD-1972, 2003 WL 21180434 (N.D.N.Y. May 16, 2003). The town had adopted an ordinance governing the issuance of franchises to telecommunications providers seeking to install facilities for the provision of telecommunications services in the town. Citing the TCG New York, Inc. v. City of White Plaines, 305 F. 3d 67 (2d Cir. 202) the court invalidated most of the provisions at issue in the town's ordinance. The judge acknowledged that the 1996 Act includes a safe harbor provision in Section 253(c) which allows towns to exercise management and control of their public fights-of-way. However, the judge found that several provisions of the local ordinance went well beyond the scope of lawful management. These provisions included the ability for the town to consider the legal, financial and technical qualifications of the applicant in deciding whether to approve a franchise. The judge did uphold the town's right to consent prior to any transfer or assignment of the franchise. Most importantly, the conrI also invalidated the fee provision contained in the ordinance noting that it must be applied on a competitively neutral basis and the town had yet to enforce the local law against Verizon. rian T. Grogan is a shareholder with the Minneapolis law firm of Moss & Barnett practicing in the areas of telecommunications and cable television law. Brian represents entities throughout the country on franchise renewals, transfers of ownership, competitive franchising, rate regulation and effective competition proceedings, telecommunications planning, right-of-way management, first amendment issues, tower siting, leasing and zoning, litigation and other related communication matters. He is a f~equent presenter at state and national conferences regarding communications law and he is a member of the American Bar Association (Forum Committee on Communications Law), National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, Intemational Municipal Lawyers Association (Contracts, Franchises and Technology Section), and is past chair of the Communications Law Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association. Brian Grogan at Moss & Barnett, 4800 Wells Fargo Center, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402, phone: (612) 347-0340 or via email at -ro~anb(&,moss-barnett. eom. Web site: Please visit www.municipaleommunicationslnw.com for additional updates on communications law issues of interest to municipalities. If you would like to begin receiving this Communications Law Update via email or facsimile or if you have updated contact information, please notify: Terri ltammer, Moss & Barnett 4800 Wells Fargo Center, 90 South 7th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402-4129 Phone: (612) 347-0349 Fax: (612) 339-6686 E-mail: hammert ~(~a~oss-barnett.com The materials in this CommunicaHons Law Update have been complied from a vadetyof sources and address only a portion o fife ch?levant issues contained within hundreds of pages of regulations and decisions. We have not addressed many important points t may apply to your situation. You shouM eonsult with legal counsel before taking any action on matters eovered by this mrnunications Law Update. 589631/1 4 3241 Minnesota Lawful Gambling FLG555 Goyei rtme .nt Appro.val or Acknowledgment or Use of Gambhng I:Un:ds (prev'o.s yL 03a.dLC26 ) Organizatiori Information (please print) (! 1101) ExpeUdlture Description (attach additional sheets ifnecessaw) 2. Check the approprlate expendilUre calego~: 0 ~ p~ C&~*/ . ~ontrlbutlon to a unit of government - United States, State of Minnesota, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or Instrumentalities. NOTE: A contribution ma~ not be made directly to a law enforcement or ~rose~btorial agency, such as a police:department, county eherlrf, or county attorney. _ . A wildlife management project that benefits the public at large wilh opproval of the state agency that has authority over (he project. Deecrlbe the proposed expenditure, including vendore. ; __ Grooming and maintaining snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle trails wilh approval by DNR. All Irails must be open to public use. Describe the proposed expenditure, including vendors. Oath t affirm that the contribution or expenditure, in accordance wilh Minnesota Rule 786'1.0120, subpart 5D(10), does not result in any net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit to our organization. I affirm that when lawful gambling funds are used for grooming and maintaining snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle trails or for any wildlife management projecl for which reimbursement Is received from a unit of government, the reimburse- ment funds musl be deposited in our lawful gambling accounl and recorded on lhe LG1010 - Schedule C/D raped. , / / Chief executive officer's signature Phone number -- -- ~ Dale Government Approval/Acknowledgment By signature below, Ihe representative of the unil of government · approves the project as described above, and/or · acknowledges Ihe contribution, which will nol be used for a pension or retirement fund. Stgnalur~ Keep this completed form attached io the I_G 1010 - Schedule CID in your organlzalion's records. This form Will be made available In alternal ve format (i.e. large prlnl, Braille) upon requesl. If you use a TrY, you can call us by using the Minnesota Relay Sen/Ice and ask {o wilh place a call Io 651-63g-4000. The Infon-nalion requested on Minnei~ota statules and rules governing lawful gambling this form will become public information, when requested by ' lhe Board, and will be used !o determine your compliance activities. For additional Information, check our web sile at ww. gcb.state.mn.us 3242 MINUTES OF THE QUARTERLY MEETING OF THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY Pursuant to due call and notice, the quarterly meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the New Brighton Family Service Center, New Brighton, Minnesota, on July 16, 2003, commencing at 6:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by John Wallin 2. ROLL CALL: Bloomington Brooklyn Park Columbia Heights Edina Minnetonka New Brighton Bob Cockriel Diane Deblon Bruce Nawrocki John Wallin Desyl Peterson Matt Fulton Also present were legal counsel for the SRA Jim Strommen and Robert Vose of Kennedy & Graven. It was determined that a quorum was not present to transact business. A committee of the whole was declared and all actions taken by the committee are subject to later ratification. 1. APPROVAL OF APRIL QUARTERLY MEETING MINUTES: Ms. Peterson moved to approve the minutes from April 16, 2003 Quarterly Meeting. Mr. Wallin seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 2. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: Mr. Wallin reported on the financial status of the SRA and distributed the audit report for 2001-2002 prepared by Keegan & Cummings (attached). The SRA is in good fmancial health with sufficient funds to continue its ongoing utility work and participate actively in selected proceedings. It was noted that the numbers from the first half of 2003 reflected the 25% reduction in SRA assessments implemented this year and to be continued in 2004. Mr, Cockriel moved to accept the report of the Treasurer. Mr. Fulton seconded the mOtion which passed unanimously. 3. COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Strommen reported that the city of Lakeland had submitted a letter of withdrawal from the SRA.. He had spoken with the Lakeland delegate and had provided information to the council for its consideration. The letter of withdrawal would be effective january 1, 2004. Mr. Strommen will contact the city. In addition, Mr. Vose distributed a memo (attached) notifying members of a recent Minnesota Court of Appeals decision. In the case, the Court found that the City of Otsego properly imposed franchise obligations on a telephone company seeking to provide cable service. 4. QWEST AFOR/FILING DELAY: Mr. Strommen reported that as anticipated, Qwest sought an extension of the Alternative Form of Regulation (AFOR) for one year in lieu of the review by the Commission mandated by state statute. The AFOR statute contemplates a review and JMS-230449vl SU 160-3 3243 determination of whether to continue the AFOR in any form, or institute rate of return regulation, as of January 1, 2004. Counsel strongly recommended that the SRA oppose this Qwest requested extension. The reasons given by Qwest are unpersuasive, i.e., there are other administrative proceedings ongoing at this time. The performance of Qwest in this AFOR has been average at best, and investment in advanced telecommunication services has been limited during this time. The recommended action was to oppose the extension in comments and participate in proceedings that require Qwest to disclose its operations, including rate of return, during the AFOR. Ms. Peterson moved that the SRA oppose the Qwest request for an extension. Mr. Fulton seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Counsel noted that the SRA has retained MEMO Enterprises to assist in this process. Tony Mendoza, the former head of the telecommunications unit of the Department of Commerce and Garth Morrisette, a telecom technical/cost expert are the contacts at MEMO. 5. XCEL TRANSLINK PETITION: Mr. Strommen reported that the Commission had rejected Xcel's initial petition to form the unregulated company, TRANSLink, to operate Xcel's transmission facilities. The SRA was successful in identifying one of the significant impediments to this petition; the Commission's lack of statutory authority to approve such a divestiture of Xcel's assets. The Commission has tentatively agreed with the SRA's position which has also been raised by other parties. As of the meeting Xcel had not re-filed a petition. The SRA will continue to pursue this matter. One of the Commissioners characterized this matter as the most significant policy decision he has been faced with since being with the PUC. 6. XCEL METRO EMISSIONS REDUCTION PLAN: Mr. Strommen reported on the recent Order issued by the Commission establishing a 90-day process for public hearings, discussionS among parties, and a technical conference on the price of natural gas before making a decision on the Xcel plan known as MERP. The issues discussed by the Board included the concern for committing such a substantial project to natural gas when many experts are predicting that natural gas prices will increase dramatically. This is the subject of the technical conference which SRA city delegates are urged to attend (the date has not yet been set). The other issue involves the cost of the project and how much of that is appropriate to surcharge back to ratepayers in Xcel's service territory. AIl ratepayers by class will be paying the same surcharge amount beginning in 2006, regardless of where they reside in the Xcel service area. The generation plants at issue are the Riverside area in North Minneapolis, the High Bridge area near downtown St. Paul and Oak Park Heights in suburban St. Paul. Mr. Strommen expressed the need to continue monitoring the proceedings, including specifically the technical conference and the Commission-requested process between the parties regarding cost considerations. He also cautioned that this was a large proceeding with .significant issues and the potential for an "over,allocation" of SRA's budget. Accordingly, Ms. Peterson moved to authorize continued monitoring of the proceedings to identify issues of concern to the SRA, with the exercise of caution regarding the level of participation. Mr. Cockriel seconded the motion which passed 'unanimously. 7. MUNICIPALIZATION STUDY: Mr. Strommen reported that the finn of Dahlen Berg continues to study the municipalization of utilities. Active participation by SRA cities has been limited, but Dahlen Berg reports that it has been able to compile helpful information on the issues of interest to the SRA cost-benefit analysis of acquiring Xcel assets and converting them to a JMS-234719v2 SU 160-3 3244 municipal distribution facility. SRA cities are urged to contact Dahlen Berg. The final report will be issued and discussed at the October SRA meeting. 8. XCEL'S FACILITIES RELOCATION TIMELINESS: Mr. Strornrnen referred to the memorandum included in the SRA packet regarding the issue that had been identified last year, i.e., Xcel's repeated delays in relocating utilities on public improvement projects. It was suggested that separate e-mails be sent to SRA delegates to be directed to public works directors on the performance of Xcel during this construction season. Counsel will follow up on that request. 9. QWEST LONG DISTANCE AND LEGISLATIVE UP-DATE: Mr. Vose reported that the FCC approved Qwest's application to re-enter the long distance market in Minnesota over the objection of three MPUC commissioners. Mr. Vose also noted that once again, telecommunications reform legislation has been introduced and will be on the table. 10. APPROVAL OF 2004 SRA. BUDGET: After discussing the budget previously. recommended at the April quarterly meeting, Mr. Nawrocki moved to approve the 2004 budget. Mr. Wallin seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Strommen noted that the circulation of this budget; the by-laws and its approval by the Board (subject to ratification)'fixes the commitment of members through 2004. 11. XCEL UNDERGRoUNDING SURCHARGE UPDATE: Mr. Strommen reported on significant developments in the undergrounding surcharge process recently-adopted by the PUC for Xcel's service territory. The city of Loretto was informed by Xcel that none of the "standard" relocation costs in a downtown project (overhead to overhead relocation) would be deducted from the underground cost incurred or estimated to be incurred on the project. The result of this position would be an additional surcharge to ratepayers of the City, for the entire undergroundings ;alleged cost. Xcel's rationale for this was that the relocation was not necessary and done merely for the convenience or "beautification" of the City. The continuance of this policy by Xcel would raise surcharge amounts in all cities where Xcel deems the relocation to be unnecessary. This is an issue to be watched and objected to at the PUC. The city of Loretto is considering such action. In addition, the city of Mound is in the process of a major downtown redevelopment. The undergrounding of distribution lines in this project may be argued as a standard requirement for downtown areas. As a standard relocation, none of the cost would be surcharged to City rate- payers. If pursued by Mound, Xcel would strongly object. This issue, however, is another major policy issue that is appropriate for decision to give guidance to cities on public improvement projects. 12. TIME AND LOCATION OF NEXT MEETING: The October 15, 2003 quarterly meeting will be held at a location in the east metro area, the exact location to be determined by Mr. Strommen. The start time continues to be at 6:00 p.m. The October 15 meeting will include a number of important reports for SRA members, including the municipalization study. 13. CLAIMS: Several claims were submitted to the SRA Board and approved by single motion by Ms. Peterson and seconded by Ms. Deblon. Kennedy & Graven submitted a bill for $19, 844.35, the accounting firm of Cummings & Keegan submitted its audit bill for $1,910.00, Memo Enterprises submitted a bill for $360.00, the State of Minnesota required a $50.00 lobbyist JMS-234719v2 SU 160-3 3245 registration fee and authorization was obtained to pay the League Insurance Trust premium for coverage of SRA delegates in an mount not to exceed $1,000. Attest: 14. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Chairman Secretary JMS-234719v2 SU 160-3 3246 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA 7:00 PM, Wednesday, July 23, 2003 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster · Discussion of August Board Meeting Schedule READING OF MINUTES- 6/25/03 LMCD Regular Board Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) LAKE USE & RECREATION A) Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Water Patrol, briefing on July 4th incident from Lt. Brian Johnson involving the death of a boater; B) Three Rivers Park District, 2002 Water Quality of Lake Minnetonka Report presented by John Barten; C) Additional Business; m WATER STRUCTURES A) Concept Landscaping, consideration of draft Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a side setback variance application at 5331, 5341, and 5341 Three Points Blvd.; B) Howards Point Marina, consideration of draft Findings of Fact and order for denial of "off-lake" storage facility license application to license 37 "off-lake" storage Boat Storage Units (BSU's) under LMCD Code SectiOn 2.045; C) Additional Business; PUBLIC HEARINGS · City of Deephaven, new multiple dock and special density license applications for 246 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 4,639' of non-continuous shoreline. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration Jennings Cove Dock Owners Association, new multiple dock license application for 20 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 1,164' of shoreline on Jennings Bay. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration 3247 Hary Kreslins, new multiple dock license application for eight Boat Storage Units BSU's) on 407' of shoreline on St. Albans Bay. 1. Public Hearing (Continued from 6/11/03 and 6/25/03 Regular Board Meetings) 2. Discussion and/or Consideration 3. FINANCIAL A) Audit of vouchers (7/1/03 - 7/15/03) & (7/16/03 - 7/31/03); B) May and June financial summary and balance sheets; C) Additional Business; ADMINISTRATION A) Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for Administrative Technician, Judd Harper (handout); B) Additional Business; 5. EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE A) Staff review of 2003 EWM Harvesting program Mid-Season Summary Report (handout); B) Additional Business; 6. SAVE THE LAKE 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 8, OLD BUsiNEss 9. NEW BUSINESS 10.ADJOURNMENT 3248 DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DSITRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 PM, Wednesday, June 25, 2003 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER Foster called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members present: Bed Foster, Deephaven; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Lili McMillan, Orono; Tom Skramstad, Shorewood; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Orr Burma, Mound; Miles Canning, Greenwood; Paul Knudsen, Minnetrista; Tom Seuntjens, Minnetonka Beach; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Jose Valdesuso, Excelsior; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Greg Nybeck, Executive Director. Members absent: Pete Nelson, Victoria. CHAIR ANNOUNCMENTS, Chair Foster Foster stated that Nybeck had requested discussion by the Board on the Regular Meeting schedule for the month of July, Nybeck stated that Regular Board Meetings in July were scheduled for 7/9/03 and 7/23/03. He stated that he believed only one of these two scheduled meetings was necessary for action items by the Board and that the other scheduled meeting could be used as a workshop/planning session for a new Board member orientation to provide an overview of the District and its Code of ordinances. He recommended that the scheduled 719103 Regular Meeting as the date for the Workshop/Planning Session because there might not be quorum present that evening. The Board discussed this recommendation and the consensus was to cancel the 7/9/03 Regular Board Meeting, to hOld the scheduled 7/23/03 Regular Board Meeting, and to schedule a new Board member orientation in the near future. READING OF MINUTES. 5/28/03 LMCD Regular Board Meeting 6/11/03 LMCD Regular Board Meeting MOTION: Craig Nelson moved, Canning seconded to approve the minutes from the 5/28/03 Regular Board Meeting as submitted. Babcock commented on the motion on page 11 that removed the condition on the 2003 multiple dock license for the City of Minnetonka Beach that removed the need for an as-built survey for dock site 23. Although this condition was removed from the multiple dock license, he believed it is required by ordinance and does not relieve the need to have it done. Skramstad recommended a friendly amendment in the paragraph on page 9 just above the motion made. He recommended language be added that indicates that Commissioner Linda Koblick has communicated to him that 3249 ~k&; .M. inrtet0nka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 2 she is committed to this project and that thero is a need to ensure continued funding of it from Hennepin County in the future. Craig Nelson and Canning agreed to this friendlY amendment. VOTE: Ayes (8), Abstained (4; Babcock, Knudsen, McMillan, and Craig Nelson); motion carried. Ambrose ardved at 7:04 p.m. MOTION: Skramstad moved, Suerth seconded to approve the minutes from the 6/11/03 Regular Board Meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes (9), Abstained (4; Babcock, Burma, Canning, and McMillan); motion carded. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Persons in attendanCe on subjects not on the agenda. There were no comments from the public on subjects not on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA- Consent agenda items identified with a (*) wilt 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. Canning moved, Burma seconded to approve the consent agenda as amended, removing item 1D. Motion carried unanimously. Items so approved included: 2A, HennePin County Shedffs Office Water Patrol Significant Activity Report, and 3B, May financial summary and balance sheet. PUBLIC HEARINGS · ConcePt LandScaping, variance"appliCation from LMCD code for side setback requirements at 5331, 5341, and 5351 Three Points Blvd. on Harfisons Bay (Continued from 6/1i/03 Regular Board Meeting). FOSter re,opened the public hearing at 7:06 plm. and asked for baCkground from Nybeck Nybeck made the following comments: · The Public hearing was contlnu, ed from the 6/11103 RegUlar Board Meeting when LeFevere pointed out that there were detailS, lack, n§~ On. the propos~d Sit~ pian.' TheSe'inCluded the location oi e~ended side site lines for the three properties, the location and size of the three proposed authorized dock use areas,.and the distance of the three proposed authorized dock use amis from the s desite.line extensions. ' · The applicant has proposed an auth°riz~d'bCk Use area'=at ali three sites that would include a four foot overhang on both ends of the proposed docks and would extend 20 feet into the Iago.on area, with stOrage, of' s~aller watercraft a:li~W~ ~10hg::~e ~o~iine Wi{hin the ProPOse~ dSCk Usb'~rea applicant has documented the side site line extensions of all three sites on the proPosed site plan; however, they have not documented the distance of the proposed authorized dock use areas from the side s,te line'extehson§'' ' · · At L0tl, he estimated ?t t~e northwest cOmer oi::ihe proposed authorized dock.,use area would be 27' from the e~ended'Si~ ~ite line ~nd'{he ~OuthWeSt comer would have a zero foot side setback. The northeast comer of the proposed authorized dock use area would be 20' from the extended side site line and the southeast comer would have a 26' side setback. · At Lot 2, he estimated that the northwest comer of the authorized dock use area would be 27' from the extended side site line and the southwest comer'would have an 18' side setback. The northeast 325O Eake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 3 corner of the proposed authorized dock use area would 27' from the extended side site line and the southeast corner would also have a 27' side setback. · . At Lot 3, he estimated that the northwest corner of authorized dock use area would be 21 feet from the extended side site line and the southwest corner would have a 17' side setback. The nearest the proposed authorized dock use area would be from the property to the east, which was granted a variance from Code for an adjusted dock use area and for side setbacks in recent years, would be nine feet. He pointed out that the dock installation and boat storage for the residents to the east of Lot 3 was not in compliance with the approved Vadance Order. · He entertained comments or questions from the Board. Skramstad asked if the residents who were granted the variance from Code were notified that they were in non-compliance with the approved Variance Order. Nybeck stated that they were notified of this in late March and that they attended the 6/11/03 public hearing, noting that Foster strongly encouraged them to make the adjustments so that their dock installation and boat storage would comply with the approved Variance Order. Canning asked if the three lots of the applicant were buildable. Mr. Bill Stoddard, owner of the three lots, stated that the three lots are buildable and are larger than most of the lots in the immediate area. The building of houses on these lots has been approved by the City of Mound and he pointed out that the proposal has been submitted for two purposes, First, the proposed docks that would parallel the shoreline in the lagoon area would help out in an already congested area. Second, the proposed permanent dock would cleady define expectations of prospective buyers relating to docking and boat storage. He entertained questions or comments from the Board. Canning stated that he had visited the lagoon area and there is not a lot of room for boat storage in the area. Navigation to these docks could become a problem in the future because of other docks and larger watercraft already being stored in the lagoon area. Foster complimented the proposed site plans to have permanent docks that would parallel the shoreline at the three lots. Stoddard clarified for the Board his reasons for 20' wide authorized dock use areas from the edge of the docks into the lagoon area. This would allow for the storage of larger watercraft and possibly visitor boats on an occasional basis. Babcock asked Canning for further clarification on where he believed navigability problems in the area might occur if the proposed site plan was approved. Canning stated that he believed navigation problems could possibly occur with the boats on the south side of the lagoon area because of how narrow the lagoon is. He asked if there was a difference between navigational concerns in a channel area versus the main lake. Foster stated that docks cannot be installed to block a navigable channel area. This was taken into consideration when the variance was approved at the abutting property east of Lot 3. Although the lagoon area is congested, he believed that it is navigable and that the proposed site plan takes this into consideration. 3251 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 4 Skramstad stated that he concurred with the comments from Foster, adding that the most congested area is the channel leading into the lagoon area from Harrisons Bay. Babcock asked the applicant if he needed a 20' dock use area from the edge of the proposed docks or if he could agree to something less. Stoddard stated that he did not want to limit the authorized dock use too much because a variance would not be needed if the docks were installed into the lagoon area rather than paralleling the shoreline as proposed. Nybeck stated that the Board should consider not allowing deicing as a possible condition of any Board approval. Van Hercke stated that she supported the proposed site plan in general; however, she had some concerns about the possible stacking of boats within the authorized dock use areas. Ambrose reminded the applicant that there was a need to ensure that the City of Mound reviewed and approved the proposed site plan. There being no further comments, Foster closed the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. MOTION: Skramstad moved, McMillan seconded to direct the District attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of the proposed variance application. Babcock stated that he was in general in favor of the proposed variance application; however, he had a couple of concerns that should be addressed in the Findings. First, he wanted to ensure that watercraft storage was contained within the authorized dock use areas in the future and he believed it would be appropriate to have the approved site plan registered against the deed. Second, he believed that a no deicing clause should be added to the Findings of Fact and Order. He recommended adding language to the motion as a friendly amendment that would address these concerns. Skramstad and McMillan agreed to this. Suerth questioned whether the size of watemraft should be restricted at the proposed docks. Foster stated that there are already larger watercraft being stored on the south side of the lagoon. Babcock stated that he had some of the same concerns and that was why he believed that language was needed in the Findings that requires boat storage to be fully contained within the authorized dock use area. Canning and Babcock questioned whether a canopy should be allowed at these dock sites. They recommended this as a friendly amendment. Stoddard stated that one of the reasons for the proposed applications was to define whether canopies would be allowed at the three proposed docks. If they are prohibited by the District and a future owner would like a canopy, they would need to get approval by the District in the future. Foster asked Stoddard if he would agree to a restriction of no canopies as condition of the approval. Stoddard stated that a no canopy rule would be pretty restrictive, 3252 Lake Uinnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page5 Seuntjens questioned whether it would be fair to the applicant to require a no canopy restriction when there are several other sites within the lagoon area that have less lakeshore frontage that already have canopies installed at their doCks. BabcoCk questioned whether it would be feasible to navigate into these side opening docks if a canopy is installed at them. Van Hercke stated that there are docks in the channel leading into Libbs Lake that have canopies installed at them, noting that they parallel the shoreline and they can be navigated into. Babcock questioned whether there would be sufficient space, especiallY at Lots 1 and 3, to meet the setback requirements outlined in Code. Stoddard stated that he would prefer to not have the no canopy restriction included in the Findings because it would already require approval by the District and he had concern about too many restrictions on these lots. Babcock and Canning stated that they would prefer that the expectations of whether a canopy was allowed to be clarified in the Findings. Craig Nelson stated that he would prefer the question on whether canopies should be allowed at these lots to be separated from the rest of the motion. Foster stated that without objection from the Board, he would like to split the question on whether to prohibit canopies at these three dock sites as an amendment to the original motion. There was no objection from the Board on this. He clarified that the motion to amend would require a stipulation in the draft Findings of Fact and Order that would prohibit canopies, noting that a vote in the affirmative would not allow canopies and a negative vote would be to not address the canopy setback issues at this time. LeFevere stated that it is possible that some areas within the authorized dock use areas might be able to meet the 20' side setback for canopies if the slip in question opens towards the lagoon rather than the side site line. VOTE ON: AMENDED MOTION Ayes (3; Babcock, Burma, and Canning), Nayes (10); vote on amendment to the motion failed. Foster stated that the vote on the original motion would direct the attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of the proposed variance application, subject to: 1) installing the dock as proposed on the site plan, 2)no deicing allowed at these sites, and 3) a copy of the Findings of Fact and Order to be registered against the deed on all three sites. VOTE ON: Vote on original motion carried. ORIGINAL MOTION 3253 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 6 · Hary Kreslins, new multiple dock license application for eight Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 407' of shoreline, on St. Albans Bay. Foster'm-opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. He stated that the applicant has requested that the Board to continue the public headng to a future Regular Meeting until after he resolves the issues with the City of Greenwood. The applicant has a signed a waiver of the. 60-day rule; however, he suggested that the Board should take testimony from any member of the public who was in attendance to comment on the proposed application. Mr. Judd Mowry, 445 Lakeview Avenue, made following comments: · He reviewed the existing site plan for the Kreslins property and he questioned whether the 407' of shoreline as proposed by the applicant is accurate, especially since the site has been approved for approximately 310' in the past. · The City of Greenwood attorney raised a concern to the city council in 1998 that the right of way near Minnetonka Blvd is under {he ownership and control of the City of Greenwood rather than the applicant. · He reviewed the historical property tax records for the proposed site. · More watercraft are being stored at the site than are currently approved. · He recommended that the District conduct the following: 1) notify the applicant that an additional 60 days is needed to process the proposed application, 2) require the applicant to submit a survey that accurately'dOcuments.the 929,4'' lakeshore frontage at the site, and 3) fUrther investigate the potential violatlons at the Kreslins multiple dock facility. Nybeck stated that the shoreline issues that were raised by Mr. Mown/would need to be reSOlved between the applicant and the City of Greenwood~ with changes made tothe p~oposed surveY if needed. AdditiOnally, staff is working on itS' annual muitiple deck inspections andan=inspecti5n,i~ ~planned in'the near futura for this facility. He commented that staff ts awam~ of, state laW mquii'ements ~rtaining to i~mcessin~j arid administering complete applicatiohs submitted to the District, adding' that staff, was on toP Of it. Foster stated .,that with no objections from the Board, he Would temporarily close the public heating at 8:00 p.m. and'Continue it to the 7/23/03 R~ular Board M~ting. WATER STRUCTURES A~ Lisa RyskamP,~nsideration of draft Findings Of FaCt and Order for app~val ora dock length variance application at 1080 Wildhurst Trail on Forest Lake. Foster introduced the agenda item and asked for questions or comments on it. Nybeck. stated th at:~{he draft' Find ings WOuld, allOW ~eapplicant to' s~ore four. watercraft ~t~the dObki:.' including two'personal watemmff n~arshbre; a small fishi=ng,boat, and a='la~er:watercraft withifi ~6 proposed slip. This is not documented within the draft Findings or on the'~roposed¥~ite~ plan and Should be documented either in the Findings or on the approved site plan, or possibly both. MOTION: Babcock moved, Knudsen seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Order fo!...app~val of · the Lisa Ryskamp variance application, subject to: 1) the applicant documenting B'SU's 3 and 4 on the approved site plan, and 2) adding a condition that all four watercraft are to owned and registered to the residents of the site. 3254 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting Jun 25, 200 Page7 VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. B. Bayview Event Center, consideration of draft Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a new multiple dock license application and adjusted dock use area variance application from LMCD Code on Excelsior Bay. Foster introduced the agenda item and asked for questions or comments on it. Canning disclosed that the applicant was a client of his; however, it was not a conflict of interest. Babcock asked for clarification on whether the proposed application would increase the sizes of BSU's 33 and 34 from the approved site plan. Nybeck stated that the applicant has proposed to maintain the double-wide slip currently approved for two BSU's, to store one boat in its place, and to move the second boat as a tie-on to the south of the same dock structure. MOTION: Babcock moved, Craig Nelson seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a new multiple dock license and adjusted dock use area vadance applications as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Howards Point Marina, new "off-lake" storage facility application to license 37 "off-lake" storage Boat Storage Units (BSU's) under LMCD Code Section 2.045 (Public Hearing conducted at 5114103 Regular Board Meeting). Foster introduced the agenda items and asked for background from Nybeck, Nybeck made the following comments: · Mr. David Albrecht, President of Howards Point Marina, has submitted a new "off-lake" storage facility application for Board consideration on the South Upper Lake in the City of Shorewood. it is currently licensed for 58 BSU's in the water, on 252' of continuous shoreline, with a BSU density of approximately 1:4'. They are considered a legal, non-conforming facility for density, maximum dock length, and minimum side setback requirements. · Howards Point Marina has proposed to license 37 BSU's for "off-lake" storage purposes in the parking lot on the east-side of Howards Point Road. A public headng was conducted at the 5/14/03 Regular Board Meeting, with extensive review of background information provided by staff, background and testimony received from the applicant, and testimony received from the public. The consensus of the Board was to table further discussion of the proposed application to a Regular Board Meeting in the near future. · Section 2.045 outlines the Code relating to conforming and legal, non-conforming "off-lake" storage facility applications on Lake Minnetonka. The Code defines "off-lake" storage faCilities as "any dock, mooring area or launching ramp used by any club, business or association in conjunction with the storage of restricted watercraft off the water of Lake Minnetonka". There are a number of requirements that the proposed application does not comply with so they need to make application as a legal, non-conforming facility. There is an exception for existing facilities 3255 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 8 that would allow them to continue in use and operation, provided they are licensed within 30 days of 12/28/87. · A letter from Martha Reger, dated 5/16/03, was included inthe packet that summarized the MN DNR status on the purchase of Howards Point Marina for public access purposes. · The applicant needs to document for the Board the extent of "off-lake" storage that existed in 1987, not in recent years. The burden of establishing this documentation is the responsibility of the applicant, not the District. Howards Point Marina has.submitted documentation for the proposed 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's; however, he expressed concern about the documentation submitted. Further details of this analysis is outlined in the staff, memo dated 5/7/03. · He stated that he did not believe that Howards Point Marina had satisfactorily documented that 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's existed during the 1987 bOating season. OPtions for the Board to consider when evaluating the proposed application include: 1)deny the apPlication because it was not submitted within 30 days from the 12/28/87 grandfather date, 2) deny the application because they have not documented that 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's existed' during the 1987 boating season, 3) grant the apPlication and back license to 1988 for the number Of,off. lake. BSU's that the'applicant demonstrates, to the Board satisfaction, existed in 1987, and 4) continue the mater for presentation of further information specified by the Board. He pointed out that the applicant has signed a waiver of the 60'-day state rule. · A multiple dock license dOCk inspection was conducted by staff and Board member Skramstad on 6/19/03, with five discrepancies observed from the approved site. plan and license conditions. He circulated digital photos from the 6/19/03 inspection. · He entertained question or comments from the Board. Van Hercke asked for a summarY of the letter from Martha Roger. Babcock stated that Reger has indicated that the MN DNR was not pursuing HowardS Point Madna as a possible public access at this time. If the MN DNR were to pursue this, a Task Force would be set up similar to the one in GraYs Bay. " Foster asked Nybeck to comment on the map submitted by the applicant, dated 1/2/80, whiCh documents 38 parking spots'. Nybeck stated that!the map does document 38 parking spotsl however, they are not for "extended- parking" purposes.'; Canning asked: for a'definition of "extended parkihg". Nybeck stated'-that the.term "extended parking, is a :term uSed'bY the applicant and not by the District. Mr, Mark Peltier,:Howards Point Marina Manager;~ stated .that "extended parking" is a term used for the storage of boats on trailers in designated spots inthe paiAing lot. Foster stated that the digital photos:from the 6/19/03 inspection indicate that a green ti'actor is parked in the area and that there a few pontoon 'boats stored in the parking lot that are transfeiTed from the lot to the lake.. Babcock stated it would be beneficial to lOok at the original intent of the ordinance in 1987. He believed that the Howards Point Marina private launching ramp was being used in conjunction with the parking lot 3256 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page9 for residents in the area. He believed that the intent of the ordinance was that this facility was already had a density greater than the 1:10' density and that it Should not be able to be expanded either in the water or on the land. The activity going on across the street is an illegal use based on the ordinances and the applicant has not documented satisfactorily that 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's existed in 1987. He ~tated that the grandfathering language in thi~ ordinance would make it difficult to do so currently, especially since the application did not come within the 30-day window in 1987. Canning questioned whether the District would have problems with the "off-lake" storage activity being conducted by Howards Point Marina if the private acceSs was shut down. Babcock stated that he believed it was a gray area. Foster stated that he believed that the Howards Point marina "off-lake" storage activity would not be a concern of the District if their private access were closed. However, he questiOned whether this would be practical for Howards Point Marina and the customers that are leasing these BSU's, Seuntjens asked for clarification of the pontoons being stored on land that were observed during the 6/19/03 inspection. Nybeck stated that these pontoons originally were designated as rowboats on slides in the water and they have expanded to larger boats that cannot be stored in the water. BabcoCk stated that although the BSU density at this facility exceeds the density allOwed for special density licenses, he expressed some general support for some pontoon storage on the land because it provides a form of public access to the lake. Foster stated that he believed that there was some "off-lake" storage activity taking place in 1987; however, he did not believe the applicant has provided supporting documentation for 37 BSU's. A compromised number might make sense. Babcock stated that he believed a possible compromise to resolve the situation might be to allow some "off-lake" storage BSU's on land at Howards Point Marina, With the assurance that theSe spaces are being used for rental pontoons or other waterCraft for public access purposes to Lake Minnetonka. MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Canning seconded to direct the District attomey to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for denial of the application for 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's based on Code Section 2,045, SkramStad aSked if there was an interest in reviewing photos and other eVidenCe to better document what existed in 1987. LeFevere stated that if Findings for denial of the proposed Howards Point Madna application are approved by the Board, the applicant has a couple of courses of action to consider, First, they might disagree with the outcome and challenge it in court. Second, the applicant could submit another "off-lake" storage facility license application, for a reduced number of BSU's that existed in 1987, that the Board might be able to support. McMillan stated that she would vote in favor of the motion to support the integrity of the ordinance. 3257 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 10 Bt Foster stated that he believed there are two pdmary issues for the Board to consider. First, would the Board be willing to waive the 30-day window required from 12J28/87 to back license a facility for "off-lake" storage BSU's 15 years after the grandfather date. Second, would the Board be willing to consider a number something less than the 37 "off-lake" storage BSU's. Skramstad stated that the best photos of the parking lot in question were from the eady 1990's and show that "off-lake" storage parking might have been taking place in 1987 on the north side of the lot. The numbers are still in question, somewhere in the vicinity of 15 to 17 he believed. He stated that he might support a requirement that these spaces be used in conjunction with rental boats as proposed by Babcock. Craig Nelson stated that if the Board were to consider a compromised number, it should be presented by the applicant rather than the by the Board. Seuntjens stated that he would not support any "off-lake" storage BSU's in the parking lot. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.' Foster stated that these draft Findings would be reviewed at the 7~24~03 Regular Board Meeting. Mike Wallace. Staff recommends the Board not refund any of the $250.00 refundable deposit submitted with the approved vadance application, as oUtlined in the 6/20/03 staff memo. Foster introduced the agenda item and asked Canning for a brief explanatiOn on why he had it removed from the consent agenda. Canning stated that he would like to discuss the recommendation from staff for the Board to not refund any of the $250 deposit submitted with the approved variance application. He reminded the Board that he expressed his concern at a recent meeting when the Board did not refund part of the application fees for a charter boat on Lake Minnetonka that withdrew its application prior to the 2003 season. In this approved application, the recommendation is based on work performed by the District. He stated that all vadance applications, whether approved or denied by the Board, have Findings prepared by LeFevere. He questioned why these expenses are not included in the base fee, rather than the refundable deposit, or absorbed by the District as a budgeted expense. The Board discusSed this agenda item and the general consensus was that the District policy was consistent with the majority of the 14 member cities that part of the expenses incurred by the District should be billed back to the applicant. There was discussion that the District is allowed to charge the applicant for costs incurred in the processing of all applications of the District. The consensus of the Board was to review the fee resolution for all Distdct applications in the near future. The Board took no action on this agenda item because staff recommended no refund because the fees incurred in the Wallace vadance application exceeded the $250 deposit submitted. E. Additional Business. There was no additional business. 3258 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page11 LAKE USE & RECREATION B. Additional Business. There was no additional business. FINANCIAL A. Audit of vouchers (6/16/03 - 6/30/03). Skramstad reviewed the audit of vouchers as submitted. MOTION: Skramstad moved, FOster seconded to approve the audit of vouchers as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. C, Review of draft 2004 LMCD Budget. Foster intrOduced the agenda item and asked for background from Nybeck. Nybeck stated that the state enabling legislation for the District requires that a copy of the adopted 2004 LMCD Budget to be forwarded by 7/1/03. He reported that no wdtten comments had been received from the member cities on the draft 2004 LMCD Budget. Skramstad stated that he had recently reviewed the draft 2004 LMCD Budget With the ShoreWood City Council and that they had no objections with the small levy increase compared to the 2003 LMCD Budget. McMillan stated that she had recently reviewed the draft 2004 LMCD Budget With the Orono City Council and they expressed concern about the District increasing the levy to the 14 member cities compared to the 2003 LMCD Budget. The city council expressed this concem because of the current economic climate the 14 member cities are facing and they have recommended the District consider a no levy increase to the member cities in 2004. She believed that there might be expenses in the 2004 LMCD Budget that could be reduced to allow this to be accomplished, citing the Boat Count and User Attitude Surveys as one possibility. Skramstad stated that an argument could be made that the District Was already being respOnsible in the 2004 LMCD Budget because the Proposed levy to the 14 member cities, $252,453, is well Under what the maximum levy the District could forWard to the 14 member cities in 2004, $299,377.40. McMillan stated that the District over budgeted expenses by approximately $15,000 in 2002 and she believed that cutting expenses in the 2004 LMCD BUdget would Send a good message sO that the levy would not increase to the 14 member cities compared to 2003. Craig Nelson stated that he had concerns about the 2004 LMCD Budget and that he would not vote in favor of it. One of his primary concerns was that it does not inClude funding for General, EWM/Exotics, and Equipment Reserve Fund accounts. Another concern was that the budget should be prepared based on actual expenditures frOm the previous budget year. 3259 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June, 25, 2003 Page12 Nybeck stated that in 2002, the Distdct collected $289,950 in revenues and spent $274,566 in expenditures. This $15,384 of additional revenues was collected for the Boat Density Survey that did not take place in 2002 and has been earmarked as a prepaid expense for the Boat Density and User Attitude Surveys planned in 2004. Valdesuso asked if the planned Boat Density and User Attitude Surveys are mandatory. Foster stated that prior to 2002, the Boat Density Surveys were planned for every two years and the User Attitude Surveys were planned every four years. At the recommendation of the Mt DNR in 2002, the Board changed the frequency of the Boat Density to every four years similar to the User Attitude Survey. Nybeck pointed out that the MN DNR has agreed to reimburse the District $12,500 at this time in 2004 for the Boat Density and User Attitude Surveys, adding that it is possible that the MN DNR could contribute more. Babcock stated that he would prefer to prepare a budget for the Distdct where budgeted expenses are a couple of percent of above planned expenditures rather than the opposite. The Distdct in the draft 2004 LMCD Budget has made two concessions. First,: no funding has been budgeted in 2004 for the General and EWU/Exotics Reserve Fund accounts that are well below the agreed upon levels with the member cities. Second, no funding' has been budgeted in 2004 to be transferred into the Equipment Reserve Fund .account'for depreciation of milfoil harvesting equipment, He exPressed concern aboutchanging the frequency of the Boat Density and User Attitude Surveys because the Board only has a data point of every four years from a management standpoint. He encouraged the Board to become more disciplined on its deciSien makiqg for amendments to the budget dudng the budget'year itself. An extensive budget review process began inMay for the 2004 LMCD Budget,process and he expressed concern about making changes at such a late date, especially since an adopted budget for 2004 needs to be forwarded to the.member cities by 7/1/03. Craig Nelson stated that. he did not believe it wouldbe inappropriate to make changes to the 2004 LMCD Budgetat this meeting because the budget is adopted by,the Board and not a sub.committeethat assisted.in its.preparation. ~ Ambrose concurred with the comments from Craig Nelson. McMi!l~n:,stated that~she agreed.with the comments from, the Oro~o City Council tomaintain the levy in 2004 ~.at is forward~'to,~e !:4member cities consisten~:,with 2003, She asked the BOard members who represent smal!e[;-.citi,es aro,,und Lake Minnetonka.to respect the burden of larger, cities that are paying the vast majodty of the levy to the District. ....ed -- alth g 0 '::"": ' :'" "" mstad stat "that ou h he did:n t necessarily'agree:or disagree with ,the comments,.from the City of Orono, he wished the city would have gotten involved in the budget process at an earlier point. Van Hercke stated that she understood the requestfrom McMillan not to increase the 2004. levy to the member cities because of the high percentage of the. levy paid by the City of Minnetonka. Seuntjens stated that the levy proposed to be forwarded to the City of Minnetonka Beach ~vould have as much impact to that city as what has been proposed for the larger cities, such as the City of Orono. 3260 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page13 Burma stated that the percentage of levy increase from the 2003 to 2004 for the City of Mound is similar to the City of Orono. He pointed out that the Distdct is not neady maximizing the levy to the 14 member cities. Craig Nelson re-stated that the responsibility of the Board is to adopt the 2004 LMCD Budget and not the sub-committee. Valdesuso questioned whether the proposed $40,000 for the Boat Density and User Attitude Surveys in 2004 could be reduced. Nybeck stated that the $40,000 figure is already a reduction from what has been recommended for these surveys in 2004 by the MN DNR. Babcock stated that if the Board would like to balance the 2004 leVy to the 14 member cities with what was forwarded in 2003, one option is to take approximately $7,800 from the reserve fund accounts. Foster reported that the City of Deephaven did not express objections to the draft 2004 LMCD Budget. He stated that he believed that the proposed levy increase to the 14 member cities, approximately three percent, was reasonable and there could be long-term impacts for the District in the near future without reasonably increasing the levy forwarded to the 14 member cities. He pointed out that one area of the budget that will increase in 2004 is that the funding from the Freshwater Center that was negotiated as an offset for increased rent in the current office will be depleted in 2003. McMillan stated that she believed it might make more sense to take funds from the reserve accounts rather than reduce expenses in the 2004 LMCD Budget. MOTION: Foster moved, Babcock seconded to approve and certify the draft 2004 LMCD Budget as submitted, and to direct staff to forward a copy of the approved budget before the 7/1/03 deadline. Canning stated that he would prefer to adjust the budget figures so that the levy increase in 2004 would not increase from 2003. Otherwise, he would like some discussion points that he could forward to the Greenwood City Council for the proposed increased levy in 2004. The Board discussed General and EWM/Exotics Reserve Fund accounts, the need for them, and the possible need to re-evaluate General and EWU/Exotics Reserve Fund levels. MOTION: TO AMEND McMillan moved, Ambrose seconded to amend the motion by reducing the 2004 levy to the 14 member cities by allocating $8,000 from the General and EWU/Exotics ReServe Fund accounts. VOTE ON: Ayes (7), Nayes (6; BabcoCk, Burma, Foster, Seuntjens, Skramstad, and SUerth); amended MOTION motion passed. TO AMEND VOTE ON: Ayes (11), Nayes (2; Seuntjens and Skramstad); original motion, as amended, passed. ORIGINAL MOTION 3261 Lake Minnstonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June.25, 2003 Page14 D. Additional Business. Babcock questioned whether the District assets reported in the May balance sheet, that Yvere approved through the consent agenda, were accurate. He believed that assets were reported too high and that it might be appropriate rescind the motion to accept the May financial summary and balance sheet to allow Nybeck to check into this with the District bookkeeper and to bring it back for review at a future Regular Board Meeting. MOTION: Babcock moved, Ambrose seconded to rescind the motion to accept the May financial summary and balance sheet to allow Nybeck to check with the District bookkeeper on the accuracy of the District assets. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATION A. Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for Administrative Technician, Judd Harper. Foster introduced the agenda item and asked for background from Nybeck. Nybeck stated that he was not prepared to make a recommendation on a compensation adjuStment for Judd Harper at this meeting. He suggested that a more formalized procedure for compensation adjustments would be beneficial and he recommended that thiscould be done through the Personnel Sub-Committee, which currently consists of Board members Craig Nelson and Tom Skramstad, and possibly including Board Officers if they are interested. A recommendation should be brought back for consideration by the Board at the 7123103 Regular Meeting. B. Additional Business. There was no, additional business, SAVE THE LAKE A. Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Water Patrol, consideration of request from Lt. Johnson for safety equipment. Foster introduced the agenda item and asked for background from UcUillan. McMil!~n :stated thatLt,. Johnson has :~ested appm~imately...$2~900 of "Save the .Lake" funds for public safety equipment. Requests included 20 PFD's ($1,200.00), 10 plastic dockbumpers ($550;00), high quality rope ($150.00), and two cold water rescue (Mustang) suits. She stated that $5,000 has been budgeted .in 2004 in the "Save the Lake" Budget for Water Patrol .safety equipment. MOTION: Canning moved, Valdesuso seconded to approve $2,900 of"Save the Lake" funds for the Water Patrol safety equipment requested by Lt. Bdan Johnson. Babcock stated that he would prefer the District use "Save the Lake" funds for public safety equipment, questioning whether dock bumpers and high quality rope was public safety equipment. He r~mmended 3262 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page~5 removing this equipment as a friendly amendment to the motion. Canning and Valdesuso agreed to this. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. B. Additional Business. There was no additional business. 6. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE Nybeck stated that the current Site Supervisor for the 2003 EWM Harvesting Program, Chris Sones, has accepted another position and has resigned. He recommended that John Evans be promoted from the Assistant Site Supervisor position to Site Supervisor to replace Chris Sones and that Pete Westby be promoted to the Assistant Site Supervisor position. He recommended hourly pay adjustments for John Evans from $14.50 to $15.50 and for Pete Westby from $13.00 to $14.00, both effective 6~26~03. MOTION: Babcock moved, Suerth seconded adjust the hourly rate of John Evans from $14.50 to $15.50 and of Pete Westby from $12.00 to $13.00, effective 6/26/03. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously, 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Nybeck stated that the lake level as of 6/20/03 was 929.39', with a discharge of 75 c.f.s. The first five-year lease for the District will terminate on August 31 st and the landlord has requested the District inform him in writing on whether it would exercise its option for the second five-year lease effective 9/1/03. He reported that the lease rate for the next five years would be a fiat rate that would only be adjusted by annual taxes and a percentage of operating costs for the building, MOTION: Babcock moved, Skramstad seconded to authorize Nybeck to notify the Landlord that the District would be renew its second five-year lease after an investigation has been conducted on similar commercial office space in the area. VOTE: Motion carried unaimously. 8. OLD BUSINESS Van Hercke updated some of the problems that are occurring in the Grays Bay area that are attributed to the opening of the new public access. These issues are being dealt with by the neighborhood with the City of Minnetonka and she stated that she would keep the Board on the status of these issues. 9. NEW BUSINESS Lake Minnetonka Clean-up Project Skramstad stated that he participated in the recent Lake Minnetonka lake bottom clean-up project and he reported that it was successful, 3263 Lake Minnetonka Conservation. District Regular Board Meeting June 25, 2003 Page 16 Woolsey Pond Update Suer'th updated the Board on the navigation question on the dock installed on Woolsey Pond in the City of Woodland. The general consensus of the Board was that although the dock in question was installed from Woodland property, the District would not get involved unless a complaint was received from the City of Woodland. The consensus of the Board was that the District should not get involved with this issue because of the pending litigation that has been filed against the City of Woodland. ' 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:54 p.m. Albert O. Foster, Chai~an Lili McMillan, Secretary 3264 Date 8\1~003 8/2/2003 8/3/2003 8/4/2003 8/5/2003 8/6/2003 8/7/2003 8/8/2003 8/9/2003 8/10~2003 8/11/2003 8/12/2003 8/13/2003 8/14/2003 8/15/2003 8/16/2003 8/17/2003 8/18/2003 8/19/2003 8/20/2003 8/21/2003 8/22/2003 8/23/2003 8/24/2003 8~25~2003 8/26/2003 8/27/2003 8/28/2003 8/29/2003 8/30/2003 8/31/20O3 Weather cloudy pt cloudy SUNNY cloudy Harbor Wine & Spirits Aug 2003 Cust. '03 Cust. '02 Variance 2003 2002 628 422 206 12022.4 771 690 81 16325.95 574 -574 351 351 5335.58 338 375 -37 5312.91 332 -332 335 -335 383 -383 591 -591 730 -730 0 336 -336 350 -350 361 -361 391 -391 593 -593 621 -621 0 363 -363 306 -306 316 -316 381 -381 547 -547 675 -675 0 329 -329 341 -341 354 -354 357 -357 589 -589 746 -746 2088 12388 -10300 38996.84 6256.8 11666.29 9840.7 5091.74 4426.04 4638.87 5571.24 10003.44 12598,87 4279.95 4793.12 5112,31 6O52.42 9919.17 11 O34.73 4670.36 4137.74 5154.47 6779.15 9173.99 11373.24 4556.27 4892.12 4910,93 5343.89 10137.43 15225.17 19764O.5 Difference +/- 5765.6 4659,66 -9840.7 5335.58 221.17 -4426.04 -4638.87 -5571.24 -10003.44 -12598.87 0 -4279.95 -4793.12 -5112.31 -6052.42 -9919.17 -11034.73 0 -4670.36 -4137.74 -5154,47 -6779.15 -9173.99 -11373.24 0 -4556.27 -4892.12 -4910.93 -5343.89 -10137.43 -15225.17 -158643.61 3265 Date 7/1/2003 7/2/2003 7/3/2003 7/4/2003 7/5/2003 7/6/2003 7/7/2003 7/8/2003 7/9/2003 7/10/2003 7/11/2003 7/12/2003 7/13/2003 7/14/2003 7/15/2003 7/16/2003 7/17/2003 7/18/2003 7/19/2003 7/20/2003 7/21/2003 7/22/2003 7/23/2003 7/24/2003 7/25/2003 7/26/2003 7/27/2003 7/28/2003 7/29/2003 7/30/2003 7/31/2003 Totals Harbor Wine & Spirfrts July 03 Weather 2003 Cust. # 2002 sunny SUNNY sunny 6848.05 404 9606.69 495 23240.93 947 5969.18 5610.23 17914.72 7847.55 11196.66 4299.6 4781.55 3459.28 5331.42 10875.63 13628.22 4459.23 4369.41 4886.21 5014.04 10993.04 11175.89 4385.63 5428.39 4175.25 4896.49 11783.96 11103.91 4624.41 5076.4 5563.17 CLOUDY 14382.23 cloudy 4648.54 rain 5034.91 RAIN 5768.24 sunny 5698.33 RAIN 10799.62 rain 15455.99 sunny 5596.07 sunny 5842.85 sunny 6539.57 sunny 6767.24 sunny 12321.55 sunny 16315.52 sunny 5191.57 sunny 5632.91 sunny 6069.2 HAZY 7913.42 HOT/SUN 12737.08 HOT/SUN 17014.61 sunny 5539.53 sunny 5848.37 sunny 6081.21 sun/rain 7224.55 689 346 332 347 353 585 752 344 357 392 381 614 726 341 337 399 432 609 773 391 375 384 4O2 234118.8 188849.5 Difference +1- 878.87 3996.46 5326.21 0 6534.68 -11196.66 4648.54 735.31 986.69 2239.05 5468.2 4580.36 -13628.22 5596,07 1383.62 2170.16 1881.03 7307.51 5322.48 -11175.89 5191.57 1247.28 640.81 3738.17 7840.59 5230.65 -11103.91 5539.53 1223.96 1004.81 1661.38 45269.31 3266 PARK AND OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES July 10, 2003 Present: Chair Susan Taylor, Vice Chair Derrick Hentz, Commissioners Ron Motyka and Norm Domholt, Council Representative Bob Brown, Parks Director Jim Fackler, Secretary Denice Widmer Absent and Excused: John Beise, Gene Hostetler Citizens Present: Tina Nutter, Kassie Ricke, Colleen Don Landon Approval of the May 8, 2003 Minutes (June 12. to lack of a quorum.) MOTION BY Motyka to approve the Hentz. Motion carried. Agenda Changes: None Comments and suggestions from Discuss: Public Lands Permit A an, Scott Bischke cancelled due BY Bay, LLC Fackler gave a very be an after-the-fact recom~ of this app 'here was stating that this would discussion. MOTION BY Hentz to approve established th )ciation w the a damage, resI by Fackler that it be e ~ve to the lights, and that if City Maintenance, that the City is not iCOND by Motyka. Motion carried apl~ of Tax Forfeited Property 24-117-24- Scott and Kristine Bischke h nev( recomi gave a taken of this application, stating that the property and designated a park, but that this area would ~s a park. Fackler also stated that it was staff's release this property to adjacent property owners only. The applica ;cott Bischke, stated that he had requested the release and that his m objective was to get that property cleaned up. Bischke also stated that he has been mowing that property since the late 1970's. Bischke also shared the concern that this property be released to adjacent property owners only, whether it be himself or one of his neighbors. MOTION BY Brown to approve the release of Tax Forfeited Property 24-117-24-41-0136. SECOND BY Domholt. Discussion followed with Moytka raising concern that all adjacent property owners be notified. Motyka also expressed his concern that the lot lines be defined so no new house could go 3267 e up if that property was bought and then subdivided in the future. Motyka requested that this be stipulated in the motion and that the recommendation be made to Hennepin County. AMENDED MOTION by Motyka to approve the release of Tax Forfeited Property 24-117-24-41-0136 with the stipulation that all adjacent property owners be notified and that this property be sold intact to either the applicant or any other interest adjacent property owner. SECOND BY Brown. Motion carried. Discuss: Rottlund Plans w/Residents (It should be noted that the Rottlund residents meeting to vote on a final play .structure Fackler gave a brief update on what's happ, installation of this play structure will not mainly to the fact that the outlots City yet. Fackler also pointed out th. main workers is having month or more, and that space opportunity for ordering. to the POSAC stated that the spring, due by the his of Brown then asked the neighl Park". He then stated the fire maintenance of the park. Taylo consider the p the neighb( eered structure e park. ~ider lark, "Fire Fighter to assist them in the bigger issues to brought up the fact that ervices in the installation of the play Kas~, stated si #1. Ricke she trying t the nu~ would m Fackler wh property neighborhood had reached a of the options they had voted on. Ricke ,ne door to door to notify everyone in the There was an 18 to 3 vote in favor of commission to accept this proposal. Ricke stated Michael Noonen, Rottlund executive, regarding that will be installed in that park. Fackler stated he Tikes to walk through the park. Ricke also asked uld be done to speed up the process of Rottlund turning the to the City. Fackler stated that they could possibly escrow the ground cover so excavation and site preparation could begin this fall, but that the ordering and installing could not take place until next spring. There was some discussion regarding the timetable of this project. Taylor asked Fackler if there he possibly has a current project that could be put on hold so his staff could concentrate on Rottlund, and Fackler stated "No", again stating the constraints due to being short-staffed and having the storage space issue. 3268 2 e e Ricke then asked about Little Tikes offer to have a supervisor on site, at a cost, to assist in the installation of the play structure. Fackler stated he had no problem with that as long as someone is qualified to do the site preparation. Ricker stated her husband is not only qualified, but that he has the equipment to do the site preparation. Ricke also pointed out that the only item voted on was the play structure and design for the park. The gazebo is still up in the air. MOTION by Brown recommending Little Tikes Option #1. SECOND by Moyka. Motion carried. Taylor stated that she would schedule a meeting Sarah Smith and representatives from the that this project is completed as soon as pos'. the fact that POSAC would like to have a from the neighborhood. Ricke asked was agreed that they needed a date September as it takes 5 weeks for ordered. Fackler also pointed out that hi he would be willing to have come in o~ again that the volunteer ions need to thanked the Commission for In g~ Kandis Hanson and to ensure Irown brought up equipment were for. It ust, first trrive once from 7-3 , but also. Reiterated on the list. Ricke project done. Tina Nutter, 6126 Sugar Mill L once it's plant, asked Kas: park for to assist in the had stated would Brown mewhere fire depa~ n to the care of the landscaping ~e City ~onsible. Brown then the neighbors about naming the ~e Fire Department may be willing Ricke pointed out that the VFW of the gazebo, but that if the fire the o, they could put that money to use ~ that he would bring this up at the July 14, Ricke stated that she would bring the park d for their recommendation. Discus Outlay No discus ~. Discuss: ~rks Tour MOTION Brown to table this issue until the August meeting. SECOND BY Hentz. Motion carried. Discuss: Legacy Brown stated that he had received information from Greenway. Brown gave a brief overview of the program, stating that they solicited various businesses and the VFW, Legion, etc in the area for donations. Depending upon the amount of the donation, they receive either a plaque at the park on up to naming rights of the park. They also solicit private citizens for donations that allow the purchase of new property, such as wetlands, that can be dedicated 3269 3 10. 11. 12. then to the donors. Brown stated that it is a very labor intensive project; they solicit, send out mailings, etc. Brown will bring a brochure to the August meeting. Domholt expressed his concern over allowing the naming of parks, as he is opposed to re-naming existing parks. Brown stated the naming would only be for new park property. Discuss: Goals Taylor requested that moving the Master Plan to September. Discuss: August Calendar Legacy and Park Tour were added. Fackler also discussed leaving the December calendar open due to the holidays, but a meeting would be called if necessary. Otherwise, a packet HRA, DCAC, and Planning Commission Minutes, and ~ pertinent information would still be mailed out. FYI: City Council Representative had Skate Park update was presented some slowdowns to do the still moving along. Director The stated that had that thc ect was MOTION BY Brown to adjo carried. Meeting adjourned at Motion 3270 Meeting held on 7/01/03 Date printed 07/21/03 Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility The meeting was convened at 8:30 AM Monday, July 1, 2003 at Mound Fire Station: Present: Kandis Hanson City KH Greg Pederson City GP John McKinley City JM Miles Britz SEH MB Bob Gamades Amcon BG Don Geiger Amcon DG Schedule: 1.1. Project completion December 1. 1.2. Work affecting City Hall parking lot will start in approximately one month. 1.3. Discussed two week schedule. Budget: 2.1. DG added line item in Funding for interest earned, $30,000. 2.2. Discussed approved and pending Change Orders. 2.3. Discussed General Condition expenditures, which are in line for phase of project. Last month the City Council approved the millwork contract. There are two contracts not yet assigned, Fencing and Fluid Applied Coating. KH has indicated she wishes to be involved in color selections. Need carpet submittal and all finish samples. Technology and Low Voltage 5.1. There will be a meeting evaluating the phone systems tomorrow. 5.2. GP is comfortable with Jim brand. He will be used to assist in designing IT work. 5.3. ABC finalizing design of Iow voltage wiring. They have not been awarded a contract for installation. They have been requested to forward a proposal, at that time it will be decided to accept their proposal or go to bid. This also includes CCTV, PA System and Security. Have decision for final design of furniture layout with Volkers. Volkers is forwarding a proposal for the provision of furniture, but may also bid from their documents. Volkers is giving a 60% discount. Building Design Issues: 7.1. Police Department modifications should be ready next week. They have split one office into two. 7.2. Need to incorporate HazMat shower into apparatus bay. This needs to be designed and proposals reviewed prior to completion of underground plumbing work. 7.3. MB needs the specs for the donated dishwasher as early as possible. 7.4. BG donated a new stove; this will not impact the hood size. GP has not discussed the removal of an additional tree from the neighboring property with property owner. C:\WINDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\5J2LV56G'u'VIPS 07 01 03 Budget.doc 3271 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOUND Meeting held on 7/01/03 Date printed 07/21/03 9. Future meeting dates are August 5, September 9, October 7 and November 5. 10. Next meeting will be held August 5 at 8:30. 11. Minutes by DG. Call if any missing items or discrepancyl C:\WINDOWS\Local SeEings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5\5J2LV56GWIPS 07 01 03 Budget.doc 3272 Page 2 of 2 CiTY OF MOUND Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility Site Meeting Meeting held on 07/08/03 Date printed 07/21/03 The meeting was convened at 10 AM Monday, July 8, 2003 at Mound Fire Station: Present: Greg Pederson City GP Bob Gamades Amcon BG Miles Britz SEH MB Don Geiger Amcon DG Jesse Roush Veit JS 1. Safety 1.1 Hard hats and vests are to be worn at all times. 1.2 Stay alert at all times for equipment operations. 2. E-Mail Address 2.1. Once again we make the request for everyone's e-mail address in order to keep everyone in the loop and to assure the up most efficient means of updating everyone on current issues. All contractors shall exercise caution when working near the foundation waterproofing. If the waterproofing is accidentally damaged in any way notify BG immediately no matter how minor the damage may appear. BG and the waterproofing contractor should be the only ones to determine if a damaged area is in need of repairs. Correcting a situation now can prevent more damage and problems later. All contractors are to start parking in the school parking lot if your vehicle is not required to perform your work. Ensure all deliveries have site contact name and phone number. Ensure personnel are on site to accept deliveries. It is not the responsibility of the superintendent to accept delivery or find a person to accept delivery. We are working on a small site, ensure waste is picked up on a regular basis and minimize the area occupied by materials and tools. Temporary electrical to be installed within the next week. Joist spacing at elevator shaft is not adequate for elevator exhaust. MB indicated to relocate joist to provide for required 24" opening. 9. Comments: 9.1. GB - Have discussed cutting of tree on neighbor's property and have received permission from the neighbor, they wish to keep the trunk. 9.2. BG - Elevator floor drain seems to be oversized, could conflict with elevator equipment. -- MB to verify with mechanical engineer. C:\WlNDOWS\Local SeEings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\5J2LV56G~vlPS 07 08 03.doc 3273 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOUND Meeting held on 07/08/03 Date printed 07/21/03 9. Schedule, see attached. ]0. Next meeting July 15, 2003 at 10:00. 10.1. Reminder that if you are doing work on site or are about to start in the week of or after the scheduled meeting you need to be present or your representative must be present. ( i.e. foreman, superintendent, project manager) 11. Minutes by DG. Call if any missing items or discrepancy, 952-200-4390. C:\WINDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\5J2LV56G~v1PS'07 08 03.doc 3274 Page 2 of 2 TWO WEEK SCHEDULE MOUND PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING DATE: JUNE 10, 2003 TASK NAME DURATION START DATE FINISH DATE Erect Precast Panels Upper 14 days 6/17/03 15:30 7/8/03 15:30 Plumbing Underground 21 days 6/30/03 8:00 7/29/03 17:00 Plank set on 2nd Floor 7 days 6/25/03 15:30 7/7/03 15:30 CMU 1st Floor 5 days 6/30/03 8:00 7/7/03 17:00 Joists and Deck 3 days 7/8/03 8:00 7/10/03 17:00 ,CMU Upper Area 3 days 7/7/03 8:00 7/9/03 17:00 WatedSanitary install 3 days 7/7/03 8:00 7/9/03 17:00 ~Grout Planks 5 days 7/7/03 8:00 7/11/03 17:00 CMU 2nd Floor 5 days 7/10/03 8:00 7/16/03 17:00 Topping Coat 1st Floor 2 days 7/14/03 8:00 7/15/03 17:00 Topping Coat 2nd Floor 2 days 7/17/03 8:00 7/18/03 17:00 3275 CITY OF MOUND Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility Meeting held on 7/22/03 Date printed 07/28/03 The meeting was convened at 8:30 AM Monday, July 22, 2003 at Mound Fire Station: Present: Kandis Hanson City KH Una Sheets Metro Systems US Greg Pederson City GP CharRae Chwialkowski Metro Systems CC Jim Kurtz City JK Larry Voelkers Metro Systems LV Miles Britz SEH MB Don Geiger Amcon DG Molly Olivier SEH MO 1. Discussed Lobby Marmoleum pattem. 2. MB to investigate stained concrete finish at Truck Display. 3. Discussed Police & Fire Station: 3.1. Two schemes presented: Burgundy and Blue 3.2. These colors will be consistent throughout. 3.3. Keep Lobby walls neutral, accented with furniture and millwork. 3.4. Discussed option of combining schemes to differentiate between Police and Fire Department. Would this create 'territory'? 3.5. Colors are to be carded into the Apparatus Bay, the structure and deck above will be painted white. The finishes will be epoxy paint on the walls and epoxy floor. GP and MB investigating epoxy flooring. 3.6. Discussed splitting color scheme in Toilet Rooms, burgundy in the women's and blue in the men's. 3.7. Splitting colors on First Level would not be noticeable in the Lobby, only in the office areas. 3.8. GP requested the burgundy paint, for the doors and frames, have more red in it similar to the sign color. 3.9. KH prefers wall color from the blue scheme in the main Lobby office area. 3.10. Lobby hollow metal frames should be painted to match the aluminum vestibule frames. 3.11. Sheet vinyl floors in halls are the same light gray as in the Lobby sailboat pattern. 3.12. The First Floor will be split with the Police area having the blue scheme and the Fire area having the burgundy scheme. Maintain blue scheme in Lobby. The Lower Level will be the blue scheme and the Second Level will be the burgundy scheme. The Women's Toilets will have the burgundy scheme, Men's Toilets and Unisex Toilets the blue scheme. 4. Discussed Design Weave carpet, DG to inquire if Carpet Contractor intends on using Design Weave or one of the alternate carpets. 5. Signage to have dark text and light lettering, blue scheme. 6. Exterior 6.1. Hollow metal doors and frames will be painted to match aluminum doors and frames. 6.2. The overhead doors will be white, painted steel. The jambs and heads will be painted an accent color; the bollards will be painted to match. 6.3. The exterior accents should all be one color to match asphalt shingle color. C:~ttachrnents~ntgs~MPS~udgetWIPS 07 21 03 Design.doc 3276 Page I of 2 CITY OF MOUND Meeting held on 7/22/03 Date printed 07/28/03 7. The City brought in three (3) examples of chairs that will be in the building. The colors are medium blue, dark blue and burgundy. 8. DG to forward submittals for carpet, VCT, Marmoleum, vinyl base, ceiling tile and tackable wall surfaces for the next meeting. 9. Furniture: 9.1. Panels will be a neutral color. 9.2. Accent colors in flipper panels, tack boards and upper panels. Metro Systems to investigate color availability for accent fabric. 9.3. Work surfaces can match Lobby front counter, wood grain. 9.4. Wall panels, paint on metal trim, pedestals and overhead bins will be putty. 9.5. KH - Any blues should match chair colors so we do not have too many blues. '9.6. Counters are to be PVC edged. 9.7. Keep main colors on Police and Fire side the same color and change the accent colors. 9.8. MO inquired if there was a fabric with blue and burgundy to use throughout, Metro Systems to investigate. 9.9. All items to be cleanable and scuff proof. 10. Next meeting will be held July 28 at 2:00. 11. Minutes by DG. Call if any missing items or discrepancy. C:~,ttachments~mtgs~VlPS\Budget~MPS 07 21 03 Design.doc 3277 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF MOUND Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility Meeting held on 7/28/03 Date pdnted 08/06/03 The meeting was convened at 2:30 PM Monday, July 28, 2003 at Mound Fire Station: Present: Kandis Hanson City KH Molly Olivier SEH MO Greg Pederson City GP Una Sheets Metro Systems US Jeff Andersen City JA Larry Voelkers Metro Systems LV Miles Britz SEH MB Don Geiger Amcon DG 1. Sheet vinyl - Colors and specifications were based on Marmoleum, other products had to meet these criteria to be accepted. The flooring contractor has included Tarket in their bid, which was another acceptable product. Since the project was bid, three of the colors in the Tarket product have been discontinued. DG is working with the contractor to determine what would be the cost impacts to use Marmoleum. MO to verify with Tarket if a dark blue is available. 2. VCT is only used on the Lower Level. Three colors will be used; light gray as a field and maroon and blue as accents. 3. The floor in the kitchen, non-commercial, could be VCT; it is currently sheet vinyl. The VCT would be higher maintenance. Counter P.Lam color to be Pionite 'Rock This Town,' and cabinet faces will be light wood grain. Could paint space between base and upper cabinets burgundy for some added color to the room. 4. A 'silvery' P.Lam will be used for the sailboat on the wall of the Lobby. 5. All counter P.Lam, non-wood grain, will be Pionite 'Rock This Town,' and cabinet faces will be light wood grain. 6. Recapped Toilet Room finishes. Could paint non-tiled walls an accent color, only two walls have wainscot tile. 7. The vinyl base will be light gray throughout. 8. Lockers will be solid color- Police will be Jersey and the Fire will be Maroon. 9. Tack Wall will be Quarry. 10. Door frames in the Fire offices will be Fine Wine. 11. The stained concrete in the Truck Display will be Padre Brown. The reducer strip between tl~e sheet vinyl flooring and Truck Display will be gray vinyl. 12. Exterior paint on overhead door jamb and heads will be Fireweed. 13. Next meeting will discuss altemate VCT colors, carpet in workout room. 14. Furniture 14.1. Tack boards and chairs will be two different colors of the same pattern, blue and burgundy. These materials are currently being tested for use as a tack board material. 14.2. Metal edges and overhead bins to be putty. 14.3. Panel fabric to be light gray. 15. Next meeting will discuss alternate VCT colors, carpet in workout room and marble transition at kitchen. 16. Signage to have dark text and light lettering, blue scheme. 17. Next meeting will be held August 5 at 1:00, furniture at 2:00. If fabric test results are not back the alternate date will be August 11 at the same times. 18. Minutes by DG. Call if any missing items or discrepancy. C:\WINDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\K52JC9UF~MPS 07 28 03 Design.doc 3278 Page 1 of 1 MOUND PUI~LIC ,~AFETY FACILITY TEAM MEETING Tuesday~ August 05, 2003 AGENDA 1. Project Schedule and Progress Update a. City Parking Lot Closure 2. Budget and Financial Status Design Issues a. Color Selection- Inside/.' b. Color Selection - Outside c. Add Alternates ? Technology Components a. Telephone System Selection b. Computer Network Design c. Surveillance Equipment d. Low Voltage Widng e. Other Miscellaneous a. Apparatus Bay Floor Coatings b. Neighbors Trees 6. Adjourn 3279 Meund Pubic 8s~ety Far.,~ty Mound, MN Lease Revenue bona Sets Pr~ect Funds HRA Cor~gan~y Ba~nce Bu~ - Contingency Allocation Constru~ton CoflUngenoy - HRA I~ere~t Earned Exp~dltures A/E B-se Fee AtE Scape Change Con~e~y L~ Fe~N~ Boil ~t - ~ R~ & ~i~ F~s (SAC) ~lc U~ cha~ B~ A~ffia~nt a~ P~ ~ Tee~g FumtshMaa an,~ EuulDmant FFE Auto vtsu~l Systems ~muflty ~ A~cess Systems/CCTV Tetepl~ene System Computer Network Paging System CalVe TV Volce/Dats Cabling Building ~ Co,ts General Conditkms (Estimated) Corltract~. Let Coritra~...ons - To Be Let (Eatlmatect) Change Ordain - Approved Change Ordain. Pending Ova~r D~reet Purchase Aabeatoe Removel Construction Manager Fee 81ts Iml:Fovements DornalltJon of Existing Removal of Well New (rel~acemem wel) Contingen~y - Con~tructio~ Recommended AIMmems Propoeed Cost Savings IMc~mmltted Funds Tmsl SEH SEH City of Mound Kennedy/Graven Miscellaneous MCE8 Ex~ll Braun MFR^ To be Bid In Const~fctlan Cost 8ub-total~ Ov~er To be bid TO be bld To 0e bid To b~ bid TO ~0a bid To be bid Tobe bid Sulo~-4otal$ Contractor~ (to I~ btCt) Amc, on GM Included in BulKing To be bid NOT i~cluded In project Altsmate #1 ~ub.totM= (~u~ 8~o~e*) Budget Work Sheet Maml~*O3 Recommended Mar 2003 5,350,000 12,478 237,522 250,000 8)60r0001 Auguet~3 Budget Meeting August 2~03 5,350,000 12,478 237,522 Re~rnmendml al~.~tlon 200,000 8et aside for canetru~l 30,000 8~no~ooe I 371,250 30,500 2,000 3,000 48,832 2~400 50,000 8,300 8,000 :S0,000 47,880 8,000 0 865,162 385,750 ~EH t%000 SEH 50,000 SEH 766 MFRA Fee to 5/1103 2,000 Kennedy Graven 3,000 El~lers 48,~'"&2 ~lty mf Mound - Gene 2,400 City 48,870 MFR/dAmcon 9,381 Am:on 8,00O C~y 30,000 Ameon 47,880 City 8,ooo c~y O ^mcon 855,870 85,000 15,000 14,400 17,200 8,700 7,500 2,80D 15r500 188,800 85,000 City 15,000 City 14,400 CH t7~200 City 8,700 City 7,5OO City 2,50O C~Y 18,500.... Ck'y 168,800 4,531,988 128,500 37,200 10,230 0 250,000 108,418 (60,7541 5,003,580 1214T8 W Amcon 163.825 4,387,~48 78,000 20,487 50,t47 425 4,000 128,500 Amcon Amc, on Max 8tolnln§er, 10,23o Stevens Drilling city 250,000 Amcon In B~cl~ Hard CostS Blclg. Commlt~e In Building Hard Costs Amoon 5,072,562 $S,897,041 (t7,041)11 AMC~N 328O CiTY OF MOUND PUBLIC ,~AFETY FACILITY 8/5/2003 CONTINGENCY Total $250,000,00 Change Orders - Approved 29,487 Change Orders - Pending 50,147 Change Orders - General Conditions $0.00 Owner Direct Purchases $425.00 TOTAL $80,059.00 Contingency Balance $169,941.00 AMCON CM 3281 MPS Const cost 08-05 Cont. CITY OF MOUND PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY 8/5/2003 GENERAL CONDITIONS Estimated $163,825.00 Pre-Construction (5/02 to 1/03) $9,722.04 Feb. $1~831.50 Mar. $2,995.79 Apr. $6r672.09 May $171772.74 Jun. $10~971.55 Jul. $0.00 ~,ug. $0.00 Sept. $0.00. Oct $0.00 Nov. $0.00 Dec. $0.00 TOTAL $49,965.71 General Conditions Balance $1 '13,859.29 AMCON CM 3282 MPS Const cost 08-05 Gen. Cond. CITY OF MOUND PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY 8/5/2003 CONTRACTS TO LET C-05 Fencing $60~000.00 C-23 Fluid Applied Coating $18~000.00 TOTAL $78,000.00 AMCON CM MPS Const cost 08-05 Contracts To Let 3283 CITY OF MOUND PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY 8/5/2003 PRINTING Estimated $30,000.00 Pre-Con $25~386.3G F~b. $358.56 Mar. $0.00 Apr. $119.85 May $333.32 Jun. $0.0(3 Jul. Aug. ISept. Oct. Nov. Dec. TOTAL , $26~ 198.0~ Printing Balance $3,801.99 AMCON CM 3284 MPS COnst cost 08-05 Printing Contract Summaries Mound Public Safe y Facility Signed Snaurance orl~lrlal Change current Contract Explrea Bond Co~trlt~ Orclem Contract A-01 City of Mound A-01A Cty of Mound .............................................................................................. A-02 Short E,iott HenciriGkson [nc, A-03 Eh ers & Associates Inc ......................................................................................... A-04 Amcon CM, LLC A-05 Braun Intertec .......................................................................................... A-06 Braun Intertec A-07 Arthur J. Ga lagher & Co of Minnesota Inc ................................................................................. A-08 SEH/KO (Krech Ojard) ....................................................................................................................................... A-09 MN Pollution Control ............................................................................................................ A-10 Xcel _..A_ ?_!_~_e!!!~_nt ....................................... ;. ..................................................................................................... .._A_-!.~...??_~?~ ......................................................................................................................................................................... .~_-.~__~?_c..~ ................................................................................................................................................ ..~.-.1__3~_ .. M. e_d i a C 0_m../_Lin__e......R. elo.ca_fi o n ........................................................................................................................................ ~2~ ~_o_~ ~.?_.a_ ?.~ _v, n,.~? rt B ~_d ................................................................................................................................... A-15 TC^T A-16 Stevens Dril ing & Environmental A-17 Minn Blue Digital Imaging .................................................................................................. A-18 Emanuelson-Podas, lnc ............................................................................................................................................... 37,200 215 37,415 C-01 Max Steintnger x 1/1104 ........................................................................................................... 567,800 3,015 570,815 oC-02 Velt and Company, Inc. x ..................................... C-04 Northwest Asphalt Inc x 12/t/o3 x a2.9oo C-05 Re-Bid Fencing ............................... C-06 Midwest Landscaping .......................................................................................... C-07 combined with C-06 .................................................................. 466.872 627 4§7,499 C-08 Ketleher Construction, Inc. x 9r~0/o3 x ................................................................................. 723,334 {35,8B~) 686,448 C-09 Hanson Spancrete Midweat, Inc. x lo/~o3 x ................ C-10 Axel H. Ohman, Inc. x i/~/o4 ..................... 108,054 2,436 110,490 C-11 Thumbeck Steal Fabrication Inc. x x 77,98g 10,83B B8,807 ~/o3 x ................. C-13 Kellington Construction, Inc. x 93.250 4.~ ~5.1~6 ................................................................................................................................ ................................... 139,775 21,750 161,525 C-14 Dalco Roofing & Sheet Metal, Inc. x 116,083 115,083 C-15 Specialty Systems s/~/o3 x ............ 31.~30 31,500 C.15A Twin City Roofing ................................................................................................ 47,233 3,082 50.315 ?_s_.S.!r._u.g.?LH~..~_?.!..!~C.: .................................. ~. ..... ?_o2 .............................................................................................................................. 68,860 c-~7 T~, C,y ~ar,0e ~r C_o_m._~?ny ............. .x._ 1~73 ................................................................................................. ............................. ~23,~ C-18 Empirehouse, Inc. x s~o3 x ..................... 99,200 99,200 C-lg Minut-Og e Co Inc x .......................... .................................................................................................... 53,313 (587) 52,726 C-20 Ceilings & Floors, Inc. x s/~/o4 C-21 Combined with C-20 67,g32 67,932 C-22 Royal Foor Cover ng Co Inc x x ................. c-23 Hold ....................................................................................................................................... 4g,800 49,800 C-24 Steinbrecher Painting Inc. x .......................................................................................................... g,294 9,294 C-25 Mid-Americs Business Systems x .................... C-26 Hold .................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4o5 4D5 _..c.;_2_7~_~"__"'y_sa~? ......................................................................................................................................... C-27B Construction Supply, Inc. 14,04e 14.04e 3285 81gned irmur~nce Odglmd Change Currant C-27C TBD C-27D BMS u~ e/o4 28.946 3,631 32.547 C-27E combined with C-27D ....................................................................................... C-27F Combined with C-27D .................................................................................................. C-27G combined with C-27D ............................................................................................ C-27H combined with C-27B C-271 combined with C-27B C-27J combined with C-27D ..................................................................... C-27K combined with C-271~ ....................................................... C-27L combined with C-27B C-28 St. Cloud Restaurant Supply x C-29 Wilkie Sanderson u~2/o4 29,648 29,646 C-30 Offisource Inc. x 3,240 3,240 C-31 Schindler Elevator Corporation 4o,aoo 4o,~o C-32 Alhed Mechanical Systems of Hut~tnson, In, _ ............................................................................................................................. ................................................................ C-33 Rdgedale Etectrc, nc x ~/~/o3 x ........................................................................................................................................... 4,357,948 29.487 4,387.435 AMCON P,n on: 8/S/2003 3286 / Z 0 3287 3288 Z o ~ 3289 Z Z 3290