Loading...
1995-11-14 AGENDA CiTY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1995, 7:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 24, 1995 REGULAR MEETING AND THE CONTINUED OCTOBER 24, 1995 MEETING TO DISCUSS THE 1996 PROPOSED BUDGET ON NOVEMBER 6, 1995. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) PARKING ASSESSMENT. REQUEST FROM RICK & DENISE HANSON FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON RESOLUTION #94-131, APPROVING A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID 23-117-24 24 0008. CONTINUED DISCUSSION: NO PARKING SIGNS ON FAIRVIEW LANE. REVIEW OF 1996 DOCK APPLICATION FORMS. SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A WARMING HOUSE AND TWO OUTDOOR SKATING RINKS ON PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH A PUBLIC SCHOOL AT 5600 LYNWOOD BLVD. SUGGESTED DATE: DECEMBER 12, 1995 UPDATE ON WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY STUDY. APPLICATION FOR RESTAURANT LICENSE "THE COFFEE PLACE" AT LYNWOOD & COMMERCE. PG. 3238-3248 PG. 3249-3252 PG. 3253-3269 PG. 3270-3281 PG. 3282-3295 PG. 3296 PG. 3297-3301 PG. 3302 3236 10. 11. 12. PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT XXXX KILDARE ROAD, LOTS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26, BLOCK 11, SETON, PID NOS. 19-117-23-22-0036 THRU 0041. (STREET WITH CURB, GUTTER, WATER AND SEWER) PG. 3303 PAYMENT OF BILLS. PG. 33O4-3326 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS DEPARTMENT HEAD MONTHLY REPORTS FOR OCTOBER, 1995. PG. 3327-3351 LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER 1995. PG. 3352-3353 C. LMCD MAILINGS. PG. 3354-3366 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 23, 1995 PG. 3367-3376 LETTER FROM ALAN JOHNSON, PRESIDENT, NORWEST BANK, WESTERN SUBURBAN MARKET, WAYZATA, RE: CHANGES IN THE WAY NORWEST'S CUSTOMERS ARE USING BANKS. PG. 3377-3378 INVITATION TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY SCHEDULED FOR FRIDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1995 PLEASE NOTE TO RSVP BY FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1ST TO LINDA AT 472-0600. REMINDER: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, TUESDAY, PG. 3379 NOVEMBER 21, 1995, 7:30 PM, AGENDA ITEM WILL ~ INCLUDE: CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON 1996 BUDGET, STREAMLINING OF VARIANCES, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHO WILL SPEAK ON THE LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT PASSED DURING THE 1995 LEGISLATIVE SESSION. ENCLOSED IS SOME ' INFORMATION FOR YOU TO REVIEW PRIOR TO THE .// COW MEETING. 3237 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TH-F MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMI ION NOVEMBER 9, 1995 Present were: Chair Carolyn Schmidt, Vice Chair Tom Casey, Commissioners Peter Meyer, Mary Goode, and Bill Darling, Council ReDresentative Andrea Ahrens, Parks Director Jim Packler, Dock Inspector Tom McCaffrey, and Secretary Peggy James. Commissioners Byrnes, Geffre, and Darling were absent and excused. The following persons were also in attendance: Edwards, and Alex Wilson. Tom Menken, Geri MINUTES MOTION made by Casey, seconded by Meyer to approve the Park and Open Spaoe Commission Minutes of October 12, 1995 as written. Motion carried unanimously· AGENDA CHANGES None. 1996 DOCK LOCATION MAP: PUBLIC ~_~RIN~ Jim Fackler, Parks Director, reviewed the proposed changes to the map as outlined within his memorandum. These changes need to be approved by the Council by January 15, 1996. Fackler noted that the Dock Location Map Attachment was Revised on 11/6/95 and copies were distributed to the Commission. He explained that duplicate numbers were found on the list, and that the list now reflects the correct number of dock sites at 448. Following is a recap of the changes proposed to the map for 1996: DOCK SITE NUMBERS: A listing of all dock site numbers, including Shoreline Type and Land Type is to be made as an attachment to the map. PEMBROKE PARK: The area on the map shown as Pembroke Park will be corrected. BRIGHTON COMMON: As shown on the attached copy of the original plat of Wychwood, the correct name for this area is Brighton Common and no change is proposed. FISHING PIER: The fishing pier at Centerview Beach will be added to the map. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes November 9, 1995 Se WATERSIDE LANE VS. WATER BANK COMMON (DOCK SITES 20130 to 22600 Morton Lane): The original plat named this area Water Bank Common. Currently, the dock map shows this area as Waterside Common, and the plat map shows this area as Waterside Lane. History indicates that when the street names were changed by the City, the name of this area was also changed. Through discussions with the City Engineer, it could be possible to rename this area' back to Water Bank Common, and also to recognize the improved road on the plat map and dock map as Waterside Lane. The City Council would have to approve this change with an ordinance amendment. Pederson commented that this is a unique area where a road is across the common. The road evolved from a path to a gravel road to a paved road. She visited the Registrar's Office at Hennepin County and they suggested that this road be described as an easement so that the abutting people will retain their "abutting" status. The Parks Director commented that regardless those residents would still be considered "abutting." He agreed that this area is unique as it is the only area with a road on the common. Tom Menken questioned the total number of dock sites within the City's dock program. The Dock Inspector confirmed that there are 448 dock sites, and this number has not changed for at least the last five years, and it is possible to add or remove dock sites. e NORTH PARK (22827 TO 23057): North Park is located just east of Morton Lane and has never been labeled on the map. The dock site numbers/lineal footage will need to be verified by the City Engineer. It was noted that the dock site numbers do not correlate with the list and should be corrected to read "22990 to 23070." e LAKE BLVD. (23057 TO 23255): Lake Blvd. is located just east of Apple Lane and has never been labeled on the map. The dock site numbers/lineal footage will need to be verified by the City Engineer. It was noted that the dock site numbers do not correlate with the list and should be corrected to read "23090 to 23230." PRIVATE SHORELINE (23057): There is an 85 foot wide parcel of land located between North Park and Lake Blvd. that is private lakeshore. This area is currently shown on the map as a docking area and needs to be corrected. Dock site numbers will need to be adjusted to account for the loss of 85 lineal feet. Park and Open Space Commission M/nu=es November 9, I995 It was noted that the dock site numbers do not correlate with the list and should be corrected to read "(23090)." 9. TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS: a. Following 20830 is 22030, which is incorrect. 22030 should also be 20830. b. 212804 should be 21280. C. 23255 is shown as 23155. There may be other typographical errors, and as they are found they will be corrected. 10. SHORELINE TYPES: The map currently refers to "Shoreline Classifications.,, In order to be consistent with the Use Plan, it should be changed to read "Shoreline Types." 11. CRESCENT PARK: The spelling needs to be corrected "Crescent". Darling requested an explanation of the numbering system. Fackler explained that it is measured on lineal footage. Fackler commented it is his understanding there are about 6 miles of public shoreline. There are no commons docks on Langdon Lake or Dutch Lake. Chair Schmidt opened the public hearing. Tom Menken asked a question regarding dock spacing. He lives on the north side of Harrison Bay between Dove and Eagle abutting commons. His first summer at that residence, 2 years ago, the docks were spaced about 30 feet apart, but last summer the docks were spaced only about 25 feet apart. The Dock Inspector stated that the spacing in that area is 30 feet and those docks were probably not installed on-center. The numbering in that area has stayed the same. McCaffrey explained that each site has 30 feet of area and a site holder may place their dock anywhere within that 30 feet as long as it does not cause a problem for adjacent sites. McCaffrey offered to assist Mr. Menken in the spring to mark the spots. Alex Wilson and Geri Edwards informed the Commission that they reside on the north end of Avocet Lane, Jennings Bay, and they have a little boat launch off Avocet Lane that the neighbors use and snowmobilers use in the winter. They have a concern with a commons dock that somewhat obstructs their use of the boat launch because it is installed at such an angle. They would like the dock installed at a more appropriate angle. The Dock Inspector agreed to work on this issue next spring. They also expressed a concern about the wetlands disappearing in Jennings Bay cove. The Parks Director explained that the wetlands thrived during the drought, but the reeds do not live with the water depth consistently at a normal level. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes November 9, 1995 Chair $chmidt closed the public hearing. Ahrens questioned if there is an ordinance requiring people to center their docks within their site? Ahrens suggested that if someone does not want to place their dock on-center, they should get approval from the other abutting dock site holders. Schmidt questioned what the concern is. Fackler stated that they try to work with the owners, and sometimes the LMCD helps mediate between private lakeshore owners and the City. Prior to the LMCD there was not a setback, and our system existed prior to 1968, so we work together.. Ahrens stated that she is not suggesting the number of docks be reduced. She would like to see a recommendation that people install their docks on the center of their site. She does not feel that it necessarily has to be in the ordinance, but that it should be a policy. Ahrens elaborated that when one person places their dock off-center it creates a domino affect and eventually somebody down the line will be negatively affected. She would like a statement included on the "Attachment" to the Dock Location Map which lists all the dock site numbers which says that people should put their docks centered on these locations, and if they do not want to center it then they need the Dock Inspectors approval. The Dock Inspector noted that he would not want to advertise that you have to center your dock because people may think that they now have the opportunity to place their docks off-center. Ahrens commented that right now though there is no assurance that people are not doing this. Ahrens referred to her docking area which is suppose to have a limited number of docks because of the sand bar, but if someone wanted they could move their dock on the sand bar. Fackler agreed that there is some movement in her area. Ahrens commented that having docks off-center provides for a very cluttered look and it is unsightly. She would rather see a policy change rather than an ordinance change. The Dock Inspector confirmed that off-setting is rare and there should be no problem. Ahrens commented that she wants the Dock Inspector to enforce the policy. Motion by Ahrens to recommend to the City Council approval of the 1996 Dock Location Map with the changes as outlined within the memorandum from the Parks Director, including the "Attachment to the Dock Location Map" Revised 11/6/95, and recommend that a policy be created that docks must be centered on the dock site locations unless otherwise approved by the Dock Inspector. Motion seconded by Casey. Park and Open Space Commission M/nutes November 9, 1995 It was questioned if an ordinance change would be required. The Parks Director suggested that City Code Section 437:05, Subd. 5 would be a good place for this change. He confirmed there is nothing in the ordinance now requiring people to center their docks at their sites. Darling questioned what would happen if somebody did not agree with the Dock Inspector's decision on the dock placement, and it was noted that an individual would always have the right to appeal to the Council. The Parks Director clarified that the Commission's recommendation will need to be reviewed by the City Council on or before their meeting on January 9th. ahrens moved to amend her motion to recommend the Ordinance be amended to require that docks must be centered on the dock site locations unless otherwise approved by the Dock Inspector. Casey, seconded the amendment to the motion. Pederson expressed a concern that Water Bank Common is disappearing, and she would like to see it properly labeled on the map. Pederson suggested that the commons area at the east end towards Morton Lane could be listed as Waterside lane, and the commons area to the west of Tonkawood Road should be labled Water Bank Common. Pederson stated that she has deeds which call this property Water Bank Common. The Parks Director clarified that a road is an easement and the street easement for Waterside Lane was never denoted on the plat map. When the street names were changed in the 1960's, the name of the entire Water Bank Common was changed to Waterside Lane. (Commissioner Goode arrived.) Fackler confirmed that there is commons on both sides of the road. Pederson requested the name be changed back to Water Bank Common. The Secretary noted that according to the original plats, Water Bank Common stretched from Breezy Road to Morton Lane, and it was all one common. The Commission noted that some areas of the common are now private, and therefore the common is divided. Ahrens suggested that they name one side Water Bank Common and other side Waterside Lane. Fackler noted that if the common is redesignated, it will clear-up any confusion and it will show on the map the location of the paved portion of the road as an easement. Ahrens moved to amend the motion to include that the dock map and plat map be modified to properly reflect the improved road easement known as Waterside Lane, and to properly denote Water Bank Common. Casey seconded the motion to amend the motion. 5 Park and Open Space Commission Minutes November 9, 1995 Motion carried Ahrens, Case¥, opposed. 6 to 1. Schmidt, Those in favor were Goode, Meyer, Pederson. Darling 8WENSON PARK IMPROVEMENTS Parks Director, Jim Fackler, explained to the Commission that he would like to hear their input for the new playground structure at Swenson Park to replace the existing tot lot. His idea is to install a structure similar to that installed last year at Dundee Park. His plan would include removal of the.existing chain link fence that surrounds the play structures. The 1996 proposed budget has $15,000 allocated for a new play structure, $2,000 for a water fountatin, and a certain amount for the tennis courts to be resurfaced. The 1996 budget has not been approved by the City Council yet. Fackler would prefer to see a wood structure versus metal, and he would like input on slides, swings, etc. Schmidt recalled that comments received about this park is that it is very hot and sunny, and she would like to see trees. Meyer recalled the report from the Recreation Coordinator of Community Services who suggested picnic shelters. Meyer suggested that a structure could be installed that has just a roof with four beams and maybe it could be incorporated into the play structure. The Parks Director commented that space is very limited, and 15,000 will buy the same type of structure as located at Mound Bay Park or Dundee, and considering ADA regulations, you may get less. Accessibility was discussed. Darling stated that the existing tot lot is in a poor location due to the location of the softball field. He stated that he has seen foul balls land in the play ground structure area. Motion by Goode to recommend that a pavilion t~pe structure be installed at Swenson Park to provide shade for summer program activities, picnicking, tables for crafts and gatherings, etc., in place of the existing tot lot. Darling seconded the motion. The Parks Director commented that the original intent, as discussed at previous P&OSC meetings was to install a new play structure, and he does not know how this change will affect any decision to be made by the Council. Schmidt noted that the Commission has always discussed the need for more shade at Swenson Park. Goode feels a pavilion would be good for this park. Fackler suggested that they get some input from the neighbors. It was noted that the existing play structure was installed in early 80's. Goode questioned if the budget is not equitable for both proposals, and emphasized that a play structure can only be used by kids. 6 Park and Open Space Commission M/nutes November 9, 1995 Fackler noted that the $15,000 in the proposed budget still needs to be approved by the Council, and it has been recommended to be approved by the City Manager. He needs to place an order by the end of December for new playground equipment and he has discussed the installation with Minnesota Tree Trust. The Commission questioned why they did not notify the neighbors when a new play structure was being considered. Fackler noted that it is not as necessary to ask for neighbors input when you are only enhancing current use. Darling noted that the principal use of this park is the softball field and people who use the tot lot are not necessarily neighbors, they can be people playing softball or tennis. Casey suggested that the Commission do a good job and ask the neighbors for their opinion before they change the use, and being pressured by time is a poor reason to push through a request. Goode suggested that the proposed change in use, from a tot lot to a pavilion type structure, can be announced in the paper for the neighbors, but feels the Park Commission educated enough to suggest the change. Motion carried 6 to 1. Goode, Casey, Schmidt, abstained. Those in favor were: Darling, Meyer, and Pederson. Ahrens A final proposal will be brought back to the Commission for their review at the December 14th meeting. COMMONS TASK FORCE UPDATR The Parks Director reported that the Task Force is in the process of tabulating the surveys in order to prepare a recommendation to the Council. CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT Casey questioned the issue relating to stairways. Ahrens reported that the City Attorney is reviewing the liability issues, so they are waiting for report. Ahrens commented that three councilmembers are not interested in having stairs meet code. The Parks Director reported that the Building Official is researching different agencies like the National Parks, the DNR to find out how they treat structures on public lands. Casey referred to the October 24, 1995 City Council Minutes, which states, "The attorney stated that if a stairway is a private structure on public land, and it is there for the use of the general public, it is a public stairway." Casey would like the attorney to clarify if the stairways on public lands are "private" or "public" structures? The Park Commission's recommendation was reviewed. Casey commented that the way this last sentence in the minutes is written does not make sense. He would like to see this Park and Open Space Commission M/nutes November 9, 1995 issue back on the Park Commission agenda in order to review the responses from the attorney and to Dossibly react to them. Ahren~ offered to get a clarification from the attorney on whether the stairways are considered private structures. P~RKDIRECTOR'S REPORT Fackler reported that his department is getting ready for winter. An update on the skating rinks, when he met with the Hockey Association he asked them to come to the Park Commission to request what they want the City to do for them. There is $1,500 in the 1996 proposed budget which could be used towards a central rink, but right now they are planning on the three small rinks. The secretary informed the Park Commission that the Hockey Association and the School has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a hockey rink, a recreational skating rink, and a warming house on the property just south of the Pond Arena where the softball fields are currently located, and this will be going to the Council in December. DOCK INSPECTOR'S REPORT McCaffrey reported that he is checking for winter dock removals and how docks are being stored. MOTION made by Darling, seconded by Goode to adjourn the Park and Open Space Commission Meeting at 9:32 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 8 RESOLIYI'ION NO. 9.5- RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR NORTHWEST TONKA LIONS FOR MOUND LANES, 2346 CYPRESS LANE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, approves a Premises Permit Application for the Northwest Tonka Lions for lawful gambling at Mound Lanes, 2346 Cypress Lane, Mound, MN. 55364. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember. The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Manager ROBEllT A. ALSOP RONALD H. BATTY STEPHEN J. BUBUL JOHN B. DEAN DANIEL 1. GREENSWEIG DAVID J. KENNEDY CHARLES L. LEFEVEIg JO~N ~L LgFgVRE, JB. ROBERT J. LINDALL ROBERT C. LONG JAMI~ M. STROMMEN COBRINE HEINE THOMSON KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota $$402 (612) 337.9300 Fac~imlle (612) 337.9310 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL (&12) 337-9221 November 13, 1995 JAMES J. THOMSON, LARRY M. BONNIE L. WILKINS JoE: Y. YANG DAVID L. GP. AV~q (192~-199t) OF COUNSEL BRUCE M. BAT'r~ISON ROBERT C. CARLSON ROBERT L DAVIDSON WELLINGTON H. CURTIS A. T. JAY SAL~EN Mr. Roger Reed Attorney at Law PO Box 9 Mound MN 55364-0009 RECEIVED NOV 1 4 1§g5 Re: Meisel Easement Dear Roger: Thanks for your Fax of November 13, 1995. It is my understanding that you met with the Meisels on Saturday and went over the entire agreement and had one minor change on page 2. You are asking us to insert the words "retaining wall and walkway with steps." This is on the plan but you have asked us to incorporate it into the written document. I am s6nding a clean copy to you and to Mr. Shukle, and we can ask the City Council to approve the amended agreement at their meeting on November 14, 1995. Thanks for your help, and hopefully we will now have this agreement in a position where both parties are comfortable with the terms and the City can go about trying to acquixe the other properties. CAP:lb Enclosure cc: Mr. Ed Shukle, City Manager Sin~rely, Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney City of Mound CAP96675 MU200-12 AGREEMENT TO CONVEY AN EASEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 1995, between Pat Meisel and Paul Meisel, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as "the Meisels", and the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Mound". Mound is in the process of an improvement project to an area known as Lost Lake and the channel leading from Lost Lake under County State Aid Highway 125 out to Lake Minnetonka. The area of the channel lying between County State Aid Highway 125 and Lake Minnetonka has two abutting property owners, Meisels and Wagman, and Mound has determined that it will be necessary to obtain a permanent easement along the side of the channel to construct a sea wall and an area behind the sea wall which is necessary for work and repairs on the sea wall. This agreement relates only to the properties owned by Pat Meisel and Paul Meisel, husband and wife, and the legal description is: Lots 22 and 23, Auditor's Subdivision No. 170 and an area of land lying between their property and Lake Minnetonka. Mound and the Meisels have met and reviewed the proposed project, and they have discussed the City's need for a permanent easement, the description of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Mound has advised the Meisels of their right to condemn their easement under the powers of eminent domain, but it has been the desire of the parties to negotiate a settlement which will save court costs, Commissioner and hearing costs, and other costs for both the Meisels and Mound. The Meisels have indicated a reluctance to grant the easement to Mound because of what they fear to be a loss of privacy, and Mound has worked with the Meisels by having their planner establish a landscaping plan which will buffer Meisels' home from the boat traffic and other traffic using the channel to get to and from Lake Minnetonka. The Meisels also have an interest in the City completing a second project in downtown Mound which includes the construction of a new Auditor's Road from Commerce Boulevard to Shoreline Boulevard. Mound officials have advised the Meisels that the plan has been presented to and approved by the Mound City Council and has been presented to and approved by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Aid Division, as an eligible project. After extensive negotiations, the parties have agreed as follows: The Meisels will grant to Mound a public easement over the channel area to construct and maintain a sea wall along the easterly portion of their property in the area directly westerly of the current channel in accordance with the easement description outlined in Exhibit A, subject to the following: . (a) Mound shall pay the Meisels the sum of $5,000, plus the Meisels shall be reimbursed for the current rip rapping improvements which are in place and for which they have paid, and the Meisels shall provide Mound with receipts for that work, which was approximately $4,900 to $5,000. (b) Mound shall install the plantings, retaining walls and walkways with steps contained in a landscaping plan attached hereto and prepared by Bruce Chamberlain of the firm of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. The estimated cost of installing the above is approximately $5,000. (c) The conveyance of this easement is contingent upon Mound having acquired the necessary properties to accomplish said construction of a new Auditor's Road. If said land has not been acquired prior to December 31, 1996, this agreement shall be null and void. If Mound has ac~luired the properties between Commerce Boulevard and Shoreline Boulevard necessary to construct the road according to the present plan, the Meisels are obligated to convey the easement to Mound free and clear of any encumbrances but subject to easements, covenants, reservations and restrictions of record, if any, and subject to the aforementioned payments of cash. The plantings shall be installed in accordance with the landscape plan, once the construction takes place on the easement. The landscaping will not take place until after the sea wall is in place, and it is not anticipated that that construction Will begin before the spring of 1997. The easement shall recite that Mound agrees to maintain the sea wall in the future and to do so without harming the privacy screen to be created by said landscaping. 2 For the purposes of this agreement, Mound will be considered to have acquired the properties between Commerce Boulevard and Shoreline Boulevard if all of the following four properties have been purchased by the City and the purchase has been completed or the City has commenced a "Quick Take" proceeding under M.S.A. 117.042 or the properties are subject to binding purchase agreements and Mound has funds on hand to complete said purchases: Post Office building, Carlock building, Mound Collision building, and the adjoining house lying Southerly of Mound Collision. 2. The Meisels understand that if for some reason there is an inability on Mound's part to meet the above described conditions, Mound will not have waived any rights it may have to condemn the easement shown in Exhibit ^ attached hereto by power of eminent domain. 3. Mound has advised the Meisels that the settlement being presented to the City Council for approval as herein contained is not contingent upon any procedures or agreements, settlement, or condemnation awards that may be involved with the Wagman property which lies on the easterly side of the channel. It being expressly understood that the Meisels' commitment to convey this easement has come after extensive discussions. Upon execution of this agreement, Mound will be in contact with Wagman to obtain the necessary easements along the easterly side of the channel and that portion of the easement which lies westerly of the channel but which is a part of the Wagman property. Pat Meisel Paul Meisel Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of ,1995. 3 Presented to and Approved by the City of Mound ,1 ggs. City of Mound Its Mayor By Its City Manager Subscribed and sworn to before me this __ day of ,1995, by Robert Polston and Edward J. Shukle, the Mayor and City Manager respectively of the City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation. 4 AGENDA CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA MOUND CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1995, 7:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 24, 1995 REGULAR MEETING AND THE CONTINUED OCTOBER 24, 1995 MEETING TO DISCUSS THE 1996 PROPOSED BUDGET ON NOVEMBER 6, 1995. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) PARKING ASSESSMENT. REQUEST FROM RICK & DENISE HANSON FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON RESOLUTION #94-131, APPROVING A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID 23-117-24 24 0008. CONTINUED DISCUSSION: NO PARKING SIGNS ON FAIRVIEW LANE. 6. REVIEW OF 1996 DOCK APPLICATION FORMS. SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A WARMING HOUSE AND TWO OUTDOOR SKATING RINKS ON PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH A PUBLIC SCHOOL AT 5600 LYNWOOD BLVD. SUGGESTED DATE: DECEMBER 12, 1995 UPDATE ON WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY STUDY. APPLICATION FOR RESTAURANT LICENSE "THE COFFEE PLACE" AT LYNWOOD & COMMERCE. PG. 3238-3248 PG. 3249-3252 PG. 3253-3269 PG. 3270-3281 PG. 3282-3295 PG. 3296 PG. 3297-3301 PG. 3302 3236 10. 11. 12. PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT XXXX KILDARE ROAD, LOTS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26, BLOCK 11, SETON, PID NOS. 19-117-23-22-0036 THRU 0041. (STREET WITH CURB, GUTTER, WATER AND SEWER) PAYMENT OF BILLS. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS PG. 3303 PG. 33O4-3326 DEPARTMENT HEAD MONTHLY REPORTS FOR OCTOBER, 1995. PG. 3327-3351 LMCD REPRESENTATIVE'S MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER 1995. PG. 3352-3353 LMCD MAILINGS. PG. 3354-3366 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 23, 1995 PG. 3367-3376 LETTER FROM ALAN JOHNSON, PRESIDENT, NORWEST BANK, WESTERN SUBURBAN MARKET, WAYZATA, RE: CHANGES IN THE WAY NORWEST'S CUSTOMERS ARE USING BANKS. PG. 3377-3378 INVITATION TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY SCHEDULED FOR FRIDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1995 PLEASE NOTE TO RSVP BY FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1ST TO LINDA AT 472-0600. PG. 3379 REMINDER: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1995, 7:30 PM, AGENDA ITEM WILL INCLUDE: CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON 1996 BUDGET, STREAMLINING OF VARIANCES, AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHO WILL SPEAK ON THE LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT PASSED DURING THE 1995 LEGISLATIVE SESSION. ENCLOSED IS SOME INFORMATION FOR YOU TO REVIEW PRIOR TO THE COW MEETING. 3237 Mound City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 MOTION by Polston, seconded by Hanus and carried unanimously to direct the city attorney to carry out the request of the Parks and Open Space Commission and address the legal liability of private stairs built on public lands and to what construction standard should be followed. 1.15 DISCUSSION: Whether or not to schedule a Special Meeting to Continue Discussion on the Proposed 1996 Budget, place the Item on the November 21, 1995 Committee of the Whole or Discuss at Truth in Taxation Hearing already Scheduled for December 6, 1995. Councilmember Hanus stated he wanted the entire Council to review the 1996 proposed budget. Councilmember Jensen stated there had already been one meeting and the entire General Fund had been discussed. Councilmember Jessen agreed with Councilmember Jensen. Mayor Polston wanted another meeting to discuss the 1996 proposed budget. Councilmember Jensen and Jessen stated they could not attend. MOTION by Mayor Polston, seconded by Councilmember Hanus to continue this meeting until Monday, November 6, 1995 at 7:30 pm to discuss the proposed 1996 budget. City Manager Ed Shukle asked what the topic would be, would they continue the discussion about the Enterprise Funds or go back and do General Fund? Mayor Polston stated the General Fund and Enterprise Funds. Jensen stated the General Fund was already discussed. Two councilmembers had been ill and were unable to attend at the 10-17 meeting. Councilmember Hanus mentioned information he had requested at the 10-17 meeting, that this could be brought to the November 6th meeting. 1.16 Payment of Bills. MOTION made by Jensen, seconded by Polston, to authorize the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of $153,939.03, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Councilmember Hanus asked about the monthly bills from McCombs Frank Roos dealing with material storage. City Manager Ed Shukle stated the project is still on going, road construction, maintenance, etc., and when John Cameron spends time he charges hourly. ADD-ON 1.17 TREE LICENSE The City Manager stated a company was caught trimming trees with no license, he was cited by the police and now had applied for a tree removal license. Precision Landscape and Tree has filed the appropriate documents and license approval is requested. Mound City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Jessen and carried unanimously to approve the tree removal license for Precision Landscape and Tree, Inc. until April 1, 1996, insurance documents have been provided. 1.18 INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS: A. Financial Report for September 1995 as prepared by Gino Businaro, Finance Director. B. Planning Commission Minutes of October 9, 1995. C. Parks and Open Space Commission Minutes of October 12, 1995. Notice from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission RE: Application for Rate Increase - Minnegasco. Memo regarding Councilmembers Ahrens' and Hanus' concern regarding tree trimming on Beachside Road, Three Points. The City Manager referred to a memo he had prepared regarding this item. Councilmember Hanus stated that it did not answer his questions. He stated there were 8 trees removed, not one or two as the memo stated and they were not leaning over. The fill was 3-6 feet from the lake, not 20', and there was no statement in the Shoreland Management Ordinance that stated a certain distance from the lake where a silt fence was to be used, as the memo states. Councilmember Hanus felt this was not the real story. Councilmem ber Ahrens was concerned that the City could just do anything on the commons, but residents had to have permits. City Manager Ed Shukle stated this is what he was told by the Parks Director. He would check with the Parks Director as to what happened. REMINDER: Annual Christmas Party, Friday, December 8, 1995, American Legion. An Addendum to Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) 1996 Policies distributed at 10/10/95 regular meeting. Please add this to your policy booklet. Economic Development Commission Minutes of September 21, 1995 meeting and October 19, 1995 meeting. MOTION by Polston, seconded by Hanus to continue this meeting until Monday, November 6, 1995 at 7:30 pm to continue the discussion of the 1996 proposed budget. The motion carried with a 4-1 vote, Jessen voting nay. Mound City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 At 9:55 PM, the October 24, 1995 City Council meeting was continued until Monday, November 6, 1995 at 7:30 pm. City Manager Attest: Acting City Clerk MINUTES - CONTINUED CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF 10-24-95 TO 11-6-95 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM. Members present: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens and Mark Hanus. Absent and excused: Councilmembers Phyllis Jessen and Liz Jensen. Also present: City Manager Ed Shukle and Finance Director Gino Businaro. 1996 BUDGET DISCUSSION An update was given on each of the items discussed at the October 17, meeting, those included the following issues: 1995 Gino Businaro, Finance Director, presented some information on how the interest is calculated for the various funds. m City Manager Ed Shukle reviewed the Capital Outlay items that were proposed by department heads and that he had cut or reduced. 3. Possible improvements to the Depot. ., Skating rink improvements (some discussion focused on cutting out the $1500 that had been proposed) A discussion regarding the right amount for the General Fund Balance. The city manager and finance director both indicated that about 33% - 35% of the General Fund expenditures should be the general fund balance which is about where the City is presently. 6. General questions with regard to the tax levy. Conferences and Schools - Line item within the City Council budget. Council consensus seemed to be that nothing should be changed. Conferences, Schools, Meetings and Dues/Subscriptions within the City Manager/Clerk account. Some questions with regard to the types of expenses paid for in these various items. No consensus was reached on making any change in this account. e The assessing calculation and should we be seeking outside assessing services. General discussion focused on the amount paid to Hennepin County for assessing services. Also discussed was the possibility of soliciting outside assessing services. The Council suggested that a letter be written to the Hennepin County Assessor's Office regarding property appraisal scheduling, more education about assessing process prior to the Local Board of Review and gaining access to properties for the purpose of property appraisal. Minutes - Continued City Council Meeting of 10-24-95 to 11-6-95 Page 2 10. Floating secretary within the Finance Department. No consensus was reached as to whether this was appropriate or not. 11. Computers General questions as to what is being spent in this area. Questions were asked about the proposed computer to split between Parks and Docks. 12. Legal and Prosecution Services - Should the City consider soliciting proposals? Consensus seemed to be that this could be a matter taken up separately from the budget process if Council so desired. 13. Training budget for the Police, specifically the Police Chief's educational incentive program. The discussion focused on the Police Chief's PhD program and whether it is something the City ought to be paying for. The city manager provided some written documentation justifying the expenditure. There was some concern expressed with regard to the initiation of the expense. More discussion will occur on this item at a later date. Also discussed was the need for Community Service Officer's and what duties they have. There was some interest in possibly cutting one CSO position. A suggestion was made to analyze the CSO's time between answering complaints and performing other job functions. Also questioned were Repairs and maintenance, contractual, Central Equipment Repairs; Conferences and Schools and other contractual services. 14. Relationship between salary and PERA/FICA in the Planning and Inspections Department. Information was reviewed on this issue. 15. Line item #2350 in Parks dealing with the purchase of sand as it relates to beaches and a play structure. The city manager indicated that the sand is placed at the various beaches and with a proposed play structure at Swenson Park. This will require additional sand. 16. Overall spending for funds in relationship to revenues and decreases in fund balances. Gino Businaro, Finance Director, presented some information on this item. 17. Discussion focused on the Recycling Fund as to whether there should be a fund balance of any significant amount. No consensus was reached on this matter. Also discussed was interest charged and the per household charge. Following the discussion of the above items, the consensus was to continue discussion at the Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for November 21, 1995, at 7:30 PM. Upon motion by Ahrens, seconded by Hanus and carried unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at I 1:35 PM.  ctfully submitted, City Manager ES:Is RECEIVED OCT 1 7 1995 2360 Commerce Blvd. Mound, Minn. 55364 October 16, 1995 Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1687 RE: NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE - 1994-95 Dear Ed: I am unable to attend the council meeting scheduled for October 24th, 1995, on the above hearing for the CBD parking maintenance for 1994 and 1995. I have several objections and questions on the proposed costs to the businessmen outlined on the schedule mailed to me. I would like to have the hearing continued on this matter until the next council meeting when I will be able to attend to discuss this proposed assessment further. Thank you. Very truly yours, Bill Netka BN:DN cc: Bob Polston, Mayor of Mound RESOLUTION NO. 9~- RESOLUTION ADOPTING 1995 CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT ROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,251.53, TO BE CERT~.D TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR AT 8% INTEREST LEVY #13232 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon ail objections to the proposed assessment for the following improvements, to-wit: 1995 CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE FROM JULY 1, 1994 TO JUNE 30, 1995 IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,251.53. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND: Such proposed speciai assessment, copies of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby accepted and shail constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessments shail be payable in equai annuai installments as follows: INT. LEVY # IMPROVEMENT RATE 13232 1995 CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE 8% o o Payment in full with no interest charges may be made within thirty (30) days (November 27, 1995) from the date the City Council adopts the assessment roll. Payments should be made to the City Treasurer at the Mound City Hall. Partial prepayment of the assessment has been authorized by ordinance (Section 370). If you wish to make a partiai payment, the payment must be in $100.00 increments. If the total assessment is under $300.00, no partiai payment will be accepted. If payment is made after thirty (30) days (November 27, 1995), interest will be charged to December 31, 1995. If the assessment is not paid on or before November 27, 1995 the amount will be spread over the assessment period (1 year). That payment will include interest for fourteen (14) months (November through December of 1995, and all of 1996). Payments will become due with your real estate taxes. All payments thereafter shall be in accordance with the provisions of M.S. 429.061, Subd. 3. The rote of interest to be accrued if the assessment is not prepaid within the required time period is eight percent (8%). The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists for the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Mayor Attest: City Manager RESOLUTION #95- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY RESOLUTION #94-131 FOR 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD. PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23 PID 23-117-24 24 0008 WHEREAS, the owners of the subject property, Rick & Denise Hanson, have requested a one (1) year extension of the variance granted by the City Council on September 27, 1994, Resolution #94-131, and; WHEREAS, Resolution #94-131 approved a variance to recognize the existing nonconforming lot area of 8,205 square feet to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 24' detached garage, and; WHEREAS, City Code Section 350:530, Subd. 2. E. states thata variance shall become null and void if the use as permitted by the variance has not been completed within one year after granting the variance, unless a petition for extension is submitted, and; WHEREAS, all variances are limited to one extension, and; WHEREAS, a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance as been provided, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request for the extension and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, to hereby approve of a one (1) year extension of the variance originally granted by Resolution #94-131. This variance will expire on September 27, 1996. Resolution #94-131 must be recorded at Hennepin County and a building permit for the subject construction shall not be issued until proof of recording has been filed with the City Clerk. 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: MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 23, 1995 REQUEST FROM RICK & DENISE HANSON FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON RESOLUTION #94-131 APPROVING A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID 23-117-24 24 0008. The Building Official, Jon Sutherland, recommended approval of the variance extension. Weiland referred to Resolution #94-131, within the fifth Whereas, and suggested that the language be modified as follows, "WHEREAS, all setbacks and impervious surface let coverage are conforming, and;" It was indicated that "lot coverage" could be confusing since the variance was issued for "lot area." MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Muller, to recommend approval of a one year variance extension of Resolution #94-131. Motion carried unanimously. Voss referred to the motion made by the Planning Commission on September 12, 1994 when this variance was originally recommended for approval, which states, "Clarification from the City Attorney is also requested relating to the determination of the lot area, ownership of the easement, and setbacks." The Building Official indicated that he assumes this was done. September 27, 1994 RESOLUTION//94-131 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNN[ENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID//23-117-24 24 0008 P&Z CASE g04-66 WHEREAS, the owner, Rick Hanson, has applied for a variance to recognize the nonconforming lot area of 8,205 square feet, resulting in a variance of 1,795 square feet, to allow the construction of a 24' x 24' detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks, and; WHEREAS, this property is located in the R-1 Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, a front yard setback of 30 feet to Westedge Blvd., a front yard setback of 20 feet to Evergreen Road, a 10 foot side yard setback, and a 15 foot rear yard setback, and; WHEREAS, setbacks and lot area are measured to the easement lines (note definition for "Lot Line", Zoning Code Section 350:310, Subd. 80), and; WHEREAS, the original parcel met the minimum lot area requirement of 10,000 square feet before a 25 foot easement for street and utility purposes was granted to the City of Mound for construction of Evergreen Road, and granting of said easement, by previous Owner, has resulted in a hardship beyond the applicant's control, and; WHEREAS, all setbacks and lot coverage are conforming, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and unanimously recommended approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: The City does hereby grant a lot area variance of 1,795 square feet to allow construction of a conforming detached garage. The City Council authorizes the alterations set forth below, pursuant to Section 350:420, Subdivision 8 of the Zoning Ordinance with the clear and express understanding that the use remains as a lawful, nonconforming use, subject to all of the provisions and restrictions of Section 350:420. 274 September 27, 1994 It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the authorization of the following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to afford the owners reasonable use of their land: Construction of a conforming 24' x 24' detached garage. 4. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: The West 150 feet of the North 95 feet of the South 260 feet of Government Lot 3, Section 23, Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except road. So This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in I-Iennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (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 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 foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Smith and seconded by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Attest: City Clerk 275 e September 27, 1994 It is determined that the livability of the residential property will be improved by the authorization of the following alteration to a nonconforming use of the property to afford the owners reasonable use of their land: Construction of a conforming 24' x 24' detached garage. This variance is granted for the following legally described property: The West 150 feet of the North 95 feet of the South 260 feet of Government Lot 3, Section 23, Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except road. This variance shall be recorded with the County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles in Hennepin County pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Section 462.36, Subdivision (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 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 foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Smith and seconded by Councilmember Ahrens. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jensen, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: none. Attest: City Clerk 275 MINUTEg - MOUND CITY CoI_rNCIL - SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 1.5 CASE//94-66: RICK HANSON, 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOV'T. LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID //23-117-24 24 0008, VARIANCE FOR DETACHED GARAGE. The Building Official explained the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval. The Council did not waive the fee for the variance. Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION g94-131 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID #23-117-24 24 0008, P & Z CASE//94-66 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1994 CASE #94-66: RICK HANSON, 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOV'T. LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID #23-117-24 24 0008. VARIANCE FOR DETACHED GARAGE. Building Official, Jon Sutherland, reviewed the staff report. This property is located in the R-1 Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, a front yard setback of 30 feet to Westedge Blvd., a front yard setback of 20 feet to Evergreen Road, a 10 foot side yard setback, and a 15 foot rear yard setback. The applicant is seeking a variance to recognize the nonconforming lot area of 8,205 square feet, resulting in a variance of 1,795 square feet, to allow the construction of a 24' x 24' detached garage that will be conforming to setbacks. Setbacks and lot area are measured to the easement lines (note Lot Line definition, Zoning Code Section 350:310, Subd. 80). All other aspects of this case are conforming. The City has, in the past, supported the construction of garages to ease the accumulation of exterior storage. Staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the lot area variance to allow construction of a conforming 24' x 24' detached garage. Weiland commented that he is in favor of waiving the fee, as requested by the applicant. The applicant questioned if it would be possible to receive a perpetual variance for this lot, so that in the future if they wish to add onto the house they would not have to go through this process again. The Building Official indicated that as the code is written today, that could not happen. (Weiland was excused from the meeting.) The Commission questioned the interpretation of staff relating to the street easements and if the lot area should not include the easement area, and where should setbacks be measured to. It was suggested that the applicant could look into vacating a portion of the easement. MOTION made by Voss, seconded by Clapsaddle, to recommend approval of the variance as recommended by staff. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Waiving the fee was discussed. Voss stated that he does not feel it is the Planning Commissions role to make recommendations relating to fees, and it should be the applicant's responsibility to try to rectify the nonconforming situation. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Hanus to recommended to the City Council that the fee be waived because the lot area could be construed differently and a variance may not have been required. Clarification from the City Attorney is also requested relating to the determination of the lot area, ownership of the easement, and setbacks. MOTION CARRIED 6 - ;2. Those in favor were: Mueller, Hanus, Clapsaddle, Crum, Surko, and Michael. Voss and Jensen opposed. Jensen stated that she is uncomfortable with statements made indicating that due to previous actions by the City that the fee should be waived. This request will be heard by the City Council on September 27, 1994. ~ he .id :ed Lere [nds n roof February 9, 1993 Mayor Johnson stated that he would not have a problem with a railing all the way around the structure to keep people off of the building. He stated he failed to see how all of the items ~¥requested are needed to alleviate a safety issue. The vote was Z in favor with Ahrens and Smith voting nay. Motion fails. ~MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by &hrens to continue this ~tem until the March 9, 199.3, Regular Meeting (when all five Councilmembers are present and the applicant can return), with t~.direction to the Building Official to work with the applicant for alternatives to consider to resolve the safety issue as it relates to the boathouse. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. & SUGGESTIONS FROM cITIZENS PRESENT were none. ~,~'~992 DEPARTMENT HEAD ANNUAL REPORT8 Department Heads presented their annual reports to Council: Park Director Jim Fackler; Sewer, Water & Street Greg Skinner; and Fire Chief Don Bryce. '~DISCUSSION: MOUND ENVIRONMENTAL & APPEARANCE MODEL Chamberlain, Consultant to the EDC, presented the Mound 1 & Appearance Model to the Council. This is trying to a design vision for downtown Mound. The EDC with input 'one has worked to fine tune it. The way the wording has was to soften the ways things were said. Mr. Chamberlain if the Council had any changes they would like to make. complimented the Economic Development Commission and they are very excited about the Model. The consensus was to ;I~_~CUSSION: PETITION FOR'NO PARKING SIGNS FROM RESIDENTS ON EW LANE - WEST SIDE OF STREET Manager explained that a petition has been received with request. The Police .have looked at the situation and that "No Parking" signs be installed on the West side of Lane from County Road 15 to Bartlett Blvd. moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution: 45 43 February 9, 1993 RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE "NO PP~tKING" ON THE NEST SIDE OF FAIRVIEW LANE FROM COUNTY ROAD 15 SOUTH TO BARTLETT BLVD. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve "No Parking Anytime" in the West side of Fairview Lane from County Road 15 South to Bartlett Blvd. and to authorize the installation of "No Parking Anytime" signs. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Smith and seconded by Mayor Johnson. The following voted in the affirmative: Ahrens, Jessen, Johnson and Smith. The following voted in the negative: none. Councilmember Jessen was absent and excused. yo~ 43 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION OCTOBER 12, 1995 DOCK &PPLICATION FORMS Meyer referred to the bottom of the second page of the "information sheet" where it states the following: "NOTE: The use of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides is not recommended on city property. These chemical drain into the lake and can cause serious environmental problems. Meyer noted that this statement is very small and not easy to see, and suggested that a statement be added to the "Notice" as follows: "The City of Mound discourages the use of fertilizer, weed killers and pesticides on public land. Chemical drift and runoff ADVERSELY affects the quality of our lakes and wetlands." It was suggested this statement be printed in a larger type and bolded. It was also suggested that the "Notice" be copied onto yellow paper. There was no objection to this change. The forms will be forwarded to the City Council for their approval in November. MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION JULY 13, 1995 REVIEW 1996 DOCK APPLICATION FORMS. The forms were approved with the modification of the dates being changed. Meyer requested that an explanation be added to the bottom of the "Information Sheet" explaining why fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides are discouraged. Staff will draft an explanation before the forms are submitted to the City Council for approval. 1996 DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD, MOUND, MN 55364 DEAR MOUND RESIDENT: Please complete and return BY FEBRUARY 29, 1996, (must be postmarked by February 29, 1996). Applications received on March 1, 1996 and before April 1 are subject to a minimum late fee of $20.00 and are placed in the third (3rd) priority category. Application renewals for non-abutting residents not received BY MARCH 31st will not retain a second (2nd) priority status, and will be placed in a third (3rd) priorty category. Residents abutting the commons who have not submitted their renewal application BY FEBRUARY 29, 1996 will be subject to a minimum late fee of $20.00 and will be placed in a third (3rd) priority category if fee is not paid by March 31. To share a dock, there is an additional $30.00 fee. Also note the L.M.C.D. Boat Fee. See information on back for senior citizen rates. Ail information pertaining to you must be completed or the application will be denied. APPLICANT'S NAME MOUND STREET ADDRESS RENEWAL: 1995 Dock Site # NEWAPPLICATION: Indicate preferred area: HOME PHONE WORK PHONE Permanent Resident (owner) Owner (paying fee for renter) *Summer Resident Renter *SUMMER RESIDENT'S MAILING ADDRESS: H A R E NAME OF PERSON SHARING DOCK: MOUND STREET ADDRESS: HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: CHECK ONE: I__I Permanent Resident (Owner) I__I Summer Resident I__I Renter List ALL watercraft to be kept at this dock. Furnish MN Watercraft License Number, make and size of boat. (This includes the boats of a shared dock holder.) Add the L.M.C.D. Boat Fee to the Permit Fee for all boats, based upon the formula below. NO PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED WITHOUT THIS INFORMATION and a photocopy of all watercraft licenses: BOAT OWNER'S NAME MN LICENSE # MAKE OF BOAT LENGTH LMCD FEE 1 2 3 4/jet ski L.M.C.D. BOAT FEES: Boats up to 20' long 6vet 20' and up to 24' long over 24' and up to 32' long = $ 7.50 = $11.25 = $15.00 over 32' and up to 40' long = $18.75 over 40' and up to 48' long = $22.50 over 48' feet long = $30.00 Permits will not be issued to any non-resident of Mound. Proof of residency or proof of boat ownership must be furnished if requested. Any false information given or violations of Dock Ordinance 437 shall be reason for denial or revocation of permit. I 1996D~kLi¢¢n~ Application This is an application only. TYPE OF DOCK NO dock can be installed until a location is granted. BASIC FEE I--I I I--I I I I__1 Straight Dock ..................... L or T Dock ...................... U or H Dock (not available in all areas) ........ $150.00 $200.0o $235.00 straight dock 'L' Dock 'T' Dock 'U' or 'H' Dock I I I I I I --I I-- I FEE AND LEGALITY OF DOCK WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE DOCK INSPECTOR OR PARK COMMISSION. SENIOR CITIZENS (65 years or older at time of application) pay 1/2 the base permit fee for the type of dock they desire, i.e. $75.00, $100.00 or $117.50. Senior citizens sharing a dock with a non-senior pay 1/4 the base permit fee for the type of dock they desire, i.e. $37.50, $50.00 or $58.75. The non-senior sharing a dock with a senior pays 3/4 the base permit fee, i.e. $112.50, $150.00 or $176.25, plus $30.00 share fee. SENIOR CITIZEN NAME BIRTH DATE BASIC FEE: 81-3260 $ SHARED DOCK $30.00:81-3260 $ L.M.C.D. BOAT FEES: 81-3200 $ LIGHT FEE: 81-3260 $ LATE PENALTIES: 81-3260 $ TOTAL DUE: XX-XXXX (MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: CITY OF MOUND) LIABILITY DISCLAIMER: I (We) acknowledge that the City of Mound is not responsible for any injury occurrin9 on this dock which is private property. According to the City of Mound Code of Ordinances Sections 437 Subd. 5 and 437:05, Subd. 2 f., if this license is not renewed at expiration (February 29, 1996), the licensee must completely remove the licensed dock and appurtenance from the water and public land. If the dock is not removed, the City is authorized to have the dock removed and the applicant agrees to pay to the City any and all costs incurred by the City in removing the dock. Also, if the City removes the dock, the City is authorized to dispose of any materials or parts which are left on public lands or in public waters and the applicant shall forfeit any right or claim to the materials left on the dock site. DATE Signature DATE Signature (shared dock holder) RETURN THISAPPLICA~ONWITHAPPLICABLEFEEANDCOPY OF MNLICENSETO THE CITY OF MOUND BYFEBRUARY28TH. 0NFO 12/3/92) CITY OF MOUND DOCK PROGRAM INFORMATION The City of Mound is licensed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) to operate approximately 400 multiple docks. To be eligible to lease one of these sites, you must be a permanent or summer resident of Mound. Applications are available at City Hall on the first working day of the year for new applicants, and are mailed to licensee's from prior year during December each year. See dock application for current fees. These fees are due with the completed application by February 28th. The following priorities govern the issuance of dock licenses per the Mound City Code. aa. a. 40 Last Priority. Residents owning private lakeshore within the City which has dockable lake frontage shall have the last priority each year for a dock on public lands. First Priorit¥. An abutting owner has first priority for a City designated location within his or her lot lines extended to the shoreline. Docks shall be located in accordance with the dock location map. Second Priority. A licensee or, if licensee has not applied for a new dock license, the shared owner as shown on the permit application for the preceding year, has second priority when applying for a dock permit for the same location held by the licensee the immediately preceding year. Second priority licensee has no priority of dock locations where a first priority license is in effect. Third Priority. A duly qualified applicant has third priority on locations vacant after the first and second priority applications have been made within the prescribed time limit described in this ordinance. Licenses will be issued to such applicants in the order of application dates. There shall be no third priority where the first and second priorities are in effect. Residents owning private lakeshore within the City which has dockable lake frontage shall have the last priority each year for a dock on public lands. Administration of Priority. The Dock Inspector shall assign all locations to the applicants upon compliance with this ordinance and subject to reasonable conditions and Council approval. Ail applications received after February 28th shall be subject to a minimum late fee of $20.00, and will be placed in a third priority category. There will be no late fee charged to new residents who apply after February 28th of the calendar year in which the resident moves to the City. Residents of the City of Mound, 65 years of age or older, shall pay 50% of the required license fee for a dock. RULES AND REGULATIONS (PORTION OF CITY CODE SECTION 437) Subd. 1. Dock Location Map Definition. There shall be on file in the City Hall a drawing of the City of Mound that is maintained by the Dock Inspector showing the approved locations of private docks that may be constructed on or abutting public shoreland under the control of the City. Subd. 2. Annual Review of Map. Approved dock location maps shall be kept and maintained by the Dock Inspector and shall be reviewed by the Park and Open Space Commission at least once a year. The Park Advisory Commission shall review the dock location map between September 1 and December 31 before each new boating season so their recommended changes may be referred to and considered by the City Council on or before January 15. Maps shall contain all approved dock locations as established by the Council upon the advice and recommendation of the Dock Inspector and Park Advisory Commission. Final approval of the dock location map and the number of dock licenses to be permitted shall be recommended by the Dock Inspector, reviewed by the Park Commission and Approved by the City Council. Subd. 3. Dock Inspector to Review Application. The Dock Inspector shall determine and approve the location of each permit according to the specifications of the approved dock location map. Subd. 4. Costs of Erection and Maintenance. Licensed docks shall be erected and maintained by the licensee at his or her sole expense and liability for same. Subd. 5. Suspension of Eliqible Location. The City Council may suspend a dock location where it appears that a location as established on the dock location map reasonably interferes with the use of public waters or imposes a hardship on property owners abutting on public streets or public commons. Subd. 6. One Dock Per Family; Apartment Buildinq. No more that one dock shall be permitted for each resident family. An apartment building or multiple dwelling owner shall not apply for dock licenses for his renters or lessees. He or she is entitled to apply for an individual private dock license for himself or herself if he or she is a resident of the City. (INFO 12/3/92) Subd. 7. Construction Materials; Use of Car Tires. Ail private docks shall be constructed of materials specified by the Building Inspector and the Dock Inspector and in accordance with all building codes of the City. The standards for the public health, safety, and general welfare and neither the materials or the workmanship for an approved licensed private dock shall result in docks being located on public lands which are unsightly, unsafe or create a public nuisance. No tire or tires shall be hung or attached on dock posts, dock poles, or on dock hardware of any dock on or abutting public shoreland under the control of the City. (ORD. #40-1990, 1-29-90) Subd. 8. Inspections - Notice of Non-Compliance - License Revocation. The Dock Inspector or such other officer as may be designated by the City Manager or the City Council, may at any reasonable time inspect or cause to be inspected any dock erected or maintained upon or abutting upon any public street, road, park, or commons, and if it shall appear that any such dock has not been constructed or the area surrounding the dock site is not being maintained in accordance with the application or the license granted therefore, or with the plans or location approved by the Council, or shall it appear that such dock is in a condition that no longer complies with the requirements of this ordinance or other ordinances of the City, the City, by its City Manager or any other officer designated by him, shall forthwith notify the owner thereof in writing specifying the way or ways in which said dock does not comply with the ordinances of the City, after which said owner shall have ten days to remove such dock or make the same comply with the terms of the City's ordinances and the terms of the application and issuance of the license granted to said licensee. In the event such owner shall fail, neglect, or refuse to remove such dock or make the same comply with the terms of the City regulations within the period of ten days, the license therefor shall be revoked by direction of the City Council or the Dock Inspector and by notice in writing to the licensee, and said notice shall be issued by the City Manager or any other officer designated by him or her. Any appeal will be made in writing and submitted to the City Manager by a certified letter or by personal delivery to the City Manager for his or her consideration. Subd. 9. Notice of Revocation. All notices herein required shall be in writing by certified mail, directed to the licensee at the address given in the application. Subd. 10. Dock Storaqe. No person shall store, leave or abandon any dock, dock section, dock poles or dock hardware on any public road, street, park or Commons except for winter storage in approved areas. Subd. ll. Removal Deadline. All private docks abutting any public road, street, park, or commons must be removed from the waters of Lake Minnetonka or other navigable waters no later that November 1 of the license year unless it is a winter approved dock location as shown on the master dock map. Subd. 12. Dockinq of Non-Owned Watercraft. Docking of boats not owned by the dock licensee is not permitted for a period in excess of 48 hours. Section 437:15. Maximum Dimensions, Prohibited Design of Docks. Docks for which a license is required by this Section 437:15 shall not be less than 24" wide or more than 48" in width with the exception that one 72" x 72" section is allowed on L, T, or U shaped docks provided that this configuration be limited to a setback of 10 feet from private property and shall not infringe on an adjacent dock site. Docks shall not exceed 24 feet in length except where necessary to reach a water depth of 48", using Lake Minnetonka elevation levels of 929.49 feet above sea level. Channel docks, where navigation is limited and docks must be installed parallel to the shoreline, cannot be less than 24" wide or more that 72" in width. The length shall be limited to a setback of 10 feet from private property or not to infringe on an adjacent dock site. Docks shall be of plank or rail construction. Dock posts shall be of equal height above the dock boards and shall be at least two rail construction and constructed to comply to standards and specifications approved by the Dock Inspector. All docks shall be built or placed with the longitudinal axis thereof perpendicular to the shoreline unless variations otherwise may be permitted in accordance with the topographical conditions of the area. Docks which are in existence June 1, 1989, shall be brought into compliance with all provisions of the City Code when expansion or modification is requested, or replacement of 50% or more of any such dock that is damaged, destroyed, or deteriorated. (ORD. #38-1989 - 1-2-90) Section 437:20. Penalties. Any person or persons who shall violate any of the prohibitions or requirements of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. In addition to any criminal penalties as above provided, the City Council may remove or cause to be removed any dock erected without a license as required by this Section 437, or where any license has been revoked as provided by this Section 437. Removal of unlicensed docks or docks which fail to comply with the City Code will be at the expense of the owner or licensee. No person convicted of violating City ordinances relating to docks will be issued a dock license for the present or for the next boating season, and said person forfeits any priorities set forth in this Section 437. NOTE: The use of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides is not recommended on city property. These chemicals drain into the lake and can cause serious environmental problems. CITY OF MOUND MOUNO, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 December 29, 1995 Dear Dock License Applicant: Enclosed is your 1996 Dock License Application Form. If you wish to retain your existing dock location and avoid a minimum $20.00 late fee, your application must be returned by February 29, 1995. The dock fees for 1996 have remained the same as 1995. There is a $30.00 fee to share a dock with another Mound resident. Also, note the "boat fee" imposed by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). This fee is based on the length of EACH watercraft to be kept at your dock. Fees are listed on the Dock License Application. It is very important that all the information asked for on the application be completed, including information on a shared dock partner. Copies of all watercraft licenses and ALL fees required must be enclosed with your application or it will be returned to you. If your application is received incomplete, this will delay granting of your permit. Please feel free to call or write the Parks Department at City Hall with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Tom McCaffrey Dock Inspector pJ Enclosures LTRTOAP printed on recycled paper YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS A DOCK LICENSE HOLDER .3. Put in your own dock that meets City specifications for safety, size and materials. Maintain the cleanliness of the area by your site, including grass cutting and weed trimming. Aquatic plants that are protected by law require permits prior to removal. Remove Eurasian Water Milfoil from the shoreline around your dock. Boats, dock sections, pipes, posts, and other materials cannot be stored on public land during the boating season, and must be removed by June 1. Winter storage is allowed in most areas, if neat and orderly, not obstructing area or creating a hazard. Response to request to correct infractions must be made during the time stated or dock permit will be in jeopardy. Submit with your application photocopies of all valid Minnesota Watercraft Licenses for each boat to be kept at your dock site, this must be done each year or a license will not be issued. The use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides is not recommended to be used on public property. Mound City Code Section 437:10, Subd. 13. Licenses and permits are Non-Transferable. Dock licenses issued by the City are personal in nature and may ibe used only by the licensee or members of their households. No dock licensed by the City or located on public streets, roads, parks, or public commons may be rented, leased, or sublet to any person, partnership or corporation. If a licensee or permit holder rents, leases, sublets, or in any manner charges or receives consideration for the use of his or her dock, his or her license shall be revoked. A copy of your Minnesota Watercraft License for each boat must accompany your application. .,..,.o..~.,..,...,o,.,,...~ I~ I I~'~ ............... sample' ~.~:'~":" LTRTOAP ~ 2,q 0 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 **NOTICE ** DOCK FEES DUE FEBRUARY 29 .................................. All dock site holders, abutting and nonabutting, are required to pay their dock fees by March 31, or their site will be made available to new dock applicants per City Code Section 437:05, Subdivisions 8 and 9 relating to priorities. If the dock fees are not paid by February 29, the normal late fees will apply. REMINDER ........................................ Construction of any kind on any public lands, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public lands, is UNLAWFUL unless a special Construction on Public Land Permit is issued by the City Council. No person shall maintain any boathouse or other structure on public lands without first receiving a special Maintenance Permit from the City, in accordance with Section 320 of the City Code. Applications for remodeling, maintaining or repairing existing boathouses, retaining walls, stonework, decks, landscaping, trimming of trees or brush, or other types of improvements on public lands may be obtained from the Building Department. the City of Mound discourages the use of fertilizer, weed killers and pesticides on public land. Chemical drift and runoff ADVERSELY affects the quality of our lakes and wetlands. QUESTIONS ? ? ? CALL 472-0600 1996 MOORING BUOY LICENSE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD, MOUND, MN 55364 DEAR MOUND RESIDENT: Please complete and return by February 29. Applications received after this date are subject to a minimum late fee of $20.00 and placed in the 3rd priority category. Renewals not received by April 1, NO PERMIT will be issued for this year. Ail information pertaining to you must be filled in or permit will be delayed. APPLICANT'S NAME MOUND STREET ADDRESS 1993 BUOY LICENSE HOME PHONE WORK PHONE Permanent Resident (owner) ,'--', *Summer Resident ~ ~ Renter Owner (paying fee for renter) , , *SUMMERRESIDENT'SMAILINGADDRESS: REQUIRED INFORMATION: List owner, watercraft license number, type of watercraft, length of watercraft, and L.M.C.D. Boat Fee. No permit will be issued without a photocopy of your DNR watercraft license. OWNER'S NAME WATERCRAFT LICENSE # MAKE OF BOAT LENGTH LMCD FEE L.M.C.D. BOAT FEES: Boats up to 20' long over 20' and up to 24' long over 24' and up to 32' long = $12.00 = $18.00 = $24.00 over 32' and up to 40' long = $30.00 over 40' and up to 47' long = $36.00 over 48' feet long = $48.00 1996 License Fee for a sailboat mooring buoy site will be $150.00 plus the correct L.M.C.D. boat fee for the season. DESCRIBE LOCATION OF BUOY SITE: Any false information given or violations of Dock Ordinance, City Code Section 437, shall be reason for denial or revocation of permit. I understand if I allow boats not registered to permit holder to be moored at my site, I violate City Code Section 437. This is an application only. No buoy can be installed until a location is granted by the Dock Inspector. SIGNATURE FEE PAID $ DATE PENALTY $ Section 320 - Private Structures and Private Construction Activities on Public Lands Section 320=00. Special Permits for Certain Structures on Public Land. Subd. 1. Construction on Public Land Permit. Construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park, or commons, is unlawful unless a special construction on public land permit is issued by the City Council. Any proposed construction, special use or land alteration shall require the applicant to provide necessary drawings to scale, specifications of materials to be used, proposed costs, and purpose for change. Ail special permits shall require a survey by a registered land surveyor before a special permit will be issued. Survey shall comply with the Mound Building Code survey requirements. Copies of such surveys, drawings, specifications of materials, proposed costs and statements of purpose shall be furnished to the City and kept on file in the City offices. No special permit shall be issued unless approved by a four-fifths vote of all the Council members. Subd. 2. T~pes of Construction Requirinq a Special Construction on Public Land Permit. Ail stairways, retaining walls, fences, temporary structures, stone work, concrete forming, or any type of construction shall require a special permit. No special construction permit shall be issued for construction of boathouses or other buildings on public land under Section 320 or any other ordinance of the City. Subd. 3. Public Land Maintenance Permits. No person shall maintain any boathouse or other structure on public lands without first receiving therefor a special maintenance permit from the City in accordance with this subdivision. Applications for maintaining existing boathouses or other structures may be obtained from the Building Inspector at the City offices. Ail applications for special maintenance permits shall be reviewed by the City Council. The Council shall determine if the maintenance permit shall be granted or denied, and may order any structure to be removed. Special permits are required for any maintenance such as maintaining retaining walls, stonework, concrete or other types of improvements on public lands. The Council shall have the right to impose any reasonable conditions it may deem advisable to protect the public's use of the public shoreline. Ail structures, retaining walls, stonework, concrete, or other improvements on public lands are required to have a public land maintenance permit from and after April 1, 1976. Subd. 4. Land Alteration. A special land alteration permit shall be required from the City before any alterations are made on public lands which would result in any changes to the following: shoreline, drainage, grade, pitch, slope, trees, or which require the removal or placement of any fill, or which eliminates, adds or develops any access road or land. This section specifically includes any alterations to uses which are nonconforming on the date this ordinance becomes effective. No special permit shall be issued unless approved by a four-fifths vote of all Council members. Structures located on public lands which are ordered removed by the City Council or by the City Building Official under any code or law may proceed under the supervision and direction of the City Building Official without the necessity for obtaining removal permits from the City Council. (ORD. #54-1991, 12-23-91) Subd. 5. Street Excavation Permit Required. Any permit issued under the provisions of this Section 320 is in addition to and not in lieu of any street excavation permit which may be required under the provisions of Section 605. Subd. 6. Public Lands Procedure Manual. The City Manager and designated staff are authorized and directed to promulgate a Public Lands Procedural Manual and to establish necessary forms and procedures to administer the program and permit procedures set forth in this Section 320. The manual and procedures set forth in said manual shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council by Resolution. The City Council may amend or change the Public Lands Procedural Manual by Resolution. (ORD. #62-1993 - 4/19/93) 1996 COMMERC DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD, MOUND, MN 55364 PHONE: 472-0600 NAME OF APPLICANT: ADDRESS: BUSINESS NAME: BUSINESS ADDRESS: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT BLOCK ADDITION PLEASE ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING WITH THIS APPLICATION: e 4e A scaled drawing showing the size, shape, and type of dock proposed, and the location and type of buoy(s) to be used. A scaled drawing showing off-street parking provided for each three rental boat stalls, buoys or slips. A statement outlining the manner, extent and degree of use contemplated for the dock proposed. Payment of permit fee must be included with this application. Ail applications received on or after March 1 shall be subject to a late fee of $20. NEW APPLICANT FEE .............. $200.00 BASIC RENEWAL FEE .............. $150.00 NUMBER OF SLIPS IN WATER X $5.00 = NUMBER OF BOATS STORED ON LAND X $2.00 = BUSINESS NAME DATE APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE AND TITLE 1996 MOORING BUOY LICENSE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 ~Y~OOD RO~D, MOUND, lqlq 55364 DEAR MOUND RESIDENT: Please complete and return by February 28. Applications received after this date are subject to a minimum late fee of $20.00 and placed in the 3rd priority category. Renewals not received by April 1, NO PERMIT will be issued for this year. Ail information pertaining to you must be filled in or permit will be delayed. APPLICANT'S NAME MOUND STREET ADDRESS 1993 BUOY LICENSE HOME PHONE WORK PHONE ' ' Permanent Resident (owner) ' ' *Summer Resident ' ' Owner (paying fee for renter) ' ' Renter *SUMMER RESIDENT'SMAILINGADDRESS: REQUIRED INFORMATION: List owner, watercraft license number, type of watercraft, length of watercraft, and L.M.C.D. Boat Fee. No permit will be issued without a photocopy of your DNR watercraft license. OWNER'S NAME WATERCRAFt LICENSE # MAKE OF BOAT LENGTH LMCD FEE L.M.C.D. BOAT FEES: Boats up to 20' long over 20' and up to 24' long over 24' and up to 32' long = $12.00 = $18.00 = $24.00 over 32' and up to 40' long = $30.00 over 40' and up to 47' long = $36.00 over 48' feet long = $48.00 1996 License Fee for a sailboat mooring buoy site will be $150.00 plus the correct L.M.C.D. boat fee for the season. DESCRIBE LOCATION OF BUOY SITE: Any false information given or violations of Dock Ordinance, City Code Section 437, shall be reason for denial or revocation of permit. I understand if I allow boats not registered to permit holder to be moored at my site, I violate City Code Section 437. This is an application only. No buoy can be installed until a location is granted by the Dock Inspector. SIGNATURE FEE PAID $ DATE PENALTY $ CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472~3600 FAX (612) 472-0620 PUBLIC HEARING NO TICE CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA CASE NO. 95-52 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A WARMING HOUSE AND TWO OUTDOOR SKATING RINKS ON PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH A PUBLIC SCHOOL AT AT 5600 LYNWOOD BLVD. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will meet in the Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road, at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, 1995 to consider the issuance of a conditional use permit to allow for two outdoor skating rinks and a warming house on property associated with a public school at 5600 Lynwood Blvd. (west of the Pond Arena). The subject property is legally described as follows: Metes and Bounds, Unplatted 14-117-24. PID #14-117-24 41 0058. All persons appearing at said hearing with reference to the above will be given the opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Pegg~ J~rr~s, ~lannir(g Secret~ry Mailed to property owners within 350' by December 1, 1995, and published in "The Laker" on November 27, 1 995. printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 November 8, 1995 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER UPDATE Attached is a Westonka Public Schools Action Item scheduled for action by the school board on Monday, November 13, 1995, relating to the Community Center Task Force and a recommendation on the future of the existing Community Center Task Force facility. As you can see from the attachment, the Task Force has recommended that option //1, which calls for the complete demolition and the reconstruction of a new facility in cooperation with area cities be pursued based on positive community support through the Community survey recently conducted by Decision Resources, Ltd. The Task Force has recommended that a workshop session be held with representation from the school board and the cities of Mound, Minnetrista, Spring Park along with the community center task force. The purpose of the workshop would be to determine the level of interest by the school board and these area cities in pursuing a cooperative venture for the construction of an area community center facility. The workshop has been scheduled for Thursday, December 14, 1995 at 7:30 PM, in the conference room of the Westonka Community Center. The Task Force would like to have each city appoint a mayor and a councilmember to attend this meeting. If a mayor cannot attend, then the council should appoint another representative from the council. Since Councilmember Jensen already serves on the task force she will most likely be in attendance at the workshop. Therefore, we would like to have Mayor Polston also present at the meeting to represent the City of Mound in the discussions that will be held. If you have any questions with regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to Contact me. printed on recycled paper PS. Aisc attached is a resolution approved by the Economic Development Commission which supports a new community center within the City of Mound. This resolution was transmitted to the task force and will be presented as part of the presentation to be made before the school board on November 13th by members of the task force. It is basically a resolution of support from the Economic Development Commission which has a major interest in the redevelopment of downtown Mound and certainly a new community center impacts what happens within the redevelopment efforts that are being pursued under the Mound Visions program. ES:Is 11/00/1095 03:00 6124720272 WESTONKA COHH ED PAGE 02 WESTONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS Independent School District No. 277 SCHOOL BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 13, 1995 COMMUNITY CENTER TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item: V.G. BE IT RESOLVED that the School Board sponsor a workshop for the purpose of reviewing the current recommendation by the Community Center Task Force as it has been developed to date. The workshop is to include the School Board Chairperson and one other Board member (or two Board members) and the Mayor and one Council member (or two Council members) from the cities of Mound, Minnetrista, and Spring Park, and the Community Center Task Force. The workshop will be held on Thursday, December 14, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room of the Westonka Community Center. BACKGROUND: The School Board appointed Community Center Task Force recommends that Option #1, calling for the complete demolition and reconstruction of a new facility in cooperation with municipalities, continue to be pursued based on positive community support as identified by the recent community survey conducted by Decision Resources, Ltd. The purpose of the workshop is to build on this positive community support and to further explore the details of pursuing a cooperative venture for the construction of an area community center facility. November 8, 1995 CITY OF MOUND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUND WHEREAS, a Task Force was established by the School Board of the Westonka Schools, District #277 in September of 1994 for the following purpose: "The purpose of this Committee shall be to determine the best use of the Westonka Community Center and the wisest expenditure of funds to provide for the required code upgrades, necessary maintenance and desired building modifications to meet School District and community needs." and; WHEREAS, the Task Force examined several different alternatives with regard to the future of the Westonka Community Center and site, and; WHEREAS, the Task Force examined what the best use of the Westonka Community Center and site would be for the long term success of the Westonka area, and; WHEREAS, the Task Force recommended to the School Board the following: "The best use of the Westonka Community Center is the existing use plus additional uses that would add income in excess of associated operating costs. The best use of available funds is to combine it with funds from others to do option 'D' (Option 'D' refers to raising the entire existing community center and building a new community center facility). If there is not significant interest and support by others to pursue option 'D', then pursue option 'B'." Option'B' refers to razing a portion of the existing 1939 building and implementing fire safety, accessibility and maintenance improvements in the remainder of the existing building. This does not add to existing programs, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission has kept abreast of the activities of the Task Force, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission sees the need for new community center as a economic boost and benefit for the Westonka area, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission believes that by selecting Option 'B', the community would be doing itself a disservice, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission realizes the costs associated with such a project, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission realizes the financial impact that the construction of a new facility would create, and; WHEREAS, the Economic Development Commission believes that the School District and the cities in the area need to view this project as one that instills cooperation between the School District and cities for the overall benefit of the area. WHEREAS, the results of a community wide survey completed by Decision Resources, Ltd., in the summer of 1995 indicated that the area is in support of a new community center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Economic Development Commission of the City of Mound, Minnesota, that the Task Force recommend to the School Board and the Municipalities involved Option 'D' as stated above and to recommend that Option 'D' be vigorously pursued. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the School Board work with the Cities of Mound, Minnetrista, Spring Park, Orono and others to develop a financial plan that can accomplish Option 'D' and to work on this financial plan aggressively so that Option 'D' becomes a reality for the Westonka area.~ ~/,t,~~....,.~.. /~~__.~.. t~ IVr~k Brewer', Vice ~ Attest: City Manager RES-COMM.EDC 2 PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT MOUND, MINNESOTA 18th day of October , 19895 TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: We, the undersigned, owners of not less than 35 percent of the real property described as XXX Kildare Road, Mottnd, M_irunesota 55364 LegallY described as: Lots 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, Block Seton PID Nos: 19 117 23 22 0036 through 0041 and abutting on Kildare easement hereby petition that improvements be made by the construction of A City street with curb, gutter, water and s~er, beginning at Kildare Road and qoinq west on the Kildare easement approximately 360 feet with a cul-de- sac at end of road. pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. SICNATUR~ O.F/~¥NER . , /~ DE~ZPTTON OF PROP~TY / ~ ~~// ~ '~'~~~ as ~ve for all ~ers. 5. Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required number of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for .... - ......... Tracy T. Ingram /,A1 Excellence Lake Minnetonka 2477 Shadywood Road Orono, Minnesota 55331 City Clerk Each Office Independently Owned and Operated TO: FROM: RI:: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER GINO BUSlNARO, FINANCE DIRECTOR OCTOBER FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT Investment activity Bought: Money Market Money Market Money Market Money Market CP CP Matured: First Bank Smith Barney Norwest 4M Smith Barney Smith Barney 5.86% 5.76% CP Norwest 5.83% CP Smith Barney 5.82% Money Market Norwest Money Market 4M 54,256 245 146 1,957 510,206 149,551 (349,867) (651,580) (lOO,OOO) (10o,000) Fall Recycling Day - 1995 (Joyce's Report) The total number of cars was 740 compared to about 800 last year and the total dollars collected were $4,860 ($4,374 in 1994.) Furniture 15.50 Tons Goodwill Carpet 1000 lbs Appliances Goodwill 12.7 Tons TV's Tires N/A Tires Appliances 15.5 Tons Carpet TV's 4 Tons Furniture & Scrap Metal 18 Tons Est. Mattress Phone Books 200 Lbs Household Batteries 200 Lbs Total $321.00 1,770.00 N/A N/A 900.00 2,512.64 $5,5O3.64 City of Mound BUILDING ACI1VITY REPORT Month: OCTOBER Year: x99s THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE ;INGLE FAMILY DETACHED 3 3 388,914 22 2,4r12,353 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED {CONDOS) 4 4 1, 184,000 10 2,942,000 TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX MULTIPLE FAMILY {3 OR MUSE UNITS) TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS / MOTELS) SUBTOTAL 7 7 1,572,914 32 5,384,353 COMMFRCIAL IREIAIL/RESTAURANT} OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL INDUSIRIAL PUBLIC I SCHOOLS SUBTOTAL ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING 3 29,296 29 687,279 DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 5 49,292 11 124,868 DECKS 4 14,967 53 142,575 SWIMMING POOLS REMODEL- MISC RESIDENTIAL 24 114,761 207 829,733 REMODEL' MULTIPLE DWELLINGS 6 93, 100 SUBTOTAL 36 208,316 306 1,877,555 ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS COMMERCIAL {RETAIL/RESTAURANT) i 14,280 10 97,830 OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL I ]]5,000 INDUSTRIAL 1 75,635 4 143,801 PUBLIC / SCHOOLS 2 216,300 DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS I ...... i,,, SUBTOTAL 2 89,915 17' 256,631 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 5 NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 6 # PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION # UNITS VALUATION 32 TOTAL /45 1,871,145 '351 7,518,539 'BUILDING 45 361 FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 9 38 S~GUS 1 5 PLUMBING 14 110 MECHANICAL 28 111 GRADING 1 7 S&W, STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 5 50 TOTAL J 103 J 682 MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT I~tS.. ..IAS~ ~HI$ YEAR LAST YEAR 4ONTH OF OCTOBER 1995 ~ ~{C~ TO DA~ TO DATE ~, OF CAbSS 71 43 626 525 ~OUND FIRE .13 7 145 109 ~ERGEN~Y 13 15 203 205 qINNETONKA BEACH FIRE 6 2 17 22 ~GENCY O O 5 1 ~INNETRISTA ,FIRE 9 5 44 17 ~MERGENCY 9 2 32 40 ~RONO FIRE 6 3 47 33 EMERGEN~ 7 1 24 22 SHOREWOOD FIRE 0 0 7 0 KMERGEN~ 0 0 2 5 SPRING PARK FIRE 4 2 37 33 ~.~-RGE~"f 4 5 57 31 yIUTUAL AID-' .F.i'RE 0 O. 3 5 ~MERGE~ 0 1 3 2 tOTAL FIRE CALLS 38 19 300 219 tOTAL EMERGENCy CALLS 33 24 326 306 ~OMMERCIAL 0 0 4 8 RESIDENTIAL 5 4 63 43 INDUSTR_I'AL 0 0 0 0 GqlASS & MISCELLANEOUS 15 5 105 71 AUTO ~ O 19 7 FALSE ALARM / FIRE ALARMS 15 10 107 84 NO. OF HOURS FIRE 21~ 153 3181 2477 - MOUND ,.]~ERGENCY 203 ~4~ 3914 3999 TOTAL 419 401 7095 6476 FIRE 103 ' 39 347 370 MTKA BEACH M~RGENCY Q 0 91 11 TOTAL 103 39 4~ ~81 FIRE 129 82 951 264 M' IR I STA F~.~GENCY 16~ 27 577 735 TOTAL 294 109 1528 999 .FIRE 123 71 1163 679 ORONO ]~MERGENCY 128 24 545 . .352 .... TOTAL 251 95 1708 1031 FIRE 0 0 192 0 SHOREWOOD ~4~IRGENCY. 0 0 44 94 ~ 0 0 23~ 94 FIRE 67 ~2 786 725 SP. PARK .EM~GENCY 77 124 112~ 676 TOTAL 144 156 1~09 1401 FIRE 0 0 131 200 - MUTUAL AID EMERG~N'CY O 24 74 36 TOTAL 0 24 205 236 TOTAL DRILL HOURS 157½ 157% 1577% 1667% TOTAL FIRE HOURS 638 377 6751 4715 TOTAL EMERGENCY HOURS ' 573 447 1!636~ 2~59Q3 /DY_AL FIRE & ~iMERGENCY HOURS 1,21~ 824 13,119 10,618 MUTUAL AID RE,CEIVED O O 1 4 MUTUAL AID ~IVEN 0 ] 6 7 MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MOUND, MINNESOTA FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER 1995 FIRE FIG}{TERS DRILLS & MAINTENANCE FIRE & RESCUE 10/9 10/~6 ~ ~ }U/~S 1 JEFF ANDERSEN X X 2 19.00 Z 59 6.00 354.00 2 GR~G AND~SON ~ X 1 9.50 Z 63 6.00 378.00 3 PAUL BABB ~X X 2 19.00 Z 49 6.00 294.00 4 DAVE ~8OYD X . X 2 19.00 ~,~ 31 6.00 186.00 5 SCOTT BRYCE X X 2 19~00 Z,~ 14 6.00 84.00 6 DAVE CARLSON f'~ X 1 9.50 2 20 6.00 120.00 9 ~0~ c~ x x 2 19.00 2 ~0 6.oo 180.oo n s~ ER~ON x x ~- ~9.00 0 I 4~ 6.so ~.~9.so 18 JASON MAAS 2 X X 2 19.OO 34 6.OO 19 JOT-~ NA~I$ X X 2 19.OO 2 39 6.00 234.00 20 3At.mS N~T.~ON ;{ X 2 1~.00 0 28 6.00 168.00 21 HARVTN N~.~DN ;~ X 2 19.00 2, 25 6.00 1~0.00 22 BRET NTC~ X X 2 19.OO ~,S 37 6.OO 222.OO 23 GR~ PAT~ X X 2 19.00 ~,~ 27 6.00 162.D0 24 ~.m(E PALT4 X X 2 19.00 2.5 33 6.00 198.00 25 TIM PAL~! X X ' 2 19.00 ~ 32 6.00 ' 192.00 26 GRI~G PEDERSON X X 2 19.00 ~ 30 6.00 180.00 27 CHRIS I:OUNDER X X 2 19.00 2 28 6.00 168.OO 28 TONY RASMBSS~; X X 2 19.00 1.5 25 6.00 150.OO 29 MTKE SAVAg~ X X 2 19.00 6 45 6.00 270.00 30 KEVIN. SI?PRELL , X X 2 19.00 3.5 36 6.00 216.OO 31 RON STALl. MAN ('~ X 1 9.50 5 16 6.00 96.00 32 BRUCK SVOBODA X X. 2 19.00 2 45 6.00 270.00 34 ED VANi~EK X X 2 lg.oo 2.5 &5 6.00 _. RICK WI'LLIk~ X X 2 19.oo 17 _~1 6.00 36 ~I~.! WILLIAMS ' ~ ~ 0 -0- 1.5 39 6.00 37 DENNIS WOYIgKE X X 2 19.00 2 28 6.00 168.00 30 33 63 157½ I~ ~.~ 598.50 94½ ~ 1, 5~., ~C~AL 9,063.75 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER /.'~ ~ GREG SKINNER, PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT ~.~' OCTOBER 1995 REPORT STREET The Christmas decorations were installed, lights on trees first during the warm weather. They have been tested once and will be done again on November 13th, the day before the "Tree Lighting", to make sure all are working. The ornaments were installed on every other pole because the business owners have purchased banners to be hung on the empty poles. As of November 7th, we have not received them. We hope to get 30 of them up. The extra ornaments left over were installed east along Shoreline up to Fairview Lane. There will be a banner or ornament on every light pole up to Fairview Lane. We have been hauling some 3/4 to dust and sand fill, getting ready for the water main breaks and street repairs. WATER There was one water main break on Clover Circle. There were a few meter repairs. We have a deal going with Northern Water Works regarding warranty work. We will be sending our stuff to them and they will be exchanging meter heads and parts with us instead of us sending our parts to Alabama. We hope this works out better for us, providing Schlumberger sends enough inventory to Northern Water Works to handle us and the other accounts they have. Plows are on the various vehicles, ready for winter. printed on recycled paper SEWER The new jet VacAII was used for flushing out stations and wet wells and it worked very well. The old blue tanker was also used on other stations. They are ready for winter. Some of the dialers are still not working properly. We are working with Tri- State to get problem resolved. The storm sewer on Evergreen was repaired. Landscaping and fill will be needed to finish it off. We came out good on the cost, it was less than expected. CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS The trees that we decorate are getting bigger and will need more lights or trim the trees back. We should discuss this with the CBD and see what they want to do for next year. GS:ls City of Mound Monthly Report Utilities Month of: October 1995 11/06/95 Utility-96 Residential Commercial Total No. of Customers: Water 1,099 122 1,221 Sewer 1,104 122 1,226 Water Used: (in 1,000 gallons) 19,175 2,966 22,141 Billing: Water $28,211 $4,196 $32,407 Sewer $46,441 $11,634 $58,075 Recycle $5,133 $105 $5,238 Total $79,785 $15,935 $95,720 Payments: Water $44,188 $4,302 $48,490 Sewer $72,177 $10,083 $82,260 Recycle $6,764 $81 $6,845 Total $123,129 $14,466 $137,595 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER JOEL KRUMM, LIQUOR STORE MANAGER NOVEMBER 1, 1995 OCTOBER 1995 MONTHLY REPORT Well now that the World Series and Halloween are over the holiday season is approaching fast. It's hard to believe that the last ten months have come and gone so quickly. Must be a sign of old age setting in. Gross sales for the year are $1,254,420. That is exactly $42,500 more than last year at this same time. Even though 1994's sales were $54,000 more than that of 1993, I was a little bit disappointed in our wine sales. All of the increase in 1994 came in the beer, liquor and mix and misc. categories, with the wine department being flat. So, I made a concerted effort in 1995 to see if I could do anything to remedy this situation. What I have done so far is to expand our current wine selection while also eliminating some of the slow moving items. I have also put more emphasis on display merchandising and have more aggressively promoted different products. The dividends seem to be paying off, which is good, because wine is your most highly profitable product. Last year wine sales to date were $137,718. This year sales are $149,306 - an 8.5% increase. printed on recycled paper LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ed Shukle ChiefLen Harrell Monthly Report for October 1995 The police department responded to 709 calls for service during the month of October. There were 24 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses included 6 burglaries, 16 larcenies, 1 vehicle theft, and 1 arson. There were 57 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 child abuse/neglect, 1 forgery/NSF check, 7 narcotics, 9 damage to property, 1 liquor law violation, 2 DUI's, 6 simple assaults, 3 domestics (1 with an assault), 5 harassment, 13 juvenile status offenses, and 9 other offenses. The patrol division issued 103 adult citations and 9 juvenile citations. Parking violations accounted for an additional 18 tickets. Warnings were issued to 102 individuals for a variety of violations. There were 4 adults and 3 juveniles were arrested for felonies. There were 17 adults and 16 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 8 warran~ arrests. The department assisted in 15 vehicle accidents, 3 with injuries. There were 17 medical emergencies and 51 animal complaints. Mound assisted other agencies on 12 occasions in October and requested assistance 12 times. Property valued at $4,121 was stolen in October. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - OCTOBER 1995 II. INVESTIGATIONS The investigators worked on four criminal sexual conduct cases and one child protection issue. That accounted for 44 hours of investigative time. Other cases investigated include assault, arson, theft, damage to property, burglary, auto theft, stalking, controlled substance, procuring alcohol for minors, hit and run accident, domestic abuse and absenting. Formal complaints were issued for improper disposal - public nuisance, aggravated DWI, and gross misdemeanor driving after cancellation. III. Personnel/Staffim, The department used approximately 83 hours of overtime during the month of October. Officers used 57.5 hours of comp-time, 109 hours of vacation, 39 hours of sick time, and 4.5 holidays. Officers earned 47 hours of comp- time. IV. TRAINING The department had training in situational shooting response and range qualification. Officers attended defensive tactics training and vehicular stop safety. Individual courses included EMT refresher, drug interdiction, narcotics enforcement supervision, community oriented policing, tactical driving, Wilson Supervisory Leadership, background investigations, and intoxilyzer refresher. I attended the IACP conference in Miami and attended the following seminars: "Organizational Renewal" "Creating a High Performance Workplace" "Recognizing, Understanding, and Managing the Public Employee" "Hot Legal Topics and Areas of High Liability" "Terrorism in America" "Police Agencies' Hidden Resources" "Moving from Problem Employee to the Problem Organization" MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - OCTOBER 1995 The general assembly keynote speakers were Atty. General Janet Reno and ATF Director John Magow. Other speakers included Mr. John Walsh of America's Most Wanted. The Mound Police Reserves donated 152.5 hours during the month of October. The reserves have been doing an excellent job of making themselves available when needed by the department and the community. There are currently six very dedicated people who make up the unit and we continue to recruit for additional help. Community Service Officers Officers Maki and Paschke addressed 32 animal complaints, 46 ordinance violations, and 112 miscellaneous calls for service. Eight citations were issued in October. MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1995 OFFENSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED REPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT JUV PART I CRIMES Homicide Criminal Sexual Conduct Robbery Aggravated Assault Burglary Larceny Vehicle Theft Arson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 1 3 0 3 t 0 0 1 t 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PART II CRIMES Child Abuse/Neglect Forgery/NSF Checks Criminal Damage to Property Weapons Narcotic Laws Liquor Laws DWI Simple Assault Domestic Assault Domestic (No Assault) Harassment Juvenile Status Offenses Public Peace Trespassing All Other Offenses 24 I i 4 4 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 9 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 7 6 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 6 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 13 0 4 8 0 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2 4 0 TOTAL 57 I 9 23 17 16 PART II & PART Property Damage Accidents Personal Injury Accidents Fatal Accidents Medicals A~imal Complaints Mutual Aid Other General Investigations TOTAL 12 3 0 17 51 12 512 607 HCCP Inspections 1 TOTAL 709 10 27 21 19 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT OCTOBER 1995 GENEPJtLACTIVITY SUMMARY Hazardous Citations Non-Hazardous Citations Hazardous Warnings Non-Hazardous Warnings Verbal Warnings Parking Citations DWI Over .10 Property Damage Accidents Personal Injury Accidents Fatal Accidents Adult Felony Arrests Adult Misdemeanor Arrests Juvenile Felony Arrests Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests Part I Offenses Part II Offenses Medicals Animal Complaints Ordinance Violations Other Public Contacts THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR MONTH DATE TO DATE 64 727 564 45 585 435 12 155 153 54 604 271 76 588 609 18 283 245 2 42 78 1 35 66 12 78 93 3 28 33 0 0 0 4 21 25 25 306 333 3 44 37 19 138 96 24 220 299 57 637 693 17 281 261 51 549 893 20 448 455 512 5,911 7,887 TOTAL Assists Follow-Ups HCCP Mutual Aid Given Mutal Aid Requested 1,019 11,680 13,526 75 759 433 20 306 416 1 28 39 12 163 126 12 128 87 MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1995 CITATIONS DWI More Than .10% BAC Careless/Reckless Driving Driving After Susp. or Rev. Open Bottle Speeding No DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired or No Plates Stop Arm Violations Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield Equipment Violations H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance Illegal or Unsafe Turn Over the Centerline Parking Violations Crosswalk Dog Ordinances Code Enforcement Seat Belt MV/ATV Miscellaneous Tags TOTAL ADULT 2 1 1 4 0 37 1 1 18 3 4 1 6 1 8 0 0 18 1 6 0 1 0 7 121 JUVENILE 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 9 MOUND POLICE DEPA~TMENT OCTOBER 1995 WARNINGS Insurance Traffic Equipment Crosswalk Animals Trash/Derelict Autos Seat Belt Trespassing Window Tint Miscellaneous TOTAL WARRANT ARRESTS Felony Misdemeanor Adult 29 19 21 0 5 13 0 0 0 5 92 5 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Run: 27-0ct-95 13:36 PRO03 HOUND POLICE DEPARTHENT Page I Primary [SN's on[y: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Activity codes; Al[ Property Status: AIl Property Types: AIl Property Descs: AIl Brands: AIl Node[s: Officers/Badges: Enfors Property Report STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED Prop Prop [nc no [SN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen Date Recov~d Tp Desc SN Stat Stolen Value Recov'd Value Quantity Act Brand Node[ Off-1 Off-2 Code Assnd Assnd B Prop type Totals: 650 340 E Prop type Totals: 7 7 G Prop type Totals: 800 0 0 Prop type Totals: 350 0 R Prop type Totals: 200 0 T Prop type Totals: 358 0 W Prop type Totals: 310 0 X Prop type Totals: 1,290 0 Y Prop type Totals: 156 6 **** Report Totals: 4,121 353 4.000 1.000 2.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000 4.000 22.000 Run: 27-0ct-95 15:21 CFS08 Primary ISN's only: Date Reported range: Time range each day: How Received: Activity Resulted: Dispositions: Officers/Badges: Grids: Patrol Areas: Days of the week: No 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 00:00 - 23:59 Al Al Al Al Al Al Al MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9000 SPEEDING 37 9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 1 9004 RESTRICTED D/L 1 9014 STOP SIGN 4 9015 J-STOP SIGN 1 9016 FAILURE TO YIELD 1 9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 5 9019 J-EQIPMENT VIOLATION 1 9020 CARELESS/RECKLESS 1 9021 J-CARELESS/RECKLESS 1 9023 J-EXHIBITION DRIVING 1 9030 CROSSWALK VIOLATION 1 9031 J-CROSSWALK VIOLATION 1 9034 STOP ARM VIOLATION 3 9036 OBSTRUCTED VISION 1 9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 1 9040 NO SEATBELT 1 9041 J-NO SEATBELT 2 9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 18 9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 4 9201 J-OAS/DAR/DAC 2 9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED 18 Page I Run: 27-0ct-95 15:21 CFS08 Primary ISN~s only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: AIl Officers/Badges: Grids: At[ Patrol Areas: Days of the week: ACTIVITY CODE DESCRIPTION 9220 NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 9221 J-NO INSURANCE/PROOF OF 9240 CHANGE OF DOMICILE 9312 FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS 9313 FOUND PROPERTY 9314 FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED 9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 9440 H/R PERSONAL INJURY ACC. 9450 PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS 9451 H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC. 9452 H & R ACCIDENTS W/TICKET 9563 DOG AT LARGE 9564 DOG BARKING 9566 ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS 9710 MEDICAL/ASU 9720 MEDICAL/DOA 9730 MEDICALS 9731 MEDICALS/DX 9732 MEDICALS/CI 9750 FIRES 9800 ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED 9801 DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 8 1 5 4 6 2 2 1 9 3 1 1 1 6 1 1 13 1 1 1 6 2 Page Run: 27-0ct-95 15:21 CFS08 Primary ISN's on[y: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All Patrol Areas: All Days of the week: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS 9900 ALL HCCP CASES 9904 OPEN DOOR/ALARMS 9920 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 9930 HANDGUN APPLICATION 9931 HANDGUN DENIALS 9980 WARRANTS 9990 MISC. VIOLATIONS 9991 J-MISC. VIOLATIONS 9992 MUTUAL AID/8100 MUTUAL AID/6500 MUTUAL AID/ ALL OTHER ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ BURG 3-UNOCC RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-N-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT BURG 4-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 1 1 3 6 1 8 1 1 5 3 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9993 9994 A5351 A5352 A5354 A5355 A5502 B3334 B3434 B3494 B3894 B4060 B4830 Page 3 Run: 27-0ct-95 15:21 CFSO8 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: All Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: AIl Patrol Areas: Alt Days of the week: AIl ACTIVITY CODE DESCRIPTION MO{JND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS C3212 FORGERY-MS-UTT-POSS-PLACE-CHECK-BUSINESS 1 D8500 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION 3 DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 4 F4205 ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO WEA-OT PROP-S299 LESS 1 J2700 TRAFFIC-GM-AGG DUI-UNK INJ-UNK VEH 1 J3500 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 1 J3EO0 TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK [NJ-UNK VEH 1 M3001 JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER 1 M3005 JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 1 M5313 JUVENILE-CURFEW 4 M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 8 M5532 HEALTH-SAFETY-HAZ WASTE-UNLAWFUL DISPOSAL 1 N3030 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 5 03772 OBSENITY-MS-OBSCENE LETTER ETC-ADULT 2 Pl120 PROP DAMAGE-FE-PUBL[C-UNK INTENT 1 P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 1 P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 6 P3130 PROP DAMAGE-MS-BUSINESS-UNK INTENT 1 Ql126 STLN PROP-FE-RECEIVE-VEHICLES-2500-34999 1 Q2298 STLN PROP-GM-POSSESS-OTH PROP-201-500 1 TC169 THEFT-501-2500-FE-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP 1 Page Run: 27-0ct-95 15:21 CFS08 Primary ISN,s only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 How Received: Activity Resulted: All Dispositions: All Officers/Badges: Grids: All Patrol Areas: Days of the week: MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Calls For Service INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS TF159 THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP TG151 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY 1 TG159 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER 2 TG169 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP U3288 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS 3 U3497 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 1 U3498 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS X3250 CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION **** Report Totals: 293 Page Run: 27-0ct-95 15:33 OFF01 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Dispositions: ALl Activity codes: ALL Officers/Badges: All Grids: ALL MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS Page 1 ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL COOE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING A5351 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-FAM A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC A5354 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-FAM A5355 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ A5502 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 83334 BURG 3-uNocc RES FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 83434 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT B3494 BURG 3-UNOCC RES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 83894 BURG 3-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-U-UNK WEAP-COM THEFT 84060 BURG 4-AT FRC NRES-N-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT 84830 BURG 4-UNOCC NRES NO FRC-D-UNK WEAP-UNK ACT C3212 FORGERY-MS-UTT-POSS-PLACE-CHECK-BUSINESS D8500 DRUGS-SMALL AMOUNT MARIJUANA-POSSESSION DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK F4205 ARSON 3-MS-UNINHB-NO WEA-OT PROP-S299 LESS J2700 TRAFFIC-GM-AGG DUI-UNK INJ-UNK VEH ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED J3500 J3EO0 M3001 M3005 M5313 M5350 M5532 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-UNK VEH JUVENILE-ALCOHOL OFFENDER JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO JUVENILE-CURFEW JUVENILE-RUNAWAY HEALTH-SAFETY-HAZ WASTE-UNLAWFUL DISPOSAL 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 33.3 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0 4 0 4 0 3 1 0 ~+ 100.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0 4 0 4 0 0 3 1 4 100.0 8 0 8 1 0 4 3 7 87.5 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 Run: 27-0ct-95 15:33 OFF01 Primary ISN's only: No Date Reported range: 09/26/95 - 10/25/95 Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59 Dispositions: All Activity codes: All Officers/Badges: All Grids: All MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT Enfors Offense Report OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS Page 2 ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING N3030 N3190 03772 Pl120 P2110 P3110 P3130 Ql126 Q2298 TC169 TF159 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS OBSENITY-MS-OBSCENE LETTER ETC-ADULT PROP DAMAGE-FE'PUBLIC-UNK INTENT PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT PROP DAMAGE-MS-BUSINESS-UNK INTENT STLN PROP-FE-RECEIVE-VEHICLES-2500-34999 STLN PROP-GM-POSSESS-OTH PROP-201-500 THEFT-501-2500-FE-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP THEFT-201-5OO-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP ..... OFFENSES CLEARED .... ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED TG151 TG159 TG169 U3288 U3497 U3498 X3250 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 5 0 5 3 0 0 2 2 40.0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 6 0 6 4 0 0 2 2 33.3 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 .0 0.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 100.0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 4 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0.0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER THEFT-LESS 200-MS-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-201-500 THEFT-MS-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-200 OR LESS CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION **** Report Totals: 76 2 74 37 14 13 10 37 50.0 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-o6oo FAX (612) 472-0620 PARKS DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 1995 MONTHI,Y REPORT Parks We completed the last mowing of all areas and installed the remainder of the snow removal equipment on the tractors. The trailer for the bobcat was re-built. A new expanded metal decking was installed along with re- welding of all stress-cracked welds. It is now ready for sandblasting and painting which should be done in November. Docks The Dock Inspector began making site inspections for proper dock storage. Cemetery Markings for winter burials were installed. prlnted on recycled paper 11/82/1995 16:54 G12--4724435 TOM REESE PAGE 01 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 900 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 160 · WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 812/473o7033 BOARD MEMBERS William A. Johnstone Chair, Minnetonka Douglas E. Babcock vice Chair, Spring Park Josel311 Zwek Secretary, Greenwood Robert Rascop Treasurer, Shorewood Mike Bloom Mlnnetonka Beach Albert (Bert) Fosler Deephaven James N. Grathwol Excelsior Duane Markus Wayza[a Ross McGlasson Tonka Bay Craig Moiler Victoria Eugene Partyka Minnetrista Tom Reese Mound Herb J. Suerth Woodtancl Orono TO: MOUND CITY COUNCIL DATE: NOVEMBER 2, 1995 FROM: TOM REF~E, LMCD REPRF~F..NTATIVB SUBJECT: OCTOBER RP_,PORT - LMCD 1.0 Gmeral Itea~ 1.1 This has b~n a month of morgarization for thc District. The mw officers have tak~ dfice and ar~ presently in the act d establishing program priorities for the upcoming year, 1.2 Bob Rsscop has been elected treasttrer to replace the ~ Ross McOl~.son. Craig Nelson has been appoint~ to ~t Spring Park. Thc Minnctonka r~placement for Bill Johnstone remains to I~ idmtifi~t 2.0 EXotic Spa, in Task For~ 2.1 An excellent pms~tation by Sea Grant on the Zebra mussel threat, sponsored by the Freshwater Foun~tion was held this month. Dc~te 1.500 invitations, and wide publicitT, only 6 l~rSons showed up, and two of these wen= from the LMCD. A sad commentar~ on where persons have their priorities. 2.2 Plans am proIF~ng for the development of a proactive zebra mussel program. 3.0 Water Stmetarts 3. I The City d Excelsior and the Bxcdsior Park Pavilion are requesting extensive changes in their dock slmctums to bett~ accommodate the cha~ boats that dock thcs, and the steamer Minnehaha. It appears that new multiple dock licenses and variance requests will bc rcquire~ 11/82/1995 16:54 612--4724435 T0M REESE PAGE 02 3.2 11 sites around thc lake that have thc potential for larser scale development have been identified. The most significant of these is the Sweatt property on Grays Bay, which has 54 acres of propc~ with 3200 feet of shoreline. 4.0 Lake Use. 4.1 An initial mcctin8 has bccn held with thc new sheriff's administration t~ review the joint and eoopex~ve aSreement f~ I~. This is the doeummt whereby the Hennepin county shenfl~s department is retained as the enforcement agcncy for the LJVlCD criminal ordi~. LMSl~Clflt Ittms fc: Doug Babcock Alnn Willcutt RECEIVED [~0¥l~ lg§5 MINNETONK~ CONBBRV'ATION DlgTRICT BO~RD OF DIRECTORS WOR~HOP! PLaNNiNG ~GEND& Wednesday, November 8, 1995 Immediately Following Board Meeting Tonka Bay City Hall 1. Call to Order; 2. Prioritizing of 1996 Goals and Objectives; 3. Additional Business; 4. Adjournment; RECEIVED Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors Workshop I Planning Session 6:30 P.M., Wednesday, November 8, 1995 Tonka Bay City Hall Call to Order Chair Babcock called the workshop to order at 6:45 p.m. Board Members Present Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Joe Zwak, Greenwood; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Kent Dahlen, Minnetonka Beach; Bert Foster, Deephaven; James Grathwol, Excelsior; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Also present: Al Willcutt, Executive Director; Greg Nybeck, Administrative Technician. Items Discussed The Board of Directors discussed an army of specific goals, objectives, and tasks in an effort to assist staff' with direction for project implementation in 1996.* A listing approach was utilized as a result of a written survey which was conducted to compile board members attitudes and thoughts for further LMCD, projects and programs. A follow up planning session will be held prior to the next regular board meeting to prioritize and develop a time line for implementation of all goals and objectives. There being no further business, Chairman Babcock adjourned the Workshop/Planning Session at 7:30 p.m. Doug Babcock, Chair Joseph Zwak, Secretary RECEIVEO l;0V§ 199, LAKE KINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGBNDA 7:00 pm, Wednesday, November 8, 1995 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock RF2%DING OF MINUTES- 10/25/95 Regular Board Meeting 10/25/95 Planning/ Workshop Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS- Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min) CONSENT AGENDA- Consent Agenda items identified by "*" will be approved in one motion unless a Board member requests a discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda. 1. WitTER STRUCTURES Ordinance 138, Report from subcommittee to present alternatives on the interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting Lake Minnetonka, the planning process, and the health, safety and welfare of the public, and restricting the licensing, construction and maintenance of new commercial and multiple docks; B. 1995 Deicing Licenses, Update on licenses issued and pending; C. Additional Business; LAKE USE AND RECREATION Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Joint and Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County, Report on 11/2/95 meeting; Be Ordinance Amen~uent, 1st reading of an ordinance relating to Personal Flotation Devices; Amending LMCD Code Sections 3.04, Subd. 2 and 3.041, Subd. 2; C. Additional Business; ADMINISTRATIVE A1 Willcutt, Review of Health Insurance, per Personnel Policy, and request to approve additional Health Insurance reimbursement for dependents; B. Staff memorandum outlining November holiday schedule; C. Additional Business; 4. FIITANCII%L &. October financial summary and balance sheet (handout); B. Audit of vouchers for payment (handout); E. Additional Business; 5. EXEC~TIFB DIRECTOR REPORT, Willcutt 7. ~DJO~RNMBNT o October financial summary and balance sheet (handout); Audit of vouchers for payment (handout); E. Additional Business; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT, Willcutt HLIBUHXHBHH M~OURHMBHT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 7:30 P.M., Wednesday, October 25, 1995 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER RECEIVEr.) Chair Babcock called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. Members present: James Grathwol, Excelsior; Joe Zwak, Greenwood; Douglas Babcock, Tonka Bay; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Bert Foster, Deephaven; Kent Dahlen, Minnetonka Beach. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; G. Alan Willcutt, Executive Director; Gregory Nybeck, Administrative Technician Members absent: Gene Partyka, Minnetrista; Duane Markus, Wayzata; Craig Mollet, Victoria; and Tom Reese, Mound. Orono, Minnetonka, and Spring Park have no appointed members. CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS Babcock introduced Craig Nelson, the newly appointed Board representative of Spring Park. He added the formal appointment would take place at the 11/8/95 Board meeting once the paperwork from Spring Park was received. He welcomed Nelson to the Board. READING OF THE MINUTF~ Rascop moved, Suerth seconded to approve the minutes of the September 27, 1995 Regular Board meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from persons in attendance on subjects not on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA Zwak moved, Foster seconded to approve the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously. (Approved agenda items include: 2B, Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Significant Activity Report; and 3A, Approval of 10/5/95 Save the Lake Advisory Committee minutes.) COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. WATER STRUCTURES A. Discussion on proposed dock changes to the City of Excelsior's and the Excelsior Park Pavilion's multiple dock licenses, how these proposed changes would affect their special density licenses. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 2 Babcock stated that staff has asked for direction on these proposed projects. He added that staff needs Board direction on how these proposed projects would affect previously granted special density licenses. LeFevere noted that staff and himself agreed that Board direction would be beneficial before proceeding with these applications. Specifically, direction on how these proposed projects would affect their previously granted special density licenses (SDL). He added the question the Board needs to address is whether a new SDL application should be required for both projects. He noted ordinarily, once you have a SDL, if the conditions, slip sizes, and BSU's do not change, a new SDL application has not been required. LeFevere noted this case is out of the ordinary. He noted the size of the slips would increase, however, the BSU's would not increase. He added the conditions of the site plans associated with the SDL approved would change. He stated a case could be made to require new SDL applications. He stated a concern with doing this is the high cost of a new SDL application. He added this could also be interpreted as a reconfiguration which would allow for a minor change to their SDL. He concluded staff would work with the applicants based on the Board's direction. Rascop asked if issues such as dock length beyond 100' and dock width greater than 6' have been addressed? Nybeck stated that staff would require variance applications for length and width on both projects. Babcock asked if new multiple dock license applications should also be required? LeFevere stated typically a new multiple dock license would be required for 1996 associated with a new special density license application. Foster asked staff for approximated costs to the applicants for new special density licenses? Nybeck approximated Excelsior's cost for a special density license would be $4,000, and the Excelsior Park Pavilion's would be $2,100. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 2 Babcock stated that staff has asked for direction on these proposed projects. He added that staff needs Board direction on how these proposed projects would affect previously granted special density licenses. LeFevere noted that staff and himself agreed that Board direction would be beneficial before proceeding with these applications. Specifically, direction on how these proposed projects would affect their previously granted special density licenses (SDL). He added the question the Board needs to address is whether a new SDL application should be required for both projects. He noted ordinarily, once you have a SDL, if the conditions, slip sizes, and BSU's do not change, a new SDL application has not been required. LeFevere noted this case is out of the ordinary. He noted the size of the slips would increase, however, the BSU's would not increase. He added the conditions of the site plans associated with the SDL approved would change. He stated a case could be made to require new SDL applications. He stated a concern with doing this is the high cost of a new SDL application. He added this could also be interpreted as a reconfiguration which would allow for a minor change to their SDL. He concluded staff would work with the applicants based on the Board's direction. Rascop asked if issues such as dock length beyond 100' and dock width greater than 6' have been addressed? Nybeck stated that staff would require variance applications for length and width on both projects. Babcock asked if new multiple dock license applications should also be required? LeFevere stated typically a new multiple dock license would be required for 1996 associated with a new special density license application. Foster asked staff for approximated costs to the applicants for new special density licenses? Nybeck approximated Excelsior's cost for a special density license would be $4,000, and the Excelsior Park Pavilion's would be $2,100. lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 3 Foster expressed trouble that the ordinance does not distinguish between a BSU/ overnight storage and BSU/transient slip. He added there is a significant difference between overnight and transient slips. He stated transient slips provide a service to the lake and the Board should consider code changes to distinguish between the two. Babcock noted he had reviewed the code. Based on his review, he suggested the Board require variance applications but not require new multiple dock or special density license applications. He added he felt these proposed projects could be interpreted as minor changes and the fact they are transient facilities could allow them to be treated more liberally. Foster expressed a concern with interpreting these proposed projects as minor changes. He suggested the better course of action may be code amendments. Rascop asked if it would be appropriate to ask them to apply for new licenses and waive the fees, requiring them to pay the LMCD's actual costs or the fees on the application, whichever is lower? Babcock noted that is a possibility. LeFevere recommended this not be treated as a minor change for multiple dock license purposes. He stated a new multiple dock license and variance applications should be required. He added the question is density considerations relating to their special density licenses. He added that substantial changes could be made to the multiple dock licenses and the Board would not necessarily have to consider it a minor change for multiple dock license purposes in order to conclude that they are minor changes for special density license purposes. Foster stated that he would prefer a much more simplistic ordinance relating to transient slips. Zwak stated there is a difference in interpretation between public and private entities and their use of transient slips. MOTION: Foster moved, Zwak seconded to require new multiple dock and variance license applications for the City of Excelsior and the Excelsior Park Pavilion for their proposed projects. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 4 VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Rascop asked Carl Zieman for explanation of the proposed 56' wide dock? Carl Zieman. City Administrator. City_ of Excelsior stated that it would be used to dock only excursion boats for a short period of time. He believed that this amount of space that would be more adequate, safer, and handicapped accessible. Grathwol stated that he had concerns about the 6' wide dock limitations when excursion boats are involved. He believed, for safety reasons alone, wider docks should be permitted. Babcock asked what the width of the current dock is? Zieman stated he believed it is 8' wide. LeFevere stated it could be difficult to approve a variance for such a wide dock. He stated proving a hardship for this wide of a dock may be difficult to prove. He suggested accommodating such a request by an Ordinance amendment rather than a variance request. Zieman stated that they did contemplate having an open area in the middle of the dock to reduce the variance request but safety was an issue. Babcock stated further examination with the City of Excelsior and staff needs to be done to determine proper side setbacks to the east of the dock. Leo Meloche. Minnesota Transportation Museum discussed the Excelsior Park Pavilion issues. He noted the steamboat is not responsive when docking at slow speeds. He noted the dock to the west, approximately 160' long, creates a problem for parking steamboats. He added the MTM, in association with the Excelsior Park Pavilion, is proposing a 160' pier that is 8' wide with a 16' "L" at the end of it. He stated a railing may divide the pier into two 4' wide sections of pier. Suerth asked if a bow thruster would be possible to improve the maneuverability of the boat? Meloche replied that a bow thruster has been considered but is not feasible with Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 4 VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Rascop asked Carl Zieman for explanation of the proposed 56' wide dock? Carl Zieman. City_ Administrator. Ci_ty of Excelsior stated that it would be used to dock only excursion boats for a short period of time. He believed that this amount of space that would be more adequate, safer, and handicapped accessible. Grathwol stated that he had concerns about the 6' wide dock limitations when excursion boats are involved. He believed, for safety reasons alone, wider docks should be permitted. Babcock asked what the width of the current dock is? Zieman stated he believed it is 8' wide. LeFevere stated it could be difficult to approve a variance for such a wide dock. He stated proving a hardship for this wide of a dock may be difficult to prove. He suggested accommodating such a request by an Ordinance amendment rather than a variance request. Zieman stated that they did contemplate having an open area in the middle of the dock to reduce the variance request but safety was an issue. Babcock stated further examination with the City of Excelsior and staff needs to be done to determine proper side setbacks to the east of the dock. Leo Mel0che, Minnesota Transportation Museum discussed the Excelsior Park Pavilion issues. He noted the steamboat is not responsive when docking at slow speeds. He noted the dock to the west, approximately 160' long, creates a problem for parking steamboats. He added the MTM, in association with the Excelsior Park Pavilion, is proposing a 160' pier that is 8' wide with a 16' ~L~ at the end of it. He stated a railing may divide the pier into two 4' wide sections of pier. Suerth asked if a bow thruster would be possible to improve the maneuverability of the boat? Meloche replied that a bow thruster has been considered but is not feasible with Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 5 the conditions of the boat. ® Zwak expressed concerns with width of the pier if the railing is put in and the relation to ADA requirements. Foster noted that ADA requirements will require 60" in width. LAKE USE AND RECREATION A. Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol Joint and Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County, discussion on conditions for renewal in 1996. Foster stated a meeting has been scheduled for November 2nd at 7:30 a.m. at the Wayzata American Legion. He noted Sergeant Schilling was present at the meeting for discussion purposes and to answer questions of the Board. Sergeant Schilling stated he had received a copy of the agreement and supplementary change from the past few years from Nybeck. He stated that he did not see a real need for major changes to past agreement. Foster encouraged Board members to discuss concerns with Schilling and how to incorporate these into the new agreement. Rascop asked Schilling to comment on how the public event permitting process is working with the Water Patrol? Schilling stated to the best of his knowledge, he had not noticed a problem with the process. He added the applicants have been happy since it is one less approval. Babcock discussed the Board's concerns about not being aware of the special events taking place since the LMCD relegated licensing special events. He added the LMCD is considering licensing special events in the near future. Schilling stated that a happy medium could be arranged. He stated an update meeting could be conducted where roundtable discussions of pending applications could be done. He added the Water Patrol could forward pending applications to the LMCD allowing for comment. Babcock asked if a report could be provided to the LMCD of monthly special events? Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 6 Rascop suggested that the applications be faxed over to the LMCD office. Suerth asked for Schilling's comments on the Bass Fishing Tournaments and speeds on the lake associated with them? Schilling stated that special efforts are taken during these tournaments. He noted deputies are on the lake looking for offenders. Those that are caught and issued a citation are disqualified from these tournaments. He added most contestants in these tournaments comply with LMCD Code. Grathwol asked if information could be made available on Lake Minnetonka, particularly statistical information (where the Water Patrol is working, how many there are, etc.)? Schilling noted the number of contacts made by the Water Patrol could be provided. With regards to special events, he added a great deal of data is outlined on the applications. Suerth expressed concerns with zebra mussels and the need to prevent the infestation into Lake Minnetonka, especially through fishing tournaments. Schilling noted the Water Patrol could incorporate stipulations in the permitting process, however, they do not have the manpower to inspect boats. Foster reminded the Board of the 11/2/95 meeting with Water Patrol officials and encouraged them to attend. WATER STRUCTURES (CONTINUED) Be Ordinance 138, report from subcommittee to present alternatives on the interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting Lake Minnetonka, the planning process, and the health, safety and welfare of the public, and restricting the licensing, construction and maintenance of new commercial and multiple docks. Zwak discussed his review of plat maps which border on Lake Minnetonka in order to find parcels of land with significant property which could be developed. He noted that eleven sites have been identified. He stated the most significant property identified was the Sweat property on Grays Bay. He approximated it was 54 acres of property with 3,200 feet of lakeshore. He recommended staff Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 6 Rascop suggested that the applications be faxed over to the LMCD office. Suerth asked for Schilling's comments on the Bass Fishing Tournaments and speeds on the lake associated with them? Schilling stated that special efforts are taken during these tournaments. He noted deputies are on the lake looking for offenders. Those that are caught and issued a citation are disqualified from these tournaments. He added most contestants in these tournaments comply with LMCD Code. Grathwol asked if information could be made available on Lake Minnetonka, particularly statistical information (where the Water Patrol is working, how many there are, etc.)? Schilling noted the number of contacts made by the Water Patrol could be provided. With regards to special events, he added a great deal of data is outlined on the applications. Suerth expressed concerns with zebra mussels and the need to prevent the infestation into Lake Minnetonka, especially through fishing tournaments. Schilling noted the Water Patrol could incorporate stipulations in the permitting process, however, they do not have the manpower to inspect boats. Foster reminded the Board of the 11/2195 meeting with Water Patrol officials and encouraged them to attend. WATER STRUCTURES (CONTINUED) Ordinance 138, report from subcommittee to present alternatives on the interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting Lake Minnetonka, the planning process, and the health, safety and welfare of the public, and restricting the licensing, construction and maintenance of new commercial and multiple docks. Zwak discussed his review of plat maps which border on Lake Minnetonka in order to find parcels of land with significant property which could be developed. He noted that eleven sites have been identified. He stated the most significant property identified was the Sweat property on Grays Bay. He approximated it was 54 acres of property with 3,200 feet of lakeshore. He recommended staff Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 7 provide copies of these 11 sites at the 11/8/95 Board meeting for further discussion. e Suerth asked if it would be benifical for each city representative to take their particular map(s) for review at their city? Zwak noted that the quarter section maps do not follow city boundaries. He stated that he will give the maps to staff for review and distribution. He added this will allow the Board to review appropriate ordinance changes related to possible subdivision development. Specifically, the Board will need to review shoreline measurement. Ce Additional Business There was no additional business. SAVE THE LAKE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Be Informational Report, per 10/5/95 minutes. Willcutt reported a solicitation letter was sent out in late October. He reported a total $5,900.00 had been received bringing the year's total to $25,234.50. He stated the next letter will go out following Thanksgiving. Ce Additional Business There was no additional business. ADMINISTRATIVE A. Election of new treasurer Babcock recommended the nomination of Bob Rascop as the new treasurer. MOTION: Foster moved, Grathwol seconded to elect Rascop as treasurer. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Be Additional Business Babcock noted an additional letter had been received from Spring Park. He stated he hoped to resolve the levy question in the near future. FINANCIAL REPORT Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 8 A® September f'mancial summary and balance sheet. Rascop reviewed the September financial summary and balance sheet. MOTION: Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the balance sheet. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Be Audit of vouchers for payment (handout). Rascop reviewed the vouchers for payment. MOTION: Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the vouchers for payment for the month of October. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Ce Additional Business There was no additional business. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT DNR Dire~tiv~ 9n PFD's Willcutt stated that effective May 1, 1996, all boats in excess of 16' will be required to have a U. S. Coast Guard Type IV (cushion) or ring buoy in each boat. Foster added the state is requiring a throwable device in boats in excess of 16'. He recommended staff rewrite the ordinance to conform to state ordinance at the next Board meeting. He added a throwing device not be required for a PWC since they are required to wear a PFD. Insuran~ Willcutt noted he solicited insurance quotes. He added he received a quote which was higher than the current provider, LMCIT. He recommended that we remain with the LMCIT. Marine Toilets Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 8 A® September f'mancial summary and balance sheet. Rascop reviewed the September financial summary and balance sheet. MOTION: Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the balance sheet. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Be Audit of vouchers for lmyment (handout). Rascop reviewed the vouchers for payment. MOTION: Rascop moved, Zwak seconded to approve the vouchers for payment for the month of October. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Ce Additional Business There was no additional business. EXECUTWE DIRECTOR REPORT DNR Dir~five Off PFD'~ Willcutt stated that effective May 1, 1996, all boats in excess of 16' will be required to have a U. S. Coast Guard Type IV (cushion) or ring buoy in each boat. Foster added the state is requiring a throwable device in boats in excess of 16'. He recommended staff rewrite the ordinance to conform to state ordinance at the next Board meeting. He added a throwing device not be required for a PWC since they are required to wear a PFD. Insurance Willcutt noted he solicited insurance quotes. He added he received a quote which was higher than the current provider, LMCIT. He recommended that we remain with the LMCIT. Marine Toilet~ Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting October 25, 1995 Page 9 Suerth discussed his concerns about marine toilets on charter boats and whether they are pumped out on a regular basis. ® Se Meeting Schedule Willcutt reviewed a staff memo which recommends cancelling the 11/22/95 and 12/27/95 meetings. MOTION: VOTE: NEW BUSINESS Foster moved, Grathwol seconded to approve the November and December meeting schedule as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously. There was no new business ADJOURNlVlENT There being no further business, Chairman Babcock adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Douglas Babcock, Chair Joseph Zwak, Secretary MINUTES 01: A MEETING 01: THE MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 23, 1995 Those present were: Chair Geoff Michael, Commissioners Michael Mueller, Frank Weiland, Bill Voss, and Becky Glister, City Council Representative Mark Hanus, City Planner Mark Koegler, Building Official Jon Sutherland and Secretary Peggy James. Absent and excused were Commissioners Crum and Clapsaddle. Surko was absent. MINUTES The Planning Commission Minutes of October 9, 1995 were presented for approval. Weiland requested a change on page 7, #4., should clarify" curb and gutter around the entire perimeter of the parking lot." MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Mueller to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of October 9, 1995 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FROM RICK & DENISE HANSON FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON RESOLUTION #94-131 APPROVING A LOT AREA VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE AT 2710 WESTEDGE BLVD., PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 23, PID 23-117-24 24 0008. The Building Official, Jon Sutherland, recommended approval of the variance extension. Weiland referred to Resolution #94-131, within the fifth Whereas, and suggested that the language be modified as follows, "WHEREAS, all setbacks and impervious surface lc*, coverage are conforming, and;" It was indicated that "lot coverage" could be confusing since the variance was issued for "lot area." MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Muller, to recommend approval of a one year variance extension of Resolution #94-131. Motion carried unanimously. Voss referred to the motion made by the Planning Commission on September 12, 1994 when this variance was originally recommended for approval, which states, "Clarification from the City Attorney is also requested relating to the determination of the lot area, ownership of the easement, and setbacks." The Building Official indicated that he assume~ this was done. Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 VARIANCE STREAMLINING. City Planner, Mark Koegler, reviewed his memorandum relating to Variance Streamlining. The types of cases that are likely to fall under the streamlining approach are those that currently receive almost rubber stamp approval. Koegler quoted the Comprehensive Plan developed in 1990 which states, "It is the City's overall goal to preserve and protect existing natural features and to preserve and enhance the residential, commercial, industrial and recreation components of the community." Comments and questions offered by the City Attorney in a letter dated June 5, 1995 which should be asked before the zoning ordinance is changed were reviewed. Will non-conforming uses and the expansion of those uses extend the lifetime of the non-conforming use? Will the City be closer to its planning goals 20 years from now than it is at the present time if the ordinance is modified to allow expansion? Does the expansion perpetuate the life of uses that would be better terminated and the property restructured to meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance as recorded through the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinances and restrictions? The most common variance situations include the following: 1. Lot Area - a property has insufficient lot area under the current zoning provisions. Setbacks - properties that have existing structures that do not meet current front, side or rear setback requirements. Lot/Improved Street Frontage - lots that contain insufficient frontage along an improved public street. 4. Lot width or depth - lots containing insufficient width or depth dimensions. Shoreland Setbacks - structures that have insufficient setbacks from the ordinary high water levels of lakes. Shoreland setbacks are separate from other forms of setback because of the City's requirements to comply with DNR standards. Impervious Surface Coverage - properties with total amounts of hardcover that surpass ordinance requirements. Planning Commission Minutes October 23, f995 Koegler reviewed variance statistics from over the past five years: Over the past five years, the City of Mound has processed 218 variance applications. Of those, 206 were approved by the Planning Commission and City Council (94.5% approval). Between 1990 and 1994, the range of variance applications that were approved varied from 100% in 1993 to a Iow of 81.5% in 1990. Over the five year period, the City averaged 3.6 variance cases per month. Koegler summarized, of all the types of variances reviewed by the City, those involving lot area and setbacks seem to be the most viable candidates for streamlining measures, should such measures be found to be in the best long term interest of the City. Implementation of such techniques poses a number of practical and theoretical problems such as: Streamlining needs to have adequate safeguards to ensure that the City does not lose its ability to gain long term compliance with codes and ordinances. Properties have a wide range of existing nonconforming conditions. Which, if any of these items, should be included in streamlining? Is the real issue before the Planning Commission a revision of the ordinance standards to make them less stringent? Added emphasis could be placed on the Building Official's analysis of the condition of a structure. If a property owner doesn't agree, would their recourse be to apply for a variance? Creating provisions which reduce the need for variances may have or be perceived to have the effect of relaxing community standards. Extensive implementation of streamlining techniques will establish new minimum thresholds. Therefore, is the real issue before the Planning Commission a revision of the ordinance standards to make the less stringent? Staff suggested the Planning Commission address the larger scale issue and then outline a framework for potential variance streamlining methods, and this can be forwarded to the City Council for review at their November C.O.W. meeting. General Discussion Mueller commented that his greatest concern is how to deal with determining the structural condition of a building. Planning Co/n/n/ss/on Minutes October 23. 1995 Voss questioned if the variance process is broken? He feels that when citizens are required to ~to throu~ih this process it makes them aware of what the problems are in the City, and by streamlining variances the problems would be out of site and out of mind. Weiland is not in favor of loosening the requirements and commented that 3.6 variances cases per month is not an overload. Weiland would rather see the cases come through so they do not loose control. Voss referred to page 28, item #2 which refers to the City's planning goals, and questioned how we measure these goals. Koegler noted that the assessment of the progress is somewhat subjective. It was indicated that according to the statistics within the City Planner's memorandum, that we are meeting those goals. Voss then questioned why streamlining is an issue. Hanus noted that there are numerous complaints from citizens regarding the process, and reducing the number of variances would allow the Planning Commission more time to work on traditional planning issues. Hanus commented that he would like to see those variances that are "rubber stamped" allowed without going through the process. Voss commented that Mound does not have a lot of open spaces and don't have as many planning issues as other suburbs, and therefore, there may be a greater need to concentrate on dealing with existing nonconforming properties. Hanus thinks that some applications should not have to go through the process, and this could make it easier for the citizens. The Building Official commented that this is a long-standing issue, and the previous council asked that staff research ways to reduce the number of variances. Sutherland suggested one method of streamlining as done by another City, is to have the Planning Commission be the final body granting the variance, this speeds up the process. Hanus commented that the downside of that method is that it would make the Planning Commission much more political. Voss agreed. Voss questioned the Building Official if the City would benefit fiscally by the streamlining of variances. The Building Official stated that cost savings has not been evaluated, however, if there were less cases there would be less paper, and some reduction of staff time on variance reports. Hanus commented that there are also consulting fees to be considered. Staff noted that the $50.00 variance fee does not cover the costs incurred by the City to process a variance application. Hanus also stated that the time saved by the Building Official by not working on variance cases could be spent on other more important matters. Voss stated that there were 3.6 variances per month over the last five years, he questioned if there are more variances each year. Koegler reviewed the number of variances for each of the last five years. 1990 = 29 1991 = 44 1992 = 57 1993 = 45 1994 = 54 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 It was suggested that the number of variances is concurrent with Iow interest rates. Michael stated that it is his opinion that if the new construction is conforming, the variance should be allowed if the nonconformity was recognized by a variance in the past. Weiland commented that he does not think the method of streamlining as suggested by Mueller would reduce a significant number of variances. Glister questioned if there was a time when there were more variances denied, within the last five years. Koegler stated that from 1989 the number of variances denied average from 0 to 6. Sutherland noted that the previous Building Official interpreted the ordinance differently and did not require variances if the new construction was conforming. Mueller and Sutherland agreed that they would not be in favor of allowing an existing nonconforming setback to be extended, but new construction that totally conforms to setbacks should be allowed. Mueller reiterated that if a nonconforming situation on a lot has previously been recognized by a variance and the proposed new construction totally conforms to setbacks, hardcover, etc., a new variance should not be required. Weiland debated that if the existing dwelling which has a nonconforming setback is in a dilapidated state, this could be an opportunity to correct the nonconforming situation. Weiland would rather see the City rubber stamp variances rather than miss the opportunity to correct nonconforming situations. Mueller acknowledged Weiland's opinion, however, reiterated that the Planning Commission was directed by the Council to look into streamlining variances. Weiland does not want to change a system that he feels works. Mueller commented that if their discussions keep reverting back to the question of whether or not they should streamline, the Planning Commission should decide if they want to move forward with the discussion of streamlining or not. MOTION made by Mueller that the Planning Commission review the ordinances with respect to the possibility of streamlining variances in order to make a recommendation to the Council on the issue. Seconded by Hanus. Mueller clarified the intent of the motion is for the Planning Commission to discuss the possibility of streamlining certain aspects of the ordinance for the purpose of reducing the amount of variances granted under the current ordinance provisions. Weiland stated that the motion is unclear. Hanus explained that if you vote for it you are willing to discuss the streamlining opportunities, and if you vote no it saying that you do not want to talk about it. Mueller summarized that he wants to move past the rhetorical question, "is streamlining is a good thing or not?" MOTION carried unanimously. Planning Cornrn/ss/on Minutes October 23, 1995 MOTION made by Mueller that any previously recognized existing principal dwelling structure which was granted a variance, the property owner be allowed to construct an addition or accessory structure in a conforming location meeting all other requirements if such approval of the variance was granted within the previous ;20 years, subject to the condition of the existing nonconforming structure, as determined by the Building Official. Motion seconded by Voss for the purpose of discussion. Voss questioned how you insure compliance with the City's long-term policies and zoning standards. Mueller commented that the things we are granting variances for right now will be around for at least the next 20 years, so he thinks they are meeting that long range goal. Koegler commented that this type of streamlining would not threaten the overall integrity of the code or long-range interests of the City. It was confirmed that Mueller's motion does not allow exceptions for previously recognized nonconforming accessory structures. Mueller stated that a lot of nonconforming sheds have been ordered removed, however, houses do not get removed as easily. Mueller noted that the Building Official will still have to go out and look at the nonconforming principal structures to verify structural integrity. Weiland questioned if this is putting too much pressure on the Building Official. Mueller commented that if a person does not agree with the Building Official's opinion, they should have the right to appeal through the variance process. Hanus addressed the issue that nonconforming accessory buildings are not included in Mueller's motion, and he understands that if a variance is approved to recognize a nonconforming dwelling that in 20 years the condition of the dwelling should be reviewed again, but why not accessory buildings too? Mueller explained that accessory buildings tend to deteriorate faster and they are not always maintained. The 20 years clause also puts a sunset on variances. MOTION carried 5 to 1. Those in favor were: Mueller, Hanus, Voss, Glister, and Michael. Weiland was opposed. Weiland is in favor of keeping in control and not giving-up on the rubber stamped variances. Mueller feels this motion meets every single criteria for the granting of variances under Subd. 1, 350:530 of the code, and it complies with the questions and comments posed by the City Attorney. .Lot Area Mueller stated that it is his understanding the City has no proviso for purchasing undersized lots of records, nor have they ever denied a building to be constructed on an undersized lot of record as long as contiguous lots are not owned by the same Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 person. Koegler confirmed that the City does not have a program in place to buy properties it deems should not be built upon. The Building Official referred to the Prior Lake ordinance that allows conforming construction on lots of record which do not comply to both lot width and lot area. Weiland presented an example: he owns three separate lots that are three separate parcels, they are contiguous, and they are each undersized, can he build on them? Mueller recalled what the City Attorney had told them that if contiguous lots, under the same ownership, were sold prior to the zoning ordinance, you cannot deny them the right to build on that lot unless you want to purchase it. Shoreland Setbacks and Impervious Surface Covera~;c Voss questioned if all the items I through 6 should be streamlined. Mueller was not in favor of including item 5, shoreland setbacks, and item 6, impervious surface coverage to be part of the streamlining. Hanus questioned why no shoreland setbacks? Mueller explained that the houses will creep closer and closer to the shoreline if they are allowed to average with the neighbors setbacks. The Building Official reviewed the DNR's staff position on lining-up of structures on the lakeside. The DNR considers it a legitimate hardship situation when adjoining structures have a lesser setback to the lake. The issue of a reduced setback to a wetland such as Lost Lake, versus the main body of the lake was also discussed. MOTION made by Mueller, seconded by Voss to recommend that there be no streamlining provisions for "shoreland setbacks" and "impervious surface coverage." Motion carried unanimously. The Commission discussed if new construction should be allowed on an undersized lot of record without requiring a variance, as long as everything else is conforming. Mueller expressed a need for clarification from the Attorney on new construction on an undersized lot. Hanus questioned if this could eliminate the need for a lot area requirement? Koegler suggested putting a floor on the square footage or percentage of lot area for what you would want to allow. Lot Area, Setbacks, and Lot/Improved Street Frontage; It was questioned if the previous motion does not cover these issues. It was indicated that it does, except if a variance has not been previously recognized. 7 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 The Commission discussed the possibility of eliminating the need for a variance if only one nonconformity exists, and if it is a minor nonconformity, such as no less than 10% of the required. Koegler suggested that the Commission may want to look at setting different limitations on setbacks versus lot area, such as allowing a one foot lee-way on side setbacks, and a 10% lee-way on lot area, etc. The Building Official suggested that more detailed information on previous variances cases may need to be provided, and that a very high approval rating (close to 100%) sets a new standard. Mueller clarified the intent of his motion was to include any previously recognized nonconformity to the principal structure, including lot area, setbacks, hardcover, etc., so now they need to decide what they would do for "new construction." And, Mueller suggested that maybe his motion should include previously recognized nonconforming accessory structures that have received a variance within the last 10 years, he would not be opposed to this. Koegler stated that he understood Mueller's motion to include principal building setbacks only, and did not realize it was to include lot area, impervious cover, width, depth, etc. Mueller confirmed that the intent was to include lot and land parameters. Mueller commented that he could make a motion that would deal with non-recognized situations. MOTION made by Mueller that should any existing nonconformity exist for lot area, setbacks, lot/improved street frontage, or lot width/depth, and the request is for an addition of any sort that is totally conforming, that they need not get a variance if it is within 20 percent of that singular nonconformity. Hanus seconded the motion for discussion purposes. Mueller clarified that if a totally conforming proposal is received, and the lot width is within 20 percent of the required, they don't need to get a variance. Or if a totally conforming proposal is received, and the lot area is within 20 percent of the required, they don't need to get a variance. But, they can only have one nonconformity. The proposed "20 percent" was discussed. The Commission discussed how the 20 percent would apply to lot area, lot width, lot frontage, and setbacks. Hanus' original options as presented in his memorandum to the Council dated May 8, 1995 to streamline variances were reviewed, as follows: "Option 1: Legally non-conforming, single family residential dwellings may be expanded to improve livability, and accessory structures may be added or expanded, provided that all uses in the parcel are conforming, and provided that the non-conformity is not increased beyond the existing conditions upon the parcel and no other non-conformities within the Zoning Ordinance are created." 8 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 "~ Legally non-conforming, single family residential dwellings may be expanded to improve livability, and accessory structures may be added or expanded, provided that all uses on the parcel are conforming, and provided that the entire expansion or construction meets the current zoning regulations and no other non-conformities with the Zoning Ordinance are created." Hanus stated that when the Council reviewed these options, he thought they were leaning more towards Option I which is more lenient. It was suggested that the City Planner could investigate what percentage or amount of setback would be reasonable to consider for this scenario of streamlining. Mueller moved to amend the motion to read as follows: MOTION made by Mueller that should any one existing nonconformity exist on a property for either lot area, setback, lot/improved street frontage, or lot width/depth, and a request is received for an addition, of any sort, that is totally conforming, that they need not get a variance. The singular existing nonconformity should not exceed a certain threshold as yet to be determined and investigated by the City Planner. This would be subject to the Building Official's review of the structural condition of the existing nonconformity. Hanus agreed to the amended motion. MOTION carried 5 to 1. Those in favor were: Mueller, Hanus, Michael, Voss, and Glister. Weiland was opposed. The Planning Commission confirmed that the City Planner will bring this issue back to the Planning Commission for further review, hopefully at their November 13th meeting, and prior to submitting this framework to the City Council. MEMORANDUM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM CITY MANAGER, ED _SHUKLE, REGARDING CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION REGARDING ORDINANCI REVIEW. Hanus stated that he does not know why "Vehicles for Sale Ordinance" is on the agenda. It was his understanding that the Council prioritized the ordinance amendments to be reviewed as follows: Streamlining Variances Telecommunications Domestic Abuse Shelters He added that the City Council needs to yet prioritize the discussion of amending the ordinance relating to driveways. Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 1995 _VEHICLES FOR SALE ORDINANCE. Not discussed. ORDINANCE VERNING TELECnMMUNICATi,',NS OR RELAT P BLI R UND OF THE CITY OF MOUND. ED SERVICES IN THE Not discussed. DOMESTIC ABUSE SHELTERS - APPROPRIATE ZONING. Not discussed. CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT Not discussed. MOTION made by Weiland, seconded by Voss, to adjourn the meeting at 11:01 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Attest: Chair, Geoff Michael lO BANKS Alan V. Johnson President West Suburban Market Norvvest Bank Minnesota, AI.A. 900 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Hopkins: 612/932-3030 Wayzata: 612/476-3831 November 1, 1995 The Honorable Bob Polston City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1687 Dear Mayor Polston: Because of our commitment to the communities you represent, I'm writing to tell you about Norwest's plans to respond over the next few years to changes in the way our customers are using banks. If you examine your own habits and those of your family and friends, you may find that most of us are doing more banking by phone or ATM than, say, ten years ago. If we want to buy a house, car or some types of investments, most of us still prefer the in-person contact available only at a bank branch. However, people are increasingly using the phone not only to conduct simple transactions and get information, but also for taking out loans, buying mutual funds and conducting other more sophisticated business. Continuing our commitment to serve our customers when, where and how they want to be served, we have made general plans to: Add more bankers to our 24-hour phone bank, the use of which has risen 30 percent a year since we first introduced it in 1986. More than a third of our consumer loan applications now are taken by phone bankers. Change our branches, which we call "stores" because we see ourselves as retailers of financial services. Reflecting our customers' preferences, we're considering three basic types: 1) Superstores: These are full-service stores with investment and mortgage representatives and other professionals helping to solve our customers' financial needs. The Honorable Bob Polston Page -2- November 1, 1995 2) Convenience stores: These will look like most of the branches in the Norwest Twin Cities system today and provide personal banking, investment and other specialized services. 3) Express stores: These will be in markets where customers are telling us they generally want to conduct simple transactions quickly with some help from a Norwest representative. Our stores will be complemented by ATM's, The Phone Bank, and other PC-based services we're developing for consumers and businesses. One action we took recently in response to the needs of our small business customers was to provide community business banking services at all of our locations in the Twin Cities. In making decisions on how specific locations will change we are committed to the following: · Continuing to meet the needs of all the communities we serve; · Maintaining our "outstanding" CRA rating; · Reducing certain types of jobs gradually and, to the greatest extent possible, handling reductions through attrition and offering other Norwest positions to affected employees. These changes will not significantly affect the size of Norwest's workforce in the Twin Cities. · Basing everything we do on patterns of customer use, our goal is to build market share in every market where we now have banking stores and to enter new markets where customers do not yet have the benefits of a Norwest Bank. I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any questions, please call me at 476-3831. Sincerely, Alan V. Jo~ President AVJ/Id THE CITY OF MOUND INVITES YOU and YOUR SPOUSE or S.O. to its ANNUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY FRIDAY, DECEMBER 8TH at the MOUND AMERICAN LEGION Social Hour: Dinner: Program: Entertainment: 6 - 7 (Cash Bar) 7'8 8 8:30- 12:30 (V.J.) Your R.S.V.P. is Very Important and Dinner Reservations are a MUST. r Please do so by Friday, Dec. 1st to Linda at 472-0600 or, you are welcome to arrive after dinner.